[sclug] Debian
Will Dickson
wrd at glaurung.demon.co.uk
Sat Oct 25 09:05:37 UTC 2003
Hi all,
Following a recent filesystem failure on my DMZ server, and a subsequent
nightmare with the SuSE8 install / config tool (which, as recently
re-written and "improved", is a complete dog IMHO) I decided to try
Debian instead.
Firstly, to Phil Hands and any other Debian-ites listening: superb job,
guys, and much appreciated. Finally, a distro which, in no particular order:
- Doesn't assume you're a newbie installing a bog-standard desktop
system, and make it hugely inconvienient to do anything else;
- Doesn't break when asked for non-standard configurations, because that
bit never got tested properly;
- Has an install system which doesn't suck when run in text mode;
- Degrades gracefully when faced with exceptions or user cockups, rather
than dying horribly;
- Doesn't munge and / or hide all the config data to make it impossible
to administer the machine manually;
- Understands the concept of "Do What You're Damn' well Told", rather
than appearing to accept your command and then doing the opposite;
- Doesn't have 5-mile long init scripts which require an MSc in shell
programming to modify successfully;
- doesn't try to imitate Windows, and in so doing become the worst of
both worlds;
- etc. etc.
If anybody else out there is looking for a distro that is good for
non-standard configurations as well as ordinary desktop use, try this one.
...
All the above notwithstanding, there are a couple of beefs I came
across, such as Woody's version of XFree4 being very naff (large swathes
of inoffensive hardware are made broken by this version, simply because
the drivers hadn't been ported at the time). It might've been better to
have stuck to XFree3.3.6 if that was the best XFree4 available.
On the basis of it being better to light a candle / flamethrower (delete
according to preference) than curse the darkness, I'm going to write
down a "Woody installer's cheat sheet" documenting all the little
foibles I came across, for my own use if nothing else (I look after 2
DMZ servers, and I'm going to upgrade the other one to keep it in line).
Would the Debian project find such a document useful? (All the required
information is already present in the ref manual; as usual, the problem
is finding the right bits at the right time.)
...
<op-ed bsLevel="high">
One frequently hears reviewers saying things like, "Debian is not for
the faint-hearted."
Well, say rather that Debian is not for the feeble-minded.
When faced with some disagreeable task, there's a common tendency to get
someone or something else to do it for us. Undeniably this makes life
easier. However, there's a downside: ultimately, the entity which is
actually doing the work, is also the entity that's in charge. The two go
together.
In Windows, and increasingly in the more commercially-oriented Linux
distros, this entity is a quasi-intelligent "setup tool" of some kind;
it does the work while you sit there and watch.
In Debian, this entity is you. (Yes, there is a script which acts as a
guide, but that's really all it does.)
So, what's so great about a distro which makes you do all the drudge
work? Well, it gets you clear of three big hidden drawbacks.
Firstly, these "smart" installers aren't nearly as smart as you are, or
even as smart they'd have you believe. When faced with unusual
circumstances, they generally fall over. And when they do, you are
stuffed, because there's no manual fallback.
Secondly, can you really trust the installer? Is it working for you? Or
is it working for whoever sold it to you? Windowsland has this problem
already (M$ product activation etc.), and I suspect that it won't be
long before it becomes an issue in Linuxland as well - the behaviour of
Red Hat in particular (the company) gives cause for concern.
The final issue is subtle, but potentially the most insidious: smart
tools encourage dumb users. More accurately, they encourage users to
adopt a passive mindset wherein they accept the choices the machine
gives them, rather than actively taking control of the process and
ensuring that the machine does what they want it to. There are
unintelligences vast and greedy and unsympathetic which dearly wish that
computers were overgrown TV's, and would have us behave as though they
were. To do this, they first need to passivate us. Viewed in this light,
smart install tools are potentially the thin end of a very nasty wedge.
(Paranoid? Me? Why did They tell you that? :-)
</op-ed>
More information about the Sclug
mailing list