Re: I can't beleive this
On Fri, Mar 19, 1999 at 09:41:44AM +0800, ivan wrote:
> At 10:38 PM 3/18/99 +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> >You don't need to reinstall to reconfigure parts of your system or single
> >packages. I can hardly understand what options would require a reinstall if
> >given the wrong answer (beside partitioning, I think).
>
> Unfortunately (?) I have had a nicely working Debian system for many months
> now & can't remember !
Ah, I thought you'd speak of old boot disks only, but I wasn't sure. If you
have a chance, try the latest boot disks from slink (or even hamm), for
exmaple when installing Debian for a friend. They have much improved.
> Essentially it was a case of not knowing the
> software & config packages well enough at that stage to setup just the
> package that was causing me trouble.
Understandable. We need a good Debian book, luckily, multiple such projectas
are under work.
> Coming from the Windows world - when something doesn't work reinstall the OS !
:)
> >> Again I would like to suggest that the install could be made much easier
> >> with a couple of (not necessarily simple) changes. For instance, providing
> >> a kernal with SB16/AWE32/AWE64 support already present and working.
> >
> >The kernel can't guess or detect the interrupts and ioports. AWE cards also
> >require often pnp set up. You are asking for too much. However, ALSA will
> >have better sound support and auto detection. The OSS Lite sound driver is
> >really crap.
>
> I can understand you saying that it is difficult but I can't understand you
> saying impossible.
I don't remember the exact quote, but usually saying "it's impossible" in
the Free Software world means, "well, that's very hard to do, and I don't
know how and don't have the time to find out how to do it" :)
> From what I understand RH at least has working
> autodetect and along with OSS it has been proved to be possible.
Yes, it is. Still, OSS is semi-free software (OSS lite is free, the official
costs bucks), and is not worth working much on. Alsa, as I said, will have
support for multiple sound cards and better auto detection.
> I also
> understand that Debian doesn't want something that just limps along - we
> want something that is truly good. That's fine and understandable. All I
> was doing was making comments on the difficulties that I feel need
> resolving at some stage in the future.
Yes, you raise valid points. Unfortunately, they are blatantly obvious, and
everybody is aware of them :) Even worse, the correct solution
is not as obvious as the problem.
> I bow to your acknowledged expertise in this area :) But somewhere along
> the line the kernel must make interrupt allocations and record them.
Yes, when it allocates them. But then it is too late for autodetection.
> What I was suggesting was something along the lines of (for pnp):
> Have a precompiled kernel available that has sound
But which sound driver? The kernel can't have all sound drivers compiled in,
only one. So you have to use modules anyway.
> Autoexecute isapnp
This can actually hang your machine, which is a first problematic step!
> Automodify the config file with reference to the kernel list of already
> allocated interrupts
Hehe. That's nice. But you need somelogic for that. Oh, and, you definitely
want to fix the problem that it doesn't detect all ports of the AWE cards.
> Recompile just the sound module to reflect the correct interrupt/ioports as
> detected by isapnp
This would requrie a complete development system and kernel source,abut
isn't necessary. sound modules should accept parameters "io=yyy irq=zz", and
the latest versions does.
> Or maybe there's an alternative to isapnp somewhere ?
Latest kernels have PNP support, and ALSA has its own pnpsupport, too. Then
there is Tom's PNP project (or sim.). here is a lot of things going on, and
over time, they will merge to a whole.
But as I said, let's wait for Alsa, which will sove a lot of our problems in
the sound area.
> >> Same
> >> also with PPP which most people want - if they didn't have modems they
> >> wouldn't be on the net and so, probably, wouldn't have discovered Linux
> >> anyway.
> >
> >Did you try pppconfig? It is started automatically in recent boot disks
> >(since hamm, I think).
>
> yes - great script ! It's more a case that I feel that the default kernel
> should have the ppp (amongst other things) compiled in. I guess what I
> want is to completely avoid the configure modules stage of the installation
> unless I have particularly unusual requirements.
I don't like the module screen, too, it should be optional. An alternative
would not be to compile everything in, but to use the auto-module-loader kmod
by default.
> There are IMHO too many packages installed as standard many of which I
> haven't even looked at yet myself despite using Linux daily. This creates
> the second problem of too much choice for the new user. As I said above, I
> feel one low power easy to use editor will do just to get the new user
> going same as notepad in windows.
Just remember that Linux is not Windows, but a Unix clone. So we will have
more unixish structure then windowish. Every new user msut accept that.
Therefore, the standard editor is not notepad, but vi. The reasons are also
historical ones.
I wonder what the SEUL (simple end user linux) is doing. Someone should
definitely build a simple linux based on Debian targetted to ex windows
user. But let's not make bare Debian to that.
I don't think making Debian windowish does really help anyone.
A derivative of Debian can be windowish, I would encourage everyone t try
something like this.
> When more is needed then more can be
> installed. New users are going through enough trauma already getting used
> to the command line - bearing in mind that, from what I can see, most of
> the newbies are Windows users who have never even used or seen any *nix
> before.
Well, that should be changed, right?
> Both vi and emacs are very powerful tools but have a steep learning curve.
> I was almost put off of Linux in general because I thought that learning
> either was too much trouble. Fortunately I discovered ae before it was too
> late !
:)
As I said, for the braindead windows user, a simple end user linux should be
prepared. Everyone else will have to swallow our philosophy anway, so why
not right from the start...
> >> Why not,
> >> if a X type setup has been chosen just install Netscape (plus maybe Lynx)
> >> instead of NS, Lynx, Mozilla, W3 etc ... These sorts of examples just go
> >> on and on.
> >
> >Netscape is not part of Debian, sorry. I would find it VERY annoying if
> >selecting X would select a web browser, too. Again, I don't know what you
> >exactly are complaining about (see above).
>
> I understood that NS is available from the non-free section ?
non-free section is not part of Debian GNU/Linux.
> The above browsers are ALL installed as standard from the Hamm distro
> (using the dialup user option during install). This to me is very annoying
> because I don't want them and it takes up more time during the installation
> and more disk space needlessly. I understand that just about any package
> can be de-installed quite easily but the point is that I don't see why I
> should have to.
Agreed.
> In the meantime I do not complain (and sorry if it seems like that) I want
> to make what I hope are useful comments for those people skilled enough to
> translate ideas to practice.
You raise very valid points. And I really have to try hard to find good
excuses why we haven't fixed those problems already :)
> It is only by people outside the development community making suggestions
> that the developers can be aware of the "wish list" that these people have.
> I would hope that no-one expects volunteers to drop everything to try to
> satisfy a difficult or impossible request immediately or sooner but surely
> even the impossible requests/suggestions/ideas are all grist for the
> development mill ?
Well, let me rephrase it: After a while, you seldom notice something new :)
Some new requests pop up, some vanish, but over a long time they stay the
same. It's not too bad to get reminded often, but I would be more happy
if people would include patches :)
> Again let me emphasise that I am not complaining - I would like these
> comments and any others that I make to be taken as constructive criticism.
> If I had the coding skills I would implement the ideas myself and in time I
> will.
Your comments are appreciated! You don't need to be a coder to help. Set up
a web page where you keep track of the boot floppy development and which
parts of the install are troublesome (stuff like installing emacs and
xemacs). If you have a spare partition to make test installs, that is all
what is needed. Then mail the boot floppy team about your analyse.
That's just a suggestion. There are zillion ways to help.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
Reply to: