lubuntu-desktop team mailing list archive

[Leszek Lesner <leszek.lesner@xxxxxx>]

Am Mittwoch 30 März 2011, um 14:23:52 schrieb PCMan:
> Text based installer + 1.
> The alternate CD with console-based UI is good enough IMO if it can
> have l10n user interface.
> Windows installer has long been text-based since windows 3.1 and it's
> still text-based in windows xp. Nobody complains of this so why should
> we insist that there should be a graphical one?
> Yes, if you boot from Windows xp installer cd on a machine without OS,
> you'll enter text-based installer. The GUI part is only available
> after the basic system is set up.
> 
> Actually, we can do the same.
> The text-based installer (part I) only installs base system and core
> components and then reboot and automatically login X11 with a super
> user. After boot, a GUI-based installer (part II) is launched and
> continues the remaining parts. This can make things much easier.
> 
> The only problem with this approach is, we cannot have a good
> GUI-based UI for partitioning. Windows XP handle this in text-mode,
> too. However, I see no real problem here. The rationale is quite
> simple.
> 
> Users who doesn't know how to use text-based UI are also the ones that
> will almost always choose "automatic partitioning". Others who like to
> use "customized" and "manual partitioning" are definitely advanced
> power users who don't need a GUI installer.
> So don't put 80% of development resources to do what only 20% people need.
> 
> Please, if someone know how to work with the text-based debian
> installer, consider this approach. Let's set up a base system with the
> text-based one, and continue the remainng parts in a GUI installer
> after rebooting into X11. This is also what Windows does.
> 
> Comments?

It needs to be a base system + X11 Otherwise it won't work. 
The other problem is the enormous effort and work we need to put in such a 
project. (e.g. I can promise you lots and lots of bugs, and yes I created an 
installer for ZevenOS-Neptune on my own, so I have a little experience in 
this) 

My suggestions just promote the alternate install cd for everyone who can't 
use the graphical (live) installer. Maybe we can one day also use the debian-
live-installer (which is basically the textinstaller from debian but able to 
run and install from a live system) as an alternative to ubiquity. 
The problem I see from switching from ubiquity to X would be that lubuntu will 
never become an official flavor of ubuntu. (even kubuntu uses ubiquity under the 
hood and only created a kde'ish interface for it)

> 
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Jean-Pierre Vidal Piesset
> 
> <jpxsat@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> Unfortunately, it will be very difficult to reduce the memory
> >> >> footprint of the installer for 11.04.
> >> 
> >> The other question this poses is, is it really necessary to have a
> >> graphical installer as the default for Lubuntu?
> > 
> > Some time ago, there was a question on the mailing list "What do you
> > expect from Lubuntu" and i think that a very important point is "it will
> > go where Ubuntu can't" or something like that.
> > A graphical installer is something that we do only one time (in theory)
> > so if it's a little "ugly" (text) IMHO i don't see the problem.
> > --
> > jpxsat
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> > Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp