On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, David Palmer. wrote: > On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 11:52:06 -0700 > "s. keeling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Incoming from James Miller: > > > I'm thinking of recommending Debian to someone who has only a dialin > > > connection to the 'net. For various reasons, a network install would be > > > > Isn't cheapbytes still out there? The last time I bought from them, > > shipping cost more than the disks. > > > > Alternatively, can't you get access to a machine with adsl/cable and a > > burner? That way, your "someone" will have disks. > > > > Yes, it's possible. No, it's not much fun. I just did an apt-get > > upgrade and it tied up my phone for days. > > > My last dist-upgrade took 36 hours. > Ok. But so far no one is addressing the minimal installation factor I specifically referenced in my initial post. Someone mentioned KDE and Gnome, though I explicitly said I would recommend a lightweight WM (fluxbox is my preference). To be more precise, the initial installed system I envision is going to be something like 300MB *installed*. Now, given that, what is the feasibility of doing this over dialup? What took you 36 hours - i.e., upgrading what kind of system? Did you have KDE and other heavyweight apps installed? Does your OS take up a gig or more of HD space? I think this is an important consideration in determining the feasibility of a network install over dialup. As for the individual that answered about apt having the ability to resume broken downloads: when one does a base install starting with the floppy set, is the base system being retrieved by apt, or is there maybe some small ftp program at work at this early stage? If apt is not doing the downloading at this early stage, or maybe some barebones version of it is running, then maybe the resumed download feature is not in play.
Thanks, James -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
