On 5/6/2015 11:18 PM, rivendell-dev-requ...@lists.rivendellaudio.org wrote:
Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 13:49:05 -0400
From: Cowboy<c...@cwf1.com>
To:rivendell-dev@lists.rivendellaudio.org
Subject: Re: [RDD] newer linux kernel
Message-ID:<201505061349.05167.c...@cwf1.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Wednesday 06 May 2015 09:27:34 am Joey Alcala wrote:
>I want to run rivendell on the newest/ most modern kernel (and desktop
>environment) possible
For all of the reasons already stated, I would not !
In conclusion of my previous length post on on this: I agree and would
not either unless you first experiment with what you are getting
yourself into.
>Preferably ubuntu or debian.
If those are the choices, Debian Stable.
Ubuntu is known to be derived from Debian UNSTABLE,
not even as reliable as Debian Testing, the equivalent of beta.
If it has to be Ubuntu, then I would strongly lean toward the
"officially" unsupported RRUbuntu package.
Although derived from an unstable ( alpha ) Debian, it's mostly
been debuged by the maintainer.
Ubuntu is actually based on their own repositories which divorced from
Debian long ago, other than they often import then rebuild packages from
Debian. This is often worse in my opinion as with Ubuntu insanely fast
release cycle, often their quality suffers as they try to be more on the
"bleeding edge" instead. Ubuntu is more for people wishing the latest
and greatest with a reasonable amount of polish, but never working quite
perfectly. If you still want to go Ubuntu, I'd go with the "LTS"
versions (like 10.04 was) as they seem to spend a little more time on
the polish part on these releases and then support them longer with even
more polish and fixes later.
I actually find Debian "UNSTABLE" to be quite reliable (once the package
manager is actually happy with what you are trying to install or
update). It is less bleeding edge than a typical Ubuntu release. The
problem is that by "unstable" they mean "always changing", meaning
constant updates which will drive you absolutely crazy on a critical
24/7 "production" machine, so don't use it for this, but for other
reasons than what is stated above.
Now that Debian is moving away from tried and true init and toward
a solution looking for a problem, systemd, who knows how long
RRUbintu will last in a familiar form ?
Yea, systemd, designed and implemented by Red Hat and therefor has been
used on CentOS since version 7. The only problem I've had with systemd
on Debian (other than I really don't know how to use it yet), is that
sometimes some services try to start too soon in the boot process and
fail to start correctly. I'm sure there is a straight forward way to
fix this, but I don't know what it is yet. I believe the old SysV init
system is still available on Debian, at least for now, just not
installed by default.
Then you have Ubuntu that uses their own, yet another init system called
"upstart". So hence an example of one of the criticisms of Linux OS
that every distribution and every version can be radically different
from the others causing lots of confusion for everyone.
_______________________________________________
Rivendell-dev mailing list
Rivendell-dev@lists.rivendellaudio.org
http://caspian.paravelsystems.com/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev
