YAPIB (was: Drawing graphics on terminal)
paul at iconoplex.co.uk
Thu Jun 19 02:57:34 PDT 2003
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 11:40:13AM -0400, The Anarcat wrote:
> > > - Whether the installer is graphical or not is not the issue. Grey boxes on
> > > a blue background with yellow, red and black text is just plain ugly to a
> > > society that understands art and interior design. I know you're limited on
> > > pallet due to the restrictions of the console, but you can make sysinstall
> > > nicer just by changing the colour scheme. You can make it a hell of a lot
> > > nicer by making it consistent and functionally useful.
> Who cares really... Are you going to code it? Are you going to rewrite
> sysinstall and provide support or are you going to rewrite dialog?
You're quoting me there. The answer to your question "Are you going to code
it?" is "Yes". "Are you going to reqrite sysinstall and provide support or
are you going to rewrite dialog?" - neither.
I'm fed up of it sitting there too. I'm sick and tired of the discussions.
So, after I've moved house this month, got my new machine sorted, and then
I'll be sitting down to work on it. I'll do it my way, make it a port, and
if others like it, I'll make it easy for them to use in building their own
ISOs. I do not see a problem with this.
As to what I'm writing, well, I'm going to do the design in about four weeks
time, and anybody who is interested can take a look. An announcement will
probably go up on -hackers and -libh...
> I'm getting *really* tired of random people popping up on mailing
> lists and saying what should and shouldn't be done and complaining
> about how sysinstall sucks. Yes it sucks! So what? What are you going
> to do about it?
> I suggest you folks to stop talking and start designing. If someone
> can come with a clean design of a new package manager/installer, then
> *maybe* something could come out of it, but in all the time I've been
> interested in package management in BSD, all the talk I've seen has
> been moot (e.g. I want a GTK installer! I want a pkgAPI!), without any
> actual code or design. Just talk impeding progress.
I want something that works. To be honest, just something that abstracts
/usr/ports and makes use of the pkg-descr files would be more useful than
the current blank void navigated with cd and more...
> The only real improvement I'm aware of is portupgrade, which is doing
> an extraordinaire job considering the architechture, and just popped
> up without prior useless, endless, close-minded discussions. Let us
> not forget Colin's binary upgrade software which looks increasingly
Yeah, noted. Good stuff. I'm just looking at putting a "friedndly"
abstraction over that.
> libh's dead, folks. It's been dead for a good while now. I was just
> kicking it to make it look like we could tear something out of this
It's not *that* bad is it? :-)
More information about the freebsd-libh