Subject: Re: Installing NetBSD experiences and help wanted
To: Jimmie Houchin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Matthew Orgass <email@example.com>
Date: 06/21/2005 20:07:44
On 2005-06-21 firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> Matthew Orgass wrote:
> > I wish NetBSD would go the other direction. There is really nothing you
> > do in an install that is never done at other times and there are very few
> > steps necessary to get a system that boots to single user. Time spent on
> > systinst would, IMO, be better spent working on the real tools and turn
> > sysinst into a basic shell script or eliminate it entirely.
> Let me see if I understand you correctly.
> Your wanting a system that does enough of an install for you to boot off
> the hard disk. From there you use better, normal or real tools in order
> to create the system you seek? Is that a reasonable assessment?
Currently (at least last time I checked) sysinst does not do much and
uses the standard tools for most of the work. It is already quite
possible to entirely ignore sysinst (I haven't used it for a long time and
never miss it). Fdisk is a good example of my point (if it still works
the way it used to): the disk is partitioned with fdisk, but sysinst has a
separate interface to it. The standard interface is not that bad, but if
a different interface is desired for install, then it is almost certainly
useful in other situations as well. IMO, the "installer" should just be a
document, not a separate program.