Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Debian

Debian Retail on CNN 119

Posted by CmdrTaco from the ain't-that-nifty dept.
Chuck Milam writes "CNN is reporting that Debian will soon be available via retail outlets. According to the article: 'The companies say they will donate all profits from the sale of the retail GNU/Linux package to Software in the Public Interest, a nonprofit organization for open source projects.' " I've seen the boxes. They're super sweet. Saw them shipping with a Myth 2 CD.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Debian Retail on CNN More

Debian Retail on CNN

Comments Filter:

  • So, who's gonna buy this? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Debian users value free software. Are they gonna run right out and buy this?

    And what about the Debian newbies? The box might look pretty, but once they get to Debian's install, they'll go screaming back to mommy.

    Now, I'm all for Debian's success. The Debian developers I've meet are the most dedicated and knowledgable. Debian is one of the best Linux distributions, but it's not for the store-browsing newbie. To put it metaphysically: "one must reach Debian. Debian will not reach you."

    This to me is a case of a few greedy companies trying to cash in on the name (if not the profits) of the coolest Linux distribution.

  • Re:great for Debian, bad for newbies (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    My personal experience with Debian has been almost entirely positive since I switched from Red Hat (I'd ordered both and wanted to give each a try, so I only spent a brief time with RH). At this stage, I *much* prefer Debian's installation and configuration to any other OS I've used, with the exception that dselect itself is painful to use. The interface pretty much sucks. Given a dselect with a clearer, easier to understand UI, I'd have no reservations about reccomending it for relative newbies.
  • Good for Debian! I will certainly check it out; however unless they have significantly improved the installation procedure since I reviewed Debian for CPUReview [cpureview.com] newbies are likely to have problems installing it. Don't get me wrong, I liked dpkg; but the installation would have been very confusing to a prospective Linux user.
  • Boy, that's hard to quantify, especially in a (reasonably short) post.

    Let me try it this way. I come from an electronics background. I've been a hobbyist/technician since about the time the first IBM PC came out. When I first started playing with computers, it was the hardware I was most interested in, so I learned about that before really delving into the software aspect. The way I approach things is from the bottom up; if I learn how the hardware works, then I can always figure out at least what the software should be doing, and usually why it does or doesn't as well. It seems the most obvious way of doing things to me, but many people find it strange.

    There were things about computers (I would have to really sit down and think for a while to come up with concrete examples, but the general concept is what's important) that just stymied people I knew, but made perfect sense to me; I just expected them to work that way. Someone will look at something and say "Why does it do that", and I find it unusual that they think it should do anything different. Most people have chalked it up to the fact that my "mind just works that way". As an aside, my family can tell you some hilarious stories about times I missed things totally obvious to everyone else for the same reason; it has been said that if you want to find the hardest way to do something, let me do it.

    Whatever these differences in thinking actually are, it seems that perhaps they're the culprit here. If so, it's definitely something that will need to be kept in mind as Debian moves forward (maybe this is a good place for 'value add' for resellers, esp. if the Debian distribution proper doesn't address it).

  • Generally, people who state that Debian is difficult to install have never installed Debian themselves. It is not more difficult than any other distrobution, it is just a bit in it's approach.

    I've always kind of assumed this as well, but I hear this so much that I'm thinking that there must be some fire to go with all the smoke. I asked for elaboration in a thread above, and there are already a couple of good responses.

    I'm starting to think there is more to the 'technical/non-technical personality' issue than I've generally accepted, and this explains the differences in perceptions of Debian's installation process.

  • Not to flame you, but when you hear people complaining about Debian's install and configuration listen to them. Their confusion should be telling you something; ie the simple things are unnecessarily obscure in Debian and thus appear complex and difficult.

    I do listen; the problem is, that while people seem happy to say that it was hard, they seem relatively reticent when it comes to pointing out specifics. This is not necessarily their problem; if you flat out don't understand something, it can be difficult to explain to someone what it is you don't understand.

    As far as the simple things being unnecessarily complex and obscure, this seems to be the general consensus. I personally don't find it true, though; thus my request for elaboration (and I think your comments are definitely helpful).

    So far, I haven't had any problems recommending Debian to people, but most of the people I deal with are familiar with the innards of their computers, and many have previous Unix experience. I'm thinking this makes a bigger difference than I generally give it credit for. I'm also really beginning to believe that Debian is made by people with a certain personality type, and is optimized for that way of thinking. I think this would go a long way toward explaining why some people think Debian installs are cake, while others find it impossible (note that if this is the case, it should probably be changed as soon as is practical).

  • Re:great for Debian, bad for newbies (Score:4)

    by Analog ( 564 ) on Friday October 15, 1999 @06:09AM (#1611238)
    First off, a disclaimer. This is not a flame, and I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm serious here.

    I hear this again and again about Debian's lack of ease of installation and configuration, but I just don't see it. I don't mean as compared to Red Hat or Suse, etc. (they might very well be much easier), I mean just in absolute terms. Now admittedly, I like getting into the innards of things more than the average Joe (and this may be the entire explanation), but I've never found installing Debian hard. I've installed more Win95 machines than I can count, and I'll take a Debian installation over that any day of the week. I've also had someone that had terrible problems installing Red Hat (one of the 5.* versions) find happiness after I recommended he try Debian. This may have been because I was able to give more focused help after the switch, though.

    Keeping in mind that my viewpoint is most probably warped (I like tinkering with things, and I know more about PC hardware than anyone I know) I would find it helpful if you could point out some problems with it. Not as compared to other distros, but along the lines of things that someone with no previous Linux experience (but with experience installing other OS's) would look at and go "huh?". If the person who posted the first reply to your comment could offer some points as well, that would be great.

    Again, I have no illusions that what you say isn't true. But as I am obviously reasonably ignorant of or unaffected by the problems, and I fairly regularly get asked to recommend a distro by people trying Linux for the first time, I'm quite interested in hearing an elaboration of your viewpoint. Thanks.

  • Newbies who walk into Best Buy and blindly pick up a software package without doing any research on the subject before hand are not only newbies, they are fools. I would not advocate dumbing something down for the sake of fools who do not do their homework. But newbies (fool and non-fool alike) need to start somewhere, and this is a concept that Red Hat has taken to heart to a degree greater than debian has. But that has come at a cost. I, as a seasoned Linux user, have found debian to be a bit more difficult to install than, say, recent versions of red hat, but debian has given me fewer headaches in the long run.
  • I don't think I missed your point. I agree with what you say. All I'm saying is that the fool variety of newbie will always exist. Given that, the folks who create distributions have to allocate resources toward various aspects of their distro, one aspect of which is the install. Given the decentralized development model of linux distributions, there is no way to prevent the problem of releasing an arguably shitty installation routine which may alienate new users. This is indeed a problem, but the solution to this would be centralizing the development model.

    But you are right about people getting a bad first impression, and not wanting to have anything to do with it for a long time. But I think this is a property of how Linux distros are made, and there is no good way to deal with that problem, complaining included. I, for one, have no right to bitch about Debian's (or anybody else's) install process, because I haven't made any effort to improve it. (not that I think you were bitching ;)

    back to diffEQ. Ack.
  • Maybe. But you're missing my point. There are TONS of fools out there buying software at BestBuy/CompUSA/Circuit City/etc. If the fools walk out with Debian, go home, and hate it because it's harder to install than say Red Hat, we will never see that user touching Linux again. ..to me, THAT is a potential problem. I know people who tried the first version of MS Word, compared it to Word Perfect, and didn't even want to HEAR about MS-Word for another 5 years. NOw, I know you'd love to tell me how bloated and piss-poor MS-Word is, but you ahve to admit, it's better than trying to use Word Perfect.

  • You're missing my point partially. I'm trying to say that for someone that walks into Best Buy and says "wonder what the LInux thing is all about. " and walks home with Debian, it WILL be harder to install. You obviously know what you're doing, and that puts you in the same category as me: Debian User. However, my friend dennis for example was a first time insatller about 2 months ago. He installed Debian on one box, Red Hat on the other, and never used Debian again. It is NOT as easy.

  • great for Debian, bad for newbies (Score:4)

    by Suydam ( 881 ) on Friday October 15, 1999 @05:37AM (#1611243) Homepage
    This is great for Debian! They deserve all the recognition they can get.

    But can anyone but me see this as a potential problem? Right now, newbies who walk into Best Buy (for instance) can choose any Linux they want and it runs easily...Debian is, even though I love it dearly, much MUCH harder to get running to the level that a newbie expects.

    Without proper packaging and some warning, it could actually damage Linux's inroads into the mainstream if all of a sudden people are getting home and trying to install Debian...

    Don't think I'm trying ti diss Debian. I use it on about 3 machines right now. But just because I use it, doesn't mean everyone should...and retail purchases are going to consist largely of people just getting their feet wet with Linux. Seems risky to me.

  • Couple of things so the non-debian people know ;)

    Not everyone uses the syslinux boot floppy that redhat uses. Debian do their own boot floppies complete with dire warnings about fdisking your system ;)

    The redhat install system may be GPLed, but IMHO it kinda sucks.

    For the *most part* the Debian 2.1 installer is much nicer, the only problem is package management using dselect.

    Debian 2.2 is going to replace dselect however, so hopefully we should see a nice easy to install debian, even for first time debian installers :)

    Oh, and just so you know... Debian has a 2 disk FTP install. It can also install over a PPP connection, which is something that I dont believe Redhat can do...


    smash
  • On the release schedule with debian thing...

    Most debian users probably DO run out of unstable and do an "apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade" every day, but its not really necessary.

    Besides, once you get the system installed, you can always just do that later in one hit, or just decide to upgrade the packages you want.

    I really don't think the Debian developers are concerned with meeting any "release schedule".

    Debian 2.1 (slink) may be about the same age as redhat 5.1 or so, but it is pretty much bug free, and the security issues can be fixed with a simple apt-get dist-upgrade :P My potato box here has been totally upgraded from slink to potato without even needing a reboot...

    Debian 2.2 will be "released" when its good and ready, and in the meantime, people will desperately want the bleeding edge will just run from unstable anyway ;)

    smash
  • Debian rocks for getting a bare bones system and working your way up :)

    The way I currently install Debian (after about 10-12 installs of it) is this:

    Boot from cd/floppy disk
    Partition disks
    Install base system, configure base system, reboot

    Once you perform the first reboot, Debian has all of the "base" files you need to run.

    (having a network connection, here is where i configure apt to point to the nearest unstable mirror, and install the rest from unstable :)

    From there, do not install one of the preconfigured setups.

    Run dselect (argh, i know, i do network installs and use apt-get ;) and pick the things that you want to use.

    Do not concern yourself with packages you dont know about, if they are needed, Debian will install them :)

    So for a minimal system with X, you would for example pick WindowMaker, the X server to match your card, and any X apps/C compilers you are going to use.

    Debian will automatically select and install which packages are required to install what you want to use :)

    I recommend WindowMaker if you are running a p120 with 32 meg. Should run about the same speed as fvwm or so, and it looks MUCH MUCH nicer :)

    smash
  • I think that although many people have many opinions -- probably someone will say that "it's too ugly" or "dselect sucks!", there is one and only one problem: the entire lack of a package hierarchy. This problem is peculiar to Debian since no other distribution actually lets the user list every program which could potentially be installed on his or her system, but that's no excuse for not solving it :)
    The current system provides a few broad groupings of packages (net/, devel/, etc) with no strong policy [that I know of] about where packages go -- libraries can be found in every section (for example, libmagick4g is in graphics/) and no consistency in package organization. This leads to two problems:

    1) When setting up a system for the first time, the new user must examine each and every of the 4000 packages and determine which ones he/she wants to install. There's no way to know ahead of time what the next section of packages holds, and so you have to examine it. (in some cases, libs/ and devel/ might be eliminatable)

    2) There is no way to get a quick listing of all available software of type X, and no reliable way to do it (besides the needle-in-a-haystack approach). Because of this, installing software on an already-set-up system also requires a huge amount of work.

    Both problems are exacerbated by the fact that dselect refuses to merge the different priorities and overarching sections (there's a case to be made for non-free and non-us, but separating Base, Optional, and Extra from one another by default is indefensible), meaning that there are actually *multiple* occurences of each section! So I actually have to search three or four versions of web/ and x11/ to find Web browsers.
    More annoyingly, these are not just problems for newbies, but also (IMO) hinderances for experienced users -- good organization of information is just a good idea.

    I posted a message some time last summer on debian-devel about this but it was mostly ignored, so now I'm working on actually implementing a working system of tagging packages to put them into a logical hierarchy. (yes, another curses APT frontend) I just started, though, so I don't expect it to be able to do anything particularly exciting until after potato is released.

    Daniel

    PS - historically, the huge number of questions asked in the process of unpacking packages has been a problem. Either in potato or in potato+1 this will be solved in a surpassingly elegant way by debconf.
  • you can't possibly tell me E0.16 will be in potato

    It already is :)

    Commonness of packages

    I think you should be aware that (as opposed to RPMs), most Debian packages are distributed by Debian itself. This means that just because you don't see a package listed on Freshmeat or on the homepage doesn't mean you can assume that no package exists, or that the version reported is correct. And unless you need to have the version released last week, unstable is generally fine -- note I said generally, some *specific* maintainers have been slower about keeping up with releases. This is generally with big and complex pieces of software (eg, XFree) in which multiple patches and fixes have to be backed out or put back in inbetween upstream releases, and which require coordination between multiple developers. PHP3, Mysql, and Apache were significantly behind for a while last spring, I'm not sure what the status is now (I haven't tried using them recently)

    There are very few programs which I haven't been able to get as Debian packages; for those which I can't, I usually build a package myself. For most software (read: software which uses autoconf and automake) this takes about 5 minutes+time to compile. The only recent examples were squaroid, xarchon, and sawmill (which I'm too lazy to download :P ) -- of these, xarchon and sawmill are going into potato RSN. squaroid I don't know about, but I didn't find it to be that interesting a game, so.. *shrug*

    Daniel
  • Debian 2.2 is going to replace dselect

    No it's not. At least, I hope not; there's no good alternative yet (console-apt is not and may never be; I've looked at the code and that's all I'll say on the subject :/ )

    Debian has a 2 disk FULL install

    Only if you have a good way to get the base system (ie, a local NFS machine or a DOS partition). There was just a discussion on debian-devel about getting base via FTP -- it looks like it may go into potato.

    it can install via PPP

    But not [easily] on a network where you need dhcp. RedHat handles this nicely. Again, there are noises being made about fixing this in 2.2 but I don't know for sure what's going on. (now, if I can just get debian-boot-request to handle my subscription messages properly.. :) )
    Also, I'm not sure that ppp is in base2_1.tgz. Is it? I vaguely remember having to sneakernet the ppp deb last summer when I had cause to install it on a new system.

    There are lots of good things about Debian, but please get your facts straight :)

    Daniel
  • From the Debian Social Contract (emphasis mine):
    4. Our Priorities are Our Users and Free Software.
    We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free-software
    community. We will place their interests first in our priorities. We
    will support the needs of our users for operation in many different
    kinds of computing environment. We won't object to commercial software
    that is intended to run on Debian systems, and we'll allow others to
    create value-added distributions containing both Debian and commercial
    software, without any fee from us. To support these goals, we will
    provide an integrated system of high-quality, 100% free software, with
    no legal restrictions that would prevent these kinds of use.

    Everything that's officially in Debian is free software, and (with the exception of ssh, grr..) you can usefully run a Debian system without ever touching non-free software. But that doesn't stop people from packaging useful non-free software -- in fact, the Debian ftp archives contain some (in the non-free/ section) as a service to the users.

    Daniel

  • Dont get me wrong : I think Debian is the best distribution around. But the problems that they have been experiencing seems to offset some of the quality benefits that they provide.

    What are these problem?

    1. A formless decision making process which takes really long to make any decision. I feel that they really need a leader figure with the authority to arbitrate over any decision that is getting prolonged. This leader can be democratically elected or can be anyone who is accepted by the developers.

    Some of the consequences of this problem has been (a) A lag in the versions of the kernels and associated programs that they have released (b) An incapacity to set (or meet when set) internal deadlines (c) Raging flamewars on the developer lists which contribute little or nothing to free software. (d) An inablility to get rid of people who are more of a millstone than a help - for example, developers who dont respond to queries / bug reports about their package or do not update their packages from upstream. These packages could probably have better support if they were just orphaned or listed as unmaintained.

    2. Openness : Debian prides itself on being open, and indeed, it is more open than other distributions since almost all of their mailing lists are open to the public for scrutiny.

    This openness, however, is relative. There is atleast one private list which non-developers cant read. I question the necessity for existence of this list. What is it that Debian needs to discuss behind closed doors that it cannot discuss in the public eye, since Debian itself is not a commercial organization? Witness the recent uproar over the non-admission of new developers which was discussed on debian-private. Did it help that this discussion was totally hidden from the general public? All it did was convince the general public that there is some unofficial policy being implemented to not allow new developers - all denials to the contrary.

    Just my two cents....

  • ..The last person to lead Debian (rather than guide it) described it as "herding kittens" and burned out. Authoritarian leadership doesn't work when you're dealing with volunteers.

    I wasnt aware that this had been tried before. However, it may be that the circumstances were different before, and it is time to try this experiment again with the benefit of previous experiences.

    Regarding the flamewars :

    Who are you to judge? Personally, I'll start worrying the day there isn't a flamewar on the development list, because it'll mean that people have stopped caring.

    Two points : Are you off the opinion that because I am not a developer, that my opinion isnt important? What if I were a developer? Would I then have the "right" to "judge"? What is it that makes your judgement superior to mine?

    The second thing is that I feel your conclusion is incorrect. No flamewars on lists could mean that (a) Proper arbitration of arguments is being done or (b) People have become politer or (c) People do not care anymore. I dont see why it only has to be (c). In fact, look at the moderated newsgroups on the net. They dont have flamewars and they dont seem to be dying out either.

    Why is it you're not publishing all your email on the web? Why is it you don't have a couple of webcams in your bedroom and bathroom?

    This is a truly specious argument on your part. My life is not open to the public, and I never claim so. Debian, on the other hand supposedly welcomes the public to participate.

  • >>Are you off the opinion that because I am not a developer, that my opinion isnt important?

    Debian is a democracy of sorts, but is a democracy of developers (in the broad sense of the word - people who actively contribute to Debian's development - be it as maintainers, technical writers or submitters of useful bug reports).

    >>Would I then have the "right" to "judge"?

    I, like my fellow developers, welcome opinions of people interested in Debian, but ultimately what really counts are contributions. I've read one "dselect sucks" too many from people who aren't willing to work on it (or even just give constructive criticism).

    I have in the past submitted patches to debian packages, one of which was acknowledged by the developer (who then promptly disappeared out of sight), and incorporated by none. So, yes, I speak from experience.

    In the case of the developer who disappeared out of sight, I later sent him mail offering to take over maintaining his package, but I received no response, and his package continues to languish. (If you want more details, you can email me.)

    I've sent mail to the wnpp address regarding packages that I would have liked to adopt. I did receive one response. This did not contain all the info I needed, and later queries vanished into some mail-blackhole that exists on the Debian servers. The information on the wnpp page itself is inconsistent - I've seen packages for which the wnpp page listed one maintainer, the bug reports page listed another, and the package page indicated another. But I digress....

    The point that I am trying to make is that (1) My opinion is just as relevant as yours and (2) The current setup of Debian makes it hard for my opinion to be accepted as being as relevant as yours.

    Also, you seem to be under the impression that a leader must be authoritarian in nature. Not so. They may wield authority, but that does not made them authoritarian (not in the pejorative sense that you use the word for). For example, I read the comp.lang.c++.moderated newsgroup which is moderated by 6 people. But nobody is rebelling against the moderators claiming that they are stiffling discussion or whatever. Linus is an authority, but the kernel developers accept that without any problem. I could make the same statement about several other developers (just in case you reply that Linus is an exception).

    I am still of the opinion that a closed list serves no useful purpose for Debian. The analogy that you make (black budgets and so on), do not fit in. Can Debian punish its developers for revealing what goes on in debian-private? If not, how can you prevent the "secrets" that you discuss there from leaking out to other companies. In fact the example you quoted about Corel falls apart if you take into consideration that there may be employees of Corel who are debian developers, and therefore have access to debian-private. So what exactly have you gained?

  • Installation Process. (Score:3)

    by jelwell ( 2152 ) on Friday October 15, 1999 @06:22AM (#1611254)
    I've been using linux since 95. I bought Slackware 95 (might have been 96) that year and was pleased when I had similar tools at home that I had at school - but I gave it up. A couple of years later I wanted Linux at home again and I went shopping for a new Linux distribution. I had heard that Redhat was *really* easy to use, but I also heard that Debian was better overall system. I'll tell you what the only reason is that I chose Redhat over Debian. It was because Redhat had a 2 to 3 floppy disk ftp install and Debian had a 7 to 12 floppy disk installation.

    I hear a lot of people moaning that Debian installations and maintenance can be difficult for newbies. So I'm thinking - didn't redhat GPL it's installation program? Couldn't Debian use that? I mean *everyone* uses the SysLinux boot floppy that so and so created, why not share Redhat's installation process between distributions?

    The only obvious reason I can see for Debian to not use Redhat's installation process is mindshare. Debian stands to lose mindshare if their distribution uses technologies in other distributions. But I know the Debian project to be about freedom. So I hope that they'll have the freedom of mind to make the right decision. Which might mean writing their own installation wizard. Who knows.
    Joseph Elwell.
  • Everything I've read says that the boxed set costs $19.99, and includes the O'Reilly book.

    However, the book is listed as costing $32.95, and includes a debian CD.

    What is the difference between the two? Is the book bound/packaged differently? Different CDs?

  • Debian should come with warning stickers... (Score:3)

    by slothbait ( 2922 ) on Friday October 15, 1999 @06:51AM (#1611256)
    "Warning! For advanced users only."

    Debian is great, but I would never recommend it to a newbie (such as someone who might stumble upon a box in Best Buy). Its really not a "first" distribution. When our LUG does install-fests we use Mandrake, which is nice and cuddly. Most of the members, however, run Debian.

    I like the Debian banners that I've seen around the web:

    "Debian: your *next* Linux distribution." ...I think that sums things up rather nicely.

    --Lenny
    Slackware->Red Hat->Mandrake->Debian
  • I find it annoying that everything about debian has "Copyright #%#@ Software in the Public Interest, Inc." at least twice on it.

    Hmmm? It doesn't appear in that many places; most of the copyrights are still held by individuals (SPI discourage s [spi-inc.org] copyright assignments to it).

  • [SPI] have been affiliated with Debian for a while.

    SPI was founded as a legal representative for Debian (e.g. for the purpose of receiving donations, acquire hardware etc.), and has now broadened its scope to include other projects.

  • A retail customer counting on the convenience of a CD might be put off by finding out that the CD they just bought at Borders is well over a year old

    Most of the organisations producing shrinkwrapped CDs seem to prefer a relatively slow release cycle though.

  • Will the 68k, PPC and other ports be available to buy in shops,

    I doubt it; the product is aimed at commodity hardware.

    or is Debian going to be concentrating on the x86 version of the distribution?

    No. "Debian in a Box" is a product of SGI, O'Reilly and VA, not of the Debian project. While SGI &co may be focussing on a commercially supported Debian package for commodity hardware, the Debian project is actively working on several architecture ports [debian.org], some of which have already been released.

  • Debian users value free software. Are they gonna run right out and buy this?

    "free" is about freedom, not free beer. Also, I believe there are plenty of people who just pick a distribution, and then get enrolled in its culture. Debian is often chosen by people who already have prior Linux experience. This deal can help increase our mindshare with new users.

    It has been said that many people choose their distribution on the basis of advice from their friendly neighbourhood Linux guru. I for one am recommending people packages like this.

    This to me is a case of a few greedy companies trying to cash in on the name (if not the profits) of the coolest Linux distribution.

    Out here, where net.access costs real money, it has always been difficult to get people to install Debian; the net option is too expensive, and most bookstores here have Red Hat (and perhaps SuSE as well). Having a nice shiny prepacked Debian with book is definite progress.

  • I feel that they really need a leader figure with the authority

    Been there, done that, abandoned it. The last person to lead Debian (rather than guide it) described it as "herding kittens" and burned out. Authoritarian leadership doesn't work when you're dealing with volunteers.

    Raging flamewars on the developer lists which contribute little or nothing to free software.

    Who are you to judge? Personally, I'll start worrying the day there isn't a flamewar on the development list, because it'll mean that people have stopped caring.

    There is atleast one private list [...] I question the necessity for existence of this list.

    Yes, debian-private exists. It's one of life's necessary evils. Even in an open project there are sensitive issues. Consider e.g. the recent Corel beta licensing issue - how can you plot a course of action if you're totally open, and the other side is fairly closed? Consider other dealings with companies - they're big fans of testing the waters first.

    What is it that Debian needs to discuss behind closed doors that it cannot discuss in the public eye

    Why is it you're not publishing all your email on the web? Why is it you don't have a couple of webcams in your bedroom and bathroom?

  • and Debian had a 7 to 12 floppy disk installation.

    But there are relatively few systems (mostly older ones) where you need to actually make them. On most systems, you can use a zero-floppy install (using a bootable CD) or a one-floppy install (when booting from CD isn't supported).

  • I wasnt aware that this had been tried before.

    We've had a triumvirate, authoritarian leadership, lassez-faire leadership / democracy and I've forgotten probably a few others.

    However, it may be that the circumstances were different before, and it is time to try this experiment again with the benefit of previous experiences.

    They were; the project was quite a bit smaller back then. I can only imagine that the burnout would occur quicker with the current number of developers to be managed.

    Are you off the opinion that because I am not a developer, that my opinion isnt important?

    Debian is a democracy of sorts, but is a democracy of developers (in the broad sense of the word - people who actively contribute to Debian's development - be it as maintainers, technical writers or submitters of useful bug reports).

    Would I then have the "right" to "judge"?

    I, like my fellow developers, welcome opinions of people interested in Debian, but ultimately what really counts are contributions. I've read one "dselect sucks" too many from people who aren't willing to work on it (or even just give constructive criticism).

    What is it that makes your judgement superior to mine?

    I'm not claiming my judgement is superior to yours. I am claiming it is more relevant though, as I am an active participant in Debian's development. In Dutch, there's an ironic saying that the best sailors are standing on solid land: it is easy to criticise people and organisations, but have you walked a mile in their shoes?

    Most of the developers seem to find the current situation (flamewars and all) workable - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

    a) Proper arbitration of arguments is being done

    By whom? An authoritarian leader?

    (b) People have become politer

    The developers are polite, most of the time. But people do feel strongly about issues, and occasionally express themselves in less polite terms. I'm a big fan of polite conversation myself, but having an outlet in the form of e.g. cursing or flaming is necessary occasionally.

    This is a truly specious argument on your part. My life is not open to the public, and I never claim so.

    I'm trying to draw an analogy. There is a notion of privacy; that notion isn't restricted to individuals but applies to organisations as well. A better analogy would be a democratic government which still has a need for "black budgets", closed sessions and espionage agencies.

    Debian, on the other hand supposedly welcomes the public to participate.

    We do. That doesn't mean we have to do everything in the open. debian-private is like closed senate sessions: unavoidable, but only used when necessary.

  • Re:Myth??? (Score:4)

    by Ray Dassen ( 3291 ) on Friday October 15, 1999 @06:18AM (#1611265) Homepage
    It ships with demoware?? Isn't that totally going against what GNU stands for?

    Not really. Note that the "GNU" in "Debian GNU/Linux" is part of "GNU/Linux", i.e. the operating environment based around the Linux kernel. Debian is not a part of the FSF [fsf.org], although we maintain strong ties to the FSF (see e.g. Debian GNU/Hurd [debian.org]).

    The Debian project has always encouraged others to use Debian GNU/Linux as a basis for building distributions as Corel [corel.com] has been doing, and SGI, O'Reilly and VA are doing now.

    Debian proper ("main") is and will continue to be 100% pure software, but the Debian Social Contract [debian.org] is pragmatic enough to acknowledge that our users may want to use non-free software.

  • Will the 68k, PPC and other ports be available to buy in shops, or is Debian going to be concentrating on the x86 version of the distribution?

    Oddly, the graphic accompanying the article [cnn.com] shows a penguin and an original Macintosh...

  • Well, I don't know about the boxed set, but here at ALS the Debian Project was giving out free CDs of all the different architectures. Every single one was snatched up within the first few hours of the show, even 68k. I was going to grab a copy of 68k and get an old Mac to put it on, but wasn't sure, and figured they'd still be there when I came back later. Bad move on my part. I seem to have trouble with realizing supply/demand scenarios from the consumer standpoint... same thing happened with me and Dreamcast VMUs. :)

    Regardless, the interest in the various Debian architectures is definitely there. Hopefully the folks putting out the Debian boxed set wil realize this.

    BTW, at my local Microcenter they already have a quite sizeable "Other OS" shelf. It's mostly Linux, but there's plenty of FreeBSD and BeOS stuff there as well. Very cool. Also, their books section is full of lots of Linux stuff. I even picked up a copy of TeX Unleashed (or something like that, one of those TeX books) for $3... :)
    ---
    "'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine.

  • I was referring to the previous comment, which was asking if the boxed set would support anything other than Intel. Yes, many people have gotten boxed Debian. That's what this article was about.
    ---
    "'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine.

  • Re:So, who's gonna buy this? (Score:3)

    by Pascal Q. Porcupine ( 4467 ) on Friday October 15, 1999 @07:02AM (#1611269) Homepage
    Ah, my friend, you're forgetting several things: (and I'm going to sound like a broken-record Stallman pundit now, but hey...)

    1. 'Free' does not mean 'for free,' but rather 'with freedom.' Think free speech, not free beer. You have to pay to attend ALS and listen to the speeches, but you're free to use the information you learn at it as you see fit. (Whereas afterwards, you get lots of free beer at the party they throw. After last night I've found out that 2 bottles of beer is more than enough for me. :)

    2. Not just opensource zealots use Debian. Debian is a great distribution which stands on its own merits. Its configuration and administration is much more easy and powerful than any other distro I've used (disclaimer: I've never used SuSE, which I've heard is comparable, but Debian beats the pants off of RedHat and Slackware, especially if you have a large cluster of machines to configure identically). It's easy to install software, easy to keep it completely up-to-date, and easy to remove software. To upgrade your installation to the newest stable release, you must simply run, as root:

    • apt-get update

    • apt-get upgrade
    Also, Corel's working on a to-be-opensourced Qt-based package manager system which is far superior, interface-wise, to dselect (Debian's built-in package manager)... I saw it here at ALS and nearly hugged the Corel representatives. :) Not that dselect is bad, it's actually very powerful, but the interface is a bit yucky.

    3. As far as newbies, the box comes with a manual, which is the point to paying $x0 for a boxed distribution rather than $3 for a generic CD or $bandwidth for downloading it yourself.

    Also, I don't know what you're talking about with Debian's install process being anti-newbie. It's certainly easier than, say, RedHat's. It's no WinLinux, granted, and it could really use a nice X configuration tool, but you never have to see dselect, and it's got a relatively nice fdisk frontend. The only real shortcoming in 2.1 is that LILO configuration is non-intuitive; IIRC, it doesn't give you any means of automagically setting up inferior^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hother operating systems to boot from; you have to actually know how to add an entry to lilo.conf. However, the boxed set's manual may include this, and IMO it's rather nice to force the newbie into learning how to use Linux well enough to get back into Windows. :)

    All that Debian's lacking is a nice pre-configured desktop environment, and that's where Corel's distribution comes in. Also, once Qt2 comes out and KDE's been ported to it, we'll finally have an available desktop other than Gnome. (Note: I don't use either Gnome or KDE. When it comes down to it, I prefer KDE, but I prefer to just run a highly-customized fvwm2 setup. I've invested lots of time in my fvwm2 setup. :)


    ---
    "'Is not a quine' is not a quine" is a quine.

  • > I really don't think the Debian developers are concerned with meeting any "release schedule".

    Actually, that's my point. Shrinkwrapping a product for retail sale is quite a different approach than volunteers maintaining a distribution over the net. Someone who downloads the Debian core, boots and apt's the rest is well served by Debian's stable/unstable branch design. A retail customer counting on the convenience of a CD might be put off by finding out that the CD they just bought at Borders is well over a year old and requires *many* megabytes of download through their 56k modem, whether for the occasional security issue or just compatibility with 3rd party apps.

    Don't get me wrong, I may be a Red Hat guy myself, but I have nothing but respect for Debian's contributions and commitment to Free Software. I'm not critisizing Debian for a style that obviously works for many people, I'm just not sure their release schedule (or rather lack of one) will work for a shrinkwrap market.

    ---------------------

  • A Retail Debian? (Score:3)

    by ed_the_unready ( 5193 ) on Friday October 15, 1999 @05:48AM (#1611271)
    Glad to see Debian getting some recognition and wider distribution, but I'm wondering how this will be handled. It seems that Debian users typically use the "unstable" branch and update in near real-time (daily, whatever) to stay current, as opposed to the "stable" release which goes for quite a while between formal updates. Will the requirements of retail distribution push Debian into an accellerated release schedule?

    ---------------------
  • I would buy it just to support SPI. I don't need it (apt-get has kept me current), but I want to show my support for the Debian project.

    If this sells well, companies will take notice. They may market Debian heavily.

    More people would use a superior distro.

    Time to vote with my checkbook.
  • The Debian installation program runs you through a series of very easy to use screens, which all correspond to the installation documentation found at [debian.org]
    http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/. Contratry to what Red Hat does, Debian's installation program is just that - an installation program. It doesn't configure packages for you.

    The reason that dselect is so intimidating is because of the thousands of packages available. While I recomment apt-get for more experienced users, for first time users, it's very good. It won't allow you to install packages without installing their dependancies (as does apt - they are both front ends to dpkg). It's description area is generally very informative, and warns of necessary further work, or package conflicts.

    Now, it is a LONG process to use dselect, but it gives you important, accurate information every step of the way. If you are willing to invest the time in the instilation, you will have a tailor-made system, running only what you want to run.

    I've had a few friends install Debian who never used Linux before. I was there just to answer questions. I found that Debian's install process actually fosters knowledge of your machine. It may take a new user a bit longer the first few times, but longer != more difficult. The Debian install process helps to create more knowledgable users.

  • Re:great for Debian, bad for newbies (Score:4)

    by trog ( 6564 ) on Friday October 15, 1999 @06:29AM (#1611274)
    Generally, people who state that Debian is difficult to install have never installed Debian themselves. It is not more difficult than any other distrobution, it is just a bit in it's approach.

    Having switched to Debian from RH about 6 months ago, I find that Debian is very easy to install. The only component of a system that posed any diffuculty to me was setting up X the first time. It took me a whole twenty minutes. With the inclusion of the excellent Debian manual, I don't see any one with reasonable intelligence having any problems with the installation.

    Ever try to install rpm's after an install, when they refuse to install because of dependencies, and you have NO IDEA where to get that package? Tell me Red Hat is easier to use....:/

  • Here's a quick list of things that would make a newbie go "huh?" during a Debian 2.1 installation from CD.

    • /dev/hdc You have to specify the installation device. You get a list of 8 cryptic /dev names and have to move the cursor to the correct one. Nothing that I've noticed indicates that the CDROM is /dev/hdc.
    • dselect You have to specify an access method. I find "single CD" to be the correct answer, but it is not the default. Then you have to specify the device. (Fortunately, /dev/cdrom is the default here.)
    • exim The exim configuration script is confusing and intimidating.
    • that newsgroup fetcher I don't remember what the package is called, but the conf script really wants to test the newbie's configuration choices, which are probably wrong.
    • gpm The gpm conf script shows you a bunch of line noise, asks you if you want to change it, and makes "y" the default answer.
    • X You have to know which X server to use and you have to know the XF86Setup command.
    • Emacs byte-compiling You get asked dozens(?) of times whether you want some elisp module byte-compiled. Fortunately, the default is "y" so you can just hit enter, but you have to stay there hitting enter for quite a while.

    This is just off the top of my head...

    Or is there an easier way?

  • Uhm, why not buy a Debian CD from LSL or Cheapbytes?

    It costs, what, $US5?
  • *LOL* .. Thanks, that made my day...

    nothing more funny to see than someone making a 'first post' lame comment a full 18 minutes after the real first post..

    Hehehehh..

  • I kind of like the idea of seeing a nice shrinkwrapped box in CompUSA with a big warning label on the front:

    Warning - Debian Linux is for advanced Linux users only. If "MS Windows"-like simplicity is what you want, we suggest you try one of the many other fine commercial Linux distributions. However, if you are looking for the best application packaging system and the finest level of control and quality assurance in a Linux distribution, Debian Linux is for you!

    Debian is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to free software

    If anything, such a warning would probably increase sales.
  • I have tried Debian and as far as installation, it is simply Linux so there were no problems there.The only thing that pissed me off real bad was dselect. It is probably on of the most confusing tools ever created ... I gave up trying to install couple of packages.
  • Take a look at Debian's vendor listing [debian.org] for a distributor near you.
  • Building a distribution is a lot like making sausages: the end product is usually nice, but you really don't want to know how it got that way.

    Without divulging what takes place on -private directly (the rules say "don't quote anyone elsewhere w/o permission", but the de facto rule is you don't refer to discussions on -private unless they're already general knowledge... a kind of Clintonesque compartmentalization if you will), I will say there are a lot of "sausage" things going on there: discussions about the Corel license, the new-maintainer situation, serious security issues, and whether or not there is a "Debian Cabal" ;-). It mainly deals with sensitive "political" issues, or topics of internal organization, rather than development issues. Non-sensitive issues should be on -devel or the new -discuss (I think that's what it's called) list.

    Also, to respond to your comment about -devel having flamewars. Yes, moderation avoids that problem neatly (because the flamewars are abrogated by moderators). -devel isn't moderated, nor should it be (and who would moderate it?). I suspect if we were to move to a more hierarchical scheme, many developers would quit.
  • The CD-ROM issue is being addressed for 2.2; the -boot guys are working on an autodetection script which should be way cool.

    I'm never asked about byte compiling for Emacs... I guess that's been changed since 2.0 or 2.1 (I do remember it being asked a long time ago).

    I didn't find the exim script too confusing, though it's not clear what to use for a dial-up link (option 1 or 2 usually).
  • I've thought a bit more about this, and come to the conclusion that -private lets developers participate more (not less) than having just a public list.

    Why? Well, imagine there's a group of people in Debian privy to more info than the rest of us,
    say like the guys who work for Novare or VA or the DPL. Without a -private
    list, they have to pick and choose who gets the information (for the sake of this discussion,
    let's call the chosen group The Cabal ;-). The Cabal inherently leaves lots of people out
    of the process. Wouldn't it be better to let everyone whose identity we've verified participate?

    Thus, everyone is part of the Cabal. I much prefer this to the model of other projects, which is basically that at "some point" you get to join the "star chamber" where the real decisions get made (like *BSD's "core" groups, or the [I'm speculating here] Alan Cox-Linus Torvalds brain ethertap).

  • I managed to upgrade a Red Hat 4.2 installation to glibc 2.1 and kernel 2.2.12, by downloading and maually installing packages.

    But as far as I can tell it is a completely undocumented procedure.

    There's no way I could have been able to do it if I didn't already have a few years of Linux/Unix experience. I had to make educated guesses as to which packages to upgrade first, when to use --force, and so on. I could've shot myself in the foot easily -- and if I were still a Linux newbie, I probably would have.

    For anyone who knows their way around Unix at all, Debian is clearly superior.

  • Eh? (Score:1)

    by rde ( 17364 )
    Is Suse not available in a box in the US?
    And hands up who gnoticed that the article referred to GNU/Linux?

  • Re:Eh? (Score:1)

    by rde ( 17364 )
    Well, of course it referred to GNU/Linux. The proper name for Debian is "Debian GNU/Linux" (their page at http://www.debian.org makes this very clear).
    My surprise wasn't the fact that it was called GNU/Linux, but that it was called GNU/Linux by CNN. News agencies tend to have a remarkable reluctance to specify in such situations, preferring a generic term such as 'Linux' that's easily recognised by the great unwashed.
    Of course, it was someone else's report quoted by CNN, so that may have something to do with it.
  • I'll buy one for my office. My boss and co-workers will need to be able to install and run Debian, although their linux experience is slight. There's no way I'm going to trust our severs to some distro that tries to be 'idiot-proof', but I need some way for them to get up to speed. They would probably not love having to read all their docs online, and they'd probably prefer a CD to an internet-based or even lan-based install. This book is a good answer, as I haven't seen that Debian Installation and Usage book I've heard about in stores anywhere around here.

    "So, what do you want to hack for, Bickle?"
    "I can't sleep nights."
    "They got porno theaters for that."

  • Why don't we just shoot newbies on sight. That would stop them from asking all those stupid questions.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • The companies say they will donate all profits from the sale of the retail GNU/Linux package to Software in the Public Interest, a nonprofit organization for open source projects.

    I think this rocks.
  • Re:Debian needs to get their act together (Score:)
    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 15, @02:40PM EDT (#)
    I agree with this completely.

    I tried out slink (2.1) for a few weeks, and found that it was poorly organized (the development teams)and the release was very backleveled, e.g.

    Whats wrong with the development teams and organization?

    XFree 3.3.2?!?, when 3.3.5 has been out a while, and most importantly, No easy way to upgrade userland stuff unless you want to go the whole 9 yards to UNSTABLE.

    Dude, slink has been released in March it and it was frozen in November (before 3.3.3 was released)
    If you want slink debs for 3.3.3.1 I think you can find them on www.netgod.net/x. Also there is somewhere an "unofficial" list of sites that carry non-main debs (including X, gnome, KDE, etc)

    in any of those cases all ou have to do is plug a corresponding line in /etc/apt/sources list and run apt-get update;apt-get upgrade
  • I agree with this completely.

    I tried out slink (2.1) for a few weeks, and found that it was poorly organized (the development teams)and the release was very backleveled, e.g.


    Whats wrong with the development teams and organization?

    XFree 3.3.2?!?, when 3.3.5 has been out a while, and most importantly, No easy way to upgrade userland stuff unless you want to go the whole 9 yards to UNSTABLE.

    Dude, slink has been released in March it and it was frozen in November (before 3.3.3 was released)
    If you want slink debs for 3.3.3.1 I think you can find them on www.netgod.net/x. Also there is somewhere an "unofficial" list of sites that carry non-main debs (including X, gnome, KDE, etc)

    in any of those cases all ou have to do is plug a corresponding line in /etc/apt/sources list and run apt-get update;apt-get upgrade
  • As a former 2-year RedHat user (with a bunch of Slackware before that), I just switched to Debian 2.1 about 2 weeks ago... after messing with dselect for a few hours and almost giving up, I finally got it working. Then I couldn't get X working. It kept core dumping on me. Finally I figured out that it was because it only have glibc 2.0.7 and the new X servers I was trying to download were all linked against 2.1 (I couldn't use the one that came with Debian since it didn't have support for the TNT2) Once I installed the new glibc (with a simple dpkg --install, even) everything fell into place... now I love it. Everything about it is so much nicer than RedHat (and especially Slackware) I recommend people give it a try - you'll be pleasantly surprised.

    I think this is definately a good thing - what Debian really needs now is more public exposure.

    "Software is like sex- the best is for free"
  • I tried out slink (2.1) for a few weeks, and found that it was poorly organized (the development teams)and the release was very backleveled, e.g. XFree 3.3.2?!?, when 3.3.5 has been out a while, and most importantly, No easy way to upgrade userland stuff unless you want to go the whole 9 yards to UNSTABLE.

    All I had to do to upgrade my slink system with packages from potato (the "unstable" version) was to install the .deb of glibc2.1 (and everything it depended on - it'll tell you what you're missing when you try it, and there isn't much). After that point every package I installed from potato worked just fine.

    "Software is like sex- the best is for free"
  • Important to remember that Debian is often considered closest to Linux' roots. Franky, I can't imagine a distro I'd rather see in this position. I might have missed it, but I'm *assuming* that a no-sweat (by Linux standards anyways) installer will be packaged. And if people buying this haven't heard that Linux Windows, well...

    I think this is absolutely wonderful. Even more for the fact that the retailers will be donating the profits to more of the same.

    A /. reader noted that a market leader that acknowledges someone else as a threat ceases to be seen as the market leader. Microsoft did just this in it's Linux Myths page. I'm willing to bet that MS is shooting a blue eggroll out it's collective a** on this one.

    ...and that thought alone just made my whole day. =)

    My .02
    Quux26
  • This new CNET review of Corel's beta Linux distro [cnet.com] touts its "terrific installation" (although a partitioning utility apparently isn't in there yet). As noted elsewhere, Corel's distro is based on Debian. It's unclear yet whether Corel will open-source the components it has built itself from scratch, i.e. the installer, but the review indicates that Corel at least is addressing the installation issue.

    Disclaimer: I'm a CORL shareholder

  • Well. I am not a developer at all so my opinion should be just as an important as both of you (yes, I am using your elitism against you... that is if you are elitist).

    I have found that private mailing lists are far more common for free software projects than you might expect. It is just that most of the time you don't know about them. Once you start contributing, someone may let you in. I know that Debian, Gnome, and UDE have private lists or forums, but them are just the projects that I look-up daily. There are probably more, much more. Even small projects probably have just a couple developers they e-mail directly, it is still a closed list, just smaller.

    Debian's organization may not be optimal but the important thing is that it works reasonably. There really isn't an optimal solution, I don't think. Linus seems to be burning out because of his authoritarian leadership. Perhaps a hierachical system would be best...

    The biggest problem I think is when a developer refuses a patch. Ideally the person who made the patch would realize his mistake and walk away. But that person probably gets upset at his own wasted effort and may do any number of things to hinder development.

    --

  • Why would you shoot yourself in the foot like that? Do you have a problem with people giving you source code and a liscense that makes the software freely distributable?

    "No! No! Please. I only want binaries and a propietary license! No source code, GPL is evil!"

    What a world we live in, eh?

    --

  • I think you make a very valid point. For those with enough know-how to install Deb correctly then they can get the distro from all sorts of places, they don't need a store bought version.

    I have to say if not for my respect for the companies backing this little adventure I would be seriously suspicious of the motives (read: bandwagon jumping) of this move. I think this will hurt more than help unfortunately :-/

    woof
  • Your options so far have been the Caldera and Red Hat Linux distributions....

    (reaching for the "inaccurate reporting" EJECT button)
    Uh, yeah. Right. Whatever.
  • Kudos to C gN gN gnews for that. I wonder if RMS thinks its gnice.
  • Well, I learned something new about security AND humanity today.

    Decency suggests that next time you should just politely log someone out if they were foolish enough (or exhausted and therefore forgetful after 48 hours of Loki-Hacking) to leave themselves logged in.

    The lesson was still appreciated...thank you. I shall not do something as foolish again.

    --ryan.

  • Ever try to install rpm's after an install, when they refuse to install because of dependencies, and you have NO IDEA where to get that package? Tell me Red Hat is easier to use....:/

    I couldn't agree more. I've got a red hat box at home that's stuck on linux 2.0.34 (RH: 5.0). The thought of buying another set of cd's just to upgrade it makes me sick. I installed debian at work, and I love dselect. I'm converting the box at home right now! Long live Debian GNU/Linux

  • It ships with demoware?? Isn't that totally going against what GNU stands for?

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • Yeah, I agree. So, if I went to BestBuy and wanted to buy a PPC version of Debian - would I go to the Mac section? I guess so, but wouldn't it be keen if eventually there were entire Linux sections in places like CompUSA?

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • Hello? Non-commercial? If you pay for it, that's commerce. Don't kid yourself - they might take away sales from other commercial packages, but that doesn't exclude them from the bunch.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • What? has noone else got a boxed Debian yet? VA Linux was giving them out at ALS on the hour every hour (at least they were Thursday).

    Nice yellow box with the big swirl on it and the logos of VA, O'Reilly and SGI. And it comes with an O'Reilly book "Learning Debian GNU/Linux', 1 CD and a bumper sticker...

    Favorite quote on the box: "Never buy software again" (talking about apt-get).

    It's gonna take over an NT box pretty soon ;-)...

  • I've read through the posts, and I see a few complaints about the number of disks required. For those of us spreading Linux to less-than-up-to-date machines, the Debian floppy install is a godsend. I had a Sparc IPC which was old, old, old - the only way Linux was going on that thing (version 1.OLD prom) was Debian's 8-disk install. Only recently have the RedHat Sparc images become palatable to that old machine.

    Only NetBSD seems to exceed Debian in its cross-platform projects. If the floppy disk images are included in the commercial distro, they can advertise compatibility with machines below the latest pentium 3, and even hold out the promise of Linux on old 486's without a CD. I think that's at least worth considering...

  • Debian is clearly superior

    Except for two things:

    1. Recentness of software, you can't possibly tell me that E DR0.16 is going to be in potato.
    2. Commonness of packages - I can always find package X as an RPM, but as a deb it's always a version behind if I can find it at all.
  • Well, of course it referred to GNU/Linux. The proper name for Debian is "Debian GNU/Linux" (their page at http://www.debian.org [debian.org] makes this very clear).


    Yes, Suse is available in a box. As is slackware, Mandrake, and certain others (I just know I've seen others, but can't remember the names).


    Two links of note, found thanks to this article:


  • Ah, sorry about that. I'd gotten the impression that a journalist might have done some actual research, and gone to the Debian home page [debian.org]. Of course, now that I think about it, a journalist doing research is roughly equivalent to MicroSoft producing a stable, reliable operating system and being honest about any security issues (and even fixing them quickly). Sure, it could happen, but most likely not in this lifetime.



    Again, sorry about that. Shoulda thought before I posted that.

  • I'm starting to think there is more to the 'technical/non-technical personality' issue than I've generally accepted, and this explains the differences in perceptions of Debian's installation process.


    Would you mind elaborating on this? I consider myself to be a moderately technical person (people around me look at me funny when I say that. But I know who I compare myself to, so I am only moderately technical), and I was stymied by the dselect process at first. It's not so bad anymore, and apparently apt can now do multi-cd [debian.org], so it should be even easier. Anyway, I'm rambling, so I'll just ask.


    What is the "more" that you've noticed to that issue?

  • I'll speak up as a person who is a fan of maintaining a Debian installation, but who had awful problems installing it the first time.



    I bought the Cheapbytes Debian CDs, and was working with them. I had no problems until dselect came into the picture. After that, it was all downhill, for about a week. It took me about an hour of trying (and reading dselect help) to figure out that I was supposed to put CD 2 in, run update, and then put CD 1 in for the install. If I'd caught that up front, the entire process would have been much less painful. In addition, the interface for dslect is very very far from easy to follow (at least for me).



    Now some notes about this experience: I've installed Slackware, and several versions of RedHat, all without a hitch (well, except for the first time I installed Slackware. That was due to total inexperience with setting up an OS, though). I'm not exactly a computer newbie, either. I've been working (and playing) with them since the old days of the VIC-20. Just the interface for dselect lacks a lot in terms of usability.



    Now, I know that I could have just settled for one of the profiles, but I wanted to actually see what packages would be installed, and maybe modify the package listings. That process was about three hours of reviewing the listings, and determining if I wanted a package or not. Too many packages, I think.



    Next issue was during the install stage of dselect. A few hours worth of package configuring (hindered by the fact that at least a third of the packages wanted me to help them out, and didn't have defaults). All in all, an extraordinarily frustrating day.



    Finally, I had two other issues, but they can't be blamed on Debian itself. CD 1, it turns out, was a bad CD (meaning it had some bad sectors), so once those failed, making dselect go again (I thought) meant restarting from scratch. That was a very very frustrating experience, I can tell you. As luck would have it, I also had a hard drive (brand new) which had a bad spot on it, and had to be replaced.



    All in all, not an easy installation experience, and one that I would steer newbies away from as much as possible.



    My $0.02, YMMV, <insert standard disclaimer here>.

  • How strange. I find Debian very easy. Unlike the other distro's alot is automated for you. 'update-menus' leaps to mind.



    I agree with you wholeheartedly. Using Debian is much easier than other distros. Maintenance can even be automated to a better degree, if you choose (cron, anybody?). However, the very initial installation of Debian is much more difficult than others, I think. It's getting over that hill of "Let's get it installed and working" that is so hard. Once past that, though, it's very easy to get along with.

  • Danimal wrote:

    >Debian may be a better alternative, maybe you can enlighten me.

    I've only been using Debian for maybe 4 months now, but I'll see what I can do.

    >I am new to the actual systems cosmetic portion and I find it very difficult to configure my system with RedHat.

    The Debian "Control Panel": ls /etc :)

    I've never had any trouble configuring Debian. I've hacked up the look of things quite a bit, Debian includes a number of packages to help with aesthetics, (including very cute Debianized version of the Linux Logo, though use slink one, the new one in potato ain't so hot), svgatextmode, every window manager you might want to try, themes for every window manager, etc. It also includes the linuxconf utility, but it doesn't seem to do much overly useful at the current time.

    Debian makes it very easy to configure things without understanding them intimately, because it installs fully-functional (usually well-commented) default configuration files for everything, so you don't have to puzzle over dozens of options you don't understand. Want to run an ssh sever, but don't really know a lot about ssh servers? (Probably not the best idea to run servers you don't know much about, but hey, your system), one simple apt-get, and it's installed, configured, and running. Many of the configuration files have good manpages as well, between them and the comments you shouldn't have any trouble figuring out config files.

    >I know it can be done but I would rather have a stripped down version and build my way up, rather than a bloated version and work my way down. Does Debian have more of this approach?

    Debian seems to me to be the most modular of the distros. The Debian base system, including just the package management tools, basic utilities, and telnet so you can MUD while packages are downloading, is just a few MB. Above that, there are the set of "required" packages; you'll get yelled at if you don't have all of them installed. There are a few that most people will never use, but nothing that'll get in your way. I wouldn't call it bloat. Above the base filesystem and the required packages, everything is simple to install or uninstall in seconds. The packages tend to not be psychotic with dependencies, create impossible sets of dependencies, or depend on packages that don't exist (there are exceptions, of course). The package management software can have some interesting quirks from time to time, and it's hard to override dependencies in dselect and APT (though you can download the package yourself and force it with dpkg), but I'm very, very pleased with the package system. Though you're likely to find almost anything you want either in the main distribution or on some apt-friendly server, local packages are supported nicely as well, and alien seems to do a very good job of converting RPMs -- 18 of the 20 packages I've converted with it worked flawlessly, though source RPMs seem to be a bit flaky.

    >BTW: I realize there are options in the installation process, and I have tried different configurations. But it always seems that my changes to certain files always get overwritten by some script at the next boot-up.

    I've never seen anything like this with Debian. When upgrading packages, you'll be asked whether you want to keep your current config file(s) or upgrade to the default config files included with the new version. (Unless they're the same -- isn't it clever?)

    Oh yeah, if you're looking for a very good very lightweight window manager that's good for systems with low memory, try icewm. It's quite cool, probably includes all the features you need, and is very small. And of course, it comes with Debian.
  • Hi there, I am a former RedHat and FreeBSD user. Free BSD was very nice, but not for me, and RedHat made me see red getting it to work with my NIC (never did, even after new kernel)

    Anyways, on the Debian website, it says it has an integrated SGML environment. What does this mean? What is it used for?

    I ask because I do quite a bit with XML now, and need to do some new development on a Linux system.

    Thanks,
    E

  • How strange. I find Debian very easy. Unlike the other distro's alot is automated for you. 'update-menus' leaps to mind. No other distro that I'm aware of has such a nice menu system. Debian is all about rigorous standards and management systems. Redhat, my former distro, seems to be less concerned with uniformity (e.g. gnome menus/kde menus/etc)

  • Thanks for the help (from both posters)! I think I'll try it out when I get home. ;-)
  • I currently run RedHat6.0. Though I enjoy all of the bells and whistles to some extent, I find myself continually miffed at the overhead my system seems to have. I think in my case (being somwhat of a newby) Debian may be a better alternative, maybe you can enlighten me. Though I am not truely a newby (I've worked on UNIX systems for a few years), I am new to the actual systems cosmetic portion and I find it very difficult to configure my system with RedHat. (Note: I have successfully setup a proxy/firewall and webserver, I'm talking here more about the 'look and feel') I know it can be done but I would rather have a stripped down version and build my way up ,rather than a bloated version and work my way down. Does debian have more of this approach? If not, does anyone have a recommendation for a distribution.

    BTW: I realize there are options in the installation process, and I have tried different configurations. But it always seems that my changes to certain files always get overwritten by some script at the next boot-up. For example in FVWM I change the menu items and the next time I reboot those menu items are gone. I could take the time to figure this all out but I would rather not. Besides I am on a P120 with 32 MB RAM, my GUI is killing my system, I want something good but simple.

  • I saw Debian on retail at Media Markt in Switzerland about six months ago. 2 CD's for about CHF 35.00 (~US$ 24.00).
  • I do so much like Debian... but yes the installation could be a little better...

    1) They fact that you have to select every single package is kinda tedious. Why not have a package of preselected packages?? or put more than one package in an option? Some ppl like this but I'm sure newbies would look at the massive number of packages and say "huh?".. especially if they don't know what "make-3.7.7" or "groff" is?? or better yet I've been asked what gcc was...

    2) The installer uses keys that aren't intuitive to everyone... "+" to add package, "-" to subtract, and do the little stars next to the package mean that the package is already installed or going to be installed... what about underscores... what does the second star mean? Newbie will look at the states of the packages and say "huh?", I know I did at first

    3) And when you press "+" or "-" it goes through the dependacies(which I like) but will lead newbies to wonder what is going on, and can get VERY confusing..

    The installer is very confusing to start with... It could DEFINITLY be improved... like make the states of the packages more clear... The installer is nice to me(though I take forever to select EVERY package), but to a newbie... I could see myself explaining every single package, and the then they would think and move on...

    Debian... Good distribution, but the installer is what gets ppl away from it(That's why many people are looking forward to Corel, because they use Debian AND the installation is supposed to be easier) Imagine, Debian with an easy install. WOW! what a dream :-)

    Just my $.02
  • Does anyone know when this will be out? I browsed all the articles I could find on it, and the release date was not mentioned anywhere that I could see.
  • This would expand (OK, just a little bit, but you get the idea) the userspace info on the distro a touch -- would this not be useful too?

    Just a thought.


  • This is -good news- , but where can I buy this. I've spent alot of time trying to download DebIan, but thanks to BT, it's never quite happened. SuSEs CDs are great and stuff, but I've never been able to attempt DebIan without a bag full of floppies. Give me a URL (in EU if pos).
  • Demo CD = wasted space! It seems like having a full game version would enhance sales, doesn't it? (nudge nudge)
  • I'm a newbie, and I found debian 1000x easier than redhat. I just installed redhat, and I've had nothing but problems. First problem is that it set enlightenment to be the default window manager -- I can't use VisualAge for Java in enlightenment -- it crashes constantly. (bringing X down with it I might add. I have to hard reboot) Second problem is that none of the "easy to use" software is included. xv and xemacs are missing, and instead I get electric eyes and emacs. Aside from those problems, the man pages are also inconsistent. For instance the manpage for afterstep says that afterstep configuration files are located in one of several places. When I check those several places, I find theyh don't exist. RedHat decided they should go elsewhere, but didn't bother to amend the documentation it seems. Finally, I can't telnet or even ping my computer running redhat, when I did not have that problem with Debian. (it works intermittently, and when it does it is slow) I'm going back to Debian, is MUCH easier to install and it actually WORKS out of the box.
  • It's about time that there was a good non-commercial distro out there for general sale - maybe it will eat at the profits of the commercial distros. To be honest, though, I find it annoying that everything about debian has "Copyright #%#@ Software in the Public Interest, Inc." at least twice on it. Couldn't they tone it down a little bit?
  • For those of you who don't know, SPI does promotion and education of free software systems. They are a good organization and have been affiliated with Debian for a while. Their web page is at http://www.spi-inc.org/ [spi-inc.org].
  • Well PC World in the UK took out 1/2 page ads in the broadsheet papers this week advertising Mandrake 6 and bundles of Linus s/w
  • I think it's a great move for Debian, and the open source community. Debian just has to advertise it somewhat. People will recognize Redhat, but few people are going to recognize Debian in a retail outlet unless they are part of the "enlightened" linux community. BSD's have been doing this stuff for years, but only to benefit their own works. Still benefits the open source community, but not everyone. This group is helping out a lot more than just themselves, which hopefully will benefit everyone. :)

Slashdot Top Deals

Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills. -- Ambrose Bierce

Close