[daneel_w]

>> Hard disagree, the Openbsd installer is the gold standard to which all other installers compare poorly.

> No not really. I recently took my friend through it and there is several places where it is pretty easy to screw something up. Whenever people say stuff like this, they are usually accustomed to the quirks.

Like what places, and how are they pretty easy to screw up on? I'm genuinely curious, as to me it's the cleanest and most straight-forward console installer I've ever experienced. I managed to get it done the very first time I, 25 years ago, with zero *nix experience, decided to try OpenBSD. Also, you can always exit the installer and restart the process. You're not "screwed" unless you reboot at the end without having reflected over your instructions.

[Flamingoat]

> Like what places, and how are they pretty easy to screw up on? I'm genuinely curious, as to me it's the cleanest and most straight-forward console installer I've ever experienced.

To you it is. I installed on 3.8 and it was not straightforward. I used to go to university with a guy that used OpenBSD and he even said the installation at the time was straight forward. So it isn't just me.

I can't remember specifics as it was about 4-6 months. It was something to do with drive labelling IIRC, it was super confusing and I think I just ended up removing drives temporarily.

> you can always exit the installer and restart the process.

Nope. I tried that. It did not work.

> You're not "screwed" unless you reboot at the end without having reflected over your instructions.

Again it wasn't that straight forward.

[daneel_w]

> Nope. I tried that. It did not work.

The installer is a plain *sh script. You simply ctrl+c to break out and return to the shell, then run "install" to start the script again. I can't see why you would end up with an installation medium containing a different installer than everyone else.

[Flamingoat]

> The installer is a plain *sh script. You simply ctrl+c to break out and return to the shell, then run "install" to start the script again

I ended up in situation where that wasn't possible. I wasn't sure how that happened. But it did.

I have done many installations over the years on real hardware and VMs. It only happened once, but it can happen.

I could also bring up the issues with the auto partition layout that is suggest which can make impossible to install any larger of software after installation. Or how the disks can be confusingly labelled in some cases (especially in VMs).

The point being communicated is that it isn't as straightforward as many people claim.

I first started mucking about with it in like 3.8/3.9, and you had to do something which was very archaic (even for 20 years) with calculating partition size, so it has improved.

> I can't see why you would end up with an installation medium containing a different installer than everyone else.

I don't appreciate how you worded this.

I am not lying about my experience. I just can't remember the exact set of steps of what happened because it happened several months ago now.