From: Anthony Anson
I've just had an attempt at installing Woody, but fell at, if not the first hurdle, the next one.
I'd strongly advise installing a Ubuntu distro (latest is 5.10 Breezy Badger) if you want to try out Debian.
I'm a dedicated Debianite and also a total convert to Ubuntu after setting up a dial-up PC for a non PC literate friend a couple of months back (Quote: "Wow this is as good as Windows!!"** :-> )
I'm sure someone on the list has some of the latest Ubuntu Live+Install CD packs (I've got some of the previous 5.04 Hoary Hedgehog packs).
IMO the install is a dream.
Regards,
Keith ____________ Though the forest is dense, yet water flows through it freely. - Zen Saying
** recent quote after another acquaintance was bemoaning getting assorted viruses and rogue diallers over the past year, "Oh!, I don't get those, I run Linux" (accompanied by a superior grin) [however I did enable their firewall]
The message 63F7A21F1CA18143AFDBF28E2A7D6BBA02720315@endor.kewill-europe.com from "Keith Watson" keith.watson@kewill.com contains these words:
From: Anthony Anson
I've just had an attempt at installing Woody, but fell at, if not the first hurdle, the next one.
I'd strongly advise installing a Ubuntu distro (latest is 5.10 Breezy Badger) if you want to try out Debian.
I've got Knoppix to play with.
I'm a dedicated Debianite and also a total convert to Ubuntu after setting up a dial-up PC for a non PC literate friend a couple of months back (Quote: "Wow this is as good as Windows!!"** :-> )
<snort!>
Pass the cloth, IYWBSK
</snort!>
I'm sure someone on the list has some of the latest Ubuntu Live+Install CD packs (I've got some of the previous 5.04 Hoary Hedgehog packs).
IMO the install is a dream.
Well, I have a seven CD Debian thingy, as well as a few other bits for it - XFree 4.3; KDE 3.1.1; Gnome 2; and other things on DVD - a drive for which which has only recently been added to the box.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Keith Watson keith.watson@kewill.com wrote:
From: Anthony Anson
I've just had an attempt at installing Woody, but fell at, if not the first hurdle, the next one.
I'd strongly advise installing a Ubuntu distro (latest is 5.10 Breezy Badger) if you want to try out Debian.
I'm a dedicated Debianite and also a total convert to Ubuntu after setting up a dial-up PC for a non PC literate friend a couple of months back (Quote: "Wow this is as good as Windows!!"** :-> )
Hmm, I still haven't jumped on the Ubuntu bandwaggon, it's alright, but it's nothing particularly special... I'd much rather have something that I know is going to survive, long term...
I'm sure someone on the list has some of the latest Ubuntu Live+Install CD packs (I've got some of the previous 5.04 Hoary Hedgehog packs).
IMO the install is a dream.
I wonder if now is a good time to point out that ubuntu uses the debian installer, and there are *very* few changes to d-i in ubuntu, a bit of preseeding, IIRC, and possibly some extra udebs for some nasty drivers.
Thanks, - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk
On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 20:39 +0000, Brett Parker wrote:
Hmm, I still haven't jumped on the Ubuntu bandwaggon, it's alright, but it's nothing particularly special... I'd much rather have something that I know is going to survive, long term...
I hear what you are saying but I'm not convinced it really matters with individual workstations. Sure if I was rolling out a whole office or providing a standard desktop spec then I would be looking at survivability of the distro. But for me at least it isn't really a big deal if Ubuntu ceased to exist (beyond being a damm shame because I quite like what they have done so far) A few annoying bugs aside (most of which are 64bit specific) I was swapped over from SuSE to Ubuntu within about 5 hours....I could swap to something else just as easily.
Also I think it has already reached the critical mass whereby if Ubuntu ceased to exist as a business entity then it would be taken over as a community project pretty quickly.
I'm sure someone on the list has some of the latest Ubuntu Live
+Install
CD packs (I've got some of the previous 5.04 Hoary Hedgehog packs).
IMO the install is a dream.
I wonder if now is a good time to point out that ubuntu uses the debian installer, and there are *very* few changes to d-i in ubuntu, a bit of preseeding, IIRC, and possibly some extra udebs for some nasty drivers.
It may use the debian installer but either the default package selection or the kernel config make hardware detection more reliable in my experience. Of all the distros I have used Ubuntu required the least configuration to work on my hardware...Debian was one of the ones that required the most.
A lot of Debian people seem to just not get Ubuntu. I think this demonstrates why Ubuntu was needed in the first place. It's built for a different audience. It's obvious Bret that you really know your way around a Linux box....for people that don't I think Ubuntu is a slightly more friendly option.
The message 1131150587.3072.206.camel@localhost.localdomain from Wayne Stallwood ALUGlist@digimatic.plus.com contains these words:
A lot of Debian people seem to just not get Ubuntu. I think this demonstrates why Ubuntu was needed in the first place. It's built for a different audience. It's obvious Bret that you really know your way around a Linux box....for people that don't I think Ubuntu is a slightly more friendly option.
Hum. Perhaps I ought to try it then?
Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
<>>> Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
Installing Debian imho does not have to be difficult, the new installer under Sarge should drag you through it quickly and easily. I'd like to say more but very quickly, if you use the /quiet switch when istalling Debian you will get very few questions and a quick install. I use a floppy / minimum cd install followed by anything else required over the net. To get the latest packages first time around I use a large http proxy at my firewall / gateway and so the latest packages are stored locally for any machine that needs them, this way you can mess up the install and trash it time and time again and get back to where you were very easily, to get your packages via http your apt sources list might look like this:
deb http://mirror.ox.ac.uk/debian/ stable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
<digressing slightly> To look for and download the latest packages nightly (including security updates) I run the following crontab entry which then sends me an email letting me know what has been downloaded ready for install, the crontab entry looks like this:
# Look for updates daily 0 3 * * * (apt-get update && apt-get -dy upgrade) | mail -s "`hostname` update" nicka
Hope this is of interest to someone, Nick
The message 436C7821.7080609@northtrack.net from Nick Atkins nicka@northtrack.net contains these words:
<>>> Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
Installing Debian imho does not have to be difficult, the new installer under Sarge should drag you through it quickly and easily.
That does *NOT* apply to Woody - it's about as easy to understand as a difficult to understand thing.
I'd like to say more but very quickly, if you use the /quiet switch when istalling Debian you will get very few questions and a quick install.
Even if I'd known what to do with it, no command line facility presented itself. It was vaguely similar to a Windows installation, but immeasurably cruder, and expected you to know things that no mortal not in possession of of a bucket of chicken entrails could possibly understand, let alone know.
It is only by the best of fortune that I knew what graphics card was in the box - because I put said box together from a carcase and a pile of bits, and that was one of the things I had to get a driver for.
I use a floppy / minimum cd install followed by anything else required over the net.
Yes. It wanted to connect by some arcane method (Leafnode?) which I couldn't configure because I didn't have the necessary addresses, living as I do in the 21st century, and indeed, earlier, to get it to go on, I had to tell it fibs about my ISP's 0808 number, and then disconnect the modem when it tried to dial out to 'get security updates' or something.
To get the latest packages first time around I use a large http proxy at my firewall / gateway and so the latest packages are stored locally for any machine that needs them, this way you can mess up the install and trash it time and time again and get back to where you were very easily, to get your packages via http your apt sources list might look like this:
Nice - but I'm on dial-up.
deb http://mirror.ox.ac.uk/debian/ stable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free deb http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free
Which leaves me none the wiser even if better informed.
<digressing slightly> To look for and download the latest packages nightly (including security updates) I run the following crontab entry which then sends me an email letting me know what has been downloaded ready for install, the crontab entry looks like this:
# Look for updates daily 0 3 * * * (apt-get update && apt-get -dy upgrade) | mail -s "`hostname` update" nicka
Hope this is of interest to someone, Nick
<whine>
I just want to free myself from the shackles of the Evil Umpire, not to get a PhD in Arcane Mathemagics...
</whine>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Anthony Anson tony.anson@zetnet.co.uk wrote:
The message 436C7821.7080609@northtrack.net from Nick Atkins nicka@northtrack.net contains these words:
<>>> Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
Installing Debian imho does not have to be difficult, the new installer under Sarge should drag you through it quickly and easily.
That does *NOT* apply to Woody - it's about as easy to understand as a difficult to understand thing.
Indeed it doesn't apply to woody, woody was pre debian installer... woody is *ollllllld*, very old, infact... we all rejoiced when we got a new debian release, the world was good again!
Cheers, - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk
On Saturday 05 November 2005 11:58, Brett Parker wrote:
<>>> Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
Installing Debian imho does not have to be difficult, the new installer under Sarge should drag you through it quickly and easily.
That does *NOT* apply to Woody - it's about as easy to understand as a difficult to understand thing.
Indeed it doesn't apply to woody, woody was pre debian installer... woody is *ollllllld*, very old, infact... we all rejoiced when we got a new debian release, the world was good again!
Yay indeed. Sarge going stable, despite a few nasty buggy packages, was indeed a day to rejoice. It is still let down by an arcane and newbie-unfriendly installer. Thanks to the likes of M$, RH, SuSE, etc, large numbers of potential users have come to expect (should I say "demand") a simple click'n'drool installer. From the screenshots I've seen of d-i, Debian fails badly on this front.
Regards, Paul.
The message 200511051211.58281.bdi-emc@ntlworld.com from Paul bdi-emc@ntlworld.com contains these words:
Yay indeed. Sarge going stable, despite a few nasty buggy packages, was indeed a day to rejoice. It is still let down by an arcane and newbie-unfriendly installer. Thanks to the likes of M$, RH, SuSE, etc, large numbers of potential users have come to expect (should I say "demand") a simple click'n'drool installer. From the screenshots I've seen of d-i, Debian fails badly on this front.
Ohh goody! Someone pass the body-oil.
C'm'ere, eel...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Paul bdi-emc@ntlworld.com wrote:
On Saturday 05 November 2005 11:58, Brett Parker wrote:
<>>> Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
Installing Debian imho does not have to be difficult, the new installer under Sarge should drag you through it quickly and easily.
That does *NOT* apply to Woody - it's about as easy to understand as a difficult to understand thing.
Indeed it doesn't apply to woody, woody was pre debian installer... woody is *ollllllld*, very old, infact... we all rejoiced when we got a new debian release, the world was good again!
Yay indeed. Sarge going stable, despite a few nasty buggy packages, was indeed a day to rejoice. It is still let down by an arcane and newbie-unfriendly installer. Thanks to the likes of M$, RH, SuSE, etc, large numbers of potential users have come to expect (should I say "demand") a simple click'n'drool installer. From the screenshots I've seen of d-i, Debian fails badly on this front.
Hang on... Paul... this is a really silly question I know... but have you actually *used* d-i?! There are a hellofalot of Ubuntu users out there that swear by it, and a hell of a lot of people have used the ubuntu live cd (which, guess what, starts with d-i to get going)... "Screenshots" != how something feels. Pointy-clicky is all well and good, but it doesn't neccessarily make it *easy* - installers should always aim to be *easy* rather than "pretty"... d-i is not unfriendly, sometimes it asks a few too many questions, but ubuntu kinda got round that by preseeding the 'unneccessary' ones.
Personally, I *hate* the 'pretty' installers of SuSE, RedHat and Windows... they get the hell in the way of installing, display stupid advertising saying "we are the best, all hail us", and put additional load on the system that is completely unneccessary for an install.
YMMV. HTH. HAND. - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk
Hi Brett
On Saturday 05 November 2005 12:45, Brett Parker wrote:
Hang on... Paul... this is a really silly question I know... but have you actually *used* d-i?!
To be honest - No.
Once I have installed Debian by what ever means available, I never need to look at running an installer again (for my own systems).
Personally, I *hate* the 'pretty' installers of SuSE, RedHat and Windows... they get the hell in the way of installing, display stupid advertising saying "we are the best, all hail us", and put additional load on the system that is completely unneccessary for an install.
To quote Scotty from one of the Star Trek films... "Ooo, a keyboard. How quaint"
To be fair to Red Hat & SuSE, they do offer an ncurses based installer if you really, really want to use a keyboard. Personally, I see nothing wrong with being able to have the option of a purty GUI install. Anything that simplifies installation and removes another barrier that would otherwise discourage a convert from the dark side is a good thing IMO, BYMMV..
I like my CLI and use Midnight Commander as my day to day pocket knife for just about everything. Avoiding the emacs-vi argument is easy - I see no point in mashing a keyboard so treat both with the same degree of disdain. But I still like my KDE desktop with all the konsole sessions plastered over three screens, twenty odd html files open in mumble,mumble konqueror windows on a second virtual desktop..
Regards, Paul.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Paul bdi-emc@ntlworld.com wrote:
Hi Brett
On Saturday 05 November 2005 12:45, Brett Parker wrote:
Hang on... Paul... this is a really silly question I know... but have you actually *used* d-i?!
To be honest - No.
Once I have installed Debian by what ever means available, I never need to look at running an installer again (for my own systems).
Ah ha! See, a "once only" operation! So why make it all graphical ;)
Personally, I *hate* the 'pretty' installers of SuSE, RedHat and Windows... they get the hell in the way of installing, display stupid advertising saying "we are the best, all hail us", and put additional load on the system that is completely unneccessary for an install.
To quote Scotty from one of the Star Trek films... "Ooo, a keyboard. How quaint"
To be fair to Red Hat & SuSE, they do offer an ncurses based installer if you really, really want to use a keyboard. Personally, I see nothing wrong with being able to have the option of a purty GUI install. Anything that simplifies installation and removes another barrier that would otherwise discourage a convert from the dark side is a good thing IMO, BYMMV..
... unforunate side effect tends to be that it's installed, and not keeping up to date with security holes, etc... this is one of the few things that Ubuntu have actually got right, IMO. How many people do you actually know that have installed a modern windows operating system rather than it coming preinstalled? Have you noticed that the CDs that tend to come with new hardware are "rescue" cds, and tend to just copy a bunch of files in to the right places rather than actually running through an install process? Windows + Drivers == major headaches.
I like my CLI and use Midnight Commander as my day to day pocket knife for just about everything. Avoiding the emacs-vi argument is easy - I see no point in mashing a keyboard so treat both with the same degree of disdain. But I still like my KDE desktop with all the konsole sessions plastered over three screens, twenty odd html files open in mumble,mumble konqueror windows on a second virtual desktop..
Feh - I'm only in X so that I can get 4 terminals on the screen at the same time, neatly... and firefox running on the other desktop (who decided that the web should have graphics, damned fools! lets go back to it being an information store, dammit!)... serious devel work tends to happen in a full height xterm these days, with vim still being my editor of choice (I really hate mice, I really hate having to mash a keyboard, a mode based editor fixes it nicely, one key press at a time, in a nice easy to remember order... Esc:wq isn't really that difficult, is it ;). I don't get on with Kate (the evil KDE editor of doom), or nedit... there are too many things that I like being able to do from vim without having to think or click...
Editor wars are fun, there should be more of them... ;)
Cheers,
- -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk
The message 20051105141123.GJ20752@pitr from Brett Parker iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk contains these words:
/snip/
... unforunate side effect tends to be that it's installed, and not keeping up to date with security holes, etc... this is one of the few things that Ubuntu have actually got right, IMO. How many people do you actually know that have installed a modern windows operating system rather than it coming preinstalled?
Well, here's one - I've installed DOS 6.22; Win 3.11; Win 98; Win 98SE; Win 2000 Pro - usually with no problem. The *ONLY* problems I've had were in installing Linux of various - er - distress.
Couldn't understand talk of 'cylinders' etc while trying to install an early S.u.S.E. - and had no idea how to convert them to the size of partition I wanted; then I installed Mandrake off a coverdisc, seemingly successfully, but the second time I fired it up, the logo sat on the screen for half a minute, then the whole thing fell over.
I have got a CD on which is Mini Linux, which runs in a DOS partition.
Allegedly.
Have you noticed that the CDs that tend to come with new hardware are "rescue" cds, and tend to just copy a bunch of files in to the right places rather than actually running through an install process? Windows + Drivers == major headaches.
Never had problems at all. Plug in hardware, feed the floppy drive or CD ROM with the driver disc, tell Windows roughly where to look, (CD, Floppy, or sometimes, \catroot and it works as if by magic. It looks, sorts out the right driver from the disc, and all you have to do is hit 'Enter'.
I like my CLI and use Midnight Commander as my day to day pocket knife for just about everything. Avoiding the emacs-vi argument is easy - I see no point in mashing a keyboard so treat both with the same degree of disdain. But I still like my KDE desktop with all the konsole sessions plastered over three screens, twenty odd html files open in mumble,mumble konqueror windows on a second virtual desktop..
Feh - I'm only in X so that I can get 4 terminals on the screen at the same time, neatly... and firefox running on the other desktop (who decided that the web should have graphics, damned fools! lets go back to it being an information store, dammit!)...
Luddite! (Though I admit to extreme Luddism with the format of e-mail and news.)
serious devel work tends to happen in a full height xterm these days, with vim still being my editor of choice (I really hate mice, I really hate having to mash a keyboard, a mode based editor fixes it nicely, one key press at a time, in a nice easy to remember order... Esc:wq isn't really that difficult, is it ;). I don't get on with Kate (the evil KDE editor of doom), or nedit... there are too many things that I like being able to do from vim without having to think or click...
Gnome?
Editor wars are fun, there should be more of them... ;)
What, editors?
D&RFC
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 02:21:09PM +0000, Anthony Anson wrote:
The message 20051105141123.GJ20752@pitr from Brett Parker iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk contains these words:
... unforunate side effect tends to be that it's installed, and not keeping up to date with security holes, etc... this is one of the few things that Ubuntu have actually got right, IMO. How many people do you actually know that have installed a modern windows operating system rather than it coming preinstalled?
Well, here's one - I've installed DOS 6.22; Win 3.11; Win 98; Win 98SE; Win 2000 Pro - usually with no problem. The *ONLY* problems I've had were in installing Linux of various - er - distress.
Have you noticed that the CDs that tend to come with new hardware are "rescue" cds, and tend to just copy a bunch of files in to the right places rather than actually running through an install process? Windows + Drivers == major headaches.
Never had problems at all. Plug in hardware, feed the floppy drive or CD ROM with the driver disc, tell Windows roughly where to look, (CD, Floppy, or sometimes, \catroot and it works as if by magic. It looks, sorts out the right driver from the disc, and all you have to do is hit 'Enter'.
Blimey! you've been *very* lucky then. It seems every time I end up having to "help" with a Windows machine it is because of driver wars, where the owner has tried and failed to get their hardware working. At the moment the Windows install on my laptop has killed itself *again* (I only have Windows on the laptop for a few games for testing stuff with Internet Explorer and also in case the laptop breaks I don't want to freak out the "engineer" who would be sent out to fix it) and needs to be fixed but I keep putting it off as I don't want to spend the time on it. (Another question I have is why are the Intel chipset drivers and the Wireless lan card drivers something like a 50 meg download *each* for Windows but only a few KB and already in the Ubuntu kernel? I think to get all the updates and drivers to install Windows XP on the laptop is currently running somewhere between 500 *MEGABYTES* & 1 *GIGABYTE*! of data and you don't get goodies like decent software with that.)
After the last time I had to install Windows on the laptop it took about 4 or 5 hours and lots of downloading of service packs and drivers (thank god I have ADSL!, even then the downloads themselves took another couple of hours on top if I had dialup then there would be no way I could have got the laptop working) compare and contrast to an Ubuntu install that takes, perhaps 20 minutes? and then some upgrades to packages which only take a few minutes of user interaction to deal with. I /think/ the only thing I need to do with Ubuntu and my laptop to make a bit of hardware work is that I have to copy the firmware for the Intel wireless card into the right place and this isn't really an Ubuntu "fault" as the problem is that Ubuntu can't redistribute the firmware because Intel says no.
After all that I'm still left with a *very* unfriendly environment that needs lots of tweaks+powertoys+useful software (like firefox, gimp, anti-virus, putty etc. etc.) to make the machine useful with Windows compared to a shiny Ubuntu that came with most of the useful software I need on the CD (which is quicker to download and simpler to get running than that Windows junk).
I'm wondering that as you are on dialup how you managed to keep up with the Windows updates and patches? Only the other day when installing a neighbours ADSL did he say "oh, I never bothered with those Windows updates before as they took too long with dialup". Even now I remember the horrors of downloading 100 meg service packs for Windows NT 4.0 on dialup and the Microsoft servers not supporting resume...
</windows rant>
Thanks Adam
The message 20051105194614.GB18938@thebowery.co.uk from Adam Bower adam@thebowery.co.uk contains these words:
/snip/
Blimey! you've been *very* lucky then. It seems every time I end up having to "help" with a Windows machine it is because of driver wars, where the owner has tried and failed to get their hardware working. At the moment the Windows install on my laptop has killed itself *again*
Flaptops are ye work of ye devil.
(I only have Windows on the laptop for a few games for testing stuff with Internet Explorer and also in case the laptop breaks I don't want to freak out the "engineer" who would be sent out to fix it) and needs to be fixed but I keep putting it off as I don't want to spend the time on it.
I so seldom need a floptip that I still have a 500 MB HD on mine, and it runs DOS 6.11 and Win 3.11: I never play games, and I never use Internet Explorer - not even to verify web pages. If it works in Firefox and Opera and doesn't work in IE - tough.
(Another question I have is why are the Intel chipset drivers and the Wireless lan card drivers something like a 50 meg download *each* for Windows but only a few KB and already in the Ubuntu kernel? I think to get all the updates and drivers to install Windows XP on the laptop is currently running somewhere between 500 *MEGABYTES* & 1 *GIGABYTE*! of data and you don't get goodies like decent software with that.)
Pass. I haven't got wireless - nor even Mk1 LAN with wet string. However, practically anything written for Windows is bloatware, especially if supplied by M$ themselves. You ask why...
I have an hypothesis: when something new needs software, the developers in the Evil Umpire look round for something which does something similar, and then tack a bit on to it to make it work with the new gismo (not Gismo). And every flea has bigger fleas, and bigger fleas to bite 'em, and all those fleas have bigger fleas, and so ad infinitum - to paraphrase.
After the last time I had to install Windows on the laptop it took about 4 or 5 hours and lots of downloading of service packs and drivers (thank god I have ADSL!,
Well, I had the service packs - SP1 was included on the install CD, and SP4 was to hand, and I didn't time myself, but I reckon it took me some where between half an hour to three-quarters to install Win 2000 Pro, including formatting the HD - and 900 MHz isn't exactly fast these days. (Mind you, since I was using a 233MMX until recently, I notice the difference.)
True, I've had to apply several tweaks since, but that was due to my incompetence in building it, and nothing to do with Windows as such, (putting a master and a slave HD with the wrong sort of partitions (I suspect) on IDE1 and a CD/DVD-RW as master and a zip as slave on IDE2) and shuffling the components later sorted one problem, and then finding the UW SCSI card was faulty, and changing it cured the rest.
Mind you, I'd done it before.
even then the downloads themselves took another couple of hours on top if I had dialup then there would be no way I could have got the laptop working) compare and contrast to an Ubuntu install that takes, perhaps 20 minutes? and then some upgrades to packages which only take a few minutes of user interaction to deal with. I /think/ the only thing I need to do with Ubuntu and my laptop to make a bit of hardware work is that I have to copy the firmware for the Intel wireless card into the right place and this isn't really an Ubuntu "fault" as the problem is that Ubuntu can't redistribute the firmware because Intel says no.
Last night's abortive Debian install took well over six hours.
After all that I'm still left with a *very* unfriendly environment that needs lots of tweaks+powertoys+useful software (like firefox, gimp, anti-virus, putty etc. etc.) to make the machine useful with Windows compared to a shiny Ubuntu that came with most of the useful software I need on the CD (which is quicker to download and simpler to get running than that Windows junk).
Ah, well, I wish that OS installations wouldn't come with apps bundled in. For a start I would have left Mozilla out. If it were down to me I'd leave a lot of what comes bundled with Windows out too - IE, OE and Outlurk for a start. (Yes, I left Outlook and OE out during the installation on the previous box, but the cunning B******s seem to have arranged it so that if you do that, other things don't work properly, and whine because this file or that is missing.
And, I suppose French is simpler to understand if you're a Frenchman. While I've had Linux distros and loaded some successfully (FSVO successfully) I've never really understood it, but Zetnet is mainly a Windows-based environment, and the internal help groups lean in that direction too (with the exception of the Linux, Amiga, Atari, Acorn groups)
I'm wondering that as you are on dialup how you managed to keep up with the Windows updates and patches? Only the other day when installing a neighbours ADSL did he say "oh, I never bothered with those Windows updates before as they took too long with dialup". Even now I remember the horrors of downloading 100 meg service packs for Windows NT 4.0 on dialup and the Microsoft servers not supporting resume...
If I need big files (which isn't often), another Zetnut with widepipe downloads them for me. But there's very little support for Win 2000 now, and I'm never going to get XP.
</windows rant>
Thanks
My pleasure.
Hi Brett
On Saturday 05 November 2005 14:11, Brett Parker wrote:
Once I have installed Debian by what ever means available, I never need to look at running an installer again (for my own systems).
Ah ha! See, a "once only" operation! So why make it all graphical ;)
As you probably already know, I also build custom distros for other people. Their end users are often M$ users who wouldn't know a CLI even if it poked them in the eye...
Editor wars are fun, there should be more of them... ;)
Couldn't agree more - Still don't see the need to mash keyboards, even if it is esc:wth.. Munging keys, whether in a sequence, or in one hit is so icky.. As for Kate, it's not an editor I willingly use either.
Regards, Paul.
On 05-Nov-05 Paul wrote:
On Saturday 05 November 2005 11:58, Brett Parker wrote:
<>>> Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
Installing Debian imho does not have to be difficult, the new installer under Sarge should drag you through it quickly and easily.
That does *NOT* apply to Woody - it's about as easy to understand as a difficult to understand thing.
Indeed it doesn't apply to woody, woody was pre debian installer... woody is *ollllllld*, very old, infact... we all rejoiced when we got a new debian release, the world was good again!
Yay indeed. Sarge going stable, despite a few nasty buggy packages, was indeed a day to rejoice. It is still let down by an arcane and newbie-unfriendly installer. Thanks to the likes of M$, RH, SuSE, etc, large numbers of potential users have come to expect (should I say "demand") a simple click'n'drool installer. From the screenshots I've seen of d-i, Debian fails badly on this front.
Going back some time, now, I recall the first time I installed Slackware (1.0, in 1994, after good experiences with SLS and the interesting MCC Interim).
You had to install this off floppies, and the packages were presented in alphabetical order rather than by dependency, and you chose item by item whether or not to install.
So if you installed something that depended on something you had not installed, you had to write down what it depended on, and then go back later to fill in the gap.
However, that was the only complication, and since the "base" install was the first thing to do and did not involve much in the way of choice, by then you had a proper working system and the subsequent runs were not a problem.
A good clean way to install off a drawer-full of floppies.
I enjoyed Slackware, but it stagnated after a few years so I moved on (Red Hat, Debian, SuSE, ... ); but I'm now seriously thinking of giving it another try since its revival a few years ago. I liked it's barebones no-nonsense approach and lack of "gotchas".
A propos another little issue: might one say that GUI addicts haven't got a CLUI?
Cheers, Ted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 05-Nov-05 Time: 13:05:34 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
The message XFMail.051105130537.Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk from (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk contains these words:
/snip/
A propos another little issue: might one say that GUI addicts haven't got a CLUI?
<OT> <warning danger="rude words follow">
You could - that was one reason why I resisted Windows until it was necessary for one program I wanted to run, so I had a dual-boot box with Linux FT and Win 3.11 running in DOS 6.22 put together.
Even then, most of the programs I ran were in DOS - some of which I still use occasionally - Electronic Workbench, Neopaint, Morse, Supermorse, and if the most important disc in the installation set hadn't degraded, I'd be using Locoscript Professional (DOS app) still.
I must say, I like cfdisk's capability of formatting partitions in so many - er - formats, CP/M included, but, can someone please tell me, is a special type of floppy drive required to read CP/M format discs? (I have 3œ" CP/M system discs, also CPMlulator to run in DOS)
</OT> </warning>
I'm even putting a 5Œ" floppy drive in the backup box I'm building.
Hi Tony,
On 05-Nov-05 Anthony Anson wrote:
The message 1131150587.3072.206.camel@localhost.localdomain from Wayne Stallwood ALUGlist@digimatic.plus.com contains these words:
A lot of Debian people seem to just not get Ubuntu. I think this demonstrates why Ubuntu was needed in the first place. It's built for a different audience. It's obvious Bret that you really know your way around a Linux box....for people that don't I think Ubuntu is a slightly more friendly option.
Hum. Perhaps I ought to try it then?
I recently looked at the Ubuntu Live CD and (though no installation was involved) it seemed very user-friendly. I've not had much experience with raw Debian, though I did once (several years ago) install it successfully on a laptop. As I recall, my impression was similar to yours -- stuff flashes by on the screen (which you fear you may need later, if only you'd been able to take it in), and then you get faced with decisions you're not prepared for.
Clearly Bret is battle-hardened, but I suspect many people may conclude that installing Debian should not be done for the first time.
However, while I can't help with Debian, ...
Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
... if you're having trouble on that front, drop me a line.
Eelman.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 05-Nov-05 Time: 09:26:04 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
The message XFMail.051105092607.Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk from (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk contains these words:
/snip/
Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
... if you're having trouble on that front, drop me a line.
That's how I caught the eel...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Ted Harding Ted.Harding@nessie.mcc.ac.uk wrote: <snippage class="random" />
Clearly Bret is battle-hardened, but I suspect many people may
^ OK - is it really impossible for people to spell my name correctly! *sulks in the corner*.
conclude that installing Debian should not be done for the first time.
It's no harder than installing ubuntu, the major difference being that debian may not detect all your shiny evil new hardware because there aren't OSS drivers for them... the kernel for the installer is Free, and therefore you don't get all the 'lovely' hardware detection... I really don't see how people can say "the ubuntu installer is lovely" WHEN THEY'VE JUST USED DEBIAN-INSTALLER. *sigh* I give up, I really do.
Thanks, - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk
Anthony Anson tony.anson@zetnet.co.uk
Installing Debian is like being greased, and wrestling with an eel.
No, but installing very old Debian now may seem like it, so STOP.
Even with Woody, there were debian-installer-based disks about and d-i is now default with sarge on Intel. Why make life hard? Do you live in Mazza chasm? Please try a new copy or at least get a detailed review/log which describes the known bugs.
I think the Woody default installer asked too many questions and cfdisk felt more clumsy even than the plain text fdisk. The smarter "guided partitioning" tool on the new installer is pretty good. So it's text menus, but they're now fairly easy menus.
Ignore Paul's comments about debian-installer if he's never used it. Equally, I'd say ignore comments I make now about anaconda: I've only seen screenshots of the latest ones, so I'm out of date. When I used it ages ago, it sucked. I think it's not going to be as well-known, usual or supportable for debian systems.
Ubuntu may be worth a try: I hear it's a lot slicker on the desktop than debian, but worse on servers. In reply to Wayne, I'd suggest that lots of debian supporters "get" Ubuntu, but Canonical has arguably needlessly disrupted debian by not contributing back efficiently (hence Utnubu) and by advocating unreleased Canonical-controlled development tools, amongst other effects. It has ups and downs, like many things.
Hope that helps,
The message E1EYYVz-0000Cg-00@pipe.localnet from MJ Ray mjr@phonecoop.coop contains these words:
/snip MJR view/
Hope that helps,
Thanks, more for the melting-pot. Paul has kindly offered to provide Sarge and some other goodies, (Including Anaconda) so I can look at these things from an uneducated position.
And with any luck, gain an education...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Wayne Stallwood ALUGlist@digimatic.plus.com wrote:
<snippage class="probablyExcessive" />
It may use the debian installer but either the default package selection or the kernel config make hardware detection more reliable in my experience. Of all the distros I have used Ubuntu required the least configuration to work on my hardware...Debian was one of the ones that required the most.
Ubuntu does, indeed, have a different kernel, which is really where it gets better hardware detection... Debians kernel is the one thing that really lets it down... on the other hand, it's also fairly much entirely garanteed to contain only Free drivers, with a capital F and all! Whereas Ubuntus is, really, designed to just be practical...
A lot of Debian people seem to just not get Ubuntu. I think this demonstrates why Ubuntu was needed in the first place. It's built for a different audience. It's obvious Bret that you really know your way
^ I want my other t back! who stole it! gimme, gimme!
around a Linux box....for people that don't I think Ubuntu is a slightly more friendly option.
No, I get Ubuntu, I just don't like it's bandwaggon ;) They've done some good work, agreed, and they're getting a reasonable community together... now, if the debian utnubu picks up, we'll have mostly the same work in the debian repository - we'll still have a kernel, however, that is Free (sometimes the debian kernel team are a little over zealous but hey ;).
I like configuring hardware, it makes the day feel better somehow :) Actually, that's a bit of a lie... I hate configuring hardware in windows, because that's always a complete hit or miss operation, with random bugs seeping in that may or may not be the hardware playing up... I like knowing what's playing with my hardware, and I like to know what driver it's using (and you never know how useful knowing that might be!)... the most fun recently was getting a hfc-pci card working, which turned out to be a lot easier than first thought - note to those that ever want to use one of these in asterisk, compile the hfc-pci driver, and use the zaptel/zapata configs in asterisk, the hisax driver + i4l just did not work for me!
And after that random tangent... upstairs for coffee I go!
Cheers, - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk
Sussed cfdisk, formatted hda into primary (boot) and swap, then spent *HOURS* installing Woody.
So, it asks me if I want to enable things I've never heard of which will do things (or not) that I wot not of.
It asks for details it really doesn't need to know, and there's no way of skipping the question. (How do I know what number I need to dial for my ISP without accessing the data on the HD in one of the other trays?)
Just as well I had the book for the monitor I'm using - it's the only monitor (out of four) I have the data for.
I can see what people mean when they say that Linux will never get a real foothold until it is more user-friendly.
At the end of unpacking everything and (presumably) installing it, all HD and CD ROM activity ceased, and the screen remained blank.
In the end I switched off.
On restarting, it went into the configuration programme all over again.
Switched off.
cfdisk again?
Flippin' quarter to three and what have I accomplished?
G'night.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Anthony Anson tony.anson@zetnet.co.uk wrote:
Sussed cfdisk, formatted hda into primary (boot) and swap, then spent *HOURS* installing Woody.
OK - installing Woody is a PITA, Woody is pre d-i... grab a Sarge image, it'll steer you much much much better.
Cheers, - -- Brett Parker web: http://www.sommitrealweird.co.uk/ email: iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk
The message 20051105100935.GG20752@pitr from Brett Parker iDunno@sommitrealweird.co.uk contains these words:
Sussed cfdisk, formatted hda into primary (boot) and swap, then spent *HOURS* installing Woody.
OK - installing Woody is a PITA, Woody is pre d-i... grab a Sarge image, it'll steer you much much much better.
Good thing I've sussed cfdisk, then...
I can see all my efforts disappearing down the plug'ole of time.
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 12:44:33AM +0000, Anthony Anson wrote:
I can see what people mean when they say that Linux will never get a real foothold until it is more user-friendly.
My opinion of these people is that they are wrong ;) I still think that somewhere around 90-99% of computer users when asked to install an operating system (any operating system) will fail to manage the task.
So the real problem is getting Linux installed onto peoples computers, when more manufacturers start offering Linux pre-installed and more users see what/how Linux works then more people will use it, I just think that the critical mass is still building before it becomes the pre-dominant OS, but every minute that passes the Linux market share is growing (and it is getting more user-friendly by the minute too, so in some ways part of your comment is showing that Linux will get more of a foothold as time goes on).
Further to this is 5 *years* ago (pre Debian Woody) I was working for a company that used both Linux and Windows on it's desktops. To keep the amount of support down we (the network/computer admins) started putting Linux onto peoples workstations.
Out of all of our users nobody really had any massive complaints about having to use Linux, except a few "why can't I run this program on Linux?" but compared to the amount of complaints we had about Windows "why am I getting this error message every time I try to do this?" "why does my computer crash whenever I try to load this program?" "why is my computer so slow?" I'd say Linux was far more user friendly.
Of course the powers that be then decided that we should run Windows on everyones workstations apart from technical staff, which was a bit of a shame and resulted in lots of complaints from the people who had been running Linux as they didn't like their shiny new Windows 2000 machines because they were less stable/more buggy.
Again I can also vouch for this situation sometime later on when I worked somewhere that had about 200-300(ish) employees, many of whom were given computers running Linux as part of a plan to phase out the machines running Windows, you'd always get a few whinges when people first started using Linux as "this isn't like Windows/doesn't work like Windows" but after a week or two they wouldn't want to give up their Linux workstations for anything (and several of them were asking if they could have help getting Linux installed at home).
Thanks Adam
-
Adam Bower -
Anthony Anson -
Brett Parker -
Keith Watson -
MJ Ray -
Nick Atkins -
Paul -
Ted.Harding＠nessie.mcc.ac.uk -
Wayne Stallwood