Re: redesigning the debian installer
Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:
> I never said this was a complete design yet. You're right, these are
> all gaping holes:
Yeah -- I wasn't trying to deprecate your work but cast my net a
little wider, since there are a lot of blue sky / wishlist stuff
floating around. I think the code that works best is the code that
keeps it simple.
> - A module's maintainer decides it needs one of these things (a configured
> network, say).
> - They make the module depend on an appropriate virtual package
> (configured-network).
> - Before the module is used, the system makes sure its dependencies are
> met, and that the modules that satisfy those dependencies are
> configured (so the network is configured, but first hardware support
> for it is set up).
> (I need to change how the main menu works a little bit, come to think
> of it. More on this soon.)
So this is all micro-dpkg stuff, using Depends/Provides ?
Clearly you're going to need to arbitrate a set of virtual package
names for the fundmentals, such as "configured-network".
How does this work with attempting to configure your targetted media,
i.e., IDE, SCSI, NFSRoot, PCMCIA IDE device -- "configured-boot-media"
and "configured-target-media" virtual pkgs ? And
"configured-installation-media" is where we're installing from,
provided by "install-from-cdrom", "install-from-http", etc.?
So the installer basically proceeds through installation steps, which
is a process of installing more and more packages, perhaps leading to
an overarching completed installation of "installed-debian" ?? Thus
it knows that it's time to install "configured-target-media" so it
tries to fullfill that dependancy, presenting the user with all the
possible micro-pkgs which fulfill that?
This is starting to make my head spin. Are you sure we're not
overdesigning/overabstracting a bit?
> My point is that these various classes of modules don't need to be
> specified in much detail. I don't care how a network configuration
> module works, or what programs it installs where, as long as once it
> is set up, there is a configured network.
Sure.
> Of course, that's just in general -- we do need to think about each of
> these classes of modules and find the little details that need to be
> specified.
Well, I wouldn't underestimate it. I mean, "configured-network" does
would have to be a standardized virt pkg name, it would have to have a
documented/specified list of things it's expected to do, etc.
Would "configured-network" only be required for any pkg which wants to
install over the network (such as installing from http, or in the
later stages, running apt with http/ftp sources) ?
> I wish we could share more, it's really silly we all go off and write
> our own installers. Um. Er.
Well, as much work as it is, it would be more risky and harder to try
to mediate one installer used by all distros.
> Right that's doable easily (trivial to map debconf db to 822-format) and
> will work fine. Or there is this mythical debconf remote database stuff
> that maybe one day someone will actually write.
Please try to keep it simple. I don't want to have to maintain a woody
boot-floppies. :)
--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: