I'm not convinced Testing is a better choice than Unstable. I've used both and moved from Testing to Unstable after finding a few libraries missing in Testing which were in Stable and Unstable. Despite having recent problems with libraries in Unstable I still think it a better choice than Testing if you want working applications.
I also have the impression that Unstable may actually be more secure hat Testing due to the regularity of updates. Isn't there something online suggesting that the order to try Debian is Stable>Unstable>Testing? Or did I just imagine it?

I was responding to the statement that the installation CD only has Gnome. There are three CD1's: One with Gnome; one with KDE; and one with LXDE/XFCE. So if one chooses to install with CD1, any of those four DEs can be installed, depending on which ISO one down-loads.

If you read my first post in the thread, you will see that I mentioned:
So I am not sure how you get the idea I believe any of the three CDs has everything on it.

1 members found this post helpful.

I wonder if it isn't a different situation once Testing gets closer to Stable, though.

Until today, right now actually, I did not know this. Thank you for the information.

It is called a misunderstanding because I didn't know there were seperate cd1s available.

I still believe, and this is my personal opinion due to installing Debian on a variety of PCs and people wanting different DEs, that DVD1 is the better option rather than downloading 3 seperate CD1s. 1 disc is used, or in my case 1 dd command is given to copy 1 disc to a usb, instead of up to 3 discs just so people can experiment and look around. Each to their own.

It may even be worse then, with "almost-there" packages being added and removed as and when they come up to scratch.

Or maybe not, as more bugs get squashed and more kinks get worked out. I'm not sure, but I feel more comfortable using Testing a couple of months before it goes to Stable than I'd feel using Sid.

I honestly do not know, but I can say that Sid hasn't let me down bar the 32 bit library fiasco. It's too late for me to track down the website I found but I've read in more than one place that Sid is likely more useable than unstable.

Sure there are. A Debian installation comes with free membership to the Ubuntu Haters Club.

Seriously, I've been using Debian as well as Ubuntu LTS versions for years (I avoid Ubuntu's six-month release cycle). It's hard to say that, on balance, there are more advantages to one over the other. But Debian Stable is the one distro that I never, ever have any concerns with about breakage. The Unstable > Testing > Stable process is one that works really well.

Glad I could help.


Completely agree. If having the option of all DEs on disc is desired, even with a slow connection, it makes infinitely more sense to down-load one ISO and have everything on one disc, than keeping three discs on hand. Some may disagree, but as you say, to each their own.

My laptop's HDD is full, no more free space.
I have an external USB 3.0 2.5" HDD,
can I install Debian on it?

Certainly. It may be a little slower than an internal drive (I've not used USB 3.0 for my OS though so I don't know for sure) but it ought to work.

I faced some problems here but no people replied me yet.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...dd-4175441650/

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...on-4175441534/

I have had no trouble using an external drive. You would just need to be careful where you install the boot-loader. I stopped using the external drive to test OS's after having a couple disasters caused by careless boot-loader placement. But if you are careful, an external drive will work fine.

I tested with Zorin, it works well.
But I want test Fedora too, but failed.

There are 4 cd-1 to choose from; gnome, kde, xfce, or lxde.

Edit: 4 in Wheezy/testing (3 in Squeeze; combined xfce-lxde).