How to Install Debian on Mac mini 527
Posted
by
CmdrTaco
from the because-you-can dept.
from the because-you-can dept.
wikinerd writes "After the hype about Mac mini, a Linux consultant wrote a detailed guide on how to install Debian on Mac mini. The whole procedure takes about an hour, but you will need to erase the hard disk and learn to live without the AirPort Extreme, since it's unsupported. The guide also explains how you can dual-boot with Mac OS X and Debian and gives you ideas on how to set up your partitions."
Yes, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Yes, but... (Score:2, Insightful)
Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Why not? (Score:2, Insightful)
I wouldn't mind ditching my towercase for a Mac Mini, if I knew that all the software I run would work on it.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, could someone explain to me why similar remarks about Windows aren't modded up on stories about x86 hardware? What about all the other proprietary UNIX-like operating systems in addition to OS X. Why doesn't every Linux story have a modded up comment about HP-UX, Solaris, Irix and others asking "why use Linux?". What's so special about OS X? Sure, it's a nice OS but in no way is it equal or better than Linux in every possible aspect and for everyone.
Linux has many things going for it that OS X does not. And even if it didn't, some people would use it just for the freedom [gnu.org]. I personally have an iBook running Ubuntu and my sister is dual booting Fedora & OS X. I also have a friend using debian exclusively on his iBook for many years.
Re:Why? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
How is that absurd? It's no worse than buying a PC to run Windows.
"Why not just buy a Shuttle XPC instead?"
Because for the same price as the Mac, you'll get a shuttle PC without a motherboard, CPU, memory, disk, or drives. An actual working Shuttle PC, built, to similar specifications will be about $950
"By not using OS X, you negate the main factor behind buying a Mac in the first place"
Indeed. Unless your reasons for buying were the price, the size, or the neat design.
and in so doing significantly reduce its value when compared with equivilently priced PC hardware."
What equivalently-priced PC hardware? For that price, in a shop, you'll get a beige box PC filled with the cheapest components they could find. Try selling that in 2 years, and compare it to the price of a secondhand Mac Mini then
Re:Why? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
This baffles me. Are we talking about the same thing? I'm talking about Linux. I don't know what "GNU/Linux" is. Is it something different?
a good example of the GNOME desktop integration
But the pieces only work with each other, not with other applications. There's no interoperability between, say, the piece of Evolution that stores your address book and your chat program.
I like Psi which is a great Jabber client
That's fine and all, but it's ki
Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
That sounds more like an excuse than a feature. Why only to a point? Why is the interoperability incomplete, and why is it only available to other programs in the "suite?" It's obviously possible to do interoperability the right way. Why doesn't Linux have good interoperability?
for other operating systems there *are no different desktops and accompanying software suites*
I don't understand. Why would you want to use a different user interface if
How confused can you possibly get? (Score:2, Informative)
X11 is a windowing server, nothing more. What Apple is probably talking about is the fact that a lot of graphical *nix apps use X11 library routines to facilitate their graphical interface, and Aqua does not support these calls. Although the presence of X11 on OSX does make porting apps ov
Re:How confused can you possibly get? (Score:2)
Re:How confused can you possibly get? (Score:4, Informative)
Nobody, not even Apple, has said this.
"Easy to port X11 applications
With the complete suite of the standard X11 display server software, client libraries and developer toolkits, X11 for Mac OS X makes it even simpler to port Linux and Unix applications to the Mac." -- Apple's X11 Page [apple.com]
What you might not realize is that there are already a significant number of X11 apps that have already been ported. This is what the OP was basing his statements on.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe you just don't get on with the Mac UI. Such people do exist. I understand that if you want focus-follows-mouse in Mac OS X, you either get a compromise where it only works on X apps, or you have to spend $40 on third party virtual desktop software.
Mac Mini is definitely a cuter form factor than anything else out there right now.
I'm tempted to get a Mini just in order to try out Mac OS X, but I'm dubious enough about Mac OS that having the option to replace it with Linux if I don't like it is a selling point for the hardware.
You can change the window manager.. (Score:2)
Re:Why? (Score:3, Interesting)
I want to get a Mini and start using OS X as my main (but not only) OS. After living with a 17" Powerbook for a few months, I'm ready to switch - well, switch back anyway, until Win2K I was a Mac guy.
But if I end up liking it as much as I expect I will, I'll want a dual G5 at some point. Then what would become of the Mini?
Problem now solved: the Mini would become a Linux development
Re:Why? (Score:2)
No you don't. Try this one [sourceforge.net]. It works great for me.
Re:Why? (Score:2)
He bought about five of them over the next year and gave me one he got for a "2 for $175" deal. It's by far the most popular computer in our house among family and friends that want to che
Re:Why? (Score:2, Redundant)
Then don't buy a Mac. Go to PC World, get a beige box put Linux on that where it belongs.
But I repeat: "Mac Mini is definitely a cuter form factor than anything else out there right now."
We have the opportuntity to run the OS we want, on a box that's not ugly. Is that so hard to understand?
Re:Why? (Score:2)
Well, one reason is some programs won't run with Apple's X11. For example, Konqueror gets this error:
For those without a Mac, Xnest also doesn't provide the XInputExtension extension, so you can play around with that, and find out what works and what doesn't. (In fact, the erro
Article Text (just incase of slashdotting) (Score:2, Informative)
Introduction
Apple's Mac Mini is something which a lot of Linux users have been waiting for: An inexpensive, readily available PowerPC system in a small, quiet and attractive chassis.
Debian is very popular on Intel i386 compatible systems. Due to the open source nature of the Linux kernel and the Debian operating system, it is possible to build the same software to run on the PowerPC processor found inside the Mac Mini. It's simple to swap your big, noisy old PC for the slim, svelte Mac Mini, and this pa
Re:Article Text (just incase of slashdotting) (Score:3, Funny)
Aha! Here we have the TRUE purpose of the article: a geek bragging about having a girlfriend. And at a time of the year when most geeks weep silently into the pillow of their twin bed every night, fervently wishing they were Cloud in Final Fantasy IIV.
Re:Article Text (just incase of slashdotting) (Score:3, Interesting)
OK (Score:5, Funny)
And iMovie, and iDVD and iTunes and Photoshop and Poser and Bryce and Vue D'Esprit and... wait... why do I want to do this again?
Re:OK (Score:4, Informative)
Re:OK (Score:2)
You don't care about any of those apps? Or you care about apps that haven't been ported to MacOS? Linux always gets all the best open source software first.
WHy would you want to? (Score:2, Insightful)
So why would you use the same OS, on what is essentially older, and far less impressive hardware, when for the same price you get the same OS, and FAR better hardware?
Please fill me in.
Re:WHy would you want to? (Score:2)
Macs are for ricers
Re:WHy would you want to? (Score:2)
Re:Why would you want to? (Score:2, Insightful)
We could debate the interest of using Debian over Mac OS X, but if your really need Debian on a small computer, why not the mac mini ?
Re:WHy would you want to? (Score:4, Insightful)
You *can* find faster and (not much) cheaper PCs, but it will be large, ugly, and loud.
Apparently (Score:5, Funny)
Remember, a Mac Mini = a Mac, period. (Score:4, Informative)
Debian and OSX (Score:5, Informative)
I have OSX. I have apt. I just installed fink, and got apt with it. I installed Apple's X11 and I run GNOME in full-screen mode. I like the way it runs with Aqua. The desktop is the same in both. I use LyX a lot, but don't like the Aqua QT version so I use the X11 version with GNOME it works better, but when I click "View DVI" it switches back to Aqua and opens TeXShop because I like that program.
I love that kind of interoperability. I get the best of both worlds. I can apt-get install stuff, and still get nice OSX software running alongside it.
If I did want debian on my powerbook I would install Ubuntu. I has a great install process, has a clean desktop even my parents could use, and runs well. But I wouldn't give up my Airport Extreme card for it.
Why - Because OS X and BSD are not Linux (Score:5, Insightful)
1) I like Linux, and I like to switch it up sometimes - maybe on Tuesdays I dont feel like running OS X
2) When I'm working in an all Linux environment, it's often more convenient to have a full Linux OS to test on, work with, and interface with the rest of the system. YES, OS X has BSD under there, but that's not Linux, as any BSD fan will be quick to point out, and there _is_ a difference between being able to fun some linux apps on your OS, and actually having Linux on your machine.
-Jay
It Just Like... (Score:2, Insightful)
*Shakes head, walks away*
Yellow Dog (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Yellow Dog (Score:2)
I've been considering tinkering with linux on my iBook, but not until they get the whole wireless thing down.
why there's no Airport Extreme Linux driver (Score:2, Informative)
Re:why there's no Airport Extreme Linux driver (Score:2)
Nick
Re:why there's no Airport Extreme Linux driver (Score:3, Informative)
WEP encryption [tapr.org]
In addition if you google for "Broadcom Military" you will find quite a few references to their relationship.
Use Ubuntu (Debian) (Score:5, Interesting)
Why run Linux on a Mac? I find that Linux has less to distract me from work. I like to boot OS X to edit video, etc., but for writing (OpenOffice.org) and programming (Eclipse for Java, Python, and C++) there is less fluff on Linux to distract me from my work.
Re:Use Ubuntu (Debian) (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Use Ubuntu (Debian) (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, by running Linux on the mac mini, you get to completely avoid the unnecessary distractions of audio, bluetooth, wireless networking, or modems. Plus the screen driver's flickering will keep you from being distracted by smooth, high-quality graphics, and the annoying, error-prone install procedure will prevent you from getting distracted by having software that works, or being distracted by a GUI that doesn't suck.
Yeah, bo
Re:Use Ubuntu (Debian) (Score:3, Interesting)
Well that's funny. I feel exactly the opposite about the whole thing. When I want to get work done, I fire up the Mac. Things just work right. It stays out of my way while I complete my work.
When I want to experiment, play and tinker endlessly with the system (it seems most often to get it working the way it already should, or find another project that works better) I fire up the Linux box. When I want to spend time learning how to get something working or the elements of a project I fire up the Linux box.
You know it... (Score:5, Funny)
- A set of Debian CDs: 5,-
- "Making her new Mac look like her old PC": Priceless!
Maybe this should be called... (Score:2, Insightful)
WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)
Perhaps questions about why someone would want to install software on a computer, is an attempt to start up one of those stupid jokes. 1) In Soviet Russia, Mac installs Debian on YOU! 2) Imagine a Beowulf cluster of Mini Macs. 3) ??? 4) Profit!
But seriously, since when did asking why (as opposed to how) someone would do something unusua
Firewire problem? (Score:4, Informative)
A few odd problems I've discovered:
* If I plug the firewire port into the firewire port on my PC, it seems to interfere with the PC's power supply. It's like holding down the "reset" button on the PC. This makes it impossible to use "firewire target disk mode" on the Mac Mini.
However, I'll wager that if he used a 4 pin Firewire cable and it would have worked fine. The 6 pin cable supplys power as well as data, and both the PC and the mini are supplying power. It's probably a ground loop.
And.. (Score:2)
Deb on G5? (Score:2)
Does anyone know if you can safely install Debian on a G5 yet? The G5's require the operating system to run the fans to keep it from melting itself, and I hadn't heard of any distro other than Yellow Dog claiming to provide that (also, no information about this that I could find on debian.org).
--realinvalidname
Re:Deb on G5? (Score:3, Insightful)
Cheap portability check (Score:5, Interesting)
I installed dual-boot Debian testing the day I got the mini, however. (debian-ppc lost my success report mail from weeks ago, so I can't cite precedence over this guy.)
Why install Linux on an OS X dongle?
Because it's probably the cheapest new non-x86 machine you can buy. I care about the portability of my software to other architectures, and I can check them on the mini. Also, it's big-endian.
At some point I'm going to buy a nice Athlon 64 box and run it in pure AMD64 mode. That will give me a sizeof(void *) != sizeof(int) box, and mostly a non-i386 machine. (It's still little-endian, though.) Between the mini and the Athlon 64, I figure I've covered most of the common portability problems, without spending too much money on hardware I can't use for something else like OS X or Halflife 2.
Re:Cheap portability check (Score:3, Interesting)
Just curious, but why don't you replace it? 40GB drives run about $50-60 or so now, and most of the ones on currently the market only have 1 platter and run pretty cool and quiet.
Apple is not quite there yet (Score:3, Informative)
I bought a 17" Powerbook. While I'm fairly happy with it, they are a bit hacker-unfriendly in some respects.
The UJ-825 "SuperDrive" in mine is RPC-2 with a vengeance, for example. It won't even read the raw data from an out-of-region DVD, making even VNC useless, and it doesn't look like any firmware hacks will be forthcoming.
Also, because Broadcom will not release specs on the Airport Extreme, no "monitor mode" is available, so passive wardriving is impossible without using a 3rd-party wireless card.
Maybe someone smarter than me will eventually reverse engineer and fix these problems, but it's not looking too good so far. IMO, Apple needs to get back to it's hacker-friendly roots. [metromac.org]
Re:but why? (Score:3)
I have an M10000 Mini-itx mobo in my car, and I know the costs. Your message smacks of 'it's a mac, so it's obviously much more expensive'.
We live in a strange time, with cheap Macs (mini) and iPods (shuffles). We're like one wax seal away from the apocalypse.
Re:but why? (Score:2, Funny)
Of course, the equivalent PC is only $200 at Walmart. And it includes the keyboard and mouse at that price (Mac Mini doesn't).
Re:but why? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:but why? (Score:3)
I've been debating about upgrading my PC since its gotten a bit out of date. In a college dorm room you don't have a lot of space, so I've been looking at mini-ITX cases and all, but the Mac-mini looks like a very good alternative. Its small, fanless (so I can leave it on and work with a silent keyboard without bothering my room-mate too badly), and the price and OS-X are both additional plusses.
Re:Why ? (Score:2)
In terms of user-friendliness, OSX wins hands down, but it is for performance and customizability that ppl will turn to Linux on a mac.
Re:Why ? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Why ? (Score:2, Interesting)
why? because some people prefer linux :)
although OSX is 'unix' under the hood, I still cant stand the 'bubbly' backwards interface. Another great reason is to play around with the source code on a different platform. Although I would never buy an apple product, if someone gave me a mac, I would wipe the OS immediately and install linux.
Me? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Me? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you missed the question slightly. If what you want is Open Source/Debian, then you pick the software first, and the hardware second. You can get a lot of hardware cheaper than a mini and just as good or better.
The decision to get a mini generally involves a decision that the extra cost brings wit
Re:Me? (Score:2)
Do you have research to prove it?
What percentage of closed-source software is crap? Remember to include all that shovelware on those rotating stands in Walmart, and the entire contents of every shareware library.
Re:Me? (Score:2)
Crap? Linux on servers rocks and it's getting better every day on desktops - which is my whole point, i'd rather have a crappy OSS desktop than a propietary one.
What directions is mac os x taking? Are the ones you want, or the ones you're told to like? Some people don't like mac os x and they can't modify the propietary libraries.
What will hapen if apple has to clo
Re:Me? (Score:3, Interesting)
you and four other people.
most of us will use the best tool for the job. that is why i use os x AND darwinports. i get the best of both worlds. until iphoto, itunes, and imovie have comprable equivalents on linux then it's a moot point. for me, i need java, perl, mysql, php, and python. hmmm...already there. X11. there. the only real reason i'd need to run lunux is if i was doing kernel development or something x86 specific. and i do
Re:No offense (Score:3)
Re:Why ? (Score:2, Flamebait)
No kidding. We're finally able to buy cheap functional BSD or BSDesque machines and people want to install Linux on top of that? Why? Not enough security problems? A fixation to put things in the wrong place ? An aversion to dp->d_type ?
Re:Why ? (Score:2)
Segments are for worms.
Re:Why ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why ? (Score:3, Informative)
The latest version of OS X runs great on my Powermac 7600 (early 1996), thanks to a G3 upgrade and XPostFacto [macsales.com]. As long as you have a decent amount of memory, you'll have few problems. 512mb of ram seems to be the "sweet spot"
Re:Why ? (Score:3, Insightful)
i've been thinking of picking one up totally based on the hardware for the price. i want a small quiet machine that isn't made of cheap looking plastic. i don't really want an intel solution (cappuccinopc) or one that is too pricey (hush).
if i could be sure that i can basically have my cake (minimac) and eat it to (linux) i'm a happy camper and i'm sure steve jobs won't mind me reformatting that d
Re:Why ? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm tempted to mod the parent as both overrated a troll, but I'll respond instead. And this is coming from someone who is typing on a dual G5 with two other Macs in view.
The general answer is that it could be the user simply *likes* Linux or Debian (for a host of reasons that really don't need explanation to most Slashdotters).
It could also be that the user is philosophically committed to Open Source software, or doesn't have the means or inclination to commit to an OS that doesn't come bundles with something as basic as a decent FTP client.
It could be the user has older Mac hardware that feels sluggish with OS X. Apple has done good work optimizing OS X since its first release, but it's still pretty heavy.
It could be that the user is building a server and has no need for the desktop goodness of OS X.
It could be that the user was given or acquired a Mac box cheaply, but is committed to Linux.
It could be that the user has acquired a Mac without an operating system, and finds the investment in Panther unaffordable.
In the case of the Mac Mini, it could be the user has need of Linux in a small form factor.
It could be that the user has a Linux application need and wishes to take advantage of the PPC platform's modest power and cooling requirements.
It could be that the user is committed to Linux, but appreciates Apple's design ethic.
Really, one could go on and on, but here are a few answers to your question. I suspect, however, your comment was rhetorical.
It's "Mac," not "MAC," by the way. And there's no dash in OS X.
Re:Why ? (Score:3, Insightful)
I wouldn't presume to say why Linux is "better" than OS X. To begin with, I prefer OS X, on balance, to anything else. I've invested far more cash than I should probably admit in the Mac platform. To me, it's worth it.
Being "committed" to a platform can mean a number of things, w
Re:Why ? (Score:5, Informative)
Yellow Dog / BronzeG3 (Score:2)
OSX, wont even let me boot for the installer.. So Im stuck with OS9... Somewhat outdated, but it does fly...
Re:Yellow Dog / BronzeG3 (Score:3, Informative)
For OS X (which unfortunately is out of my league, DUE to the 604e, unless I want to run 10.1) I suggest looking at XPostFacto, which should take care of your installation issues. http://www.opendarwin.org/pro
IBM behind on G5s? (Score:3, Interesting)
XFS, Reiser, ext2, etc, etc... (Score:3, Interesting)
Apparently you either haven't heard the horror stories about UFS, or you're one of The Few The Proud The Etc. who've had good experience with it.
Apt is handy. And a hell of a lot easier to use than software update, ime- with debian, any gui app you have is updated through apt. No going
Re:Slackware? (Score:2)
This is why I run MSDOS! No bloat and blindingly fast! And by the way, who needs anti-aliased font!?!?!?! That just consumes extremely valuable CPU and memory resources!!!!!
Re:Slackware? (Score:2)
Re:Slackware? (Score:3, Informative)
Slackware, officially, only supports x86 processors.
The Mac dosen't use an x86 processor.
Debian, on the other hand, does produce a PowerPC Linux distro.
Re:Debian on PPC (Score:2)
Re:Debian on PPC (Score:2, Informative)
For example, I like how Debian has mirrors all over the world. Source Forge has mirrors here and there, but most countries have strict limits on the speed of international connections, even with a neighboring country. (Where I currently live, my home Internet connection is 16k/sec for international, 96k/sec for national, 200k/sec for movies stored at my ISP's tera-byte drives^W^W^W^W^W.)
And finally, well, I'm lazy and I find Linux more sim
Re:Debian on PPC (Score:2)
For the most part (and the exceptions are rare), since the package names are the same, you can apt-get install (some-debian-package), and get a nice PowerPC-native Darwin-built binary.
What freedom is lacking ? (Score:2)
Re:keep in mind (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1274
Re:No 802.11g !!! (Score:2)
Re:Great (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Debian boot but no OS9 boot? (Score:2)
Re:Debian boot but no OS9 boot? (Score:2)
Making Debian work on every new system requires effort on the part of Debian developers, with whom Apple has no association. This is completely free for Apple.
So, what's your problem?
Re:What! No Airport Extreme! (Score:4, Interesting)
Wireless support in linux distros is actually quite good these days.
I'm on an older pismo powerbook that dual boots osx and ydl. I plugged in a dlink 802.11b card and osx didn't see it at all. I ended up paying for a $40 aerocard driver. (There is an opensource driver but it doesn't support wep or wpa for 90% of the cards). Linux did see it and prompted me for the wep key etc.
Then a year later I got an airport card from work. I plugged it in, and removed the dlink card. OSX made me reconfigure the card, including plugging in my wep key again. Linux asked me if I wanted to migrate my wireless settings over to the new airport. It required 0 setup and "just worked".
From your list of gripes ... (Score:5, Informative)
No SSH server
Open up the System Preferences app. On the "Internet & Network" row, click the "Sharing" icon. Look down the Services list for "Remote Login" and enable it. Done !
Autoupdate keeps on telling me I need 40mb of updates for an iPod and I don't own one.
Highlight the update when it appears in the list, then goto the Update menu option and choose "ignore update".
Image and font rendering isn't as good as pango/xorg
You have sky high standards mate. Image & font rendering are stunning on Mac OS X, and from the few pango'd screenshots I can find I can't see any difference
Expose is nice but more of a gimick than a useful feature
Huh? You're joking. Try using Mac OS X for some real work and get your screen a bit busy. Multiple terminal app windows, a brower or two, mail, etc and you'll soon discover just how useful it is. Especially if you map the Hot Corners of the screen to the different functions. Parking my mouse pointer in my Top Left corner exposes all app windows in the same group. Top Right exposes everything. Bottom Right exposes the Desktop, and Bottom Left turns on the screen saver.
I'll give you the point about the DVD Region locking. Discovered that pain in the ass when I went to the USA recently and grabbed a DVD in the airport to keep me amused on the flight back. Only allows you to switch Regions 4 times before you're stuck. Boo hiss
Don't you think you're being just a touch nit picky with the rest though?
Re:Why replace Mac OS X? (Score:5, Informative)
Indeed. Maybe back when Macs were running Mac OS 9, or even OS X 10.0 and 10.1, there might have been an advantage to Linux... but since Jaguar came out I've been hard-pressed to come up with a reason to run FreeBSD, let alone BSD's adopted cousin Linux. People talk about running Linux on a Mac laptop and I look at them like they've grown an extra head... Apple's laptops are uninspiring if you don't get to run Apple's software on them.
If in a few years Ocelot requires more beef than the Mini can provide (unlikely, my daughter's running Panther on a 1999 iMac and it's actually faster than with Jaguar), you'd do way better with Darwin than Linux.
I can maybe see an advantage to the Mini hardware for a little while, but as soon as someone comes out with a nice slab case for your Mini-ITX boards, maybe 8" by 10" but only an inch thick, why spend more for a less expandible box?
Re:Cool, man (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey, man, so when can I install Windows 3.1 on my new Sony Vaio that came with XP? Sorta the same deal, isn't it?
Wash your mouth out, sunshine! Round here, Linux is the ultimate OS. Macs are for girls, Windows is for losers. The only reason Linux isn't being used by 101% of the planet is marketing.
Okay, I'm being ironic, but the prevailing attitude on /. is centered in the ideology of the kernel. The essence of a consistent and usable GUI is usually dismissed as eye candy.