Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 06:21:37 -0500 From: "Alfred Perlstein" <perlsta@sunyit.edu> To: <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>, "Capriotti" <capriotti@geocities.com> Subject: Re: X based Free installation Message-ID: <199801070725.HAA15251@fang.cs.sunyit.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Maybe if you could use libvgl something or other, it uses the VGA hardware which is on almost any system. this would make it so that anyone with a vga card could install freebsd instead of anyone with a vga card supported by Xfree... this might have a chance of fitting on the install disk... i know Xfree has a VGA/VGA16 server, maybe you could use that, in fact if libvgl stops being supported (i hope not) the X program will still work.... making this an option off the CD-ROM isn't a bad idea, if someone could setup freebsd so that this could even be done off of floppie via several disks that wouldn't be that bad either... -Alfred ---------- > From: Capriotti <capriotti@geocities.com> > To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: X based Free installation > Date: Wednesday, January 07, 1998 6:32 AM > > At 11:40 AM 1/6/98 -0800, you wrote: > > Hey, Tom. I apologize for the misunderstanding I caused. Allow me to explain: > > > > How would a graphically install help? I don't think it would in the > >examples you've given. If the CDROM can't be accessed, why would a > >graphical install indicate why, and a non-graphical install not? Why > >would concepts (info and language) displayed in a graphical dialog box be > >lessing confusing if those concepts where displayed in a non-graphical > >one? > > I was thinking of a way to make Free more attractive for other kind of > users; As I mentioned before, my goal os making FBSD so attractive - and > easy - to install/use that even a secretary could do it. > > Actualy user buy things that are "neat". A graphical interface would make > things look beautiful. Placebo effect, I know, but it would help "spreading > the word". > > Of course a GUI has nothing to do with ease to install or the CD ROM > working properly. I was just sharing a couple of my experiences in the > installation field. > > >> Today's instasllation (2.2.1) is a bit better, more user friendly, but I > > > > Todays installation? 2.2.1 is ancient. Two releases have been made > >since. > > I was just mentioning that 2.2.1 was the one I was talking about; And, > Installation of 2.1 and 2.2.1 are not that different, so I thought that it > wouldn't have changed that much on newer versions. But I see it did, I am > glad to learn about it. > > But there's something I didn't understand: > > OK. We wouldn't be able to make one single installation disk (floppy) for > FBSD using the X interface. But what if the CD ROM installation ? Can't it > be done ? > > I am not THAT familiar with the processes, so I can't see the difficulty, > but, if you get the kernel up and running, and if you have the files on the > cd, why whould it be so difficult to put X running too ? > > I mentioned X, but it culd be a X looking GUI, just to make things LOOK > nice. It seems silly, but can make the difference when one is choosing the > working platform.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801070725.HAA15251>