Re: how many CDs for v3.1 r3?
On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 12:23:11PM -0800, anonymous wrote:
>
> hendrik@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 13, 2006 at 07:23:11PM +0530, Amit Joshi wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't know, but this has been discussed quite a lotta times in various fora.
> > > Users often get stunned by the number of CDs and get confused what to
> > > download and what not to.
> >
> > Perhaps http://www.debian.org/distrib/ should explicitly say
> >
> > If you have a decent internet connection, you only need the netinstall
> > CD or the first regular CD. The rest will be downloaded as needed
> > and you won't waste bandwidth downloading packages you won't use.
> >
> > and the netinstall option should be the *first* on the list. Definitely
> > it should be presented before the option of downloading the complete set
> > of CDs or DVDs.
> >
>
> Many thanks for your elaborated reply. I prefer to download the iso
> image at least for the
> first time install of the distribution as it would give me a better
> *feel* about the distribution
> and the packages included with it. Later, I can manage my machine even
> when the
> network is not available. May be installing next release of Debian, I
> would go for a network
> install.
>
>
>
> > THen it should go on to explain:
> >
> > The other CD's are needed only if you are installing on a machine
> > without a decent net connection, and you can install a very
> > respectable Debian system using only the first few CDs, which contain
> > the most popular packages. The later CDs in the set contain less
> > popular packages.
> >
>
> I still have not received a definitive reply to my question as yet.
> Which, to repeat was:
>
> " I found out that I would need to download 18 CDs: 15 regular and 3
> for the update.
> I would like to know whether all these CDs have binary files or are
> these also include CDs
> with sources and documentation. If so, which ones of them?"
The first ones, anyway, have binary files and documentation.
I used CDs back in the days when woody was current. There were seven of
them, and they contained binary packages and documentation -- the
stuff you need for using Debain, and not the stuff you need for
recompiling it all from scratch. I don't think I ever needed past
disk 5. As I mentioned, the contents are organised in order of
popularity, so unless you like massively unpopular software, you
shouln't need more than a few disks.
I never use more than the first CD for an installation nowadays. I
guess it might be different if I had a machine whose ethernet hardware
was not recognised.... No. Now that I think of it, when that happened
to me last January I stuck in a $15 PCI ethernet card and used it
instead. Much easier than acquiring 15 CDs.
I'm not sure which CDs would contain the sources. I suspect a different
set.
>
> In fact, I have received conflicting statements to answer this query.
> Just compare the two
> statements below.
>
> <As far as I know they include documentation and source code - thats in
> fact
> one key-feature of free-software.> Samuel B?chler
>
> AND
>
> <Just Binary Files. Documentation..as in relevant man-pages would be
> provided.>Amit Joshi
>
> I am unable to decide which one of these is correct.
>
> Having used Redhat and Slackware before which just use 4 CDs each for
> the boot and
> packages and a couple more for the documentation and sources, it is
> difficult for me to take
> 15 CDs for the installation of packages alone.
>
> IF this *is* really the case, there should be some good reason for
> this: Does debian offer a
> lot of packages choices? Lot more than does either slackware or redhat
> so as to need this
> much number of CDs?
I have heard that Debian has the most extensive collection of packages
for any Linux in existence. Anyone know if that is true?
>
> OR the .deb packages are not as much efficient and do not use good
> compression to
> squeeze them all in a fewer CDs?
>
>
> > That said, a list of which CDs contain which packages would still be
> > useful.
> >
> > -- hendrik
>
> Again, still awaiting some insight into the above issues.
>
Reply to: