After four years of development, the first release candidate of the new Debian installer is here. If you’re familiar with other install programs, this one may surprise you. It introduces Debian’s strengths right at the start, and it goes a long way toward burying Debian’s reputation for being difficult to install.
Review: Debian-Installer Release Candidate 1
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
I was allways surprised by Debian’s opinion about being hard to install. This is easiest, after Slackware, distro to set up. All my boxes are running Debian (mostly Sid) and it never took me more than 40 min to get it ready. Maybe the secret is to use net-install instead of org. Debian CD’s?
Contrary to the review, it is the reality, not the reputation, of Debian’s install that frightens prospective users. Plain and simple, the reputation exists because a lot of people can’t get it to install. Debian needs something better. Who knows why it took 4 years to get to a release candidate, though.
I believe the fact that there is a “secret” justifies the claims of the ones stating it’s hard to install…
Who knows why it took 4 years to get to a release candidate, though.
Because they have to made an installer for ALL architectures they support. Not just one or sometimes two architectures like many other distro.
is easy and logical. It’s also intuitive and faster. I have never been intimidated by such installs. Debian is one of the easiest such installs. The key to master such installs is to grasp how to partition. Only OpenBSD/NetBSD’s partitioner is a bit trickier, but once you comprehend how to do it, it becomes a piece of cake.
A friend of mine recently wanted to install Debian on a couple of his boxen, wiping the 2K (file server) and Mandrake (web server) installs that used to be on them. Since I have an apt-cache server, we did it at my place.
I hadn’t installed Debian in quite some time (mainly because all my Debian boxes were in a state of ‘just working’).
The sarge-installer blew me away. All the messy playing with modules and other garbage, now ‘just works’. (The xserver setup is still a little indepth) I’m now at the point that anyone with a bit of technical know how asks which Linux distribution to use, I can happily reccomend Debian-sarge, and leave it at that.
This weekend, after getting annoyed with my increasingly odd desktop system (three years of misc update/upgrade/make install abuse has left it in less than optimum, if still usable, condition), I trashed everything and reinstalled from sarge. This time round, I was even able to configure my seperate partition for /home/ before doing anything. A couple of bugs have niggled (it insisted on loading OSS drivers for my soundcards until I black listed them), and the first time I booted, I had four listings for my two optical drives in fstab, but dare I say, the whole thing is actually faster. I’ve given up on recompiling my own kernels now, because the Debian defaults just work (apt-get install kernel-image-2.6.7-1-k7 for example), without all the other junk ussually associated with such things.
Now, if we can just get an auto-detecting x.org server, and some sort of super-apt-get gui for the less than technically astute, we’d have the best OS on the planet.
I suppose it depends on what measure of difficulty you’re using.
I have recently installed DebianPPC on an old PPC Mac (pre G3) and it went on without a hitch. I couldn’t get the other Linux PPC distros to even boot up (I couldn’t boot from a CD, so floppy time!). Many of them seem to have remakably little documentation, especially on non-dual booting systems! I didn’t want to use BootX to dual boot, I wanted a clean system! Anyway, I am rambling.
I have installed a huge variety of Linux distros onto x86 hardware, and up until recently, I have never been satisfied with the Debian install. I have no problems with the actual installer itself, but the initial setup of apt sources, and the horror that is dselect seems to be crazy!
I, for one, am very glad that the Debian team are pursuing this further.
Good one peeps.
Just installed Debian sarge ppc.
I’m kind of a newbie just switching from yellowdog.
The installer was simple and I was up and running in no time.
“Because they have to made an installer for ALL architectures they support. Not just one or sometimes two architectures like many other distro.”
I think this is a major factor. We run Debian on x86’s and sparc boxes. The installs were the same (in terms of look and feel) across all boxes. With the sparc ones tough, we had to use net boot.
What exactly makes it so hard to write a multiplatform installer? Is python a dead language?
I guess half the installer work is probably in making the auto-detection, but they probably could have written it on say ppc, and then started doing others. Release them as you go..
It’s a nice process, but the hardware detection doesn’t match kudzu. I personally use Debian – I can’t live without their superb repositories – but the install is a pain. Luckily, you only have to go through it once and then it is beautiful from there on in.
Don’t know if it has been mentioned here yet.
In other distro news, the planets align as Debian shoots for a September 15th release of version 3.1, codenamed “Sarge”. This release is the debut of debian-installer, the new installer for the Debian project. We’ve been using the installer
http://arstechnica.com/etc/linux/index.html
I believe the fact that there is a “secret”
Maybe you’re right. On the other hand, net-install CD’s are listed on http://debian.org, so it’s not so big secret. Maybe it’s cfdisk that scare’em away?
“Who knows why it took 4 years to get to a release candidate, though.”
The first two years of that were more or less completely wasted due to development on the new installer being put completely on hold in order to patch up the old boot-floppies installer one last time. Joey Hess’s retrospective (http://www.kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/d-i_retrospective-2004-08-0…) has the juicy details.
since debian is completely community based, things get done in the order of interest. no one wanted to do an installer, so it didnt get done.
Debian was my first distro 5 years ago, and I don’t think it was difficult at all, coming from a DOS/Windows world to Linux, I am glad I tried Debian first, I always go back to it. I love the way you can customize your set of packages for every situation without having to get a specific distro for that purpose. Debian everywhere.
It’s definitely one of the more friendlier installers I have used ( ncurses based ). I really don’t understand why people have given it the “hard-to-installer” tag. You don’t even have to “get used” to it. I feel that this tag was given out to debian because of the little warts and hang ups that users encountered because they failed to read the documentation or the help files in the installer.
Although if those of you out there who “must” have an anaconda interface to install, there is always the installer from progeny that is basically the anaconda installer running on top the debian system and leaves you with the gnome-desktop running on top of debian.
But due to it’s beta nature progeny still has a few kinks to iron out, so beware …
An installer should be a standard X app running off a live CD.
OK a quick question for those 1337 debian users.
Say I do a net-install and only install a base system. Afterwards I apt-get Gnome and X, how would I go about getting debian to automatically setup X for me like it does if I choose to install a DE during the net-install?
I really like the new-installer, its just a pain that it installs both KDE and GNOME if I choose tasksel -> desktop-environment.
am I missing something? Mepsis Linux does precisely this.
I install debian with just a base system and then apt-get the rest. 2 days ago when I installed on my laptop, I apt-getted pekwm (my window manager), x-window-system, and gdm. I was asked the typical questions for setting up X and then I restarted the computer. Done.
http://www.mepis.org/
Boot from live CD, run the installer, select your drive and your time zone, go surf the web until your install is done. Hardware autodetected, plays nice with multiboot systems. It’s based on Debian so you still get all the joy of apt-get trashing your system now and then.
I’m stupid with you I’m afraid because what you said makes more sense than all the other installation ideas around.
As to people saying “Yeah debian is easy to install you just need to know it’s quirks and read the manual to find the warts”
Excuse me, but that doesn’t spell easy to install, that spells minefield.
oh..I totally agree with you..its a great install idea and distro’s like MEPIS, KNOPPIX, GNOPPIX..etc take advantage of it. (and btw my comment was mostly a joke
..I am just seriously tired of this kind of comment today). People don’t seem to realize that something working for them does not mean it works for everyone. Sure, having a livecd that works while it installs is nice for many users and the installation is usually pretty easy..but Vanilla Debian supports how many archs?…not all of them can do this and not every sysadmin (probably close to 0) would want this anyway. Why on earth do you want a web browser on a livecd to setup a server? Or even setting up multiple desktops..its just cruft..utterly useless and a waste of time. Also, most of the install routines on these livecds are simply too limiting for the experienced user. I don’t even use Debian, but I have used their new installer and its a good one. Sorry for making fun of you, but the comment “An installer should be a standard X app running off a live CD” _is_ stupid…oh and being graphical means nothing (the user who required a graphical install simply is not Vanilla Debian’s audience)
“Say I do a net-install and only install a base system. Afterwards I apt-get Gnome and X, how would I go about getting debian to automatically setup X for me like it does if I choose to install a DE during the net-install? ”
I am neither 1337 nor a debian user
…however I think the command you are looking for is dpkg-reconfigure ..the package name I think is x-window-system (maybe x-windows-system…or maybe something completely different), so it would be something like dpkg-reconfigure x-window-system
mepis, knoppix etc are horrible when installed (w/ knoppix you don’t have a clean system, can you track sid or any official debian repo?) besides all this stuff is for i386 only. What about the people with other machines, like PowerPC, SPARC, Alpha etc?
“What exactly makes it so hard to write a multiplatform installer? Is python a dead language?
I guess half the installer work is probably in making the auto-detection, but they probably could have written it on say ppc, and then started doing others. Release them as you go..”
Boot kernel, drivers, autodetection of hardware, partition schemes (think BSD labels), different types of boot managers and their quirks (not all architectures grok grub or lilo, but need aboot or slilo…which have odd requirements sometimes), etc, etc.
If it only were so simple to create a multiplatform installer by copying python script on top of an architecture specific kernel.
Started installer formatted my root partition as reiserfs… installer said cannot mount / 🙂
Besides that minor problem (used ext3 instead) the installer is very easy. Somebody mentioned Mepis and ohters, all these life distros have one problem. Sure they are perfectly suited and have very good installers, but they all rely on debian unstable.
That basically means install one of those and wait for the next release which will wipe out your entire configuration except the homes, or go the unstable apt-get route and be prepared to fixe trashed config files every one or two weeks.
Come on, not a single one in the article or on the debian site…
http://people.debian.org/~madduck/d-i/screenshots/
I have never, ever configured X to work properly on a Debian system. Is there a secret to that as well?
Dunno aboot the new installer but in woody, you’d just type
xfree86 -configure
And it would auto detect your monitor and stuff. You’d have to mess around with the XFConfig-4 file to get things right. It’s not really that hard but it could be way easier. I’ve borked my install a few times so now I use Libranet to install and just apt-get update to Sarge.
I’d say that after about a month or so of the new installer being released, loads of GUI installers will start popping up all over the place.
You could also boot with Knoppix and then just copy the XFConfig-4 to your Debian installation.
-J
To those of you who claim that Debian or Debiannet is “easy” to install, please consider that the REST OF THE WORLD considers Mandrake or Fedora easy to install.
While these 2 examples are windows-esque where you can’t remove EVERYTHING at the install, they’re extremely easy to use. About as simple as installing ANY APPLICATION IN WINDOWS. Debian’s old installer is very cryptic and a non-starter for inexperienced computer users. The only installer that’s worse is Gentoo. I wouldn’t even call it an installer.
In order to use debian, my favorite distro by far, I install knoppix or mepis & customize it heavily. I’m a huge fan of linux in general and open source applications (as I’m a mediocre at best programmer.) Hopefully RC2 won’t take as long as XP SP2 to release.
>An installer should be a standard X app running off a live CD.
Why?
It is not hard to install.
>To those of you who claim that Debian or Debiannet is “easy” to install
They are easy to install.
>please consider that the REST OF THE WORLD considers Mandrake or Fedora easy to install.
What you and “the rest” of the non computer savy world consider easy (as in easy to install) is in fact easy (as in “I dont know anything about linux or computers in general but want to set a desktop up”.) Dont muddle these two up.
A Debian (or a gentoo or a slack) is really easy and fast to install, when you know what you want and how to do it. The people who dont know this, should stick with Mandrake and/or Fedora, because they are the target group of these two distros, which are tuned for this one single purpose (desktop computer) and meant for use especially with one of two major Desktops, KDE or Gnome. There is just no sense in tuning Debian/Gentoo for Joe User and his Granny, when they are not their target user group.
With the target user group in mind Debians installers are easy and fast to use.
As a Debian user for several years I think new installer is great, but I realy think it lacks serious requirements that should be solved as soon as possible.
Must have:
– An automated X server configuration.
– A clean CD/DVD configuration, no duplicated drives. (with automount option).
Also desiderable:
– A graphic frontend.
– A setings duplicator, so you can save or load selected packages and desired setings.
– More tips,help… Debian provides a lot of tools but those tools are unprofitable if you don’t know they exist.
Would be a plus:
– Easy apt archives mirroring and mixing, so you can set and apt server in a network.
– Better tools to integrate with a windows network, included domain authentication.
THANKS TO ALL THE DEBAIN DEVELOPERS !!!!
(1) Very few people going to call the new installer “easy to use” because it doesn’t sport fancy GUI. It wouldn’t matter if the text and GUI installers are functionally the same, because it is some sort of mental block.
(2) The wonderful thing about the old installer was the high degree of interactivity. This meant two things:
(a) It didn’t do anything unexpected. For some reason the new interface for patitioning the hard drive put a second swap partition in. Later on, it overwrote my boot configuration to launch debian — without asking. That feels like something out of Redmond.
(b) Because it gave me the opportunity to twiddle with everything, it meant that Debian would install cleanly on machines where every other distro would fail (such as laptops or the latest Macs). Maybe the “expert” install will give me the same opportunity to twiddle. I don’t know, and I’m leary to try it after it munged my existing bootstrap.
Another distro which has gone the way of the dogs to satisfy users who don’t want to learn where the power switch is, let alone how to use the switch. Why oh why does every distro have to satisfy the lowest common denominator when there are a large enough number of distros to satisfy those who want to learn and those who don’t!
If you think debian is hard, try gentoo (had no problem with it though, but must people will)
OK – I want to move away from Red Hat running my FTP and servers and am quite keen on Debian. This ‘new installer’ that everyone is talking about…how does one go about getting it then running the install of Debian or is it on the first install CD? I.e. Boot from the CD and get a nice gui as you do with say YaST 2 with SuSE or Anaconda with RH.
Or is it just like the old Debian install, a text based installer?
cheers dudes!
Probably the best way to use the installer is to burn it on a CD and do a network install. Perhaps you can also get a CD with packages, but my experience is that you’ll want to get packages from unstable (because they are up to date), in which case any previously downloaded packages are pretty useless.
As for graphics, the installer is text-based for now. It is not like the old installer, though, as it does almost everything automagically (including hardware detection). I don’t know what it is that people find hard about the old installer, but if it’s the many steps or the lack of automatic hardware detection, the new installer solves it all. If, however, the old installer is “hard” because it’s not point and click, the new installer will not be any easier.
Hey, I went to this page http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/ and found that there’s a special section called “Documentation” with some interesting links. One is called “Installation Howto” and another “Sarge Installation Manual”. Very cool stuff. Check it out!
Lots of information about the new Debian Installer:
http://wiki.debian.net/index.cgi?DebianInstaller
http://wiki.debian.net/index.cgi?DebianInstallerFAQ
>An installer should be a standard X app running off a live CD.
Why?
Exactly. Quite a many Debian users don’t want to run X nor a graphical window managers of any kind on their Debian servers.
Besides: a well-designed text-based installer is really no more difficult to use than a fancy graphical one. Sometimes it may even be the opposite. Though: GUI programs do tend to be more intuitive than commandline (or ncurses etc. based) programs, there’s no denying that. Anyway, for example, the text-based Libranet installer is extremely easy to use and worth trying if you want to see a well-designed Debian installer for common PC machines.
I think that the Debian developer community could gradually try to stop bluffing themself when they always insist that people should use the Stable branch of Debian instead of Testing or Unstable, because it seems to be a clear fact that those willing to run pure Debian Stable are only a small minority of Debian users.
Is it because the Debian developers themselves run (& are able to run) mostly Unstable that they don’t themsleves really notice the problems of running aging software versions of the Stable version?
Developers have also developed many nice apps (like apt-listbugs & apt-listchanges) for themselves to help make Unstable more useful and stable. But running Unstable could prove to be too hard for most people still – becauase, it’s unstable: constatly changing thing where there may be lots of new bugs in new software updates.
Isn’t it a simple fact that most Debian users (also the new potential ones) seem to want to run Debian Testing instead of Stable? A good prove of that is the fact that most Debian-based distributions seem to be more or les based on the Debian Testing. But Testing is still perhaps the least supported of all the three branches: security fixes come to Testing later than to both the Stable and the Unstable Branch etc.
I wonder, it it would really be impossible to find resources to officially support Testing better too? At the very least, the official Debian documentation should address the needs of those unorthodox users better too that do not run only pure Stable, as they seem to be the majority of Debian users anyway. Nowadays, what you can read on the official Debian docs about Unstable and Testing is mostly only that running Testing or Unstable is not recommened nor supported – so, though maybe a big majority of Debian users do run Testing or Unstable or some sort of mixed sources system.
The current Debian release model where the Stable release is very static, gets practically only security fixes and therefore gets old reapidly, is not very dynamic. Many people would like to run newer software than what Stable gives them, also server users. (Maybe Debian community should, for example, pay attention to what has been happening in the kernel development recently: they’ve started to use a more dynamic development model – because they felt that it was needed.)
Potential solutions:
– better official support for Testing
– a bit faster (time-based? once a year?) release cycle and/or more dynamic release/updade policy for Stable that would make it more interesting and attractive to run Debian Stable.
I’ve badmouthed the Debian install many times. If you think it is bad now, you should have installed potato.
But…I’ve spent the last few hours using the new installer. It works.
I burned a CD from today’s installer image, rebooted, and was off. The curses-based install reminds me of Slackware’s. Except for being asked twice about proxies, it went off without a hitch, not bad for an initial release candidate. I was especially pleased that it offered a manual partitioning option that allowed me to use my two drives as I wish. (Partioning is still too error-prone to be included in any Linux install — even for Windows — but will be with us until someone devises something better than fdisk or its derivatives.)
Moving to unstable was no problem. Then, after some Google research and a few mistakes on my part, I rebuilt my kernel to use the Nvidia driver my video card expects.
Display quality — important for me — is good, but not the best I’ve seen. That’s for tomorrow, as is getting my printer configured. (Printers live in the Linux slums. Since the new nstaller — as do most installers — correctly identifies the printer — why can’t it set it up automatically?
Now if they’d include something like Slackware “Pkgtools” so users don’t have to pull thier hair out looking for the right config tools…..
Yes really , pkgtools is so much better then
apt-get ,apt-build, or dpkg-reconfigure
)
I hope u joked when u asked about “something like pkgtools”?