Re: [GSOC 2008] update: install-tool
"Zach Wegner" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.installation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 12:06 PM, David Laight <[email protected]> wrote: > Indeed, but it is rather important to be able to query the user to fix > the input and then retry set installation. > > > David > > -- > David Laight: [email protected] > I would agree. But it's not such an easy problem to tackle: 1. Calling the back end from the front end to check would be cleaner IMO in design, but it's not perfect. That is, you can test something as much as you want in the front end, but it could still fail in the back end. 2. Calling the front end from the back end is a little uglier IMO. Mostly just aesthetic reasons though, but it also doesn't allow for testing when you do mass installs. 3. I think the best solution would be to have both, in a way. You allow the checking feature in the front end, and then sysinst becomes a loop that repeatedly calls the front end and then the back end until installation is successful or the user gives up. 4. Regardless of what is chosen from the above, it doesn't solve the problem of unattended installs. Ideally it should be possible to install without a monitor or a keyboard if everything is set up right. But if an FTP site is down, it should have some sort of error correction. My idea is to have backup media, so that for when a set fails on CD, we can try NFS, and if that fails, FTP, etc. The implementation shouldn't be too hard, as each type of media specifies what sets it's installing, and it will just try all of them and take out any duplicates. You can also specify multiple instances of each media type, so you can try different FTP mirrors, etc. How does that sound, everyone?