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