Subject: Re: Graphical Sysinst in 2.0
To: Timo =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sch=F6ler?= <email@example.com>
From: Frank B. Scholl <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/07/2004 23:27:57
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 11:19:17 +0200
Timo Sch=F6ler <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> * using XML for data sets like the timezone list (there's more or less
> >> a kind of dynamic change in it)
> > to make it bigger and more complicated?
> sorry for the noise -- kick it ;)
> > smells like windows marketing ;)
> uhm, sorry, as a Mac/Sun/sgi/NeXT user i have to ask this question:=20
> what is windows?
> (i really didn't even touch a peecee since '96 :)
> This life is a test. It is only a test. Had this been an actual life,
> you would have received further instructions as to what to do and where
> to go.
hi list, to give you my opinion to that discussion i am joining a bit late..
i would be lucky _not_ to see a more bloated installation, especially if th=
e textmode interface of sysinst is not kept in parallel. it would be better=
to put some efforts into getting the sysinst even smaller, so it runs on m=
ore small platforms. it is netbsd`s main advantage and aim to run on nearly=
all computer systems one can get today, but if it doesnt support the weake=
st configurations on those platforms, it dramatically fails. for example - =
you might laugh now - it is impossible to install it on an i486 with 4mb of=
ram, even with the tiny images. especially, when there are no swap partiti=
ons, i.e., the disk is factory new or dd`ed - same with small sparcs. it sh=
ould not be an urgent need to have another machine running netbsd, on which=
you need to prepare disks.. if you want to gain new users testing the oper=
ating system on a single weak machine, just to see "how it might act as a r=
outer" for example, and they get presented by an installer that doesnt even=
handle the machine the os is supposed to run on, i am sure, there is not m=
uch applause left. the os might be brilliant, but it needs to be kept insta=