Modern FreeBSD Installer?

[Manolis Kiagias]

Polytropon wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:59:53 +0300, Manolis Kiagias <sonicy at otenet.gr> wrote:
>   
>
>> Exactly. Modern install does not necessarily mean GUI. FreeBSD *needs* a
>> text installer to work on old machines, headless servers, serial
>> consoles and the like. That being said, there are quite a few annoyances
>> with sysinstall. And of course, having a GUI installer as an additional
>> option is also very welcome.
>>     
>
> No problem, as long as (a) it isn't default (read: too complicated
> to switch it off of not needed) and (b) doesn't make things more
> complicated.
>   

The text installer should always be the default, IMHO. A GUI  installer
should be selectable i.e. from the boot options.
I hope Ivan Voras finds the time to continue with the finstall project,
it looked very promising:

http://ivoras.sharanet.org/blog/tree/2009-02-19.what-happened-to-finstall.html

>> - No real 'back' functionality. Can't fix most mistakes, need to redo
>> the install
>>     
>
> Hmmm... I think this is where the user learns "first think, then do"
> on a good basis.
>
>
>   

The problem here is that sysinstall *does* allow you to go back and redo
some steps, but then fails miserably and mysteriously

>
>   
>> Personally, I would like a text installer using a previous/next approach
>> that would give me options like:
>>     
>
> Forgive me my ignorance, but personally, I completely DISLIKE this
> linear approach. Instead of
>
> 	A ---> B ---> C ---> D ---> E ---> F	oops, forgot something
> 	                            E <---	no, not here
> 	                     D <---		not here, too
> 	              C <---			ah, here it was, okay, got it
> 	              C ---> D ---> E ---> F ---> Finish
>   

The moving back approach as I see it is not intended as an excuse to
leave your brain turned off. And it doesn't even have to move back all
steps - one would be enough for the occasional wrong key-press.

> A hierarchy would be better.
>
> 	Options:
> 		A	This and that
> 		B	Some other stuff
> 		C	More stuff
> 		D	Even more stuff
> 		E	Some settings
> 		F	Several other settings
> 		Done	Commit
>
> So one could first select
> 		A	This and that
> then, knowing that C - E are not interesting for him, address
> 		F	Several other settings
> directly, make some choices, and then, maybe go back to 
> 		A	This and that
> and do some more tasks, and finally select
> 		Done	Commit
> to do the install.
>
>   

I have no problem with this strategy, but...

> This is what sysinstall already provides. In a modern way, it allows
> to "go back" to any setting that has already been done and change it,
> and the user is not limited in doing choices in a pre-defined order.
>   

...it does allow you to go back in a sort of way - but then fails many
times to continue normally.