FreeBSD Based Live CDs 252
Newtonian_p writes "Now the BSD world has an answer to Knoppix. The FreeSBIE project have released a live FreeBSD based system on CD. There are also plans to develop a suite of programs to be used to create a personalized disk." If it offers a painless BSD install (the way Knoppix makes it easy to install Debian to a hard drive), this should be a popular project. Reader Cronopios links to a related effort called LiveBSD which "has heavily modified FreeSBIE's scripts to allow for apache mysql and many other programs to run."
I'm there! (Score:3, Interesting)
good news.
FreeSBIE? (Score:5, Funny)
Hopefully eventually (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Hopefully eventually (Score:5, Informative)
no business card, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:no business card, but... (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, even Knoppix isn't new. I was using Slackware '96 off of a CD with a floppy for
Why BSD? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Why BSD? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hopefully eventually (Score:2)
Re:Hopefully eventually (Score:2, Informative)
Not much info available (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, I RTFA, but it's pretty sparse. Can anyone involved explain a bit more how this works?
I would think it would be similiar to the MandrakeMove(?) live linux CD we saw earlier this year, but bad things happen when I make assumptions. :)
OS Comparison (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:OS Comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
You're bound to come across a distro suited for your needs.
(server, router, desktop, multimedia system, whatever you want)
Every Linux distro has it's upsides and it's downsides (both are mostly about whether it's something for you).
As for the BSD's, I've never tried them, but afaik they're a bit more geared towards servers/security than Linux.
It still comes down to personal choice
Re:OS Comparison (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyway, back to the subject at hand, machines which will be running various OSes.
A) Game Development platform.
B) Internet Gateway
C) Internal multipurpose server. (Print/File/Internal document/http hosting)
D) Laptop.
That last one's the fun one. It's a Sony VAIO PCG-NVR23, and I really want to move it to GNU/Linux, as it serves mainly as a word processor and web browser, so there's no excuse for it to have ANY non-free software, but I'm not familiar enough with GNU/Linux to necessarily be able to follow the directions I've found to get it working. Though I'm sure once I RTFM (or RTFD as the case may be) I'll get things worked out in the end.
Anyway, suggestions for a few of those will be welcome, so long as you guys don't get into arguments about it. (Y'know, a few simple "Why this might work here" style comments are nice. Any posts that claim someone else is wrong, are most certainly not.)
Re:OS Comparison (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:OS Comparison (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:OS Comparison (Score:3, Informative)
Reading the certification results (example [suse.com]), I found that the internal WLAN card wasn't supported. Not
Re:OS Comparison (Score:5, Informative)
No need to pollute your machine. I develop a computer simulation (it started as a thesis project), so it has almost all the same requirements a modern game would have: 3-D graphics, sound, GUI, etc. I use wxWidgets (formerly wxWindows) which gets me pretty much every feature I need. The best part is tha I can use the gcc cross-compiler to build the win32 target .exe from my Linux box. I then have friends of mine test the final windows .exe (after I do some preliminary testing through WINE).
I would assert that is better to develop the Win32 apps from linux than from win32. Especially since I don't have to worry about VS.NET flaking out on me, or the other crappy tools that are common on Windows.
Re:OS Comparison (Score:5, Informative)
FreeBSD looks like UNIX (oversimplification, albeit) down-and-dirty. I ran X on it for awhile (enlightenment or fvwm95 on a 486DX/66) and will never again. It really is not set up for a GUI, and you will do a ton of work getting it there. It will run Linux-compatible binaries provided you have the right libraries.
This is what I would use as the server because I am comfortable with it, and feel it is faster and more secure in this capacity. (I have little proof of the proceeding statement, but know there are thousands of benchmarks that prove me either right or wrong)
Linux distros I've tried range from pretty and trendy (Mandrake, Knoppix), to Windows clones (Lin---s, Licoris), to down-and-dirty UNIX type (Slackware). Mandrake would be my choice for the laptop and the development box because I just like the way it feels.
The FreeBSD live CD doesn't seem like anything more than an educational tool, because, IMHO, FreeBSD is supposed to be installed, customized, and left to what it does best, run server daemons. Check out linuxISO.org [linuxiso.org] if you haven't already. It is a quick resource for information about a TON of different distros.
Re:OS Comparison (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, clicking on "Desktop" in the installer, that really was hard.
It will run Linux-compatible binaries provided you have the right libraries.
I forgot to undertake the astonishingly difficult task of clicking "Linux Compatibility" in the install, so I had to resort to the incredibly complex "make install" command in any of the linux binaries port because I forgot that the linux base system had the incredibly cryptic name of "linux-base".
You sir posited zero evidence for your assertions.
Re:OS Comparison (Score:2, Informative)
Oh come now... I've installed FreeBSD on a few machines ranging from a Dell pII 400 to a Frankenputer(tm) I built from parts lying around the house. I've never had any issues getting X running with Gnome, KDE, Windowmaker, or anything else. I choose the options right in the installer and it just works for me.
From there the GUI runs just like it d
Re:OS Comparison (Score:4, Informative)
Next time you run the FreeBSD sysinstall, take a little more time and pay more attention.
Re:OS Comparison (Score:5, Funny)
yeah, "make install" just about killed me. and I can never remember that "startx" thing you have to do.
Re:OS Comparison (Score:3, Informative)
I must respectfully disagree. I am using FreeBSD as my primary desktop OS at home and at work. I'ts fully "GUIified". KDE 3.2. MPlayer, Xmms, yada, yada, yada.
While setting stuff up isn't automatically done for you before you even insert the install CD, it still isn't that difficult. Thanks to XFree86 (the true hero of the desktop), the days of having to manually compute modelines is ancient history. Run the command "XFree8
Maybe I can help some... (Score:3, Interesting)
B) Gateway : astaro.org
Nice (very nice) standalone firewall with statefull packet inspection.
You get a very secure firewall, with a free licence if under 10 protected ips.
I'm using it as firewall, mail relay and DMZ control for my small webserver.
updates are downloaded automatically and it's really, really stable.
It also includes (for a fee) a good email antivirus.
Nice solution, web based control, did
Addendum : (Score:3, Interesting)
All together I have 5 pcs and an Xbox on the network
Internet Access is Xdsl 4Mbits and pppoe.
Firewall is a PII 450 with 280 Mo ram. CPU usage under 2% average, so you can use a smaller machine if you want...
The Webserver with E-smith is a PII350 with 370Mo ram, but it will run from a P200-128Mo and up.
The fileserver is a Duron 1.3+256 Mo ram, 4+80Gigs on a raid card and a smallish 4Gig hdd for the system...more
Re:OS Comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
After a few months it will be a fairer comparison, if you can spare the time of course. You may find that most are good, none are perfect, and it depends which imperfections you want to tolerate. But, I'm sure you will find one that you like, and it will be of more use, in the long term, than the badly broken "competitive" products of the Convicted Monopolist, or the abominal violation of the GPL known as SCO Unix.
Re:OS Comparison (Score:3, Insightful)
Installing the *BSDs has not had the ease that many of the Linux distros have had, so hopefully this will encourage
Re:OS Comparison (Score:2, Insightful)
i have one small thing to add about what youve said, however. not a correction, just an addition. something a new linux user need to think about is the speed of the machine used for testing versus that of the machine it will be used on. if you are blessed enough to have a spare machine that is up to standards, then by all m
Re:OS Comparison (Score:3, Informative)
BSD isn't a hard install (Score:5, Interesting)
I was shocked, yes shocked, at how easy OpenBSD was installed on my intel machine. The mac install was another kettle of fish but the intel install was the easiest install I've ever done. FreeBSD wasn't exactly a difficult install either. I don't remember NetBSD being hard come to think of it. Actually, has anybody found an intel BSD OS difficult to install?
Re:BSD isn't a hard install (Score:5, Informative)
Re:BSD isn't a hard install (Score:3, Interesting)
Well isn't that the case with all computers and software? I've installed all the Big Three BSDs, several iterations of the much feared Slack, Debian and countless other distros, and they've never posed any serious problems -- sure, driver/package issues and the like, but zero showstoppers. Why? I'm fairly computer literate, but nothing exceptional, I have no l33t *nix 1nst4ll sk1llz (maybe some experience).
All I did was read, download and print down the nece
Re:BSD isn't a hard install (Score:5, Informative)
1. Burn floppy
2. Insert floppy into old hardware (in this case, a 486 DX4 100), reboot machine
3. OpenBSD boots from floppy. Asked me if I want to Install, upgrade, or cancel. I chose (I)nstall
4. Asked me which hard drive.
5. Gave me fdisk like partition manager. Listed whole drive as c with one bit "a" FAT16 partition. I deleted "a," entered in the partitions I needed, with "b" being my swap by default. Did w,q to write and quit.
6. Asked me to set up network interface, root password, etc...
7. Asked me which install type, I set up ftp, I selected the mirror closest to me, selected the packages I wanted, and then waited for install to complete (20 min on cable modem).
8. I took out the floppy, rebooted, and got a login prompt.
9. Signed in as root, and heeded "afterboot" security warning.
Then I installed bash with a simple add_pkg command, added non-root user, set up pf, found apache was installed and set up by default, changed forwarding to "1", slapped pfctl and apachectl to run, and wala! Working router/NAT/webserver in less than an hour.
Re:BSD isn't a hard install (Score:3, Funny)
Isn't it going to be hard to boot off that floppy if you burn it?
Re:BSD isn't a hard install (Score:4, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:BSD isn't a hard install (Score:3, Insightful)
One of the things I love about OpenBSD is that the documentation and man pages are so well done, having a look at the Installation Guide [openbsd.org] and the afterboot(8) [openbsd.org] man page, virtually anyone can have full fledged secure by default OS installed configured in a breeze.
DOS is easy to install to (Score:3, Insightful)
Your probably talking about using it as a server and your right, if you follow the instructions any *nix isn't too difficult to get initially installed.
My point is for the distro-of-the-week, dual-booting, desktop nix using, Slashdot majority who will probably need help once their beyond the basic initial install. For them the idea that any BSD is a "painless install" is a bit of a misnomer. The real test is getting X working at the prope
Knoppix + Cluster Knoppix... (Score:2)
Installing Nvidia driver using a nice script from a guy called Kanotix (the name of his cluster distro, so google for it...)
Printer conf using the tools given with Knoppix : 2 minutes
Digital Camera/Scanner/usb, same 5 minutes as long as your camera works as a usb drive, much much harder otherwise...
Palm : open a Midnight Commander session under root, go to
How easy is install in a multiboot scenerio? (Score:2, Informative)
the disklabel process. Now, there are some things about my setup that may have
been making it hard, but in the same scenerio I was able to get other systems
installed (e.g., Mandrake, BeOS), and I failed to get BSD working. One of the
things I suspect may have been a problem is that I was trying to put it on my
"spare" partition that I was keeping open at the time for fooling around with
installing various things just for a few days
Re:BSD isn't a hard install (Score:3, Insightful)
" If it offers a painless BSD install "
I was shocked, yes shocked, at how easy OpenBSD was installed on my intel machine. The mac install was another kettle of fish but the intel install was the easiest install I've ever done. FreeBSD wasn't exactly a difficult install either. I don't remember NetBSD being hard come to think of it. Actually, has anybody found an intel BSD OS difficult to install?
"Painless BSD install" means "I don't need to know what I'm doing."
FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD have *
Available for purchase (Score:4, Informative)
Now? (Score:5, Informative)
Err... This may be "Stuff that matters", but it shouldn't be "News for Nerds". FreeBSD has had live CDs since at least 2002.
Re:Now? (Score:5, Informative)
I have been using this particular FreeSBIE disk for a couple of months now. Using it to post this, as a matter of fact.
I'm using it at work on a machine that normally runs XP and takes twice as long to boot to XP as it does to the live CD.
For some reason the giant list of Live CDs [frozentech.com] doesn't seem to include the BSD variants.
There are 8 different *BSD live CDs listed at LiveCDNews.com [livecdnews.com].
Another Live CD (Score:5, Informative)
Plan 9 (Score:4, Funny)
Useful if money is tight (Score:3, Interesting)
LiveCD. (Score:5, Interesting)
I want my configuration changes as well as any programs I install to be burned on the CD in either rewritable or writeable with limited space type setup.
If I download a neat application and install it or save a word doc in my directory, I want it automatically cued up to be burned when I shutdown.
Also, it would be nice to be able to go to a website and enter your hardware configuration and a customer version of the live cd be created on the server and be available for download with your drivers in ISO format.
SP
Re:LiveCD. (Score:5, Informative)
[...]
> If I download a neat application and install it or save a word doc in my directory, I want it automatically cued up to be burned when I shutdown.
First, most LiveCD systems are already packed to the brim, and don't allow you to unmount you're main CD during operation, so you'd need at least two drives. Second, there are two ways to add files to a cd-rw: multisession and packet writing. Multisession is widely supported, but not suitable for small files as there is a overhead of about 15MB for each new session. Packet writing requires the UDF filesystem. AFAIK, neither Linux nor FreeBSD have good UDF support in read-write mode, and I'm not sure if anyone is actively working on it.
A much better bet would be a LiveCD in conjunction with USB flash memory for your personal files. If you want to install apps, the new version of the SLAX-Live CD supports ovlfs (Overlay Filesystem), which lets you insert files on a read-only root filesystem. For FreeBSD, unionfs might do the trick.
Wahoo! (Score:2, Funny)
DVD?? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:DVD?? (Score:2, Informative)
I asked this in a previous dicussion on Linux CD's and the answer has to do with how the OS reads DVD's. I don't recall the exact answer, but they are not "bootable". My DVD will boot a CD, but not a DVD. It may have to do with the way the bios reads the CD's
Re:DVD?? (Score:2)
Is this only an issue with BIOS's older than 2 years? It's worked on both a newer system, and an old HP we had sitting around.
I wonder why... (Score:5, Informative)
It's the older FreeBSD LiveCD around, a project carried by the Brazilian FreeBSD User Group.
Its a shame linux doesnt work this well (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Its a shame linux doesnt work this well (Score:2)
Live CD on Flash Drives??? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Live CD on Flash Drives??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Live CD on Flash Drives??? (Score:2)
advantages over cd's are obvious, it's small enough to keep on the keychain & etc..
Er... "Now?" (Score:5, Interesting)
"Now the BSD world has an answer to Knoppix."
Except we've had that answer for a while - here is the first NetBSD Live CD announcement from 20th June, 2002, by Jorg Braun:
ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/iso/1.5.2/README.
Note this was the first version - a 1.6 based version was also released (with updated packages).
It's a great tool. (Score:4, Interesting)
Dude, If you need Knoppix to be able to install Debian easily on your HD then you need help! If on the other hand you need a live Linux distro to use in emergencies or when a full installation is not viable/ available or required, then rather stick with your Knoppix.
The same goes for this. It is great and a lot of BSD fans will be really happy about this, but I pity those that will use it to "easily" install FreeBSD on a HD. IMHO That's just sad...
It is meant to be so much more and I think a lot of people don't understand the true functionality and usefullness of a live Linux distro or BSD. Anyway, nice!
Re:It's a great tool. (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, so what if we do ned help? I hope you're teasing us for trying to learn this stuff. It puzzles me that it saddens you that not everybody is as elite as you. Some of us are bound to be newbies. Right?
Personally, I've tried installing Debian a few times, and given up just as many times. Half of those, I couldn't even get my (plain vanilla) keyboard to work in the installer. And I freely admit it -- I do need
Re:It's a great tool. (Score:2)
I can install FreeBSD in my sleep, upside down and backwards looking in a mirror. But I've not once been able to endure the frustration level required to install Debian. So your experience has nothing to do with your newbieness.
p.s. I'm not knocking Debian, but it's installer is not definitely not intuitive to the Debian outsider.
You are missing (one of) the points! (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, are you missing it! How many CDs are there in a Debian distro? In any distro? LiveCDs are 1 cd.
LiveCDs are fantastic as emergency disks, but they are even better as installation disks. You get to SEE and USE the system before you install it. I have considered switching to Debian a couple of times (mainly because of apt-get), but it is a much bigger deal to backup, install, and try it out than to boot it and try it. Forget using a spare machine. Why would I want to spend hours when I could be up and running in 2 minutes?
These things are fantastic, and will only improve over time. The only thing a distro offers that these don't is configurability during the install, where you pick and choose what you want to install. But that is a minor point IMO, and will be fixed if the need is really there.
I have several different LiveCDs, and you know how many times I have used them for emergencies? None. I have performed several installs off of them though. Why would you deny one of the major benefits of these things?
Portage and deb-apt on FreeBSD (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.freshports.org/emulators/linux_base-
http://www.freshports.org/emulators/linux_base-
they worked fine, thank god I won't have to use linux. It's to risky with SCO attacking, my clients and I are much safer.
And the torrent... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And the torrent... (Score:5, Informative)
Uh oh..... (Score:5, Funny)
The puns that can be made here...
Dead, LiveCD, make up your mind... (Score:3, Funny)
will it boot on my machine? (Score:2)
On my cheap Athlon machine, with ECS K7S5A board, the following installers work fine:
Win2k, WinXP, NetBSD 1.5.2, Gentoo 1.4, Slackware 8.0, Redhat 7.2, Redhat 8.0, and some Debian version
The following installers fail by freezing after detecting hard drives:
FreeBSD 4.4, FreeBSD 4.5, and FreeBSD 5.2.1
Yes, it did (Score:2, Interesting)
I did have to pop in a PS/2 mouse (having been using the same 3 button generic serial for years in this box), but it works great.
I use Knoppix as a recovery disk when I screw up a config file or something else while tinkering and have found it to be very useful. I also supply copies to Win weenies when they ask about Linux.
Solaris LiveCD (Score:2, Informative)
Rollling your own (Score:2)
I can edit configuration files, install packages from source, use SSH, and set up Apache/PHP and MySQL. That doesn't sound too bad at first, but I still don't have the ability to troubleshoot or utilize the OS to the degree that I can with Windows, simply due to familiarity.
What I'm wondering is if customizing a distro is fairly straightforward, or a massive headache even for the experienced.
I want to be able to boot up a LiveCD that has a collection of Care Sheets
ALLRIGHT!! (Score:2, Funny)
~m
FreeBSD for newbies (Score:5, Informative)
I would recommend all newbies who are trying out a unix OS for the first time to start with FreeBSD.There are a few reasons for this
1. The installer (sysinstall) is ver easy and self explanatory.
2. FreeBSD gives you a lot of options in terms of how you want to install and from where.It can even pick up a the installation from a dos partition.(from c:)
3. The documentation is amazing.You will love the handbook.All my questions about the installation were answered by the handbook itself, i had to look nowhere else.
4. For any non-standard issues theres a very active FreeBSD mailing list.
For all the above reasons,i think FreeSBIE should be even smoother than a normal FreeBSD install. Looking forward to givin it a spin, guess i dun have to try knoppix now
They've had one forever (Score:3, Insightful)
My quick review (Score:5, Informative)
I am writing this from the Live CD using Firefox, so that at least says something. But here are some issues I ran in to: (Keep in mind I've never used FreeBSD before)
1. The Live CD doesn't boot properly on my system. After churning away for a while, it finally gets to the boot splash screen so I can't see what's going on. Then after hitting a few keys I got to the console and it displayed an error:
Mounting Root from cd9660:acd0
Root Mount Failed: 5
mountroot>
Using a little trial and error I was able to get the boot process to continue by typing:
cd9660:cd2
It appears that the Live CD got confused along the way as to what CD drive is which. I have two IDE-attached and one SCSI-attached CD devices in my machine.
2. I was presented with screens to select my KB Language and Layout. No biggie here, but just more interaction than Knoppix requires.
3. At the end of the boot process, I was presented with a root console prompt, and the tail end of a list of 10 items. I couldn't figure out how to scroll up the screen to read the list. PageUp, Shift + PageUP, + PageUP... I tried a bunch.
4. One of the last items in the list explained how to get into X (by typing xinit). So I got into X with XFCE fine. But the refresh rate is 60Hz and I fear my eyes are going to start bleeding pretty soon.
5. XFCE has auto-hide toolbars on the top and bottom of the screen. I find these quite distracting.
That's about it so far. It's neat to be able to play around with an OS that lives on a CD, but I'm wondering how useful this project is. Knoppix is a slick way of showing what a free non-MS operating system can do. Pop in the CD, boot it up, and you'll end up in a nice graphical interface with programs to try out. Plus it's extremely handy to use as a "rescue" CD for systems whose operating systems will not boot for various reasons.
But where does FreeSBIE fit in? As a rescue CD for those who know BSD well but not Linux? To show off how FreeBSD can almost be as nice a desktop as as Linux (Knoppix)? If FreeBSD is aimed as a server OS ("The Power To Serve"), how useful is a Live CD?
I don't mean to sound too negative here. It does seem like a neat project. I'm just failing to see its niche.
Re:My quick review (Score:2, Informative)
Re:My quick review (Score:2, Informative)
One use. (Score:2)
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:5, Interesting)
Why is this ? IMHO, Linux stands just fine on its own. People have been talking on slashdot about how they use the Live CDs to show people what Linux can do, and to run Linux where you cannot install etc, I can't see why it should be any different with a BSD live cd. My guess is that it will be used as the Linux live cd's, to test and try. I think it's a good idea, and I will most certainly try it, I don't buy your idea that BSD stands better on its own than Linux though.
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:5, Informative)
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:5, Interesting)
It's based on knoppix, only took me a couple of hours to work ou how to remaster [knoppix.net] it to suit my needs.
LiveCDs are cool.
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:5, Insightful)
I Never got a cd-rw to boot... (Score:2)
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:2, Insightful)
If your logs are on a RAM disk, they're gone as well...
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree with your point about running from a LIVE CD, all my servers run GRSecurity patched Linux kernels from ISOLINUX boot CDs. The init process replaces the entire OS on disk from the CDRom. I can upgrade all of my boxes by changing the CDRom and re
Live CD Firewalls/Routers (Score:2)
Will this FreeBSD live allow the setting up of a FW and internet sharing?
Are there any live CD's that are not exclusively FW/router but rather full-fledged OS and apps with an easily configured FW/router ability?
Better Use: DNS Servers (Score:2)
I would even consider using such a setup as a webserver, having the system mount a
Chris
Re:FreeBSD is a solid OS (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:You can install Knoppix...?!?!? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:You can install Knoppix...?!?!? (Score:5, Informative)
Just open up a console, su, and run "knx-hdinstall". Its "just" a shellscript, so you can browse while installing. After install you get a Debian Sid system.
Re:You can install Knoppix...?!?!? (Score:5, Informative)
You can indeed install it -- the result is a kind of Debian-lite installation. It's probably better to install real Debian once Knoppix has led the way; installed Knoppix has some quirks, such as a tendency to read things from the CD image on the HD now and then.
Re:You can install Knoppix...?!?!? (Score:2)
When you install Woody over Knoppix all the auto-configuration gets smashed. You can't have it both ways.
You can indeed install it -- the result is a kind of Debian-lite installation
Actually it pretty heavy when you consider the the Knoppix CD is compressed. It's also way more advanced and way less tested as a unit than Woody. The package collection isn't just sid, it's from a number of version of Debian so "apt-get update ; ap
Re:You can install Knoppix...?!?!? (Score:4, Informative)
there's few ways to do it, you can install the image to hd and run it from there. or do a normal installation(as other replier said, knx-hdinstall iirc).
however be aware that upgrading from this installed system to a normal debian system might not go as smoothly as you'd hope(it might though, but I'd rather use a 'proper' installation cd and do a netinstall).
Re:You can install Knoppix...?!?!? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're looking for the stability of Debian, do a "real" netinstall of the current stable version. If you want the cool new toys, then Knoppix is the easiest way to
Re:You can install Knoppix...?!?!? (Score:2, Informative)
Then I stroked my sources and apt preferences correctly, that would iron out. I've since been running Debian unstable on 3 systems for the last 4 months without a hitch, all installed with Knoppix.
I could never get all my hardware working correctly with a straight Debian install (without kernel recompiles and other mucking about). But having installed with Knoppix, its just WORKED !!