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

Re: Corel Setup Design Proposal

On Fri, May 07, 1999 at 12:19:09PM -0400, Dave Neil wrote:
> Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> > 
> > I've got some more comments to your proposal:
> > 

(In fact those comments come also from problems we face while trying to
improve our current boot-floppies).
> > 
> > a) Your proposal assumes the user will do a CD-ROM based installation.
> > But we support floppy (the horror, the horror) and network based
> > installations as well. For network based installations, the rescue image
> > would have to mount a remote medium (probably by NFS) to start X from it.
> > That means configuring the network before using X. Have you thought
> > about that for your design?
> For now we onlywould support an X based install from CD-ROM
> . All others would revert to console<curses> mode

Just FYI, currently we use newt (a toolkit built over SLang) for console

But the main problem is not running X or a console based UI. It's
configuring some subsystems (SCSI drivers, network, ...) before mounting
the "big medium", be it a SCSI CD-ROM, NFS-mounted partition or who knows
what. That configuration will have to be done from a small root.bin file
on a little floppy that also contains the kernel. It's a hard constraint.

> > b) 2.2.x with all SCSI drivers compiled in is a huge beast. Are you going
> > to compile them as modules? If so, where are they going to be loaded
> > from? When? (You may need them while detecting the cdrom and hard drive
> > devices).
> Yes we would have to build a modularized kernel much like the Red Hat system.

So, where are they going to be loaded from? The rescue image or the
CD-ROM? What if the user has a SCSI CD-ROM?

Also will the same modularized kernel be used after installation? If so,
how will the user upgrade his kernel?

> 5. I really think a well planned gradual phase in of this concept is needed on many levels.
>        A.Debian supports many other platforms and would need time to convert them and do any modifications
>          to make this work.
>        B.We could use an X based install initially and then move to frame buffer once it's ready.
>        C.A console based install must be included in all situations as a choice and in some cases

My main objection to the X based install is that X is a huge beast that
requires a lot of space and resources for such a simple task as
bootstrapping a system.  It's OK to use it once one has the base system
installed, but on the initial steps, when one is booting from a small
floppy disk, and one doesn't even have partitioned the target disk,
trying to start X can be a nightmare.
Enrique Zanardi					   ezanardi@ull.es

Reply to: