Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:00:24 +0300 From: Manolis Kiagias <sonicy@otenet.gr> To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> Cc: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>, questions@freebsd.org, VirtualHost <jeroen@virtualhost.nl> Subject: Re: Modern FreeBSD Installer? Message-ID: <49F01208.2080705@otenet.gr> In-Reply-To: <20090423084637.eb58cbe1.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <BLU0-SMTP493F2C64E33D39A37EF75DD8740@phx.gbl> <714DFCFC-9547-497D-A2C7-0BA10B39B901@mac.com> <49EF82B2.2040807@gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0904222316130.3543@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <49EF98C6.2060902@virtualhost.nl> <49EFA169.4050903@otenet.gr> <20090423084637.eb58cbe1.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Polytropon wrote: > On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:59:53 +0300, Manolis Kiagias <sonicy@otenet.gr> wrote: > > >> Exactly. Modern install does not necessarily mean GUI. FreeBSD *needs* a >> text installer to work on old machines, headless servers, serial >> consoles and the like. That being said, there are quite a few annoyances >> with sysinstall. And of course, having a GUI installer as an additional >> option is also very welcome. >> > > No problem, as long as (a) it isn't default (read: too complicated > to switch it off of not needed) and (b) doesn't make things more > complicated. > The text installer should always be the default, IMHO. A GUI installer should be selectable i.e. from the boot options. I hope Ivan Voras finds the time to continue with the finstall project, it looked very promising: http://ivoras.sharanet.org/blog/tree/2009-02-19.what-happened-to-finstall.html >> - No real 'back' functionality. Can't fix most mistakes, need to redo >> the install >> > > Hmmm... I think this is where the user learns "first think, then do" > on a good basis. > > > The problem here is that sysinstall *does* allow you to go back and redo some steps, but then fails miserably and mysteriously > > >> Personally, I would like a text installer using a previous/next approach >> that would give me options like: >> > > Forgive me my ignorance, but personally, I completely DISLIKE this > linear approach. Instead of > > A ---> B ---> C ---> D ---> E ---> F oops, forgot something > E <--- no, not here > D <--- not here, too > C <--- ah, here it was, okay, got it > C ---> D ---> E ---> F ---> Finish > The moving back approach as I see it is not intended as an excuse to leave your brain turned off. And it doesn't even have to move back all steps - one would be enough for the occasional wrong key-press. > A hierarchy would be better. > > Options: > A This and that > B Some other stuff > C More stuff > D Even more stuff > E Some settings > F Several other settings > Done Commit > > So one could first select > A This and that > then, knowing that C - E are not interesting for him, address > F Several other settings > directly, make some choices, and then, maybe go back to > A This and that > and do some more tasks, and finally select > Done Commit > to do the install. > > I have no problem with this strategy, but... > This is what sysinstall already provides. In a modern way, it allows > to "go back" to any setting that has already been done and change it, > and the user is not limited in doing choices in a pre-defined order. > ...it does allow you to go back in a sort of way - but then fails many times to continue normally.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49F01208.2080705>