NetBSD Problem Report #37415

From martin@duskware.de  Wed Nov 21 10:23:03 2007
Return-Path: <martin@duskware.de>
Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [204.152.190.11])
	by narn.NetBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB73363B88C
	for <gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org>; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:23:03 +0000 (UTC)
Message-Id: <20071121101427.4D65663B88C@narn.NetBSD.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 10:14:27 +0000 (UTC)
From: rillig@NetBSD.org
Reply-To: rillig@NetBSD.org
To: netbsd-bugs-owner@NetBSD.org
Subject: sysinst should be available after installation
X-Send-Pr-Version: www-1.0

>Number:         37415
>Category:       bin
>Synopsis:       sysinst should be available after installation
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    bin-bug-people
>State:          open
>Class:          change-request
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Wed Nov 21 10:25:00 +0000 2007
>Last-Modified:  Tue Mar 06 15:25:01 +0000 2012
>Originator:     Roland Illig
>Release:        
>Organization:
>Environment:
>Description:
sysinst makes partitioning disks much more comfortable than using the command line interfaces of fdisk and disklabel. It also avoids the confusion about which of the tools is the correct one.

>How-To-Repeat:

>Fix:

>Audit-Trail:
From: Julian Djamil Fagir <gnrp@komkon2.de>
To: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:11:04 +0100

 Hi,

 as the plan seems to be to replace sysinst by a newer version anyway, and
 currently there are few people caring for sysinst, I wonder if having sysinst
 available for users (and thus, having to fix more bugs or feature requests)
 would be a good idea.

 Regards, Julian

From: Marc Balmer <mbalmer@NetBSD.org>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: Julian Djamil Fagir <gnrp@komkon2.de>, gnats-admin@NetBSD.org,
        netbsd-bugs@NetBSD.org, rillig@NetBSD.org
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2012 10:37:30 +0100

 Am 29.02.12 14:15, schrieb Julian Djamil Fagir:
 > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: Julian Djamil Fagir <gnrp@komkon2.de>
 > To: gnats-bugs@gnats.netbsd.org
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
 > Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 14:11:04 +0100
 > 
 >  Hi,
 >  
 >  as the plan seems to be to replace sysinst by a newer version anyway, and
 >  currently there are few people caring for sysinst, I wonder if having sysinst
 >  available for users (and thus, having to fix more bugs or feature requests)
 >  would be a good idea.

 If sysinst can be used for something useful _after_ system installation,
 then we can move it to /usr/sbin or /sbin.  One possible such use case
 could be installing _and_ configuring of pkgsrc packages, e.g.
 installing a PostgreSQL server _and_ creating a database cluster and
 creating the DBA account.

From: David Holland <dholland-bugs@netbsd.org>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 18:41:03 +0000

 On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 09:40:04AM +0000, Marc Balmer wrote:
  >  If sysinst can be used for something useful _after_ system installation,
  >  then we can move it to /usr/sbin or /sbin.

 There are a number of possible things, such as configuring the
 network, or installing sets that one didn't the first time.

 Or, even, doing a system update, but that is probably not safe the way
 things are currently organized.

 -- 
 David A. Holland
 dholland@netbsd.org

From: Marc Balmer <mbalmer@NetBSD.org>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: David Holland <dholland-bugs@NetBSD.org>, gnats-admin@NetBSD.org,
        netbsd-bugs@NetBSD.org, rillig@NetBSD.org
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 10:19:10 +0100

 Am 03.03.12 19:45, schrieb David Holland:
 > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: David Holland <dholland-bugs@netbsd.org>
 > To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
 > Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 18:41:03 +0000
 > 
 >  On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 09:40:04AM +0000, Marc Balmer wrote:
 >   >  If sysinst can be used for something useful _after_ system installation,
 >   >  then we can move it to /usr/sbin or /sbin.
 >  
 >  There are a number of possible things, such as configuring the
 >  network, or installing sets that one didn't the first time.
 >  
 >  Or, even, doing a system update, but that is probably not safe the way
 >  things are currently organized.

 What would be a good way to detect whether sysinst is run at
 installation time or after installation?  The difference between the two
 modes should be the menus.  It would behave differently and offer
 different options.

 Maybe sysinst can detect whether it's part of a crunched binary (install
 time) or a selfstanding binary (after installation)?

From: Martin Husemann <martin@duskware.de>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:44:57 +0100

 On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 09:20:05AM +0000, Marc Balmer wrote:
 >  Maybe sysinst can detect whether it's part of a crunched binary (install
 >  time) or a selfstanding binary (after installation)?

 For many install media, there is no such difference that you can detect.
 E.g. on amd64 install CDs sysinst will run in multi user mode and not be
 part of a crunched binary.

 Martin

From: Matthew Mondor <mm_lists@pulsar-zone.net>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 13:22:44 -0500

 On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 10:19:10 +0100
 Marc Balmer <mbalmer@NetBSD.org> wrote:

 > What would be a good way to detect whether sysinst is run at
 > installation time or after installation?  The difference between the two
 > modes should be the menus.  It would behave differently and offer
 > different options.
 > 
 > Maybe sysinst can detect whether it's part of a crunched binary (install
 > time) or a selfstanding binary (after installation)?

 So far there just were two different menu paths: one for update and
 another for install.  Is that a problematic approach?
 -- 
 Matt

From: David Laight <david@l8s.co.uk>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:13:06 +0000

 On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 06:25:02PM +0000, Matthew Mondor wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.
 >  
 >  So far there just were two different menu paths: one for update and
 >  another for install.  Is that a problematic approach?

 I'm not 100% sure there is much difference between 'update' and
 doing an overlay 'install'.
 I always used 'install' - not sure I played much with 'update'.

 	David

 -- 
 David Laight: david@l8s.co.uk

From: David Holland <dholland-bugs@netbsd.org>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 05:37:56 +0000

 On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 09:20:05AM +0000, Marc Balmer wrote:
  >>>  If sysinst can be used for something useful _after_ system installation,
  >>>  then we can move it to /usr/sbin or /sbin.
  >>  
  >> There are a number of possible things, such as configuring the
  >> network, or installing sets that one didn't the first time.
  >>  
  >> Or, even, doing a system update, but that is probably not safe the way
  >> things are currently organized.
  >  
  >  What would be a good way to detect whether sysinst is run at
  >  installation time or after installation?  The difference between the two
  >  modes should be the menus.  It would behave differently and offer
  >  different options.

 Well... it shouldn't be *that* different.

 however, I think the best way to detect if it's being run from install
 media is to have the install media invoke it with some option. An
 ordinary user running it won't provide that option (unless they know
 what they're doing, etc.)

 Trying to autodetect it based on the system environment is futile.

 -- 
 David A. Holland
 dholland@netbsd.org

From: Matthew Mondor <mm_lists@pulsar-zone.net>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 00:42:38 -0500

 On Sun,  4 Mar 2012 20:20:04 +0000 (UTC)
 David Laight <david@l8s.co.uk> wrote:

 > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: David Laight <david@l8s.co.uk>
 > To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
 > Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:13:06 +0000
 > 
 >  On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 06:25:02PM +0000, Matthew Mondor wrote:
 >  > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.
 >  >  
 >  >  So far there just were two different menu paths: one for update and
 >  >  another for install.  Is that a problematic approach?
 >  
 >  I'm not 100% sure there is much difference between 'update' and
 >  doing an overlay 'install'.
 >  I always used 'install' - not sure I played much with 'update'.

 I myself have no experience with it, updating from source and then
 install=/ over nfs for other systems.

 Probably that one difference would be avoiding to extract etc.tgz, and
 running etcupdate+postinstall?

 In this context, it could also avoid to rewrite fstab, network and
 hostname configuration...
 -- 
 Matt

From: Matthew Mondor <mm_lists@pulsar-zone.net>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 00:43:41 -0500

 On Mon,  5 Mar 2012 05:40:03 +0000 (UTC)
 David Holland <dholland-bugs@netbsd.org> wrote:

 >  however, I think the best way to detect if it's being run from install
 >  media is to have the install media invoke it with some option. An
 >  ordinary user running it won't provide that option (unless they know
 >  what they're doing, etc.)

 I think that this makes a lot of sense.
 -- 
 Matt

From: Marc Balmer <marc@msys.ch>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:53:40 +0100

 Am 05.03.2012 um 06:45 schrieb Matthew Mondor:

 > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: Matthew Mondor <mm_lists@pulsar-zone.net>
 > To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
 > Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 00:43:41 -0500
 > 
 > On Mon,  5 Mar 2012 05:40:03 +0000 (UTC)
 > David Holland <dholland-bugs@netbsd.org> wrote:
 > 
 >> however, I think the best way to detect if it's being run from install
 >> media is to have the install media invoke it with some option. An
 >> ordinary user running it won't provide that option (unless they know
 >> what they're doing, etc.)
 > 
 > I think that this makes a lot of sense.


 Yes, no magic trickery, but a clear option, maybe -i


From: Marc Balmer <marc@msys.ch>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: gnats-admin@NetBSD.org, netbsd-bugs@NetBSD.org, rillig@NetBSD.org
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:08:01 +0100

 Am 06.03.2012 um 12:55 schrieb Marc Balmer:

 > The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by =
 GNATS.
 >=20
 > From: Marc Balmer <marc@msys.ch>
 > To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 > Cc:=20
 > Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
 > Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:53:40 +0100
 >=20
 > Am 05.03.2012 um 06:45 schrieb Matthew Mondor:
 >=20
 >> The following reply was made to PR bin/37415; it has been noted by =
 GNATS.
 >>=20
 >> From: Matthew Mondor <mm_lists@pulsar-zone.net>
 >> To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 >> Cc:=20
 >> Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after =
 installation
 >> Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 00:43:41 -0500
 >>=20
 >> On Mon,  5 Mar 2012 05:40:03 +0000 (UTC)
 >> David Holland <dholland-bugs@netbsd.org> wrote:
 >>=20
 >>> however, I think the best way to detect if it's being run from =
 install
 >>> media is to have the install media invoke it with some option. An
 >>> ordinary user running it won't provide that option (unless they know
 >>> what they're doing, etc.)
 >>=20
 >> I think that this makes a lot of sense.
 >=20
 >=20
 > Yes, no magic trickery, but a clear option, maybe -i


 An here is a very good reason to put sysinst in base (i.e. /sbin or =
 /usr/sbin):  It can be used to prepare NetBSD disk images that are later =
 deployed e.g. in an embedded system.  To prepare CF disks, for example.  =
 Usage could be 'sysinst <device>'.  And then, I think it does not really =
 matter if sysinst comes from boot media are not, but rather whether it =
 is being execute on the final target or nor.  An option -T could =
 indicate that sysinst runs on the target, and ramdisks with installers =
 would invoke sysinst as 'sysinst -T'.=

From: Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui@ceres.dti.ne.jp>
To: marc@msys.ch
Cc: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org, tsutsui@ceres.dti.ne.jp
Subject: Re: bin/37415: sysinst should be available after installation
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 00:20:37 +0900

 marc@ wrote:

 > An here is a very good reason to put sysinst in base
 > (i.e. /sbin or /usr/sbin):  It can be used to prepare NetBSD
 > disk images that are later deployed e.g. in an embedded system.

 It's also useful to build the "install-image" target without whole
 "build.sh release" ops but with only "build.sh tools".
 (currently src/distrib/i386/installimage/Makefile requires files in OBJDIR)
 ---
 Izumi Tsutsui

Home	PR Database Search