On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 10:08 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
On 2.7.2020 01:42, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:23 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson <johannbg(a)gmail.com>
>> On 2.7.2020 01:06, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 9:03 PM Jóhann B. Guðmundsson
>>>> On 1.7.2020 23:28, Neal Gompa wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:19 PM Björn Persson
>>>>>> Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
>>>>>>> More user friendly than Grub ( has lilo like interface
easier to change
>>>>>>> kernel entry, which goes nicely with the default editor
>>>>>> This made me go "What?!". I used Lilo back in the day.
>>>>>> interface was nothing but a prompt. You had to know what to type
>>>>>> you'd be stuck.
>>>>>> Information for others like me who haven't seen Lilo since
>>>>>> along: Apparently development of Lilo continued until just five
>>>>>> ago, and it grew a menu at some point. I guess that menu is the
>>>>>> of user-friendliness that Johann was trying to invoke.
>>>>> If I ever wanted to switch to another boot manager, I'd
>>>>> us to consider rEFInd: https://www.rodsbooks.com/refind/
>>>>> It's a very nice boot manager that looks good and doesn't
>>>>> purportedly is somewhat (if not fully) compatible with bls.
>>>>> sd-boot is too barebones and unfriendly to use, which makes sense
>>>>> since it was designed for non-interactive machines and not humans
>>>> If there is this general feel that sd-boots configuration syntax is
>>>> harder to read and the ability of not having to run additional command
>>>> once the file has been edited or the ability to be able to easily
>>>> maintain and manage multiple kernels or multiple operating systems due
>>>> those being a drop-in configuration text files, is considered being too
>>>> bare bone and *less* user-friendly than grub, then obviously me
>>>> a change proposal based on what Javier suggested along with other
>>>> cleanups to provide as best user experience as can be had with sd-boot
>>>> would be doing the distribution a great disservice would it not?
>>> Oh, I don't care about the configuration syntax. That part would be
>>> the same across grub, refind, and sd-boot anyway.
>>> The user-interactive portion of sd-boot is *awful*. I know our GRUB
>>> looks ugly by default these days too, but it doesn't have to be, and
>>> most distros actually do make it look semi-decent.
>>> But alas, nobody cares about making that part look nice, because they
>>> hope people don't have to go there at all. But even Windows makes
>>> their boot manager not look ugly and relatively easy to navigate. And
>>> obviously Apple has done this forever with macOS.
>>> I honestly don't get why everyone is okay with butt-ugly and
>> Because the end user should never find himself in the boot manager to
>> begin with that's why no boot manager invest any time in being
>> The end user should find himself ending up in some form of shiny nice
>> user friendly rescue environment that helps him troubleshoot his problem
>> would you agree?
> I would, except, we can't have that either, because nobody cares to
> make that either.
Well if anything I would have expected atleast the Gnome community to
care deeply about that and build a a rescue environment consistent with
the overall Gnome experience.
This is the first time I'm hearing of GNOME being interested in
If we implement sd-boot in conjunction with the automatic boot
assessment we should be able to boot into such environment if the end
users boot fails but if people oppose sd-boot and see that as unusable
root of all evil or there is no interest within the Workstation WG and
or Gnome community ( Team Anaconda might be the right place for such
work? ) working on to provide such an rescue environment then obviously
nothing will change.
This could still work. But you really shouldn't accept butt-ugliness
from any user-facing technology, even sd-boot.
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!