torios team mailing list archive

[Nio Wiklund <nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Israel,

I do not fully understand how an installation along those lines should
work. But I know that you understand a lot about creating a full
operating system, so I encourage you to try it; to do what you want with
a much smaller foot-print than doing it with ubiquity.

Another option might be to extend the OBI to take advantage of an
existing home partition; to let you include it or copy it to be used in
the system that is being installed.

Best regards
Nio

Den 2014-09-14 22:37, Israel skrev:
> Hi all,
> I agree in both respects.
> The target system is something that will freeze up using ubiquity....
> however,
> our target is also people that want a lightweight environment that is
> fairly easy to set up, and is fully customizable.  This would make using
> Ubiquity ideal for some people... however,
> I have an idea that we could in effect partition the harddrive for the
> user based on a few options, and detecting what is already on the
> machine (is it Linux, or not?).
> Then make a chroot on the computer from stored packages in /var/apt/cache
> and install grub2 to it.... and voila.
> It could be a simple dialog program that asks a couple of questions, and
> runs basically the script we already have to build the Live CD, but uses
> /dev/sdX mounted at /mnt/OS as the chroot directory.  it could
> potentially link /dev/sdN as the /home of the new system.
> 
> Phill, does this seem reasonable?  Am I missing something major in what
> I understand here?  This seems like what Ubiquity would be doing in essence.
> 
> On 09/14/2014 10:33 AM, Nio Wiklund wrote:
>> No, I'm not joking, Phill :-D
>>
>> Ubiquity should not be the only installer, because it has a heavy
>> foot-print, as you wrote. I certainly agree with you about that.
>>
>> But I think many people 'need it' to set up their system in an advanced
>> way, with several partitions or with OEM.
>>
>> For OEM it is enough to include ubiquity in the tarball and not in the
>> installer (live system). We can consider that.
>>
>> -o-
>>
>> But I suggest that we do *not* include ubiquity in the present version
>> of ToriOS.
>>
>> The alternate installer is an entirely different concept without a live
>> session. It would create a doublet system, that I do not think we should
>> bother about for ToriOS. The OBI needs much less RAM than the alternate
>> installer, and it is much faster and much more stable, particularly with
>> low end computers.
>>
>> Who needs a very complicated partition system on a very old and weak
>> computer? I think some people want it, but do they really need it? Many
>> people (including me) are happy with one root partition, one swap
>> partition and a *data partition*, that need not be included in the
>> system setup, and that can be managed separately for pictures, music,
>> video, etc). This is easily set up with gparted and used by the OBI at
>> the advanced OBI level.
>>
>> It might be different in a more powerful computer, but then ubiquity can
>> do the job.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Nio
>>
>> Den 2014-09-14 16:51, Phill Whiteside skrev:
>>> WHAT????
>>>
>>>
>>> On 14 September 2014 15:22, Nio Wiklund <nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx
>>> <mailto:nio.wiklund@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     So even I would say that ubiquity should be bundled with ToriOS, maybe
>>>     not in the first version, but in the next version, or in a DVD version
>>>     (oversized for CD disks), while we must keep a very lean CD version.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> you are joking. 
>>>
>>> Use the alternate installer as per lubuntu. A lot of the machines you
>>> are aiming for could not run ubiquity! Lubuntu runs on less than what
>>> Ubiquity needs.
>>>
>>> Just my thoughts,
>>>
>>> Phill.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw
> 
>