On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 11:48:03PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello,^M > ^M > Firstly, sorry if my english is not very good sometimes...^M
No problem, but your ^Ms are really annoying, sorry. Could you please somehow get rid of them? ;-) > Second, I'm trying to make a GUI Installer for Fw.^M > ^M > I find in TODO list 0.9 :^M Hmm, I can't see it at http://bugs.frugalware.org/?do=roadmap Having a graphical installer for 1.0 is not a must IMHO, but it would be nice. Any contribution in this area are welcome. > "5) graphical installer^M > ^M > when we were at 0.1 i thought a graphical installer for 1.0 is a^M > musthave. nowadays i'm not that sure. if we want it, how do we want it?^M > having a so-called installer (which in fact isn't a real installer) like^M > Ubuntu has? (fwlive+a pygtk or pyqt script) or do we want a real^M > graphical installer like Fedora does?^M > ^M > i think a graphical installer is more like the later, but that's more^M > complicated and i'm not too motivated to code it :S"^M > ^M > Always the same question : how do you want it ? :) ^M Hmm, this is like: "Do we want an USB install or support for installing via netboot?" Probably - in case somebody is willing to do it - having both is the best. > In the first case, it's "easy" to make (using Gtk).^M Never underestimate a man before you walked in his shoes. ;-) Writing an installer is always tricky. Though yes, probably it's easier than adding graphical support to the current setup. > In the second case, to avoid X system, we need to use linux framebuffer (I^M > don't know any other solution). So, can I use directfb in this case? ^M > In fact, I started to work with it.^M I'm not too familiar with the topic, but I guess the best would be to use a vesa X server, that is really supported by all video cards except a very few. > But today, maybe I found another solution. Can we make a "fedora like"^M > installer whom can be used from fwlive too? I remember that GTK have a^M > directfb backend. So, I compile GTK (with cairo and pango) without X^M > support to make a test with a basic GTK program coded in C. Program work^M > with X11 GTK library and seems to work correctly out of an X environnement^M > when it's linked with directfb GTK library.^M > ^M > Both solutions are fine for me (directfb or gtk), but what do you think^M > about? ;)^M Given that you do it as a hobby I can't say who do you spend your free time ;-), but I would suggest first doing the "Ubuntu-like" (so a normal program, that can be started from fwlive) one, so that you don't have to face with problems like the lack of the X server and such. What you can think of that you can modify the existing setup to support GTK or you can do it from scratch. I'm not sure which one is the better. The current setup uses curses and at the beginning, there are some code parts like: #ifdef DIALOG foo #else // GTK bar #endif where the code is dialog-specific, but given that the GTK part was never really worked, most of the code uses dialog calls unconditionally. So it's up to you. If you do it from scratch, you can even do it in an other language if you want; since other interpreters like Python or Perl are on the livecd as well already. > Thank you very much^M No problem, your efforts are welcome. :-)
pgpyiWfLeC58H.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Frugalware-devel mailing list [email protected] http://frugalware.org/mailman/listinfo/frugalware-devel
