From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 10.236.95.4 with SMTP id o4csp24488yhf; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <9front+bncCMfQ29LlCBDnqd-ABRoEFaS1Gg@googlegroups.com> Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of 9front+bncCMfQ29LlCBDnqd-ABRoEFaS1Gg@googlegroups.com designates 10.52.68.141 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.52.68.141 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of 9front+bncCMfQ29LlCBDnqd-ABRoEFaS1Gg@googlegroups.com designates 10.52.68.141 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=9front+bncCMfQ29LlCBDnqd-ABRoEFaS1Gg@googlegroups.com; dkim=pass header.i=9front+bncCMfQ29LlCBDnqd-ABRoEFaS1Gg@googlegroups.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.52.68.141]) by 10.52.68.141 with SMTP id w13mr5950424vdt.18.1343739111863 (num_hops = 1); Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=YowUZGWo445E2CpG79ZFIU++XLGJJuxduetOflZsrug=; b=CsFm/7C+QjghG3BlRzPlfBLMLwo23FA9Vcl4zgXQEAOOGBZRyxD369iwvNKDyLcNwt I6S1EjCwaG26R4ynSwbK46PwiJEytp/f+2n2pnfIQj00Hs/B7yoqJidhGh5v0RZTiyjK ot+WiAlBYs+Sya9uSvrSrrji9N5PHVXd4IJn4= Received: by 10.52.68.141 with SMTP id w13mr1325436vdt.18.1343739111825; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:51 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: 9front@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.52.100.72 with SMTP id ew8ls78172vdb.9.gmail; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.240.229 with SMTP id wd5mr16740742vdc.8.1343739110628; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.240.229 with SMTP id wd5mr16740741vdc.8.1343739110619; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vb0-f47.google.com (mail-vb0-f47.google.com [209.85.212.47]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dy2si2649vdb.1.2012.07.31.05.51.50 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of steve.ruckdashel@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.47; Received: by mail-vb0-f47.google.com with SMTP id fr13so5956714vbb.20 for <9front@googlegroups.com>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.225.194 with SMTP id it2mr13990367vcb.32.1343739110525; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.43.19 with HTTP; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 05:51:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120731125919.1835ca55@vardo.ethans.dre.am> References: <1c421a0da52eeb6e8ccf98b953fb5205@yourdomain.dom> <20120731125919.1835ca55@vardo.ethans.dre.am> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:51:50 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Installing 9front From: Steven Ruckdashel To: 9front@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: steve.ruckdashel@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of steve.ruckdashel@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.47 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=steve.ruckdashel@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: 9front@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list 9front@googlegroups.com; contact 9front+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: <9front.googlegroups.com> X-Google-Group-Id: 831096995978 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: 9front@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I think most people that would benefit from the streamlined installer are trying to install within QEMU. Maybe making an install option for this and having the installer do a complete setup with no additional input. On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote: > On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 20:30:05 +0200 > Uriel wrote: > >> Maybe we could have a 'fake' install environment somehow that is easy >> to reset and where you can run the whole installer system inside a rio >> window. Not sure how practical and difficult this could be to arrange, >> but seems like it should be feasible and should make it much easier to >> polish the installer script(s). > > Wat? The installer already runs in a rio window on a normal (I think) > live-CD system. I'm fairly confident I could pull the install scripts > onto my running system and use them to, say, install to a USB drive or > whatever. Hm... I think if you wanted the option of killing the > installer to get a completely fresh start you'd just have to clean up > some scripts in /tmp. > > > -- > This is obviously some strange usage of the > word "simple" that I was previously unaware of.