[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Glug-nith-discuss] Installing Debian from Windows

From: Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray
Subject: Re: [Glug-nith-discuss] Installing Debian from Windows
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 07:03:08 +0530
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)

>>>It is not meant to be run in WINE. It is for Windows users. Read the use

> It is true it is meant for  Windows users but it does not say that it is
> not meant to be run in WINE. What if I do not have the iso and to use
> install.exe to install it from another distro. Unlikely but cannot say
> not meant.

So who is stopping you from doing it? Do it. If it does not work, then file
a feature request. Where is the problem?

>> a. "Brenda is an inexperienced Windows user who is tired of viruses and
>> crashes, so she decides to try out Ubuntu." But she does not know what
>> to do with the .iso. Enter install.exe.

> There are a lot of live cds available which you can use to how it is
> working out for and there is the graphical mode installer as well which
> does everything for you. You  need not be a great hacker to work your way
> out. If you mean that Brenda does even know the existence of such stuff
> then it is a different issue altogether.

It is a matter of choice. If someone finds a LiveCD simpler, then let her
use it. The installer.exe is for those who find installer.exe simpler. Is
this why installer.exe is useless?

>> b. "Peter is an amateur video editor who is interested in trying out
>> Ubuntu." But he can not because he is scared of losing his data. Enter
>> install.exe.

> Peter does not have to delete his million dollar data if he installs from
> an iso even if he uses the install.exe that will also use his hard disk
> space and so also from the iso he will just have to see where to install
> it properly.

Please read how installer.exe works. It does not need to re-partition the
hard drive to dual-boot a system, unlike a conventional CD/DVD based install.
It copies two disk images-- one for the root file system and one for the
swap file system in C:/Windows. There is no GRUB, but a modified version of
it, which just edits Windows' boot loader in boot.ini. The time-zone and
country information is retrieved from the Windows registry. So in a way you
have to provide lesser inputs as compared to installing from a LiveCD also.

All this was there in

>> c. "Jane and her coworkers are employees at WidgetTech Corporation who
>> would like to use their favorite OS, Ubuntu, at work." But their company
>> would not allow any re-partitioning. Enter install.exe.

> Out here what exactly is repartitioning? I think it means deleting
> partitions and making new ones or resizing them according to WidgetTech
> Corporation. If that is the case then they can use a partition which they
> can allocate for the distro and make the 2 minimal root and swap partiions
> without resizing and cleaning other partitions as ultimately install.exe
> will also have to make 2 minimal root and swap partitions.

We all know what re-partitioning is, it is just that _you_ do not know how
installer.exe works. Please read it.

>> d. "Mark is an Ubuntu user who has just bought an ultra-portable laptop."
>> But he does not have a CD drive. Enter install.exe.

> I guess he can use an USB drive if not network  install.

Again, it is a matter of choice. What is the problem? Is innovation a big

> In case all my explanations sound too justifying, yes they are justifying

No they are not. You are just too inclined to pick up a fight. Please read
the entire thing before you post next time.

> very convincing to me... I am not saying it is useless or not worth it. I
> agree it is a great idea to initiate people into GNU/Linux what I meant
> was the reasons that are listed need not necessarily have the only option
> of install.exe

If you mean there are more better use cases or examples, then you should
have edited the wiki page. Otherwise just do not blankly criticise.
>> Which of these use cases talk about reducing ShipIts? In case you were
>> referring to:
>> "The elimination of the need for an installation CD will allow users
>> without CD burners or spare CDs to try Ubuntu, ease burdens on ShipIt,
>> and allow installation on ultra-portable laptops with no CD drives."
>> Stamping, packaging and shipping millions of Ubuntu, Kubuntu and Xubuntu
>> CDs to all corners of the world costs some money. Canonical is has not
>> yet broken even, and is a start-up with just twenty odd workers. Even Red
>> Hat can not afford to do this for Fedora.

> I had referred to shipping in a humorous tone sorry I forgot to add a
> smiley but I agree to your point.

I do not even see the humour in it. :-(

husband    v. use sparingly; conserve; save
husbandry  n. frugality; thrift; agriculture

Attachment: pgpEB1pUMj61F.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]