Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:22:14 -0800
From:      Devin Teske <devin.teske@fisglobal.com>
To:        "'Chad Perrin'" <perrin@apotheon.com>, <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   RE: FreeBSD 9
Message-ID:  <04db01ccd6df$a6ebe3f0$f4c3abd0$@fisglobal.com>
In-Reply-To: <20120119164234.GB21488@hemlock.hydra>
References:  <BLU160-W54C133B8003EF140C41EF7AE860@phx.gbl>	<loom.20120119T094302-811@post.gmane.org> <4EFDA3B50040906E@> <20120119164234.GB21488@hemlock.hydra>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Chad Perrin
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 8:43 AM
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: FreeBSD 9
> 
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 11:15:08AM +0100, Eduardo Morras wrote:
> >
> > I think that a full/complete update of the old installer to add it
> > support GEOM, ZFS, scripting and more newer features will consume more
> > manpower and resources than create a new one from scratch, where the
> > devs aren't chained by old code, backwards compatibility, old
> > restrictions and old point of views. This way, is easier correct bugs,
> > new features, simplify the installation and even automate it to this
> > new installer than try to add them to the old one.
> 
> I'm curious: Is this just speculation, or have you determined this by reading
the
> source of the old installer?  Old code means *tested* code, and when it is
well-
> maintained it often means easily extensible code.  Is that the case for the
old
> installer, or is the older installer a crufty mess of "temporary" fixes that
became
> permanent, as your statements seem to imply?
> 

I believe the "difficulty in maintenance" stems primarily from the fact that the
existing partition editor MAY have to be entirely rewritten to accommodate other
root filesystem types (but even that's not entirely true -- if done right).

Other than that, it's most likely just FUD and misperception that sysinstall(8)
is either (a) hard to maintain or (b) hard to extend.
-- 
Devin

_____________
The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?04db01ccd6df$a6ebe3f0$f4c3abd0$>