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

Re: Switching g-i from DirectFB to X11 -- console-setup

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:49:42AM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> if xkb-data is available then these keymaps can be generated at 
> runtime by ckbcomp/setupcon (although I'm not sure ckbcomp-mini can do 
> it; Anton?).

No, ckbcomp-mini can not do this and ckbcomp would require Perl and a 
new udeb.  However, in a X-based installation you don't need to 
configure the console so maybe console-setup-pc-ekmap is not required?

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 10:22:54AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> Besides that it offers choices for keymaps that are not even available and 
> AFAIK it does not detect headless systems that don't need any console 
> setup.

AFAIK this doesn't happen.

> The extremely long selection lists make console-setup-udeb completely 
> unusable with the text frontend.

Inconvenient as always with the long selection lists, but not unusable, 
see #531646.  However, I am not sure which extremely long selection 
lists are you refering to.  AFAIK there is only one long selection list 
in c-s-udeb, in the typical situation this question won't be asked and 
it is longer than the corresponding selection list of kbd-chooser only 
because some layouts are not supported by kbd-chooser.

> The basic error in the design is the assumption that the same functionality 
> is suitable for both installed systems (where users may want to tune there 
> keyboard for their personal preferences and, most importantly, have the 
> opportunity to try out different options and see their effect) and for the 
> installer (where users only need a basic selection of the correct keymap 
> with solid defaults based on country, language and keymap for everything 
> else).

There is no such assumption.  If the d-i team has enough man-power the 
the udeb can be redesigned to ask entirely different questions.  
Setupcon is there so only the debconf-dialog needs to be redesigned.  
The current implementation is due to the realisation that this the only 
way I can support partially the udeb.  Any difference between the udeb 
and the regular package would imply more work for the d-i team.  

However, I'd like to point out that in the typical situation 
console-setup-udeb would ask only one question with less choices than 
kbd-chooser.  More functionality does not necessarily mean less 

> I'm not going into further detail here. For that, please see the earlier 
> thread Samuel already linked to.

I think a lot of things changed in console-setup since that thread.

Anton Zinoviev

Reply to: