Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.os.linux.debian > #7552 > unrolled thread

version control systems

Back to article view | Back to alt.os.linux.debian

Contents

  version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-28 04:50 -0700
    Re: version control systems "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2015-12-28 13:56 +0100
    Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-28 08:03 -0600
      Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-28 19:30 -0700
        Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-28 21:31 -0600
          Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-29 06:59 -0700
            Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-29 08:47 -0600
              Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-12-29 19:42 -0500
              Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 03:01 -0700
                Re: version control systems mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-12-30 10:35 +0000
                  Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 04:41 -0700
                    Re: version control systems Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2015-12-30 20:19 +0000
                      Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-31 02:28 -0700
                        Re: version control systems Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2015-12-31 20:46 +0000
                          Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-31 23:12 -0700
                            Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-01 11:40 -0500
                              Re: version control systems Mark Carroll <mtbc@ixod.org> - 2016-01-01 17:16 +0000
                                Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-01 13:37 -0500
                              Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-01 15:01 -0700
                                Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-01-01 19:19 -0500
                                Re: version control systems Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2016-01-02 02:45 +0000
                                  Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-02 01:33 -0700
                                Re: version control systems Kirk_Von_Rockstein <Kirk_Von_Rockstein@nowhere.invalid> - 2016-01-04 00:55 +0000
                                  Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-04 03:38 -0700
                                    Re: version control systems Mark Carroll <mtbc@ixod.org> - 2016-01-04 12:19 +0000
                                      Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-01-04 11:19 -0700
                Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-12-30 05:58 -0500
                  Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 04:50 -0700
                    Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-12-30 08:02 -0500
                      Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 06:43 -0700
                        Re: version control systems mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-12-30 14:42 +0000
                          Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 12:14 -0700
                Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-30 07:30 -0600
                  Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 06:55 -0700
        Re: version control systems "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2015-12-29 09:20 +0100
          Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-29 07:03 -0700
          Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-29 08:34 -0600
            Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 03:17 -0700
              Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-12-30 05:59 -0500
                Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 04:53 -0700
                Re: version control systems Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-12-30 12:07 +0000
                  Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 05:20 -0700
                    Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-12-30 08:05 -0500
                      Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 06:45 -0700
                      Re: version control systems Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-12-30 13:59 +0000
                    Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-30 08:28 -0600
                      Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 12:21 -0700
              Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-30 07:45 -0600
                Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-30 08:30 -0600
                  Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-12-30 14:28 -0500
                Re: version control systems Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-12-30 14:28 -0500
              Re: version control systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-12-30 08:15 -0600
                Re: version control systems crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-12-30 12:53 -0700
                  Re: version control systems mm0fmf <none@mailinator.com> - 2015-12-30 20:33 +0000

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#7552 — version control systems

Here's an article that I found interesting:
  http://biz30.timedoctor.com/git-mecurial-and-cvs-comparison-of-svn-software/

Since I'm currently most interested in Debian, I did some poking around 
to see what version control system is used for Debian.  I came away more 
confused than not. <g>

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
  [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#7554

On 12/28/2015 12:50 PM, crankypuss wrote:
> Here's an article that I found interesting:
>   http://biz30.timedoctor.com/git-mecurial-and-cvs-comparison-of-svn-software/
> 
> Since I'm currently most interested in Debian, I did some poking around 
> to see what version control system is used for Debian.  I came away more 
> confused than not. <g>
> 

I would say that cvs you should forget, tools mostly there for legacy
reasons. Svn has it's issues specially when you are merging things.

I been using git, sure I don't know everything about it, I learn new
things from time to time, but using the basic functionality you can
already do a lot, you can take a look at this:
http://rogerdudler.github.io/git-guide

if you feel it's not for you you can try things like mecurial or any
other new version control systems out there and which you end up with
will most likely be just a question of taste and how your thought
process is.


-- 

 //Aho

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7559

crankypuss writes:
> Since I'm currently most interested in Debian, I did some poking
> around to see what version control system is used for Debian.

Debian as such uses none: the question isn't relevant.  Most developers use Git.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7564

John Hasler wrote:

> crankypuss writes:
>> Since I'm currently most interested in Debian, I did some poking
>> around to see what version control system is used for Debian.
> 
> Debian as such uses none: the question isn't relevant.  Most
> developers use Git.

Uh, okay.  What's used to maintain the Debian builds then?  IOW if most 
developers use Git, how do they then check their work in so it gets 
included in the builds?

Maybe it's something that only Debian developers have a "need to know"?

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
  [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7565

crankypuss writes:
> What's used to maintain the Debian builds then?  IOW if most
> developers use Git, how do they then check their work in so it gets
> included in the builds?

What "builds"?  Each package is built seperately, either by the
maintainer or by the autobuilders, and then added to the archive.  The
archive is maintained by custom software developed over the life of
Debian.
-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7576

John Hasler wrote:

> crankypuss writes:
>> What's used to maintain the Debian builds then?  IOW if most
>> developers use Git, how do they then check their work in so it gets
>> included in the builds?
> 
> What "builds"?  Each package is built seperately, either by the
> maintainer or by the autobuilders, and then added to the archive.  The
> archive is maintained by custom software developed over the life of
> Debian.

So "the archive" is basically a website with custom software.  
Presumably each distro has its own archive/software?

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
  [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7579

crankypuss writes:
> So "the archive" is basically a website with custom software.

The Debian system is a large, complex, world-wide network.  The archive
is the database from which the package management software on your
machine fetches packages.  It has many mirrors around the world, most
not under the direct control of Debian.  Digital signatures are used to
maintain security.  The Security archive is an exception: it is never
mirrored.

Behind the archive is some truly amazing custom software developed over
the life of Debian.

-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7600

John Hasler wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> crankypuss writes:
>> So "the archive" is basically a website with custom software.
>
> The Debian system is a large, complex, world-wide network.  The archive
> is the database from which the package management software on your
> machine fetches packages.  It has many mirrors around the world, most
> not under the direct control of Debian.  Digital signatures are used to
> maintain security.  The Security archive is an exception: it is never
> mirrored.
>
> Behind the archive is some truly amazing custom software developed over
> the life of Debian.

  +1

-- 
Your temporary financial embarrassment will be relieved in a surprising manner.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7603

John Hasler wrote:

> crankypuss writes:
>> So "the archive" is basically a website with custom software.
> 
> The Debian system is a large, complex, world-wide network.  The
> archive is the database from which the package management software on
> your
> machine fetches packages.  It has many mirrors around the world, most
> not under the direct control of Debian.  Digital signatures are used
> to
> maintain security.  The Security archive is an exception: it is never
> mirrored.
> 
> Behind the archive is some truly amazing custom software developed
> over the life of Debian.

LOL, I've seen some software that was "truly amazing" in the sense that 
it worked at all. <g>

I wonder why we still have so many different version control systems; 
they're all about doing one conceptually-simple thing, and even though 
the range of their scaling is large, we ought to have been able to have 
figured out the general case by now.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
  [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7605

On 30/12/2015 10:01, crankypuss wrote:
> John Hasler wrote:
>
>> crankypuss writes:
>>> So "the archive" is basically a website with custom software.
>>
>> The Debian system is a large, complex, world-wide network.  The
>> archive is the database from which the package management software on
>> your
>> machine fetches packages.  It has many mirrors around the world, most
>> not under the direct control of Debian.  Digital signatures are used
>> to
>> maintain security.  The Security archive is an exception: it is never
>> mirrored.
>>
>> Behind the archive is some truly amazing custom software developed
>> over the life of Debian.
>
> LOL, I've seen some software that was "truly amazing" in the sense that
> it worked at all. <g>
>
> I wonder why we still have so many different version control systems;
> they're all about doing one conceptually-simple thing, and even though
> the range of their scaling is large, we ought to have been able to have
> figured out the general case by now.
>
By all means go ahead and produce some software as it is so conceptually 
simple. We all use it if it's any good.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7610

mm0fmf wrote:

> On 30/12/2015 10:01, crankypuss wrote:
>> John Hasler wrote:
>>
>>> crankypuss writes:
>>>> So "the archive" is basically a website with custom software.
>>>
>>> The Debian system is a large, complex, world-wide network.  The
>>> archive is the database from which the package management software
>>> on your
>>> machine fetches packages.  It has many mirrors around the world,
>>> most
>>> not under the direct control of Debian.  Digital signatures are used
>>> to
>>> maintain security.  The Security archive is an exception: it is
>>> never mirrored.
>>>
>>> Behind the archive is some truly amazing custom software developed
>>> over the life of Debian.
>>
>> LOL, I've seen some software that was "truly amazing" in the sense
>> that it worked at all. <g>
>>
>> I wonder why we still have so many different version control systems;
>> they're all about doing one conceptually-simple thing, and even
>> though the range of their scaling is large, we ought to have been
>> able to have figured out the general case by now.
>>
> By all means go ahead and produce some software as it is so
> conceptually simple.

Still busy trying to get Debian stretch installed identically on 3 
different machines.  Once I get past that it'll be time to pick up where 
I left off a very long time ago.

> We all use it if it's any good.

That's one of the few things we can count on as a community, our 
inherent laziness, it's what will save our asses in the long run because 
"crap" is hard to use and "excellent software" just works.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
  [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7633

On 2015-12-30, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Still busy trying to get Debian stretch installed identically on 3 
> different machines.  Once I get past that it'll be time to pick up where 
> I left off a very long time ago.

If you want identical, perhps try FAI

-- 
  \_(ツ)_

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7640

Jasen Betts wrote:

> On 2015-12-30, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Still busy trying to get Debian stretch installed identically on 3
>> different machines.  Once I get past that it'll be time to pick up
>> where I left off a very long time ago.
> 
> If you want identical, perhps try FAI


I assume that you mean 
	http://fai-project.org/ 
and not any of these other many meanings of FAI:
	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAI

Thanks for mentioning it, I don't recall ever having heard of it before.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
  [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7643

On 2015-12-31, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Jasen Betts wrote:
>
>> On 2015-12-30, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>> Still busy trying to get Debian stretch installed identically on 3
>>> different machines.  Once I get past that it'll be time to pick up
>>> where I left off a very long time ago.
>> 
>> If you want identical, perhps try FAI
>
> I assume that you mean 
> 	http://fai-project.org/ 

I was thinking https://wiki.debian.org/FAI

but yeah it's the exact same thing.



-- 
  \_(ツ)_

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7650

Jasen Betts wrote:

> On 2015-12-31, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> Jasen Betts wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-12-30, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Still busy trying to get Debian stretch installed identically on 3
>>>> different machines.  Once I get past that it'll be time to pick up
>>>> where I left off a very long time ago.
>>> 
>>> If you want identical, perhps try FAI
>>
>> I assume that you mean
>> http://fai-project.org/
> 
> I was thinking https://wiki.debian.org/FAI
> 
> but yeah it's the exact same thing.

Looking through the web pages, I'm not seeing a whole lot of mention of 
its ability to handle various (potentially vendor-specific) drivers, and 
different machine configurations, like when one system is 32-bit only, 
one is 64-bit with 32-bit UEFI firmware, etc.

Maybe it can handle the automated finding and installing of the correct 
drivers.  But if it can, then why doesn't the base Debian installer 
handle that a little more gracefully then not handling it at all?  I 
must have installed stretch a dozen times over the past few weeks, and I 
haven't even seen it ask whether or not I'm willing to use non-free 
drivers , much less say "device XXXX found, do you want to install its 
non-free driver, or not use the device?"  It's tough-luck-charley-go-
dig-it-up.

So it's interesting, but until I can fully back up what I have, I'm not 
in a position to try it.

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
  [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7654

crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Jasen Betts wrote:
>
>> On 2015-12-31, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> Jasen Betts wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2015-12-30, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Still busy trying to get Debian stretch installed identically on 3
>>>>> different machines.  Once I get past that it'll be time to pick up
>>>>> where I left off a very long time ago.
>>>> 
>>>> If you want identical, perhps try FAI
>>>
>>> I assume that you mean
>>> http://fai-project.org/
>> 
>> I was thinking https://wiki.debian.org/FAI
>> 
>> but yeah it's the exact same thing.
>
> Looking through the web pages, I'm not seeing a whole lot of mention of 
> its ability to handle various (potentially vendor-specific) drivers, and 
> different machine configurations, like when one system is 32-bit only, 
> one is 64-bit with 32-bit UEFI firmware, etc.

Dude, Debian will enumerate your hardware and load the appropriate modules
at boot time.

In rare cases you may have to set up the configuration (/etc/modules)
to load drivers for uncooperative hardware.

> Maybe it can handle the automated finding and installing of the correct 
> drivers.  But if it can, then why doesn't the base Debian installer 
> handle that a little more gracefully then not handling it at all?  I 
> must have installed stretch a dozen times over the past few weeks, and I 
> haven't even seen it ask whether or not I'm willing to use non-free 
> drivers , much less say "device XXXX found, do you want to install its 
> non-free driver, or not use the device?"  It's tough-luck-charley-go-
> dig-it-up.

I believe that is something you have to initiate yourself.  Not sure, it's
been a few months since I did a Debian (Sid) install.

-- 
My only love sprung from my only hate!
Too early seen unknown, and known too late!
		-- William Shakespeare, "Romeo and Juliet"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7655

On 01 Jan 2016, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
(snip)
>> I 
>> must have installed stretch a dozen times over the past few weeks, and I 
>> haven't even seen it ask whether or not I'm willing to use non-free 
>> drivers , much less say "device XXXX found, do you want to install its 
>> non-free driver, or not use the device?"  It's tough-luck-charley-go-
>> dig-it-up.
>
> I believe that is something you have to initiate yourself.  Not sure, it's
> been a few months since I did a Debian (Sid) install.

I'm pretty sure I've seen jessie netinst suggest to me drivers from
firmware-linux-nonfree like tg3_tso5. They didn't come on the CD image,
but it was happy to accept them from removable media so I just put the
bin files on a flash drive and then the installer happily continued.
I've no idea about sid.

-- Mark

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7657

Mark Carroll wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 01 Jan 2016, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> (snip)
>>> I 
>>> must have installed stretch a dozen times over the past few weeks, and I 
>>> haven't even seen it ask whether or not I'm willing to use non-free 
>>> drivers , much less say "device XXXX found, do you want to install its 
>>> non-free driver, or not use the device?"  It's tough-luck-charley-go-
>>> dig-it-up.
>>
>> I believe that is something you have to initiate yourself.  Not sure, it's
>> been a few months since I did a Debian (Sid) install.
>
> I'm pretty sure I've seen jessie netinst suggest to me drivers from
> firmware-linux-nonfree like tg3_tso5. They didn't come on the CD image,
> but it was happy to accept them from removable media so I just put the
> bin files on a flash drive and then the installer happily continued.
> I've no idea about sid.

Aside from Sid, the other wrinkle to my installs is that I start with a
basic "testing" netinstall, then change /etc/apt/sources.list to install
the rest from Sid.

-- 
Your step will soil many countries.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7661

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> Jasen Betts wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-12-31, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Jasen Betts wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-12-30, crankypuss <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Still busy trying to get Debian stretch installed identically on
>>>>>> 3
>>>>>> different machines.  Once I get past that it'll be time to pick
>>>>>> up where I left off a very long time ago.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If you want identical, perhps try FAI
>>>>
>>>> I assume that you mean
>>>> http://fai-project.org/
>>> 
>>> I was thinking https://wiki.debian.org/FAI
>>> 
>>> but yeah it's the exact same thing.
>>
>> Looking through the web pages, I'm not seeing a whole lot of mention
>> of its ability to handle various (potentially vendor-specific)
>> drivers, and different machine configurations, like when one system
>> is 32-bit only, one is 64-bit with 32-bit UEFI firmware, etc.
> 
> Dude, Debian will enumerate your hardware and load the appropriate
> modules at boot time.
> 
> In rare cases you may have to set up the configuration (/etc/modules)
> to load drivers for uncooperative hardware.

I don't know what values "rare" might have, but I do know that for 2 of 
my 3 laptops, it was necessary to manually install the correct driver 
and firmware.  Both were proprietary (Broadcom), and the installer never 
even asked if I wanted to enable a non-free repository.

I'm fully aware that the kernel will discover hardware and attempt to 
load the appropriate driver, and imo it does a very good job of that 
*when* the driver has been installed (present in the expected place).

Since the installer can also discover hardware and get its vendor-id, 
it's unclear to me why this business is so poorly handled by the 
installer.  Probably just another case of "nobody got around to that 
yet" because of resource constraints.  It's a table-lookup after all.

>> Maybe it can handle the automated finding and installing of the
>> correct
>> drivers.  But if it can, then why doesn't the base Debian installer
>> handle that a little more gracefully then not handling it at all?  I
>> must have installed stretch a dozen times over the past few weeks,
>> and I haven't even seen it ask whether or not I'm willing to use
>> non-free drivers , much less say "device XXXX found, do you want to
>> install its
>> non-free driver, or not use the device?"  It's tough-luck-charley-go-
>> dig-it-up.
> 
> I believe that is something you have to initiate yourself.  Not sure,
> it's been a few months since I did a Debian (Sid) install.

According to what I've picked up over the airwaves, you have never done 
a sid install; there *are* no sid ISO images built, so you installed 
something else then upgraded a copy of it to sid, nyet?

Terminology is *such* a bitch, ain't it? <G>

-- 
http://totally-portable-software.blogspot.com
  [Sun Nov 22: "Total Portability is not binary"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#7662

crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> crankypuss wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>> 
>>> Looking through the web pages, I'm not seeing a whole lot of mention
>>> of its ability to handle various (potentially vendor-specific)
>>> drivers, and different machine configurations, like when one system
>>> is 32-bit only, one is 64-bit with 32-bit UEFI firmware, etc.
>> 
>> Dude, Debian will enumerate your hardware and load the appropriate
>> modules at boot time.
>> 
>> In rare cases you may have to set up the configuration (/etc/modules)
>> to load drivers for uncooperative hardware.
>
> I don't know what values "rare" might have, but I do know that for 2 of 
> my 3 laptops, it was necessary to manually install the correct driver 
> and firmware.  Both were proprietary (Broadcom), and the installer never 
> even asked if I wanted to enable a non-free repository.

I was talking about after the installation, to clarify.

I've had to deal with Broadcom in the past, using the wired NIC to
do the install and then to add the Broadcomm drivers and/or non-free
firmware in order to enable the wireless.  After enabling the
non-free repository manually, which you've verified is still the
case with Debian.

> I'm fully aware that the kernel will discover hardware and attempt to 
> load the appropriate driver, and imo it does a very good job of that 
> *when* the driver has been installed (present in the expected place).

Yeah, I see what you're getting at, now.

> Since the installer can also discover hardware and get its vendor-id, 
> it's unclear to me why this business is so poorly handled by the 
> installer.  Probably just another case of "nobody got around to that 
> yet" because of resource constraints.  It's a table-lookup after all.
> 
>> I believe that is something you have to initiate yourself.  Not sure,
>> it's been a few months since I did a Debian (Sid) install.
>
> According to what I've picked up over the airwaves, you have never done 
> a sid install; there *are* no sid ISO images built, so you installed 
> something else then upgraded a copy of it to sid, nyet?
>
> Terminology is *such* a bitch, ain't it? <G>

Well, to me, it is a Sid install.  To Debian, too:

   https://wiki.debian.org/InstallFAQ

   If you are aware of the risks of running unstable, but still want to
   install it, you have three choices:

   Use the stable installer to install a minimal stable system and then
   change your /etc/apt/sources.list file to point to "unstable" and do an
   update and a dist-upgrade. Finally, install the packages you desire. This
   method is the most likely to work of those presented here.

   Be a tester of the "testing" installer and install "testing" using a
   netinst image, then upgrade to "unstable" by changing the entries in your
   /etc/apt/sources.list (change each occurrence of "testing" to
   "unstable"). To avoid unnecessary downloads and package upgrades,
   it is advisable to install a minimal "testing" system first and only to
   install most of the software (e.g. desktop environment) after the switch
   to "unstable". Then apt-get update and apt-get -u dist-upgrade - then you
   have a sid release.

   Use netboot "mini.iso" image. You will find it on any of the Debian
   mirrors under
   debian/dists/unstable/main/installer-*/current/images/netboot/mini.iso.
   During the installation choose "Advanced options" -> "Expert install". In
   the step "Choose a mirror of the Debian archive" choose version "sid -
   unstable".

I use the second method.  But hmmm, might be good to try that mini ISO
image some time.

-- 
Gone With The Wind LITE(tm)
	-- by Margaret Mitchell
 
	A woman only likes men she can't have and the South gets trashed.
 
Gift of the Magi LITE(tm)
	-- by O. Henry
 
	A husband and wife forget to register their gift preferences.
 
The Old Man and the Sea LITE(tm)
	-- by Ernest Hemingway
 
	An old man goes fishing, but doesn't have much luck.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.os.linux.debian

csiph-web