Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Debian Installer RC1 Is Out

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the smoosh-it-onto-a-machine dept.

Debian 212

rekt writes "The Debian crew has just announced the release of debian-installer RC1. You can find versions of it for 11 different architectures at the d-i page. This is one of the most flexible, modular installer architectures out there. As we near the release of sarge (debian 3.1) next month, it's important that we find and work out any bugs in the installer. Grab a copy and give it a shot!"

cancel ×

212 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

A nice tall glass of... (0, Troll)

Ads are broken (718513) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913900)

fr1sty posteeez!!!!!!!!1

Id say FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9913911)

but i know it isnt going to be

Why fuss over some linux distro. New versions are released constantly

Gentoo > *

Re:Id say FP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9913926)

but i know it isnt going to be
And me without mod points. That was funny.

Re:Id say FP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914067)

Erm.. no, sir. THAT [slashdot.org] is funny.

Full RC1 torrents. (5, Informative)

eddy (18759) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913925)

.. available at suprnova.org.

Debian 3.1 (Sarge) Release Candidate 1 - CD 1 of 12 [66.90.75.92] ...

Re:Full RC1 torrents. (1, Insightful)

lambent (234167) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913947)

It's great and all to be using bittorrent to help spread the bandwidth around, and in all likelihood the distribution is completely benign, and i know SN only provides links ... it's just that most people have learned long ago not to trust applications delivered by warez outfits.

I would personally much rather see that torrent being hosted somewhere more official.

Only the hash needs to be official (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9913961)

Only the md5sum needs to be hosted somewhere official.

Re:Only the hash needs to be official (1)

lambent (234167) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913990)

Good point. You needn't have posted anonymously.

While no sane person who knows what they're doing would install an OS without first verifying data integrity, i think that virtually nobody will bother to d/l the sums separately and take that extra step.

Me, i'm just paranoid. I wonder how many others are, too?

I don't have an account (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914345)

... N/T

Re:Full RC1 torrents. (5, Informative)

eddy (18759) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913977)

The question of checking the signature after download not withstanding, if you check the torrent you'll see that the tracker is... cdimage.debian.org.

It's up to you to decide if that's "official enough".

Re:Full RC1 torrents. (3, Insightful)

lambent (234167) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914009)

And how easy would it be to trick someone who browses SN and casually decides to give this linux thing a try? How many people, after compulsively snarfing as many free files as they can get, habitually check the trackers that they use?

Debian documents are improved (4, Informative)

vivekg (795441) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913972)

Yes, it looks like documents are new and improved. http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/ [debian.org]

Re:Full RC1 torrents. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9913991)

CD 1.... of 12?!?!?!

Yes. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914105)

And if you want the non-i386 archs it's probably a couple more. Here's the rest of the i386 set:

Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 2 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 3 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 4 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 5 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 6 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 7 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 8 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 9 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 10 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 11 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .
Debian 3.1RC1 (Sarge), CD 12 of 12 [66.90.75.92] .

Re:Yes. (4, Informative)

reynaert (264437) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914188)

For the people not familiar with Debian, in the official release, the CD's will be organised so that the most popular packages will be placed on the first CD's, so you don't have to download all of them.

If you're using Debian now and want to help decide what's popular, please install Popularity Contest [debian.org] .

just go directly to cdimage.debian.org (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914300)

There's no need to use suprnova. You can get the .torrent files from the offical site [debian.org]

Seems debian isnt the same (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9913927)

heres [aderkach.org] some info about this installer. I dont like it.

Re:Seems debian isnt the same (0)

wirah (707347) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913939)

Argh, slashdotted in the comments.

I trust the debian team though, perhaps not their Qt packages, but generally I trust them :>

Re:Seems debian isnt the same (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9913983)

YOu fuckwad. THat's the second time I fell for that this morning.

Re:Seems debian isnt the same (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914016)

YOu fuckwad. THat's the second time I fell for that this morning.

If that's so, then one of you, the troll or you, is a moron, and it's not the troll...

Re:Seems debian isnt the same (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914026)

But they were different links under different domains each time! One was the original and the other (this one) was a link to another domain which then redirected to the other.

Fortunately, it's simple enough to close one browser window without killing your whole session. Also, fortunately enough, my girlfriend already knows I'm a latent gaymo. :P

Re:Seems debian isnt the same (0, Offtopic)

Uniball (613935) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914433)

Great photo!
I'll add it to my goatse, tubgirl and smurf bundage collection ;)

Knoppix (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9913946)

I burned a disk of this, booted up with it, surfed a few sites, then immediately realized I couldn't use any of the games and apps I use because they didn't exist for Linux, immediately took the disk out, rebooted, and did some real work in Windows.

I'll probably repeat this useless exercise a couple years from now.

Re:Knoppix (0, Offtopic)

wirah (707347) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913955)

What apps were those? Were you trying to run MS Office from the terminal again? Get back under your bridge.

Re:Knoppix (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914015)

It took you that long to work out that Windows apps don't run natively on Linux?
And you keep repeating the same thing over and over again?

Jeez.

Re:Knoppix (1)

Tore S B (711705) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914436)

Okay, I'll bite.

I couldn't use any of the games...immediately took the disk out, rebooted, and did some real work in Windows.

Hee.

Re:Knoppix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914483)

'll probably repeat this useless exercise a couple years from now.
We await the results with interest. Do let us know how you get on.

Security Support for Sarge (5, Informative)

arturogatti (550637) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913956)

Security support for sarge is scheduled to begin today [debian.org] . Woody users may want to consider upgrading to sarge now, testing the upgrade path, and help out with reporting/fixing any bugs they encounter.

Re:Security Support for Sarge (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914094)

testing the upgrade path, and help out with reporting/fixing any bugs they encounter.

Uh oh, this sounds familiar. I don't know about you all, but I hate being a test subject.

Re:Security Support for Sarge (3, Informative)

Mr.Ned (79679) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914234)

http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2004 /08/msg00003.html

It's now scheduled to start on the 12th.

screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9913970)

Isn't the installer supposed to be sort of a GUI-based installer this time? So uh.. why haven't I seen any screenshots of this? I'm not going to toss together a new machine and burn an ISO and go through the install process just to see what the installer looks like now. Not that i have any intention of installing a new version of debian on my production box, but...

Re:screenshots (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914021)

AIUI the installer is still text-based and looks pretty much like the old boot-floppies, but this time with good hardware detection, aptitude instead of dselect , and streamlined to minimize the number of questions.

However, the installer is very modular and it should be possible to write a graphical front-end. In fact, a prototype exists, but I'm pretty sure it won't be used for the release.

Re:screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914048)

Well, as long as you can still use dselect during install *if you want* then I'm happy. I don't need your new fangled aptitude thank you very much! heh

Re:screenshots (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914036)

IIRC the author of the GTK installer lost much of the interest in it, because the framework wouldn't allow him to make a true graphical interface over the Debian installer.

Instead, all he could do was mapping every widget to its GTK counterpart, which then would make not much difference from the text-based installer. This way it is not possible to include, for example, a GTK partitioner app really integrated to the framework.

I think many people was looking forward for the graphical installer...

Re:screenshots (1)

datadriven (699893) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914082)

Kind of looks like the slackware installer to me.

Re:screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914244)

I just noticed this too; looks verymuch like the slack installer. :)

-Adam

Screenshots (0)

anandpur (303114) | more than 9 years ago | (#9913982)

Screenshots please. Is it based on Progeny Anaconda [progeny.com]

Re:Screenshots (1, Informative)

GammaTau (636807) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914020)

It's not based on Progeny Anaconda. It has been written from scratch.

Some screenshots are available at http://people.debian.org/~madduck/d-i/screenshots/ [debian.org]

Re:Screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914038)

What?! That's it?!

Those screenshots may just as well have come from the installer with Woody that I've used umpteen billion times. I don't see any different in this "new installer" over the old one. When I hear "GUI" I think "point and click windows/mac style installation". This is just the same curses/ANSI/whatever installer it's always had.

I love debian and I don't see what the big deal is with installing it as it always has been (it's by far the simplest linux distro to install and more straight forward, too) - but ever since I started hearing about this great new graphical debian installer, I've been envisioning something red-hat-ish or something.

*shrug*. *yawn*

Re:Screenshots (1)

Mehmet Kse (803792) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914063)

new installer has a 'working' hardware detection (thanks to progeny at this point) and extreme modularity. I think grafical interface will come from http://www.userlinux.com/ [userlinux.com] userlinux

Re:Screenshots (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914115)

What?! That's it?!


Those screenshots may just as well have come from the installer with Woody that I've used umpteen billion times. I don't see any different in this "new installer" over the old one. When I hear "GUI" I think "point and click windows/mac style installation". This is just the same curses/ANSI/whatever installer it's always had.

I love debian and I don't see what the big deal is with installing it as it always has been (it's by far the simplest linux distro to install and more straight forward, too) - but ever since I started hearing about this great new graphical debian installer, I've been envisioning something red-hat-ish or something.

*shrug*. *yawn*

The new Debian installer has automatic hardware detection, an improved partitioner (automatic "wipe the drive and do it for me", or manual with options like non-destructive resizing), and as of several months ago, gets you an installed Debian system in 11 keystrokes, 10 of which are Enter [kitenet.net] . It's also incredibly modular (based on installing miniature Debian packages), making it far easier to maintain and to extend.

Re:Screenshots (1)

Alan (347) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914277)

It also gives install options like LVM and raid (finally)!

However, it's still not all that impressive looking, still the same white text on blue that's been the same since I first used debian some 7 years ago. It's not bad, it's just not all that exciting.

Re:Screenshots (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914241)

Those are some pretty shallow observations there.

What I see is an installer that keeps with the Debian traditions but streamlines and improves.

Did you notice that there are more features? Look at the module selector, the network configuration, the partitioner, or the LVM and RAID stuff. How about its ability to display Chinese, Cyrillic and Greek characters? I thought that was pretty cool. You don't see that in many console applications.

"Graphical" installers mean nothing. A graphical installer would ask the same questions but cause an unnecessary hardware dependency, which complicates things. A graphical installer would make things sluggish and error-prone, and you can forget about serial console. "red-hat-ish" installers are much worse than this thing. Stick to the basics. Stick to what works.

Re:Screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914324)

Screenshots to the GTK+ frontend here. [rwth-aachen.de]

Not great (reminds me of the Tk-based pre-2.6 "make xconfig"), but a work in progress.

Re:Screenshots (1)

nofx_3 (40519) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914556)

mmm but xconfig is so tasty now. I haven't tried the gtk version but the qt version is quite sweet, I installed x and kde on my last machine before building my 2.6 kernel, just so I could use it. (not I would normally install kde anyhow, just usually after I built the kernel)
-kaplanfx

Re:Screenshots (2, Informative)

utopist (142845) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914031)

No it is not based on anaconda.
Screenshots [debian.org]

At least! (1)

Teppich (769850) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914000)

In short words: At least - with the bits taken from RHs Anaconda the installer ist "just more fun". Sarge looks very promising, but lets hope the next release will not take 5 years and more again. GO Debian!

Re:At least! (0, Redundant)

wasabii (693236) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914064)

It has nothing to do with Anaconda.

Re:At least! (2, Interesting)

reynaert (264437) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914165)

hmm, now I'm wondering what the important/difficult issues for sarge+1 will be
  • gcc 3.4 with incompatible abi on some arches
  • amd64 inclusion / multi-arch
  • removal of gfdl-licensed documents and other controversial non-free stuff
anything more?

Re:At least! (1)

eldacan (726222) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914501)

The transition to L4/Hurd as default kernel for all architectures? (Almost ready... may require some polishing and porting though)

Screenshots (5, Informative)

adun (127187) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914003)

http://people.debian.org/~madduck/d-i/screenshots/ [debian.org]

Because I love all of you.

Re:Screenshots (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914073)

Looking at the screenshots I miss one thing compared to YaST from SuSE: On the left side YaST has a pane with lots of help text for every dialog. The really big advantage is that it's very helpful for newbies or people who never have bothered about that part of a setup but at the same time doesn't get into the way of experienced users. Just perfect! Documentation whenever you want it and streamlined installation for the know-it-alls.

I nonetheless are very eager to try the new installer.

Re:Screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914096)

Those text-based setup screenshots really take me back, back to the times I spent fixing my mother's DOS PC. You know, in 1989 or so.

Re:Screenshots (1)

gabbarbhai (719706) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914168)

I really don't care about graphical setups. Fedora (IMVHO) does a good job of making a GUI setup. Debian on the other hand (again IMVHO) fills what otherwise would be a gap between something overly for-the-average-user (Mandrake/Fedora/maybe SuSe) and something for the control-freak (My beloved Slackware), and the installer portrays that fact..

Re:Screenshots (3, Informative)

Afrosheen (42464) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914497)

Mandrake still embraces both styles, you can use a text-based installer with prompts like the old school Redhat installer if you want, it's a commandline switch at boot time. Best of both worlds, or a work around for wacky video hardware.

No gap here.

Re:Screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914249)

If you're apt to mistake eye-candy for functionality, maybe you should go back to playing Doom 3 instead of commenting on modern OS installers?

Re:Screenshots (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914276)

Oh please, modern my ass!

That installer can't even set up DSL that uses PPPoE.

PPPoE is only used by all the baby bells you know the largest DSL providers in America and it's also used by major providers in Canada and EU, but the Debian developers said ti was too niche to bother to support so now when you install you gotta spend an hour screwing around tyring to fix PPPoE which is a pain in the aass if you got no internet to read howtos and fine manuals.

I now debian prides itself on being a 90s throwback but you really need to be able to support DSL out of the box...

Re:Screenshots (1)

nofx_3 (40519) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914461)

The way it has been explained to me, there is a damn good reason that Debian still uses an ncurses installer. Basically becuase it supports so many architectures (a good thing) with so much diff hardware, the ncurses installer is the best interafce to make sure a single installer can support each and every supported architecture. I think broader support for a good distro like Debian is much more important that a true GUI installer. Besides, I find the Debian installer to be the easiest to use, even though maybe its not the prettiest, but thats just my opinion of course.
-kaplanfx

Re:Screenshots (1)

runderwo (609077) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914523)

Guess what? Many of the machines D-I supports don't even have a framebuffer console. A text-based setup is the lowest common denominator for all the machines that the Debian can run on. There are install images with PGI for i386 only, if you just have to have that eye candy.

Re:Screenshots (4, Insightful)

base_chakra (230686) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914291)

Mods and flamers get ready: I'm about to criticize Debian (even though it's my favorite distro).

The fact that there are 231 screenshots of the new installer should raise some flags. 231!! Excluding a handful of error screens and progress bars, that suggests that in some circumstances the user would have to field more than 200 interactive prompts during the installation process. I should hope that many of these can either be consolidated or eliminated.

I had high hopes (too high) about the new hardware detection; I would be happy if these kinds of prompts [debian.org] disappear from the final build. You know the kind... the ones that require either clairvoyance, a second computer for hardware research, or the degree of advance preparation that only the IRS would demand.

Re:Screenshots (4, Informative)

Daniel (1678) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914417)

I used an older build to install a system the other day, and I hardly even had to hit the Enter key. (ok, the system didn't work once it was set up, but that turned out to be my fault, not the installer's :) )

If you scan through some of those screens, you'll discover that the reason there are so many is that you can take branches in the installer: for instance, if you choose to set up RAID, you get a bunch of screens about the RAID configuration; if the network can't be set up via DHCP, you get screens about setting up the network. A fair number of the screenshots are also screenshots of progress bars, which are noninteractive. (and a huge improvement over the old installer, where you just watched a message like "Setting up the base system..." while the hard drive churned)

Daniel

Re:Screenshots (2, Insightful)

Afrosheen (42464) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914480)

Pardon my french, but this looks like the same old crap to me. When are they getting with the times and making a decent graphical installer? I want to be able to mouse around and use nice partitioning tools like Diskdrake.

Re:Screenshots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914563)

When mandrake will run flawlessy on 11 architectures... I know it's the same old story but it's not easy to have HW detection on all these different architectures.

I've given it a shot (5, Funny)

Avian visitor (257765) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914007)

Grab a copy and give it a shot!

I've downloaded a copy, burned it on a CD and gave it a few shots.

This is the result [psychicgoldfish.com] .

Re:I've given it a shot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914142)

I have 5 PC's in my home. Most of them are crappy.
I tried Installing RC1 on them. It installed
correctly on only 2 of them. Hopefully slashdotters
will help me spread the fact that Debian RC1 doesn't
install correctly on 3 out of 5 PC's.

Re:I've given it a shot (2, Funny)

pyrrhonist (701154) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914198)

I've downloaded a copy, burned it on a CD and gave it a few shots. This is the result.

Me too. I got all my shots through the same hole, though.

This is the result [feurio.com] .

debian vs knoppix installer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914033)

Whats the difference?

Quite simply put: (1)

empaler (130732) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914068)

The resulting system.
Knoppix is stripped-down.

Re:Quite simply put: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914155)

Well, since Knoppix is based on Debian and not the other way around, this is actually the new stuff that future Knoppix releases will be based on.

Exactly (1)

empaler (130732) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914425)

Knoppix is a stripped-down Debian.

pppoeconf (3, Informative)

sewagemaster (466124) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914037)

I've used the nightly builds (>beta4) about 6 times for installations on seperate occations within the last 2 weeks. Everything works much better than previous versions. No problems when it tried to probe my DHCP internet account. I'm now back at school where my pppoe which isn't DHCP based and obviously it failed detection.

Thankfully the pppoeconf package is unpacked before the initial reboot and is available after the bootstrap. Ran pppoeconf and got my connection. Still, though, I had to do this via virtual console. For the first-time debian user, they may not know pppoeconf as the name to get around this and will be stuck unable to do any sort of net-install.

good stuff, cd sets? (1)

falkryn (715775) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914057)

Well I'm looking forward to seeing this go stable, my experiences with the beta installers were quite good. Really clears out one of the last stereotypical complaints against Debian and all ("installer is an ancient piece of cruft", which really, part of it was.) I'm more of a slackware user these days, but I often list Debian as the "other" distro that I like. But once sarge gets stable, I might just give it another go. Maybe, I might even go ahead an buy a cd set, since on dialup, downloading packages and such can be rather a pain. Anyone have any suggestions of the best place to get debian cds from?

Re:good stuff, cd sets? (1)

falkryn (715775) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914074)

actually, what would be REALLY good if anyone knows, a dvd set anywhere I could eventually purchase?

Yeah, a dvd set, with all the umpteen debs on it all my disposal, that would be hard to argue against :-)

Re:good stuff, cd sets? (1)

Afrosheen (42464) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914516)

Couldn't you just make one? Anyone with the cd set and a DVD burner should be able to put one together for you.

Re:good stuff, cd sets? (2, Informative)

reynaert (264437) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914109)

Debian maintains a list of cd-vendors [debian.org] . Probably far from complete, but better than nothing.

Installation of X working? (2, Interesting)

Tego (609196) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914078)

Hey, the main problem I had with woody was that I never got X to install. Did they get that fixed?

Re:Installation of X working? (1)

Mehmet Kse (803792) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914110)

'discover' and 'hotplug' help people who don't know the name of their VGA card. read-edid helps -most of- people who can't read the specs (something like 30-70, 50-120) from monitor's users guide. so it works for everyone.

Debian woes (5, Funny)

vuvewux (792756) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914111)

I'm sort of new to this linux thing, but there's this directory on my new install of Debian 3.1 called "/usr/bin". It was all messed up when I first went in there. None of the files had descriptive names, and it took me like an hour to figure out they were executables, since none of them had .exe on the end of them. Furthermore, whenever I double click them, they just pop up a command prompt for a few seconds then go away.

I was gonna delete them, but I got kinda afraid that they might be my kernel, so I fiugred I'd ask. It's ok to delete this stuff, right?

Re:Debian woes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914184)

That's pretty Awful [somethingawful.com] .

Re:Debian woes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914203)

No, they're not ok to delete. Those are command-line apps mostly.

If you're new to Linux, I'm not sure that Debian is right distro, anyway.


Oh dammit, post just got modded funny. Stupid me, I thought I was gonna be helpful this time. Meddling Kids!!

Re:Debian woes (2, Informative)

killjoe (766577) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914334)

Exe? Just Exe? The proper regexp is more like.

(lnk|asd|hlp|ocx|reg|bat|c[ho]m|cmd|exe|dll|vxd| pi f|scr|hta|jse?|sh[mbs]|vb[esx]|ws[fh]|wmf)

Let Parent be a lesson, kids! (1)

BerntB (584621) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914409)

First, it starts as a serious question so the reader's fingers starts twitching when s/he starts thinking of a reply.

Then it gets more and more weird until you realize it's a quite funny joke.

What made it work was the lead up. I guess Seinfeld et al could do better, but the point is that you have to think through the path that the readers/users will think when reading the joke. (I've read that artists think the same way when {composing, writing, painting}).

My point is that software and documentation is usually better when you've thought through the way the user thinks will be thinking and accessing it. But (if it's not a joke) you need to put those assumptions at the top of what you write.

Sorry for this irrelevant rant -- which probably is too obvious for people other than me -- but this is something I've been thinking about for a while. (-: And if some of you guys (names withheld) read this and grokks, I've made the world a better place for all of us! :-)

On topic, I installed with a Beta a month or two ago and it worked well (except for not setting the partition type when it formatted partitions(!) which made grub confused, which confused me. -- yes, I reported the bug).

Re:Debian woes (2, Funny)

WWWWolf (2428) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914513)

Most of the files under /usr are important system files, and should not be deleted.

As a general rule, do not delete anything you're absolutely sure you won't need, much less if you have absolutely no idea what they're for. There are countless tales of people like you who invariably, no matter what operating system they are using, end up suffering after deleting stuff they think they don't need. Those who don't end up regretting it usually only do so by sheer luck - until something finally goes wrong.

As for deleting things from /usr, it is advised not to do that anyway - these are best done through the package manager (use Synaptic if you use GUI, or dpkg or apt if you are familiar with the command line).

As for lack of .exe or any other descriptive file extensions, it is merely only one of the common idioms of the UNIX environment. Please get used to it, it usually doesn't take much getting used to.

Hope this helps.

(And to anyone who found parent post +5, Funny: Get yourself a pet newbie, or try to answer newbie questions on a public forum for a whole. After a while, questions like that miraculously lose all funniness.)

Which discs? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914153)

Anyone know which discs are needed for what installation you might want? I would assume that a few of those are for different platforms, or maybe include all the source packages. But I am just a normal i386 user who doesn't have any need for source packages, and also don't really feel like downloading 4-6GB worth of data to figure out which. Any information on which discs to obtain would be great.

It actually works (4, Interesting)

n6mod (17734) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914167)

I've done four installs with a just-slightly-pre-RC1 netinst snapshot, and in all cases the installer produced a working system with a functional KDE desktop (yes, working X out of the box).

The X settings were pretty conservative, but they were functional.

This was such a shock to me that I really believed I'd burned too much karma and was likely to be hit by a bus on the way home.

I can actually recommend using the native installer instead of Knoppix to do a Debian install now.

Install is a breeze (4, Informative)

SST-206 (699646) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914171)

Anyone who still thinks that Debian is hard to install, please think again [thiesen.org]

A big up to Debian developers everywhere!

Hate these condescending usability studies... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914381)

get a REAL bob.

Pretending to be bob is never experimentally valid.

Re:Install is a breeze (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914390)

you call that a breeze... crap

Re:Install is a breeze (1)

ttfkam (37064) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914569)

Anyone who still thinks that Debian is hard to install...
...has used at least one other distribution's installer. Much better than it used to be (what was the name of the kernel module for the chipset in my network card?), but still harder than most others.

Yes, I know the reason: unified installer for all supported platforms. That simply tries to justify the difficulty. It doesn't make the difficulty go away.

That said, I'm a loyal Debian user. I hate putting it on a box, but once it's on, I have no real complaints.

Isn't it time... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914227)

To go Gentoo [gentoo.org] ?

I mean really? Why should you have to settle for "versions"? Tired of your binary packages demanding specific users and uids for your application? Gentoo increments, it doesn't panic when it can't use UID 500.
Gentoo's security group is more active with linux than debian.
Gentoo gives you a lot more flexibility with the packages you want that debian!
Gentoo has better managed kernel packages than debian.
Gentoo tracks it's dependencies using a state of the art package management, not a bandaided database!
Gentoo has bleading edge stuff! Literally, like 2.6.8_rc3, and it's built from source!
Gentoo has stable stuff, like 2.4.27, and apache 1.3!
Gentoo has complete support forums, and mailling lists, not to mention a newsletter with real content.

No, it isn't (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914307)

I'm running gentoo and I like it but that doesn't mean that it is superior to other distros, nor that everyone has to like it too, nor that it meets everyones needs.

So please do yourself, slashdot and most of all gentoo a favor and STFU! Trolls like you are giving gentoo a bad name and the people working on gentoo clearly don't deserve that.

Re:Isn't it time... (1)

nofx_3 (40519) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914524)

Next you are going to tell me the Gentoo installation is easier than Debian huh? Oh and its faster too. Right... I don't think even a skilled user needs to have or even most packages custom compiled. I usually use binaries for everything that I don't need anything out of the ordinary for (I like having my own LAMP packages, etc) Yes Gentoo is good, and I like it, but it is very much for the hobbyist and I feel is really only "fun" the first time around
-kaplanfx

Re:Isn't it time... (5, Informative)

davegaramond (632107) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914571)

Yes, yes, parent is a troll. But...

Debian (stable) is geared towards server, the whole Gentoo thing is geared towards desktop or experimental.

Debian has always had the philosophy of free distribution and legal safety, I've seen none of this in Gentoo. I love the Debian philosophy.

Debian is a mature distribution with a strict QA, I still don't believe Gentoo has a decent QA "department" at all.

None of the datacenters/dedicated servers facility that I know offer Gentoo, for each one you mention supporting Gentoo, I can name 25 supporting Debian.

Gentoo has bleeding edge stuffs, that's why I don't want it.

Debian has complete support forum (debianplanet), a portal (debianplanet), ten times the number of mailing lists than Gentoo, local user groups, not to mention SEVERAL newsletters with real content.

Debian has Knoppix, etc based on it.

Debian has at least twice the number of worldwide mirrors compared to Gentoo;

As for "versions", you can upgrade from between Debian versions pretty much seamlessly.

From my experience as a alpha/beta tester... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914289)

...for the upcoming release (and mostly for the new installer), I have observed that a few of the Debian developpers have been less than responsive to major bug reports (like, big common average things not detected automagically as it is with other distros). This, with the fact that Joey Hess quit as release manager just recently, i.e. at a critical stage of the Sarge release, has me starting to wonder about Debian's future.

Has Debian hit the ceiling in terms of what a volunteer org. can acheive? I mean, are projects of this size be developped and delivered successfully by orgs such as Debian?

It took *forever* for Sarge to come out and my impression (I hope I am wrong) is that the installer will compare negatively with other distros installers. This and other config/post-install details that are bad in my mind make me truly wonder if Debian can continue in its current shape.

Is it because of the incessant splitting of hairs on "political" issues or what, I don't know. But to push Joey Hess to quit, something bad must be happening at the core of Debian.

Maybe I'm overly pessimistic because I'm transposing my personal non-tech feelings on everything today (I am in the doghouse with the girl-friend, long story), but the bad vibes I got when learning of the resignation of the Debian Sarge release coordinator do pre-dates my current predicament.

I wonder if Joey Hess did say anything (interview, somewhere?) about all of this. Joey, if you are reading this, can you comment with some insider's perspective?

Re:From my experience as a alpha/beta tester... (0, Offtopic)

Homology (639438) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914567)

Maybe I'm overly pessimistic because I'm transposing my personal non-tech feelings on everything today (I am in the doghouse with the girl-friend, long story),

Your girl-friend is not a canine, I hope. Not that this is any of my business, though.

New installer? (1)

Wm_K (761378) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914404)

I've started using Debian about a year ago (or even longer ago) and from what I can remember I've never used an other installer for Debian than the one I see in the screenshots posted in this thread.

Have I just been using the beta version of the installer all along or is this install just a minor version update over the previous installer?

Why 3.1 instead of 4.0? (2, Interesting)

davegaramond (632107) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914406)

I thought Woody still uses 2.2 kernel? Doesn't a jump to another kernel series merit a major version upgrade?

Re:Why 3.1 instead of 4.0? (1)

ari_j (90255) | more than 9 years ago | (#9914482)

Not necessarily, but a jump to the default compiler being gcc 3.x certainly does.

Imagine..... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9914422)

A beowulf cluster of these
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>