Re: Next release of RedHat Installer

["Andrew Smith" <rhml k1k2 com>]

> "Andrew Smith" <rhml k1k2 com> writes:
> 
>> > "Andrew Smith" <rhml k1k2 com> writes:
>> > 
>> >> > Hmm, could the install be split into multiple transactions maybe?
>> >> >  Do a base install, then add the fancy stuff?
>> >>
>> >> a really simple installer that gets the machine up and running and
>> >> the rest is up to you ... no X, no GUI interface
>> > 
>> > Now you're already talking about a lot of (duplicated) work and
>> > testing, for not much benefit. If this effort could be put into
>> > improving the current one (which I like a lot) or other products, I
>> > think that would have greater benefits overall.
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > Trond Eivind Glomsrød
>> > Red Hat, Inc.
>> 
>> /* Flame bait on
>> 
>> Trond,
>> from your comments, I hope you have nothing to do with actual
>> development in RedHat.
> 
> Insults won't help, will it?

4 points:
1) Yes, I guess a more diplomatic comment would have been appropriate
2) It did help, you took notice and responded very quickly :-)
3) If you don't like good development practices or don't use them for
   whatever excuse you prefer, then I still hope you are not involved
   with the actual development
4) "Flame bait on"

In any intelligent development group, your statement
"Now you're already talking about a lot of (duplicated) work and testing," 
would attract much more harsh comments than the one I have made
especially when I was discussing a simplified version of the same
product - with less memory requirements being the catch, but still
the comparison is quite reasonable.

>> Never heard of reusable code, libraries, objects, generic code,
>> etc. etc. etc.
> 
> Gee. What's that?

I guess that explains it :-) :-) :-) :-)

>> Are you really telling me that all of the install process needs
>> >= 32 Meg of RAM to run and none of the basic system setup code
>> could be reused in a simpler install?
> 
>> (or worse the entire thing is just python
> 
> Except the loader, yes.

Everything except the loader? (ALL functionality of the install) is
only running Python? - no tools, utilities or progams used in the
install that are not python.
I thought RPM, diskdruid, fdisk, XYZsh, cp ...
were not written in Python :-)

>> and there is no version of pyhton that could be used in less than
>> 32Meg of RAM?) 
> 
> Python takes a chunk of memory. What you didn't read, is the other
> things taking memory: The ramdisks from which the install runs, the rpm
> transaction (when processing it, rpm needs quite a bit of memory)

Hmmm - I didn't read?
The original point was a simple install that didn't need all the bells
and whistles that the current one seems to need to try and play catch
up with Microsoft and their memory hungry install process (maybe MS
should use director for the next windows imstall :-)

Use all the non-"bells and whistles" (if that is possible - sounds like
it isn't) and put a much simpler interface in front of it.

What about swap? (or maybe that's a "bell and whistle"? :-)

The complexity of code and/or difficulty of reuse in many systems is
often inversely proportional to the abilities of those who created it.

If, however, the problem is the tools used to develop the system, then
the tools chosen where either mandated by someone who didn't know what
they were doing, or chosen by someone who should not have been choosing
or had no foresight or future consideration in their decision.

>> "a lot of (duplicated) work" is either wrong or the side effect
>> of poor programming practices.
> 
> It's neither. It's just a result of low-memory machines not being the
> highest of priorities.

Ok - then it's the second one.

> ... the point here is actually CPU not memory - but typically old
>> machines like this or older do not have much memory and thus cannot
>> use RedHat even for a simple firewall
> 
> The memory is what wil cause the problem. Read the code if you want to.

I know that the memory is what will cause the problem - reread what you
quoted from me ... an old CPU is typically well fast enough to do all
these things, but PC's with old CPU's typically do not have much memory
and are hard or expensive to get memory for
(I did this for one machine: the memory cost more than the then current
PC133 168pin DRAM of the same size)
thus you canont install RedHat on them without possibly spending money
on at least a RAM upgrade.

> 
>> It is funny that you can put a complete Linux router on a floppy but
>> the RedHat version requires 32Meg of RAM just to run install :-)
> 
> Not if you know what the differences are... but you didn't bother
> checking, did you?

Yes I know what the differences are, the install process needs 32M
of RAM to run.
The install process can be compared to (with abreviation):
"the router plus the install program"

A Linux system can: work extreemly well as a router and fit compressed
on a floppy disk and be run in 4M of RAM.
But you need to run a 32M install process to create something similar
with RedHat (and then you can remove some of the memory after the
install completes)

It was a statement of irony ... even with a ":-)" at the end

> -- 
> Trond Eivind Glomsrød
> Red Hat, Inc.

-- 
-Cheers
-Andrew

MS ... if only he hadn't been hang gliding!