Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Manjaro Works To Make Calamares A Distribution-Independent Installer

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by Chewi View Post
    Red Hat just replaced their installer, which makes it all the more likely that they won't look at this one.
    They didn't replaced anything. It's still anaconda - just a new version.

    Anaconda has a long development history


    I'm not sure how much it's based on their previous text installer - it was probably a total rewrite, because I don't see any mass code import.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Chewi View Post
      Red Hat just replaced their installer, which makes it all the more likely that they won't look at this one.
      Nope. It's still anaconda. It's had some fairly major overhauls, but it's still anaconda (and there's still some nice fifteen year old Python in there).

      If this turns out to be awesome, hey, who knows? But right now it's a long way behind anaconda's capabilities - just some quick notes I took as I watched the video:

      * No multiple keyboard layout selection
      * No support for encryption
      * No apparent support for complex storage formats (LVM, proper btrfs, soft RAID etc)
      * No apparent support for complex storage backends (iSCSI, multipath...)
      * No package selection (not applicable to a live installer, but there's still lots of use for 'traditional' installers)
      * Requires creation of local user and root accounts - does not allow you to just create one or the other, no apparent support for identity management services like FreeIPA or AD

      Not trying to pour any cold water on anything, I just hope the devs realize they have a long road ahead

      Comment


      • #13
        Waiting for systemd-installd

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
          Waiting for systemd-installd
          that one will be the best

          And no, Red Hat switches in RHEL 7 its installer to the one used in latest Fedoras.
          http://www.tecmint.com/redhat-enterp...-installation/

          Just take a look at those screen shots. That is not anaconda.

          They may still name it Anaconda due to Enterprise reasons, but is not the old Anaconda, is a new completely redesign from the ground up installer, that has nothing to do with old Anaconda.
          https://access.redhat.com/documentat...d_Booting.html

          And this is why it was completely rewritten
          http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/NewInstaller

          Comment


          • #15
            Also, something that I don't quite understand : everybody on this thread complains about "one more standard" and "the other existing installers", but as far as I know no other distro tried to make its installer standard, it was always quite tied to the distro... so here it would be a single standard. Standards don't just pop like that into existence, there has to be some prior experiments to see what works and what does not.

            Comment


            • #16
              future design

              here is some mockups of future design of calamares that will available after 1.0 : https://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=285&t=123003

              for example:

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by darkcoder View Post
                They may still name it Anaconda due to Enterprise reasons, but is not the old Anaconda, is a new completely redesign from the ground up installer, that has nothing to do with old Anaconda.
                Just read the fucking code. Grep the repo.

                UI look it's one thing. Libraries is another. You can redesign your application UI and it still uses 99% of an old code.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
                  Also, something that I don't quite understand : everybody on this thread complains about "one more standard" and "the other existing installers", but as far as I know no other distro tried to make its installer standard, it was always quite tied to the distro...
                  I think it's just because if you spend so much time on your distro installer, you don't give a flying ship about other distros. Anaconda is used by remixes and some distros IIRC. DI is also used outside Debian. Just nobody cares about nameing his installer an installer framework.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by darkcoder View Post
                    that one will be the best

                    And no, Red Hat switches in RHEL 7 its installer to the one used in latest Fedoras.
                    http://www.tecmint.com/redhat-enterp...-installation/

                    Just take a look at those screen shots. That is not anaconda.

                    They may still name it Anaconda due to Enterprise reasons, but is not the old Anaconda, is a new completely redesign from the ground up installer, that has nothing to do with old Anaconda.
                    https://access.redhat.com/documentat...d_Booting.html

                    And this is why it was completely rewritten
                    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/NewInstaller
                    I'm a Fedora QA engineer at RH. Believe me, I am *intimately* familiar with anaconda. At a rough guess I've probably run north of 10,000 Fedora installs, by now. Manually.

                    anaconda was not 'completely rewritten', no. It is recognizably the same code base. Between Fedora 17 and Fedora 18 the *graphical UI* was rewritten. That is a different thing from rewriting the whole installer, because the whole codebase is much larger than the UI. It's the same codebase, maintained by the same team. It's gone through that overhaul and many others through its life - in F17 we landed noloader, which dropped the old 'stage1', for instance, and post-F18 the storage code was split into a separate python module (though it's still the same code) - but it's the same project, with continuity throughout.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by michal View Post
                      I think it's just because if you spend so much time on your distro installer, you don't give a flying ship about other distros. Anaconda is used by remixes and some distros IIRC. DI is also used outside Debian. Just nobody cares about nameing his installer an installer framework.
                      Anaconda, Debian Installer, and Ubuntu installer are used on their respective spin-offs because they are the best (or the easier one) for their respective official and unofficial spin-offs. I haven't seen an Ubuntu derivative to use Anaconda for example.

                      I haven't looked at neither installer source, so I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure each of those "Major Distribution" installers, do only work with their distribution package manager. So yes they cannot call themselves Framework because they target a single platform... Their Own.

                      Calamares may be or may not be a framework. I cannot judge that because haven't seen the source, but at least looks like is gonna become the standard installer in Arch derivatives, but no main Arch because of their philosophy. KaOS is actually testing next image with Calamares.

                      For an installer to became standard it was to either support the main package managers, with plugin support for adding more as needed, or an unified package manager interface has to surface. Yes I know about PackageKit but we can said it has fail on that.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X