foser <foser@g.o> said:

> On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 01:07, Tiemo Kieft wrote:
> > > 3. Gtk2: I am thinking that this may not be the best interface to use.  
> > > How will this fair with those putting gentoo on very slow/old machines.  
> > > Also for those doing an install through ssh would not be able to benifit 
> > > from this.  Maybe curses would be the way to go?  There are already many 
> > > tools that are already made for curses(menuconfig, ufed, net-setup).  Or 
> > > heck maybe there could be support for both.
> > 
> > This actually is one of the requirements for the installer as well as
> > the config tools. It was discussed in the desktop-research meeting. We
> > really want to support both.
> 
> I think it's a pretty silly idea to support multiple backends. Afaic
> it's about a GUI installer, so ncurses isn't really what we are after.
> You always will get compared to other installers which aren't curses
> anymore.

Can you give me example of installer that aren't ncurses anymore?
redhat, mandrake, debian, slackware have all ncurses/newt option

> The people installing over SSH aren't the new users a GUI
> installer is targeted at anyway.
> 
> As far as the choice for a widget set, gtk2 seems logical to me. It may
> be allegedly slow on older systems, but we're talking about 3 buttons on
> a screen here. And if the installer is considered slow, well what's
> gonna happen when someone does a GRP install of stable GNOME or KDE.
> That's gonna be real slow desktop-ing.

agreed on that. gtk2 or qt or whatever, just need to choose. I prefere gtk2
because of the language binding possibilities, but it's only my opinion

-- 
dams

--
gentoo-desktop-research@g.o mailing list