Suggestions for Installer improvements?

_alexmyself · 2005-09-27 15:01:30

::help new linux/arch users::
-looking if there's a windows already here and add an entry to boot loader conf.
-maybe set to dhcp the interfaces.
-easely keyboard choice.
-if wm installed set init to 5 as default (not if it's twm...this will not help...).

add hwd to the cd.
add the cd's fsck the possibility to check all partitions type that are possible to made during install (maybe not all, i don't know, but ext2 could be nice).

actually the cd is 570mo.
i've install it all and then --sysupgrade....411mo...............
maybe a 0.7.1 could be nice, for download size and for bugs.

goodbye and thanks for this distrib

Moo-Crumpus · 2005-09-27 15:52:51

hd section and package selection should offer an "undo". In case I make a mistake, I have to reboot or the installation is f***ed up.
Hotplug could be added in case one does not know which modules would be necessary.

Furthermore, it would be nice to have a installation iso created by jigdo. Using this, your fetched iso would be a snapshot of the current packages.

gaah · 2005-10-12 08:34:39

Hi, I don't know if this is really a installer issue, but anyway. And I'll admit that I didn't have the energy to read this whole thread so if this suggestion already has been up, sorry for the duplication.

I'm just in the process to reinstall arch from the begining, and as always I'll do a ftp install. Because I feel that it's a waste of time to first install old packages from an iso, and then do a pacman -Syu that would probably replace most packages. For this I have (what I know) two options, using three floppies (which I only could find one that's working, as always anoying floppies) or using an iso. So now I'm downloading the base iso to burn to a rw cd just to be able to boot, the actualy packages on the cd I will not use...

So wouldn't it be a good idea to make one more iso, that does the same as the floppy way, just boot up to a ftp install? I know I'd like it much!

And also, I don't know how secure the ftp install is, so maybe make it more secure if it's possible. I mean, why install packages from an old iso and then upgrade? Why not just download all the new packages at once? I think this would be the prefered way to install.

deficite · 2005-10-12 14:49:38

Here's what I do: I boot off a live CD (doesn't matter which one) and use this: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php? … hbootstrap

mezoko · 2005-10-15 14:33:30

Well I'm not gonna take teh time to read the whole topic but I think it would be great if we have three types of disks. FTP Install only, Arch Base, Arch Full.

s0lar · 2005-10-17 12:35:03

Hi There,
I guess the best way to fix things is by knowing what to fix. With the new updates I had several problems.
I knew about the grub config file.
I installed full with the 0.7 iso and constantly had errors after pacman -Syu.
I thought, forget this, I just installed it so I tried again starting from base.
Opted the install from CD and selected base, rebooted, installed nvidia driver before I installed xorg and I could'nt install xorg, same error. Something with a file allready existing?
Then the ndiswrapper really is screwed. I tried pacman -S ndiswrapper from the comunity, I just cannot modprobe ndiswrapper, module doesn't exist. So I removed ndiswrapper and installed it from source instead. Then when I try to load it, my pc hangs. I tried to install ndiswrapper 1.1 and that worked flawlessly. Perhaps we could have an option to install older versions of a package with pacman? Like pacman -S ndiswrapper-1.1?
That would solve some problems if a newer package doesn't work good for someone.
I really enjoy Arch Linux, it's fast, it's lightweight and I can choose whatever I want, I also can't wait untill the x86-64 port is completely finished.

dtw · 2005-10-17 13:14:04

I also can't wait untill the x86-64 port is completely finished

If you can't wait help (apologies if you already are)

s0lar · 2005-10-17 13:29:17

I haven't tried it yet but it's only a matter of days. I just found out there was a port in progress.

dtw · 2005-10-17 13:31:06

s0lar wrote:

I haven't tried it yet but it's only a matter of days. I just found out there was a port in progress.

Where did you find out? Could it be better "advertised"? What might you suggest? We might be able to improve things.

s0lar · 2005-10-17 15:50:13

I was browsing about the update changes and then I saw a topic where someone mentioned he was porting Arch to x86-64. I thought, nice, I would like to try that on my desktop. Then at the topic where gentoo and arch are compared they also say something about it.
More advertsiement? I don't know, it's still not really finished from what I read and even it it would, it's a work in progress. Maybe a forum for the x86-64 port, I guess that would be the best thing. I know there is an "other architectures forum" and there allready are a lot of topics for 64 bit but x86-64 is a lot more used then let's say PowerPC.

Anonymo · 2005-10-18 22:49:59

Perhaps an option on how disk and stuff are named:

/dev/discs/disc0/disc1

If you like this, fine

Maybe a script in the installer that changes it to

/dev/hda1...etc etc

I really like this better, but maybe it could be added to the installer to make it simple.

Snowman · 2005-10-19 02:02:07

Anonymo wrote:

Perhaps an option on how disk and stuff are named:
/dev/discs/disc0/disc1
If you like this, fine
Maybe a script in the installer that changes it to
/dev/hda1...etc etc
I really like this better, but maybe it could be added to the installer to make it simple.

/dev/discs/disc0/disc1 is the devfs naming scheme. Since Arch 0.7, devfs has been removed from the kernel. The next iso will be using /dev/hda1.

Anonymo · 2005-10-19 18:53:09

cool, so I'll wait for the next release. Anyone know about when it will be out?

Snowman · 2005-10-19 19:51:46

There's plans of releasing a 0.7.1 iso that will essentially be the same as 0.7 but with upgraded packages ( udev-only kernel, gcc4, etc). There's no relaese date yet, AFAIK, but it could happen it the next weeks or so.

Anonymo · 2005-10-20 07:39:42

Awesome, can't wait. I am definetely a fan of arch and my favorite is pacman.

Bysshe · 2005-10-21 18:24:14

Can ext3 filesystem have option to install as indexed?

Gullible Jones · 2005-10-21 18:58:15

Should probably be indexed by default actually, as indexing has no detrimental effects.

Bysshe · 2005-10-21 19:31:31

I'd rather it be indexed, I just assumed it wasn't, b/c using ext utility to index it changes the drive geomotry. I need to do something to fix pacman optimize. Maybe ext3 was optimized a different way, and I foolishly didn't do something I was supposed to. Sorry.

Gullible Jones · 2005-10-21 23:08:38

No, don't apologize; I meant that the installer should be modified so that it creates indexed ext3 partitions by default. My bad for not being more specific.

Bysshe · 2005-10-21 23:52:03

Gullible Jones wrote:

No, don't apologize; I meant that the installer should be modified so that it creates indexed ext3 partitions by default. My bad for not being more specific.

^^^cool. Thanks for the support on this one. :mrgreen:
*also nice to suddenly realise this thread is from 2003. :twisted:

deficite · 2005-10-23 15:44:46

Or you can just use your favorite live cd and archbootstrap it.

Snowman · 2005-10-23 21:13:29

pholie wrote:

msg43 wrote:
Well I'm not gonna take teh time to read the whole topic but I think it would be great if we have three types of disks. FTP Install only, Arch Base, Arch Full.
I like the idea. When someone decides to install from ftp, why should he download the iso with old packages? Really lightweight iso only with installer (and kernel of course) would be cool.

To install from FTP only, there are floppy images that you can use: ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distrib … nux/images
They are on all the mirrors.

Snowman · 2005-10-24 07:04:46

pholie wrote:

Yes, that's good. But still one cd image is better than 2 floppies + some addons. Just my 2 cents.

And, of course, an iso (CD) might be useful for systems that don't have floppy drives like some modern laptops.

Gullible Jones · 2005-10-24 08:08:25

On the other hand, floppy images are useful for people who do not have CD burners.

arooaroo · 2005-10-24 19:41:01

Snowman wrote:

And, of course, an iso (CD) might be useful for systems that don't have floppy drives like some modern laptops.

Surely you mean most modern laptops, not some?!

Arch Linux

#51 2005-09-27 15:01:30

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#52 2005-09-27 15:52:51

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#53 2005-10-12 08:34:39

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#54 2005-10-12 14:49:38

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#55 2005-10-15 14:33:30

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#56 2005-10-17 12:35:03

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#57 2005-10-17 13:14:04

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#58 2005-10-17 13:29:17

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#59 2005-10-17 13:31:06

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#60 2005-10-17 15:50:13

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#61 2005-10-18 22:49:59

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#62 2005-10-19 02:02:07

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#63 2005-10-19 18:53:09

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#64 2005-10-19 19:51:46

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#65 2005-10-20 07:39:42

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#66 2005-10-21 18:24:14

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#67 2005-10-21 18:58:15

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#68 2005-10-21 19:31:31

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#69 2005-10-21 23:08:38

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#70 2005-10-21 23:52:03

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#71 2005-10-23 15:44:46

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#72 2005-10-23 21:13:29

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#73 2005-10-24 07:04:46

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#74 2005-10-24 08:08:25

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

#75 2005-10-24 19:41:01

Re: Suggestions for Installer improvements?

Board footer