Re: new sysinstall

[David Leimbach <leimy2k@xxxxxxx>]

On Sep 1, 2003, at 4:34 PM, Bill Huey (hui) wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 09:23:15AM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> >     If RedHat has been using Python to good effect for system 
> > utilities and
> >     sysop supporting scripting then that is a good recommendation for
> >     Python, and from other messages posted to this list I no longer 
> > worry
> >     so much about version mismatches between base and 
> > package-installed
> >     Python revs.  All of our own scripts would explicitly path to a 
> > versioned
> >     python (e.g. #!/usr/local/bin/python2.2 or something similar)
>
> Python is very good and has very good support.

Yep.  Which is why I think we could go with it. [I am warming up to PHP 
too though]

> >     In fact, so many people seem more familiar with Python then Ruby 
> > that I
> >     think we should discard Ruby from our list of possibilities and 
> > move
> >     Python up a notch.
>
> Ruby is a great system, even more regular than Python, but the
> library support is somewhat sparce. Also portupgrade is written
> in Ruby.

I can't think of any other significant piece of code written in Ruby. :)

Bit torrent is written in Python... Top that!  [actually please 
don't... I am stating in jest]

Anaconda is a pretty rich Python based installer for the Red Hat linux 
distribution and
allows things like kickstart to happen [which is used a lot on 
clusters] sounds like we
could do something similar with Python and get DragonflyBSD into 
clustering...

Really... I don't care if we use a language we create ourselves for the 
installer.  As long
as its flexible enough to get the job done and meet all the 
requirements.

> It's really a toss up, as it concerns programming methodology
> between the two for me, so the determining factor should be
> the specific issues involved in implementing this. It might be
> that a specific kind of library support would tip one over the
> other. I suggest keeping it in the arsenal of possibilities,
> but with a preference for Python.

Yes ... it always boils down to this.... requirements.  Let's be 
engineers about this :).

> bill