"standard" version of 9.0 live image?

If none of the more specific forums is the right place to ask

"standard" version of 9.0 live image?

Postby litspliff » 2017-06-25 02:46

all the 9.x images posted have a desktop...f that. do i need to roll my own, or is there a standard iso on the way? thanks for any replies. (posted with lynx)
User avatar
Posts: 21
Joined: 2011-11-12 20:48

Re: "standard" version of 9.0 live image?

Postby Wheelerof4te » 2017-06-25 07:54

Here you go, standard install images from which you can pick and choose which desktop you want:


(click on a architecture)

If you wan't bare-bones installation image, only one is netinstall (it requires internet connection):

https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/cu ... 64/iso-cd/

Currently, there is no live version of netinstall (CLI) since Live images are designed to test hardware compatibility of various desktops. So it's pointless to provide live image of something that can run on pretty much anything.
Options for users who don't like systemd as Wheezy EOL draws near
Debian 9 GNOME
Intel Pentium 3825U Broadwell
AMD Radeon R5 330m
8GB DDR3 RAMesting
User avatar
Posts: 394
Joined: 2015-08-30 20:14

Re: "standard" version of 9.0 live image?

Postby litspliff » 2017-06-26 00:20

i believe you misunderstood the question. "standard" is the name of a specific type of iso image that does not have X and a bunch of other cruft. also, you seem to overlook the myriad of other uses for a live image other than just testing hardware. thank you for your reply, but i once again pose the question: are there plans for a 9.0 standard live, like was made available for version 8, or should i roll my own using the live-build tools? thanks in advance for any replies. (posted using lynx)
User avatar
Posts: 21
Joined: 2011-11-12 20:48

Re: "standard" version of 9.0 live image?

Postby GarryRicketson » 2017-06-26 02:04

or should i roll my own using the live-build tools?

If you really are capable of that, then that is what you should do,
I don't think what you seem to be looking for exists, and as far as I
know there are no plans to create something like that,... all the standard
iso's do have Xorg, and come with Desktop Environments, etc,...
If you use a "netinstall" image, you can select the option to just install a
minimal base system. That will give you a minimal system, that boots and has
a few of the normal commands, no X, or Xorg, and cruft, as you call it.

are there plans for a 9.0 standard live,

As far as I know, no, but you really would need to contact the Debian developers
to find out about that, here on this forum it is pretty much just Debian users, and
we do not know what plans the developers may or may not have,...
I am curious, Why do you seem to think it is necessary to keep telling us
you are using lynx to post ?
Is that supposed to be significant ?
"What we expect you have already Done"

Before doing anything, read the Debian documentation:
Debian Documentation
How to ask the smart way
Debian Foro Español
For the Birds
User avatar
Posts: 4353
Joined: 2015-01-20 22:16
Location: Durango, Mexico

Re: "standard" version of 9.0 live image?

Postby GarryRicketson » 2017-06-26 02:23

Install Debian base

Maybe read this:https://debian-handbook.info/browse/stable/sect.installation-steps.html
Skip down to:
4.2.14. Installing the Base System
This step, which doesn't require any user interaction, installs the Debian “base system” packages. This includes the dpkg and apt tools, which manage Debian packages, as well as the utilities necessary to boot the system and start using it.

Once you have that part of the installation done, you do not have to install
other packages, like Desktop Environments, etc. "Cruft " as you call it.
Interesting term "cruft", I use to cal it "junk", but apparently some people considered the term "junk" offensive, so I stopped.

Oh dear, time to go, my mind is starting to wander again.

As you will see, if you read further,
you get to:
4.2.17. Selecting Packages for Installation
The following step allows you to choose the purpose of the machine in very broad terms; the ten suggested tasks correspond to lists of packages to be installed. The list of the packages that will actually be installed will be fine-tuned and completed later on, but this provides a good starting point in a simple manner.
Some packages are also automatically installed according to the hardware detected (thanks to the program discover-pkginstall from the discover package). For instance, if a VirtualBox virtual machine is detected, the program will install the virtualbox-guest-dkms package, allowing for better integration of the virtual machine with the host system.

Don't select anything, if you do not want anything. Or select what you do want.

Just because one uses lynx as a browser is no excuse for not doing any searches.
I use it myself, but never felt the need to advertise it.
User avatar
Posts: 4353
Joined: 2015-01-20 22:16
Location: Durango, Mexico

Re: "standard" version of 9.0 live image?

Postby ruffwoof » 2017-06-26 20:19

The omission of a live standard isn't good IMO either. Handy to have if you prefer another live boot choice to the default desktop choices ... such as installing just xorg, jwm and pcmanfm (along with no recommended) ... for that lighter touch.

Yes you could do just a basic install using the standard installer, add live-boot to that and create a squashfs ...etc. i.e. home grown, but as Standard was included by default in Jessie it would have been nice if that had also been carried forward into Stretch. In effect a incomplete release that was released too early.

The other option of using Jessie standard and dist upgrading that does require that aufs-dkms to also be manually installed (along with adding union=aufs as a kernel boot parameter) ... as Stretch doesn't use aufs by default.

Along with kicking out the lead livecd developer, SystemD and now aufs dropping to being a secondary ... almost a though a masochistic tendency. As in the joke : when a masochistic asked a sadist to hurt him the sadist said no, there could very well be more developers/supporters saying no and moving elsewhere due to such top level decisions.
Posts: 211
Joined: 2016-08-20 21:00

Re: "standard" version of 9.0 live image?

Postby litspliff » 2017-06-27 19:50

ruffwoof, if that is your real name, i like your style. others i must repectfully remind that i'm interested in a live-boot scenario, installation is not an option on a machine with no drives, which is how this situation should be approached. i apologize if i was not properly verbose in my original postings. mr. woof, i am interpreting your post as confirmation that the absence of a standard-live image was more than a "forgot to post it" scenario. i will continue to use the jessie standard live ... unfortunately there has been a kernel update issued, and to activate requires reboot...which can not be done in a live situation. so having a live CLI image with an up-to-spec kernel would be great. as an alternative, i may make a binary snapshot of a freshly installed system and cp(or dd) that to /dev/usbdiskdev;sync on a seperate system somewhere hopefully close by, then after waiting 10 minutes for the sync, i can walk back to the original machine, then....wait.what? that sucks dude. maybe i'll see if dropping to a command line on the netinstall is worthy of live use (posted using lynx [a text web browser that should always be supported for the visually impaired, which i thankfully am not])
User avatar
Posts: 21
Joined: 2011-11-12 20:48

Return to General Questions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests