Re: Installing Buster (improvements)
On Wed 01 Jul 2020 at 14:20:41 (+0200), Klaus Jantzen wrote:
> On 6/30/20 11:29 PM, Peter Ehlert wrote:
> > On 6/30/20 1:36 PM, Klaus Jantzen wrote:
> > > today I installed Buster on my laptop.
> > >
> > It would be very helpful to know which of the many install ISOs you used.
>
> debian-10.4.0-amd64-netinst.iso
>
> > > > As usual it ran very well (at the end). But I would like
> > > > to suggest the follwing improvements to the Graphical
> > > > install:
> > > >
> > > > a) At some point the process informed me, that a firmware
> > > > module is missing and asked whether I would like to supply
> > > > it from a disk, a USB stick or from the net. As I had this
> > > > module from another installation on a USB stick I stuck it
> > > > into the laptop. The install process did not even look at
> > > > it; it was looking only for network devices.
> > > How do we know that "The install process did not even look at
> > > it"?
>
> I assume it would have told me that the module itself or the debian
> firmware-package (both were on the stick) are not usable, readable or
> something like that.
There's no need to guess. When the installer runs, there's a log
scrolling past on VC4. If you miss some information, the file can
be examined in a shell using, IIRC, more /var/log/syslog.
After the installation has finished, the log is at /var/log/installer/syslog.
> > > BTW: in the future if you expect the need for firmware I
> > > suggest using one of the many unofficial non-free firmware
> > > ISOs.
>
> I know.
>
> I have installed the various versions of debian since 1995(?)
> providing all the partitions, including swap, as required. This time I
> wanted to find out what debian does when you provide just one big
> partition.
It should allow you to install onto that one partition.
> > > > b) Before I started the installation I defined a partition
> > > > of 150GB on the disk (SSD) for Debian. At some point in
> > > > the process the system informed me that I did not provide
> > > > a swap partition (I had hoped the installation process
> > > > would allocate that automatically from the space provided)
> > > > and asked whether I want to define that partition.
> > > This is normal, you have many options. Sometimes swap is not wanted.
> Accepted.
> > > > As there was some room left on the disk I was ready to do
> > > > it. The system asked for the data of where that partition
> > > > should lie in terms of 'cylinder/sector/head' (or
> > > > something like it). Now usually I am not concerned with
> > > > this type of data and even more so as I was installing
> > > > debian on an SSD. As there was no way I could solve this
> > > > problem directly I had to abort the installation, define
> > > > the swap partition and restart the installion process.
I can't speak to your CHS problem. AFAICT the installer can also ask
for partition sizes in other units, like %, but this might depend on
the fact that you had already partly partitioned the disk and were
expected to know its (fake ) geometry.
However, there's not much point in making suggestions here in the
absence of a more precise narrative of your experience.
> > > It is unfortunate that you did not read any of the Debian Wiki
> > > install manuals and tutorials before you started.
> > >
> > > I suggest you start reading here:
> > > https://www.debian.org/releases/buster/installmanual
> > >
> My point ist that when you have the possibility to allocate the
> missing partition in the process then the information expected from
> the user should be in terms that are generally used in this context:
> e.g. size, free space before/after the new partition. Do you know how
> much space you are talking about when you specify the space e.g. from
> cylinder 30312/sector 301/head 45 to cylinder 30800/sector 20/head 4
> on an SSD?
No idea. It's a long time since I saw any disk geometries other than
16383/16/63 (useless) or NNNNN/255/63 which is the normal fake.
The better strategy would have been to continue the installation
without swap, and then create the swap partition using the tool of
choice in the new installation (if you require it).
> > > > Couldn't that be done more user friendly? Especially in
> > > > view of the fact that I assume that Graphical Install is
> > > > not supposed to be an Expert installation.
> > > >
> > > That was a poor assumption. Again, the install manual covers that.
> OK, my fault.
> > > >
> > > > c) When entering the passwords for root and for the user
> > > > there are always two lines: one for entering the password,
> > > > the other where one clicks if one wants to see the
> > > > password.
> > > >
> > > > I suggest that these two line be switched: the first for
> > > > the selection for seeing the password, the second for
> > > > entering the password. Again a little increase in user
> > > > friendlyness.
I didn't realise that the Graphical Installer presented two lines.
The text installer looks like this, which seems clear and friendly:
│ │
│ Note that you will not be able to see the password as you type it. │
│ │
│ Root password: │
│ │
│ _____________________________________________________________________________ │
│ │
│ [ ] Show Password in Clear │
│ │
│ <Go Back> <Continue> │
│ │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
> > > There are tons of ISOs and methods. Best of luck next time.
>
> I have no problem with the "normal" ISOs, like the one I mentioned above.
Cheers,
David.
Reply to: