On Apr 14, Hal Murray wrote
> Extra pauses give you time to read the screen.  That can be very 
> helpful when something gets confused and you aren't a wizard. 

You need to be able to read the screen only when a command didn't work.
What I did is to ask the user to acknowledge only when a command failed.

> 
> I thought the current setup was pretty good.

used to Microsoft's install tools, maybe ? :)
No, this is really a problem when you install on a slow machine, where
extracting the sets can take up to several hours.

You should be able to start the install in the evening, and once all
parameters are entered leave it running the whole nigth. If all goes well,
all the time-consuming tacks should be done when you get back.

> 
> Would it be easy to make them optional?  (Rather than removing them 
> totally.)

Do you really need the extra pauses when all goes well ?
Of course if a command fails, sysinst needs to warn the user, and wait
for the user to aknoledge it. I didn't remove this, I even think I improved
it a bit.

--
Manuel Bouyer, LIP6, Universite Paris VI.           Manuel.Bouyer@lip6.fr
--