Subject: Re: sysinst report [was: 1.3Beta]
To: Bill Sommerfeld <>
From: Simon Burge <>
List: port-i386
Date: 12/05/1997 15:36:40
On Thu, 04 Dec 1997 20:38:00 -0500  Bill Sommerfeld wrote:

> > >2. In sysinst, most menu's end with an x (exit) option.  This
> > >   is really gets you to the next menu so why not call it n (next).
> > 
> > It doesn't always mean `next', often it means `go back to parent'.
> > I'd prefer to just use 'x' consistently to mean `leave this menu' (
> > change the `e' in the main menu to be 'x') and have the documentation
> > clarify what happens where.
> > 
> > Would you  be unhappy with that?
> I would.  From the point of view of the user, you migrate from one
> screen to another as you provide additional details about how you want
> the install to proceed.  the actual call/return structure of which
> menu calls which is irrelevant to the UI.
> A forward/back structure for the install screens would be much easier
> to navigate; if you realized that (for instance) you made a mistake on
> a previous screen after moving on, you can always move back to change
> your entry and then move forward again.

I've said before (dunno which list tho!) that the Solaris installation
procedure is pretty slick, and handles this "oh shit, I got it wrong"
stuff well.  I've been looking at it closely for ideas for sysinst.
I've also said (about an unrelated issue with sysinst) that changes of
this size are unlikely to get done before 1.3...