So, it's more the opposite! At least for me, it was not ok during live & shrinked (perhaps from my tune to "size=6" (or =7, I forget) setted during "live", before installation) after install, so being tinny (perhaps a quarter free down screen), but I didn't had the good idea to read more or save the .conky prefs file: I just quickly edit it by search/replace "size=x" to "size=8"...
Could you, @Thanatermesis, please confirm that at least @triantares & I, had "collective at distance" hallucination with Elive installation process writing simultaneously on two different system partitions?
Of course,
not everyone is able to understand the whole process, may be confused by several questions
(Dialogue- boxes) from before - not sure about the status meanwhile anymore.
Additionally if users are cancelling then all previous changes has to be undo
and leave the users at the point where they started from.
Ubiquity among others are acting like this,
why now Elive needs to reinvent the wheel...
Hard to get for me
why this became a point of discussion -
makes me feel like am trapped in a time-loop;
back to the beginning of Linux installs _ 10+ years back....
ok, let me explains what exactly happens here and how it should the installer proceed in the other (same) way:
upgrade your existing Elive is asked
you select "yes"
installer starts upgrading... (no more questions /confirmations here)
now, what happened to you and similar cases, is that since your disk is detected as being GPT and the installer didn't found any BIOS type partition, it added an extra step (but again, is exactly the same procedure), so the steps was like this:
upgrade your existing Elive is asked
you select "yes"
2.1. installer found that because of your disk structure, could be better to have a bios type partition (which is optional but strongly suggested), so it asks about add one
2.2. you didn't had it, so you selected "no" on this step or in the "format confirmation" step, result is that you didn't added the wanted BIOS-type partition
2.3. installer considers that can continue without it, and probably warns you about why is needed and what could happen if you don't have it, but again, the installer just continues (in the same way it will continue if you don't add a swap partition, its not a requirement). So it continues on its next (same) step:
installer starts upgrading... (no more questions /confirmations here)
3.1. you felt that something is wrong and you wanted to abort the installation, but it already started and you ended in a half-installed (broken) system unable to upgrade-mode later
do you see the point of what i mean? (yes i see your point), the procedure has been exactly the same as if you pressed "cancel" in the first upgrade-mode example
maybe what is required here is to tell the user that the BIOS-type partition is not a strict requirement? in order to not worry about if didn't added it?
exactly
like explained before, this is exactly what it does, but as a security / improvement it found that could be good to add the extra bios-type partition on gpt structure
ok this is an important point to consider here: "if worked before, it should still work now"
so what i see is that instead of htis procedure, it should just suggest to the user about add in the future a bios type partition , that should make things easier and avoid issues like that
mentions: @Franc@maxinou (if they encountered the same issue)
Updates on the installer:
added the option to "abort installation" when selecting the partition to use when trying to add extra partitions (not possible to add this option as a button, so its added on the select list instead)
changed the label "cancel" to "skip", which will ignore the extra partition/mountpoint to add (installer will continue without it)
example screenshot:
(suggestions for a better wording used on the "ignore/skip" button?)
Note: I wanted to also add the feature to skip the step if migration mode, but since the message of the bios partition says suggested, comes as a question dialog, and now also is even more clear that can be skipped, I assume it is not needed to add that
On the Eeepc 1015pn: Install of CAELinux (quite ok, with Xfce, Ubuntu 16.x bads, but login, running are ok (in english))
FreeCAD, Blender, launched...
Morphing CEALinux with Elive runs, apparently ok; Reboot, nvidia splashscreen, login ok, but no Conky nor Cairo-Dock...
Trying to re-launch E16 gives nada...
The original E16 menu takes minutes to be seen-able...
In the menu I have this time nvidia x server settings (ok)...
When trying to launch Conky by the menu I just got a brief window frame and nothing...
When running Conky via terminal, it's ok (but with original size that here is too big to fit this screen/machine)...
Synaptic only by Terminology...
Cairo-Dock running too by command line...
THE thing is: by morphing one system to Elive, the interest is to keep some prefs and softwares that are integrated in it...
I can understand some dev' problems for specific progams that, e.g. can't run without KDE or GNOME or xxx, but here, I can't find any of the tools provided by CAELinux, for exemple: FreeCAD, Code-Saturn, Code-Aster & all the specific set...
Will next install tests, renew the partitions on this machine to better fit with "/bios"...
But such a "/bios" seems to be a security hole... It needs to have a survey system in os launch (as a systematic summ control or so)...!?
this is caused by, because now, the menu is re-generated on every desktop start (which is needed in order to update your applications list if you install new packages)
There is another step/choice if multiple installs are detected:
Which OS should be updated/migrated?
After that it would be wise to keep the other OS (the OS not to be updated/migrated) out of all following options concerning filesystem/gpt or whatever partition changes.
I see what happens and also what you mean but what I'm calling for is:
At all times when it's about changing partitions (and their contents)
The user must have an option to leave without having altered anything.
The so called *point of no return* has to be stated very clearly, every time.
AS for the upgrade choice, that is clear but ....
Once there are questions about altering partitions it actually isn't a simple migrate/upgrade anymore and IMO shouldn't be offered....indeed thinking along the line: It worked before - So leave "well enough" alone.
In most cases the disk will already be fully partitioned from previous installs, especially the beginning of the disk, which (as happened in my case) will require (re)moving existing partitions.
I don't have the BIOS/GPT pop-up available right now but I would certainly add something along lines:
If you are not sure or want to keep things as they were, choose No
Where choosing No would continue upgrading. A pop-up about the dangers of not booting properly are actually not advisable here ....... unless you give the user the option to abort/cancel the whole installation again .... i.e loop !
This is a bit dual as in fact both buttons continue the installion, with the exception of the "abort" choice.
So I would change OK to Validate Choice and continue
And either change Ignore partition and continue to a choice option too. i.e: (Continue) ...
Don't change anything and continue upgrading/migrating (recommended)
Ok! But why here it can takes minutes when if the user have made it after a new package install it's not that long? In this case, it should be better to have mind-full users that think at it each time or invite them to have a sticker beside their screens to remember... Well, not sure each user can have your skills / memories / reflexes & sometimes (rarely) yourself can tell us that you forgot a point in Elive...
that's the case, only the one you select is afected (and everything related to it, like if has configured a /home partition, etc)
well, I see the point, and after the actual improvements added I think that is enough this way (user should be able to clearly abort in any moment or to continue the install as-is), you can try a next upgrade to see the same (new) process and how it looks like (upgrading same version of elive i mean, this just works the same way)
hum, not so easy, they actually do:
ok: (add the mountpoint/partition)
ignore: don't add it but continue
abort: stop installation
so the last is clear, the first could be changed to "add" which is more precise, but the second (continue) is not valid since is not clear how it continues (that's why the skip/ignore sentence)
because in fact, when you install a package, the menus are not modified at all (not included in the menus, in the e16 menu we mean), so the user should trigger manually the "regenerate menus" each time, but to avoid this need, now the menus are always regenerated at new desktop
that's not an "issue" in newer versions of enlightenment, they are always regenerated, but for e16 needs to be manual (or launched automatically at desktop start like how it is set now), but is not "smart mode" in e16
A proposed addition for clearness that might be useful:
When the installer only discovers a single existing OS, it doesn't mention it explicitly by name. It would be better if the pop-up did, though. Like in the multiple "OSes found" pop-up.
In the current
situation (i.e my case) the first OS was unrecognizable without me knowing and I didn't want the second (Elive stable) to be upgraded ...... but that happened anyway because I didn't know (yet) that the 3.7.9 was "gone".
So: Even with only a single OS to upgrade/migrate, name it specifically with version et all.
Ummm, I was reffering to the text of the buttons here mainly.
That shouldn't be hard.
I think some stuff is getting lost in translation.
I was proposing to change the buttons text.
Or optionally to remove Ignore partition and continue completely (leaving only one OK button) and add the "ignore/don't change" as a choice to the list.....which would indeed require some coding.
There's also an important thing that users don't know and could be nice to improve:
when installing elive (elive is being installed on your hard disk), if you Cancel this process, the system is unusable, which is not wrong because there was no system before
when upgrading-mode / migrating to elive, the same thing happens, but then there's an issue because there was a working system before...
what i suggest is to make clear on this step that if you press Cancel on that moment, you will break the system (so: is better to wait that the process finishes correctly, and then try again or do whatever thing)
For that, I suggest to change the "Cancel" button when migrating the system to something like "Stop and obtain a broken unusable system"
So what this button could include as an improvement instead of "Cancel" ? suggestions?
This doesn't change a thing on the installer and still has no extra safegaurds ..... a waste of time!
This proposal makes a Cancel totally useless, so why not call it Kill Everything!?
There should be no need for a cancel if (I cannot stress this enough):
Prior to the point of no return (partitioning, writing/erasing data or formatting) a user should be shown a message about what he/she is about to do exactly......a total overview with a commit or Abort option.
Do not count on the memory or intricate knowledge of the existing system by the user: 9/10 there isn't any.
BTW, I disagree about the unusable machine without a system ....... no real person has such a thing except alpha testers. There will always be something on it albeit Windows crap....which clearly cannot be migrated easily.
In fact, IMHO the best way is not to surcharge of new pop-up windows but have a "Back" button in all of them (language, keyboard, etc... likes Debian has) that let came back as many times as necessary until be sure that our choices are Ok, obviously, one time that Gparted has finished we are in a one way road and those "Back - Return" button is not more needed...[quote="triantares, post:20, topic:1462"]
IMO, when the user effectively chooses yes he/she should be returned to the partitioning phase i.e the choice "gparted", "gnome partitioner" and be able to alter the partition scheme as a whole ..... or not. This should loop until the user is either fully satisfied or he/she stops and starts searching for more info on what is expected.
So: Noloop , until satisfied OKcontinue or Cancel and die gracefully.
If I read correctly @Franc , @maxinou and have encountered the same "issue" and there will be more if left this way.
[/quote]
Yes, I agree, because I found the same "issue" (shit, too late!!!!) but better a NO or Cancel button in a loop maybe the good way as I write up there is a "Back" or "Return" button that lets user to came back one or more steps even if he had partitioned and he thinks that another partitioning scheme is better for him.
well, yes, the cancel button is more or less useless, you would obtain a similar behaviour if you simply poweroff hte computer on that moment, but is here as an option (that should not be pressed), hum! it should be removed? the only moment for when could be wanted to press it is if the user feels that the installer already took 30 minutes without moving (that could happen if very low ram), so maybe is not a bad idea to simply remove the cancel button
note: I have see on the reports that some people press this cancel button, some of these reports included an extremely slow never-finishing install (so its good) and some others just pressed by some uknown reason
UPDATE: cancel button has been removed from when upgrade/migrate mode, its entirely useless and dangerous, but kept for the normal install mode
well, it is not hard to add a "final question before to start" popup, but about the "summary" i would do something very simple is not easy to elaborate a complex message based in variable values
that is my point, users already complains about these popups and the installer has a good amount of them (fortunately is not a daily-to-use application) , so my question is "do we really need it?"
In fact, Microsoft is not allowed to make "cars", its a security measure because the airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.
So, the users could feel like "YES DAMN! ANOTHER F**** QUESTION, YES YES YES I WANT, DAMN, JUST INSTALL THE F***** OS NOW DAMNIT"
lol
I know but what I would suggest (and this is not impossible) is for the user to see which partition (or OS in case of upgrade) is going to be used for / and which for /home (or any other when opted for)
and (very important) which partitions (OSes) are not going to be changed.
It will be a summary of what the information /choise that have already been made.
It's a simple "do you want this yes/no? i.e abort/continue
If you feel that way, just surpress the pop-ups about the (might be) boot problems, as there's nothing that can be done anyway......and it's there a 2nd time at a later stage any how, where again: I don't see the usefulness. If your system will not boot up afterwards that pop-up isn't bringing any solace, if you even can remember it.
IMHO (being blunt here):
Your @Thanatermesis "issue" is that you focus on the installer to install Elive "sine qua non" whereas I want to save a new user from an undesirable experience ..... even if it means NOT installing Elive (for now).
Again and again and again: Do not take partitioning or data loss lightly, get user permission first. It's their machine after all.
It is true that is a good feature to have, but I won't invest time on making it in the near future, because of:
it is a not-so-needed feature for the cost to pay to have it, which is:
will require a probably entire rewrite of the installer itself (and its 13k lines of code, 66k words in the code)
it will be dangerous
Now let me explain the details of that:
the installer was originally made 10 years ago, and since then it has been improving in every aspect and also its code, but since the code has originally a type of structure (functions + linear steps), to add the feature to "go back in steps" would require a big rewrite, with everything being much more "based in functions" and much more dynamic. Everything should be changed since their linear steps should be install just callback steps, this is a really big massive work (probably an entire month), and even worse, this will lead to tons of new unknown states, for example, calling a function that calls another with an unexpected value/variable, or lacking values in next steps, or updating a value that should not... this is extremely delicated thing (and so dangerous) in an installer, since a partition that should be not formated can be formated, or similar things
