The main goal of the [G.O.BI.E.] is to add a graphical installation to OpenBSD. This project has been developped in the spirit of OpenBSD which means that the installation is as close as possible as the text one. [G.O.B.I.E] wishes to add some value to the product by developping installation modules to known servers such as Bind, Sendmail, Inn, Apache etc. Our Take: Great project, but may I point out the illegal use of the BeOS and (some) Windows icons in the Installer?
OpenBSD GUI Installer Project
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
> illegal use of the BeOS and (some) Windows icons in the Installer?
That’s okay, since I’ll be using it with my illegal Dano OS, which appears to be offically supported by BeBits.
Dano uses the icons because Dano was made by Be, Inc. The deal with the BeOS icons was that you can use them, as long as your *web site* is about BeOS, or you are running an article about BeOS.
The OpenBSD installer was not made by Be neither has nothing to do with BeOS.
… who would actually use such a thing?
One thing I’ve always appreciated about the OpenBSD install (and to a lesser extent, the Debian installer) is its ease of use. Click-through installers seem to take twice as long to work through as a text installer.
Also uses the be Icons ( http://www.pagesjaunes.fr ), be should su them and make some money with that.
—
http://islande.hirlimann.net
My favorite thing about the original text-mode OpenBSD installer is that it fits on a single floppy disk…that makes for a very convenient network install. All the other BSDs and require 2-disks to do the exact same thing and most Linux distros I’ve seen don’t even support network installs anymore
-bytes256
Don’t support network installs anymore? Did you really think twice before clicking “submit comment”? Let’s see… Red Hat, Mandrake, Gentoo (sorta) and Debian all support network installs via FTP (probably others, these are just the ones that come to mind). In fact, I routinely do WIRELESS 802.11b installs on my Red Hat 7.3 boxen via the pcmcia driver disk.
Please step away from the keyboard before you hurt yourself.
-fuzzyping
That red cross is off Microsoft Outlook Express…
Now that really IS asking for trouble.
>That red cross is off Microsoft Outlook Express…
No, Outlook Express’s delete icon is similar, but not exactly the same as in their screenshot.
I dunno, I think it’s a good idea for those new to *BSD; a textmode installer for such a fellow is quite scary. Anyway, its unlikely that any *BSD distro is going to force this on you anytime soon. BTW – SuSE definitely still has a nifty network install (though I was less than impressed with their soundcard support – it’s a SBLive for gravy’s sake – and GCC 3.0 issues. Bah. Anybody know of a good multimedia-oriented linux distro?)
…is a little puzzling. Lot of people will stay scratching their head in front of that screen. Would have been better to have one asking which disk is chosen, and a second one asking if one wants to use all of it.
I have seen nice things come from Gentoo if one wants to put up with the initial configuation BS. The portage collection has a nice assortment of media related goodies. The sound (once it works) is done well and the 3d graphics on my VisionTek GF3-Ti200 are pretty nice. Fast to boot, but, damnit, could use a graphical installer to make life easier.
BeOS is dead. I see nothing wrong with OpenBSD using those icons, as long as Palm doesn’t argue or complain which is more than likely not going to be a problem anymore.
…it doesn’t really tell you anything more than the text based installer, nor does it make the install less complicated. The target audience for an OpenBSD GUI installer are people that are used to configuring everything via a “wizard” and look at the big picture, rather than the details. The irony is that such people have probably never heard of OpenBSD. This installer presents the same install data as the text installer, but smacks a GUI on top. I could see a GUI installer making sense if it did an automatic install with all the decisions made a-la Mandrake’s installer options.
Of course I’m probably jumping the gun since the project still appears to be in its infancy. However, it states that they want to add server config modules, which would make this a *very* useful piece of software.
I really dont see why people make such a fuss about graphical installers? Is it really that hard to read the text and answer a few questions? Just because its in a fancier font and has prettier buttons with icons doesnt mean its really easier. The only good part i can think of for a graphic installer is for partitioning a disk, fdisk can be freaking scary to newbie.
What happens when things dont go exactly as planned in a graphic installer? Boom, back to windows that box goes. I dont know how it is in other linux distros, but in debian, if something isnt quite going as planned, alt+f2, you get a shell, you fix it, you return to the installer and continue.
“Good artists copy, great artists steal”
Because Text mode should have died when DOS did.
Even Windows 3.1 had a graphical installer of sorts….. If I’m installing Linux and it tries to make me do things by a nasty black text screen I wipe the drive and look for better software.
TExt mode is ugly, its crude, and it denies all the benefits of the GUI which really should be universal by now…..
< / troll.orwasit? >
Well. I got a simple with. KISS. Keep It Simple Stupid. Make the installer the same as text, just easier to navigate. The current text one is a bit arcane..and isnt nearly as nice as the “textmode” debian or redhat installers are. Its all weird, and hard to navigate..especially for linux users like me. I found that openbsd was weird to install, but to do post-install configuration was rather simple. So an easy to navigate(also gui is highres..so docs would be simpler to read!) installer would rock.
Just please…make it like mandrake in that it can do a single-floppy network install with just 1 floppy
I really don’t care personally if the installer for OpenBSD is text or graphic. I’m only going to be using it for about 10 minutes.
I think the graphic installer is a good thing to give people with text-phobia a chance to use OpenBSD. However, the installer better do more than what the text based installer does for OpenBSD currently, or those newbies are going to be completely lost. They will boot up to a “#”. They aren’t going to read their mail. They are not going to have X set up. They will be lost and clueless and they will run away screaming into the night, pushing their friends into medium sized shrubs.
While the graphic installer may be nice for some, I think the biggest “fix” I want for OpenBSD is support for the Dvorak keyboard layout during installation.
Oh, by the way, I really liked the moderated comment today.
I am currently running Mandrake 9.0 b2 and I would say that the Mandrake sets the standard for a user-friendly installer. If installing new RPMs and other packages were as simple as inslalling the distro itself I wouldn’t be posting this from a windows partition. I’ve not tried RPM apt-get on Mandrake yet though.
Couldn’t any of these BSD’s simply port Anaconda or Lizard to their distro rather than writing one from scratch?
I understand that there are plenty of differences, but couldn’t it be done easier than writing from scratch?
Which just goes to show that the BeIcons are just too cool for school …
OpenBSD has a simple irect and foolproof installer that is stupid monkey proof. Why is there a need for a graphic installer?
The OpenBSD installer is generally ok EXCEPT for the disk partitioning step. This is not something you want to get wrong but it is so damned cryptic it’s ridiculous.
The BeOS installer was and is still so far ahead of everything else.
David
I’ve used OpenBSD and its install and for me it has only one difficult issue: its fdisk program. In my opinion, it is more difficult to use then it needs to be. Other than that, the installer is easy to use and it works really well. I also feel that if the OpenBSD team were to upgrade the installation program, it should be because they want to or need to, not simply to attract more OpenBSD users.
Personally, I would rather see efforts spent towards getting Mozilla to work on OpenBSD. It is the only free unix that I know of that can’t run it.
Ok, why care about fancy graphs when u install the system in text-mode about 30 minutes ONCE.
Like FreeBSD, Slackware and DEbian text installer are powerfull and faster, and why worry about guis?
simplicity IS the key!
u just have to be sure what are are u doing, and select the riogth options, ok?
I install slackware about 15 minutes, can u suffer only 15 minutes per year?
😉
Ok,
BTW, why do i need GUIs, and they dont work out fine?
Like Corel Linux!
🙁
NEVER get to be initializated the installer because it didnt detec my card!
🙁
If the installer had worked, or detect my card(like redhat) or an option to choose text mode?
Ok, last chance!
People used to be accostumated with DOS and dummy termianls at hole 80s and some 80s (until windows comes), why they cant continue using that?
Disgusting?
…and use your immagination for a change OpenBSD team. You’ll see it’s not *that* hard : )
I am currently running Mandrake 9.0 b2 and I would say that the Mandrake sets the standard for a user-friendly installer.
I didn’t notice a Beta 2 coming out…. I’m currently downloading Beta 1…..
I think those brilliant people that used and expert in *BSD should have learn logn ago why they lost to Linux. Most of them claimed *BSD kernel are superior to Linux but the sure thing is that many end user prefer Linux partly because of the easier installation method compared to *BSD.
Let wait and see the effect of graphical installer for OpenBSD. I highly believed this will increased the installed compared to other *BSD.
Well, the USELESS 10 MINUSTES are among the reason why Window$ left *Unix in dust especially on desktop.
If the interface is designed well there is no reason to use graphics. If you have a bad interface graphics will not save you.
There are very few things that need graphics in the interface. And installing an OS is not one of them.
How is fdsik a well designed interface? fdisk alone is reason enough to use the GUI installer.
i apologies for the icon stuff.
they where there because we needeed temporarly some icons for making a small release at school to our teacher.
This is only screenshots.
there is no public release now but i think this will come in september.
So forget these fucking icons, i will change them asap.
It’s sad that people focuses only on 4 icons insead of the rest of the project that represent nearly 4 month of hard work
For the rest of the discussion all has already told on deadly.org
http://www.deadly.org/article.php3?sid=20020805035436
if you don’t like GUI just ignore GOBIE
so keep cool and stay tuned
Congrats Theo Toury for a good effort !
Now if people can help u improve the
fdisk/partitioning routines,that would
be cool & worthy of applause i/o lousy
flames/fanatical opinions of some I seen
on deadly.org – Do NOT be disheartened
by such comments ! I wish you all success
in improving your GUI installer with
support from the REAL OBSD community!
-ska
##################################################
the GOBIE has nothing to do with the OpenBSD team
##################################################
it is not planed to be commited
it is an external add on independant of OpenBSD, but it will use the standarts packages and it makes exactly the same things as the text installer
So, does the fact that there is no public release mean there is no actual illegal use of the BeOS icons?
in fact nobody execpt two coders and our teacher have the sources/binaries so what ?
i already apologied and i have said it was temporarly
WHAT CAN I DO MORE ?
i ‘m not at home but i promess that i will correct this this nigth
so please stop with this now
OpenBSD’s fdisk does suck but that still does not require a GUI to fix. FreeBSD and NetBSD both have well thought out fdisks that do not make people jump through a hoop in order to install.
But let us not throw out the baby with the bath water. The rest of OpenBSD’s installer is great and totally understandable. I can also understand their resistance to “dumbing-down” the installer, which is why I have never complained about it.
This is an OS news website, not a BeOS news website. So please stop knocking a new graphical installer for an amazing OS simply because it uses 4 icons from a dead OS. Second, I tend to agree, text mode has many uses where the GUI is just too big and demanding and a waste of resources otherwise. But, without graphics, newbies can’t make the transition unless it looks pretty. Besides, it might be nice to have the option, even if the majority of people never use it. It is just really sad that individuals from the old BeOS croud are unwilling to move on, and let other OSes take the spotlight like they deserve. I for one am happy, because the BeOS icons were basically the only thing I liked about that OS. Everything else flat out fell below my expectations at least when compared to QNX or FreeBSD. Anyway, I applaud the OpenBSD team as well as all the BSD teams, and wish them much luck in future projects.
compat_linux (8)
Days back when I tried to install OpenBSD from a DOS partition cuz my system doesn’t have a CDROM drive, the install did boot successfully and I wasn’t having any problems until suddenly it reported that it couldn’t find install sets inspite of me giving partition i (path /OpenBSD/3.1/i386). So, I quit the installer, went to the shell prompt, mounted the DOS partition to find all files in full caps. So, I edited the `install.sub’ script, using the mighty `ed’ (you don’t have vi/emacs in the boot disk), changed the install set names and returned to installer–which worked fine. And lo, OpenBSD was successfully installed!!
Now tell me could this be ever possible with any other installers and/or operating systems here!
OpenBSD and its installer just rocks!!
And Eugenia busted them for Be icons!
Isn’t that amazing ?
Apparently guys were really impressed by BeOS installer and
tried to make something for their small project – deploying OpenBSD at school.
It’s funny to read comments how GUI installed Windows beats text installed Unix. Guess what – Windows is using test mode installer too.
These guys should take the simplest way – load framebuffer with some animated graffic and load OpenBSD with default values in the background (swap and one partition only, all the packages, dhcp for tcp/ip ). Then put a trademark on it and sell it to Microsoft.
This GUI was designed by a child. It breaks every interface rule known to mankind.
And who needs a stupid GUI for OBSD anyway? IF you can’t configure it using the keyboard, please step away and go back to windows.
Anyone who has to use a GUI to adduser is someone I would *not* want working for/with me.
Well you must be a terrible liar Kon
This GUI was designed by a child. It breaks every interface rule known to mankind.
And you know this how? From looking at the screenshots?
Anyone who has to use a GUI to adduser is someone I would *not* want working for/with me.
Hint this is an installer. It has nothing to do with the upkeep of the system. All you are doing here is Trolling and sending bad vibes to 6 students who are trying to do something right.
I hope their project goes very well. Despite Trolls like you.
Something like this will only attract the n00b lamerz to OBSD
“I think those brilliant people that used and expert in *BSD should have learn logn ago why they lost to Linux.”
What, is there a competition? Is it over?
“Let wait and see the effect of graphical installer for OpenBSD. I highly believed this will increased the installed compared to other *BSD.”
The FreeBSD installer is being remodelled so that any interface (text or gui) can be easily plugged onto it.
“Well, the USELESS 10 MINUSTES are among the reason why Window$ left *Unix in dust especially on desktop.”
Was UNIX ever a consumer desktop leader? The only people who think it should be are some Linux users obsessed with destroying Microsoft. Most other Unix-like OS users don’t care that much because Unix has not been left behind in the areas it is so much better than Windows.