Re: On links and things (LONG)
> Date sent: Tue, 1 Feb 1994 17:55:25 +1100 (EST)
> From: Charlie Brady <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Subject: On links and things (LONG)
> To: email@example.com
> Copies to: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Charlie Brady <email@example.com> writes:
> > > I second this. Scripts which use "dialog" look great, and a lot of
> > > the complexity of looping, parsing and error checking is taken out
> > > of the script.
> > 'dialog' should not be introduced at this point when the install
> > script is so stable. I am not also entirely certain that 'dialog'
> > will work for all monitor types (monochrome, namely).
> > This also reminds me of the entirely shameful Perl rewrite.
> > > A lot of discussion went on a while ago about a good looking
> > > installation - I think that dialog will make that possible.
> > "Good looking" is just that -- looks. You install once. The majority
> > of Ian's install is also based on 'dpkg' and I don't want some cutesy
> > interface being used for it.
> > I really don't think it is wise to make major changes like this at
> > this point.
> Daniel, *your* opinion is that you don't want some cutesy interface. I
> think that it should be considered, and that the list should have a say.
> My advocacy for dialog was not just for its attractive appearance, but
> because it allows easier and more reliable script development. I don't
> understand your assertion that the install script is stable. I haven't
> yet installed 0.90 or 0.91, but I understand that major changes have been
> made to the script, and there hasn't been much time for user feedback.
> What is your BETA test group for?
> My opinion, expressed before, is that a good looking, reliable and
> easy-to-use installation procedure is important for the success of Linux.
> It's worth working at. If it is ever going to be done, sooner is better
> than later. If you look into it, you might find that changing the
> installation script to use dialog is not such a major change. Is the
> decision not to use it final?
The dpkg script is the part of the debian release which really could
use some improvements. The package selection is rather awkward. And if
you have to redo it 5 times, because the dpkg script does not like the
place where you put the packages it gets annoying. I got the packages
as a mirror of the original ftp server layout into my root
filesystem. dpkg insisted on mounting the filesystem where the
packages are stored and failed because this was already mounted as
root filesystem. I then copyed the complete tree into my dos
filesystem. dpkg failed again. It did not seem to like the directory
tree. Only when I moved all packages into one subdirectory did dpkg
finally succeed, except for one package, which failed again.
BTW the kernel as delivered with debian 0.91 screwed up my ne2000
clone network card.
Probably this was the probe for some other device. Fotunately I
already had a pl14u kernel, which I could swap in. After that the
network was up and running and I only missed an ftp client to proceed
with my installation.