Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Saturday 01 April 2017 21:23:21 Cindy-Sue Causey wrote: > On 4/1/17, cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:33:08PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> In all this talk of Debian being the universal operating system, and > >> helping > >> newbies

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 4/1/17, cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:33:08PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: >> >> In all this talk of Debian being the universal operating system, and >> helping >> newbies ... > > I'm not sure those two concepts are related. My

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Saturday 01 April 2017 18:59:48 cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:33:08PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > In all this talk of Debian being the universal operating system, and > > helping newbies ... > > I'm not sure those two concepts are related. My understanding of

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:33:08PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > In all this talk of Debian being the universal operating system, and helping > newbies ... I'm not sure those two concepts are related. My understanding of Debian being the universal operating system is that it can run on as many

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 09:10:16AM +, Darac Marjal wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 06:03:12PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: > >>Sent from my iPad > > > >Note it is sent from an iPad! Open Source all the way! > > > >Incidentally, why

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Friday 24 March 2017 18:25:30 Joe wrote: > On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 15:18:31 + > > Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Friday 24 March 2017 12:06:58 Joe wrote: > > > I've mentioned recently that I once did a non-expert netinstall, in > > > the days when I used static addresses and no

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Fri 24 Mar 2017 at 18:46:43 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > > > On Mar 24, 2017, at 6:05 PM, David Wright wrote: > > > >> On Fri 24 Mar 2017 at 15:44:15 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >>> On Mar 24, 2017, at 2:30 PM, Steve

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Catherine Gramze wrote: > On Mar 24, 2017, at 6:05 PM, David Wright wrote: >> Here's the netinst installation menu after Advanced/Expert options >> have been chosen. The asterisks are mine, and show what's probably >> the most typical path from start to finish (in

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> On Mar 24, 2017, at 6:05 PM, David Wright wrote: > >> On Fri 24 Mar 2017 at 15:44:15 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Mar 24, 2017, at 2:30 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: >>> >>> but that went away years ago. At the end

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Fri 24 Mar 2017 at 15:44:15 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 24, 2017, at 2:30 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > > > but that went away years ago. At the end of the single installer run, > > it should be finished. Do you mean "reboots into the

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 24, 2017, at 2:30 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > but that went away years ago. At the end of the single installer run, > it should be finished. Do you mean "reboots into the newly installed > system" instead, maybe? > Yes, it boots into that bare

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Fri 24 Mar 2017 at 18:23:26 +, Steve McIntyre wrote: > Catherine Gramze wrote: > > > >The point of free software is not to cater to your personal > >preferences, or mine, but to make that software accessible and useful > >to the greatest number of people. The netinst installer doesn't do >

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 2017-03-24, Catherine Gramze wrote: > > > > > Sent from my iPad >> On Mar 24, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Curt wrote: >> >> I'd just wish you'd wrap your lines in accordance to rule number 87 of the >> "Debian Etiquette Guidelines," by I.M. Sikothis. > > Thank you for

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 24, 2017, at 2:08 PM, Curt wrote: > > I'd just wish you'd wrap your lines in accordance to rule number 87 of the > "Debian Etiquette Guidelines," by I.M. Sikothis. Thank you for mentioning this. I was not aware that my iPad does not wrap lines

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Catherine Gramze wrote:> >> On Mar 23, 2017, at 9:22 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >> Catherine, I'm curious - when was the last time you installed Debian >> using d-i? I've now seen you several times write (like above) about >> "backing out of the installer after the reboot".

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 15:18:31 + Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Friday 24 March 2017 12:06:58 Joe wrote: > > I've mentioned recently that I once did a non-expert netinstall, in > > the days when I used static addresses and no DHCP, and was miffed > > to find I had no network

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Catherine Gramze wrote: > >The point of free software is not to cater to your personal >preferences, or mine, but to make that software accessible and useful >to the greatest number of people. The netinst installer doesn't do >that when it allows a very broken installation to result. There will

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 2017-03-23, Catherine Gramze wrote: > > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Mar 23, 2017, at 2:03 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >> Please calm down, why the aggression? :-( > > Lisi is incensed with my suggestion that the netinst installer should refuse > to

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 2017-03-24, Andy Smith wrote: > > It can be useful to note the names of people who can't seem to > prevent themselves from writing argumentative and massively > off-topic responses over and over again. It's a relatively small but > vocal list. Right. Let's write the names

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Hi Jonathan, On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:16:16AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 06:29:35AM +, Andy Smith wrote: > > It can be useful to note the names of people who can't seem to > > prevent themselves from writing argumentative and massively > > off-topic responses

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Friday 24 March 2017 12:06:58 Joe wrote: > I've mentioned recently that I once did a non-expert netinstall, in the > days when I used static addresses and no DHCP, and was miffed to find I > had no network interfaces at the end of the process. Until fairly recently I have always had static IPs

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Friday 24 March 2017 12:06:58 Joe wrote: > the user > should be notified and asked whether to continue. The user *is* notified and asked whether to continue. The user is not *prevented* from continuing, should he or she be perverse enough to wish to do so. Lisi

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Friday 24 March 2017 12:07:59 Richard Owlett wrote: > It might be just the ticket for some > of my minimalist experiments. ;-) It would. The other minimalist install media have mostly gone by the board. I have just checked, and amazingly LNX-BBC (Linux Bootable Business Card) and DSL

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thu 23 Mar 2017 at 22:23:42 -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > > On Mar 23, 2017, at 9:22 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > > > Catherine, I'm curious - when was the last time you installed Debian > > using d-i? I've now seen you several times write (like above) about > >

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/24/2017 07:07 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: On 03/23/2017 05:18 PM, Catherine Gramze wrote: [ *SNIP* ] A complete Debian dvd set does NOT solve the unrecognized network problem; only the unofficial iso downloads that include the non-free firmware do. The same issue was present the last time I

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/23/2017 05:18 PM, Catherine Gramze wrote: [ *SNIP* ] A complete Debian dvd set does NOT solve the unrecognized network problem; only the unofficial iso downloads that include the non-free firmware do. The same issue was present the last time I used a complete 12 dvd set, which was years

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 10:29:09 + Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Friday 24 March 2017 10:20:46 Jonathan Dowland wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:07:22AM +0100, Mart van de Wege wrote: > > > I disagree. Sometimes there is no disagreement, someone is just > > > plain wrong.

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Friday 24 March 2017 10:20:46 Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:07:22AM +0100, Mart van de Wege wrote: > > I disagree. Sometimes there is no disagreement, someone is just plain > > wrong. Catherine has been given the use cases that disprove her thesis, > > and has been

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 02:33:00PM -0400, songbird wrote: > Catherine Gramze wrote: > ... > > When you burn the netinst iso to a dvd, because you can't buy blank cds > > anymore in any local stores, you have a netinst dvd. I can't remember the > > last time I saw a cd in the wild. > > i just

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:07:22AM +0100, Mart van de Wege wrote: > I disagree. Sometimes there is no disagreement, someone is just plain > wrong. Catherine has been given the use cases that disprove her thesis, > and has been contradicting herself. Catherine's *suggestion* has been shot down for

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 06:29:35AM +, Andy Smith wrote: > It can be useful to note the names of people who can't seem to > prevent themselves from writing argumentative and massively > off-topic responses over and over again. It's a relatively small but > vocal list. Yes... but, a) the

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 24-03-17, Catherine Gramze wrote: > > > On Mar 23, 2017, at 9:20 PM, David Wright wrote: > > > > It's not really polite to call this "expert" (only in the sense > > described by the Advanced options in the installer) rabid, and what > > I do with the installer

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Hello, On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:25:20PM +0100, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:16:54PM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > > This thread is a great example of why I really despise debian-user > > sometimes. > > There's no reason to be so hostile, you simply disagree with each

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> On Mar 23, 2017, at 9:20 PM, David Wright wrote: > > It's not really polite to call this "expert" (only in the sense > described by the Advanced options in the installer) rabid, and what > I do with the installer ridiculous. > > I don't wish to accept arbitrary

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> On Mar 23, 2017, at 9:22 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > Catherine, I'm curious - when was the last time you installed Debian > using d-i? I've now seen you several times write (like above) about > "backing out of the installer after the reboot". Are you talking about > a

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thu 23 Mar 2017 at 20:15:34 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > It was you who started maligning me, accusing me of making false claims (but > not being able to present one) and generally harassing me for disagreeing > with you. I have only responded politely, explaining my opinion and why I

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Catherine Gramze wrote: > >I am suggesting, not "demanding" that the netinst installer refuse to >continue when it is not going to be able to successfully complete the >installation due to no network connection. This does not prevent >anybody from backing out of the installer after the reboot to

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> On Mar 23, 2017, at 7:38 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > Anyone who reads this knows that the net-install disc cannot include non-free > firmware and that there could be a problem with connecting to the net. No, they don't. They know it can't can't contain non-free

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thursday 23 March 2017 22:54:13 Catherine Gramze wrote: > > On Mar 23, 2017, at 6:44 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > > On Thursday 23 March 2017 22:18:53 Catherine Gramze wrote: > >>> Mar 23, 2017, at 2:46 PM, Lisi Reisz >>> > >>> This is of

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> On Mar 23, 2017, at 6:44 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Thursday 23 March 2017 22:18:53 Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> Mar 23, 2017, at 2:46 PM, Lisi Reisz >> >>> This is of course incorrect. But I doubt that I could refute it without >>>

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thursday 23 March 2017 22:18:53 Catherine Gramze wrote: > >  Mar 23, 2017, at 2:46 PM, Lisi Reisz > > > This is of course incorrect.  But I doubt that I could refute it without > > appearing aggressive again. :-( > > What part of what I said is incorrect?

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> Mar 23, 2017, at 2:46 PM, Lisi Reisz > This is of course incorrect. But I doubt that I could refute it without > appearing aggressive again. :-( What part of what I said is incorrect? > It does indeed incense me that Catherine should demand that the net >

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thu 23 Mar 2017 at 11:07:22 +0100, Mart van de Wege wrote: > Jonathan Dowland writes: > > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 08:06:46AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:52:46PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > >> > Do you prefer that people move on to other

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/23/2017 09:48 AM, Catherine Gramze wrote: On Mar 23, 2017, at 12:38 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: Catherine Gramze wrote: On Mar 20, 2017, at 10:02 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: Particularly where you have encountered it where it takes you past the point of

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

My reply went initially in error to Catherine privately because she had sent a copy to me privately. I wish people would stick to teh CoC and not cc people. On Thursday 23 March 2017 18:20:39 Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 23, 2017, at 2:03 PM, Steve McIntyre

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Catherine Gramze wrote: ... > When you burn the netinst iso to a dvd, because you can't buy blank cds > anymore in any local stores, you have a netinst dvd. I can't remember the > last time I saw a cd in the wild. i just saw piles of them available at Best Buy. plus i'd be very surprised

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 23, 2017, at 2:03 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > Please calm down, why the aggression? :-( Lisi is incensed with my suggestion that the netinst installer should refuse to continue if no network card is recognized and configured. She sincerely

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thursday 23 March 2017 18:03:35 Steve McIntyre wrote: > Please calm down, why the aggression? :-( Sorry. Lisi

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Lisi Reisz wrote: >On Thursday 23 March 2017 16:48:56 Catherine Gramze wrote: >> >> When you burn the netinst iso to a dvd, because you can't buy blank cds >> anymore in any local stores, you have a netinst dvd. I can't remember the >> last time I saw a cd in the wild. > >No, you do not. You have

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Catherine Gramze wrote: >> On Mar 23, 2017, at 12:38 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> >> Sorry, what? There's no such animal as a netinst dvd... The netinst is >> a minimal-ish (small) CD-sized image that just contains the installer >> and the (very limited) base system. The DVDs

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thursday 23 March 2017 16:48:56 Catherine Gramze wrote: > > On Mar 23, 2017, at 12:38 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > > > Catherine Gramze wrote: > >>> On Mar 20, 2017, at 10:02 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >>> > >>> Particularly where you have encountered it

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> On Mar 23, 2017, at 12:38 PM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> On Mar 20, 2017, at 10:02 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: >>> >>> Particularly where you have encountered it where it takes you past the >>> point >>> of no retreat before you

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Lisi Reisz wrote: >On Wednesday 22 March 2017 17:26:56 Richard Owlett wrote: >> >> I had a "Live 8.6 MATE" DVD next to me. >> I had a minor glitch and a possibly significant problem. >> The minor glitch was when launching the installer it needed a password. >> Having seen that problem reported

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Catherine Gramze wrote: >> On Mar 20, 2017, at 10:02 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: >> >> Particularly where you have encountered it where it takes you past the point >> of no retreat before you discover that you need a network driver, so that >> you >> have wiped your old

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

rhia...@mac.com wrote: >> >> If run from Jessie's DVD 1 of 13, if Desktop is selected but >> without a specific D.E. selected, you get Gnome. >> >You only get Gnome if you have first selected a mirror. Ummm, I've done this lots of times - DVD 1 should give you Gnome without needing any external

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thursday 23 March 2017 11:50:33 Joe wrote: > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 11:07:22 +0100 > > Mart van de Wege wrote: > > Jonathan Dowland writes: > > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 08:06:46AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:52:46PM -0400,

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 11:07:22 +0100 Mart van de Wege wrote: > Jonathan Dowland writes: > > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 08:06:46AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:52:46PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > >> > Do you prefer that

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Jonathan Dowland writes: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 08:06:46AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:52:46PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: >> > Do you prefer that people move on to other distros after a base system only >> > installation because the Debian

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Wednesday 22 March 2017 17:26:56 Richard Owlett wrote: > On 03/22/2017 10:33 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Wednesday 22 March 2017 14:53:24 Richard Owlett wrote: > >> On 03/22/2017 09:28 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >>> On Wednesday 22 March 2017 14:05:28 Richard Owlett wrote: > The results of

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/22/2017 10:33 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Wednesday 22 March 2017 14:53:24 Richard Owlett wrote: On 03/22/2017 09:28 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Wednesday 22 March 2017 14:05:28 Richard Owlett wrote: The results of the 6 installs I intended to run: [the only variable being which DE related

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 20:52:46 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 7:20 PM, David Wright wrote: > > > >> On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 15:44:18 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > >> > >> The installer allows you to continue the

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Wednesday 22 March 2017 14:53:24 Richard Owlett wrote: > On 03/22/2017 09:28 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Wednesday 22 March 2017 14:05:28 Richard Owlett wrote: > >> The results of the 6 installs I intended to run: > >> [the only variable being which DE related boxes checked] > >> [space used

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/22/2017 09:28 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Wednesday 22 March 2017 14:05:28 Richard Owlett wrote: The results of the 6 installs I intended to run: [the only variable being which DE related boxes checked] [space used reported by gparted] 1. None CLI installed taking ~.92 GB 2. Only

Re: [TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Wednesday 22 March 2017 14:05:28 Richard Owlett wrote: > The results of the 6 installs I intended to run: > [the only variable being which DE related boxes checked] > [space used reported by gparted] >    1. None >       CLI installed taking ~.92 GB >    2. Only top entry checked (asking for

[TEST RUNS] Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/21/2017 05:30 AM, Richard Owlett wrote: On 03/20/2017 09:05 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Tuesday 21 March 2017 00:38:36 Richard Owlett wrote: With the installer from DVD 1 of 13 the first option in taskel is for choosing to have a desktop - the default is yes. Thanks, Richard! This is as

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:16:54PM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 08:06:46AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:52:46PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > > > Do you prefer that people move on to other

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 08:06:46AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:52:46PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > > Do you prefer that people move on to other distros after a base system only > > installation because the Debian installer let them inadvertently get there? > > If

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:52:46PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > Do you prefer that people move on to other distros after a base system only > installation because the Debian installer let them inadvertently get there? If they're like you, yes. Good riddance.

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 06:03:12PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: Sent from my iPad Note it is sent from an iPad! Open Source all the way! Incidentally, why did we need to know that? These sorts of signatures are usually used on

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 2017-03-21 at 20:52, Catherine Gramze wrote: >> On Mar 21, 2017, at 7:20 PM, David Wright >> wrote: >> >>> On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 15:44:18 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> >>> The installer allows you to continue the installation without a >>> configured network

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 7:20 PM, David Wright wrote: > >> On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 15:44:18 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: >> >> The installer allows you to continue the installation without a configured >> network card, and it shouldn't. > > Please

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 15:44:18 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:44:42PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > >>> On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 3:10 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:44:42PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: >>> >>> wrong >> >> Then use a different installer! >

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 18:38:44 Catherine Gramze wrote: > And I specified it was the netinst about 8 posts ago, immediately in > response to you asking. And I have repeatedly since then mentioned netinst. > You might try reading what I say instead of skimming it for things to > object to. The

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > That doesn't mean the installer should refuse to work. There is > absolutely nothing wrong with doing a minimal install using a netinst > image to get a working Debian system. Maybe you want to

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:44:42PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > > wrong > > Then use a different installer! No. Stop telling other people what to do. Stop trying to take away OPTIONS from other people. I will

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 01:15:32PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > But a netinst dvd or usb stick is not the best tool for that. The very name > lets you know that a network is going to be needed. Netinst is not the only > installer, you know. The name does indeed imply that a network will be

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:12 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > wrong Then use a different installer! The netinst dvd leaves you with what would be considered a crippled system by most people. Requiring a functioning network card removes that possibility for

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 2:01 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: >> Sent from my iPad >> On Mar 21, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 06:03:12PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: > > Sent from my iPad > > Note it is sent from an iPad! Open Source all the way! > > Incidentally, why did we need to know that? It's about as relevant to this list as

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 01:15:32PM -0400, Catherine Gramze wrote: > Of course they should. But a netinst dvd or usb stick is not the best tool > for that. The very name lets you know that a network is going to be needed. > Netinst is not the only installer, you know. That doesn't mean the

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad Note it is sent from an iPad! Open Source all the way! Incidentally, why did we need to know that? Lisi

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 17:15:32 Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:55:07PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >>> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:33:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: > >>>

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:55:07PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: >>> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:33:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> Refusing to continue an installation that will inevitably be a failure

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue 21 Mar 2017 at 10:33:29 (-0400), Catherine Gramze wrote: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Mar 21, 2017, at 6:31 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > >> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 02:58:50 Catherine Gramze wrote: > >> The installer allows you to continue the installation without a

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 02:55:07PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:33:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: > > Refusing to continue an installation that will inevitably be a failure is > > how it should act. > > Rot. It will not "inevitably be a failure". It can be a very good way

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 14:33:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: > Refusing to continue an installation that will inevitably be a failure is > how it should act. Rot. It will not "inevitably be a failure". It can be a very good way out of some problems. Lisi

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 11:59:39 Greg Wooledge wrote: > Sure, if you *don't change the default selection*, you probably get > GNOME.  Is that what you meant by "don't actually select anything"? > Just accepting whatever the default is, without reading or changing > what's on the screen? Exactly

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

Sent from my iPad > On Mar 21, 2017, at 6:31 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > >> On Tuesday 21 March 2017 02:58:50 Catherine Gramze wrote: >> The installer allows you to continue the installation without a configured >> network card, and it shouldn't. > > Of course it should

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:48:51PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote: > The question is what you get by default if you don't actually select > anything - desktop or no desktop. I got Gnome, so got a desktop. The last Debian install I have done was for jessie (netinst). Like every recent version of

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 2017-03-21, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Tuesday 21 March 2017 00:38:36 Richard Owlett wrote: >> With the installer from DVD 1 of 13 the first option in taskel is for >> choosing to have a desktop - the default is yes. > > Thanks, Richard! This is as I expected - the default

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 02:58:50 Catherine Gramze wrote: > The installer allows you to continue the installation without a configured > network card, and it shouldn't. Of course it should *allow* you to do so. And it does warn you. Not allow you indeed! People open viruses, help telephone

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/20/2017 09:05 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Tuesday 21 March 2017 00:38:36 Richard Owlett wrote: With the installer from DVD 1 of 13 the first option in taskel is for choosing to have a desktop - the default is yes. Thanks, Richard! This is as I expected - the default is to have a desktop.

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> On Mar 20, 2017, at 10:02 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Tuesday 21 March 2017 00:19:52 Catherine Gramze wrote: >>> On Mar 20, 2017, at 7:51 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote >> > What I was asking is where you yourself have encountered it recently, not in >

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 00:38:36 Richard Owlett wrote: > With the installer from DVD 1 of 13 the first option in taskel is for > choosing to have a desktop - the default is yes. Thanks, Richard! This is as I expected - the default is to have a desktop. I must find a machine on which I can

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Tuesday 21 March 2017 00:19:52 Catherine Gramze wrote: > > On Mar 20, 2017, at 7:51 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > > That sounds as though it is the message that is at fault, not the > > installer or installation method. It should perhaps mention that you > > have to carry

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On 03/20/2017 06:48 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Monday 20 March 2017 20:29:31 Richard Owlett wrote: On 03/20/2017 03:06 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Monday 20 March 2017 09:46:45 Jonathan Dowland wrote: I don't have an installation image locally to test this as I write, but your messages indicate

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

> On Mar 20, 2017, at 7:51 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > That sounds as though it is the message that is at fault, not the installer > or > installation method. It should perhaps mention that you have to carry on to > get a desktop. Is this in the set of DVDs? > > Lisi >

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Monday 20 March 2017 20:54:29 Catherine Gramze wrote: > the misleading message that your base installation is complete and the > system will now reboot to Linux. You can't blame some beginners for > believing the installation is complete! That sounds as though it is the message that is at

Re: installer defaults for desktops (was Re: Suggested edit)

On Monday 20 March 2017 20:29:31 Richard Owlett wrote: > On 03/20/2017 03:06 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > On Monday 20 March 2017 09:46:45 Jonathan Dowland wrote: > >> I don't have an installation image locally to test this as I write, but > >> your messages indicate that the graphical desktop

  1   2   >