Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
Francis Earl wrote: On Thursday 15 May 2008 10:54:29 Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: On Saturday 10 May 2008 3:22 am, Stephen D'Souza wrote: I definitely recommend Debian Etch for one reason. Debian makes releases less often than Ubuntu. That means I do not need to go and update my machines every 6 months when a new release of Ubuntu is made. If all the hardware works, software versions are acceptable then my suggestion is Debian Etch. I also do not advice testing or Sid on servers because one has to constantly keep track of the updates, breakages, bugs, security fixes etc., With stable you only need to keep track of security updates and the updates work 99.99 % of the time. hth raju Well if you would opt for the Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support) Versions, then you would get support for up to 5 years (for server versions and 3 years for desktop versions), so no need for upgrading when a new version is out every 6 months, also each version has a minimum of 18 months support Regards Stephen That's a good idea. I have not thought about Ubuntu LTS. Note that LTS original releases are no better quality than normal releases, and to be frank (after using since release till yesterday) it is very unstable and has very bad performance in many places. They make LTSver.1 LTSver.2 etc... I recommend going with one of those as your first try of Ubuntu in everyday use. I don't know how they do it, but their 6 months of bug fixing from Sid seems to result in a less stable system... I concur. Had Ubuntu on a server for a friend of mine, and it was the most unstable server I manage. Have since switched to Etch, and I don't have to do a thing for him. -- John Allen mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] CodeMountainhttp://www.codemountain.net Ubuntu 8.04, kernel 2.6.24-16-generic up 10 days, 1:30, 21 users, load average: 0.31, 1.00, 0.85 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
On Thursday 15 May 2008 10:54:29 Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > On Saturday 10 May 2008 3:22 am, Stephen D'Souza wrote: > > > I definitely recommend Debian Etch for one reason. Debian makes > > > releases less often than Ubuntu. That means I do not need to go and > > > update my machines every 6 months when a new release of Ubuntu is made. > > > If all the hardware works, software versions are acceptable then my > > > suggestion is Debian Etch. > > > > > > I also do not advice testing or Sid on servers because one has to > > > constantly keep track of the updates, breakages, bugs, security fixes > > > etc., With stable you only need to keep track of security updates and > > > the updates work 99.99 % of the time. > > > > > > hth > > > raju > > > > Well if you would opt for the Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support) Versions, > > then you would get support for up to 5 years (for server versions and 3 > > years for desktop versions), so no need for upgrading when a new version > > is out every 6 months, also each version has a minimum of 18 months > > support > > > > Regards > > Stephen > > That's a good idea. I have not thought about Ubuntu LTS. Note that LTS original releases are no better quality than normal releases, and to be frank (after using since release till yesterday) it is very unstable and has very bad performance in many places. They make LTSver.1 LTSver.2 etc... I recommend going with one of those as your first try of Ubuntu in everyday use. I don't know how they do it, but their 6 months of bug fixing from Sid seems to result in a less stable system... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
On Saturday 10 May 2008 3:22 am, Stephen D'Souza wrote: > > I definitely recommend Debian Etch for one reason. Debian makes releases > > less often than Ubuntu. That means I do not need to go and update my > > machines every 6 months when a new release of Ubuntu is made. If all the > > hardware works, software versions are acceptable then my suggestion is > > Debian Etch. > > > > I also do not advice testing or Sid on servers because one has to > > constantly keep track of the updates, breakages, bugs, security fixes > > etc., With stable you only need to keep track of security updates and the > > updates work 99.99 % of the time. > > > > hth > > raju > > Well if you would opt for the Ubuntu LTS (Long Term Support) Versions, > then you would get support for up to 5 years (for server versions and 3 > years for desktop versions), so no need for upgrading when a new version > is out every 6 months, also each version has a minimum of 18 months support > > Regards > Stephen That's a good idea. I have not thought about Ubuntu LTS. raju -- Find out how you can get spam free email. http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/3 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 09:50:37PM -0500, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote: > Unless by "commercial support" you mean something other than "paying > to get help with Debian"... "Commercial support" is generally understood to mean a vendor that supports the product it sells. If you buy a suit, you can take it to a third-party tailor to fix defects, but that's not the same thing as receiving support (e.g. exchanges or refunds) from the retailer you bought it from. Whether or not one *needs* commercial support from a vendor is an entirely separate issue. However, it *is* a differentiator between community distributions and commercial distros, and as such should be considered if you're trying to choose between the two. -- "Oh, look: rocks!" -- Doctor Who, "Destiny of the Daleks" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
On 12/05/2008, Todd A. Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That said, my personal opinion is that you should run commercial servers > on Debian stable, with the (very) occasional must-have package imported > from sid. Unless you need the commercial support, the stability of Etch > is probably your best bet. And, since Ubuntu is based on Debian, why use > it unless it's for the commercial support? Uhm. Debian also has commercial support: http://www.us.debian.org/consultants/ Unless by "commercial support" you mean something other than "paying to get help with Debian"... - Jordi G. H. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 12:30:43PM -0400, Tenant wrote: > Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at > Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced Disclaimer: I'm a Debian user, not an Unbuntoid (or whatever they call themselves). While there's an Ubuntu Server Edition, the things to think about are: - Ubuntu's claim to fame is its focus on the desktop and 6-month release cycles. Neither is really a good idea for server-centric stuff. - Ubuntu applications are essentially a subset of what's available in sid at whatever point in time they take their snapshot. That said, the Ubuntu folks often have fixes for things that have been languishing on the Debian bug tracker for a gazillion years, and you can always buy support from Canonical. That said, my personal opinion is that you should run commercial servers on Debian stable, with the (very) occasional must-have package imported from sid. Unless you need the commercial support, the stability of Etch is probably your best bet. And, since Ubuntu is based on Debian, why use it unless it's for the commercial support? In the end, though, a distro is a distro. Some make it easier to do certain things than others "out of the box," and some of the commercial distros have non-free software that makes life (theoretically) simpler in the short term, but with few exceptions you can make any distro do anything you want if you apt/yum/compile enough. YMMV. A lot. -- "Oh, look: rocks!" -- Doctor Who, "Destiny of the Daleks" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 12:30:43PM -0400, Tenant wrote: > I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before. We're > looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running Debian > Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at Ubuntu, which > is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced overview of the pros and > cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same vein are there any views on > just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with Lenny? > > I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks. If your server still runs sarge that is good and bad. It is good because etch will seem like space age technology to you, though it's already one year since release. It is bad because you waited so long with an upgrade. The security support for sarge has ended. I would suggest about the same time as lenny is released you start planning you next upgrade. This way you will have an entire year to complete the move (security support for oldstable ends about one year after the release of stable). Regards, Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
Tenant wrote: > I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before. > We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running > Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at > Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced > overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same > vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with > Lenny? > > I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks. I definitely recommend Debian Etch for one reason. Debian makes releases less often than Ubuntu. That means I do not need to go and update my machines every 6 months when a new release of Ubuntu is made. If all the hardware works, software versions are acceptable then my suggestion is Debian Etch. I also do not advice testing or Sid on servers because one has to constantly keep track of the updates, breakages, bugs, security fixes etc., With stable you only need to keep track of security updates and the updates work 99.99 % of the time. hth raju -- Kamaraju S Kusumanchi http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/ http://malayamaarutham.blogspot.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
Mike Bird wrote: On Fri May 9 2008 09:30:43 Tenant wrote: I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before. We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with Lenny? I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks. If Debian Stable runs on your hardware and provides the software versions that you need then use it. It is by far the best quality and your colleagues on debian-users are much more likely than those on ubuntu-users to give an accurate answer rather than a wild and often inaccurate guess. However Debian Stable releases are rare Yes, I quite agree that Debian's mailing lists are very useful, full of knowledgeable people and quite good at giving accurate help as compared to Ubuntu lists. In my experience, Ubuntu turns out to be more "friendly" and "gui rich" in workstations though --- as perceived by an average user. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
On Fri, May 9, 2008 9:30 am, Tenant wrote: > We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running > Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at > Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced > overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same > vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with Lenny? For Colo work I wouldn't recommend Ubuntu. Ubuntu's track record for upgrades between releases is spotty. Most times the recommended procedure is a reinstall. While that is tolerable (note, not ideal) for workstations thanks to Microsoft's training of the IT world it is utterly unacceptable for servers. That goes double for servers you most likely have no physical access to. Debian's release schedule is glacial, granted, but a part of that is the effort that goes into ensuring that upgrading from one release to the next won't break in unexpected ways. Some things will break in upgrades because of version incompatibilities on specific applications, but generally the whole system won't go belly up because of an upgrade. Because of that proven track record of dedication to smooth upgrades going back 10 years I would not recommend anything but Debian for colo machines. It is all that I have used on my colo machines in spite of my love/hate relationship with Debian on the desktop and subsequent dabbling with Ubuntu on the desktop. -- Steve Lamb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
2008/5/9 Mike Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > If Debian Stable runs on your hardware and provides the software > versions that you need then use it. It is by far the best quality > and your colleagues on debian-users are much more likely than those > on ubuntu-users to give an accurate answer rather than a wild and > often inaccurate guess. However Debian Stable releases are rare > and they are usually sadly out of date. > This is very, very true. Especially the part about the mailing lists. I joined the Debian list because the Ubuntu list was so childish. That naturally got me to installing Debian. I still install Ubuntu for new Linux users, though. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
On Fri May 9 2008 09:30:43 Tenant wrote: > I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before. > We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running > Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at > Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced > overview of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same > vein are there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with > Lenny? > > I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks. If Debian Stable runs on your hardware and provides the software versions that you need then use it. It is by far the best quality and your colleagues on debian-users are much more likely than those on ubuntu-users to give an accurate answer rather than a wild and often inaccurate guess. However Debian Stable releases are rare and they are usually sadly out of date. In recent years we have used only Debian Stable on servers. Otherwise you can choose between Debian Testing, Debian Unstable, Debian Stable+Backports, a mixture of the above, or Ubuntu Stable. (I wouldn't recommend pre-release versions of Ubuntu for anything except beta testing.) Generally these Debian versions involve more work due to the large volume of updates. Ubuntu Stable on the other hand has something of a history of nasty update problems, and the support on ubuntu-users is not the same quality as on debian-users. Ubuntu is quirky but usually supports a wider range of hardware than Debian. Ubuntu installation is easier than Debian providing the way you want to configure your system matches the way that Ubuntu wants to configure your system. In recent years we used Ubuntu on workstations, then switched to a mix of Debian Testing and Debian Unstable. We're just starting on yet another re-evaluation against Debian Stable+Backports and Ubuntu. For workstations there are many acceptable solutions but no great solutions as yet. --Mike Bird -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/09/08 11:30, Tenant wrote: > I've been lurking on the list for a while, but haven't posted before. > We're looking at upgrading our co-lo web server which is now running > Debian Sarge. Some people we know have suggested we take a look at > Ubuntu, which is based on Debian. Is there anywhere a balanced overview > of the pros and cons of using Debian or Ubuntu? In the same vein are > there any views on just upgrading to Etch or jumping in with Lenny? > > I'd appreciate any URLs or your own thoughts. Thanks. A web server needs stability. Go with Etch and the most modern kernel in Etch. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA We want... a Shrubbery!! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFIJIqZS9HxQb37XmcRAtsfAJ4qt2vFEM83UKtdHd5QbSAft5jhzwCgtejR g2DUr4r8nJFrLowVwPukgIQ= =4RjN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 01:32:37PM -0500, Sebastian Luque wrote: > Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > > > What's with the question marks? (Non-ASCII characters?) > > As Hal, I don't seem them in his post either, so some decoding variable > probably needs correcting on your system. I've had similar problems > before, and had to check that the MUA's settings were the same as those in > my system. I saw ?Ubuntu ... packages. ?In Debian, ... but only in Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> which was a response to Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> So it looks like Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has his MUA (Mutt/1.4.2.1i) misconfigured? -- Chris. == Reproduction if desired may be handled locally. -- rfc3 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Saturday 16 July 2005 10:11, Bernie Betlach wrote: > I'm new to Linux but have a little programming experience. Which should I > install Ubuntu or Debian??? > > Thanks I appreciate your opinions and advice. > > Bernie Advice: Create a separate partition for /home ; If you ever need to reinstall (or want to try another distro), this allows you to reinstall without deleting your personal data. (When reinstalling, just make sure you tell the installer where /home resides.) (/home is where all your documents, music and the like will be stored, so make it as large as possible.) - - - Here are my thoughts on the distros: Less Maintenance - - - - > More Maintenance Debian Stable < Ubuntu < Debian Testing/Unstable < Any Distro w/mutt packaging (Less Flexible - - - - > More Flexible) - - - Wants and Distro: - - - Bleeding Edge Features: You'll eventually have to compile a few packages with any distro (from Debian to Gentoo) Playground: Debian Long-Term Playground: Debian Usability Playground: Ubuntu Consistent Needs: Ubuntu Rarely Play: Debian Stable - - - Ubuntu seems to be a good balance if its default install does almost everything you need, and you like to be somewhat current. It promises 6-month stable release cycles that will keep you working with updated versions of the default tools. These 6-month upgrades are similar to the Debian stable releases--fairly painless upgrades. Debian stable is good if its default install and (stable/Sarge) repositories almost does everything you need, and you do not mind using useful, but old packages. (These old packages are updated for security reasons.) I mention old packages because stable releases of Debian have occurred once every few years. Debian unstable/testing is good if you like to install current, new programs often, and do not mind taking time to fix things that break. Upgrades are sometimes painful, especially if you aggressively update the system (e.g. install new sid packages during a C++ ABI transition, or get unofficial xorg packages). Personally, I believe Debian unstable is the closest to Gentoo if you want to be bleeding edge; it seems to have more non-official repositories of bleeding edge packages than any distro I've seen. - - - Rule for Having No Trouble with Linux: When everything is working, change nothing--not even for fun!!! (Each change is another step away from a default install.) Ha--that isn't very practical. So, here are some tips: Good Housekeeping: * A separate /home partition allows for less painful emergency reinstalls. * Do as much as you can with the default (stable) repositories--what's offered in Synaptic. Be weary of non-official repositories, especially for critical system functions. (Often, problems occur when one has been using non-official packages, Debian suddenly offers the same packages, and one must remove some of the non-official packages to install the Debian packages.) * Keep any changes you make to the system separate from the system defaults. If you compile any programs, put them in /usr/local/bin or some other special directory. If you hand-edit configuration files, do two things: keep a copy of all your personally changes files together AND keep a backup of the system defaults (even if the backup is as simple as renaming foobar to foobar-debian). (Keeping all of your personal changes together will save you a lot of time when you want to reinstall, apply the changes to another machine, or simply remember what you've done.) Ubuntu: * See what Synaptic offers before looking for other package repositories Debian Stable: * See what the default repositories offer before looking for non-official packages Debian Unstable: * learn apt-get, dpkg, and how to force package installs and removals with both dpkg and apt-get * install package debfoster If you plan to compile your own packages to stay as current as possible (e.g., tracking KDE SVN HEAD), plan to spend time learning how to manage your custom installed programs (or packages) along side system packages. If you plan to use external repositories (non-Debian or non-Ubuntu official) to stay as current as possible, plan to spend time working out package conflicts. (If you plan to do this, Debian will be best because it seems to have smoother non-official packages than Ubuntu.) - - - I saved personal testimony for last. I've used Debian for years, and love having up-to-date software. I went to Debian unstable and would always spend a little bit of time fixing this or that when a big update (or self-imposed change) came around. I've installed Ubuntu on several computers for people who are new to GNU/Linux, and there were very few problems; they have working hardware and up-to-date software with no hitches. I now use Ubuntu (or, the kubuntu-desktop meta package) on my desktop (as even 10 year release cycles are fine for my servers), and have had the same trouble-free experience I saw on the other computers
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 07:11:55 -0700, Bernie Betlach wrote: > I'm new to Linux but have a little programming experience. Which should I > install Ubuntu or Debian??? No doubt: Debian Reason: I tried Ubuntu, is nice to install, recognised my hardware. The great and decisive 'but': packages are less reliable to install; when I did it, transcode would not install; and a few more that you might consider 'non-free' respectively multimedia-related. So I sighed off Ubuntu and subscribed to Debian another time. Uwe -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 07:11:55AM -0700, Bernie Betlach wrote: > I'm new to Linux but have a little programming experience. Which should I > install Ubuntu or Debian??? The main difference between the two is the installer, I think. Any Linux distribution will give you the same components: GNOME desktop (though Debian also gives you the option of using KDE), OpenOffice, Gnumeric (spreadsheet), AbiWord (my favorite graphical word processor), gaim (instan-messaging client), Evolution (mail, calendar, etc.), Firefox (web browser), Thunderbird (another mail client, from the same people who brought you Firefox), etc. Ubuntu offers shorter release cycles (it comes out every six months) and an orientation toward consumers. It can be less stable than Debian, because Debian waits until it's rock solid before releasing a new version. Recent experience with Sarge suggests that Debian may fall behind the curve, but what you get is incredibly solid. That's because Debian has been focused on servers, or at the very least has had split loyalties -- it's not clear whether Debian is a server OS or a desktop one. Ubuntu is more clearly focused on desktop users, so it allows them a little more freedom. -- Stephen R. Laniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] +(617) 308-5571 http://laniels.org/ PGP key: http://laniels.org/slaniel.key signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
Bernie Betlach wrote: I'm new to Linux but have a little programming experience. Which should I install Ubuntu or Debian??? I think you can easily go with Debian. It will allow you more freedom than Ubuntu. I switched from Window$ directly to Debian and I had no problems with setting it up on my laptop. I had no previous programing or Linux experiences. Maybe before it was difficult to instal & setup Debian, but now it is not anymore. If you will have any problem there is a lot of Debian-help available on web and of course you have this list. -- Mitja Podreka http://mitja.kizej.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On 2005-07-16, Sebastian Luque <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [...] > >> What's with the question marks? (Non-ASCII characters?) > > As Hal, I don't seem them in his post either, so some decoding variable > probably needs correcting on your system. I didn't see them in the original post either, which used Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable and '=A0' for the second space. Carl seems to have switched to 7-bit encoding so that the 8-bit second space became a '?'. Howard E. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Saturday 16 July 2005 03:59 pm, Stephen R Laniel wrote: > On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 12:10:18PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > > What's with the question marks? (Non-ASCII characters?) > > His encoding is ISO-8859-1. I've not figured out how to get > all ISO-8859-1 characters to display properly when I'm using > UTF-8. Is there any cleverness I'm not aware of? H That's something I've never changed. I am using KMail in Kontact, in a default install (also apt-get upgraded, I think). Just now I looked and found ASCII was first choice 8859 2nd and UTF-8 3rd. I changed so it's ASCII, UTF-8, then 8859. Let's see if that makes a difference. Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Saturday 16 July 2005 06:15 pm, Mr Mike wrote: >Well, MAYBE Libranet. I've chatted with a fellow in this > group that is a libranet tester and he 'swears' it's 100% compatible with > debian packages... If anyone knows better, let me know before I make > mistake numero-two-oh.. Libranet uses Ubuntu packages and I know some beta testers for them that had real trouble with some of their packages. I won't say more, especially after the recent tragedy of Jon Danzig's death, and also because every time I dare say anything that even remotely raises the possibility that it isn't the best Linux ever, I find nastygrams arriving from some fanboys. Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 17:15:22 -0500 Mr Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, MAYBE Libranet. I've chatted with a fellow in this group that > is a libranet tester and he 'swears' it's 100% compatible with debian > packages... If anyone knows better, let me know before I make mistake > numero-two-oh.. I can't speak to the newer versions but I installed Libranet 1.9.1 long ago, switched to Debian Sid sources and never looked back. Some people have complained that doing so removed the Libranet (x)adminmenu but mine stayed there the whole time although I started using other configuration options pretty quickly. I recently went to Ubuntu for fun and to try it out, installed their Warty Warthog version and updated to Hoary Hedgehog pretty quickly. Everything was and is fine, but I /have not/ gone to Debian sources again yet and won't until Debian goes with x.org which is working very well so far for me. Cybe R. Wizard -- Q: What's the difference between MicroSoft Windows and a virus? A: Apart from the fact that viruses are supported by their authors, use optimized, small code and usually perform well, none. Winduhs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 02:15:16PM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote: [huge snip] > However, like many Debian based distros, Mepis uses mixed sources that are > neither Stable, Unstable, or Testing. At one time that didn't mean that much > to me, but now I really value the dependability of the Stable branch. I'm > gradually switching all my systems over to pure Debian. My servers will be > Stable, and I may make my workstation Unstable, with the ability to boot a > Stable partition in case something goes wrong. That way I can play around > with new eye-candy and stuff, but still count on being able to get it up and > running. I personally run Testing on my laptop and desktop computer, and Stable on the two servers I admin, so I think we're actually in agreement. -- Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you attempt to fix something that isn't broken, it will be. -Bruce Tognazzini -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
Sebastian P. Luque writes: > As Hal, I don't seem them in his post either, so some decoding variable > probably needs correcting on your system. I see them here with Gnus, but not in other articles that use double spaces after periods, such as my own. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 14:15:16 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Saturday 16 July 2005 12:10 pm, Carl Fink wrote: >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 11:59:21AM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote: >> > Yes and no. ?Ubuntu is a flavor of Debian and uses the Sarge installer, >> > but they use their own packages. ?In Debian, if you use the Stable >> > (currently Sarge) branch, you get packages that have been tested about as >> > thouroughly as any in computerdom. ?Ubuntu does not follow branches, so >> > you can't count on their packages to be as stable as Debian's. ... >> >> What's with the question marks? (Non-ASCII characters?) > > Don't know. They didn't show up when I was typing it, and didn't show up on > my post when it came through the list, but show up in your response. It was > written on KMail, and I've never changed the character set. I use a standard > 2 spaces after a period at the end of the sentence and it seems your mail > reader is converting the 2nd space after a period into a question mark. > >> Ubuntu doesn't use "branches" but they do use "versions". The current >> Ubuntu version has undergone serious testing, and since they're still >> feeding from Debian any problems discovered by us Debian users will be >> fixed in Ubuntu as well. > > But does Ubuntu take packages from Stable, Testing, or Unstable? If they > take > from Unstable, even if their people test it, there is still no way they will > get the amount of testing a package gets when it reaches Debian Stable. > >> I'm not endorsing Ubuntu for everyone, but your criticism isn't really >> fair. > > I think it is more than fair. Aside from reports that Ubuntu packages can > break dependencies if mixed with pure Debian packages, they are taking Debian > packages, and they are modifying them to work by the Ubuntu rules, which are > not always the same as Debian rules. That means taking a package that has > been proven to work to a certain degree under a Debian system, making > changes, and expecting it to be as stable as it was. It doesn't work that > way -- whenever you make a change in a program or package, you can't count on > that change making it more stable. For sure. Because of Ubuntu hype, I felt safe in creating a Ubuntu/Sarge(stable) system... What a mistake. Not a complete disaster but bad enough to make me almost dispise ubuntu. Case in point... I got my DSL activated so went to town upgrading packages. Of coures I used my Sarge DVD's and a variety of stable repositories. First 'f' up was xmms and alsa... Geesshhh... thought I'd never have sound again. Then it went to Gnome... Holy sh$t, everything under the sun went wrong. Even just starting gnome from gdm only worked 1/10 of the time (maybe) and when it DID start, don't dare clik on anything and expect it to work... More than likely it would just die for no apparent reason and leave no trace of the cause... Well... I ALMOST diped into sid to get 2.10 but decided to try another approach. Replaced xfree with x.org but didn't have any virtual terminals (ctl+alt+F1 etc) so reinstalled xfree. Damn if that didn't seem to clear up the Gnome trouble. WHY? Hell if I know. All I know now is my system seems to be stable again and I'll be damned if I'll ever mix/match debians' again. Well, MAYBE Libranet. I've chatted with a fellow in this group that is a libranet tester and he 'swears' it's 100% compatible with debian packages... If anyone knows better, let me know before I make mistake numero-two-oh.. >Any programmer or program packager can > tell about scads of cases where they made a change to fix a bug or improve > something and instead of the program being more stable, it got worse. > >> I think Ubuntu (or other Debian-derived distributions like, oh, Mepis or >> Libranet) might be somewhat easier for a Linux newbie. Debian requires >> more knowledge to configure and use. IMO. > > Yes, they might be. At this point I'd recommend Mepis, with the LiveCD and > an > extremely easy install program. That's not to say Ubuntu is bad. I've had > limited experience, since when I had to pick a distro, I tried Ubuntu's > LiveCD (forgot the version, but it was months ago), and it didn't work with > my Logitech optical & cordless mouse. There's also Knoppix and Kanotix. > There's a few Debian based distros you can buy, but there are so many good > ones that are free now, I can't see how I could justify spending the money on > them. Other people's mileage may differ. > > However, like many Debian based distros, Mepis uses mixed sources that are > neither Stable, Unstable, or Testing. At one time that didn't mean that much > to me, but now I really value the dependability of the Stable branch. I'm > gradually switching all my systems over to pure Debian. My servers will be > Stable, and I may make my workstation Unstable, with the ability to boot a > Stable partition in case something goes wrong. That way I can play around > wi
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 12:10:18PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > What's with the question marks? (Non-ASCII characters?) His encoding is ISO-8859-1. I've not figured out how to get all ISO-8859-1 characters to display properly when I'm using UTF-8. Is there any cleverness I'm not aware of? -- Stephen R. Laniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] +(617) 308-5571 http://laniels.org/ PGP key: http://laniels.org/slaniel.key signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > What's with the question marks? (Non-ASCII characters?) As Hal, I don't seem them in his post either, so some decoding variable probably needs correcting on your system. I've had similar problems before, and had to check that the MUA's settings were the same as those in my system. -- Sebastian P. Luque -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Saturday 16 July 2005 12:10 pm, Carl Fink wrote: > On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 11:59:21AM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > Yes and no. ?Ubuntu is a flavor of Debian and uses the Sarge installer, > > but they use their own packages. ?In Debian, if you use the Stable > > (currently Sarge) branch, you get packages that have been tested about as > > thouroughly as any in computerdom. ?Ubuntu does not follow branches, so > > you can't count on their packages to be as stable as Debian's. ... > > What's with the question marks? (Non-ASCII characters?) Don't know. They didn't show up when I was typing it, and didn't show up on my post when it came through the list, but show up in your response. It was written on KMail, and I've never changed the character set. I use a standard 2 spaces after a period at the end of the sentence and it seems your mail reader is converting the 2nd space after a period into a question mark. > Ubuntu doesn't use "branches" but they do use "versions". The current > Ubuntu version has undergone serious testing, and since they're still > feeding from Debian any problems discovered by us Debian users will be > fixed in Ubuntu as well. But does Ubuntu take packages from Stable, Testing, or Unstable? If they take from Unstable, even if their people test it, there is still no way they will get the amount of testing a package gets when it reaches Debian Stable. > I'm not endorsing Ubuntu for everyone, but your criticism isn't really > fair. I think it is more than fair. Aside from reports that Ubuntu packages can break dependencies if mixed with pure Debian packages, they are taking Debian packages, and they are modifying them to work by the Ubuntu rules, which are not always the same as Debian rules. That means taking a package that has been proven to work to a certain degree under a Debian system, making changes, and expecting it to be as stable as it was. It doesn't work that way -- whenever you make a change in a program or package, you can't count on that change making it more stable. Any programmer or program packager can tell about scads of cases where they made a change to fix a bug or improve something and instead of the program being more stable, it got worse. > I think Ubuntu (or other Debian-derived distributions like, oh, Mepis or > Libranet) might be somewhat easier for a Linux newbie. Debian requires > more knowledge to configure and use. IMO. Yes, they might be. At this point I'd recommend Mepis, with the LiveCD and an extremely easy install program. That's not to say Ubuntu is bad. I've had limited experience, since when I had to pick a distro, I tried Ubuntu's LiveCD (forgot the version, but it was months ago), and it didn't work with my Logitech optical & cordless mouse. There's also Knoppix and Kanotix. There's a few Debian based distros you can buy, but there are so many good ones that are free now, I can't see how I could justify spending the money on them. Other people's mileage may differ. However, like many Debian based distros, Mepis uses mixed sources that are neither Stable, Unstable, or Testing. At one time that didn't mean that much to me, but now I really value the dependability of the Stable branch. I'm gradually switching all my systems over to pure Debian. My servers will be Stable, and I may make my workstation Unstable, with the ability to boot a Stable partition in case something goes wrong. That way I can play around with new eye-candy and stuff, but still count on being able to get it up and running. Hal -- > Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] > If you attempt to fix something that isn't broken, it will be. > -Bruce Tognazzini -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 11:59:21AM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote: > Yes and no. ?Ubuntu is a flavor of Debian and uses the Sarge installer, but > they use their own packages. ?In Debian, if you use the Stable (currently > Sarge) branch, you get packages that have been tested about as thouroughly as > any in computerdom. ?Ubuntu does not follow branches, so you can't count on > their packages to be as stable as Debian's. ... What's with the question marks? (Non-ASCII characters?) Ubuntu doesn't use "branches" but they do use "versions". The current Ubuntu version has undergone serious testing, and since they're still feeding from Debian any problems discovered by us Debian users will be fixed in Ubuntu as well. I'm not endorsing Ubuntu for everyone, but your criticism isn't really fair. I think Ubuntu (or other Debian-derived distributions like, oh, Mepis or Libranet) might be somewhat easier for a Linux newbie. Debian requires more knowledge to configure and use. IMO. -- Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you attempt to fix something that isn't broken, it will be. -Bruce Tognazzini -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
On Saturday 16 July 2005 10:31 am, Alan Ezust wrote: > I thought Ubuntu was a flavor of debian, so when you install ubuntu, you > get debian at no extra charge :-) > > On 7/16/05, Bernie Betlach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm new to Linux but have a little programming experience. Which should > > I install Ubuntu or Debian??? > > Thanks I appreciate your opinions and advice. > > Bernie Yes and no. Ubuntu is a flavor of Debian and uses the Sarge installer, but they use their own packages. In Debian, if you use the Stable (currently Sarge) branch, you get packages that have been tested about as thouroughly as any in computerdom. Ubuntu does not follow branches, so you can't count on their packages to be as stable as Debian's. It has also been said if you use Ubuntu, some Ubuntu specific packages don't play well with standard Debian Packages. Hal
Re: Debian or Ubuntu Dilemma
I thought Ubuntu was a flavor of debian, so when you install ubuntu, you get debian at no extra charge :-) On 7/16/05, Bernie Betlach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm new to Linux but have a little programming experience. Which should I install Ubuntu or Debian??? Thanks I appreciate your opinions and advice. Bernie -- University of VictoriaDepartment of Computer ScienceVictoria, BC, Canada
