new look installer... why?

[Brian Durant]

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 13:04:48 -0500, Eric Dunbar <eric.dunbar at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 10:50:51 +0100, Ubu Roi <ravachol at home> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 12:38:55AM -0500, Eric Dunbar wrote:
> >
> > > -- a good installer makes for a happy customer and reviewer. I
> > > appreciate the simplicity of *no* configuration, but all you have to
> > > do is look at Mac OS X to see that simple package selection is not
> > > beyond the typical computer "user". OS X gives you the option to
> > > install language packages, a variety of printer packages (Epson, HP,
> > > etc.), applications, and developer tools (IIRC). Ubuntu does need a
> > > simple interface for such groupings -- an intermediate between the
> > > full blown custom (which requires a pretty hefty dose of *nix
> > > knowledge) and "just take our word for it" installs.
> >
> > My opinion is that a slick graphical installer should not have the
> > highest priority at the moment.
> >
> > What I would like to see is:
> > 1) the ability to check (and maybe correct) the installers choice of
> >    monitor/resolution/depth/videocard selection before the end of
> >    install.
> > 2) The option of choosing a non graphical boot into a console screen.
> >    So that you can 'startx' yourself when needed.
> >    (reserve runlevel 2 for this).
> >    It is not a terrible lot of trouble to fix this after the install
> >    (edit 'inittab' and stop the necessary service in rcx.d) but
> >    an install option would be handy and nice.
> 
> I will second #1 as a MUST have given that Ubuntu can be installed on
> a million and one different pieces of hardware.
> 
> #2 is probably one of those things that UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should
> be in the installer! If you are knowledgeable enough to want to boot
> into a non-graphical environment and startx manually, you certainly
> will know how to set the appropriate run level. It's one of those
> "features" that would render a system inoperable to a regular user if
> accidentally selected.
> 
> And, #3:
> 
> My vote would maybe be for a _brief_ readme to be displayed (optionally).
> 
> One for "user" migrants from Windows or Macintosh saying hello, and
> perhaps describing one or two things of what to do and where to go for
> help (help is one of the most frustrating things to find if you don't
> have an internet connection).
> 
> Another for "advanced" users (but not experts; users who at least know
> what the command line is) with a few comments on major concepts or
> apps (e.g. completely OSS, sudo is used for security, NOT su or root,
> different vts (ctrl-alt-Fkey to access... expert Mac OS X users for
> e.g. will not know vt1-9) etc.). Keep the gobble-di-gook to a minimum
> too -- high level stuff.

Personally, I can live with the installer as is, but I sure would like
to see SUSE's YAST, which is now Open Source, to be used for
configuring.

Cheers,

Brian