Date: Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:41:46 -0600 (CST) From: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@futuresouth.com> To: Karl Pielorz <kpielorz@tdx.co.uk> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD updated Installation / Adminsitration Kit Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980129203433.4784E-100000@shell.futuresouth.com> In-Reply-To: <34D12AF4.80043C1B@tdx.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 30 Jan 1998, Karl Pielorz wrote: > 1. We write something that will 'install' FreeBSD with emphasis on ease of > use, size, and the fact it will run very nicely on FreeBSD and let people > install it (I hate to use the words 'Like windows 95'). On this, here's a thought on a shorter-term goal: Leave sysinstall basically the way it is, but make the 'novice install' MUCH more novice; more extensive help 'what am I doing here?' sort of things, etc. My first FreeBSD install (2.1.6) was sheer luck that I figured out what a 'mount point' was ;). I know what it is now, and lots of other stuff that I didn't even dream of then, but you see my point; not everyone (including me) RT's the FM before it's too late. > 2. We write something that will maintain FreeBSD - again with emphasis on ease > of use, but including portability (i.e. we want to be able to run this from > Windows, other Unix platforms, Alpha workstations, X-servers etc. This is more > akin to the Admin tools for something like SCO OpenDesktop etc. - but done > properly ;-) Hmm, perhaps the best thing here would be to ignore the portability for the time being; work on something like AIX's SMIT for running on FreeBSD< and once all those decisions are made, move up to remote use, and platform independance. > 3. We write something that tries to accomplish both the above, hopefully not > causing too many compromises. And here, I'd suggest doing 1) and 2), then looking at merging them. That way, we'd have at least 1) working great MUCH sooner, which would attract more people. > For the actual program, we are faced with how to implement it. Currently we > have considered: > > TCL / X Beautiful. > Java Nice; save work later. > HTML / cgi This I don't like, for security and ease of extensibility, but... > Dedicated Win32 Client Umm... No. This eliminates the portability we're trying to create. Note that all of this is IMHO; I'm not an expert on the coding involved, nor necessarily in the concepts behind it. Just my pair of copper coins. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* | FreeBSD; the way computers were meant to be | * "The only reason I'm burning my candle at both ends, is * | that I haven't figured out how to light the middle yet."| * fullermd@futuresouth.com :-} MAtthew Fuller * | http://keystone.westminster.edu/~fullermd | *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980129203433.4784E-100000>