The Well-Tempered Debian desktop

An anonymous reader writes "What happens when the editor of a popular Linux website attempts to install a Debian Etch desktop on an old ThinkPad? How does it turn out? Surprisingly well! The article comprises an entertaining account of the entire process, complete with lots of informative screenshots, from downloading the net-install to tangling with Wi-Fi and modem PCMCIA cards as the last step — and everything in between. A great primer for Debian newbies... Go Debian!"

Comments

Fine and all but

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

What happens when the editor of a popular Linux website attempts to install a Debian Etch desktop on an old ThinkPad?

The real question is: what happens when non-popular-linux-website folks attempt to install a Debian Etch on an old thinkpad? I'm not sure the report would be so peachy...

Re:Fine and all but

[frdmfghtr]

The real question is: what happens when non-popular-linux-website folks attempt to install a Debian Etch on an old thinkpad? I'm not sure the report would be so peachy...

Good question...and the answer, my friend, explains why Linux won't make it to the mainstream desktop for quite some time. I'm going to focus my comments on hitting a particular target audience, and neglect the technical/security superiority of one platform over another.

FTA:

Tops on my list of applications are Firefox and Thunderbird, and I always get rid of modified versions and substitute the pristine versions direct from Mozilla.org. So I downloaded both, unzipped and untarred them into /usr/lib/, where Debian likes to keep them, and created symlinks in /usr/bin/ pointing to /usr/lib/firefox/firefox and /usr/lib/thunderbird/thunderbird, where the system expects to find them.

I tried Firefox first, but it wouldn't load. I tried it again, this time by typing firefox from a console window, and noticed that the program was sending out an error message ("error while loading shared libraries") regarding a file called "libstdc++.so.5" that it either couldn't load or find. A quick bit of googling led me to install the missing library, using the command (as root): apt-get install libstdc++5. Thankfully, that was all it took to get the pure, Mozilla.org-supplied Firefox running on my desktop.

Two points of interest here:

(1) The author had to create symbolic links to make Firefox and Thunderbird work.

(2) "A quick bit of googling" was required to get the missing library installed.

Read the first quoted paragraph again. Note the author had to unzip and untar the files into the directory "where Debian likes to keep them," and make the symlinks where "where the system expects to find them." Does the Debian distro put Firefox and Thunderbird in a different directory than the Ubuntu or Fedora? How about Slackware?

Lots of Linux fans berate Microsoft for stooping to the lowest common denominator, i.e. the common user, when it comes to making Windows more or less configurable. These same Linux fans point out that most users are just doing Web surfing, e-mail, word processing, and playing multimedia files/viewing photos--activities that don't require knowledge on configuring user permissions or defining firewall rules or any other low-level ("low level" as in base system) settings.

If these users are the ones that the Linux community are trying to get to migrate to Linux, there's a long road ahead of them. These "commoners" aren't going to know about installing libraries, or making symbolic links because "the system" expects the files in one locations but that particular distro "like them" somewhere else. Here's the real kicker; they don't CARE about these things. They want to read and send e-mail. They want to look at Web pages. They want to look at the pictures taken with their digital cameras. They know "click the setup.exe" files and the installation takes care of the rest, including installing other library files that may be needed. Click the desktop icon, and your program starts.

You want the masses to migrate to Linux? Make application installations "point and click" operations, including all necessary dependency checks and library installations as part of that initial click of the mouse button. Installing apps has to be that easy. There's no getting around it. Computers are no longer the domain for the tech-savvy (and haven't been for some time) and have to be made easy to use, like a television or microwave oven. Computers are a commodity, not an oddity.

Before you go off accusing me of being a MS apologist or fanboy, note that the only thing I use Windows for is playing a couple of games on rare occasion. The rest of time I'm on an OS X platform. I've used Linux in some research projects and tried to convert comp

Re:Fine and all but

[jb.hl.com]

Using an apt frontend of your choice really is that easy though.

If, however, the app you want isn't available via apt in the way you like (e.g. you want to use Firefox and not Firepandadovebollocks that Debian ships now...dunno why but last time I tried Linux that really irritated me, possibly a bit more than not being able to get my surround sound working properly) or it isn't available in apt at all (mplayer anyone?), or you need to add extra repositories (which is NOT going to be easy to do for a newbie)...you may be slightly fuct.

Put it another way: if I want to play DVDs in 5.1 surround in VLC, here's how it works on Windows XP:

1. Download VideoLAN installer
2. Run VideoLAN installer
3. Click Next a few times until the installer finishes
4. Go into Windows' speaker settings and change the speaker type to 5.1 surround (which has a little descriptive picture to make it nice and clear) and click OK a few times.
4. Run VideoLAN and play my DVD, with surround sound working

I recently tried to do the same on Debian, and this is precisely how it went:

1. apt-get install vlc
2. Run VideoLAN client, try and play DVD
3. Notice that it crashes every time giving no cause or reason
3a. Smash with hammer
4. Google with the only real error message I get, which has nothing to do with DVDs
5. Find out that libdvdcss is required, and it's on an additional repository, so edit sources.list and apt-get update
5a. Realise that any sane person would have given up at step 3
6. Apt-get install libdvdcss (or whatever the precise package name is, I forget)
7. Run VLC, find out that my DVD plays now...in stereo
8. Play with volume settings and read lots of stuff about alsa.conf via Google
9. After much futzing, work out that ALSA outputs the rear to the subwoofer and vice versa for no explicable reason, so I had to swap the cables round
10. Watch my DVD, only with a pisspoor slow CPU-intensive picture because I haven't installed the NVidia drivers yet, which is yet another rigamarole

For its part, Xine (or at least Kaffeine) was even worse; that just crashed whenever I tried to play a 5.1 DVD. Now; which will be easier for a new person? For most people, over the phone I could tell them to go to VideoLAN.org and click the big Download link, and then tell them where in the Control Panel to go to enable surround. Can I do that on Debian? No. I'd have to explain to them how to edit sources.list, which commands to type in, when to type them in...you get my point.

This isn't just APT though, it's a lot of things. Why does ALSA change the subwoofer and rear plugs around for example? Where is the simple clicky box that changes the speaker settings from Stereo to 5.1? And I understand the licensing implications of including libdvdcss, but...well, who outside Slashdot is going to take "Well, it's the big bad mean MPAA" as an explanation for why getting DVDs working is such a pain in the ass?

Sorry for the length, it being Christmas I may have drunk a little bit too much Hobgoblin (or, I'm sure a few people are lining up to say, "the Kool-Aid") ;)

Re:Fine and all but

[Kjella]

Two points of interest here:

No, the only point of interest here: He wanted to do something way outside what normal people would. He wanted to manually unpack and install software outside the distro's packaging and even outside normal packaging for Debian over a trademark dispute. Even of the few that knows, most of us don't care and maybe a few even like Debian "making RMS look soft" Legal. And it's so most definately in the category of "nice to have", if not "get a life". Would it be a showstopper if he couldn't do it? Hell no, they're installed and fully functional. This is in the big picture of linux adoption about as relevant as the vi/emacs flamewars.

Re:Fine and all but

[MostAwesomeDude]

Because I was using APT. The be-all-and-end-all for software installation, remember?

Oh, is VLC back in the main repo? Sweet. Mine comes from the VLC repository. On the VLC front page, click "Debian Linux" under installs, and follow the directions. About as painful as, say, fetching .NET or MFC libraries for the first time on Windows.

Uh-huh, but, did you have to quit X? If so, how is a newbie supposed to know how to stop GDM/KDM, install the drivers and restart the X server? How do they know if they have the kernel headers installed or not? If not, how would they know how to install them?

I remember quite well that restarting a Windows computer is standard procedure after installing new video drivers. A reboot is adequate on Linux as well, no console-work needed. I just tend to avoid restarts on this computer due to a laggy BIOS which adds about 90 seconds to every cold boot.

I am trying desperately to remember if build-essential is still automatically installed by the Debian installer. However, I do remember for sure that kbuild is included with the stock kernels, and at least the ATI installer automatically builds the kernel modules when installing via the GUI. No out-of-console work is needed; even if the build package is not there, you can request it through your package manager.

Surprisingly?

[RAMMS EIN]

``What happens when the editor of a popular Linux website attempts to install a Debian Etch desktop on an old ThinkPad? How does it turn out? Surprisingly well!''

Only if you don't know Debian and you don't know IBM ThinkPads. If you do know them, you know that Debian generally works really well. Of course, Linux support for laptop hardware isn't always stellar, but IBM seems to actually have made an effort to ensure their hardware, including ThinkPads, played nice with Linux. Alas, Lenovo seems to have no intention of continuing that tradition.

Re:Any idea...?

[HairyCanary]

Totally off topic, but the real question in my mind is why do the two most popular GUI's for Linux insist upon copying Windows in the first place? OSX provded that you do not need a start button to have a good GUI. I'd like Linux a lot better if the developers could get a little more original with the GUI. Or if they'd at least target a *good* GUI to copy ;-)

Re:Any idea...?

[walt-sjc]

Personally, I don't use a windows-like theme at all, but the answer is that the Windows look and feel is familiar to people who are moving from Windows to Linux (easier transition) or who work in both environments on a regular basis (consistency.) I would have thought this is obvious...

Re:Any idea...?

[Pink Tinkletini]

But the better they get at copying the Windows look and feel, the less reason there is to switch. I would have thought that was obvious.

Only on Slashdot would me-tooism be celebrated as a virtue.

Re:Any idea...?

[hahafaha]

Well, for two reasons. The first is that it makes it easier for new users to switch to GNU/Linux, and the second is that it is a pretty good system (*gasp*).

I mean, think about it. What are the parts that are copied? Similar looking and placed minimize, maximize, close buttons, a menu button, some sort of a menu and panels. Those are all very useful. Their exact location and appearance is there because it is more familiar to Windows users. It is fairly easy to change, too.

For example, my setup is as follows:

A Mac OSX-esque panel thing at the bottom (autohides). It has some of the programs I use regularly). I use the Mist GNOME theme, with a Close button (looks like an X) in the left corner, centered title text (this took editing raw XML to accomplish, BTW, since Mist has title text aligned to the left, by default), and a minimize button on the right. There is no maximize button, because that effect can be accomplished by double-clicking on the title bar. At the top, there is a short panel with the menu, weather, workspace switcher, window list, sound applet, language applet, notification area, sticky-notes applet, power supply applet, networking applet and clock applet.

Re:unzipped and untarred them into /usr/lib/,

[fimbulvetr]

Indeed. I always like to think this is a sign of newbs. If you need to overwrite the files a package maintainer maintains, what good is a package maintainer anymore? He has three paths from here:

A. Keep doing what he is doing, and suffer compounded problems in the long run. (Which is why I think he is a newb, as most people learn this lesson early).
B. Deal with what his package manager gives him.
C. _Understand_ his system and the intimacies of his package manager. Prevent problems before they happen. Install in /usr/local.

Re:unzipped and untarred them into /usr/lib/,

[krmt]

The problem with this article is that the guy clearly wants linux to work just like windows. That's all well and good, but it misses out on the real benefits of the linux (and debian) approach entirely. Still, it's nice to actually see someone write a positive article about Debian for a change.

Re:Any idea...?

[shish]

But the better they get at copying the Windows look and feel, the less reason there is to switch

People aren't switching for the GUI, they're switching for the price. The GUI is one of the reasons they stick with windows.

(Statements apply to the vast majority of non-technical people I know; the people who know what they're doing and *do* swap for the interface know how to set a non-default WM)

Re:Any idea...?

[fimbulvetr]

Suprisingly, linux separates userland utilities already - well at least debian does. Check your /usr/bin folder and compare to /usr/sbin. Alternatively, compare /sbin and /bin.

The reason it doesn't work so well to do it the way you suggested is because there is a lot of gray area. Every person, company, shareware maker, vendor, etc. is going to have a different opinion of where software should go. Just look at unix in general or even other distros (besides debian/ubuntu/gentoo). Apple can do it without few issues because they are the sole authority on their OS. What's the difference between MS and Apple again?

Re:Ubuntu

[fdfisher]

Ubuntu may always be "free of charge," but that doesn't mean it will always be free in the way that really matters. The Ubuntu team has already begun shipping binary blobs in the kernel, non-free wireless drivers, and proprietary nvidia drivers in their standard, default setup. Debian's primary goal is to be a free (as in free speech) operating system, and as Ubuntu diverges from that fact, it becomes difficult to argue that they're truly "part of the Debian family."