reactos in client/server?

[ThePhysicist]

Plus I do agree it should be possible to do this in just two stages of installation so all packages can be selected and installed during second face of the installation. Thus package manager should be one of the screens of second face install along with some config wizard for the selected packages.

I would really like a "one stage setup": Insert your ROS setup/live cd and boot. Then you can choose to try/work with reactos (livecd) or install it. When you select installation, all user interaction will be done at the beginning, including package selection (package configuration will automatically be saved to a file to be reused later). When installation begins, you can go away for x minutes and when you come back, you have already booted into a complete system.

[Davy]

( SNIP )

So there's LAMP, WAMP, WIMP and (hopefully) RAMP


http://www.hmailserver.com/

why RAMP if a Windows version already is there?

i'm guessing you mean WAMP? i actually like IIS, but the WIMP acronym is a bit mean. there'll never be a RIMP so RAMP is about as close as it'll get. but asking why use RAMP when WIMP is available is like saying why use react when windows is available.

also, the reason you'd want to use WAMP instead of WIMP is because IIS doesn't always work well with PHP; whereas apache and PHP were made to work together and i've never had PHP barf on a WAMP system where i've had it barf on WIMP

mostly when i use non-standard permissions on a folder--specifically with the IUSR_ account; such as setting deny all to IUSR_ and then setting RX permissions for domain accounts to force prompting of authentication. it doesn't always cause problems, but it has happened to me.

Nope, you'll be a SHRIMP

[Floyd]

I totally agree, there is sertainly good reasons to include a bunch of softwares on the Installation CD/DVD, but actually, this can be done with the Package Manager, it's just to make it able to choose from CD/DVD/HD/LAN/Internet as a source for the packages.

Plus I do agree it should be possible to do this in just two stages of installation so all packages can be selected and installed during second face of the installation. Thus package manager should be one of the screens of second face install along with some config wizard for the selected packages.

if you're talking about a package manager for packages already on the ISO/CD then i don't care about that. all i care about is that they are available for install immediately and without requiring internet access. requiring internet access for set up is a bad idea. offline package management when a core set of applications are immediately available would be fine. and hopefully not in the way fedora core does it where you have 4-5 cds of programs that overlap. we should pick a good core of singular programs and try to keep the system to 1 CD.

to match windows desktop :-
write program (abi word?)
draw program (gimp)
small web browser (there are smaller browsers than firefox)
basic email client (i'm only familiar with thunderbird)

to match windows server :-
dns server (WINS is being phased out but still used by older systems)
network authentication server (agreeable to NT domains/SMB)
web server (apache) ~ to IIS
ftp server ~ to IIS
php install (just files, and an httpd.conf) ~ to IIS's ASP
basic mail server (the only one i'm familiar with is hmailserver)

[Floyd]

So there's LAMP, WAMP, WIMP and (hopefully) RAMP

Nope, you'll be a SHRIMP

SHRIMP?
best explain yourself lucy!

[Floyd]

Or an ISO creator/editor is used/made available for the end user to image whatever they may need. I think Vista Enterprise is supposed to have that feature, and it would certainly be useful if ReactOS incorporated something like that in the future.

vista comes with that because vista isn't "installed" like previous systems; it's an image file (WIM format) that you copy and is customized to your system. much like using ghost.

i believe that having to customize an ISO like that is counter-intuitive and won't be winning many admins over.

[Wierd]

Support for a removeable device containing the analog of an MSSETUP.INF or similar would work just fine. It would have all the choices for packages and what not-- allowing very rapid cloning.

Drop in the CD and EG-- a floppy or pendrive with the "ROSSETUP.INF" file, boot the machine, and walk away.

[keytotime]

Um actually the answer file is called winnt.sif. Here are my Ideas
1) Make a program to compile an ReactOS ISO image. So anybody can create a custom ReactOS install. Like MS CDImage except include the boot image.
2) Have ReactOS scan a folder for Drivers during Part2 of Setup and install them silently if they are compatible.
3) Make a special folder called RAID where at the beginning of the setup ReactOS scans for RAID/SATA drivers. To add Raid drivers to a Windows Install is an unbelievable pain.
4) Have a way to tell ReactOS Setup that a package is available. Also make a way to select which packages to install by default. IE:

Code: Select all

Packages.sif
[ValidPackages]
;= 1 if package is on CD. = 0 if package is on CD.
Apache = 0
Notepad = 1

[InstallPackages]
;= 1 to install a package by default. = 0 to not install a package by default.
Apache = 0
Notepad = 1
WineMine = 0
Calculator =1

[Jaix]

I would really like a "one stage setup": Insert your ROS setup/live cd and boot. Then you can choose to try/work with reactos (livecd) or install it. When you select installation, all user interaction will be done at the beginning, including package selection (package configuration will automatically be saved to a file to be reused later). When installation begins, you can go away for x minutes and when you come back, you have already booted into a complete system.

LiveCD with Packages
I think a LiveCD with the ROS BootCD function is a really good solution, I have been discussing this with some devs and they think it's a good solution and one of them said that he wanted to make such solution, but he said it is so much work so he didn't want to start the work, but with enough good ideas behind it and some people wanting to help we might be able to get it.

I also think we have to find a good solution to include the packages into the LiveCD/DVD so we can make our own solution easily like keytotime:s suggestion above together with the precent Package Manager.

These changes to the Live/BootCD:s would make the installation of ROS one of the best ones in the world I think.

[Blazkowicz]

There won't be all that many services shipped with ROS. Most things will be available as addons. Thus you will install a base system, and will build up your own environment as you install software.

People installing OOo, Firefox, Thunderbird, etc, will obviously be building up a desktop environment. People installing Apache, Perl, FileZilla Server, Pegasus Mail Server, etc will be building up a server environment.

Built in services like Firewalls and Samba will be configured according to requirement.


Apart from the number of processors and number of network connections, (which is a limitation ROS won't have), there isn't all that much difference between Windows desktop and Windows server system. It's all in the software.

this actually sounds very much like Windows Server 2003. a 2003 install is lightweight, with fewer services than 2000 or XP and none of the server stuff installed except for file/connexion sharing that every other windows version have.

if you enable directX acceleration, sound service and a few other simple tweak then install firefox, OOo, games etc. you get what is IMO the best desktop OS in the NT 5.x line; if you install IIS, Active Directory things and stuff you get a windows server.

[Z98]

If you combined the custom ISO with an answer file for the installation, all you would do is pop in a CD, boot it, and walk away and let the CD handle the installation. About all you might need to do is enter a name for the computer. That's generally how unattended Windows installations are handled.

This basically accomplishes the same thing a LiveCD would do though, with the possible side benefit of not needing to boot into an OS environment. Either way would work, but both would require some work. The answer file would need the ISO being able to get the info from it and a LiveCD would need an installer built in and all the programs integrated into the ISO.