On 9/13/07, Steve Shockley  wrote:

quoted text
> Bob Beck wrote:

> >> As OpenBSD grows there simply is no reason, or logic to keeping

> >> around such an archaic method of installation it now uses.

>

> > I await your diffs! Please feel free to write one that works, and

> > fits on the install media for 10 architectures.

>

> I assume you're only encouraging this because it's likely impossible.

> Frankly, I find the FreeBSD installer somewhat confusing.  About the

> only thing that would maybe make the OpenBSD installer simpler for new

> (or impatient) users would be a "default" disk layout with sane

> partition sizes for /, /tmp, /var, /usr, etc.  Of course I rarely

> install OpenBSD on non-x86 boxes but I'm sure sane defaults for x86 are

> quite different than mac68k or hppa.

I've found times where a default layout would have been useful, but on

the other hand I've been bitten more than once by a default layout

(from the sysinstall [A]utomatic partitioner) that didn't set up a big

enough /tmp for my needs. The result was spending extra time

reinstalling to do it right the second time around.
In almost all cases I think it's worth just being forced to think

about my needs a bit more up front rather than trusting technology to

do it for me. _Especially_ in cases where an autopartition scheme is

involved (several OSes come to mind...)
DS