http://www.osnews.com/story/9271/Debian_Installation_with_the_Net-Installer_RC2 Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:59:24 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? woot no more 7 cds lol jk but it does sound very promising i might even try it tonight. Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Nice article,

Debian is my distro of choice too, I like to be able to start with a "bare-bones" installation, and then just add exactly what I need.

Also, the Debian installer is getting better and better, clean, objective and simple. The wizards behind it managed to please both experts and newbees... Wanna control? You got it, from loading modules to setting up a LVM volume! Want a simple straightdforward install? You got it too, thanks to the improved hardware detection, assisted patitioning and GRUB detecting Windows and other OSes previous installations.

I wrote an guide to the new installer myself... it's written in Brazilian Portuguese. Get it at www.debian-rj.org =)

(ps. sorry my broken english, I'm no native speaker!!) Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I tried it too, but I found it too complex for absolute newbies and not powerful enough for a power user (a description which might also apply to debian in general).

This new installer is better than the old one, especially when it comes to partitioning and kernel modules. Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Debian Woody can also be installed with a small netinstall image. You would only need a few floppy's or a miniCD or something. The rest can be fetched from Internet. Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Although I think articles like this get new people away from thinking they need 7 ISOs to install Debian, I figured this was going to explain netbooting (PXE) as well.

My laptop's CDROM drive is busted, so about a year ago I read how to install Debian via PXE:

http://www.debianplanet.com/node.php?id=818

... and it resurrected my PC from the dead. From then on, PXE was the -only- way I ever installed Debian until I rolled to Arch Linux. No more ISO downloads, just the netboot kernel and initrd files. Debian makes it very, very simple. Even if you just install Woody, you're just a bit of changes and an apt-get dist-upgrade away from unstable or testing.

Once you get the hang of it, you can install most anything this way too. After fighting the Arch setup, getting help from Freenode/#archlinux, and making a million initrd tests, I got Arch to install via PXE. It required hand-extracting the pacman package and zlib, along with some crazy symlinking, but it works.

[end ramble] Anyway, for those looking to get away from ISO installs, check out PXE booting. Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? you dont need all 7 CDs to have a fully working Linux desktop, i only download the first two CDroms, and add a debian mirror to apt-get, i download very little from the mirror - usually just updates that did not make to the weekly sarge ISO i have burned... Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? i have found the regular install (not expert) to be more than sufficient for any of my needs. in fact, the expert mode is not aimed at newbies and newbies prolly shouldnt be using it. why try to explain all the individual steps to somebody when all you need to explain is the partitioning? more steps mean more chances at problems. Mon, 27 Dec 2004 19:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I would like to note that going to expert mode is not how debian is usually installed.
First, you can change modes anytime during setup, second, it will give tons of mostly useless questions which is just waste of time (i.e. installer is choosing very sane defaults automaticly). Mon, 27 Dec 2004 20:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? It's nice to be able re-use 3 floppies that you've had for 15 years and go from there.

My old thinkpad has "issues" with CDs sometimes so last time I installed on it, I did a floppy/net install. Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I get annoyed now with Fedora and other non debian based distros that use multiple disks. why does one need all those? just have a small image and then have the packages needed pulled to the computer. it is less annoying . Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:45:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? One needs all those if, for instance, one has a complex connection to the internet that's beyond the scope of the network installer to cope with. Or if one has a slow internet connection, or a capped internet connection, or no internet connection. Many distros that come on CDs also have alternative install methods (I know you can install Mandrake and SuSE over the network, I'm sure the same is true for Fedora but I can't vouch for it personally). Mon, 27 Dec 2004 22:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? In what way is Debian "not powerful enough for a power user (a description which might also apply to debian in general)"?

Note - this is an honest question, not flamebait. Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Debian Woody can also be installed with a small netinstall image. You would only need a few floppy's or a miniCD or something.

You can even use TFTP to download the boot image (only ~ 8MB) and don't use floppies or CDs at all provided you have a sane bootloader or 'BIOS' (LILO can't do it IIRC). Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I tried it too, but I found it too complex for absolute newbies and not powerful enough for a power user (a description which might also apply to debian in general).

Fortunately you don't speak for the rest of us. I found the new installer quite powerful enough for the power user. Please inform us of just what it is lacking in the "power user" department? Maybe you can inform the installer team of any improvements that they should consider. As for the "too complex" for noobs, well just what is complex about it? Installing operating systems is not like installing a program, but there are many articles(like the one above) & docs that clearly explain the process for new potential Debian users. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Is there any significant advantage in using pure Debian rather than Ubuntu? Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I have been using Redhat 7, 8, 9 now Fedora, is there an advantage to go over to Debian. Like more packages, multi-media and other stuff? Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? P2 266, Excuse me do you live in todays times. Even the curbside computers trashed in my neighbourhood are better than this. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I have been using Redhat 7, 8, 9 now Fedora, is there an advantage to go over to Debian. Like more packages, multi-media and other stuff?

Debian's package management is a lot better than Fedora's, things break at a much less frequency. The repositories are also much bigger for Debian.

I use Ubuntu, because it has the power of Debian, but makes it very easy to use and is truly beautiful. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I agree, the old P2 could not run X-windows the basic X-windows manager but NOT Gnome or KDE.

It would not have the memory nor the processing power. If so, it would take forever to load, then to load a app it would be using all the swap space.


So basically, Debian is an improvement over Fedore Core 3? Would it be worth the switch from what I am reading, is Debian much harder than Fedora/Redhat?

Very interested. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 02:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? We switched from RedHat 8,9 at work to Debian after RedHat pulled RedHat Linux, for Fedora. I use unstable for my desktop at work, testing at home, and stable on the servers.

I think that Debian offers a huge repository, a very solid, stable system, and easy install (with RC2*). Not to mention the community and support.

Debian is not harder then Fedora. Some things will be different, but not harder. They both have there advantages and disadvantages. I would highly recommend trying Debian. You could test out Debian with UML instead of whipping your box, or you could jump in with both feet. ;-) Tue, 28 Dec 2004 04:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? We work with fedora every day with our customers (in tech support). Fedora has more problems by far and is much harder to fix than debian hands down. Plus fedora does not have near as many packages as debian and debian is much faster and eaiser if you ask me to install. If you found ten people that have worked with fedora and debian I bet nine of them would reccommend debian to you. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 05:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "Is there any significant advantage in using pure Debian rather than Ubuntu?"

With Debian (Sarge), you have instant access to around 15,000 packages, which can be downloaded and installed, with dependancies automatically resoved, through "apt-get". I don't think you get that with Ubuntu. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 05:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I've used the new installer, and I love it. As a non expert, I'm astonished at how easy it is to use compared to the days when I used to bluff my way through the old Woody CD installation. It won't be long before all these light debian distros will be pretty superfluous. Anybody who can install SuSE will be able to install Debian-- and I'm pretty convincved that a chimp could install SuSE. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 05:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Hi

I am wondering for years now why during the whole
installation procedure you will never be asked if
you have a dial up connection via DSL.

But you can fake this !

Just do all the things like mentioned in the tutorial.
So, when you come to the point to choose the APT repository
and Debian flavour like testing /sid, etc, just switch with ALT+F2 to the second console, log in as root
do "pppoeconf", configure your DSL dial up, switch back to first console with ALT+F1 and then normally procede like mentonied in the tutorial.

This is how I am instaling Debian since woody.

Hope this helps someone.

Regards
paines Tue, 28 Dec 2004 07:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "I don't think you get that with Ubuntu."

Well, actually you do. Ubuntu is aproximately Debian + Installer with some default apps chosen for you + an Ubuntu controlled repository of packages.

But you can simply config you apt to use whatever repository you want and have basicly the same 'good old' Debian. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 08:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I am aware that I don't speak for the rest out here. I've never pretended I did. It's not that I don't like the installer, it's just that I miss certain features (as a power user), such as compiling a kernel myself. E.g. I see no point in installing a stock kernel if replacing it with a custom built kernel is the first thing I intend to do anyway. There's just no way you can get a completely configured system, tailored at your needs without ommiting the installer itself.

With not being easy enough for newbies, I meant that, after installing, they end up with only half the system properly configured (most notably X & DRI). And that where the story ends alreay (for an absolute newbie). Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? By the way, these days I install debian (using the installer RC2) using just the "netboot.tar.gz" kit, the PXE method ... served from my Mac OS X client system, all you have to do is turn on tftpd, set up the tftpboot directory, which (in 10.3.x) is pretty easy. I was glad to see that OS X includes bootpd, with which you can serve clients for Linux installations. With a decent Internet connection, this makes it quick to bring up a debian client, no disk images required. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 09:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Is there any significant advantage in using pure Debian rather than Ubuntu?
Ububtu specializes on Gnome -- if your main desktop is Gnome, Ubuntu is probably a better option. But if you mainly use some other desktop (KDE, XFCE, WMaker, IceWM, Fluxbox), pure Debian might be a better choice. If you don't use Gnome at all, there's no reason to even consider Ubuntu. Another difference is that Debian is a community project -- it has more developers and package maintainers and it is not dependent on any financiers or outside sponsors. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:56:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? "P2 266, Excuse me do you live in todays times. Even the curbside computers trashed in my neighbourhood are better than this."

Very much so, proof of it is that I can write an article about the installation of my favorite OS, in a language that is not my own.

I'm sorry if the hardware I use is not modern enough for your taste, but I live in a third world country where owning a computer in itself, it's an accomplishment, and where PII and PIII are the most popular hardware.

I'm a translator, not a gamer, so a PII, is enough for me.

Maybe your folks understand what I mean, Anand, not everybody is from New Jersey. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 14:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The fact that Debian can be installed easily on a Pentium 2 just highlights the flexibility of the operating system. Also, as others have pointed out, the net installer is the way to go. No one should need to download all the iso images unless they are installing on a machine without an internet connection. An OS based totally on free software is the only type that could be installed that way. It makes installation and updating a breeze.

Another comment, the "expert" option is needed in some cases. I installed Debian on a Dell Inspiron laptop and had to use the "expert" option to install. The default options won't work for my laptop.

Great article Luis! Tue, 28 Dec 2004 15:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? The ability to run a modern OS on very old hardware is a sign of a powerful, portable OS. I've run very recent versions of Debian on a Pentium 90 MHz with 80 MB RAM. I'm currently running NetBSD 2.0 on a Pentium 200 MHz with 32 MB RAM. Operating systems with such low footprints transform old hardware into productive systems. Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Well I read the article and also tried it out on a PII/300. Worked just fine! I'll have to go in and clean up the menus, a min install leaves a lot of dead menu links! I'm using Ubuntu 'Hoary' and Debian 'Sid' at the moment, and must say I do like the Debian-based distros and there is a lot of them, they just work! SkoleLinux is also worth a mention because it has a thin client/server install option as standard, which I haven't seen before. Very cool! Bee nice to see it also in Debian too! Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Is cdrecord still broken.I installed Debian not so long ago with the netinstaller.Great OS,nevertheless after i had installed one of the 2.6 kernel images my dvd and cd drives weren't detected anymore.The 2.4 kernel gave no problems.I just wondered if this particular issue still exists. Fri, 31 Dec 2004 10:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I think it's a discover problem. I don't know if it's been fixed yet, but you can run as root "dpkg-reconfigure discover1" and tell discover that you don't want it to manage cdrom related symlinks. Then make the relevant symlinks and directories in /media yourself and everything should be OK. Fri, 31 Dec 2004 20:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments