suggestion to arch installer...

mairoo · 2009-09-05 09:14:42

I'm a newbie to arch. I just moved debian/ubuntu to arch, but I'm not a distro hopper. I'm now fascinated to arch, but I'm also frustrated to arch installation system.

I don't care installing os by console(ncurses). It's quite simple and efficient. I often installed debian/ubuntu in this way previously.

My suggestion is

1. partitioning

after cfdisk and we go through /arch/setup. Yes! "kiss" principle is important. Everything should be simple. but, we might lose "integrity" in the view of installation. cfdisk - partitioning (format stuff) - editing /etc/fstab the separated steps also make sense to me. However, in my opinion, will it be better that they merged into one step? I'm a newbie That's why I didn't find the way to keep(preserve) the previous partition. Whenever I tried to mount ie. "/home" it just formats. I solved this problem to skip the step, not to mount, and I edited /etc/fstab at the end.

2. choosing packages

we can choose base/base-dev packages. I love this because it provides the way to build the really minimalistic system. About 100 packages, I think most of people can't memorize exactly what they are, what they do. Will it be better to show short description like which utilites are installed, which daemon works, what they do... I believe that the user-friendliness during installation doesn't harm the system efficiency or compactness.

I hope the arch keep this way.. however, a bit kinder or nicer...

Allan · 2009-09-05 09:19:31

I suggest you open up a feature request in the bug tracker so that the release team see your suggestions.

.:B:. · 2009-09-05 09:23:15

Although your first suggestion is a valid point, I think the second one is not. This distro is aimed at a certain public, and that public should know what it needs (not to sound braggy but I do know what most of those packages do, and I learnt it the hard way - by using Slackware and doing LFS).

Pacman does a fine job at resolving dependencies, so whatever you need will be pulled in anyway (unless you leave out some pretty essential stuff that is not pulled in automatically that is ).

Last edited by B (2009-09-05 09:28:22)

tomk · 2009-09-05 09:28:24

Also re point 2 - this is the installer, not the installed system. You can get full descriptions of everything from pacman when your system's up and running, and decide then if you need to add/remove anything.

Dieter@be · 2009-09-05 09:42:02

mairoo wrote:

That's why I didn't find the way to keep(preserve) the previous partition. Whenever I tried to mount ie. "/home" it just formats. I solved this problem to skip the step, not to mount, and I edited /etc/fstab at the end.

answer "no" to "do you want this filesystem to be (re)created?"

mairoo wrote:

I think most of people can't memorize exactly what they are, what they do. Will it be better to show short description like which utilites are installed, which daemon works, what they do... I believe that the user-friendliness during installation doesn't harm the system efficiency or compactness.

http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/13040

mairoo · 2009-09-05 16:04:16

Dieter@be, Thank you so much! It's really helpful. I answered "no" and it really worked what I thought. I'm not good at English cuz my mother tongue is Korean. I hope the feature-request FS#13040 is accepted sooner or later. the way of curses menu during kernel compile could be a good model. Finally, I hope "the menu" could be a bit more /intuitive/ for poor english skilled people like me.

Last edited by mairoo (2009-09-05 16:04:44)

Dieter@be · 2009-09-05 16:17:36

mairoo wrote:

Dieter@be, Thank you so much! It's really helpful. I answered "no" and it really worked what I thought. I'm not good at English cuz my mother tongue is Korean. I hope the feature-request FS#13040 is accepted sooner or later. the way of curses menu during kernel compile could be a good model. Finally, I hope "the menu" could be a bit more /intuitive/ for poor english skilled people like me.

So, you tried again, you answered 'no' to the 'recreate?' question and this allowed you to choose a mountpoint and it automatically put the needed line in fstab, without overwriting your partition?

Suggestions for better menu's are welcome also. There is also a ticket open for a translated installer (i18n or i10n or whatever it's called), but I'm personally not convinced if it's worth it. It will depend mostly on contributions from other people.

andre.ramaciotti · 2009-09-05 17:18:47

I do like the idea number 2. I remember Slackware used to have it (I don't if it still does) and IMHO it was a nice feature. Of course one can use pacman in another tty and ask for the description, but I don't think it's so productive.

Anyway, in my experience, reinstalling Arch Linux is a rare occasion, so it's not a "zOMG we **MUST** have it!!1" kind of feature and if it's going to add too much complexity to the installer, I think it's better not to have it.

zowki · 2009-09-06 12:15:29

mairoo wrote:

Dieter@be, Thank you so much! It's really helpful. I answered "no" and it really worked what I thought. I'm not good at English cuz my mother tongue is Korean. I hope the feature-request FS#13040 is accepted sooner or later. the way of curses menu during kernel compile could be a good model. Finally, I hope "the menu" could be a bit more /intuitive/ for poor english skilled people like me.

Like B said, this distro is aimed at a particular audience: "Linux experts who speak English natively".

.:B:. · 2009-09-06 12:21:37

That's called willfull misinterpretation - I'm quite sure my posts says something completely different. It's one thing to make a case for your own point, it's a whole other thing to distort someone else's.

Arch Linux

#1 2009-09-05 09:14:42

suggestion to arch installer...

#2 2009-09-05 09:19:31

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

#3 2009-09-05 09:23:15

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

#4 2009-09-05 09:28:24

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

#5 2009-09-05 09:42:02

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

#6 2009-09-05 16:04:16

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

#7 2009-09-05 16:17:36

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

#8 2009-09-05 17:18:47

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

#9 2009-09-06 12:15:29

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

#10 2009-09-06 12:21:37

Re: suggestion to arch installer...

Board footer