| 1 |
On Tuesday 03 February 2004 23:16, Nathaniel McCallum wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 17:03, Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I find an after-the-fact interference idea to be quite unnatural. Another |
| 4 |
> > option would be to feed the backend two xml files which basically have |
| 5 |
> > null actions such that they complement eachoter. Such a solution however |
| 6 |
> > would be suboptimal to me |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I don't understand why this is unnatural. Could you develop a case |
| 9 |
> scenario what would warrant the pausing? Personally, I would prefer |
| 10 |
> hooks for user defined scripts (between stages). |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Say that I want to do custom filesystem creation to create extra inodes, a |
| 13 |
different blocksize, or whatever. What I would like to do is able to just use |
| 14 |
the installer until the point where it asks about the filesystem creation. At |
| 15 |
that point I ask the installer to put into effect the options I have chosen, |
| 16 |
and I use mke2fs/mkfs.whatever to create my filesystem. Then I want to say to |
| 17 |
the frontend (which is running at the top half of the split console) that I |
| 18 |
performed this step manually, and then continue. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
If I would need to first make the choice and then later get into the system it |
| 21 |
would be counterintuitive for me. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Do I agree that such actions break any automatic install recording? yes. Do I |
| 24 |
think we should offer it? yes. Why? because gentoo is about choice and |
| 25 |
control. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Paul |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 31 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 32 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 33 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives