From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 28 01:54:09 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA5DE3BB for ; Tue, 28 May 2013 01:54:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from smtpauth3.wiscmail.wisc.edu (wmauth3.doit.wisc.edu [144.92.197.226]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D453E01 for ; Tue, 28 May 2013 01:54:09 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed Received: from avs-daemon.smtpauth3.wiscmail.wisc.edu by smtpauth3.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) id <0MNH00500JVBXN00@smtpauth3.wiscmail.wisc.edu> for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Mon, 27 May 2013 20:54:07 -0500 (CDT) X-Spam-PmxInfo: Server=avs-3, Version=6.0.2.2308539, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2013.5.28.13929, SenderIP=0.0.0.0 X-Spam-Report: AuthenticatedSender=yes, SenderIP=0.0.0.0 Received: from comporellon.tachypleus.net (adsl-76-208-69-84.dsl.mdsnwi.sbcglobal.net [76.208.69.84]) by smtpauth3.wiscmail.wisc.edu (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit (built Aug 30 2012)) with ESMTPSA id <0MNH00GQ5JXZPP10@smtpauth3.wiscmail.wisc.edu>; Mon, 27 May 2013 20:54:01 -0500 (CDT) Message-id: <51A40E37.9060702@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 20:53:59 -0500 From: Nathan Whitehorn User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130410 Thunderbird/17.0.5 To: Alfred Perlstein Subject: Re: FreeBSD installers and future direction References: <51A0DC3F.9030301@cran.org.uk> <51A1025A.2020607@cran.org.uk> <51A14445.4060305@freebsd.org> <51A15EDF.6050600@erdgeist.org> <13CA24D6AB415D428143D44749F57D7201F5B337@ltcfiswmsgmb26> <51A38051.8040909@mu.org> <51A39039.1070202@cran.org.uk> <51A39FEC.5070402@mu.org> <51A3A891.5060103@cran.org.uk> <51A3C202.9030802@mu.org> <51A3CEB6.3070200@cran.org.uk> <51A40AF2.2010108@mu.org> In-reply-to: <51A40AF2.2010108@mu.org> Cc: Bruce Cran , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 01:54:09 -0000 On 05/27/13 20:40, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > On 5/27/13 2:23 PM, Bruce Cran wrote: >> On 27/05/2013 21:28, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >>> On 5/27/13 11:40 AM, Bruce Cran wrote: >>>> Yes. >>> Is this a joke? >> >> It probably /was/ too short a reply. Personally I think there should >> be a single UI and scripting interface across all platforms. We >> should try and get pc-sysinstall running on all of them first in case >> there's some problem that means it can't be done, in which case we'd >> need to use a different backend. >> > > There are just going to be certain platforms that make it EASY to do > cool things. We should embrace that! That's why there are different > platforms! > > Some are great for low power, others are great for graphics, cpu > power, gpu, networking etc. > > If we always go for the lowest common denominator then we are > crippling all the platforms for no one's benefit. Even if something > CAN be done, if it is very difficult, or just never happening, then we > can't limit everyone's experience based on the more difficult and/or > resource strapped platforms. > > It's just not good business. Yes, and all of this cuts both ways: pc-sysinstall has no wireless setup support, for instance. Right now we support what we support because it is the most feature-complete thing we have, not just on tier-2 platforms but also on x86. To bring this discussion back to the ground, the fact is that we lack an installer that has both internal support for ZFS and a UI. One of the reasons for this is that making a good expressive UI for ZFS is a non-trivial undertaking given its enormous flexibility. The bsdinstall partition editor has been written to be extensible for this, and several people have started writing code to do it, but no one ended up having time to finish. Probably a reasonable thing to do is to start with supporting only a minimal set of features. If anyone felt like actually writing this code, I'm sure it would be appreciated by all and be more productive than email exchanges. -Nathan