Hello, I'm new to the Debian community, but I have used RedHat for about 8 years, and Gentoo for almost two. I must say, Debian is quite good compared to these other distro's. Perhaps RH is more stable than Sid/Sarge, but there is NO way to install a base system from a RH CD. The smallest install I was ever able to get was over 450MB and included LOTS of extras that I really didn't want.
I see lots of people advocating Sid(unstable) as a desktop, but shouldn't people who are not developers/maintainers gravitate to Sarge? Isn't testing/debugging Sarge supposed to be a priority? Also, since packages automatically drop into sarge from Sid after 10 days (unless there is an unresolved issue), you are likely to get all the great new apps that you want, but without someone dropping in a new, "buggy" version by mistake. Also, this would make more bug reports get filed against Sarge, which would help to progress it to the next stable. I realise that I have written these in a somewhat argumentative form, but read them as questions. As I said, I'm new here ( < 3 months ), but I have read up as much as I can find on the releases and the procedures for advancement. I have used Sarge for about 6 installs now (including upgrade from Woody and the new installer), and I'm very pleased with it's performance and package features. I used Woody for my file server (which now has a local Debian Mirror!), mostly because I don't care about the desktop on it, and I like to have the security patches, but I have Sarge running on two laptops, three desktops and a DB server. Also, I'm running Kernel 2.6.3 with the proprietary Nvidia driver and VMware Workstation on my work laptop. I note this because these things were exceptionally problematic on other distros, but were cheezy-eazy on Debian. --JATF -----Original Message----- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Monique Y. Mudama Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 7:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Debian has turned unusable. On 2004-04-12, Adam Aube penned: > Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > >> Well, "more unstable than the stable distribution" takes a lot longer >> to type and wouldn't fit on a CD volume label =P > > What about "current", then? > This would encourage people to use the unstable distribution, which by definition isn't considered ready for prime time. The truth is that there are tradeoffs; a one-word name just isn't going to capture those tradeoffs. If anything, the right term for unstable might be "head" or "tip" -- or would that be experimental? But what do I know? I'm just a random user. It does seem to me that we've had the name game a few times, and every time a dev has strongly indicated that we should leave well enough alone. -- monique -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
