What is Digg?135 Comments
- 3242130193, on 07/11/2008, -5/+37Debian is a good distro, but it's definitely not for beginners. Starting out with something easier like Ubuntu and then transitioning to a more advanced distro is usually a better path.
As an aside, the best software repository of all distros... is Debian. pshaw - zwaldowski, on 07/12/2008, -1/+22It's all about choice. Where Windows has only one configuration, Linux systems have many different profiles for many different uses. GNOME, for example, rivals the OSX experience in simplicity. KDE feels very much like Windows. XFCE is for lightweight systems, and things like Enlightenment are strictly for tweakers/power users. It's best to think of Linux distros, not as the same operating system, but as an entirely different set of packages and administration (read: another operating system) that is just compatible on a core level.
On the subject of things like package managers... they like doing it differently. I, personally, hate RPM with a passion and wish it would die. Therefore, I stick with Debian-like systems. - parax, on 07/12/2008, -1/+20Debian was my first Linux distro. I liked it well enough, but I've come to appreciate the polished interface Ubuntu has put on top of it. I'm a little confused by the people who describe Debian as being "more advanced". There's nothing I'm aware of that you can do with Debian that you're somehow locked out of doing on Ubuntu or any other Debian-based distro.
So far as I'm aware, most distros are little more than sets of default configurations, default applications, and artwork. - readme, on 07/12/2008, -0/+17Had a Debian box running as a server in my house for six years. Really good distro. apt-get makes life easy. I would run it again if I needed another Linux server.
- DangerCollie, on 07/12/2008, -1/+12Would you like a side of elitism with that distro? :)
- Borbus, on 07/13/2008, -1/+10Why is there more than one GNU/Linux distribution? Because it is free software. Some time ago Debian was created, along with its package management system etc. Some users didn't like the way it worked. Being free software, the users are free to modify it and create a distribution of their own. This gives us choice, which is good. In the free software world, the users decide what it best for themselves!
You don't even have to use a distribution at all. You can download Linux from kernel.org, collect the parts of GNU that you need from gnu.org and assemble them together to make a basic GNU/Linux system. Then get the software you need... Of course a full system will have hundreds of packages which will need updating eventually which is where package management comes in and why 99% of people choose a distro instead of this approach. - dfraser, on 07/13/2008, -1/+9Debian has been an ok distro for me, and i've run dozens of Debian boxes in the past, but I've lately stopped using it for several major reasons, most of which are related to the Debian "religion".
- perfectly good vendor hardware support stripped from the kernel because it isn't "free enough" (see: keyspan usb drivers)
- patching packages for the sake of patching them (see: horrible openssl fiasco)
- i've had 'apt-get update' render my systems unbootable too many times
- poor and incomplete documentation regarding the correct or "debian" way to deal with system configuration issues
It just became more trouble than it was worth... - picpak, on 07/13/2008, -0/+8Wow, someone actually uses stable!
- earthforce1, on 07/13/2008, -0/+7Keeping with your car analogy:
Some people want to drive a sports car that they have tweaked to run as fast as possible, ( very light and fast - Gentoo build with aggressive compile options? )
Some people want a fully loaded luxury car with all the gadgets. (Linux mint or Novell maybe, with everything under the sun installed)
Some want a reliable family car that just works. (Ubuntu/Kubuntu)
Some insist on full dealer service and factor warrenties (Commercially supported Red Hat/Novell/Ubuntu )
Some just want a low horsepower scooter to putter around, or bring their old beater back to life (Puppy Linux? Xubuntu? wattOS? )
A few diehards are hobbyists who want to assemble their car from scratch, just because they can: ( http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ )
Besides, this isn't unique to Linux - look how many Windows versions there are - Windows Server 2008, several editions of Vista and XP is still kicking around as competition for Linux in ultralight notebooks. - pbryan, on 07/12/2008, -1/+8Trying to control such a thing as package management would be akin to herding cats. The open source/free software universe tends to function as a meritocracy: the best ideas tend to win and gain adoption.
Sometimes, fragmentation is resolved when everyone collectively feels too much pain. For example, the painful differences between GNOME and KDE resulted in the freedesktop.org project, which brings common desktop functions under a single umbrella. - voyvf, on 07/13/2008, -0/+7So did I. I started out with Debian in 1996, when Boot Magazine (now Maximum PC) included a Debian install CD in one of their issues. It was ok, had the ever-so-spiffy AfterStep window manager, but back then they had a lot of issues with their packing system. So, I switched to Slack around '97.
It was heaven. No, really. Things just worked, and if they didn't, I'd download and compile them.
By about 2005, I'd gotten pretty sick of having to compile every little thing if I wanted to stay reasonably up to date. Hence, switching to Ubuntu for workstations/notebooks and Debian for servers.
Granted, I still have a few machines running Slackware, and a couple running Gentoo. To keep up with the bleeding edge, you have to compile, I know. But when I need to get things done, apt-get/aptitude ***** rock. If I had a 16+ system compile farm, it'd be different (and I'd love the crap out of it). Since I don't, I use package managers. - voyvf, on 07/12/2008, -1/+8s/Redhat/Fedora/
Though really, if Debian's too difficult for a person new to Linux, I'd go with something like Ubuntu or Mint. At least then, when they're comfortable with the system, and try to switch to Debian, they don't have to learn a whole new packaging system. - brettalton, on 07/13/2008, -0/+6I think you just need to say "let the baby have his bottle" (as in let developers program what they want) and let distributions decide what is best for themselves.
You can compare it to choosing a religion, buying a certain brand of a car, etc. Some like to be light-weight, some like to be multi-purpose, some only exist because of a small void was missing in the Computer Science realm, etc.
Ubuntu is light weight (compared to proprietary desktops at least), easy to use and seems to be following current trends very well. Once any one of those fail, another distribution will pick up and everyone will use that.
Using my example above, pretend you were a loyal Nissan owner until they decided to use 2.2 L engines instead of 3.2 L for their SUVs. At this point in time, you would decide to go with another manufacturer for your SUV. If Ubuntu decides they want a dual-core processor (meaning very modern) to run their OS, their loyal users will go somewhere else.
See?
Choice, competition and the voice of proletariats is the essence of ingenuity in capitalism. - hamobu, on 07/11/2008, -2/+8I am using debian stable right now. One problem is that it takes a while for a new package to come into reporistory. Right now if I want a new firefox 3.0, I would have to install a new library and compile firefox from source. I could do that, but I will rather wait to install it trough a deb package
- stmiller, on 07/12/2008, -0/+6or just download it from mozilla.com and run that binary. It will auto-update itself!
- Setari, on 07/12/2008, -1/+7Debian was my first attempt at using linux, and I've only ever used it for hobbyist stuff. I have to admit that aptitude spoiled me from using anything else. :P Through all the problems I've had with it, I've always been able to get stuff working again. The installer is pretty intuitive as well. I normally use the 'testing' branch just because it seems like a good balance between stable and unstable.
- Megatog615, on 07/13/2008, -0/+6Sorry, all elitism is allocated to Gentoo at the moment.
- nwoolls, on 07/13/2008, -0/+6A very, very simplified analogy would be - if all houses have a similar foundation (assuming they did), why would we need different types of houses - be they one floor, two floor, mansions, duplexes, condos or apartments? The foundation, the Linux kernel, is the same (ish), but entirely different combinations of libraries, binaries, widget sets, window managers, desktop environments, package managers, and applications can be placed on top of that foundation. Some suit the majority of people (3 bedroom, 1 and a half bath, one floor, den and living room - Ubuntu), and some people don't need all that, or need more, or just want to build their own home.
Or something. - cbeach, on 07/12/2008, -2/+8aussieaubs - I have, of course, googled many times for Linux info. However, it's difficult to get a high-level overview of the current state of the Linux world in all its glory. The problem for me is that all of the Linux projects exist in their own bubbles. They have their own history, their own reasons for existing and their own highly-focussed developers. As such, their documentation doesn't always give an unbiased account of their strengths and weaknesses relative to other projects. It's hard to get a top down view of such an organic OS and its constituent parts, when there is no central authority documenting the whole lot.
As the other commenters show, it's possible to get intelligent, up-to-date answers very quickly on a forum like this. - TheSeeker11, on 07/12/2008, -1/+6If you're looking to use Debian but want the most up to date packages, check out sidux. It's based on Debian Sid, the unstable branch - http://sidux.com
- cbeach, on 07/12/2008, -5/+10Can someone explain to me (a Linux newcomer but computer professional) why we need all the different distros? If there is specific software that comes with another distro, can I not run it on mine? Why do we need more than one window manager? More than one package manager?
I can see how competition works for our benefit in a "capitalist" software industry, but in OSS all it seems to do is cause confusion for users and dilutes overall development resources between different projects with similar aims. - databeast, on 07/13/2008, -1/+6Frankly, anyone who comes to me telling me they can only use one distro over another, and is looking for a job as a Linux admin, doesnt get the job. But yeah, having a preference for implementing things one way over another isnt a bad thing, and I know I stick up for Debian's layout as being far more logical than Redhat's. But yeah, careful with it all, like I said, every time someone waves their RHCE in front of me, I sit them down to a Debian box and see how they go about figuring out what the differences are to achieve the same task. For a real Linux admin, distribution is irrelevant... linux is linux is linux.
- mudpuddle, on 07/12/2008, -1/+6Here's what you can do. Go to your /etc/apt/sources.list file and enter add the testing and/or unstable repositories. Then add "APT::Default-Release "stable";" to your /etc/apt/apt.conf file (or make a separate file in the /etc/apt/apt.conf.d directory if it exists). After performing an update, you can selectively install packages from testing using a command such as "apt-get install iceweasel/testing". This lets you run a mixed system with stable as the default release when installing packages. But, in most respects, unless you're running debian on a server, I'd recommend running unstable for your desktop.
- Stalks, on 07/13/2008, -0/+5I would dig you up. But you have spammed this on every friggin' story.
- Setari, on 07/13/2008, -1/+6I'm a bit curious how many home users prefer a net-install to those dvd's. I personally have never needed all of the software that comes on those. I'd much rather install just the ones I want, not that the clutter makes that much of a difference.
Anyone else feel similarly? - HonestAbe, on 07/13/2008, -2/+6The OpenSSL keys are top-notch.
- earthforce1, on 07/12/2008, -2/+6I liked debian, it is one of the very few up to date distros to my Sparc Ultra 5 (Ubuntu is command line only, and I couldn't get 8.04 going on it) Unfortunately, the SSH implementation was broken somehow, (Ubuntu worked out of the box with minimal tweaking) so I had to revert back to Ubuntu-Gutsy.
If all other Linux distros sold out to MS like Novell did, there would always be debian... - inactive, on 07/13/2008, -2/+6If you are looking for a desktop I recommend ubuntu or one of its many flavors. It's pretty much debian but packed with everything you need to make things comfortable for people who are used to windows or OSX.
SUSE is another fine desktop distribution but people find debians package management to be superior to the SUSE/RedHat/Fedora rpm management... I tend to agree.
If you are looking for a stable, super secure server look no further then debian. Redhat is a good choice too, but it really depends on whether or not you prefer .deb to .rpm. I recommend experimenting. - Foutrelis, on 07/13/2008, -0/+4What are you using now?
- davidron, on 07/13/2008, -0/+4Developers will do what they do. There is no All-Shephearding boss of the Open Source World, so the best stuff just floats to the top and everything else is an experiment. It's actually quite a good thing because it allows new ideas to surface without a marketing department getting in the way.
As for the dilution of resources: developers work on what they want to work on. If we scrap the bottom 80% of sourceforge projects, we won't suddenly see an influx of developers show up on the top 20%. Those developers will simply become bored and stop contributing at all. - zip000, on 07/12/2008, -1/+4Debian was actually the first distro that I tried when I decided to try Linux. It was perhaps a steep learning curve, but I enjoyed it.
I use Ubuntu now mostly - it's just easier to get everything working, and it's also easier for my wife to use. - rlbond86, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3I think Mandriva does. Sabayon does. Gentoo does.
- 3leggedHorse, on 07/13/2008, -1/+4I am new to Linux (ubuntu) but I found an app called alien that converts rpm's to Debian and installs them. So now almost all those Fedora rpm's I see I can use as well sweet.
- f3n1x, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3debian is great but this article is crap.
it's full of unproven claims (easier user interface than ubuntu?) and pointless arguments.
what the heck does the size of the repository have to do with anything? why is a distri with 15000 packages worse than one with 25000 or 238572465739475? i don't get it... - qwuinc, on 07/13/2008, -1/+4Never "recommend" Debian unstable, unless you are there to support the people who run into broken packages...
- sosurim, on 07/13/2008, -1/+4No offense, but I agree with the previous replier who implied that, if you're confused by the diffs between Red Hat-based distros and Debian-esque ones, you're in for some headaches in the future. Let me see if I can clear some confusions.
For the most part, the plethora of Linux distros (~200 or so at my last count) can be categorized as belonging to one of two package-management camps: apt-based or rpm-based. It's kinda like capitalist countries vs. socialist countries. There are some non-extradition distros like Damn Small Linux, Linux from Scratch, etc. but these are usually very few and far in between.
Red Hat is the main rpm based distro, with distros like Suse, Mandriva, Fedora, etc. being bastardized versions. Debian is the main apt-based distro, which spawned offsprings in the likes of Ubuntu, Sidux, Parsix, Kanotix, etc.
There are diffs between them, sure. But at some abstract, theoretical layer, they're surprisingly same. Aside from the package format (deb vs. rpm), package maintenance apps (apt vs. yum), file system layout (mainly in the way the rc scripts / init levels are organized in /etc, how much they conform to the POSIX mandates (again usually in the /etc directory), all these hundreds of Linux distros are the same! They have to be, since the main part of the distro - the Linux kerne itself - comes from only one place, kernel.org.
In fact, at some theoretical level, all Unix flavors are very similar. I started my *nix career with SGI's IRIX, then trnasitioned to SunOS->Solaris, then Linux, HPUX, then FreeBSD and then Linux again.Maybe it's because I'm not very particular about where certain files are located and where they should be kept, but I really can't tell much difference when I switch from one Unix-based OS to another (which I do often), much less between Linux distros.
So that's why I'm completely confounded by people saying things like: "I know Linux but don't know Unix." And I find people saying things like: "I'm good with Debian, but not with Red Hat." To them I ask, WTF is the difference? The difference takes minimum effort to learn and get used to. And if you can't even make that effor, perhaps you have no business in the Unix world. - solarwind24, on 07/13/2008, -1/+4By "advanced", they mean harder for beginners to set up and configure. Beginners don't know all the packages they will need or all the frontends they will use. Ubuntu and friends package that all up nicely for the beginners.
- FolkTheory, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3gentoo is not debian based
- iumentum, on 07/12/2008, -0/+3I tried Debian but I couldn't mount any of my other drives in Nautilus, even after trying everything I could find from looking on forums and searching google. I'm sure it's a great distro but it's not really suited to new users, or even desktop users I'd say. I mean, even slackware admitted that was a bug and posted a work around when users couldn't mount drives.
Ubuntu takes the Debian goodness and packages it in a really convienent and useful manner. - lucifuge, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3Try getting thrown on a Solaris 10 box some day. If the difference between RHEL and Debian causes you pain, Solaris will make your head assplode.
- waydee, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3I agree with you and i've been dabbling in Linux since the late 90s, theres a heck of a lot of stuff to learn but by far the best way to do it and get a general taste of the various configurations is to just install distributions and fiddle with them.
It does seem very overwhelming at first and to be honest it still is sometimes, if there's such a thing as too much choice it probably exists with Linux but the flexibility it provides is unparalleled. Build the small media box, the lightweight install on old hardware, the modern fully featured desktop machine and the head-scratchingly confusing (at first) from source gentoo install. Best way to learn. - Borbus, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3Debian Stable (Etch) is highly secure and highly tested so meant for use in a high traffic critical application system such as a web or database server box. If you're running the kind of box that needs Firefox, then I would consider switching to Unstable/Testing aka. Sid. This does get new packages quickly but is still not a bleeding edge rolling distro. I've never used sid personally so I don't know if it really is unstable in practice (for a personal box).
- sk11, on 07/13/2008, -1/+4Why not try sidux? It's like debian unstable made stable.
- voyvf, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3I guess it really depends on how you interpret said attitude. When I see comments like "Ubuntu is badass" I read it as "my distro is better for me" rather than "my distro is better, period"
Even if that's not what they say, or even mean, that's what it gets down to, in the end. As such, having a choice is a good thing. My needs might not be the same as your needs, so why not have a configuration - and as such, a distribution - that meets both of our needs?
As for UI, that's an entirely different "holy war" in and of itself. Personally, I love the crap out of the window managers that took after the style of NeXTSTEP - WindowMaker and AfterStep, etc. Whereas my wife likes GNOME and KDE, since she grew up in a Windows-only environment; they're more familiar to her, and she doesn't feel like she's wearing someone else's shoes when she's using them.
I highly doubt that there will be fewer distros out there in five or ten years; there will just be distros that people acknowledge as being more friendly to those who've come from a Mac or Windows background. - MattBD, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3I'm just getting into Sidux now. First distro I've really liked the look of since I first started with Kubuntu.
- inactive, on 07/12/2008, -6/+9I love me some debian.
If you're familiar with ubuntu, debian is a logical step if you want a more "advanced" distro. A great learning step if you want to know more about linux and different distros. - inactive, on 07/12/2008, -1/+4Try SeaMonkey for a smaller faster browser.
- inactive, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3Gentoo was really nice but debian i could never get working :\
Maybe i should try it on my winbox on a different hd.. - iumentum, on 07/13/2008, -0/+3Ubuntu is like the "Best of" compilation from Debian. I think people say Debian is more advanced because you still have to manually configure a lot of options and the distro comes with 3 DVD's of packages.
- danjwray, on 07/13/2008, -0/+2@FairDinkumMate - virtualisation might help you with the viop phone, until such a time as it becomes supported. This is less likely to help with the output from your video card.
And agreed - anyone who uses the word '*****' seriously in a post should be blocked on sight. -
Show 51 - 100 of 136 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is