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

Re: Are mails sent to xxxx <at> buildd.debian.org sent to /dev/null ?

On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 02:36:41AM +0100, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
> > Of course, when you do such things as a new installer, you have additional
> > work in porting it. Another choice would have been to use old boot-floppies
> > on those archs that are not that well supported by d-i. But it was a
> > decision made by someone that all archs should use the new d-i. Complaining
> > afterwards that your own decision puts some more work on you is somewhat
> > strange, eh?
> In experience FAI is better suited to installing older/slower machines then 
> d-i. I doubt we need a single installer which can install debian on every 
> platform which can run debian.

It's nice to have one, when it's ready and working, but making a unfinished work in
progress mandatory for a release seems pretty wrong to me. 

> People using debian on older/slower machines 
> have different requirements for an installer then newbie endusers or people 
> wanting to deploy debian on a lot of machines. A good installer for 
> older/slower machines needs to provide the following features :

Yes. Some older machines tend to have small amounts of RAM. Some even has no
32 MB, so testing d-i on those archs seem to be pretty impossible. 
When the pressure was high to test it on m68k, I wanted to use d-i to
test-install on an A2000, but because of the high system requirements back
then (i think those are lower now) I simply wasn't able to test it. No
wonder that there were not that much reports for m68k... 
> + Easy to hack on. Preferably without requiring compilation.

Basically I agree on all of your listed points.

Ciao...              // 
      Ingo         \X/

Reply to: