Arch Linux Automatic Installer

Hrod beraht · 2008-10-13 15:18:52

crouse wrote:

the LAST thing I want Arch to be is more like Ubuntu...

+1

Misfit138 wrote:

This has been proposed a few times over the years. I must admit, I am not interested in it, because I actually like the simple installation script as it is.

I would have to second that. To me, the Arch installer is fabulously straightforward as it is. It, together with great wiki documentation, makes the Arch install seem to me to be the most 'user-friendly' install I've seen in any distro (and I've tried them all ).

Aaron Griffin got it exaclty right when he said:

" 'Simple' is defined from a technical standpoint, not a usability standpoint. It is better to be technically elegant with a higher learning curve, than to be easy to use and technically [inferior]." -Aaron Griffin

I don't have any interest in what you are proposing, but I do understand what you are getting at and wish you luck with your project.

Bob

solarwind · 2008-10-13 15:24:35

dhave wrote:

solarwind wrote:
The thing I'm more interested here is how Dusty saw me on the TTC... North York and Toronto aren't that close... Even so, how would he recognize me given he only knows my "alias" - solarwind?
I feel certain there's a perfectly illogical explanation for this.

Lol!

And @ all: I know there aren't many here that like this idea, but I know somewhere, someone will find it useful. I know setting up Arch is a "learning experience", but once you do it, you know it. And when you have to do it a few more times, it gets annoying, especially after you've done it once. That's why I'm going to make it. We'll see how this turns out. I'll keep everyone up to date. And for those who like headaches, I'm going to split this script into three versions: one to do initial configuration, one to do installation of common packages (gnome, kde, whatever) and the third to do post install configuration.

rson451 · 2008-10-13 15:24:59

How about modifying the arch installer to log what exactly is done during each step of an install, then spit out some sort of workstep at the end that can be used to automate future installs as an option when the installer is started. I haven't installed in well over a year, but I believe you call something like /arch/setup or /arch/install to begin the installer, an option could be added to run a separate script like /arch/autoinst $FILENAME to auto install using the log file created by the previous install.

I would probably never use this but that's my take on it.

Dusty · 2008-10-13 15:30:43

solarwind wrote:

The thing I'm more interested here is how Dusty saw me on the TTC... North York and Toronto aren't that close... Even so, how would he recognize me given he only knows my "alias" - solarwind?

Nah, your profile says you're in Ontario, so I l abused my privs and ooked up your IP. It says you're in Toronto, so I made the TTC reference to test you since most people outside the city don't recognize the acronym. I don't actually know any other GTA Archers.

I'm actually out in Don Mills now, but I haven't updated my profile location since I graduated. On various occasions I've been to virtually every area the TTC services. Takes about 2 hours to get from here to Pearson for example. :-(

If you ever see me you'll recognize me; I rarely go out in public without an Arch Linux shirt.

Back on topic, which has unfortunately been derailed by the all too familiar "OMG don't change Arch, I don't want any n00bies around" attitude (which is usually presented by the most recent Arch newbies anyway...), there used to be a quick install script floating around that may have been similar to what you're requesting. It used to be in the wiki but I can't find it now, but it may be in the forum somewhere. It was basically just a bash script that installed a preconfigured arch system and was meant for people having to roll out identical copies of Arch to dozens of machines. I don't think this happens much and it must have been abandoned.

There is also this article, but its not really related: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fas … nux_System

Finally, I think both larch and arch-live are designed to create custom arch linux systems configured the way you want them. The difference is that they both create live cds. You may be able to modify these scripts to create a hard drive installer as well. Or start from scratch, it should be a fun project, you'll probably learn something and end up with something you can use, and its possible other people will use it too. Don't pay attention to anyone saying they don't want one; they don't have to use it. And if the horriffic community of aweful n00bies apocalypse DOES occur, because of your one little contribution... Wow, that makes you special, eh? ;-)

Dusty

haxit · 2008-10-13 15:33:15

Dusty wrote:

solarwind wrote:
The thing I'm more interested here is how Dusty saw me on the TTC... North York and Toronto aren't that close... Even so, how would he recognize me given he only knows my "alias" - solarwind?
Nah, your profile says you're in Ontario, so I l abused my privs and ooked up your IP. It says you're in Toronto, so I made the TTC reference to test you since most people outside the city don't recognize the acronym. I don't actually know any other GTA Archers.
I'm actually out in Don Mills now, but I haven't updated my profile location since I graduated. On various occasions I've been to virtually every area the TTC services. Takes about 2 hours to get from here to Pearson for example. :-(
If you ever see me you'll recognize me; I rarely go out in public without an Arch Linux shirt.
Back on topic, which has unfortunately been derailed by the all too familiar "OMG don't change Arch, I don't want any n00bies around" attitude (which is usually presented by the most recent Arch newbies anyway...), there used to be a quick install script floating around that may have been similar to what you're requesting. It used to be in the wiki but I can't find it now, but it may be in the forum somewhere. It was basically just a bash script that installed a preconfigured arch system and was meant for people having to roll out identical copies of Arch to dozens of machines. I don't think this happens much and it must have been abandoned.
There is also this article, but its not really related: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fas … nux_System
Finally, I think both larch and arch-live are designed to create custom arch linux systems configured the way you want them. The difference is that they both create live cds. You may be able to modify these scripts to create a hard drive installer as well. Or start from scratch, it should be a fun project, you'll probably learn something and end up with something you can use, and its possible other people will use it too. Don't pay attention to anyone saying they don't want one; they don't have to use it. And if the horriffic community of aweful n00bies apocalypse DOES occur, because of your one little contribution... Wow, that makes you special, eh? ;-)
Dusty

I am in ottawa, and I know what the TTC is, pfft

Dusty · 2008-10-13 15:34:21

solarwind wrote:

And for those who like headaches, I'm going to split this script into three versions: one to do initial configuration, one to do installation of common packages (gnome, kde, whatever) and the third to do post install configuration.

You could also add an optional step 4: Headaches which randomly removes packages or files or inserts garbage chacracters into configuration files. That'll cause loads of them.

Dusty

crouse · 2008-10-13 15:57:25

Dusty wrote:

solarwind wrote:
And for those who like headaches, I'm going to split this script into three versions: one to do initial configuration, one to do installation of common packages (gnome, kde, whatever) and the third to do post install configuration.
You could also add an optional step 4: Headaches which randomly removes packages or files or inserts garbage chacracters into configuration files. That'll cause loads of them.
Dusty

Didn't someone already create a pacman roulette script ?

Stythys · 2008-10-13 16:39:20

crouse wrote:

Didn't someone already create a pacman roulette script ?

you mean...

pacman -R $(pacman -Slq | LANG=C sort -R | head -n $((RANDOM % 10)))

Last edited by Stythys (2008-10-13 16:41:18)

solarwind · 2008-10-24 06:15:12

Ok here's whats going on:

I installed a bare Arch Linux system on my laptop two weeks ago. I did this intentionally so I could test my installer once I had something usable. Right now my installer is a simple shell script witih pretty dialog boxes which installs papckages, does minimal configuration and stuff like that. I think this has a lot of potential. I was able to install a full Gnome desktop on m y laptop in very little time. Of course, my installer isn't complete and I still had to set up graphics, wireless and touchpad myself, as well some other trivial things like wicd to start up automatically. This installer seriously has potential. What I have now is not much, but already it helped get going a usable desktop from a bare minimum livecd Arch Linux install.

So why am I posting this? I want your help. I want anyone whos interested in this to help with the project. If you're interested, please post. All you need to know is how to script in BASH and general stuff about Linux.

Note: Distributions like Ubuntu do all this for you (setup network, easy video driver installation) but they plague your system with useless daemons and other stuff which greatly slows down your system. My laptop is now just as usable as a good Ubuntu installation but wayyyyyyyy faster and snappier. With this installer, I want to give the user an easy way to set up a usable desktop system without bloating the system with useless packages. It will just install what the user needs. Ex: if the user has an ATI card, it will only install one driver, not the entire set of xf86-video-* set. Also, it will uphold the "Arch Philosophy" or keepin' it simple. It wont do anything any of us Archers couldn't do manually or don't do on a normal desktop installation.

Again, any help with this project is greatly appreciated. If you're interested in helping, please post.

Last edited by solarwind (2008-10-24 06:28:54)

gradgrind · 2008-10-24 08:03:46

Is 'Newbie Corner' really an appropriate category for this thread?

Anyway, it's an interesting project and I could imagine there might not only be people who won't use it ...

I spent quite a bit of time thinking about installers while I was designing larch, and my first attempt might have been something like what you are here proposing. However in the end I decided I preferred one with a (Xorg) GUI and without too many options, specifically designed for installing from larch live systems. In my view the advantage of this approach is that you can test your new system live before installing it. By using the 'session-saving' feature of larch it is also possible to build your system interactively on a USB stick and save the latest version for further installations, or live use. Additionally I found building an interface using 'dialog' to be rather restrictive and generally a pain, python/gtk is much more enjoyable.

That's probably all fairly irrelevant here, because you are taking a different approach, and I don't really have the time to offer to help coding yours, but if it's of any help you are of course welcome to look at the 'larchin' code and if you need any assitance on specific points connected with installer writing I may be able to make suggestions. larch also provides simple gui utilities for user/group management and locale management. It's all python/gtk with a smattering of bash.

If anyone should wish to see what larchin can do (it's not really 'finished', but it does work), the easiest way is probably to build yourself a larch live USB-stick using the provided xmini or xmaxi profile.

venky80 · 2008-10-24 14:53:21

Yes totally with you there should be a way to install arch easily and still be able to get back to the bare bones structure which i like about Arch.

solarwind wrote:

Arch Linux is an amazing distribution, but the only annoying thing about it is the lack of a "user friendly" installer. I know I know, you guys call it a "do it yourself" distribution, but Arch excels in many areas where other distributions lack. Ex: stability, rolling release model, i686 optimizations, pkgbuilds and so many more. It has never ever failed me.
Is there a "user friendly" installer for arch that requires little or no configuration file editing?
If there isn't, I'm thinking about making a script that runs off of the live CD and will automatically install and set u things for you, more like what Ubuntu does. It will prompt you and install things like:
* Graphics card drivers. Set up X for you.
* Desktop environment. All you have to do is chose Gnome, KDE or whatever.
* Set up ALSA for you and automatically edit configuration files.
* Ask you if you're on a laptop or desktop and set up appropriately.
* Set up wireless for you.
And so on...
It will probably be written in Python.
Are any of you guys interested in such a project? The only reason I installed Ubuntu on my laptop is because I didn't want to spend hours setting up Arch. I know you guys will say "but it's a one time thing", but seriously, it's annoying. Also, I'm thinking for this to be a post-install installer.
Who's with me?

paraflu · 2008-10-28 01:51:00

Hello,

solarwind

1.

What i really miss at the installation process is, that
when a problem occurs i don`t have the wiki especially if
the network doesn`t work. I can`t talk about wlan, but
it need to horrorfied when you don`t have any experience
with it.
So an enviroment with an offline wiki is always good.
I mean i could do it with larch a xorg enviroment, firefox
or a browser at all and an httracked wiki. That would be great.
Maybe i should do it, when i haven`t got a second working
system around. :-)

2.

As crouse mentioned the after installing process is most time
consuming, a script which will create a user enviroment based
on advertised look or individual choice is also a good
idea.

3.

The learning process with the default procedure is great, especially
if you are coming from gentoo, but for ubuntu users which would
have to have a pre-setted system or would like to use it without
bothering with oses, it is not so great. Otherwise it is always
better to know your system, coming from the beginning or getting
down from the full system. I don`t know which way is better. When
i think about my windows time. It was 80 percent and i developed
the interest to see what are these 80%. On the other side starting
from the beginning can be frustrating if you don`t get any results.

4.
Some experiences from a gentoo user coming to use ubuntu and other
distros which try to automize most of the configuration.
when i installed ubuntu i think it was 6.04, i had a problem
with the network. So coming from gentoo i tried to ifconfig
my eth0, but it never worked, because of an demon which always
changed my configurations back to the wrong default. Not so good....
With faunos i had the experience that it didn`t configured my
xorg right so i had to boot into console and change the xorg.
You don`t have the ability to do something like that if you
don`t have to fight with it at the beginning of your
installation. i don`t know what`s better, i do think if
any dialog had asked me if it failed at the process to
select my configuration it would be much better. So a good
installiotion process is dependent on a good dialog. Especially extended
with graphics or a good readable manual at the process if needed.

5.

So i would have some suggestion.
Why not build a larch install with a base system with xorg and a base
hardware detection. Maybe even some wm like fluxbox. After that creating an
overlay with aufs to specialize the system to different needs. So we have a base
and an loop img which could be combined to have a different distro. Their must
be a reason why so many special distros have a base from a common distro and
then do their modification to it. If this could be done with an overlay
aka unionfs this would be great and would be easier for user input. There
some difficulties, when i want to have
an desktop enviroment i would difine my own user name and modification. this
would need to ask the user for a name and the overlay had to chowned to the
mentioned user should be possible. And the special distros like vdr-distros or mythtv or
mame could also be implemented this. And what i didn`t mentioned this would be unigue,
because i don`t know any distro that have
that ability. Hey you could even choose the disired function of the system at boot level.
That would solve your goal to have a preconfigured system for different proposes and
hopefully the abillity that users could contribute their own suggestions for
a system with ease - with an overlay image.

So let`s have some examples to see if this possibile and try to find the errors
in theory.

Building a booting enviroment with base, preconfigured alsa, xorg and fluxbox, maybe as
a squashfs with unionfs capabilty.
Let`s say this works, we don`t care about the installed device it works and boot.
Now we want to modify it to a gnome enviroment. We download a gnome overlay image.
Put it into an specialized dir into the boot device. Then we execute a script.
This script change/add grub to an entry which will deliver a boot parameter to union the
new image with the base system.
Reboot
After booting we will get asked about the new name and the password, we like to have
the default changed to.
This will chowned the default user on the image to the new user, delete the old and
add the new user to the system.
exit
Enter with new user or roboot, if it involves gdm or something like that.
Now we have a predifined enviroment which could be further modified.

Now we want to have a vdr enviroment.
Download an ovelay image and add it in same procedure as mentioned above.
At this point we don`t have to change the user and chowned the home-dir
of him, also we could do this. This would leave the total control for
the overlay-developer.

The possibilities are great and maybe we could see more user input with it,
because of the ability to change a system independent of the ability
to script it.

That`s it.
I hope my suggestions meet your suggestions in the middle.
I would like to know what everybody think about it and where they see problems
which could occur.

Thanks for your answers.

solarwind · 2008-10-28 01:59:04

paraflu wrote:

Hello,
solarwind

1.
What i really miss at the installation process is, that
when a problem occurs i don`t have the wiki especially if
the network doesn`t work. I can`t talk about wlan, but
it need to horrorfied when you don`t have any experience
with it.
So an enviroment with an offline wiki is always good.
I mean i could do it with larch a xorg enviroment, firefox
or a browser at all and an httracked wiki. That would be great.
Maybe i should do it, when i haven`t got a second working
system around. :-)
2.
As crouse mentioned the after installing process is most time
consuming, a script which will create a user enviroment based
on advertised look or individual choice is also a good
idea.
3.
The learning process with the default procedure is great, especially
if you are coming from gentoo, but for ubuntu users which would
have to have a pre-setted system or would like to use it without
bothering with oses, it is not so great. Otherwise it is always
better to know your system, coming from the beginning or getting
down from the full system. I don`t know which way is better. When
i think about my windows time. It was 80 percent and i developed
the interest to see what are these 80%. On the other side starting
from the beginning can be frustrating if you don`t get any results.
4.
Some experiences from a gentoo user coming to use ubuntu and other
distros which try to automize most of the configuration.
when i installed ubuntu i think it was 6.04, i had a problem
with the network. So coming from gentoo i tried to ifconfig
my eth0, but it never worked, because of an demon which always
changed my configurations back to the wrong default. Not so good....
With faunos i had the experience that it didn`t configured my
xorg right so i had to boot into console and change the xorg.
You don`t have the ability to do something like that if you
don`t have to fight with it at the beginning of your
installation. i don`t know what`s better, i do think if
any dialog had asked me if it failed at the process to
select my configuration it would be much better. So a good
installiotion process is dependent on a good dialog. Especially extended
with graphics or a good readable manual at the process if needed.
5.
So i would have some suggestion.
Why not build a larch install with a base system with xorg and a base
hardware detection. Maybe even some wm like fluxbox. After that creating an
overlay with aufs to specialize the system to different needs. So we have a base
and an loop img which could be combined to have a different distro. Their must
be a reason why so many special distros have a base from a common distro and
then do their modification to it. If this could be done with an overlay
aka unionfs this would be great and would be easier for user input. There
some difficulties, when i want to have
an desktop enviroment i would difine my own user name and modification. this
would need to ask the user for a name and the overlay had to chowned to the
mentioned user should be possible. And the special distros like vdr-distros or mythtv or
mame could also be implemented this. And what i didn`t mentioned this would be unigue,
because i don`t know any distro that have
that ability. Hey you could even choose the disired function of the system at boot level.
That would solve your goal to have a preconfigured system for different proposes and
hopefully the abillity that users could contribute their own suggestions for
a system with ease - with an overlay image.
So let`s have some examples to see if this possibile and try to find the errors
in theory.
Building a booting enviroment with base, preconfigured alsa, xorg and fluxbox, maybe as
a squashfs with unionfs capabilty.
Let`s say this works, we don`t care about the installed device it works and boot.
Now we want to modify it to a gnome enviroment. We download a gnome overlay image.
Put it into an specialized dir into the boot device. Then we execute a script.
This script change/add grub to an entry which will deliver a boot parameter to union the
new image with the base system.
Reboot
After booting we will get asked about the new name and the password, we like to have
the default changed to.
This will chowned the default user on the image to the new user, delete the old and
add the new user to the system.
exit
Enter with new user or roboot, if it involves gdm or something like that.
Now we have a predifined enviroment which could be further modified.
Now we want to have a vdr enviroment.
Download an ovelay image and add it in same procedure as mentioned above.
At this point we don`t have to change the user and chowned the home-dir
of him, also we could do this. This would leave the total control for
the overlay-developer.
The possibilities are great and maybe we could see more user input with it,
because of the ability to change a system independent of the ability
to script it.
That`s it.
I hope my suggestions meet your suggestions in the middle.
I would like to know what everybody think about it and where they see problems
which could occur.
Thanks for your answers.

Thanks for your very detailed post. What I have now is a simple shell script that uses "dialog" to ask the user specific things and modifies configuration files and so on on the fly, just like a user would modify them.

For example. It starts out with basic configuration: asks for hostname, and stuff and edits /etc/rc.conf appropriately. Then it adds a user by asking for a username, creates all the appropriate files, such as sudo and bash autocompletion. It then installs packages (gnome, all the cool packages). Then, based on your selection of a laptop or desktop, it modifies more configuration files, installs laptop based packages and so on.

FrozenFox · 2008-10-28 02:07:26

Sounds awesome Can't wait to see it. I personally have installed arch probably 30 times so I well know what I'm doing, but it would be very useful for those with less experience (or those with lots of it who are just tired of doing it manually, like myself ).

I would love if it supported the DE options. Particularly, if it perhaps gave links to the 4 or 5 major KDE options (KDE3-Tanis,KDE4-Arch,KDEmod3,KDEmod4 and I think Mark's repo or something) and specify which ones you could combine safely (I'm pretty sure I used KDE3-Tanis+KDEmod4 and KDEmod3+KDE4-Arch without problems). I'm sure a lot of people wish to have hybrid setups to keep an eye on KDE4's progress, but still stick with KDE3, and there is no real central place giving such information with so many scattered projects. Perhaps in such a script which plenty of new users would probably use, that would be valuable. Or perhaps a new thread / wiki page is in order? Or both, and point to the wiki/thread in the script?

Last edited by FrozenFox (2008-10-28 02:24:15)

solarwind · 2008-10-28 02:19:52

FrozenFox wrote:

Sounds awesome
I would love if it supported the DE options. Particularly, if it perhaps gave links to the 4 or 5 major KDE options (KDE3-Tanis,KDE4-Arch,KDEmod3,KDEmod4 and I think Mark's repo or something) and specify which ones you could combine safely (I'm pretty sure I used KDE3-Tanis+KDEmod4 and KDEmod3+KDE4-Arch without problems). I'm sure a lot of people wish to have hybrid setups to keep an eye on KDE4's progress, but still stick with KDE3, and there is no real central place giving such information with so many scattered projects. Perhaps in such a script which plenty of new users would probably use, that would be valuable. Or perhaps a new thread / wiki page is in order? Or both, and point to the wiki/thread

Yeah, that part is relatively simple. The real challenge is to get X all working properly based on open source drivers or the binary only drivers, and then configuring xorg.conf.

delacruz · 2008-10-28 03:44:39

I like you idea solarwind. Personally I learned so much about computers in general because I had to get my hands dirty with Archlinux. That said, I think I could give you a hand. Im not an expert programmer but I think i could help. Let me know.

venky80 · 2008-10-28 04:33:31

I think solarwind you are on to something;) Iam looking for something like this too

Mr Green · 2008-10-28 08:18:37

If you ever see me you'll recognize me; I rarely go out in public without an Arch Linux shirt.

Glad to hear it lol

Xorg... well there are scripts to set it up .... hwd for example

MrG

solarwind · 2008-10-28 13:29:11

Mr Green wrote:

If you ever see me you'll recognize me; I rarely go out in public without an Arch Linux shirt.
Glad to hear it lol
Xorg... well there are scripts to set it up .... hwd for example
MrG

Thanks for the hwd suggestion.

gradgrind · 2008-10-28 13:37:05

xorg's own automatic configuration seems to be getting better and better, at least with the free drivers, so that it works out-of-the-box on many machines without an xorg.conf. I think the new (not yet in extra) xorg server is even better, so that tweaks can be done with a really skeletal xorg.conf (at least that's how it is in debian lenny at the moment).

zenos · 2008-10-28 16:14:24

I wouldn't even bother with something like this. I could understand if you have a room full of machines that need to be setup a certain way and you don't want to configure them by hand. Then again you'd be better off installing off a hd image. So there is no point in it. In three years I've only reinstalled arch once and that was due to a hd failure. I don't find the installation process to be that hard or take that long and in the end it's set up the way I want. But to each his own.

btw...
I'd rather spend the time configuring and adding the software i need rather than removing and disabling software and services I don't need like in ubuntu.

Mr Green · 2008-10-28 17:02:54

[Arch Linux] is what you make it.

solarwind · 2008-10-28 18:31:43

zenos wrote:

I wouldn't even bother with something like this. I could understand if you have a room full of machines that need to be setup a certain way and you don't want to configure them by hand. Then again you'd be better off installing off a hd image. So there is no point in it. In three years I've only reinstalled arch once and that was due to a hd failure. I don't find the installation process to be that hard or take that long and in the end it's set up the way I want. But to each his own.
btw...
I'd rather spend the time configuring and adding the software i need rather than removing and disabling software and services I don't need like in ubuntu.

Thank you. I'll make sure I never get this project completed.

Mr Green wrote:

[Arch Linux] is what you make it.

Any distribution is what you make it.

Last edited by solarwind (2008-10-28 18:32:24)

Mr Green · 2008-10-28 19:36:10

For work I build systems mostly from ebay finds, donations ... stuff laying on the street .... I use Linux OS on all of them grab the Ubuntu disc and its done....

Would love to use Arch instead a super human distro :-)

SiC · 2008-10-28 21:07:50

Hmmm... Split opinions on this, I like the idea of an easy installer, I'm lazy, I just want my system to work when I install it. That said I haven't reinstalled apart from a new HDD a few months back, and am unlikely to do so again for a while. I also do think that having to configure your system manually is a good thing, esp. for users new to the distribution.

I would like however to contribute in some form to this project, should you wish any additional support, I have some ideas etc and some level of competence. If you want any help, feel free to let me know

Arch Linux

#26 2008-10-13 15:18:52

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#27 2008-10-13 15:24:35

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#28 2008-10-13 15:24:59

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#29 2008-10-13 15:30:43

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#30 2008-10-13 15:33:15

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#31 2008-10-13 15:34:21

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#32 2008-10-13 15:57:25

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#33 2008-10-13 16:39:20

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#34 2008-10-24 06:15:12

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#35 2008-10-24 08:03:46

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#36 2008-10-24 14:53:21

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#37 2008-10-28 01:51:00

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#38 2008-10-28 01:59:04

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#39 2008-10-28 02:07:26

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#40 2008-10-28 02:19:52

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#41 2008-10-28 03:44:39

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#42 2008-10-28 04:33:31

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#43 2008-10-28 08:18:37

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#44 2008-10-28 13:29:11

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#45 2008-10-28 13:37:05

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#46 2008-10-28 16:14:24

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#47 2008-10-28 17:02:54

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#48 2008-10-28 18:31:43

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#49 2008-10-28 19:36:10

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

#50 2008-10-28 21:07:50

Re: Arch Linux Automatic Installer

Board footer