Subject: Re: Graphical Sysinst in 2.0
To: Richard Rauch <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/07/2004 17:18:13
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 10:09:43PM -0500, Richard Rauch wrote:
> I have a couple of random observations that I think are new to the thread,
> based on the parts that are visible to me:
> * X (XFree86 at least) is pretty easy to configure these days.
> XFree86 was talking about dropping the config file altogether
> and supporting running just by dynamic probes.
We could do that, but I think it'd just be easier to stick with a simple=20
graphics mode that all the hardware should support (if it does graphics).=
None of the graphical installers I've played with have taxed the graphics=
setup at all.
> I assume that X.Org is going to continue this trend.
> I don't know how much that means for some archetectures. Maybe
> the XFree86 probing was not very portable. (And it certainly
> is not yet flawless.) Still, this may be something of a background
> issue. Trying an automated X config, and bailing out if things go
> bad, is one option. It would require a user with enough knowledge
> to kill X if X thought it was running but had screwed up something
> in the display.
> * To Bill, I think that developers are not voicing so many
> opinions because those who want it know that they can work on
> it. Non-developers can't just vote with their development time
> because they don't have any. So instead, they make their opinions
> known about what they do or don't think would make NetBSD better.
> If the goal is to grow the NetBSD base rather than to serve the
> NetBSD developers' own interests and needs, then it is also worth
> considering the potential loss of current users (even if the loss
> may be because some of the users are "elitist").
I'm not really sure if they'd go. While some may, I strongly suspect that=
either they will continue a pattern of strong negativity or they will=20
discover what a large number of NetBSD developers swear by - the 'd' key=20
(or 'Delete' depending on your mailer). :-)
> Not to say that there's nothing to your point about complaints
> on this topic being much the sort of demands from WIN32-escapees.
> There is certainly a bit of a double-standard in non-developers
> saying that they don't want [other] non-developers coming on-board.
That was the main point I was trying to make. :-)
The one reason I could see against lots of new blood would be if we=20
experienced an extreemely rapid growth spurt, like doubling the number of=
users over less than a year. I think that scenario would be a stress on=20
our previous users. However, I really don't think that will happen soon.=20
:-) That's one of those problems we wish we had. ;-)
> * As the GNU/LINUX world partially moves to graphical installers,
> we may see GNU/LINUX-escapees looking for graphical installers
> as well as WIN32-escapees. I think that some of this resentment
> is really "I don't want a bunch of WIN32 users coming in and
> asking why NetBSD isn't like WIN32. Let's let GNU/LINUX be
> their first experience with UNIX-like systems..." But this
> feature will relate to increasing numbers of potential GNU/LINUX
> users. (Maybe there are other aspects of the resentment, of
> course. Not to pass judgment on resentment of WIN32-escapees
> as opposed to general new users.)
One other group I think we should keep in mind is that of reluctant users.=
Like someone whose boss told him or her to use NetBSD to do X or Y. While=
I agree we don't want to add features without bound, making life easier=20
for them will help us, I think. And since folks who have to try an OS or a=
product against their will and have a negative experience tend to talk=20
about that (negative) experience a lot, I think we'll do well to avoid=20
such situations. :-)
As a specific example, I list myself. I had to install both Windows and=20
Linux for work reasons. I didn't want to, but oh well. With some measure=20
of finagling, both installs went well (tripple-booting a Dell isn't so=20
easy). Given the ease with which I installed both of them, and my ability=
to successfully configure them, I now do not dislike either OS as much as=
I did. I expect there are/will be other folks who now like the other OSs=20
and can come to like NetBSD.
> * My *own* opinion (everyone's got one, right?):
> 1) I have installed 3 or 4 varieties of GNU/LINUX. I currently
> have a Mandrake 10 Beta (AMD64) install on one of my partitions.
> I use it to play an OpenGL game because it won't run usably
> on any NetBSD stock system, and I sometimes want the distraction
> of bzflag. (^& (I also use it to occasionally test the status
> of a graphics library.)
> I find the Mandrake installer easy to use. And it was pretty
> However, the Mandrake system went too far down the road of
> hiding things. I have not been able to find where they
> stuck the !@#$ option for Emulate3Buttons (or whatever).
> It is turned on, and has caused me many times to lose my
> Guided Missile flag (right button to lock, left to fire;
> if you do it too quick, it thinks you've pressed the middle
> button and drops the flag).
> (Seems silly? Well, remember that I *mostly* use Mandrake
> for playing this one OpenGL game. Its primary function in
> life on my system is being undermined by a config feature
> that I have not been able to turn off. I *have* looked in
> /etc/XF86Config, or whatever. I haven't made as thorough
> a search as I could, though.)
> It is possible that I missed a flag to disable it when
> installing Mandrake (I also had some problems getting it
> to find my mouse for a while, I recall, and might have in
> frustration toggled a bunch of flags). However, at this
> point, I cannot see how to disable it.
> So, to relate this situation back to NetBSD:
> Where would things stop? Would we have a GUI tool for
> configuring a kernel? A GUI tool for adding and removing
> users? A GUI tool for packages? Would these tools become
> mainstream recommended ways to install/manage a system?
> (Once *that* happens, I think that people stop worrying
> so much about making it possible to get around without
> the tools. This is what Mandrake has done, I think.)
I don't think we should worry about this now. Among other things, I think
the motif of common tool base with different equi-functional presentation
methods (curses or X) is one that we can get a lot of milage out of.
We already have sushi, a management tool inspired by smit, an admin tool=20
for AIX. Having admined AIX 3 boxes, I grew to like smit. I liked how it=20
had both curses and X front-ends, the different equi-function presentation=
aspect. :-) I expect we can and will end up with the same.
As a total aside, sushi is supposed to be able to list the command it will=
run for a given function. So either of the front ends could tell you what=
you need to type to do the same thing. Unfortunately I had trouble getting=
this to work last time I tried it.
> 2) As you might infer from the above, I have reservations
> about a graphical installer. (^& Aside from some of
> the above, which may or may not happen, I do not find
> the NetBSD sysinst hard to use (when it works correctly).
> There seems to be some kind of presumed "graphical =3D=3D easy".
I think a fairer way to put this is that a graphical installer will be=20
easier for some folks, and also a graphical installer will be more=20
comfortable for some folks.
> (Then again, I'm somewhat guilty of "graphical =3D=3D hidden
> feature", though I think that graphical installers tend to
> drift more that way.) Graphical might be pretty, though that
> is not a given. If we do not add something like KDE to the
> base system, the installed-and-running system is not going
> to look as pretty as a stock Mandrake (or FreeBSD) desktop
> install and may be a disappointment to those who completed
> the installation because of eye-candy. If we are entering
> into beauty pageants, I'd worry that KDE-in-base might be up
> someone's sleeve, which I hope we do not do.
> When sysinst fails, as noted by another, a graphical
> interface would not be much of an improvement.
> Maybe I've missed it, but what is the real gain from a
> graphical install?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----