The Very Verbose Debian 3.0 Installation Walkthrough

Gentu writes "Cited the general displeasure which accompanied the Debian 3.0 release, mostly regarding its dated installation procedure, Clinton De Young wrote an easy-reading but long article for OSNews going through the Debian installation step by step. Of course Progeny released recently the PGI graphical installer, but it is not as complete as the current Debian text-based installer and it will definately be quite some time before it get adopted by the project."

Comments

What about debian's own install guide?

[dknj]

I found debian's own installation guide to be extensive enough

-dk

Long installation manuals?

[rob-fu]

I haven't used Debian for quite some time since using Gentoo, I still think Gentoo's installation page is incredibly long. Or maybe it just seems that way because I'm waiting a really long, long time in between instructions that require compiling something.

Comming a long way.

[Chris_Stankowitz]

I am in no way a linux guru and/or expert, in-fact I am about as wet behind the ears as you can get. Debian comes off as being one of those distros that you should only bother installing if you are in-the-know. I have been very curious about debian for a while now and have always went the RH or slackware and mandrake route beacause of the ease of install. I have to admit though that, A) this article helps TONS & B) debian has gotten much better for us newbs. This is a MUST read!!!

Re:Comming a long way.

[jedie]

Okay, let me be clear on this one first: this is merely *my* opinion and I too am in no way a linux guru (hell I' on a win95 machine right now :)).

Debian is in no way an uber-geek distro or anything. The installation is actually one of the best I've ever seen. This is mainly because you can choose the order in which you want to set up your installation.
If you don't know what to do, the installer gives you the most logical next step and alternatives. Switching back and forth between different installation steps is also very easy (if you screw up or forget something).
The terminal also comes in quite handy sometimes (although I don't think it's something for newbies)
The only thing that makes Debian "hard" to install is the fact that you have to use your keyboard to navigate (tab, arrows, enter) instead of pointing and clicking. And if you would just take 5 minutes to master your keyboards navigational keys, you'dn notice it's not such a daunting task afterall :)

Same goes for configuring the system after initial boot. Debconf will help you trough it all, with almost every ease of the graphical configuration tools on other distros. Although the package selection can be a pain in the ass, but then again, you could just select tasks, instead of individual packages.

I think the main problem is that some people don't like the Debian installation/configration because ncurses looks "old" :)

Re:Ease of use

[kingofnopants]

dumb itself down

not so much dumb itself down but at least make a more intuitive interface, and i'm not just talking about the instalation. If they want less-than-ubergeeks to use it then they whole thing should be reworked.

right solution, wrong problem?

[Dionysus]

I don't think the problem is walking through the installation. I had a friend, who have never installed Linux before, install Debian two weeks ago. He had no problems following the onscreen instructions (just click next, basically).

The problem is, as many people has mentioned before, the automatic (non-existing one at that) hardware detection. We weren't sure about what kind of network card he had (as in which chipset to use), and we were doing a network installation (just boot up from disks), so that was a huge problem. Finally, we just tried all the drivers, one by one, until the right one didn't fail on load.

Everything else was pretty easy.

Re:right solution, wrong problem?

[swillden]

Finally, we just tried all the drivers, one by one, until the right one didn't fail on load.

This doesn't address the general issue, of course, but it's a very useful tidbit for your future information:

If you're trying to figure out what driver to use for a semi-unknown card, you can often get some really good hints by running "lspci". It just lists everything that the PCI bus reports on it. "lspci -v" gives a bit more information. I find that 99 times out of 100 I can just look at the information reported and narrow down the list of possible drivers to just two or three.

After that, of course, modprobing them one by one is the simplest way to figure out what's likely to work, but it's a lot easier with a smaller list.

Failing that, I've resorted in the past to writing a little 'for' loop in bash to just load every driver in the directory, then running 'lsmod' to see what managed to load. Something like:

for i in *.o; do insmod $i; done; lsmod

...executed in the directory with all of the network modules is butt-ugly, has numerous problems... and very often works like a charm ;-)

Not newbie-friendly, though. But for me, like many I know who were around during the bad old days of Windows driver hell (Win95 to early Win98), I have a visceral fear of automagic hardware detection, and I would *much* rather just configure it myself, thank you. That way I know what is getting loaded, and when, and why.

Heck, I even tend to configure my kernels with everything as a module just so I can tell what drivers are being used and what aren't.

Arg!

[labratuk]

...the PGI graphical installer...

AAArrrgggh! RAS syndrome!!

(RAS: Redundant Acronym Syndrome)

Re:Arg!

[MrEd]

RAS syndrome!!
That was the joke, right? ;-)

i386 Is Not Enough

[John Hasler]

> Of course Progeny released recently the PGI
> graphical installer, but it is not as complete as
> the current Debian text-based installer

More importantly, it's i386 only.

Install isn't bad if you're familiar with linux...

[fortinbras47]

I've run Mandrake, Debian, and Redhat. Currently I have Redhat 8.0 on my main box as it just makes everything fairly simple.

On my house mail server, that's a different story. I'm running Debian on an old P133. Debian made it really easy to install a totally stripped down system and exim configuration beats the *#@$* out of sendmail configuration as far as I'm concerned.

The debian install isn't bad at all if you're FAMILIAR with linux and know what you're doing. People complain it isn't as nice as Mandrake install. Guess what, Debian is put out by hobbyists and not by a commercial company. The focus is on functionality, NOT GUI interface design.

Debian isn't shooting for the average Joe Schmo linux desktop user. I think Debian is great for systems when you want TOTALLY cutting edge (unstable gets updated all the time and installing new packages over the net is a breeze), when you want just a few precisely chosen packages, or when running headless.

My largest complaint about Debian isn't about the installer per se, it's about X windows and fonts. Basically, I apt-get install gnome etc... and I have no idea what is up with the font situation. It use to be that you didn't even have truetype and had to fuck around for hours to get basic truetype working. I have no idea what the situation is with anti-aliasing and gnome 2.

But watch the criticism of Debian. Debian is a free product that is remarkably functional. It literally amazes me that anything in Debian works at all (and for the most part, everything does *with a lil tweakin*). Unless you start paying money for Debian GUI development, watch your tongue :P You're not ENTITLED to completely free operating system with a nice graphical installer!

Re:Ease of use

[cscx]

There's nothing wrong with text-based installers. In fact, the first half of the WinXP installer (if you're doing a clean install) is text-based (50-line). However, it's well written and intuitive.

Something need not be fully graphical to be intuitive. I talking like MS-DOS editor vs VI intuitive. They just need to spruce it up, and add some better default options.

Shit, even the FreeBSD 4.5 install is monochrome text! But it's intuitive. With options like "You can configure your partitions manually, but if you have no idea what the f**k you're doing, press X to autoconfigure," or something similar to that.

Debian & the Happy Gentoo User (RTFM Syndrome)

[Plug]

As has been said a hundred times before (I'd link specific comments, but check back to any other thread about Debian), Debian isn't a distro for new Linux users. It can be, but that is not it's main purpose in life. If I were asked to summarize Debian's main purpose in life, I would say "to provide Linux on some more obscure hardware platforms and to put the F back into Free."

People say Debian's installer sucks for people who don't know what they doing. I had trouble the first time I installed Debian. I can whisk through the installer with no problems now.

I installed Gentoo some months ago for a LUG demo. The installation process ate my Windows partition (because I was an idiot and typed mke2fs /dev/hda2 instead of /dev/hdb2), but otherwise, I followed my 13 page printout to the letter and not only did I have an installed system at the end of it, I knew how the installation worked. I knew all about partitioning and filesystems and swapfiles and hopefully someone who has never seen these things before will know what they all are at the end, as opposed to someone who hits "Enter" (or worse, clicks "OK") multiple times.

Putting the installer into X or gtkfb will sure make it seem a bit more friendly for new users, but unless it's backed up by a great set of administration tools for package management etc such as Red Hat provide, you're just fooling people into thinking that they can get by without knowing anything.

I think something like what has been produced here is what Debian needed more than a graphical installer - this page will instill the sense that "if you read the instructions, complex tasks become simple" into people, and that's what really counts.

If you're going to change something about Debian, change dselect. It's horrible. It needs to be changed. I haven't used dselect since I learnt how apt worked, but sometimes it would come in useful if it wasn't so god awful!

RTFM is a damned sight easier to say to someone if they have a decent manual available. Lets hope this guide can fill that void.

Re:Ease of use

[Anonymous Coward]

There's nothing wrong with text-based installers. In fact, the first half of the WinXP installer (if you're doing a clean install) is text-based

so you're saying that if windows does it it is alright? do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

Uhhh

[Com2Kid]

• A couple of the things I won't cover in this tutorial are configuring a USB mouse

Does somebody somewheres not know the definition of plug and play?

See, there is this USB port thing, and you, err, plug stuff into it, and, uh, well, heh, it is supposed to kind of, err, work.

If USB mice require configuring then there are more serious problems here then just the lack of a graphical installer. . . .

Re:Uhhh

[AntiFreeze]

USB is hardly plug and play under any operating system other than Windows.

Up until relatively recently USB support was a pain in the ass under Linux. Tools for dealing with USB devices are still in their infancy, and if something doesn't work the first time around, it usally takes a lot of tweaking to get things working.

usbutils is a good package, but you still have to learn it before you can just go ahead and plug in a usb mouse or joystick or cablemodem and get it working.

In other words, at least for the moment, dealing with USB devices is best left to a Linux USB-Howto (there are a few) and not to a specific installation guide.

Re:Uhhh

[m0i]

USB devices are PnP, given that USB service itself is installed/configured. And on Debian, load those modules:
input
mousedev
hid
usbcore
usb-uhci
buy putting them in /etc/modules and running /etc/init.d/modutils, and you'll be set. The remaining step is to actually plug the thing in the port, as you mentionned :-)

How to install an operating system

[chazR]

Installing an operating system is easy:

Insert media

Boot

Enter hostname and IP address [NON DHCP SYSTEMS ONLY]

Done.

If it's harder than that, get a better operating system.

I know some Linux distros aren't there yet, but some are (stand up Suse and Red Hat).

OS/400 has been like this for over twenty years (except the IP stuff - LU6.2, SNA, oh the memories)

Solaris is just like that.

Installation is a difficult, but solved problem. Before you start whinging about different device drivers, incompatible IRQs, horizontal sync rates and other inanities, ask yourself why IBM, Sun, HP, Microsoft et al. have solved the problem.

If you want real geek cred, make the hurd work, or add an optimisation to gcc. Or, possibly, build an installer for Linux. Working through a difficult install is a waste of everybody's time.

Thank you and good night.

Re:Ease of use

[Safety Cap]

so you're saying that if windows does it it is alright?

The point is that > 99% of the people are used to Windows, so creating a similar installation system will lower the learning curve and make it easier for the average user to install. Shouting "RTFM!" may make you feel better, but is hardly the way to win friends and (positively) influence people.

For a solid discussion of why design consistency (across programs, platforms, and systems) is key, check out Joel On Software's User Interface Design for Programmers. Here's the relevant part of the argument:

I've seen companies where management prides themselves on doing things deliberately differently from Microsoft. "Just because Microsoft does it, doesn't mean it's right," they brag, and then proceed to create a gratuitously different user interface from the one that people are used to. Before you start chanting the mantra that "just because Microsoft does it, doesn't mean it's right," please consider two things:

1. Even if it's not right, if Microsoft is doing it in a popular program like Word, Excel, Windows, or Internet Explorer, then millions of people are going to think that it's right, or at least, fairly standard, and they are going to assume that your program works the same way. Even if you think (as the Netscape 6.0 engineers clearly do) that Alt+Left is not a good shortcut key for "Back", there are literally millions of people out there who will try to use Alt+Left to go back, and if you refuse to do it on some general religious principle that Bill Gates is the evil smurf arch-nemesis Gargamel, then you are just gratuitously ruining your program so that you can feel smug and self-satisfied, and your users will not thank you for it.
2. And don't be so sure it's not right. Microsoft spends more money on usability testing than you do, they keep detailed statistics based on millions of tech support phone calls, and there's a darn good chance that they did it that way because more people can figure out how to use it that way.

So, if Grandma can install Windows but not Debian, there's something wrong with Debian, if Debian's goal is to become a distro that the average person will use. If Debian's goal is to be some '7ee7 h4x0r d00d w4r3z O5, then make it hard--hell, make it obfuscated. That'll show those newbie lUsers, right?

Re:Ease of use

[bogie]

Again for the billionth time, ease of use and "dumbing down" are not the same thing. Smart choices eliminate that. If fact it takes one hell of a smart person to design a install that is easy to use and yet no matter what give the user a perfectly functioning system.

Like I have posted before, the perfect product is as easy to use as turning on a lightswitch. The difference between being an expert and newbie is eliminated and the product "just works".

People need to stop spreading this myth that ease of use is for dummies. Ease of use is the ultimate goal, Period!

PGI is *not* the next gen Debian installer

[salimma]

The Debian project is working on its own installer - check here for its status.

This installer is modularised, using udebs (micro debs) to extend its functionality. Currently bootable on i386 and s390 but probably not usable to do a complete install yet.

The Progeny-developed discover tool, similar to Red Hat's kudzu, is being used for hardware autodetection by the installer. But the Progeny installer itself seems to be not very useful to create a fully-fledged installer - it does not even have support for non-ext2 filesystems!

There is a bizarre idea...

[dasunt]

In open source, a lot of people will vocally voice their opinions that projects should be similiar to each other.

Debian is a great example of this. You frequently hear complants of a non-graphical installer, usually with the comment 'but my $preferred_distro has a graphical installer!' I haven't looked at the exact reasons why debian doesn't have a graphical installer, but an educated guess would take into effect the roughly dozen hardware platforms debian supports and the fact that debian will do things in ways that usually won't break - autodiscovery has the potential to cause problems. Plus, this is the distro where I can stick a few floppies into a machine, do a tiny install and skip tasksel and dselect, then apt-get apache, sshd and iptables, and have a small, fairly secure webserver without ever needing to download x.

The other complaint is that debian should have up to date packages. Debian's philosophy isn't to ride the bleeding edge, its to make sure everything works, and that stable is named stable for a reason.

I see a lot of this going on in the open source movement, and its just wrong. If Debian wants to be a better Redhat, the developers should join the Redhat team. Same with other projects. If mySQL tries to be postgres, even if it succeeds, we will have lost something. However, if mySQL strives to be a fast SQL database for websites, then we will have two good databases, both with a different purpose.

Each project should have a purpose, a goal, and it should be different from the other projects. Else there is just duplication of efforts and time lost as each project reinvents the wheel.

Re:Ease of use

[gonz]

I have used Debian for several years. Although having a sensible installer will encourage more people to try Debian, this is only relevant on day one. I think there are much higher priorities which affect the overall usability of Debian on days besides "Install Day". Some examples:

1. dselect is just an embarassment. When I first saw it, I almost quit right there. Ironically, what kept me going was the sheer shittiness, which (in my mind) was an assurance that it would have to be fixed soon. No luck so far, although aptitude looks promising.
2. The packages are seldom up-to-date. This is also a feature, since the stability is rock-solid. My system hasn't been hacked a single time since I switched from RedHat to Debian. But when new features matter (e.g. Perl, Samba, etc.), Debian is always several versions behind. This has been improving, and it wouldn't matter at all if the next problem was solved:
3. It's impossible to mix+match packages. Debian divides the world into three categories, roughly corresponding to "stable", "hackable", and "malfunctiony." Once in awhile the "malfunctiony" distribution will contain the newer version you want, but it's just there to tease you. If you try to install it, it will attempt to convert your whole system to "malfunctiony" mode. Instead you're supposed to recompile from the sources, but this has its own problems because it creates a missing dependency for other packages. That wouldn't matter, except:
4. The package system is not flexible. For example, suppose I compile my own Perl and install it, and now I want my custom version to satisfy the Perl dependency. The Debian answer? Create a fake package that provides "Perl" and install it. (Someone even has an automated utility for this stupid idea!) If you want to use the much superior -MCPAN, it becomes even more of a headache, because now you have lots of little fake packages like that. As far as I can tell, there is no equivalent of "provides" in rpmrc.
5. No support for chkconfig. Managing services in Debian means manipulating stupid symbolic links. This should be centralized.

Of course, I did choose to use Debian. To be fair, I should also mention its strong points:

• It's very stable.
• Upgrading packages is almost completely automatic, like Windows Update. This makes it easy to stay "current" and secure.
• It's easy to install without X-Windows (which I don't need, because my servers don't have keyboards or monitors)
• You can export a list of installed packages from one server, and then install this list on other server.
• The Debian people aren't conspicuously trying to make you their customer
• Debian is impossible for stupid people to use. This dramatically increases the ratio of smart people to stupid people on the newsgroups. :-)

-Gonz

Re:Ease of use

[styrotech]

It's impossible to mix+match packages.

Not anymore...

I run a mixed testing/unstable system this way, and it works for me.

Spoiler alert!

[tve]

This walkthrough will give away all the secrets to the textadventure that is the Debian installer.