Current-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: [GSoC 2011]: Sysinst alternative interface

Am 04.04.11 11:36, schrieb Martin Husemann:

> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 11:14:44AM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
>> If you want to add a graphical user interface using X11 to sysinst, you
>> are opening a can of worms, and I go as far as to say you will fail with
>> this project.
> Obviously I disagree ;-)

I know ;)

>>  Think of embedded devices where you install
>> NetBSD over the serial port.  Would X help here?
> It could. You are thinking X == console only, but you could do a remoty
> X sysinst even on a GuruPlug, or a 1u server at a remote colocation, where
> you get console over ssh (but you'd need some ipsec or whatever tunnel
> setup there first).
> You could do the same, however, with very different means as well - like
> run a httpd and use the browser on your notebook to controll sysinst on
> the embedded device.
>> - A small core in C, driven by Lua, thus making sysinst extensible and
>> adaptable using Lua.
>> - The ability to install and configure software from pkgsrc
>> - More flexible i18n (e.g. using Lua)
>> - The ability to move backwards in the install process
>> - Unattended installs
> Yes, this are all good enhancements. IMHO they are orthogonal to the
> Xsysinst project though. We need to make sure, neither project makes the
> other harder, of course.
> What I don't know (the Xsysinst proposal predates Lua in base by far)
> is: would it be a lot easier to do the GUI later in Lua alone? In that
> case, enabling full Lua controll over sysinst should be implemented
> first (and basically provides clever unattended installs as a side
> effect).

Yes, it makes it definitely easier.  See for
an example (it uses Motif, but it could easily use Xt only).

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index