Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Debian Gets Win32 Installer

Posted by kdawson on Sun Jan 28, 2007 02:10 AM
from the no-CD-no-USB-no-problem dept.
Debian Software Linux
An anonymous reader writes "Debian hacker Robert Millan has just announced the availability of a Debian-Installer Loader for win32. The program, inspired by Ubuntu's similar project, features 64-bit CPU auto-detection, download of linux/initrd netboot images, and chainloading into Debian-Installer via grub4dos. The frontend site goodbye-microsoft.com/ has been set up for advocacy purposes. Here are some screenshots."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Ian Murdock: Debian "Missing a Big Opportunity" 330 comments
Natester writes "While Debian struggles to get its next release (Etch) out the door, the project's founder, Ian Murdock, has spoken out about politics, the lack of firm leadership, and Ubuntu's meteoric rise in prominence. Murdock believes that Debian is "process run amok" — nobody feels empowered to make decisions, leading to the sluggish rate of progress."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Debian Gets Win32 Installer 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Almost Too Easy? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by P(0)(!P(k)+P(k+1)) (1012109) <math.induction@gmail.com> on Sunday January 28 2007, @02:11AM (#17788252) Homepage Journal

    The ease with which someone could blow away their Windows install (and apposite data) is hilarious, actually; the frontpage is slick, and the Debian logo has a nice, clean svg -> png feel.

    The one thing I always felt FOSS had going for it were pious, minimalist interfaces;* goodbye-microsoft.com [goodbye-microsoft.com] is no exception.

    _____________
    * And dangerous ones, like fdisk.

    • Well, it doesn't look like new users can "blow away their windows install." I read the site that was linked, and although it doesn't describe the actual process or show screenshots of terminals, it does make a huge point of (and so does the ubuntu link) showing large messages clearly stating that your hard drive will NOT be formatted.

      I was kind of disappointed though, because without reading the documents on the site, the average user would not know what the installer is actually doing. They show a screen

      • Re:Almost Too Easy? (Score:5, Informative)

        by -Neko- (67564) on Sunday January 28 2007, @06:12AM (#17788898) Homepage
        It's a loop-mounted ext3 "hard file" like you get in an emulator.

        The process is, basically - GRUB loads a kernel+initrd from the Windows filesystem. Kernel loads, mounts / from the initrd, mounts the NTFS or FAT filesystem from the Windows box, and finds the hardfile and initrd - then it swivels root to use the image via the loopback filesystem (so you can mount files as disks).

        Not sure how this bodes for expandability of the disk image though. I guess the idea is the Ubuntu install just works, and you can put the data back onto your Windows disk..?

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by -Neko- (67564)
            That's SO user friendly! A 30 page document! Much better than a one-click installer!!!

    • Well you have to install WINE... (Score:5, Funny)

      by EmbeddedJanitor (597831) on Sunday January 28 2007, @03:29AM (#17788442)
      ... oh, wait....

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Ash-Fox (726320)
        I can run Wine under Windows just fine. I used to-do it to get Windows XP only applications running under Windows 2000.

      • Re:Almost Too Easy? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by heroofhyr (777687) on Sunday January 28 2007, @11:19AM (#17790186)

        If Linux evangelists want people to move to a Linux OS then you don't want a MS Windows installer you really want a proper Linux installer other wise you are just saying that Linux is a poor cousin to MS Windows and I can assure you that the majority of potential users who do this will eventually go back to MS Windows and usually with a bad feeling to Linux.

        I disagree and think this is good news. My father-in-law only uses his computer for his mail, his music, and for the various PCB/schematic applications he needs. I've attempted to convince him numerous times to use something other than Windows, mainly because his computer has such limited resources and the software he uses is nothing that isn't available freely and just as high-quality in the FLOSS universe. It also runs like a tortoise with XP Pro. He seems nervous about trying something he's unfamiliar with, so I finally got an Ubuntu LiveCD from Ship-It. As anyone who has tried this service knows, it can be quite awhile before it arrives. The point of the CD is for him to try it out and see how it is without actually changing anything in his hard drive. The reason I had to get a CD rather than just download/burn it is because these days I'm only burning to DVD-Rs and a) I don't feel like buying a single blank CD and b) he has no DVD drive. Had I known about this installer I would've just pointed him to it and saved myself a lot of time.
        While I agree that a high-quality installer is a worthwhile goal (I remember when I first installed FreeBSD back in 1999 or so and it was so bare-bones that I had no idea what the hell I was doing for about 90% of the installation) and things are moving in that direction, there are a lot of people who lack the hardware to burn LiveCDs, aren't going to take the risk of paying for one for an OS they're just mildly curious in and have never used, and/or have no knowledge of configuring their operating system. These people also probably have an OEM copy of Windows and don't know how to use anything else. Making the act of trying something new as simple as running a program using the Windows Installer dialogs they're used to is, to me, a good idea, and rather reminiscient of the old BeOS 5 Personal Edition. Whether anyone switches or not, it's a safe way for them to check it out.

        In fact dual booting is not a real solution either because users will eventually fall back to MS Windows because it is too easy to backslide. It is very important if you are trying to convince friends that if they are serious they must switch to a Linux only PC although let them play with a few distros before that and they need to get educated in basic security and System Admin practices.

        That's a rather harsh suggestion. Unless it's an issue of HD space, I wouldn't ever recommend to a newbie that they toss Windows overboard completely and forego dual-booting. When I first started out in the non-Windows/DOS world it was around early 1998, and one of the first problems I came across was getting PPP working. If I hadn't had the foresight to dual-boot, what would you have suggested I do to find an answer to how to set it up? I certainly couldn't go online to find help--after all going online was the problem. So how did I fix it? I booted into Windows, found some websites with example scripts, printed them out, and booted back. At the time I wasn't aware of Lynx so I had to do the same thing (reboot, print out, reboot) to get XF86 configured and running. If Windows is too easy to backslide towards, that in itself speaks volumes about the learning curve and potential for frustration of non-Windows systems to people weaned on it. I don't know too many people who buy a Mac, try it for an hour, and take it back to the store (e.g. backslide) because it's too different, their menus aren't in the same place, common system applications have different names, etc. If someone doesn't like Linux, BSD, or whatever, that's their business. There may be a stupid reason for it, and one can try and correct that misinformed

  • the ultimate answer (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 28 2007, @02:15AM (#17788260)
    yes, it DOES run linux

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      yes, it DOES run linux


      It may run Linux, but it doesn't run under Linux in Wine! Just complains about missing c:\boot.ini and that my version of Windows might be too old. So where's the Linux port?

  • Has that site been slashdotted? And if so, is there a mirror?

  • Goodbye (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 28 2007, @02:19AM (#17788284)
    goodbye-webserver.com

  • IE exploit? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Qwell (684661) on Sunday January 28 2007, @02:22AM (#17788286)
    What would be funny, is if somebody managed to automate this, and used an IE exploit to force it to run.

    Disclaimer: I cannot be held responsible if somebody actually does this.
    • It'd be fairly hard to put it into practice (would require the person to download a LOT without interrupting the download, say, by turning the computer off- though in theory that's able to be worked around) and would end up damaging the public perception of linux. Right now, most people don't know what linux is or have a vague idea that it's something that goes on computers and think it's for tech nerds.
      A "linux virus" would be just the thing Microsoft needs to completely vanquish any and all hope of peop

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Joebert (946227)
      Funny maybe, but it would kill PR for Debian.
      If there's one thing people hate more than holes in Windows, it's the software that exploits thoose holes.
      • Hmm... and what if a Windows fanboy were to build it with that very purpose in mind?

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Joebert (946227)
          Microsoft would likely be willing to pay said fanboy big bucks.
          • Meh... they might still use VB... and just invoke the code for this autoinstaller once it is finished downloading it.

    • I cannot be held responsible if somebody actually does this.
      That's what you think. :P

    • Re:IE exploit? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Oopsz (127422) on Sunday January 28 2007, @02:57AM (#17788376) Homepage
      you mean tuxissa [lwn.net]?

    • Re:IE exploit? (Score:5, Funny)

      by the_womble (580291) on Sunday January 28 2007, @07:02AM (#17789030) Homepage Journal
      Most people would probably think "Windows looks a bit different after that update".

      I told a neighbour recently that I did not use Windows. The reply was "What do use instead? Excel?"

      Most people do not know what a PC is, or that it is a switchable component.
  • They spelled "responsibility" wrong in one of those screenshots:

    http://goodbye-microsoft.com/screenshots/3.png [goodbye-microsoft.com]

  • Maybe not the best way to get new users... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by exley (221867) on Sunday January 28 2007, @02:39AM (#17788352) Homepage
    From the announcement:

    This has a few interesting applications:
    ...
    - Migrating to Debian for users who have no idea how to burn an ISO and/or how to configure their BIOS for CD boot.

    Uhhhh, if someone doesn't know how to burn an ISO or tinker with their BIOS, is this installer really something they should be screwing around with?

    • Some Opperationz are Dangerous! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by twitter (104583) on Sunday January 28 2007, @03:08AM (#17788392) Homepage Journal

      Uhhhh, if someone doesn't know how to burn an ISO or tinker with their BIOS, is this installer really something they should be screwing around with?

      I understand that it's dangerous to "screw around" with your computer when it's running Windows, but I did not know that writing a file was one of those dangerous things now.

      You would be amazed at how difficult some vendors make it to do what should be very easy. Though burning an ISO image should be the easiest thing a program could do with a blank CD, most burning programs either lack the option or hide it. Telling your computer what device to boot off should also be easy, but the larger vendors don't display the keystroke required to get into the BIOS configuration utility. What should take five minutes can easily take hours and could take a trip to the store to buy burning software. People are usually put off but these types of guessing game, especially when the results are uncertain.

      All of it backfires eventually. A user who's insulted enough will do something about it. Sooner or later, they all learn.

    • I always feel that different operating systems should be on different parttions so as to gve better redundancy and the ability to remove one without wiping the others. It was a bad idea when MS allowed Windows 2000 and 98 to coexist on a single FAT32 partition and this is a bad idea now..

      If the Debian people want to make migration easier, they should built a Win32 app that exports outlook express email to mbx and installs it into Thunderbird, copies over address books, favourites and wallpaper. THATs th

  • Well that didn't work (Score:3, Interesting)

    by skiflyer (716312) on Sunday January 28 2007, @02:46AM (#17788360)
    I just tried it, it said everything went fine, I chose the Debian Installer at reboot, and I got a grub menu with 3 choices, expert, standard and auto. All three resulted in a "file not found message", so I booted back to XP.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Install Linux and run it under Wine.

    • Re:Well that didn't work (Score:4, Funny)

      by the donner party (1000036) on Sunday January 28 2007, @04:32AM (#17788588)
      That's nothing! When I tried it, everything went fine, but when I first booted linux, it burned down my house, killed my dog and ran away with my wife! They really have to fix problems like that if they want non-technical users trying out this linux thingy.

  • Just in time! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The MAZZTer (911996) <megazzt@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Sunday January 28 2007, @03:40AM (#17788474) Homepage

    For the release of Vista in two days, which will make this installer break! Vista no longer uses boot.ini or the NTLDR loader.

    In fact, I'm using the Vista RC2 bootloader to boot Windows XP. The Debian installer would fail horribly because the boot process would not be altered atall.

    • I'm sure that someone will figure out a way to boot linux from vista eventually. In the meantime, I understand that vista has fairly extreme system requirements, so there's a whole load of machines that won't be able to run it, and the installer seems like a nice advocacy move to switch those away from the obsolete version of windows they're stuck with, and over to linux.
    • Err people aren't going to get Vista on their new computer only to immediately head to goodbye-microsoft.com to install Debian.

      Oh wait.. On second thought that was a bit short sighted of them.

  • Worms (Score:4, Informative)

    by skinfitz (564041) on Sunday January 28 2007, @05:51AM (#17788832) Journal
    I am loving this 'click here to install Linux' trend - I am wondering how long it is going to be before we see a worm exploiting this to install Linux on vulnerable machines.

    All it would take is a silent installer with a built in bit torrent client to download the files and an XP theme for Gnome or KDE.

    They could even advertise - don't like Windows? Want Linux? No problem - just plug your Windows machine into the net, turn off your firewall and go out for a few hours.

  • goodbye-microsoft.com (Score:5, Insightful)

    by massysett (910130) on Sunday January 28 2007, @07:49AM (#17789164) Homepage
    I think it's better to promote Linux because of what it does well, rather than promoting Linux by saying MS is no good.

  • The front-end site is really terrible (Score:5, Insightful)

    by robosmurf (33876) * on Sunday January 28 2007, @09:35AM (#17789602)
    The windows based installer is an interesting idea, and the Ubuntu version looks pretty good.

    However, the goodbye-microsoft.com front end site is a complete disaster.

    It just contains a link to an executable file. The 'More details about it link' says NOTHING about what it does. It doesn't say what it will install, what it is for, or what it will do to your existing OS.

    I really hope that few people would be stupid enough to run the executable. Getting people to run random files from sites with names that suggest that they will trash your OS is not something to be encouraged.

  • I RTFA (Score:3, Insightful)

    by frAme57 (145879) <snakefeet.gmail@com> on Sunday January 28 2007, @11:19AM (#17790176) Homepage
    and I have one question. Now, I am all for expanding the GNU/Linux/FOSS/BSD userbase, and I am certainly no l33t user but is this

    - Migrating to Debian for users who have no idea how to burn an ISO
    and/or how to configure their BIOS for CD boot.

    really the people we want to invite to the party?

    • Re:questions (Score:5, Informative)

      by Coryoth (254751) on Sunday January 28 2007, @02:32AM (#17788324) Homepage Journal

      anyone know if this does:
      1) resizes the windows partition so you can still access it from debian?
      2) scans windows for your settings and replicates similar ones in debian?
      Anything else, and why not just use the damn CD?
      I was curious about this too. The site itself doesn't carry much information, but the related Ubuntu project [ubuntu.com] has more detail. The idea is that the linux disk image gets saved as a file (in C:\ubuntu apparently) which gets loopmounted and booted into via grub4dos. Thus Windows gets to stay exactly as it is, and there isn't even any disk repartitioning done - linux just sits as a disk image file on the C:\ drive. The Ubuntu project also talk about gleaning some info from the Windows registry for installation - though it only mentions locale and timezone data (presumably more can be managed).

      It is, at least, quite different from a CD install in that your Windows install (presuming this works the same as the Ubuntu version) remains untouched (aside from getting a new directory and a couple of extra files) with no risk of data loss via repartioning etc. Certainly an interesting idea.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Incidence (923443)
        If the installers are able to create a functional dual boot system without affecting Windows then this could be really good for Linux adoption, assuming my situation is even semi-common outside my group of friends.

        I've worked with live-CD's in the past and would like to install Linux, but the problem has always been the threat of lost data and system downtime getting the OS to work. Between school and my job I can't afford to be without a functional computer for any real length of time, so even the small ch

      • Re:questions (Score:4, Informative)

        by joey (315) <joey@kitenet.net> on Sunday January 28 2007, @04:13AM (#17788552) Homepage
        The current implementation for Debian is different than what Ubuntu is working on. goodbye-windows.com just downloads the two files (kernel, initrd) that let the completely standard Debian installer [debian.org] boot, installs a grub bootloader and uses it to convince windows to boot linux. Thereafter it's identical to what would happen if you netboot the Debian Installer.

        d-i does allow optional resizing of the windows partition and setting up a dual-boot system. It does not scan windows for settings or the like.

        Oh BTW, while it's slashdotted, you can see it at http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/f592f4a8f9a66105d 885ff7a49228380/index.html [mirrordot.org]

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by at2000 (715252) *
      1. No
      2. No

      You only avoided the need for burning a CD, but not the d-i. That's why the Ubuntu one is much easier to use.
    • For the curious...

      Here is a link to the ISO Burner Power Toy for Windows XP. This will allow you to record a CD or DVD .iso image under WinXP without having to go out and purchase a full version of Nero or Roxio. This is a very handy tool.

      http://isorecorder.alexfeinman.com/isorecorder.htm [alexfeinman.com]

          • Re: Windows .ISO burner (Score:5, Funny)

            by Curtman (556920) on Sunday January 28 2007, @07:52AM (#17789166)

            Works fine for me - you do have the correct Service Pack one, right? There's different ones for SP1 and SP2.

            That's the problem with Windows. Until they get that stuff sorted, it will never be ready for the desktop.

    • Re:Ubuntu+Windows not hard at all. (Score:4, Informative)

      by skinfitz (564041) on Sunday January 28 2007, @05:43AM (#17788806) Journal
      Microsoft do provide a program to burn ISO images - it's in the Windows Server 2003 Resource Kit [microsoft.com] and it's called 'cdburn.exe'.

      WHY they can't simply distribute a mission critical tool like this along with the OS I have no idea.

    • Re:Ubuntu+Windows not hard at all. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by The Spoonman (634311) on Sunday January 28 2007, @11:33AM (#17790254) Homepage
      some DVD/CD burner program (believe it or not, WindowsXP does *not* do this out of the box!)

      I forget the current Slashdot stance: do we want Windows to do everything out of the box, or do we want to chastise them for doing anything out of the box because that drives away competition? I mean, if they're going to be chastised for including a web browser (an absolute essential for everyone these days), but then complain that they don't include burning software (still only needed by a subset of everyone) isn't that a little hypocritical? If they did include burning software, wouldn't that drive Roxio and Nero out of business like IE did Netscape?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mrjb (547783)
      You will be surprised just how noob some users are.

      I have written a cross-platform application that consists of just an executable and a shared library (DLL/.so, respectively).

      Even with the email-assistance I give them, regularly it proves too difficult for users to copy the library file to the default library directory (c:\windows\system32 or /usr/local/lib, respectively). Especially Mac users have trouble because they have to do this as root user, which often is a concept unknown to them.

      This happens so o

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.