Suggestions for Installer improvements?

phrakture · 2005-08-25 21:36:30

Just so you are all aware, this thread is from 2003

oscar · 2005-08-25 22:24:35

Why not include a option in the phase when you're about to select what packages to install, that are pretty generic, like:

· Webserver
· Fileserver
· KDE Desktop
· GNOME Desktop
· Laptop
· etc

And by choosing one or several of them, pacman installs a number of packages which you might need in a, for example, webserver (apache, mysql, php etc).

Gullible Jones · 2005-09-13 19:17:05

How about adding support for creating JFS partitions?

sabrewolf · 2005-09-13 20:29:33

a better way to set partition points, like:

set root
set swap
set home
set other

now you don`t know if are set the partition point of the root o home.

Gullible Jones · 2005-09-13 21:50:55

The installer already lets you specify things other than root and swap, you select "other" (or whatever it is) and type in what you want it to be (/home being the default).

BTW... I think I'll add that the installer ought to have an XFS option too. There, that's 5 filesystems, each with different advantages.

(I think we might as well leave Reiser4 to Archie for now.)

iBertus · 2005-09-13 22:29:34

I thought the Arch installer already had XFS as an option?..

Father · 2005-09-13 23:11:46

I posted a bug in the tracker about there not being the option to _not_ format a mount point during the install.
It ends up that you don't have to, its just that the dialog was confusing!

I can't remember exactly what it says, but i think the dialog should mention that the mount point has already been mounted, and that the format is optional.
When I came across it, I thought it meant that I _had_ to format the partition or it wouldn't be mounted.

just a minor point.

jftaylor21 · 2005-09-14 00:38:04

it would be nice to have something like links so you can look up stuff on the web while installing in case you have trouble.

Gullible Jones · 2005-09-14 01:15:20

iBertus wrote:

I thought the Arch installer already had XFS as an option?..

Maybe you're right, I think the last time I used the installer was pre-0.7... Also, it was an FTP install using floppies.

Hey apeiro, does the Wombat installer let you use XFS?

(Sorry, can't check it out myself - got something of a shortage of usable floppies. :x )

phrakture · 2005-09-14 15:11:15

Hmmm installer - hooray! I was actually thinking of trying to get a group together to try and improve this just for-the-hell-of-it... but it looks like I've been preempted.

Let me try and list things, not features really, but "bugs" (in a way):

a) Currently the HDD section requires you to hit "DONE" or else the install fails. This should be fixed somehow - either make it mandatory (can't go on to next step unless you hit DONE), or warn about if they exit without hitting it.

b) Similar to the above, checks should be made to ensure things are mounted properly before installing to the "/mnt" root. If the previous was not done, installation fails with little or no notice to the user.

c) More network drivers and/or an additional app to handle the network control. It'd be nice to able to install via wireless or even things like pcmcia ethernet cards.

I'm sure more will come to me... I'll post them in time.

kth5 · 2005-09-14 15:24:34

a) include pcmcia_cs in the base.iso as well for laptops with no built-in network card

b) be less memory consumptive, let me explain how:

* instead of a ramdisk the kernel should boot into a plain iso9660/rockridge root
* mount unionfs (or similar) so that it overlays /
* only changes get written to the memory, not even the shell needs to be held in memory twice (ramdisk + allocated ram)

this could make it possible to install arch on machines with less than - let's say - <24mb.
i'm working on this kind of thing for teh ppc port and will release a makefile that automizes the built. i will announce it properly once it's ready. it's done when it's done.

Moo-Crumpus · 2005-09-14 15:48:15

add possibilites to choose languages, include most common fs modules and fsutils, add rescue tools.

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-09-14 20:30:51

I've noticed that after a particular thing is done in the installer, i can't continue. Everyone tells me that i forgot to hit done or something like that, but thats not true, its happened on both my main computer and my p3. That may also be something to consider

deficite · 2005-09-15 01:17:36

I think making use of Archbootstrap would make the installer easier for the developers.

I think ndiswrapper would make a nice addition to the installer. A lot of people only have one disc drive (which would be locked by the Arch install disc), so I guess people would have to load the windows drivers off of their thumbdrives or floppies (or existing partitions). Speaking of thumbdrives, the current Arch install disc doesn't create a sda nor uba in /dev. Thus, I can't use my thumbdrive in the installer. I would like to be able to put a kernel on a thumbdrive so I can get a fresh, new kernel tarball off of it. Of course, if the install disc gets ndiswrapper I could just download it.

I was actually working on an installer in Python yesterday using PythonDialog. I was going to call it Beutelmaus (It's German for "Wombat"). Since something is taking place officially, I'll just wait and see what happens with the new installer .

Moo-Crumpus · 2005-09-15 04:58:04

Gullible Jones wrote:

How about adding support for creating JFS partitions?

this is already possible

Moo-Crumpus · 2005-09-15 04:59:33

phrakture wrote:

Just so you are all aware, this thread is from 2003

brain0 · 2005-09-15 11:36:28

phrakture wrote:

Let me try and list things, not features really, but "bugs" (in a way):
a) Currently the HDD section requires you to hit "DONE" or else the install fails. This should be fixed somehow - either make it mandatory (can't go on to next step unless you hit DONE), or warn about if they exit without hitting it.

VERY important imho. My second arch install ended after two minutes because I forgot hitting DONE. My father made the same mistake just a week ago. Someone could do something to make this more intuitive.

phrakture wrote:

c) More network drivers and/or an additional app to handle the network control. It'd be nice to able to install via wireless or even things like pcmcia ethernet cards.

And of course a possibility to use PPP during installation (especially PPPoE). Basically, you need the possibility to perform ftp install in almost any environment.

The most important issue with the 0.7 installer (and I consider it a bug) is that it doesn't create /dev/{console,null} nodes, which breaks udev if you use devfs=nomount. When someday 2.6.13 will be in current this will break your ftp install if you don't know that you have to create at least the /dev/console device manually.

Gullible Jones · 2005-09-17 03:04:38

Actually, pacman seems to create those nodes on installing uDev. What ought to be found out is why this occasionally fails.

dtw · 2005-09-17 11:48:48

That would be the install script problem already mentioned I guess?

The "hit done" "bug" has been complained about on numerous occasions by various reviewers..

kleptophobiac · 2005-09-17 13:16:51

Being from 2003, is anybody actually working to improve the installer? I think that's one of the biggest weaknesses of arch right now.

leeghoofd · 2005-09-19 20:17:17

What I would like to see on the new installer disk is that it would boot into the cli. Then you could edit a very simple config file, for instance something like this:

[partitions]
/=/dev/hda1
swap=/dev/hda2
/boot=/dev/hda3
/home=/dev/hda4

[options]
bootloader=grub
mbr=true
keymap=us

[packages]
xorg
kde

And than just type

install config.txt && reboot

and it would install the system and reboot

The advantages of this would be that it would be easyer to do standart installations (just wget the install file, create partitions and run install) and I think that when there is a good config templetate it could also be faster than the dialog based installer

deficite · 2005-09-20 00:22:44

I like that a lot. I don't see why we can't have a dialog based configurator generate that file, kind of like how the kernel works.

Gullible Jones · 2005-09-20 00:58:14

That is a really cool idea... Very Arch-like.

Euphoric Nightmare · 2005-09-20 02:10:05

+1 -> That would be great...instead of people writing scripts to automate the process....its not always a quick thing to do.

jftaylor21 · 2005-09-20 06:49:50

I fifth the idea

Arch Linux

#26 2005-08-25 21:36:30

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#27 2005-08-25 22:24:35

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#28 2005-09-13 19:17:05

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#29 2005-09-13 20:29:33

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#30 2005-09-13 21:50:55

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#31 2005-09-13 22:29:34

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#32 2005-09-13 23:11:46

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#33 2005-09-14 00:38:04

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#34 2005-09-14 01:15:20

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#35 2005-09-14 15:11:15

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#36 2005-09-14 15:24:34

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#37 2005-09-14 15:48:15

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#38 2005-09-14 20:30:51

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#39 2005-09-15 01:17:36

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#40 2005-09-15 04:58:04

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#41 2005-09-15 04:59:33

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#42 2005-09-15 11:36:28

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#43 2005-09-17 03:04:38

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#44 2005-09-17 11:48:48

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#45 2005-09-17 13:16:51

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#46 2005-09-19 20:17:17

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#47 2005-09-20 00:22:44

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#48 2005-09-20 00:58:14

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#49 2005-09-20 02:10:05

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#50 2005-09-20 06:49:50

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

Board footer