Professional Web Applications Themes

Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ? - Sun Solaris

Dear All : I have a tendency to be a minamalist. This has been a long time problem for me. I like the simplicity of a VT100 terminal when I am doing an installation. The general concensus from most users of Solaris is that the CD in the Media kit labeled "Installation" should be used as a coffee coaster or simply left alone. The installation process should begin with CD 1 of 2 and then, eventually, CD 2 of 2. In the event that you want to install some things from CD 2 of 2 I believe that we should ...

  1. #1

    Default Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ?


    Dear All :

    I have a tendency to be a minamalist. This has been a long time problem
    for me. I like the simplicity of a VT100 terminal when I am doing an
    installation. The general concensus from most users of Solaris is that
    the CD in the Media kit labeled "Installation" should be used as a coffee
    coaster or simply left alone. The installation process should begin with
    CD 1 of 2 and then, eventually, CD 2 of 2. In the event that you want to
    install some things from CD 2 of 2 I believe that we should simply mount
    the CD and then run the installer.

    Not so :

    # ./installer

    java.lang.InternalError: Can't connect to X11 window server using ':0.0' as
    the value of the DISPLAY variable.

    The Wizard cannot be started on this display. On Solaris
    , you must allow the wizard access to the display.
    Try typing "xhost +" in another window.

    So then I simply cd to Solaris_8/Product on the CD and then use pkgadd
    manually. Why this insistance on the CDE WebStart approach? Why not have
    a simple java based tool that will shell out the pkgadd commands for me on
    my terminal at my server? The new user would find this disturbing and
    certainly frustrating. The installer application should do what it implies,
    on the current terminal.

    Just curious on some thoughts out there.

    Dennis Clarke
    [email]dclarkeblastwave.org[/email]

    ps: IMHO the "xhost +" approach is weak. xauth with a key is a better way.
    Dennis Clarke Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ?

    On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 20:19:27 -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
    > # ./installer
    ../installer --nodisplay (?, might be only one -)
    > The Wizard cannot be started on this display. On Solaris
    > , you must allow the wizard access to the display.
    > Try typing "xhost +" in another window.
    At the time you are doing an installation on a server, the only user on
    that machine is 'root'. Use 'xhost +server_name' and there are no
    potential X access problems. Don't forget 'xhost -server_name' afterward.
    > So then I simply cd to Solaris_8/Product on the CD and then use pkgadd
    > manually. Why this insistance on the CDE WebStart approach? Why not have
    > a simple java based tool that will shell out the pkgadd commands for me on
    > my terminal at my server? The new user would find this disturbing and
    > certainly frustrating. The installer application should do what it implies,
    > on the current terminal.
    Sun -loves- java and considers the imposition of it on admins to be no
    problem ;-)

    Dave Uhring Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer'?

    On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Dennis Clarke wrote:
    > I have a tendency to be a minamalist. This has been a long time problem
    > for me. I like the simplicity of a VT100 terminal when I am doing an
    > installation. The general concensus from most users of Solaris is that
    > the CD in the Media kit labeled "Installation" should be used as a coffee
    > coaster or simply left alone. The installation process should begin with
    > CD 1 of 2 and then, eventually, CD 2 of 2. In the event that you want to
    > install some things from CD 2 of 2 I believe that we should simply mount
    > the CD and then run the installer.
    >
    > Not so :
    >
    > # ./installer
    >
    > java.lang.InternalError: Can't connect to X11 window server using ':0.0' as
    > the value of the DISPLAY variable.
    Is it possible to run the installer like this:

    # ./installer -nodisplay

    I don't know, as I've only ever installed 2 CD versions of Solaris
    onto an install server. Fortunately, "add_to_install_server" is not
    a GUI app (yet)...
    > Just curious on some thoughts out there.
    I'm with you; I find the trend to GUI only installers extremely
    irritating. By all means, offer a GUI as an option, but the default
    method should be command line based. I mean, what is so hard
    about typing "pkgadd -d . *"?

    --
    Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

    President,
    Rite Online Inc.

    Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
    URL: [url]http://www.rite-online.net[/url]

    Rich Teer Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ?

    In article <Pine.GSO.4.44.0307230951530.449-100000zaphod.rite-group.com>, Rich
    Teer wrote:
    > I'm with you; I find the trend to GUI only installers extremely
    > irritating. By all means, offer a GUI as an option, but the default
    > method should be command line based. I mean, what is so hard
    > about typing "pkgadd -d . *"?
    And, if you're going to have a GUI install, at least make it
    look nice...

    Solaris 9 GUI install on twm??? Really inspires those folks
    who care about pretty installation routines to continue,
    doesn't it? It all seems a bit backwards - existing Solaris
    users aren't going to care about doing a GUI install, but
    new users are. So they get a really poor interface....

    Still, at least it's less complex than SGI's inst.... :-)
    Adrian Taylor Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ?

    Rich Teer <rich.teerrite-group.com> writes:
    > On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Adrian Taylor wrote:
    >
    > > Solaris 9 GUI install on twm??? Really inspires those folks
    >
    > THe S8 and earlier installers used Open Windows, which explains
    > why it's not used in S9 (OW is EOLed). But I don't know why
    > twm was used in preference to CDE.
    Because of its (lesser) memory footprint maybe? At least we have to happy
    they are not using Java (they are not, are they?) or JavaScript :-)

    Bye, Dragan


    --
    Dragan Cvetkovic,

    To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

    !!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
    Dragan Cvetkovic Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer'?

    Rich Teer wrote:
    > On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Adrian Taylor wrote:
    >
    >>Solaris 9 GUI install on twm??? Really inspires those folks
    >
    > THe S8 and earlier installers used Open Windows, which explains
    > why it's not used in S9 (OW is EOLed). But I don't know why
    > twm was used in preference to CDE.
    Perhaps because at the time the gui is started, X has not been installed yet? It makes
    sense at that point to use the most basic window manager, twm, which is part of the
    minimum X distribution. To find all the gumph needed to run CDE would require a lot more
    loaded into memory.

    Besides, dtterm s, and if we are just going to use an xterm, what's the advantage of
    CDE? It's just additional overhead. The reason for starting X is obviously so that the
    sysadmin can start a second shell and do "stuff" while the installation is progressing.

    Personally, I think this is one of the cool things Linux: providing additional logical
    text terminals on F1 to F6 is very useful - it gives the same ability without the X
    overhead. I first saw this with SCO Unix, but I've no idea if it was their idea
    originally. Didn't Xenix also have this?


    --
    -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
    Version: 3.1
    GO/! d- s++:+ a+ C++(++++) US++++$ UB++ U*++ P+++ L+++ E--- W+++ N++ w--- O-
    M+ V- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP t+ 5++ X R* tv+ b+ DI++ D G e(*) h++/-- r+++ y?
    ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

    -----------------------------------------------------
    Bob Hoekstra: APL & Unix Consultant
    Telephone: +44 1483 771028
    Mobile: +44 7710 562345
    Email: [email]Bob.HoekstraHoekstraSystems.ltd.uk[/email]
    -----------------------------------------------------

    Bob Hoekstra Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer'?


    As a bit of a follow up the installer with '-nodisplay' option does indeed
    seem to work. It is a horrible little interface but I guess it works. I
    eventually was able to select some installation options that resulted in :

    ================================================== ====
    The following items will be installed:




    Installation cannot start!

    1. Start Over
    2. Exit Installation

    What would you like to do [1]? 2
    ================================================== ==============

    OK, at least it is text on the terminal.

    As a comparison <flame suit on> the boot floppy for RedHat Linux 9 allows
    me to go with either text or a GUI for install. It then pulls the entire
    OS down across the internet or via local NFS/ftp/http. It seems fairly
    easy to use and other than asking for a device driver diskette it just seems
    to work.

    Strangely it has been sitting at 9% complete for almost an hour. I think
    I'll turn the monitor off and leave it alone.

    Solaris 9 for Intel was simple on an LX50 with no floppies required at all.

    Solaris 8 for Intel on the LX50 was a sickening experience. It is running
    but the CDROM/Floppy drives don't work at all. The ITU update disk did not
    help at all.

    All very interesting really.

    <flame suit off>

    Dennis
    Dennis Clarke Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer'?

    On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Bob Hoekstra wrote:
    > Rich Teer wrote:
    > > On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Adrian Taylor wrote:
    > >
    > >>Solaris 9 GUI install on twm??? Really inspires those folks
    > >
    > > THe S8 and earlier installers used Open Windows, which explains
    > > why it's not used in S9 (OW is EOLed). But I don't know why
    > > twm was used in preference to CDE.
    >
    > Perhaps because at the time the gui is started, X has not been installed yet? It makes
    Agreed; I was actually thinking along those lines, but I
    had to take an important phone call, so I just hit send
    without modyfying my post.
    > Besides, dtterm s, and if we are just going to use an xterm, what's the advantage of
    Oh, I dunno about that! I think it's much better than
    GNOME's terminal, for example!

    --
    Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA

    President,
    Rite Online Inc.

    Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
    URL: [url]http://www.rite-online.net[/url]

    Rich Teer Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer'?

    Rich Teer wrote:
    > On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Bob Hoekstra wrote:
    >
    >>Besides, dtterm s, and if we are just going to use an xterm, what's the advantage of
    >
    > Oh, I dunno about that! I think it's much better than
    > GNOME's terminal, for example!
    >
    Agreed. I always use xterm or rxvt.


    --
    -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
    Version: 3.1
    GO/! d- s++:+ a+ C++(++++) US++++$ UB++ U*++ P+++ L+++ E--- W+++ N++ w--- O-
    M+ V- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP t+ 5++ X R* tv+ b+ DI++ D G e(*) h++/-- r+++ y?
    ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

    -----------------------------------------------------
    Bob Hoekstra: APL & Unix Consultant
    Telephone: +44 1483 771028
    Mobile: +44 7710 562345
    Email: [email]Bob.HoekstraHoekstraSystems.ltd.uk[/email]
    -----------------------------------------------------

    Bob Hoekstra Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ?

    Adrian Taylor <spamlaudachoir.org> writes in comp.unix.solaris:
    |And, if you're going to have a GUI install, at least make it
    |look nice...
    |Solaris 9 GUI install on twm???

    That's what the webstart installer on the Installation CD is for.

    Only those who know the secret handshake of booting from CD 1 of 2 get
    the twm installer. (twm was chosen simply because there wasn't room on
    CD 1 of 2 for enough of CDE to run dtwm and GNOME wasn't ready yet.)

    --
    __________________________________________________ ______________________
    Alan Coopersmith [email]alancalum.calberkeley.org[/email]
    [url]http://www.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU/~alanc/[/url] aka: [email]Alan.CoopersmithSun.COM[/email]
    Working for, but definitely not speaking for, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
    Alan Coopersmith Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ?

    Adrian Taylor <spamlaudachoir.org> writes:
    >Solaris 9 GUI install on twm??? Really inspires those folks
    >who care about pretty installation routines to continue,
    >doesn't it? It all seems a bit backwards - existing Solaris
    >users aren't going to care about doing a GUI install, but
    >new users are. So they get a really poor interface....
    That's not the GUI install, that's the command line install under X.
    (It's under X so you can pop up an extra window to do stuff)

    Webstart is the GUI install.

    Casper
    --
    Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
    to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
    Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
    be fiction rather than truth.
    Casper H.S. Dik Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ?

    Dragan Cvetkovic <meprivacy.net> writes:
    >Rich Teer <rich.teerrite-group.com> writes:
    >> On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Adrian Taylor wrote:
    >>
    >> > Solaris 9 GUI install on twm??? Really inspires those folks
    >>
    >> THe S8 and earlier installers used Open Windows, which explains
    >> why it's not used in S9 (OW is EOLed). But I don't know why
    >> twm was used in preference to CDE.
    >Because of its (lesser) memory footprint maybe? At least we have to happy
    >they are not using Java (they are not, are they?) or JavaScript :-)
    It's mostly about disk footprint; the install root image cannot grow much
    without requiring a 3rd CD.

    Casper
    --
    Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
    to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
    Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
    be fiction rather than truth.
    Casper H.S. Dik Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer'?



    Oscar del Rio wrote:
    >>> Solaris 9 GUI install on twm??? Really inspires those folks
    >>> who care about pretty installation routines to continue, doesn't it?
    >>> It all seems a bit backwards - existing Solaris
    >>> users aren't going to care about doing a GUI install, but
    >>> new users are. So they get a really poor interface....
    >>
    >>
    >> That's not the GUI install, that's the command line install under X.
    >> (It's under X so you can pop up an extra window to do stuff)
    >>
    >> Webstart is the GUI install.
    >
    >
    >
    > Perhaps the installation from CD 1 should be command line only,
    > with some kind of shell escape.
    >
    > That would save space on the CD as X would not be needed then,
    > and no kdmconfig screens on x86.
    >
    > Anyone who wants a GUI installation could use the Installation CD.
    >
    I think the twm setup on CD 1 is just right. You want a window manager
    so you can do other stuff, especially if this is the first processor of
    a type
    that you've got your hands on; but you don't want the overn GUI thing.
    In fact, we always install via jumpstart, which gives the best of all
    worlds;
    hands-off automatic installation if it all works, a small fast window
    manager for
    when it doesn't.

    Pete.

    Peter Bunclark Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Why the installation team enforces graphics with the 'installer' ?

    Adrian Taylor <spamlaudachoir.org> wrote:
    > In article <Pine.GSO.4.44.0307230951530.449-100000zaphod.rite-group.com>, Rich
    > Teer wrote:
    >> I'm with you; I find the trend to GUI only installers extremely
    >> irritating. By all means, offer a GUI as an option, but the default
    >> method should be command line based. I mean, what is so hard
    >> about typing "pkgadd -d . *"?
    > And, if you're going to have a GUI install, at least make it
    > look nice...
    > Solaris 9 GUI install on twm??? Really inspires those folks
    > who care about pretty installation routines to continue,
    > doesn't it? It all seems a bit backwards - existing Solaris
    > users aren't going to care about doing a GUI install, but
    > new users are. So they get a really poor interface....
    TWM-based installation is fine in terms of performance and
    functionality. If you want a pretty GUI installation don't boot from
    the Solaris 1 of 2 software CD. Boot from the installation CD instead.
    You'll get a nice-looking bloated Java "webstart" installation.

    --
    Akop Pogosian

    This space has been accidentally left blank.
    Akop Pogosian Guest

Similar Threads

  1. #40433 [NEW]: SimpleXML enforces wrong cht
    By consensus at gmail dot com in forum PHP Bugs
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 10th, 10:32 PM
  2. Installation on Win2k3 SP1 Installation of ODBC serviceshangs forever
    By BadMrFrosty in forum Coldfusion Server Administration
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 16th, 08:29 PM
  3. installation of package installer
    By Sam Virgillo in forum Debian
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 24th, 11:10 PM
  4. Team debug in ASP.NET???
    By Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\) in forum ASP.NET General
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 8th, 03:37 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139