Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Debian

Download Anaconda for Debian 208

hsoom writes "Debian Planet is reporting that unofficial sarge-based ISOs using the Anaconda installer can be downloaded from here. The features developed so far include '...changed the code that installs software to use APT instead of RPM, removed Red Hat-specific configuration hooks, and written a new tool called picax that builds Anaconda-based installation CDs from a Debian repository'. However there are features that are not yet working and it is not recommended for use in a production environment."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Download Anaconda for Debian

Comments Filter:
  • This is good news. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by byolinux ( 535260 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:27AM (#7658698) Journal
    One of the main 'comments' I get when I recommend Debian GNU/Linux to people, is 'Debian is difficult to install' - a fair comment, and this will be a move in the right direction.

    Give it some time.

    Knoppix is right now probably the easiest way to install Debian, via knx-hdinstall.
  • by CAIMLAS ( 41445 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:32AM (#7658721)
    Don't worry, most of us do.

    It might have something to do with the fact that its developers all use emacs, and that little flaw has worked its way into dselect.

    I've found dselect is largely broken and will futz up your dependencies, etc. fairly quickly. Straight apt-get for me.
  • by Saint Stephen ( 19450 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:33AM (#7658729) Homepage Journal
    use aptitude (console) or synaptic (gtk)

    I'm amazed that more people don't know this. I used dselect for about a day, then quickly discovered apt+tasksel, then aptitude. Dselect is awful.
  • by The_DOD_player ( 640135 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:41AM (#7658751)
    Amen to that!!.

    Knoppix is becoming Debians default installer on x86 hardware. Its not just more fun than the conventional approach, but it feels safer, since you can SEE it working on your computer before installing for real.
  • by Trbmxfz ( 728040 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:48AM (#7658779)
    One of the main 'comments' I get when I recommend Debian GNU/Linux to people, is 'Debian is difficult to install'

    I think it can be argued that the Debian installer asks many questions that may not be easy to answer for a Linux newbie.

    But, as you say, there is hope: I remember someone saying, a few years ago, that a RedHat had formatted their drives without clearly mentioning that it would be destructive (oops!). Today, Mandrake can be installed after just a few minutes worth of clicking "OK". It generally makes the right choices for the user, clearly shows what partitions will be created, and warns if it's about to blank an existing windows partition. If it finds some unsupported hardware, it mentions what it knows about it, so that the user can simply ask their local guru for help.

    I think it's no exaggeration to say that someone who already installed Windows can safely install e.g. a Mandrake.
  • by chrestomanci ( 558400 ) * <david@@@chrestomanci...org> on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:52AM (#7658791)
    Serously, the anaconda site will be in for a very heavy slahsdoting. They have links to two isos on the page that slashdot links to. How many will click on those links? how many will be disapointed? The filesisze are BTW: sarge-2003-11-25-bin1.iso 688,074,752 bytes sarge-2003-11-25-bin2.iso 42,174,464 bytes ie, about 720 Megabytes in total. I would consider putting up a torrent link myself, but I don't have a large enough pipe to download those files before the site (inevetably) goes down.
  • by martinde ( 137088 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @08:59AM (#7658824) Homepage
    > One of the main 'comments' I get when I recommend Debian GNU/Linux to people, is 'Debian is difficult to install' - a fair comment,
    > and this will be a move in the right direction.

    And of course, the "standard answer" to this is "you only install Debian one time on any one machine". People who have not used it have a hard time believing this, but it's true barring hard disk failure or some other catastrophe like that. Even major updates happen via "apt-get upgrade", and 99.9% of the time it Just Works(TM) if you're running stable. (Take that down to about 97% for unstable/testing.)

    I have a machine that started out around Debian 1.1, as a 486 and has been hardware upgraded several times (to a Pentium Pro and now a 1GHz C3) and apt-get upgraded routinely since those days. I had to reboot due to the recent linux security issue, prior to that this machine had an uptime of 172 days. It's running Debian/stable plus I've done some backporting out of unstable for a few key bits.

    Anyways, between Knoppix, anaconda, and the new debian-installer work going on within Debian, hopefully the "it's hard to install" issue is just about a moot point. Enough proselytizing for this morning ;-)
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 08, 2003 @09:09AM (#7658862)
    Debian's installer is not a CLI.

    Sure, it's text-based. However, it's got dialog boxes and other widgets familiar from GUIs. The only thing lacking really is support for a mouse.
  • I stand corrected (Score:2, Insightful)

    by RLiegh ( 247921 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @09:12AM (#7658877) Homepage Journal
    Perhaps what I should have said instead was "text-based interface".
  • by danny ( 2658 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @09:14AM (#7658889) Homepage
    First they ported apt to Redhat, now they're using anaconda for Debian installs! This is a great illustration of the flexibility of free software.

    (Review of The Art of UNIX Programming [dannyreviews.com])

    Danny.

  • by slim ( 1652 ) <john.hartnup@net> on Monday December 08, 2003 @09:16AM (#7658894) Homepage
    I can understand some people saying Debian, in it's current state is difficult to install.

    But I cringe when I hear that from a fellow computer person. I mean honestly, just because it's not using framebuffer and a mouse on install?


    Well, dselect could be friendlier: it's not so much that it's text based, but that the interface itself is alien to most people. It's a good interface, like vi is a good interface: but it's not quick and easy to pick up, and if you skip past the instructions, you're in trouble.

    But that's not the worst thing about the Debian install. It's been proved that auto-detecting hardware can be done in Linux, yet to install Woody I needed to manually specify an Ethernet driver and select an appropriate X server. That's really not good enough, and would scupper a lot of people, computer professionals or not.

    This may be fixed in Sarge: someone reply and tell me.
  • by BoysDontCry ( 595839 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @09:45AM (#7659032)

    You hit the nail on the head with your last line. The problem is that Debian supports many architectures (I think it's even more architectures than XFree supports!), so there is a lot of work to be done to build an installer.

    There's a new installer in the works right now (it's in Beta). Don't know much about it though.

  • by flewp ( 458359 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @09:51AM (#7659056)
    What's wrong with making it easier for those who are new to linux? One of the biggest drawbacks I think for newbies to linux is the "ease" of installation. It's gettting better and better, and I'm sure soon it'll be just as easy as Windows. What bothers me though, is this elitist attitude. How the fuck are people supposed to get into linux if they have a hard time installing it? You gotta start somewhere, and you gotta install to get started.
  • by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @10:16AM (#7659204) Journal
    Well. Keep in mind that the Woody installer is several years old now.

    That seems like a serious problem in itself to me!
  • by martinde ( 137088 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @10:18AM (#7659217) Homepage
    > Yes but some of us install a lot of machines, and mostly new ones without support. Simply updating
    > the kernels in the install images would help a lot.

    This is definitely the area where I've had the most issues too. I've had to install PCI ethernet cards in cases where a new motherboard's onboard ethernet isn't supported, and occasionally I've built my own install disks with custom kernels.

    Next time I run into this, I think I'll try a Knoppix install and see how that works. It seems to be updated often and have modern kernels.
  • by byolinux ( 535260 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @10:18AM (#7659221) Journal
    Just to clarify, I don't think it is elitist in the slightest, but some people seem to have the attitude that if you can't do X and Y without a hitch, you're not worthy of GNU/Linux.

    That's just a stupid way to think IMO.
  • by byolinux ( 535260 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @10:26AM (#7659272) Journal
    I don't think we're talking about stupid people, but people need to learn somehow. For example, $JoeAverageWindowsUser should be able to use GNU/Linux to a fair degree of competency in a short period of time, including installing it.

    If he can do this on a Macintosh, why shouldn't he be able to do this on a GNU/Linux system?
  • by wuliao ( 75540 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @10:38AM (#7659359)
    Re-read your instructions from the perspective of an ordinary user.

    1. Why do I have to hit Alt-F2? Why not a Menu option?
    2. The fact that you don't know if it's Ctrl-Alt-F2 or Alt-F2 or if it changes shows a big usability problem right there.
    3. Again, typing knx-hdinstall seems completely non-obvious. I'm sure I'd quickly figure it out by reading some docs or something, but why do I need to read some docs or google to figure that out?

    Note: I've never used Knoppix, so maybe there are menu options, but those instructions aren't that easy, IMO.
  • by doodleboy ( 263186 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @11:45AM (#7659786)
    Anyway, to make a long story short, it's outdated support like this that'll never get Debian to be accepted by my coworkers, and I can't say I blame them. I love the stability and easy of maintenance once it's installed, but putting it on a newer machine is sure a pain in the ass. I'll be stuck with Red Hat (Enterprise Linux) from now on I guess for our servers since Debian provided such a poor showing on a workstation setup.
    There's a lot of new interest in debian because there's no corporation that will try to monitize its relationship with its users if it becomes more popular. The installer is a problem, but there's a lot of work being done - there's progeny's anaconda port, there's the new installer in sarge, etc. If this happens in a reasonable timeframe I would not be surprised if it made huge inroads in the enterprise space. Easy easy updates and no money to pay, ever, is a powerful combination.

    But if you can't wait for debian to ship a modern installer and don't want to fork over $$$ for Redhat Enterprise Linux 3 you can always try White Box Linux (http://www.beau.org/~jmorris/linux/whitebox/), a free version of rhel3. It's at rc2 now and production release is probably only a month or two away. I notice the Dag apt repository (http://dag.wieers.com/home-made/apt/) has rhel3 rpms, so it should be possible to stay up to date with apt.
  • by byolinux ( 535260 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @11:50AM (#7659816) Journal
    1. Agreed. There should be a 'Install' icon, with a little computer icon, a la InstallShield on Windows.
    2. I've not used it for a while, which is why I forget which it was.
    3. See Point 1.

    Like I said though, Knoppix is pretty simple. A readme file on the desktop could handle this for now, at least.
  • by MSG ( 12810 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @11:58AM (#7659865)
    Installation time, not counting file downloads which don't require my intervention anyways, is on the order of 20 minutes or less

    You won't be disappointed by anaconda. My install times are generally < 5 minutes when I do a network based install.

    but many are assuming a GUI interface is preferred.

    This "assumption" is only true if 1) you install X, which you don't have to 2) you're installing locally, using CD's. If you're setting up servers, you're probably going to use kickstart to do a network based install. X is one of the most common interfaces to Unix systems. It's ridiculous to pretend that an installer that doesn't configure X is ready for mass consumption. Ready for use by network system admins, sure. That's about as far as it'd get...

    And it's cross platform too!

    So's anaconda.

    There are advantages with this, but there are always disadvantages to a homogeneous environment.

    Uh... generally when people talk about the disadvantages to a homogenous environment, they're talking about security issues that come up when all of the members of the environment have the same vulnerabilities. Can you name one disadvantage to a complete, easy to use installer that's consistant across hardware platforms and distributions? Nothing comes to my mind....
  • by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @12:31PM (#7660136) Journal
    Because there's a lot of untapped value there. When Debian is still using ghostscript 6, and thousands of other obselete packages, you have to sacrifice all the advances made in the last several years if you want to run Debian.

    Testing/Sid isn't an option for production, since the Debian people won't commit to providing security fixes in any timely manner for those versions.

    I think Red Hat used to have it right. A distro should be updated in a major way about once every year-18 months. Ideally you'd want to support the current version, and the immediate previous major version.

    It worked great, I don't know why RH had to fuck it up.
  • by gregmac ( 629064 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @12:47PM (#7660244) Homepage
    I think it's no exaggeration to say that someone who already installed Windows can safely install e.g. a Mandrake.

    I think that the Mandrake and Redhat (8, 9) installs (to get up to a working system) are better than Windows at this point. As long as you have relatively common and supported hardware, it sets everything up for you. I used to think that it was dumb of all the distros to include so many other utilities and applications, but I've changed my views on that now.

    Once you install Windows itself, you have to run windowsupdate somewhere between 3 and 8 times (rebooting each time) to get it to the point it won't get infected with a virus in the next few minutes (and always do this behind a firewall). Then you have to go download all the things that you need for day-to-day tasks: winzip, pdf reader.. install usually an office suite, mozilla/firebird/thunderbird (well, at least I do.. but I won't go into a rant about how lacking in features IE/OE are). It takes at least two hours to install a Windows system, and most of the time is spent waiting. (And not just hands-off waiting time, either... Windowsupdate .. wait to download.. click install.. wait to install.. click to reboot .. wait to reboot.. repeat)

    Taking redhat as an example.. All the interaction is at the start, selecting paritions (formatted later), selecting what to install, etc. Then you wait for it to install, though you do have to change the CD's once or twice (unless you do a net-install, which is handy). Once it boots up, run up2date -u, probably reboot for the new kernel, and thats it. Everything is up to date and ready to go.

  • by adrianbaugh ( 696007 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @02:34PM (#7661107) Homepage Journal
    As a recent convert I must say I agree with you (having used Red Hat-based distributions for years, with occasional forays into gentoo-land). Since installing debian (via a knoppix CD) I've been almost disturbed at how well it works, especially with regard to downgrading stuff. Recent RPM distributions seem to do okay, with the help of urpmi or whatever, but tend to be slow and sometimes leave unnecessary files hanging around. Debian just does it better. (IME, certainly.)
    Also, everyone mentions apt as a reason for debian's power, but make-kpkg is also incredibly powerful. Having a tool that, given a kernel tarball and a .config file, can quickly and easily generate packages that fit in with the rest of the system's package management, is incredibly useful and not something that any other distribution does particularly well (even gentoo, although at least new kernel ebuilds seem to appear fairly promptly).
  • by tacocat ( 527354 ) <tallison1@@@twmi...rr...com> on Monday December 08, 2003 @06:31PM (#7663192)

    Most Windows users never install Windows.

    They purchase their computer with the software pre-installed. If anything goes wrong with the system, they have to find someone else who can install it for them. That's only required if they forgot their ghost CD.

    If Linux came shipped on the computers from Dell, Compaq, et al, then I think a lot of people would start thinking that Linux was easier to install then Windows. I'm pretty sure that something like Libranet today might be considered a ghost CD equivelant.

  • Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday December 08, 2003 @06:47PM (#7663333)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.

Working...