Anaconda...
YaST...
etc...

I like slackware's installer... in fact, I love it compared to the above.

BUT!

What about joe average who likes the idea of a graphical installer for slackware... I mean, why limit your user base with a intimidating installer (which it really is not, but hell...)

So, this brings me to the idea... why not create non-official install dvds with a graphical installer?

So my question to you is... and please, let's not start a flame war over the installer for slackware here... would you think there would be a use base for such a tool?

One DVD, easy installer, easy setup of most major packages from the installer... (samba, X, networking, etc...) oh and some rescue functions too.

well it's an idea that I would be more then willing to put into motion if I feel that the community would back it.

what do you think?

No flaming - go for it if you want. But I don't see the use in it. People just need to dispel the myths about Slack's installer rather than changing it. As you note in your post, it's a *perception* problem and not an installer problem. I think Slack's installer is the best, bar none. Besides, if you change that, why not change the pkgtool interface itself (for those that use the 'dialog' version, rather than the CLI)? And so on through the rest of Slackware. So then you get into either an inconsistent interface or changing a lot of Slackware. Arguably Slack's best administered with CLI and console tools and people might as well get used to it if they want to use Slack. I mean, the first thing you do is get dumped into a command prompt and told to partition your disk. That's very up front - sets the tone - it's what it's all about.

There are so many graphical installers. If that's what people want, there's zillions of things to satisfy them.

That's just me, though.

I would not be interested in a full featured graphical installer either. I would be using SuSe or Mepis if I was interested. But go for it, the great thing about open source is you can do it if you like.

Well the idea would not be to replace the current installer with an easy to use (brain dead user) wizard... more of an eye candy version of what we currently use.

It would fallow each step just like the current installer, but make things look less "intense" so to speak.

I mean, in today's age it's all about presentation...

I like the idea of having a help area with detailed instructions available. The installer would not do the work for you, just make the work seem less challenging.

For example, when you need to partition your drive... as you pointed out in an example...

Slackware drops you into a command line and expects you to use fdisk or cfdisk to make a partition table... all the graphical installer would do different is give you a cfdisk 'like' interface and explain exactly what you are doing. (and maybe give a written example of what to do, but focus on teaching what is about to happen vs just doing the job.)

once again, this is just an idea... it may not fly, but I'm interested to hear what this linux community thinks.

I like your idea for several reasons. One if interactive setup is possible it will increase rating of Slack by increasing the number of users, n00bs, in fact, will be thrilled, to have Slack like this.
Second, installer must be up to date, graphical and apealing and so... and not using ascii
need more??

Overall, I like the idea of a graphical installer, but I'm also very happy with Slackware as it stands.

But, one question: Why a wing-ding fancy installer when you only see it once?

(I'll admit to installing it four times in one day, when I was a slack noob. Made no difference to me. I already knew fdisk, cfdisk, etc...)

Well yes, to make slackware more appealing to new users would be one goal of the installer... but it is important not to take away from the learning experience gained by installing slackware.

I'd like to think of it like an eye-candy version of the standard installer... with a few extras. But not a hand-holding brain-dead installer like found in most easy-to-use distros...

You know and I know that it's just an installer we talk about.
I do not think that Slackware will "allow" to avoid bumps, if you get my meaning

Why not? Sure you only see it once, err... well if you only install/upgrade slack once, but none-the-less you still have to install and configure slackware so why not bleed your eyes with some eye-candy while doing so?

After installation, there is always a ton of stuff you need to do to 'get things right' as they should be. But if you line the main ones up... and knock them down in one sweep with some nice at hand docs and pleasent interfaces during the initial install... would that not be a nice feature?

Point and click is not the goal... text editing is still the key, but with a walk-through on one side and nice looking text editor on the other things seem a bit more friendly while keeping the learning experience I strongly believe ALL linux users should have.

And that's the nature of the beast... Linux that is, not all hardware is supported out of the box and not every distro is perfect. Most just smooth over the bumps, some work around them...

I back you up!
I've seen this installer at least 50 times already. So why not!?

Well thanks for going 'gun-ho' on this thread...

However, I am still very interested in what the rest of this Slackware/Linux community thinks about the idea. . .

So please, your comments if any.

Thanks.

Does Slackware need a (more) graphical installer? No.
Should Slackware embrace Joe noob desktop user better? Probably.
Do setup and pkgtool need rewrites? Yes

Anyone smart enough to use multiple floppy disks to install Linux does not need handholding from any distribution. The concept of disksets and grouping programs to fit on a floppy disk has left the building. My opinion is that setup should get the user past loadlin or lilo with the fewest programs/tgz installed and after reboot allow him to continue to easily add or remove a series of programs/tgz. Because of pcmcia or network setups some programs/tgz might need to be moved or duplicated in a culled a/ series. Then rewrite pkgtool to allow the user to graphically continue installing additional series of packages not just adding one program at a time. Yes there is a command line method but have you tried it?

Given all above its still Patrick's distribution to do with as he wishes and you and I can continue to write our modifications of scripts to suit ourselves. I am just glad that Pat is back.

ppd

I think the idea of a better commented or doucmented installer would be nice but using the gui would defeat the purpose.

Unless Pat's brush with death has changed him, he is not going to do this. You would have to do it yourself or get someone or group to do it for you. Pat has always wanted it just as simple as possible to get a system installed. Then it is up to the user to do the rest.