From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 23 09:30:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39E3E16A4CE; Sun, 23 May 2004 09:30:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F71543D39; Sun, 23 May 2004 09:30:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i4NGTJUf002309; Sun, 23 May 2004 12:29:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from localhost (robert@localhost)i4NGTIVg002306; Sun, 23 May 2004 12:29:18 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 12:29:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: The Anarcat In-Reply-To: <20040522204044.GB48382@shall.anarcat.ath.cx> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org cc: Jordan Hubbard cc: core@freebsd.org cc: timh@tjhawkins.com Subject: Re: LibH pronounced dead, need for a new leadership X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 16:30:09 -0000 On Sat, 22 May 2004, The Anarcat wrote: > That is why I CC'd core. Hear our call! FreeBSD needs a new installer! > Let's wake this daemon! I think most FreeBSD developers recognize that FreeBSD has gone from a relative leader in the pack in install usability and management to lagging behind, simply by virtue of having (as jkh pointed out) something that was just sufficient to keep working with incremental tweaks. I think there's also a lot of agreement that Something Must Be Done, but that it (as usual) comes down to a few hard questions: - How to build a new installer/management environment without bumping into extensive second system syndrome. There's a nasty temptation to build from scratch and try to make it all-singing and all-dancing. - How to get buy-in for the project while its in progress, as well as to build interest and development support. It's a non-trivial task. - How to find resources to work on it that are sustained at a high level for long enough. Again, a non-trivial task. I agree that software reuse is a big part of the answer -- it's clear we have been unable to muster what was needed so far, in part because the FreeBSD Project hasn't become a haven for GUI and user interface types. We provide a well-defined layer that happens to be a few layers below what those people tend to be interested in :-). I would suggest some serious scoping is in order for whoever decides to take on the task. First, I'd suggest avoiding all-singing and all-dancing, since it requires a lot of infrastructure investment. Here are some things not to do: - GUI installers are cool, but they're a lot of investment. Maybe we should eschew it and just go for a decent text interface to get the base system installed. Libdialog was half decent when it was first integrated into the installer, but I think everyone recognized the state of the art has moved on a bit. Don't design precluding it, but don't try to create an optimal architecture for a GUI if the resources aren't there to follow through, it will just become an obstacle. - Don't try to solve the package management problem. I know it's hard not to, since one of the failings of our current install model is that we don't have a decent package management solution. However I think you'll find a lot of successful systems don't have a decent package management solution for the core of the OS, albeit perhaps a smaller core than we have. Start out building something that just works with tarballs. - Do focus on the ordering and procedure of the install process: investigate the requirements for a two-phase process (boot the install media, splat, boot from the hard disk and finish up). Part of the complexity in sysinstall is attempting to provide a normal runtime environment for package install when the configuration is arguably not normal, so chroot(), libraries, etc, get involved. Splitting into two distinct environments may help with this, as well as allow the post-splat phase to take advantage of more tools and capabilities that today sysinstall can't use (such as a full X install, GUI or third party libraries, etc). - Likewise, do focus on how the new installer will build up a description of an installation to perform before committing, which is something syinstall doesn't address well (resulting in the incremental changes just making it worse). - Do answer the question of how the install mechanism fits into the FreeBSD development environment. Remember that the FreeBSD Project is unlikely to want to import vast quantities of libraries and scripting languages into the base source tree. Can we identify a model by which the installer becomes an external build and package from the 'src' tree? Grabbing someone else's solution is certainly possible, but it doesn't necessarily make all of the above easier. Frankly, my temptation, if I were going to try and run such a project, would be to spit out a prototype system that isn't integrated into 'src' as a relative fait accompli over a period of 4-6 months, and then say "Hey, it works!". I'd add some abstraction for the base component installing process, but I'd focus more on the installation model and trying to move away from libdialog. Much of the nastiness of sysinstall comes out of libdialog offering a poor event model and state mechanism. You might consider appealing on a FreeBSD user's list or two looking for application developers interested in helping. You want FreeBSD developers involved, but I'm not sure they are reliable for this sort of work: for one thing, it's pretty far from their areas of expertise so if they lead the charge, you'll get the common results of that (second system syndrome and burnout :-). You might want to talk to Scott Long, since I know he's also given this issue some thought... Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 23 16:37:47 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A04116A4CE for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 16:37:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.157]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A8543D39 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 16:37:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david@usermode.org) Received: from h-68-164-153-245.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net ([68.164.153.245] helo=scatha.home) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BS2WT-0003WO-00 for freebsd-libh@freebsd.org; Sun, 23 May 2004 19:36:54 -0400 From: David Johnson Organization: Usermode To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 16:36:53 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200405231636.53068.david@usermode.org> Subject: libh/sysinstall ideas X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 23:37:47 -0000 I've been thinking about a libh/sysinstall replacement for quite some time now. I've even committed to coding something up, but various events have conspired against me. I probably won't get a chance to actually code anything for three months. I'm more than willing to help with someone else's ideas instead, though. But in the meantime I'm going to through out some ideas. The project needs to be split up into managable sized pieces. Each piece should be a useful component in and of itself. There are several benefits to this. First it adheres better to the UNIX philosophy than libh did. Second and most important, it allows greater participation. It would provide some working code sooner, and allow interested individuals the opportunity to pick up some minor unfinished pieces to work on. I would divide the domain into three separate projects: installer, configurator and package manager. The installer is only concerned with bootstrapping, partitioning, labelling, and getting the base system installed onto the drives. It might or might not use the package manager. The package manager should need no explaining. The configurator is what we think of sysinstall, without the initial installation functionality. The configurator would be modular. Each "page" in the interface would be a different module, independent of the other modules. All of these parts should have a their interfaces strongly decoupled from their functionality. The functionality itself would be provided by shared libraries. Then there would be separate graphical (Qt) and text mode (curses) interfaces linking to them. Perhaps even a separate CLI interface useful for scripting. This would avoid the hassle of trying to create a unified gui/tui interface. A secondary idea for the interfaces is to create a dialog/libdialog replacement that can handle either GUI or text dialogs. That way the entire interface can be scripted, regardless of interface mode. Slackware managed to create its entire installer with bourne shell and dialog. An enhanced dialog combined with ruby could make a very flexible installer! I came up with this very broad high level architecture because I wanted to contribute something to FreeBSD, but a complete sysinstall replacement was simply too much for one person. This way I can work on just one piece. -- David Johnson ___________________ http://www.usermode.org From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 23 23:47:04 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 502A316A4CE; Sun, 23 May 2004 23:47:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns0.secureanonymous.com (tjhawkins.com [64.232.254.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11C343D2D; Sun, 23 May 2004 23:47:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from timh@tjhawkins.com) Received: from cdm-66-76-99-185.fayt.cox-internet.com ([66.76.99.185] helo=yourw92p4bhlzg) by ns0.secureanonymous.com with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BS8I3-0007Qz-Lr; Mon, 24 May 2004 00:46:25 -0500 Message-ID: <003601c4415a$dc14cfb0$6501a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> From: To: , , , Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 01:46:24 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns0.secureanonymous.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tjhawkins.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 Subject: Hmm... why? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 06:47:04 -0000 why does freebsd need a new installer? Why not allow the current = installer "sysinstall" to just become user friendly..edit it and add new = things to it... possilby even adding a graphical interface that works = with it. It's all possible and correct me if I'm wrong--wouldn't it be = less work? If sysinstall was just more userfriendly it would work very = well. As for porting a Linux installer to FreeBSD... I do not recommend it. = there will be alot of conflict about the GPL vs. BSD licenses and we all = know what kind of war that starts. I personally think freebsd should = have its own installer under its own license. thanks, tim hawkins. From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 00:10:20 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6902116A4CE; Mon, 24 May 2004 00:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jkh-gw.queasyweasel.com (adsl-64-173-3-158.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [64.173.3.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF11243D31; Mon, 24 May 2004 00:10:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@queasyweasel.com) Received: from [64.173.15.98] (IDENT:484-ident-is-a-completely-pointless-protocol-that-offers-no-security-or-traceability-at-all-so-take@adsl-64-173-15-98.dsl.sntc01.pacbell.net [64.173.15.98])i4O7BxXb024962; Mon, 24 May 2004 00:11:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@queasyweasel.com) In-Reply-To: <003601c4415a$dc14cfb0$6501a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> References: <003601c4415a$dc14cfb0$6501a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) Message-Id: <634F4BD9-AD51-11D8-8CA9-000393BB9222@queasyweasel.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 00:10:07 -0700 To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 cc: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org cc: core@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Hmm... why? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 07:10:20 -0000 On May 23, 2004, at 11:46 PM, wrote: > why does freebsd need a new installer? Why not allow the current=20 > installer "sysinstall" to just become user friendly..edit it and add=20= > new things to it... possilby even adding a graphical interface that=20 > works with it. It's all possible and correct me if I'm wrong--wouldn't=20= > it be less work? If sysinstall was just more userfriendly it would=20 > work very well. Go give it a try. Once you're done wrestling with the code for awhile=20= in an effort to "just make it more user friendly", you can answer your=20= own question. > =A0As for porting a=A0 Linux installer to FreeBSD... I do not = recommend=20 > it. there will be alot of conflict about the GPL vs. BSD licenses and=20= > we all know what kind of war that starts. I personally think freebsd=20= > should have its own installer under its own license. I think you sell the FreeBSD community a bit short. The issue is not=20 GPL vs BSD, and if there were a good, generic installation framework=20 that could be adapted to FreeBSD and was under the GPL, I don't think=20 people would blink twice at it. The problem with the Linux installers=20= isn't that they're GPL'd, it's that they're written to be very specific=20= to the distribution they're installing and make a lot of assumptions=20 about low-level Linux-specific partitioning methods and such. -- Jordan K. Hubbard Engineering Manager, BSD technology group Apple Computer From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 01:35:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ABB616A4CE; Mon, 24 May 2004 01:35:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp-out5.xs4all.nl (smtp-out5.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD7BE43D48; Mon, 24 May 2004 01:35:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl) Received: from freebie.xs4all.nl (freebie.xs4all.nl [213.84.32.253]) by smtp-out5.xs4all.nl (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i4O8ZRUY097456; Mon, 24 May 2004 10:35:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from freebie.xs4all.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freebie.xs4all.nl (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i4O8Yaef000749; Mon, 24 May 2004 10:34:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl) Received: (from wkb@localhost) by freebie.xs4all.nl (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i4O8Ya57000748; Mon, 24 May 2004 10:34:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wkb) Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 10:34:36 +0200 From: Wilko Bulte To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Message-ID: <20040524083436.GA718@freebie.xs4all.nl> References: <003601c4415a$dc14cfb0$6501a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <634F4BD9-AD51-11D8-8CA9-000393BB9222@queasyweasel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <634F4BD9-AD51-11D8-8CA9-000393BB9222@queasyweasel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-OS: FreeBSD 4.10-PRERELEASE X-PGP: finger wilko@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG cc: core@FreeBSD.ORG cc: timh@tjhawkins.com Subject: Re: Hmm... why? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 08:35:48 -0000 On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 12:10:07AM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: ... > > and we all know what kind of war that starts. I personally think > > freebsd should have its own installer under its own license. > > > > I think you sell the FreeBSD community a bit short. The issue is not > GPL vs BSD, and if there were a good, generic installation framework > that could be adapted to FreeBSD and was under the GPL, I don't think > people would blink twice at it. The problem with the Linux installers > isn't that they're GPL'd, it's that they're written to be very specific > to the distribution they're installing and make a lot of assumptions > about low-level Linux-specific partitioning methods and such. Apart from that I have yet to see a Linux installer that does not make me run for the hills.. sysinstall might not be it, but the Linux installers are by no means better. IMO etc. -- | / o / /_ _ |/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte wilko@FreeBSD.org From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 23 20:53:29 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21A1C16A4CE for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 20:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hotmail.com (bay19-f18.bay19.hotmail.com [64.4.53.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD06943D39 for ; Sun, 23 May 2004 20:53:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imgaolong@hotmail.com) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 23 May 2004 20:52:33 -0700 Received: from 61.187.16.2 by by19fd.bay19.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 24 May 2004 03:52:33 GMT X-Originating-IP: [61.187.16.2] X-Originating-Email: [imgaolong@hotmail.com] X-Sender: imgaolong@hotmail.com From: =?gb2312?B?0KEgt8nn5w==?= To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 11:52:33 +0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 May 2004 03:52:33.0461 (UTC) FILETIME=[8B572E50:01C44142] X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 24 May 2004 04:58:45 -0700 Subject: LibH or Anaconda ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 03:53:29 -0000 It is a pitty to hear the difficulties in libh, but the interesting thing is that we group have already ported the anaconda (linux installer) on a FreeBSD kernel to perform the entire install process in a commonly accepted graphical GUI manner of most currently used Linux releases. Using the linux.ko , and a rewrited partitioning GUI tool , we can install any compatibale RPM format packages of any Linux releases, well , after the install , the box has to be look completely like a linux box:-> So , why don't you guys to think about migration rather than rewriting a completely different architecture for the installer ? _________________________________________________________________ 享用世界上最大的电子邮件系统— MSN Hotmail。 http://www.hotmail.com From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 00:21:58 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 556C116A4CE for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 00:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web15107.mail.bjs.yahoo.com (web15107.mail.cnb.yahoo.com [202.3.77.152]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 657CB43D39 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 00:21:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imgaolong@yahoo.com.cn) Message-ID: <20040524072127.56451.qmail@web15107.mail.bjs.yahoo.com> Received: from [61.187.16.2] by web15107.mail.bjs.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 24 May 2004 15:21:27 CST Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 15:21:27 +0800 (CST) From: =?gb2312?q?Sharp=20Gao?= To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" , timh@tjhawkins.com In-Reply-To: <634F4BD9-AD51-11D8-8CA9-000393BB9222@queasyweasel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 24 May 2004 04:58:45 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 cc: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org cc: core@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Hmm... why? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 07:21:58 -0000 We have ported the linux installer anaconda to install a Linux Release over a linux.ko on a FreeBSD kernel , totally in graphical GUI interface . strange?:) while , we in fact use the RPM fomat packages , and after the install , of cource , the box looks competely like a linux box(over linux.ko).While , only the graphical partition tools need a rewrite , and only some other trial modifications are needed . if a package format is to be decided , I thought the totally install process of a native FreeBSD would not be too difficult , since the python is strong enough , as I learned when we ported the anaconda. "Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote: On May 23, 2004, at 11:46 PM, wrote: > why does freebsd need a new installer? Why not allow the current > installer "sysinstall" to just become user friendly..edit it and add > new things to it... possilby even adding a graphical interface that > works with it. It's all possible and correct me if I'm wrong--wouldn't > it be less work? If sysinstall was just more userfriendly it would > work very well. Go give it a try. Once you're done wrestling with the code for awhile in an effort to "just make it more user friendly", you can answer your own question. > 燗s for porting a?Linux installer to FreeBSD... I do not recommend > it. there will be alot of conflict about the GPL vs. BSD licenses and > we all know what kind of war that starts. I personally think freebsd > should have its own installer under its own license. I think you sell the FreeBSD community a bit short. The issue is not GPL vs BSD, and if there were a good, generic installation framework that could be adapted to FreeBSD and was under the GPL, I don't think people would blink twice at it. The problem with the Linux installers isn't that they're GPL'd, it's that they're written to be very specific to the distribution they're installing and make a lot of assumptions about low-level Linux-specific partitioning methods and such. -- Jordan K. Hubbard Engineering Manager, BSD technology group Apple Computer _______________________________________________ freebsd-libh@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-libh To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-libh-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? 嫌邮箱太小？雅虎电邮自助扩容！ From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 19:11:03 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F05016A4CE for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 19:11:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp10.atl.mindspring.net (smtp10.atl.mindspring.net [207.69.200.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9B3943D39 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 19:11:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david@usermode.org) Received: from h-68-164-156-119.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net ([68.164.156.119] helo=scatha.home) by smtp10.atl.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BSROz-00061P-00 for freebsd-libh@freebsd.org; Mon, 24 May 2004 22:10:49 -0400 From: David Johnson Organization: Usermode To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 19:10:49 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200405241910.49207.david@usermode.org> Subject: Re: LibH or Anaconda ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 02:11:03 -0000 On Sunday 23 May 2004 08:52 pm, =D0=A1 =B7=C9=E7=E7 wrote: > So , why don't you guys to think about migration rather than > rewriting a completely > different architecture for the installer ? Anaconda is certainly an option, but I doubt a binary-only Anaconda is.=20 Think about it. We need to go beyond running Redhat's installer in=20 Linux compatibility mode. Also. SuSE just open sourced their YaST=20 installer. That's an option as well. =2D-=20 David Johnson ___________________ http://www.usermode.org From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 19:27:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3955916A4CE for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 19:27:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [216.148.227.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFC3043D1D for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 19:27:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from adam@migus.org) Received: from ludo.migus.org ([68.55.85.207]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20040525022613014007rhrve>; Tue, 25 May 2004 02:26:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ludo.migus.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BE6AD3AE5; Mon, 24 May 2004 22:26:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ludo.migus.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ludo.migus.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16170-03; Mon, 24 May 2004 22:26:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ludo.migus.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 1E220D3AD1; Mon, 24 May 2004 22:26:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from MSS-AMIGUS1.Corp.Symantec.Com (MSS-AMIGUS1.Corp.Symantec.Com [192.168.4.103]) by webservices.migus.org (IMP) with HTTP for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 22:26:13 -0400 Message-ID: <1085451973.40b2aec5147df@webservices.migus.org> Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 22:26:13 -0400 From: "Adam C. Migus" To: David Johnson References: <200405241910.49207.david@usermode.org> In-Reply-To: <200405241910.49207.david@usermode.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.2 X-Originating-IP: 192.168.4.103 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at migus.org cc: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Subject: Re: LibH or Anaconda ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 02:27:08 -0000 Quoting David Johnson : > On Sunday 23 May 2004 08:52 pm, 小 飞珑 wrote: > > > So , why don't you guys to think about migration rather than > > rewriting a completely > > different architecture for the installer ? > > Anaconda is certainly an option, but I doubt a binary-only Anaconda > is. > Think about it. We need to go beyond running Redhat's installer in > Linux compatibility mode. Also. SuSE just open sourced their YaST > installer. That's an option as well. > > -- > David Johnson > ___________________ > http://www.usermode.org > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-libh@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-libh > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-libh-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > I hear great things about SuSE's YaST and I generally think that using it or Anaconda in the form of a native, ported, perhaps even enhanced application is a great idea in general. In summary, both Anaconda and YaST seem to have proven themselves in the industry and giving people something they're already farmiliar with from a UI stand-point is usually a win. -- Adam C. Migus -- http://people.migus.org/~adam/ From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 25 18:58:57 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E66816A4CE for ; Tue, 25 May 2004 18:58:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com (web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.94.72]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9C81643D46 for ; Tue, 25 May 2004 18:58:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from urgaolong@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20040526015840.14562.qmail@web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Received: from [61.187.54.13] by web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 26 May 2004 02:58:40 BST Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 02:58:40 +0100 (BST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Gao=20Long?= To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 Subject: RE:LibH or Anaconda ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 01:58:57 -0000 >Anaconda is certainly an option, but I doubt a binary-only Anaconda is. >Think about it. We need to go beyond running Redhat's installer in >Linux compatibility mode. Also. SuSE just open sourced their YaST >installer. That's an option as well. I migrate from imgaolong@yahoo.com.cn to urgaolong@yahoo.com for the trouble of gb2312 coding. Well, most code in anaconda is just a matter of scripts running on virtual-machine-like python . Pure scripts can be run on python of native FreeBSD almost without any modification , which setup the local X window system, dealing with input/output configuration data, and package installing etc . Not the C codes , after all , as the python can be embedded with C codes. That is why we rewrite the GUI partitioning tools' C codes. We patched in it the code from sysinstall , to partition the hard disk in a BSD slice manner. The only thing I thought about anaconda for a native FreeBSD install is that , shall we package an entire FreeBSD into RPM packages?:)While the rpm need a recompile if we are not to use linux.ko.Or we will have to invent a different one? --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 25 19:59:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A796716A4CE for ; Tue, 25 May 2004 19:59:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from barry.mail.mindspring.net (barry.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8419343D1F for ; Tue, 25 May 2004 19:59:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david@usermode.org) Received: from h-68-164-91-59.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net ([68.164.91.59] helo=scatha.home) by barry.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BSodP-0007ve-00 for freebsd-libh@freebsd.org; Tue, 25 May 2004 22:59:15 -0400 From: David Johnson Organization: Usermode To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 19:59:14 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <20040526015840.14562.qmail@web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040526015840.14562.qmail@web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200405251959.14689.david@usermode.org> Subject: Re: LibH or Anaconda ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 02:59:43 -0000 On Tuesday 25 May 2004 06:58 pm, Gao Long wrote: > The only thing I thought about anaconda for a native FreeBSD > install is that , shall we package an entire FreeBSD into RPM > packages?:)While the rpm need a recompile if we are not to use > linux.ko.Or we will have to invent a different one? Since Anaconda is Open Source, that means we can change it to fit our needs. Not just the partitioning portion of it, but also the package management portion. In other words, we don't have to use RPM just because Anaconda does. p.s. I'm not sold on Anaconda, but neither am I sold against it. -- David Johnson ___________________ http://www.usermode.org From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 26 06:24:15 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27CAC16A4CF for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 06:24:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com (web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.94.72]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E4EBB43D3F for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 06:24:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from urgaolong@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20040526132333.38694.qmail@web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Received: from [61.187.54.13] by web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 26 May 2004 14:23:33 BST Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 14:23:33 +0100 (BST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Gao=20Long?= To: David Johnson , freebsd-libh@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200405251959.14689.david@usermode.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 Subject: Re: LibH or Anaconda ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 13:24:15 -0000 David Johnson wrote: Since Anaconda is Open Source, that means we can change it to fit our needs. Not just the partitioning portion of it, but also the package management portion. In other words, we don't have to use RPM just because Anaconda does. OK, we have come the point , the package format! In fact , in my opinion , a good installer , not only anaconda , of any operating systems must do serveral things as : 1. set up a gook-looking and user-friendly GUI , including the X system and a windows system like GTK or QT. 2. partition the disks which to hold the operating system. 3. using a certain package format , to install the whole operating systems 4. some configuration of the operating systems. well , I find everything we use in our practice will work well for a FreeBSD install except that the RPM format may not be suitable for a FreeBSD community . It could be considered not so gracefully(though it does work and is powerful and complicated). But if someone piled the BSD into a set of RPM packages , then we can just install a FreeBSD , even use a grub bootloader , and making RPMs of a base system is not a hard work.But I also welcome a new format , as the libpgk or any kind of the format libH had wanted to use. Any thing new could be helpful , to be blank , I hated the ugly faces of Anaconda and had already want to paint some new ones:) --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 26 20:39:39 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6973716A4CE for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 20:39:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mclean.mail.mindspring.net (mclean.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A9DB43D41 for ; Wed, 26 May 2004 20:39:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david@usermode.org) Received: from h-68-164-82-194.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net ([68.164.82.194] helo=scatha.home) by mclean.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BTBjt-0002Kz-00; Wed, 26 May 2004 23:39:29 -0400 From: David Johnson Organization: Usermode To: Gao Long Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 20:39:28 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <20040526132333.38694.qmail@web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040526132333.38694.qmail@web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200405262039.28752.david@usermode.org> cc: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Subject: Re: LibH or Anaconda ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 03:39:39 -0000 On Wednesday 26 May 2004 06:23 am, Gao Long wrote: > But if someone piled the BSD into a set of RPM > packages , then we can just install a FreeBSD , even use a > grub bootloader , and making RPMs of a base system is not a > hard work. Except that there is absolutely no reason to use RPM! We already have our own package format that does everything RPM does and more. And without several of the disadvantages. Converting Anaconda's Perl scripts to use the pkg tools instead of rpm should be a rather trivial. The major problems are elsewhere. -- David Johnson ___________________ http://www.usermode.org From owner-freebsd-libh@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 27 07:33:07 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0098C16A4CE for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 07:33:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web90104.mail.scd.yahoo.com (web90104.mail.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.94.75]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BB73443D1D for ; Thu, 27 May 2004 07:33:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from urgaolong@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20040527143146.41320.qmail@web90104.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Received: from [61.187.54.13] by web90104.mail.scd.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 27 May 2004 15:31:46 BST Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 15:31:46 +0100 (BST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Gao=20Long?= To: David Johnson In-Reply-To: <200405262039.28752.david@usermode.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 cc: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org Subject: Re: LibH or Anaconda ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-libh@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated to libh code development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 14:33:07 -0000 David Johnson wrote: Except that there is absolutely no reason to use RPM! We already have our own package format that does everything RPM does and more. And without several of the disadvantages. Converting Anaconda's Perl scripts to use the pkg tools instead of rpm should be a rather trivial. The major problems are elsewhere. -- David Johnson ___________________ http://www.usermode.org Well , the anaconda is not a set of scripts of Perl , but Python , they look alike , but are different. So , if the package format has already been decided and coded into anaconda , what else is so important ? --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now