Re: 2.1 Installation
On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, alexander e dukat wrote:
> I will start by saying that I used the disks that were uploaded on 12/12.
> I do not know which version it was.
Looking at the list archives, I'm guessing 2.1.2.
> Findings:
> -- When selecting to initialize or remount a Linux partition it goes to
> the color/monochrome display selection.
Hmm, may want to verify this is still a problem on 2.1.4.
> -- Error of not being able to create random or urandom devices.
That's not good.
> -- modules.conf is said to not have been auto created and so I had to
> force it to continue the installation.
I think I remember that one, didn't seem to be a big problem. However,
making a modules.conf that fools the config script would be good.
> -- Because of there being files in /etc/apm and /etc/pcmcia the pcmcia
> package was not removed. I went ahead and removed the files from there
> and then reran the remove. It went fine except that in the boot-up the
> script is still linked and so it is still trying to start it up.
The cardinfo stuff seems to be lingering on my 2.1.3 floppy system.
Probably worth a double check on 2.1.4.
> What I see:
> -- Of course better explanation of modules.
Yes, I may download the packages and see how hard it is to update.
Enrique?
> -- Personal problem is that I created several partitions on the drive and
> needed up to hda13 to mount and there are only up to 8 on the disk. I
> created the others, but newbies would be at a loss, though I don't think
> they would actually chop up a drive that much.
That's a lot of slicing.
> -- When partitioning it may be nice for newbies to have a suggested number
> of partitions. Say one for root, one for home, and one for usr, with an
> example.
Seems like a job for the docs.
<option>
I prefer one small /boot at the front and /, /home, and swap as the other
partitions. /boot can be tiny, few megs for a few kernels. / and /home
are personal, but an idea of the size of the meta-packages (how much for a
base system, how much more for X, how much more for networking, how much
more for office packages, etc) would be nice. swap depends on how much
you plan on running at once and /home is everything else. My personal
opinion is that if you lose /usr, you are rebuilding the system, but
/home should survive with your data.
</opinion>
> -- The default selections for installation is great. The having to wait
> as packages unpack and set up is not. It would be nice to have everything
> asked before the packages are installed so that you don't have to sit with
> it.
Yes, this has also been requested many times. No idea how the fix is
coming for this. I'm imagining Debian 3.0 days.
> All in all it looks very nice. With working with a very new person to
> Linux, he finds it still very confusing as to what is happening. Simple
> explanations for everything would be a plus.
>
> Example, with the modules having more of a question answer session. Take
> a network card. Have a question of "Do you have a network card?" If they
> do not then all those modules for networking can just be skipped and not
> shown.
This is an interesting proposal. Having all the instructions presented as
you use the program instead of as a separate doc may be good for those
that don't read the fine manual. It may result in lots of changes to the
install interface though. Our menus seem to be a good mix of "context
sensitive" and "show ever thing there is". You seem to want them as
context sensitive. I think the simplicity of our current system with a
good doc would work fine, or at least would put other things first.
> Finally, the one huge list of all the packages is even daunting for me. I
> took over an hour going through it all and saying cool I will take that
> and no I don't need that. Since I do not know what deity looks like I
> hope that answers this problem. Also, a search similar to searching the
> package list on the website would be nice and not just a simple search on
> the names of the packages. Typing in "midi" and seeing all packages that
> talk of it is much nicer than just seeing "playmidi."
The "meta-packages" tool is probably the best there is to simplify that.
That's already on the install program, and I think it's pretty obvious,
although on bad keystroke will make you miss it for good.
Thanks for the report,
Brandon
+--- ---+
| Brandon Mitchell * bhmit1@mail.wm.edu * http://bhmit1.home.ml.org/ |
| Sometimes you have to release software with bugs. - MS Recruiter |
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-testing-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: