Re: Installation
On Thu, September 13, 2012 9:47 am, lee wrote:
> "Weaver" <weaver@riseup.net> writes:
>
>> On Wed, September 12, 2012 8:40 am, lee wrote:
>>> "Weaver" <weaver@riseup.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> I wouldn't classify partitioning as a 'tiny little detail.'
>>>
>>> It is one of the many tiny little steps the installer does.
>>
>> Agreed.
>> Many of the steps in the installer are tiny, but I wouldn't classify
>> partitioning or choosing a filesystem as 'tiny' from the viewpoint of a
>> newbie doing an install by him/herself.
>
> It's still just one of the many tiny steps. That you or a clueless user
> gives it so much importance doesn't change that.
>
> Importance is in the eyes of the beholder ...
Yes, and partitioning in the eyes of the newbie is an incomprehension.
>
>>> What are you trying to say?
>>
>> That the average end -user would not consider partitioning a minor
>> detail.
>> It would be more along the lines of an insurmountable object.
>
> It is one of the most basic things you do when you have a computer with
> storage devices like hard disks. How can someone /not/ know what a
> partition is? Someone installing an OS on their computer should know
> what a partition is before they start the installation.
>
> They don't need to know about all the details and issues involved before
> they start installing.
>
>>>> Along with the file system, it's the basis of any system.
>>>
>>> We could argue about that.
>>
>> You probably will.
>>>
>>>> Try installing without it and you'll see what I mean.
>>>
>>> I've done that. You can have everything on one partition or go without
>>> a
>>> partition and use a device "directly".
>>
>> O.K., we have to stop and look at something here.
>> Is going without a partition and employing a device directly something
>> the
>> average newbie would settle for in preference to partitioning.
>
> Whether they do that or not doesn't change what's possible.
>
>> Having everything on one partition is a bad idea for anybody.
>
> That's not true. It can be a very good idea in some cases, like when
> you have a small storage media or when you're setting up a VM or when
> you do an installation for testing purposes.
These are not typical newbie exercises.
Even with a small media resource, a separate/home is not a good idea.
>
> And what might "everybody" do? They might have a computer --- pretty
> likely even only a laptop --- with windoze on it and a free partition
> --- or make one free for it --- and go for a testing installation
> because they want to try out Linux.
For that they would probably go with a live CD in the knowledge that
nothing is going to touch their system.
>
> And it gets a little ridiculous here: I wouldn't recommend a laptop
> unless someone really needs it. I wouldn't exactly recommend installing
> Linux on a laptop. Why would someone who uses a laptop even /think/
> about trying out Linux on it? And if they did, they would probably be
> better advised to install it in a VM --- which also applies for people
> using a computer instead of a laptop. And isn't using a life CD to try
> it out a better option than trying to install it?
It was you that suggested the install.
I recommended the Live CD option.
We appear to have a direct contradiction here.
>
> So who the hell are we talking about here? About those people who tried
> out a life CD in a VM and have decided they want to actually install it?
> If they use a computer already and are thinking about switching to
> Linux, what do you tell them? "Sure, set up a VM and try it. That way
> you still have your working computer as is and everything works and you
> can take your time with the switch."
>
> If I could have done that when I switched from OS/2 to Linux, I would
> have.
>
>> I think that a separate /home partition could be installed in the Nebie
>> Install.
>> A nebie generally needs to reinstall on anumber of occasions - it seems
>> to
>> be part of the learning process -
>
> I agree because I had to: once because I messed up file permissions, a
> number of times because I had to change the partitioning, then when I
> switched from Suse to Debian and another time when I switched from ia32
> to amd64.
>
>> and they have to on a regular basis with Windows anyway, so they are
>> already in the habit, but they don't have to loose their data on each
>> occasion. Once they are up and running, the different configurations
>> on the install can be explained to them on the list, wiki, etc., but
>> first a successful install has to happen.
>
> I disagree. It makes a lot more sense to me to have the working system
> before having to install it. Slip in the DVD or blueray and boot from
> it into a working system and install any time you feel like it.
>
> When you assume the windoze user, they are likely to have windoze
> already running on their computer. I would advise them to install in a
> VM first. In that case, it seems to make more sense not to use
> different partitions --- unless maybe you let the VM use partitions
> instead of putting everything into a regular file. When you do that,
> the partitioning is likely be done under windoze, isn't it? In the
> Debian installer, the user would (still) have to tell it which of the
> partitions to use for what, and automatic partitioning isn't likely to
> work for this.
The introduction to knowledge needs to be done on a simple basis, at any
stage. Unrequired complexity merely clutters the landscape.
Let's just deal with the installer.
The newbie can get into concepts such as virtual machines a little further
down the track.
>
>> If they can do that, it will keep them going.
>> A little bit of success is needed to provide anybody with motivation.
>> Continuous negative bombardment is soul-destroying for anybody and we
>> won't get many adherents that way.
>
> Well, if I was using an OS and needed or wanted to switch to another
> one, I would want to keep the one I'm currently using working and would
> prefer to be able to easily switch between the current and the new one.
> I would have some software I'm using which I might want to work on the
> new OS, and if it doesn't, I would need to find replacements first. I
> also have data I don't want to lose and which I need accessible from
> either OS.
>
> Nowadays you can use a VM for this and/or maybe life systems. In the
> past you had to have several OSs installed at the same time. The CD
> drives were too slow for life systems, and the disks were too small to
> install several OSs at the same time. It's so much easier today ... you
> probably can't imagine.
>
>
> Anyway, what case are you talking about now? The clueless user who has
> become unhappy with their windoze and wants to try out Debian? Ok, they
> manage to burn a bootable CD from the ISO image (and most ppl have no
> idea what a disk image is and how to make a bootable CD from it) and
> slip it into their drive and boot from it. Then they completely nuke
> the only working system they have in the process of installing Debian
> because they allow the installer to remove all data from their computer
> because they are unable to do partitioning. That may work or not, and
> they cannot predict whether it will work or not.
>
> Come on, how likely is that? I usually underestimate peoples stupidity,
> but that a user is clueless doesn't mean that they are stupid --- and
> certainly not /that/ stupid.
>
>> 'Newbie' might be an acceptible term, but I don't think referring to
>> them
>> as 'clueless' would be helpfull in the context. Why stop at that?
>
> Are you assuming that your newbie is not clueless? How would you
> describe them?
>
>> Why don't we label them as 'Pig-Ignorant', or 'Retards'?
>
> Simply said, that's because I'm not stupid. I can't help with
> stupidity; the only thing that helps against stupidity is more
> stupidity.
>
>>>> First people have to be able to
>>>> install a system before they become familiar with it.
>>>
>>> People become familiar with a system before or without installing it
>>> all
>>> the time.
>>
>> People might get to see a GI before installing it, on somebody else's
>> machine, but they don't become familiar with it until after the install.
>> Or perhaps all the people on this list are Newbies?
>> I'm a self-confessed life-long student, but I'm a lot more familiar now
>> with Debian than I was before I installed it.
>> That's just the way it works.
>> You don't start climbing any ladder from the top and the bottom rung is
>> installation.
>>
>> Perhaps you were a guru before your first install?
>> I'm happy for you.
>
> It is not necessary to actually install an OS to run it so you can try
> it out and learn about it. I find it more reasonable not to install it
> for this purpose because not installing it makes it less likely to screw
> up your working system.
>
> When you start with nothing (but the necessary hardware), you do not
> have anything to download the Debian installer with. Letting that
> aside, it won't hurt you to install Debian on your hardware --- and that
> still doesn't mean it is necessary or should be necessary.
>
> What do you think is easier for someone who never used a computer
> before and knows (almost) nothing about them:
>
>
> 1.) put a DVD or blueray into a drive and boot a working system from
> that (so that they can start learning and maybe install once they
> feel comfortable enough to do it)
>
> 2.) put a DVD/blueray into a drive and boot the Debian installer from it
> and install Debian on their hardware
>
> 3.) buy a pre-installed computer that works out of the box (so they can
> start learning right away ...)
>
>
> (In my thinking, 1.) and 2.) involves buying the hardware and putting it
> together yourself. I don't understand people who buy pre-build
> computers ... However, let's assume that in this case, the clueless
> user has somehow acquired working hardware for 1.) and 2.). (Option 3.)
> is a questionable choice when you already have the hardware ...) )
>
> In all cases, they'd be well advised to also get a good book to learn
> from. Unfortunately, those have become really hard to find.
>
>>> Sure it does. RAID is a requirement since about 10 years now because
>>> hard disks have become too unreliable to go without. Lvm isn't
>>> required,
>>> though it can be required for the installer to work. You should know
>>> about it before installing Debian so you can make an educated decision
>>> about the partitioning you want to use.
>>
>> To employ those options, and encryption, in the installer, there needs
>> to
>> be some clarification about what order they need to be installed in,
>> along
>> with the explanation that, with encryption, you need an unencrypted
>> /boot
>> partition.
>
> Yes, I agree, the partitioner can be very confusing and pretty much
> leaves you alone too much.
Exactly!
So can we agree that clarification is required in this area?
That's why it would be great if we could
> just switch to a web browser and look up about what we need to know.
> Just putting some text into it isn't such a good idea. It would have to
> be too much text, and it would be difficult to cover all options and
> possibilities.
No, it wouldn't have to be too much....just concise.
>
>> Just as an aside and strictly between you and me, I'm running base-level
>> IDE discs with no raid or LVM2 and I think most newbies would be doing
>> the
>> same.
>
> And they wouldn't be better advised if they knew about the possibility
> that they could use a RAID to survive a disk failure?
>
>> As far as encryption goes, they are not immediately going to be
>> running Hydra and Backtrack5. They would probably be more concerned with
>> their email client, browsing and a word processor for submitting a
>> resume.
>
> That doesn't mean they shouldn't know about the possibility. And can
> they easily switch to encryption later?
>
>>>> it involves file systems
>>>>
>>>> I have already covered this also.
>>>
>>> Have you? Did you propose to inform people about the advantages and
>>> disadvantages of different file systems they can use? That makes for a
>>> lot they will have to read.
>>
>> No, this could be handled by the default.
>
> Huh?
>
>> A short note to these aspects could point to the wiki for reference
>> however.
>> If they have a laptop on the side, they could have a quick read before
>> carrying on with the rest of the install. Perhaps they have massive
>> graphic files that would be best on one file system rather than another,
>> or need to know that ext3 will fall back onto ext2 if it fails.
>
> Yay! You're kinda starting to understand what I'm saying! :)
>
> *If* they have a laptop or whatever working system at hand they can fall
> back to, you can give them a guide --- and not only about file systems
> or partitioning --- so they can look up the information they need.
> That's a very big *if*.
>
> Remember that I said that you need a working computer at hand before
> installing an OS on another one? Remember that I proposed to give users
> a working system together with the installer so that they can get the
> information they need?
>
> Not everyone has several computers (at least one of which is working) at
> hand. You said you didn't need one; maybe you didn't have one. You
> don't need a physical one when you can simply switch between the Debian
> installer into the working system. Still you insist you don't want that
> because you want users to complete the installation first before you let
> them have a working system which they can use to learn.
>
> Do you see now how that doesn't make sense? Give them a working system
> /before/ they install. Why do you want users to be stuck in the
> installer without a working system? It's something I really don't like,
> so I rather have a working computer at hand I can fall back to --- which
> unfortunately is not always possible.
>
>>>> and what
>>>>> the computer is going to be used for;
>>>>
>>>> That is something that can be left to apt/aptitude/synaptic once the
>>>> installation is over and they have had some time to choose what they
>>>> want.
>>>> That's free software.
>>>
>>> So do you want your clueless users have to change their partitioning
>>> after the installer has booted them into the installed system (at which
>>> point the installation isn't completed, keep that in mind)?
>>
>> No, I can't see where I have said or inferred that.
>
> Hm I guess you didn't realise that you were proposing this by suggesting
> that the package management shall figure out what a computer will be
> used for going by what packages are installed. When I install, I
> install a minimal system and add what I want later, and this is
> something I recommend.
Exactly!
An dwhat medium do you employ to make the decisions as to what you want
installed?
>
> Even if a user selects many packages to be installed while still in the
> installer, they might remove or add some later. What packages they
> install doesn't necessarily have anything to do with what they are going
> to use their computer for. A user might install packages out of
> curiosity or they may want to use their computer for something different
> soon after the installation when they have learned a little.
>
> Then they might find they need different partitioning for what they want
> to do. They may not even know this and just think that Linux sucks
> because unsuited partitioning prevents them from doing what they want.
Exactly!
>
> And you don't want the package management change the partitioning all
> the time when packages are installed or removed, do you?
>
>> Do you want
>>> the package managers to make guesses about how a computer is being used
>>> depending on what packages are installed and modify them so that they
>>> perform such changes?
>>
>> Ummm, no, I don't see where that comes from either.
>
> That's what you suggested, see the quote above.
>
> You could instead ask the user what they want to use their computer for
> and use this information to compute the partitioning. That involves
> asking questions, though.
>
>>>> it involves installing a boot
>>>>> loader somewhere,
>>>>
>>>> That is something that you can just press 'enter' to.
>>>> Grub-pc installation is automagic.
>>>
>>> No you can't. Letting aside that you will be asked where it should be
>>> installed, I've seen it not working at all many times.
>>
>> You will be asked where it should be installed if you have more than one
>> O.S. installed.
>
> You are even being asked when you don't have anything installed (aside
> from what the Debian installer put on).
>
>> That aspect of the installer is quite coherent and I don't see how
>> anybody
>> could be confused.
>> A newbie wouldn't, but somebody that was 'clueless' might.
>
> Whether someone gets confused about it or not is a different
> question. The installer will ask you if you want to install grub into
> the MBR or into a partition. I've been wondering many times if there's
> enough room to install it; the installer doesn't tell you what it needs.
> Many times, it told me it cannot install grub because its installation
> failed. I don't find installing grub easy at all. It's relatively easy
> when you know you want it in the MBR and *if* it actually works.
>
> What if you have other OSs on the same computer? I have no idea how to
> handle that. I'd have to find out /before/ starting the installer
> because I already know that I will be stuck in the installer, unable to
> get any external information once I started it. Sorry, but the Debian
> installer sucks ...
>
> Seriously, can't they at least put lynx into the installer?? It's better
> than nothing.
For somebody coming from a full-blown GUI browser, hopeless as it is like
Explorer, Links, elinks, Links, etc., are an obstacle not an asset.
>
>>> You are the one proposing to put information into the Debian installer
>>> which enables clueless users to make educated decisions about
>>> partitioning during the installation.
>>
>> I don't see the point in leaving them uneducated.
>
> Me neither --- I'm only pointing out that enabling them to make educated
> decisions about partitioning isn't as easy as you think, and I'm
> suggesting that the Debian installer probably isn't a suitable tool for
> the education of users, especially when the users to be educated don't
> have a working computer which would enable them to educate themselves.
>
> Therefore, and for some other reasons I already mentioned, I'm voting to
> give users a working system along with the installer so that they can
> educate themselves /before/ or /while/ installing rather than being
> stuck helplessly in the installer, which can give them pointers as to
> what they might want to look into, aiding their self-education.
>
> Do you remember my first question in this discussion? Maybe you
> understand the question now.
>
>> I have pointed out a few things
>>> that need to be considered in this context, and you claim considering
>>> them isn't necessary.
>>
>> What you point out is required for somebody running more than a basic,
>> nebie system
>
> That depends on what you consider as such. Let users decide for
> themselves what they want. Put pointers to appropriate information into
> the installer and/or into an installation guide. Give them a working
> system before and while they install so they can read the information
> and learn as they go and read their emails in between or browse the web
> when they take a break.
>
> Don't try to force users to install Debian before you let them have a
> working system. Don't keep them stupid. Let them learn and ease into
> the installation and through it from the working system they have.
>
>> Sure someone can make a decision about
>>> partitioning without considering everything that needs to be
>>> considered. That won't be an educated decision, though, and very likely
>>> not a good one.
>>
>> For the average newbie that wants an email client, a browser and an
>> office
>> suite, along with being able to watch a movie and listen to some music,
>> it
>> will be good enough.
>
> You don't need to have Debian installed for that. You can have that
> before you install. Lots of people use web clients for their mail, btw.
>
>>> You haven't even started yet to point out what you think is necessary
>>> to
>>> consider to make a decision about partitioning.
>>
>> Let's win the first battle before we carry on with the rest of the war.
>
> Ok, then make good wiki pages. They would benefit everyone at any time
> and not only people who are stuck in the Debian installer.
>
> Let's file a bug report against the installer and suggest what I
> suggested here, with a pointer to this discussion. As a first step, put
> at least lynx into the installer --- that shouldn't be too difficult.
>
> Both things can be done at the same time.
>
>>>>> Keep in mind that partitioning isn't the only part of the
>>>>> installation
>>>>> process. Maybe you now understand why I'm suggesting that deciding
>>>>> about
>>>>> the partitioning is something to be done /before/ the installation
>>>>> rather than something to be decided by a clueless user who's stuck
>>>>> without a working computer somewhere in the installation process. If
>>>>> that user has to ask "What is partitioning?", they are at the wrong
>>>>> place.
>>>>
>>>> Not if the information is there.
>>>
>>> And you think they would spend a day or two or however long it takes
>>> them to understand all the information while being stuck in the Debian
>>> installer with a simple question they should know the answer to before
>>> they start the installer?
>>
>> I have searched the annals and can't find any reference to this either.
>
> Huh?
>
>> I guess you say they shouldn't need to know
>>> the answer. I say they should know the answer (and a lot of other
>>> things
>>> as well) before starting the installer.
>>
>> And I don't.
>> The average newbie's requirements simply aren't that sophisticated.
>
> That doesn't matter. Partitioning is an important step during the
> installation, regardless of who performs the installation. The topics
> that are involved with partitioning are the same, no matter who performs
> the partitioning. It is very difficult to make a computer (in this case
> through the Debian installer) figure out how to do the partitioning in a
> reasonable way without direct user interaction not only because it
> depends a lot on information only the user has (or doesn't have because
> they are clueless) but also on what hardware and software (like other
> OSs and data) is available and must remain unharmed, or, in the case of
> hardware, should be used or not --- regardless of who performs the
> installation.
The installer is quite specific in regard to where it should place the
installation. Nobody is going to hose any other installed OS unless the
simply refuse to read.
If that's the case they need to lose the current installation to help them
to wake up a little.
There's nothing wrong with permitting people to assume some level of
responsibility for their existence.
All that is required, prior to the partitioning stage, is a short,
concise, informative note (and no more than a note) to deliver information
required to make an informed choice.
>
> Think of an internal combustion engine you might have in your car. You
> are saying "my requirements are not so sophisticated that I would need
> internal combustion". Ok then, your car won't move because its engine
> doesn't work without, regardless of who drives it. You'll have to push
> it or to get a horse to pull it or replace the engine with an electrical
> motor or put a sail on it so you can sail it --- whatever works for you.
>
> You expect the computer which controls the robots that manufactured your
> car to find the right solution for you without giving it any information
> other than that your requirements are not so sophisticated as to need
> internal combustion. Since the people who programmed this computer were
> smart, the computer decides that you can have a car without an
> engine. Since your car doesn't have an engine, it doesn't need wheels.
> Since it doesn't have wheels, it doesn't need a drivetrain and doesn't
> need a suspension. Since it doesn't have that, it doesn't need crash
> protection like a body and seat belts and airbags, and it doesn't need a
> steering wheel. Since you're not going to drive anyway, you don't need
> an electrical system and surely not a radio --- and so on. What do you
> think you'll end up with? A single seat maybe?
>
>
> Your approach either gets people stuck in the installer or keeps them
> stupid and/or leads to partitioning in unwanted ways. Partitioning in
> unwanted ways isn't necessarily bad, you only need to somehow make sure
> that it works in such a way that a user who doesn't tell you what they
> want is happy with it. Do you have good ideas about how to do that? Or
> would you consider that my approach is easier, more likely to yield
> better results and to make users happy?
>
>> I also say it might be better to
>>> give those who don't know anything a working system so that they don't
>>> need to know and can use that working system to find out more if they
>>> want to --- *if* you really want clueless people to have such a thing,
>>> which I really don't want them to have unless they are capable of
>>> learning a lot and do learn. Most people don't. Not everything is for
>>> everyone.
>>
>> Yes, but I would maintain that the opportunity to find out is their
>> decision and some level of accessibility is not out of line with
>> humanitarian principle.
>
> You may want to make a decision about whether you want to protect people
> from their cluelessnes or stupidity or not. That's something I don't
> really want to think about. Just let them install when no technical
> reasons are against it. First remove the pressing need to install by
> giving them a working system before installing, and they might think
> twice before making a mistake. Making mistakes isn't the only way to
> learn.
>
>>> What you have been totally ignoring so far is that different people
>>> have
>>> different ways of learning. It's hard to understand that lots of people
>>> do not learn by reading documentation and by maybe trying out
>>> things. They need a teacher, or they need pictures, or they need to
>>> learn in a totally different order than any you might think of ---
>>> whatever suits them best. How do you propose that the Debian installer
>>> shall be modified to accommodate all the possible different ways of
>>> learning?
>>
>> Historically, documentation has been the learning medium for every
>> subject
>> of human endeavour under the sun.
>> It is true that evrybody has different levels of comprehension through
>> different media, depending on what accent their particular modality of
>> learning style combination inclines them to. Some might need to read the
>> documentation only once, others twice, and others half a dozen times,
>> but
>> I think you will find that most of them can read and have some level of
>> comprehension associated with that.
>
> That someone is able to read doesn't mean that they want to read or that
> reading something is the best way for them to learn something. You can
> put something right in front of someones eyes (or ears) and they may
> totally ignore it because they don't see (or hear) it. Someone else
> sees it immediately (and nothing else). It's not as simple as you
> think.
It's exactly that simple.
If they refuse to see something placed right in front of them, they
deserve the result, but this is a non-event for 95% of the anticipated
market.
>
>> Perhaps we could leave the discussion concerning learning styles and the
>> effect this might have, in individual cases, for another occasion. I
>> will
>> be happy to take part then, but perhaps you might like to keep in mind
>> that this is in association with no more than ten lines of text and that
>> I
>> am an instructional designer of some considerable experience.
>
> The association with ten lines of text is there because I said it would
> *not* be sufficient to put at least ten lines of text into the installer
> in order to enable clueless users to make educated decisions about
> partitioning after you suggested putting one line into the installer for
> that purpose. Please, show us these 10 lines (or the one line) you have
> in mind.
>
> Insofar you want to educate users who don't know what a partition is to
> the point where they can make an educated decision about partitioning
> while they are stuck in the Debian installer, I would advise you to
> consider that different people have different ways of learning. I don't
> think it is an easy task, and considering that different people have
> different ways of learning might greatly increase your changes of
> success. And again, trying to educate users while they are stuck in the
> Debian installer isn't such a good idea. You're better off doing that
> before they are stuck. It will be much less frustrating for everyone
> and have much better chances for success.
>
> Just consider the timing: Even before they are stuck in the installer,
> they want to install Debian because they need/want a working system and
> not learn about partitioning. They are frustrated and more or less
> pissed and feel stupid because they are stuck. They will have no
> patience and no apperception whatsoever for your teachings. Don't let
> them get stuck. Let them switch to the working system and read their
> emails or file bug reports and come back later.
>
>>>>>>> For more than a decade now you need a working computer to install
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>> operating system on another one so that you can acquire information
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> additional software as needed. Why isn't that included in the
>>>>>>> installer?
>>>>
>>>> I've never needed more than the one I've got.
>>>> I have needed an internet connection.
>>>
>>> You can get away with that if everything works fine and nothing
>>> unforeseen happens. That usually isn't the case when installing
>>> Debian.
>>
>> Yes, it is.
>> Or at least it has been for me.
>
> Try to install on a software RAID ...
>
>> Give me a call.
>> I'd be interested in the film and video rights.
>
> Of what?
>
>> I think you'll find that most people don't see the need to make a simple
>> climb up a ladder that complex.
>> It isn't.
>
> It don't think it's complex. Things are easier to do when I'm prepared
> for what I'm doing.
>
>> An eldely uncle might have advised that it is smart to have the base of
>> the ladder out one foot for every foot in height - an important point
>> which I notice you didn't include - and after that, it's all about
>> getting
>> to the destination.
>
> I said something about making sufficiently sure that the ladder doesn't
> trip over. Climbing the ladder has a purpose and isn't a purpose in
> itself here. It's pointless to climb the ladder when you cannot achieve
> your goal by doing so (because you were unprepared).
>
> When you know you want to cook a meal this weekend and you're not sure
> you have the ingredients you need, do you wait until it's time to start
> cooking and then go hungry because you can't cook the meal?
>
>> Do you seriously ring the local ambulance association before driving
>> down
>> to the local Post Office in case there's an accident?
>
> No, and I didn't suggest doing that. They are on guard all the time,
> and if I have a car accident and need an ambulance, it's likely enough
> that someone will call them.
>
> When I plan an event and expect a lot of people to come, I do call
> whomever I need in advance so that an ambulance is available when
> needed. If I don't, I'd be in big trouble if one is needed.
>
> Perhaps the first thing you do is taking the wheels off of your car when
> you want to install new brake pads. I drive into town first and get new
> brake pads and then take the wheels off. Somehow, that makes more sense
> to me than your way.
>
>>>> Why are other Debian-based distributions so obsessed with the
>>>> installer?
>>>
>>> I don't know --- you'll have to ask them, not me.
>>
>> Because they understand exactly what I am referring to.
>
> What are you referring to?
>
>>> You're advocating to make or keep users stupid by giving them
>>> insufficient information.
>>
>> No, I am advocating supplying new users with the information they need
>> and
>> only the information they need that applies to partitioning.
>
> And who decides what they need?
>
>> It's a way of getting rid of exactly those
>>> users you seem to want to attract because users who don't want to
>>> remain
>>> clueless hate it when they are being kept stupid.
>>
>> I haven't specified how the information should be conveyed but you have
>> already passed judgement on it.
>> I feel slighted and wronged and not at all abashed.
>
> You have specified that. You suggested to put a line of text into the
> installer, and some people started telling you that a line of text or a
> few isn't enough. Since then, you are trying to deny that.
>
>>> For users who don't want to remain clueless, give them all the
>>> information. Don't limit these users to what you can put into the
>>> installer! Give them a working system before they install Debian on
>>> their computer so they can get more information about anything they
>>> want
>>> to know. Help them by telling them what they might want to know ---
>>> because one problem when you don't know anything is that don't even
>>> know
>>> what you might need to know. I have pointed out a few things which is
>>> reasonable to look into before deciding about partitioning. --- A
>>> working system before installing would be great to have for
>>> non-clueless
>>> users as well, as I have pointed out.
>>
>> I don't think you will find that this concept is conducive to economic
>> logistics.
>
> What do you mean?
>
>>> The users who want to remain clueless or who don't have a choice can't
>>> be helped. Some people just don't get along with computers, and trying
>>> to make them is the wrong approach.
>>>
>>> Who do you think you are that you think you can decide what someone
>>> needs to know to partition their hard disks? Let users decide what they
>>> want to know themselves. You can help them by giving them something
>>> that
>>> gets them started, not by giving them something that limits them and
>>> keeps them stupid. You got suggestions to that which you deny, your
>>> only
>>> argument being your assumption that it's too much for them, which even
>>> contradicts your imagination of users venturing out to learn more. It's
>>> not your decision to make how much information is too much for someone.
>>
>> I just don't think that the Debian Administrators Handbook would fit
>> into
>> the installer context very well.
>
> Remember my first question in this discussion?
>
> You can read it online just fine, provided you have a working computer
> that enables you to.
>
>>> So now, what do you suggest to actually put into the installer?
>>
>> I was thinking of something much more brief and pertaining only to
>> partitioning, but first I will have to find an old drive and do an
>> install
>> to see exactly what is needed.
>
> You'd have to try that with a number of different setups, like other OSs
> already installed and/or to be installed later, different hardware,
> including the possibility of having broken disks installed, installing
> in a VM, assuming different use cases ...
>
> You're starting at the wrong place again; clarify things first.
And I don't think so.
I have seen nothing in your words that inclines me otherwise.
Installing from a live CD works, but even there some information should be
supplied to explain different spin speeds and the effect it has on access
speed, or Debian is seen as having no speed advantage over Windows.
Far easier to solve the problem where it lives.
Regards,
Weaver
--
"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government."
-- Thomas Paine
Reply to: