From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 28 15:54:27 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D09B778D; Tue, 28 May 2013 15:54:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1F113C5; Tue, 28 May 2013 15:54:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-9.local (c-67-180-208-218.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.208.218]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 855741A3C37; Tue, 28 May 2013 08:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51A4D329.5060103@mu.org> Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 08:54:17 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nathan Whitehorn 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> <51A40E37.9060702@freebsd.org> <51A4343F.3070605@mu.org> <51A4C3F1.2010604@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <51A4C3F1.2010604@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 15:54:27 -0000 On 5/28/13 7:49 AM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > On 05/27/13 23:36, Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> On 5/27/13 6:53 PM, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: >>> 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 >> >> I'm sure if there was a list of reasonable things, such as wireless >> then pc-sysinstall could be augmented. This is the first I've heard >> of that. All the other complaints have been based on portability. >> >> Is that all that is required now, wireless? > > There are more, as well. A partial list of missing features on both > sides is here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/PCBSDInstallMerge. Other major > ones are IPv6 (maybe this has changed?) and no jail setup feature. > Most of the existing disk partitioning code in pc-sysinstall, which is > the only thing in a FreeBSD installer that is at all complicated, is > also *extremely* fragile and needs in all likelihood to be entirely > replaced. The merge effort stalled because of this kind of issue -- > doing a "merge" rapidly became rewriting both from scratch. > -Nathan > Ah this is so cool. I'll bring it up with the PCBSD folks today. Thank you Nathan. -Alfred