Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 10:32:41 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: Holger Kipp <hk@alogis.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, jan6146@gmail.com, Curtis Penner <curtis.penner2@gmail.com>, Antoine BRUNEL <antoinebrunel@yahoo.fr> Subject: Re: Sysinstall is still inadequate after all of these years Message-ID: <877ibzlb6u.fsf@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <20080703085629.GA1590@intserv.int1.b.intern> (Holger Kipp's message of "Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:56:29 %2B0200") References: <784966050807021123l267aa20en39eb513c12c90ad2@mail.gmail.com> <486BFE3B.3040509@gmail.com> <486C0928.8050607@yahoo.fr> <20080703085629.GA1590@intserv.int1.b.intern>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:56:29 +0200, Holger Kipp <hk@alogis.com> wrote: > Dear Antoine Brunel, > > I completely 100% agree. Actually I don't see the need for a new > sysinstall. It does what it needs to do. I have seen the later > RH- and SUSE-Installer, but I don't want them. What's the use of > a graphical installer? Graphical installers are not useless. They usually 'look' easier for the average user. They may not always _be_ easier to use, but it is often the first impression that counts. Localization tends to be easier for GUI installers too. Now, it may seem pretty useless for someone who knows English already, but a *lot* of people feel more comfortable with an installer that speaks their native language. After the installation is finished, English may be a lot more useful (think "manpages", for instance). But it still 'looks' nicer to be able to install in one's native language. > I am more than happy with sysinstall, have used it for years (starting > with 2.2.8 actually) and don't want to see a colorful chingeling > whistleblowing hard-to-maintain suitable for all graphics card gui > installer. Agreed :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?877ibzlb6u.fsf>