Hi all, I'm the lead developer of Yellow Dog Linux for PowerPC (mostly Apple Macintosh computers). YDL is derived from Red Hat. We currently utilize our own in-house installer but have found that keeping the codebase current (e.g. adding support for new advancements like journaling filesystems) as well as QA takes more time then we have available as a small Linux business in a niche of a niche market. As a business, we need to offer a Linux distribution for Macs that takes full advantage of those computers. So to have time to enhance Red Hat for Macs essentially, we need to spend less time just keeping our installer up-to-snuff. Instead, we'd like to focus on using an open-source installer solution that we can use to enhance for our platform. This is where Anaconda comes in. As we are derived from Red Hat, using Anaconda makes the most sense. RH sinks resources into upkeep and QA of Anaconda, leaving us to make enhancements for our users such as Apple AirPort wireless detection and configuration from Anaconda's network setup routine. So, where am I going with this? Basically, using Anaconda makes much sense for us. There are a few things we'd like to see worked on, however. Our installer (also python-based) was designed with the following as a primary design goal: We wanted each module of the installer to also be accessible in the post-installation environment. So, in the current version of YDL, someone could run /usr/sbin/mouseconfig and setup their mouse. If the user is in X, the Gtk+ frontend is used. If the user is in console, the Newt frontend is used. The difference between this and Red Hat, however, is that our mouseconfig is a symlink to /usr/lib/yi/mouse.py. Virtually every piece of our installer code can be accessed in a similar fashion from an installed system including the partition editor, bootloader setup, etc. Red Hat has Anaconda modules to complete tasks such as mouse configuration during installation(*), and C-based programs (e.g. mouseconfig) to be used for post-configuration. The C-based programs are coded around the Newt toolkit exclusively. * There is a "reconfig" mode, but this requires the user to step through Anaconda's configuration steps in a linear fashion. What if I want to just reconfigure my mouse? I've been actively engaging Red Hat's Anaconda folks about implimenting a system that would yield much more code reuse and the ability to obsolete the C-based tools. One of Red Hat's long standing problems has been inconsistant system tools. For instance, the KDE-based Kontrol Panel that Bero and his redhat.de team implimented calls newt-tools, Gtk+ tools, comand-line tools (run through xterms). This is obviously very inconsistant. Anaconda already has a design that allows for multiple UIs... if Red Hat leveraged this concept to even tools that don't get run during installation, the overall environment would be much more consistant. I'm obviously very interested in such an idea to be implimented (and have offered to contribute code once the wheels are in motion) as it will allow YDL to move to Anaconda without losing what I believe is a key feature. That said, I think that the Red Hat system would greatly benefit as well. Thoughts? Dan -- Dan Burcaw Terra Soft Solutions, Inc. dburcaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -------------------------------------------------------
