On 07/25/2011 02:56, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
On 07/24/11 19:11, Claude Buisson wrote:
On 07/24/2011 23:33, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
On 07/24/11 16:29, eculp wrote:
I have been hearing about a new installer but I obviously have not
payed enough attention, I am afraid. I started running freebsd at 2.0
and never really had a problem with understanding the installation
program. There is always a first time, I guess.
ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/snapshots/201105/
When booting I seem to get a screen that makes me remember installer
screens of the 1980s. (They were not exactly intuitive.)
I somehow got the idea that the new installer was graphic. Maybe
something like PCBsd that is not bad at all. I use it on all our
employees computers. Actually, after seeing this, I would love to
have the old installer back. Is their an option for that?
Does this new ASCII installer have a "how to" with a bit of
information on the flow of the installation.
Thanks,
Can you please describe what you didn't like about it, and what you
would prefer be changed? "Reminiscent of the 1980s" is not really
helpful, especially given that the new installer in fact looks very much
like sysinstall, which you seemed to like.
-Nathan
Recently I installed a system from the "official" memory stick May
snapshot
(FreeBSD-9.0-CURRENT-201105-amd64-memstick.img). here are a few remarks:
Thank you for testing!
My intent was not to test the installer, but I needed to install a recent
9.0-CURRENT with gpt on a brand new hardware
- the 1st thing I need to do is to configure the keyboard, as I am not
in the
US. This is needed for an install, but also for using it as a live
system. And
the keyboard configuration dialog is only a part of the installation
procedure.
Which is why this is the very first screen of the installer?
If my memory is good, it was in the first screen of the install dialog, not
before the choice of installation / live system
- the partition tool is too simple/rudimentary, compared to the old
sysinstall
dialog. I always want to have a total control of the partitions e.g.
to have a
proper alignement. So one must use the shell escape or the live
system, which is
a regression.
The alignment is done to match the disk stripe size automatically, and
the partition editor has many, many more features than the sysinstall
one. Is there something in particular you wanted?
I don't use any "stripe" (only plain UFS), and the "many, many features" where
too well hidden for my old brain.
- extracting the tarballs lead to (cryptic) errors: I discovered the
hard way
that I needed to execute a newfs.
This is what the directions at the top of the partitioning shell say.
As I not clearly understood these directions, I skipped to the live system for
doing the gpart work.
- I followed a succession of screens asking me to do the usual
configuration
steps (hostname, clock, network - IPv4 only ?? -, users) and at the
end I get
back a screen asking me if a wanted to do the steps I had done just
before...
The network configuration also allows IPv6 in newer versions -- that
snapshot is 2 months out of date. The final screen says at the top that
is there to modify earlier choices. Can you suggest a clearer wording?
Clear wording is certainly a plus.
- booting the installed system, I found that the hostname disappeared,
the
keyboard was not configured, nor the network, and so on
This is inexplicable. This has worked perfectly for everyone else --
it's possible you made a mistake in the partitioning, but I can't
imagine how it would have caused this. Are you able to reproduce the
problem?
My system is now running, and I don't have any other system to play with.
- during the whole process the screen was scrambled by the occurence
of a number
of LORs displayed on top of the dialogs/messages of the installer.
The actual 9.0 CDs will not have WITNESS enabled. It would be nice if
the LORs in question were actually fixed, however.
A "good" installer cannot suppose that there will not be any kernel message
during its use, some of them will be benign.
Furthermore the installer (and the whole make release process) has not for sole
use the installation (and creation) of official releases. I started building my
own releases at 2.2.X time..
- the file system of the installer/live system seems to be too small,
leading to
a number of "system full" messages as soon a few files are written to it.
The live system is designed more as a fixit medium. What were you trying
to do with it?
I first copied the dmesg to be able to retrieve it on another system (was
thinking that /var was a memory file system), then I saw the "system full" at
different steps of the install.
Referring to a thread I found recently a propos the documentation on
the install
media, I also want to say that a proper installer must be able to do
its work
without any Internet connectivity. There exist systems which are not
connected,
and networks without any communication with the Internet.
Which is why it behaves in exactly the way you suggest.
-Nathan
I hope so
Let us say that the new installer is a moving target, and relying on snapshots
found on the FreeBSD ftp site is not the proper way of knowing it. But my only
other -current system (i386 on VMWare in a very ressource constrained
environment) is not the proper platform for building amd64 releases.
Claude Buisson
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
