Not everyone, I don't know what all this hub bub about the installer being bad is about
See Adam's comments in the recent interview. To quote him, since it seems many people didn't read that:
It should be noted here first that the boot-floppies system is a very ancient code base. I believe there still some lines in there from Eric Raymond! It has some very deep design flaws, the worst being overall fragility and too much "coupling" in the technical parlance. It is very sensitive to changes in the base system of the Debian archive. The build process is a monster. And the installer itself isn't modular and doesn't do the right thing when it fails.
He's been working on it for several years now, so I believe he is in a position to know what he's talking about:)
Here you have some people trying to needlessly control what other people do with code.
Hello, could you please post a link to the message where someone tried to forbid these people from porting the code to Windows? I must have overlooked it.
A lot of people seem to think that the posters on debian-devel are trying to somehow suppress or forbid this port of software. Although some of us may be uneasy about it, I haven't seen anyone actually suggest that.
The question causing argument is whether this port should be officially recognized by the Debian Project, given that one of our foundational documents says "Debian will remain 100% free software", and that software which depends on non-free software to run is considered "not part of Debian".
The crux of the matter is this, from a post on the list by Stephen Langseck:
I recognize the advantages of a dpkg-based system for cygwin, and think
it's an interesting idea that will benefit many people who can't
necessarily choose the OS of their computer; but even so, I have
misgivings about using the Debian name on such a port. If the non-free
archive is not part of Debian, should a port built on a non-free kernel
be called 'Debian'? After all, unless all the compiling for this port
will be done using Wine and gcc, you effectively will have an entire
port with build-dependencies on non-free software.
P.S.: That Win95 part means that X Window doesn't work.
I've seen an X server (I think it was XFree) running within Cygwin. Just because it doesn't work on your computer, don't assume that it doesn't work for anyone else.
If people can get used to using Debian tools and programs on Windows, then they won't be nearly as nervous about using them in a GNU/Linux environment.
I don't think this is true -- my observation is that Cygwin makes Windows bearable enough for people that they don't see it being worth the effort to install a full Linux system.
That said, I have been forced from time to time to use a Windows computer, and so I think this port is a useful thing, although I'm very uneasy about Debian officially supporting it. (something that looks unlikely to happen right now anyway)
Are there any private projects to provide an alternate isntaller for Debian?
I'm not sure what you mean by "private", but Joey Hess (joeyh) is working on a complete replacement for the current installer, which hopefully will be used for the release after woody. (at which point the current installer will be taken out back and shot, and everyone will breathe a sigh of relief)
I've read discussion on debian-boot, where joeyh stated that aptitude would advance into base and replace dselect.
It seems/. ate my comment yesterday. Maybe something to do with this minimum-time-between-comments thingy.
Anyway, I jumped the gun on this; the release manager decided that fiddling with base just before a release was too risky, and so this is not, as far as I can tell, happening.
The only change necessary, though (AIUI) is to tell debootstrap to download aptitude along with the base packages. (if aptitude is installed with base, the initial configuration process will offer it as an option) If boot-floppies is buildable by mere mortals in woody (haven't tried recently), this would be fairly trivial to do. I think.
(also, there is no chance that aptitude will entirely replace dselect any time soon; if nothing else, there are some people who like dselect)
Aptitude is definitely much nicer than dselect, but still not intuitive enough, in my opinion.
The most useful definition of "intuitive" I've ever heard is "whatever the speaker or writer of 'intuitive' likes":)
*eek* command-line apt-get
apt-get is a very useful tool, for what it's meant to do. There's nothing majorly wrong with it, except that it's not intended to browse the full set of packages, which is what most of us want to do sooner or later:)
(I wouldn't put "eek" before mentioning how hard it is to drive nails with a screwdriver, personally..YMMV (of course, there aren't any mobs of screwdriver fans roaming the streets telling you to drive nails with them, but I digress))
Graphical UI would help a lot, as you can make it much more eye-friendly with colors, fonts, and graphics, and have more freedom in doing the layout.
Adding a graphical UI to aptitude would require a near-complete rewrite, unfortunately, and there's a very practical need/use for a text-mode package manager that doesn't scare young children above the age of, say, 3.
I've thought from time to time about doing a GUI apt frontend, building on what I've learned from aptitude, but I've decided that I'd have to either (a) give away aptitude or (b) get a full-time job before attempting it.
I've heard synaptic is rather nice. I wasn't terribly impressed, but they have implemented one of my long-standing todo items, visual construction of filter terms. Newbies would probably like this more than typing ~b~D(~vhelix):)
When upgrading packages, I'd recommend to make it totally non-interactive (at least by default).
Yes, this would be nice in many circumstances. Unfortunately, dpkg needs to be redesigned a bit first AIUI:( (because of conffile handling)
However, proper use of debconf should severely cut down on interaction (emphasis on "proper")
As someone who's has to maintain boot-floppies for the last 2 releases (Potato and Woody) and was also involved in Slink boot-floppies, I can definately state that it is broken.
And people who don't believe him should consider the fact that "getting boot-floppies into shape" has been (if we can trust my memory) a MAJOR cause of delays in the last two releases.
(this is not to fault Adam, who does wonderful work, but rather to emphasize that the code is just too fragile to be kept alive)
Indeed, I seem to recall that in past releases, little unimportant packages like libc6, boot-floppies, and dpkg were among the ones being "targeted for removal if you don't fix them":)
Why the hell would they freeze just before emacs21 goes in, just before KDE 2.2.2 goes in, just before ALSA goes good, etc etc?
Because if we applied this criterion, we'd never freeze!
Someone's pet package is always going to be about to be released, and will be left in the cold; IMO, this fear of leaving old software in stable is a large part of what historically contributed to long release cycles. (I think the current one is long mainly because we've completely redone the archive/release infrastructure and we're still working out bugs in the new system. That and, sigh, the installer)
Be careful about people who call themselves "seasoned users", they often don't know what they're talking about.
upgraded to kernel 2.4.13, which required stuff from "unstable"
Adrian Bunk has prepared packages to run 2.4 kernels on stable, available here
a) download the files to my desktop Mandrake system over a slow phone line, following dependencies by hand while trying to remember what I had already downloaded to not duplicate effort
.
.
.
FWIW, I gave up on Debian last night and am installing Mandrake, which, yes, I was able to walk into a store and purchase off the shelf, and which I've installed on other systems before.
Allow me to tell you a parable:
A man wished to purchase a car. He had to choose between an offering from Ford and an offering from Mitsubishi. (no reason for choosing these, they're just the first car companies that spring to mind)
So, in search of expert advice, he went to the house of his friend Fred, the amateur mechanic. Fred put his own cars together from spare parts all the time, and the man knew that he would have the answers. He found Fred in his garage, tinkering with some unidentifiable piece of metal in an engine.
"Fred," the man said, "should I buy a Ford or a Mitsubishi?" Fred paused, wiping some grime off his face, and said, "well, my last couple cars were Fords. You can get 'em real cheap if you buy the spare parts the factories would throw away anyway. Got my last car that way, and she's a beaut!"
So the man headed off to the local car factory, planning to buy the parts. He faithfully bought each part on a list Fred had made. This was very hard, because he had to buy each part from a separate factory, and he had to carry the parts home by hand, not having a car. Worse, he had to return several parts when he bought the wrong one.
After spending much time and money, he finally decided that Fred was wrong. Going to a local car dealer, he walked in and said, "I want a Mitsubishi." The dealer was helpful and cooperative, and an hour later, the man drove away in his new Mitsubishi, vowing never to purchase Ford again.
Now, one would think this man did not do the most wise thing possible -- after all, who would try to buy a car in parts, then compare it to buying a car from a dealer? But that sort of comparison is exactly what you're making.
If you've got the laptop set up, you should probably just leave it. But in the future you might want to do some simple research, including finding vendors who sell CDs of Debian. I understand that CheapBytes is particularly popular.
You might consider waiting, however, until Woody is released, as it will be a major step forward in terms of included software. Currently, it looks like Woody will be released sometime in December or January...but don't quote me on that.
I heard that even mp3 is not supported by defualt because its not free enough according to RMS. Is this true?
I suggest reading Slashdot a little less. It's true that mp3 *encoders* are encumbered by obnoxious patents, so we can't distribute them, but mp3 *players* are plentiful. And we of course distribute the Ogg Vorbis encoder, which produces much better and smaller sound files than MP3. [0]
Daniel (listening to MP3s in the background)
[0] I don't remember if this is included in potato, but it will be in woody.
Hopefully this isn't just yet another nail in the coffin for Debian...
Coffin? I hope no-one has been arranging a funeral, because they didn't invite us, and everyone knows, failing to invite someone to their own funeral is terribly impolite..
Windows does that. Nothing else on a PC does that for the average Real Person.
I've seen little evidence that Windows does that...and I can't remember the last time that any other system had a fair shake against it on PCs. (hint: any non-preloaded operating system will not fit your criteria. As long as Microsoft controls the market, no other operating system will be preloaded..)
And the year before that, top honors went to a Tourist... (by an order of magnitude, no less)
Daniel
Re:still not where it needs to be for me
on
Debian On DVD
·
· Score: 2
Well, supposedly the new freeze procedure will allow future freezes to be shortish compared to this.
(personally, I'll believe it when I see it, but..)
Daniel
Re:Isn't woody testing now?
on
Debian On DVD
·
· Score: 2
You say: Using woody in a mission critical server environment would be bad.
Where are you getting this from? Woody testing is usually VERY stable, as all packages that are in woody have been in sid for several weeks prior to their introduction into woody!
As stated previously, the Security Team does not support woody, and security fixes will be held up until the testing scripts move them in -- if there are dependency issues, they may be stalled for significant amounts of time.
Daniel
Re:Isn't woody testing now?
on
Debian On DVD
·
· Score: 2
sid is not the permanent codename of unstable. Rather, the distro codenamed sid is currently marked unstable. When woody (not testing) becomes stable and a new unstable branch is opened (yet to be codenamed), sid will be marked testing.
This is a common misconception, but it isn't true. The above poster was correct; sid (named after the evil kid who breaks your toys) will be 'unstable' forever.
Daniel
There are parts of the Linux OS (eg. Nvidia binary module) which would NEVER be allowed in a GNU operating system
If you believe the NVidia driver is part of Linux, I suggest you insert it into your kernel, observe a crash, and then report it to the linux-kernel list. Be sure to mention you had the NVidia driver loaded.
> 1. You may or may not be acting unethically. If you use the GPL with full knowledge and approval of the destructive effects it will have upon others, then -- yes -- you are acting unethically. You are knowingly and willingly hurting people who have done no harm. This is fundamentally unethical according to any code of ethics.
Am I correct, then, in assuming that you will agree with me that placing software under non-free licenses is unethical?
I say this because the GPL is no more "destructive" than a standard "you-can't-touch-this" license: while there are strings attached to it, these strings do not come into play unless you invoke freedoms which a non-free license does not give you. If you treat GPLed software the same way you treat, say, Microsoft software, you will be just as well (or badly) off as you are with Microsoft.
So it is hard to see how the "destructive powers" of the GPL are worse than those of a non-free license. Unless, of course, you believe that the users of computers should not be permitted to compete with the makers of the same computers.
Daniel, assuming that this post will be either ignored or contemptuously dismissed. (yes, I've read Brett's rants before..)
Slashdot Mirror
Not everyone, I don't know what all this hub bub about the installer being bad is about
:)
See Adam's comments in the recent interview. To quote him, since it seems many people didn't read that:
It should be noted here first that the boot-floppies system is a very ancient code base. I believe there still some lines in there from Eric Raymond! It has some very deep design flaws, the worst being overall fragility and too much "coupling" in the technical parlance. It is very sensitive to changes in the base system of the Debian archive. The build process is a monster. And the installer itself isn't modular and doesn't do the right thing when it fails.
He's been working on it for several years now, so I believe he is in a position to know what he's talking about
Daniel
Here you have some people trying to needlessly control what other people do with code.
Hello, could you please post a link to the message where someone tried to forbid these people from porting the code to Windows? I must have overlooked it.
Thanks,
Daniel
A lot of people seem to think that the posters on debian-devel are trying to somehow suppress or forbid this port of software. Although some of us may be uneasy about it, I haven't seen anyone actually suggest that.
The question causing argument is whether this port should be officially recognized by the Debian Project, given that one of our foundational documents says "Debian will remain 100% free software", and that software which depends on non-free software to run is considered "not part of Debian".
The crux of the matter is this, from a post on the list by Stephen Langseck:
I recognize the advantages of a dpkg-based system for cygwin, and think
it's an interesting idea that will benefit many people who can't
necessarily choose the OS of their computer; but even so, I have
misgivings about using the Debian name on such a port. If the non-free
archive is not part of Debian, should a port built on a non-free kernel
be called 'Debian'? After all, unless all the compiling for this port
will be done using Wine and gcc, you effectively will have an entire
port with build-dependencies on non-free software.
Daniel
P.S.: That Win95 part means that X Window doesn't work.
I've seen an X server (I think it was XFree) running within Cygwin. Just because it doesn't work on your computer, don't assume that it doesn't work for anyone else.
Daniel
If people can get used to using Debian tools and programs on Windows, then they won't be nearly as nervous about using them in a GNU/Linux environment.
I don't think this is true -- my observation is that Cygwin makes Windows bearable enough for people that they don't see it being worth the effort to install a full Linux system.
That said, I have been forced from time to time to use a Windows computer, and so I think this port is a useful thing, although I'm very uneasy about Debian officially supporting it. (something that looks unlikely to happen right now anyway)
Daniel
Are there any private projects to provide an alternate isntaller for Debian?
I'm not sure what you mean by "private", but Joey Hess (joeyh) is working on a complete replacement for the current installer, which hopefully will be used for the release after woody. (at which point the current installer will be taken out back and shot, and everyone will breathe a sigh of relief)
See Adam di Carlo's recent interview for more information on the installation system.
Daniel
hm, maybe it was two floppies. It's been a while. I know that it was able to download the drivers and base via http.
Daniel
I've read discussion on debian-boot, where joeyh stated that aptitude would advance into base and replace dselect.
/. ate my comment yesterday. Maybe something to do with this minimum-time-between-comments thingy.
It seems
Anyway, I jumped the gun on this; the release manager decided that fiddling with base just before a release was too risky, and so this is not, as far as I can tell, happening.
The only change necessary, though (AIUI) is to tell debootstrap to download aptitude along with the base packages. (if aptitude is installed with base, the initial configuration process will offer it as an option) If boot-floppies is buildable by mere mortals in woody (haven't tried recently), this would be fairly trivial to do. I think.
(also, there is no chance that aptitude will entirely replace dselect any time soon; if nothing else, there are some people who like dselect)
Daniel
Aptitude is definitely much nicer than dselect, but still not intuitive enough, in my opinion.
:)
:)
:)
:( (because of conffile handling)
The most useful definition of "intuitive" I've ever heard is "whatever the speaker or writer of 'intuitive' likes"
*eek* command-line apt-get
apt-get is a very useful tool, for what it's meant to do. There's nothing majorly wrong with it, except that it's not intended to browse the full set of packages, which is what most of us want to do sooner or later
(I wouldn't put "eek" before mentioning how hard it is to drive nails with a screwdriver, personally..YMMV (of course, there aren't any mobs of screwdriver fans roaming the streets telling you to drive nails with them, but I digress))
Graphical UI would help a lot, as you can make it much more eye-friendly with colors, fonts, and graphics, and have more freedom in doing the layout.
Adding a graphical UI to aptitude would require a near-complete rewrite, unfortunately, and there's a very practical need/use for a text-mode package manager that doesn't scare young children above the age of, say, 3.
I've thought from time to time about doing a GUI apt frontend, building on what I've learned from aptitude, but I've decided that I'd have to either (a) give away aptitude or (b) get a full-time job before attempting it.
I've heard synaptic is rather nice. I wasn't terribly impressed, but they have implemented one of my long-standing todo items, visual construction of filter terms. Newbies would probably like this more than typing ~b~D(~vhelix)
When upgrading packages, I'd recommend to make it totally non-interactive (at least by default).
Yes, this would be nice in many circumstances. Unfortunately, dpkg needs to be redesigned a bit first AIUI
However, proper use of debconf should severely cut down on interaction (emphasis on "proper")
Daniel
if you're not sharing the habits of the inner gang that designed the software
:)
/. is a sign that the software is being used, anyway.
Yum, I'm a gang now?
I guess getting armchair criticism from an AC on
Cheers,
Daniel
Woody's installer allows this. I'm sure joeyh will make allowances in debian-installer, although I haven't tested it myself.
Daniel
Woody can download the base system off the net. On modern hardware, I've done single-floppy network installs.
Daniel
As someone who's has to maintain boot-floppies for the last 2 releases (Potato and Woody) and was also involved in Slink boot-floppies, I can definately state that it is broken.
And people who don't believe him should consider the fact that "getting boot-floppies into shape" has been (if we can trust my memory) a MAJOR cause of delays in the last two releases.
(this is not to fault Adam, who does wonderful work, but rather to emphasize that the code is just too fragile to be kept alive)
Daniel
Indeed, I seem to recall that in past releases, little unimportant packages like libc6, boot-floppies, and dpkg were among the ones being "targeted for removal if you don't fix them" :)
(feel free to correct me if my memory misfired)
Daniel
Why the hell would they freeze just before emacs21 goes in, just before KDE 2.2.2 goes in, just before ALSA goes good, etc etc?
Because if we applied this criterion, we'd never freeze!
Someone's pet package is always going to be about to be released, and will be left in the cold; IMO, this fear of leaving old software in stable is a large part of what historically contributed to long release cycles. (I think the current one is long mainly because we've completely redone the archive/release infrastructure and we're still working out bugs in the new system. That and, sigh, the installer)
Daniel
Following the advice of seasoned users
Be careful about people who call themselves "seasoned users", they often don't know what they're talking about.
upgraded to kernel 2.4.13, which required stuff from "unstable"
Adrian Bunk has prepared packages to run 2.4 kernels on stable, available here
a) download the files to my desktop Mandrake system over a slow phone line, following dependencies by hand while trying to remember what I had already downloaded to not duplicate effort
.
.
.
FWIW, I gave up on Debian last night and am installing Mandrake, which, yes, I was able to walk into a store and purchase off the shelf, and which I've installed on other systems before.
Allow me to tell you a parable:
A man wished to purchase a car. He had to choose between an offering from Ford and an offering from Mitsubishi. (no reason for choosing these, they're just the first car companies that spring to mind)
So, in search of expert advice, he went to the house of his friend Fred, the amateur mechanic. Fred put his own cars together from spare parts all the time, and the man knew that he would have the answers. He found Fred in his garage, tinkering with some unidentifiable piece of metal in an engine.
"Fred," the man said, "should I buy a Ford or a Mitsubishi?" Fred paused, wiping some grime off his face, and said, "well, my last couple cars were Fords. You can get 'em real cheap if you buy the spare parts the factories would throw away anyway. Got my last car that way, and she's a beaut!"
So the man headed off to the local car factory, planning to buy the parts. He faithfully bought each part on a list Fred had made. This was very hard, because he had to buy each part from a separate factory, and he had to carry the parts home by hand, not having a car. Worse, he had to return several parts when he bought the wrong one.
After spending much time and money, he finally decided that Fred was wrong. Going to a local car dealer, he walked in and said, "I want a Mitsubishi." The dealer was helpful and cooperative, and an hour later, the man drove away in his new Mitsubishi, vowing never to purchase Ford again.
Now, one would think this man did not do the most wise thing possible -- after all, who would try to buy a car in parts, then compare it to buying a car from a dealer? But that sort of comparison is exactly what you're making.
If you've got the laptop set up, you should probably just leave it. But in the future you might want to do some simple research, including finding vendors who sell CDs of Debian. I understand that CheapBytes is particularly popular.
You might consider waiting, however, until Woody is released, as it will be a major step forward in terms of included software. Currently, it looks like Woody will be released sometime in December or January...but don't quote me on that.
Daniel
I heard that even mp3 is not supported by defualt because its not free enough according to RMS. Is this true?
I suggest reading Slashdot a little less. It's true that mp3 *encoders* are encumbered by obnoxious patents, so we can't distribute them, but mp3 *players* are plentiful. And we of course distribute the Ogg Vorbis encoder, which produces much better and smaller sound files than MP3. [0]
Daniel (listening to MP3s in the background)
[0] I don't remember if this is included in potato, but it will be in woody.
Hopefully this isn't just yet another nail in the coffin for Debian...
Coffin? I hope no-one has been arranging a funeral, because they didn't invite us, and everyone knows, failing to invite someone to their own funeral is terribly impolite..
(but, well, is it a nice coffin?
Daniel
Windows does that. Nothing else on a PC does that for the average Real Person.
I've seen little evidence that Windows does that...and I can't remember the last time that any other system had a fair shake against it on PCs. (hint: any non-preloaded operating system will not fit your criteria. As long as Microsoft controls the market, no other operating system will be preloaded..)
Daniel
And the year before that, top honors went to a Tourist... (by an order of magnitude, no less)
Daniel
Well, supposedly the new freeze procedure will allow future freezes to be shortish compared to this.
(personally, I'll believe it when I see it, but..)
Daniel
You say: Using woody in a mission critical server environment would be bad.
Where are you getting this from? Woody testing is usually VERY stable, as all packages that are in woody have been in sid for several weeks prior to their introduction into woody!
As stated previously, the Security Team does not support woody, and security fixes will be held up until the testing scripts move them in -- if there are dependency issues, they may be stalled for significant amounts of time.
Daniel
sid is not the permanent codename of unstable. Rather, the distro codenamed sid is currently marked unstable. When woody (not testing) becomes stable and a new unstable branch is opened (yet to be codenamed), sid will be marked testing.
This is a common misconception, but it isn't true. The above poster was correct; sid (named after the evil kid who breaks your toys) will be 'unstable' forever.
Daniel
There are parts of the Linux OS (eg. Nvidia binary module) which would NEVER be allowed in a GNU operating system
:-)
If you believe the NVidia driver is part of Linux, I suggest you insert it into your kernel, observe a crash, and then report it to the linux-kernel list. Be sure to mention you had the NVidia driver loaded.
Have fun
Daniel
> 1. You may or may not be acting unethically. If you use the GPL with full knowledge and approval of the destructive effects it will have upon others, then -- yes -- you are acting unethically. You are knowingly and willingly hurting people who have done no harm. This is fundamentally unethical according to any code of ethics.
Am I correct, then, in assuming that you will agree with me that placing software under non-free licenses is unethical?
I say this because the GPL is no more "destructive" than a standard "you-can't-touch-this" license: while there are strings attached to it, these strings do not come into play unless you invoke freedoms which a non-free license does not give you. If you treat GPLed software the same way you treat, say, Microsoft software, you will be just as well (or badly) off as you are with Microsoft.
So it is hard to see how the "destructive powers" of the GPL are worse than those of a non-free license. Unless, of course, you believe that the users of computers should not be permitted to compete with the makers of the same computers.
Daniel, assuming that this post will be either ignored or contemptuously dismissed. (yes, I've read Brett's rants before..)