Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Hal Vaughan wrote: > Isn't there an archive for non GPL'ed software, as well? There is a great deal of Free, DFSG-compliant software in Debian/Main that is not GPL'd. The X Window System is a prominent example. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 03:15:59PM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:23, Steve Lamb wrote: > Count me as one for apt. I like the social contract, but I have to run > a business. While I try to avoid non-FOSS, I'm not going to let my > business fail or spend months or years working around it. I've spent 5 > years writing special software and at some point I have to make sure I > make a living on it. > > Isn't there an archive for non GPL'ed software, as well? I think it is > great Debian is free, but as someone running a business who needs his > software to do certain things, I think such an archive is an important non-free contrib Just add to your sources.lst -- Chris. == -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Mike McCarty wrote: Monique Y. Mudama wrote: On 2006-04-23, Kevin Mark penned: [some snippage] In this context, free software user can never buy the software from a company because their is no company and their is no legal monetary contact between Debian and its developers and thus no one can make the free software developers do anything. The free software model does allow a free market whereby any other developer can be paid or convinced to do what you want. But it seems the free software developers are usually simply 'scratching their itch' to their satisfaction and others may or may not like the result. And the average users is more or less powerless to force the free software developer to listen to them sans forking over money and the developers accepting a contract to do what they want. When you say that the average user is powerless to force the free software developer to listen to them, I'm wondering what you're comparing this experience to. Have you ever, as an average user, been able to convince a commercial software company to do something for you? I'd love to hear about it, because that hasn't been my experience. Well, I've been on the other end of this particular stick, both working for "large corporations", and running a "small business" (I and one other guy in a garage writing software; you can find some of our ads in the back of Byte magazine in 1986 or so, under the name Kydor). Everyone in every company I have worked for was acutely aware that satisfied customers were our paychecks, and all but the slackers (all large corporations have these) worked hard to keep our customers satisfied. And that was not the only motivation... Most of the engineers were also motivated by pride of ownership. Some, sadly, were really in the wrong career, putting in their hours and going home. But most were excited about their jobs. Most were doing what they did because they like to solve challenging puzzles. I, to, have worked on the "other end", and I can say, from personal experience, that the bigger the customer (ie. the more money they have) the more likely they will be able to get something changed ASAP. Yes, the little guy may be able to get help and have some input, but little will happen until either thousands of the same general request have been received, or the issue is taken on by a 'big' customer. As for input to the free software developer, the issue for them will, I think, be a combination of 'will it be useful for a large user segment and does it fit with the design of the system?' (as understood by that developer). My experience here is that the developers are quite willing to listen and work with users. I attended a Linux show in San Francisco several years ago and spoke with some folks in the KDE and Gnome booths about a small enhancement to panel hiding functionality. Though I have not seen any tangible result (no bug number to track the issue, no name to contact), the people I talked with seemed quite eager to have feedback and suggestions from users. And willing to consider the change if it was useful. Commercial developers are always constrained by the bottom line. Neat features that could be useful for everyone but that don't contribute much to the bottom line are less likely to be done than those that are central to the function of the application being written. Open source developers have more freedom to try things out, to be innovative or even eccentric. And, of course, if an open source developer doesn't like what's being done and can't generate support for their position, they are free to move to some other project or even start their own branch of the project, without worrying about their own income being impacted. There is always self interest involved, whether corporate or personal. Bob ---snipped--- Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Social Contract WAS: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
chris roddy wrote: > Mike McCarty wrote: >> I don't want to "change the social order" or "be >> the downfall of capitalism", or "kill MicroSoft" or any of >> the other "social goals" so often associated with Linux. > It sounds like you have gravely misunderstood the debian social > contract, or you have not read it. Given that it falls under the first phrase in quotes I don't quite see how you could say that. -- Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream? PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do... ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Social Contract WAS: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Mike McCarty wrote: > I don't want to "change the social order" or "be > the downfall of capitalism", or "kill MicroSoft" or any of > the other "social goals" so often associated with Linux. It sounds like you have gravely misunderstood the debian social contract, or you have not read it. cmr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Social Contract WAS: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Chris Lale wrote:
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 05:15:06PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
Include my name in the list of "people for whom social contract is the
#1 point" also. When Debian ceases to be Free, then Debian ceases to
retain my loyalty.
--
Kent
>>
1 more here.
A
And another.
For me, an OS is a means to load applications. Debian was the
choice due to ease of install, ease of hardware detection,
and ease of making it work with some Windows machines.
The decision was based on running several LiveCD versions of
Linux, and picking Knoppix as the winner[1]. Since it is based
on Debian, Debian was the choice.
"Social contract" machts nichts here. In fact, for me, the
"social contract" aspect of all Linux distros is a drawback
to them. I don't want to "change the social order" or "be
the downfall of capitalism", or "kill MicroSoft" or any of
the other "social goals" so often associated with Linux. I
just want a cheap and reliable OS to load my apps. Unfortunately,
that means that getting support means wading through sometimes
annoying amounts of "social contract" trash to get to the good
stuff.
[1] Kanotix was a very close second, and in some ways better,
but it is also Debian based, so we didn't go farther in trying
to decide which was the "real" winner.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 01:20:37AM +0200, Hans du Plooy wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 15:58 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
And, of course, why there's UBUNTU and KUBUNTU. Waiting for XUBUNTU
myself. ;)
I want IceBUNTU :-)
Hans
how about wmUbinti?
"Wubuntu" would be the plural per Swahili ("bantu") rules.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:
On 2006-04-23, Kevin Mark penned:
[some snippage]
In this context, free software user can never buy the software from
a company because their is no company and their is no legal monetary
contact between Debian and its developers and thus no one can make
the free software developers do anything. The free software model
does allow a free market whereby any other developer can be paid or
convinced to do what you want.
But it seems the free software developers are usually simply
'scratching their itch' to their satisfaction and others may or may
not like the result. And the average users is more or less
powerless to force the free software developer to listen to them
sans forking over money and the developers accepting a contract to
do what they want.
When you say that the average user is powerless to force the free
software developer to listen to them, I'm wondering what you're
comparing this experience to. Have you ever, as an average user, been
able to convince a commercial software company to do something for
you? I'd love to hear about it, because that hasn't been my
experience.
Well, I've been on the other end of this particular stick, both
working for "large corporations", and running a "small business"
(I and one other guy in a garage writing software; you can find
some of our ads in the back of Byte magazine in 1986 or so,
under the name Kydor).
Everyone in every company I have worked for was acutely aware that
satisfied customers were our paychecks, and all but the slackers
(all large corporations have these) worked hard to keep our customers
satisfied. And that was not the only motivation... Most of the
engineers were also motivated by pride of ownership. Some, sadly,
were really in the wrong career, putting in their hours and going
home. But most were excited about their jobs. Most were doing what
they did because they like to solve challenging puzzles.
I don't understand why the idea of spending money to get an open
source solution seems, apparently, unreasonable to you. I'm grateful
for all of the free (as in beer) open source software I'm able to use.
But as a developer, I'd get mighty P.O.'ed if someone told me I "had"
to code something. Offer me money, and I might accept. (Note: I'm
not a debian developer. I don't mean that anyone should offer me
money to write something for debian, although if enough money were
offered, I might consider it *grin*.)
I am sure that each one working on any distro of Linux has his
own motivations for doing so.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Taking care when going the closed-source route (was: Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN)
On Apr 21 2006, Steve Lamb wrote: > Look, comes down to this. I'm tired of wrangling with my machine to do > anything on both sides of the fence. Windows is pissing me off daily and > this constant fighting for the basic stuff now on the Linux side is pissing > me off just as much. For a time my Linux box did what I wanted to do. World > zipped by and not the restrictions are mounting. :/ I am an old Unix user that is divided between using a "desktop system" and the old, proven method of more simpler (yet, quite powerful) tools of using basically a window manager and doing most things in a shell prompt, after I have used MacOS X. Yes, I am undecided. But the guideline of having Free Software available weights heavily in my decisions regarding productivity. Yes, I don't want to be "the guy that fixes the computer" anymore. I want to "just use the computer as a tool". But I agree that some software that we may want to use may have deficiencies. Helping it surpass its deficiencies is a good way of going from the "fixing the computer" to "just using the computer as a tool", yet having the nice side-effect of learning how things work. > If only more game developers would produce for the Mac I'd switch in a > heartbeat. And, then, forget about the ability of upgrading your system easily. Well, in fact, you may even discover that your *hardware* is neglected and even if you are willing to pay for the software, without seeing the source code, you are left alone. My iBook G3 doesn't run certain new applications that Apple has released recently. Yet, the ones that interest them the most (like iTunes---which gives them loads of customers for the iTunes Music Store) are "supported". Another problem that I faced with Apple is that my iPod (second generation) is fairly able to run newer software (e.g., letting me read a text file/"small book" on its screen). But the last update it received was to run AAC songs. Which does take a lot more development than implementing a simple, stupid text viewer in for "little notes" (which was available for the third generation iPods, at the same time the AAC decoder was available for *all* then current iPod). Why? That's because the iTunes Music Store sells music encoded in AAC. So, be careful when deciding to go the closed-source route. It's nice to have Free Software boot into my computers to use *recent* software, with all the security updates (and functionality updates too). Oh, and regarding games, I don't care for them. Regards, Rogério Brito. P.S.: Despite my comments above, I should grant you that some of Apple machines are indeed *nice*, like the Mac Mini. And the nicer thing seems to be that you can run Linux on them, AFAIK. -- Rogério Brito : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito Homepage of the algorithms package : http://algorithms.berlios.de Homepage on freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/projects/algorithms/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:18:27PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Tuesday 25 April 2006 10:02, Digby Tarvin wrote: > > > I don't think I am here primarily for the social contract. > [...] > > I like the policy of > > providing mechanism without mandating how it is used. > > Sounds like you summarized the social contract in one sentence. If thats all it means, then maybe that is why I am here ;) Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com http://www.digbyt.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 10:02, Digby Tarvin wrote: > I don't think I am here primarily for the social contract. [...] > I like the policy of > providing mechanism without mandating how it is used. Sounds like you summarized the social contract in one sentence. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpG0l4YgQhtA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 05:14:49PM +0100, Chris Lale wrote: > Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > >On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 05:15:06PM -0500, Kent West wrote: > >>Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > >>>On Saturday 22 April 2006 14:14, Steve Lamb wrote: > >>>Include my name in the list of "people for whom socila contract is the #1 > >>>point". I use debian because of its commitment to free software (which > >>>is part > >>>of social contract) not because it has apt or some other cool software. > >>> > >>>raju > >>> > >>Include my name in the list of "people for whom social contract is the > >>#1 point" also. When Debian ceases to be Free, then Debian ceases to > >>retain my loyalty. > >>-- > >>Kent > > > >1 more here. > > > >A > > > And another. I don't think I am here primarily for the social contract. I'm definately not here for APT either. My current preference for Debian is its flexibility. I like the policy of providing mechanism without mandating how it is used. There are some things in Debian that are not quite as I like them, but I am more confident that I can tailor things in Debian without having the next update put be back where I started than I am with most of the commercial distributions. It is also important to have an active and knowledgeable user base where help can be found with problems. I didn't mind paying a fair price for a BSD system (with source) back in the days before free software - although I wasn't so keen on the idea of annual license fees or annual payments to get updates. And I didn't mind installing software in /usr/local from a tarball. I do like the convenience of being able to update the system online, and it is also nice to get the system for free and be able to share it. Probably the number one priority for me is open source, which if I understand correctly is a subset of the requirements of the Social Contract, by virtue of the Debian guidlines on what is meant by 'Free' (which involves more than 'as in beer').. If I had to choose, I would rather pay a fair price for software with source, than have a free binary. The details of any license are of course very important, but I think the Debian requirements are more stringent than mine. So long as I can do what I want to my own system, and am free to share the code that I write, then I don't insist on being able to share the code someone else has written. Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com http://www.digbyt.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Chris Lale wrote: [ snipped 46 lines of quoted material ] > And another. Whoa, who let the AOLer in here. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Andrew Sackville-West wrote: On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 05:15:06PM -0500, Kent West wrote: Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: On Saturday 22 April 2006 14:14, Steve Lamb wrote: Monique Y. Mudama wrote: Well, debian is pretty obvious about its purpose. It's a link right from the front page. Maybe people should be choosing other distros if they don't like bullet item number one of the social contract. Debian without the social contract would be just another distro. In other words, there would be no point to using debian without the contract. Funny, the #1 point for most people is apt, not the social contract. #1 for *you* maybe. Include my name in the list of "people for whom socila contract is the #1 point". I use debian because of its commitment to free software (which is part of social contract) not because it has apt or some other cool software. raju Include my name in the list of "people for whom social contract is the #1 point" also. When Debian ceases to be Free, then Debian ceases to retain my loyalty. -- Kent 1 more here. A And another. Chris. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Monday 24 April 2006 09:27, Steve Lamb wrote: > I find it > mildly ironic that people who flock to a distribution supposedly for it's > social contract are some of the most anti-social one can run across. I think Chris could just as easily say the same about you. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgp7Dm0cJbuVp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Doofus wrote: Steve Lamb wrote: chris roddy wrote: so, just switch to mepis and unsubscribe from debian-user already. your show has gotten tiresome. Might I suggest a filter? Or maybe just pressing delete? I find it mildly ironic that people who flock to a distribution supposedly for it's social contract are some of the most anti-social one can run across. I think that's similar the point Chris was trying to make ;-) I use both (I have alot of machines), and both are very good, they both have faults, and both are highly excellent for their target audience. If you want to know which is "better", realise that "better" depends on the user, and try them *both* out. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If that is the missing quote to which you were referring, then yes, it > was more relevent than the later reference to apt-get'ing msttcorefonts. > > But I didn't interpret it as meaining 'there are lots of efforts going > on in this direction'. It sounded to me like he was saying that lack of > manpower was more of an impediment to easier installation than lack of > technology or licencing issues. If you are reading it differently, then > perhaps it needs clarification. Things have been done (msttcorefonts) and things need to be done. This is never going to change. Sadly I am no developer, else I would try to help. > I don't really see the reason for the frustration you are referring to. > Ubuntu has some differences in priorities, so it is not unreasonable that > in any objective comparison between it and Debian, there will be advantages > and disadvantages on both sides. I agree. The frustration was about something else, but doesn't matter. > I think the originator of this thread was probably just interested in what > peaples impressions of the differences are, rather than going into the > philosophy behind each difference and long discussions about what can be > done to address any area where Ubuntu seems to have an advantage. But we do want our favorite distro to become better, don't we? I have nothing against long discussions as long as they are constructive in some way. > I'll grant that there may well be good reasons for the Debian installer > not to be able to use my Wireless hardware when the Ubuntu installer > managed it, but I think it would be a stretch to argue that that was > not a disadvantage from the point of view of someone attempting to do > an installation on hardware that uses it - especially someone who may > not be experienced with Linux. I think nobody argued that Ubuntu is most of the times better for newcomers. > That is not a criticism of Debian or a request for change. It is just > information that may be useful for someone deciding between the two > distributions if ease of installation is a priority. It just seems > difficult to make such observations without evangelists getting > defensive. This is never going to change. There will always be extremists on both sides. And I bet, next month when the same question will come up (and it will come up) it will all start from the beginning. The Never Ending Story :) Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Steve Lamb wrote: chris roddy wrote: so, just switch to mepis and unsubscribe from debian-user already. your show has gotten tiresome. Might I suggest a filter? Or maybe just pressing delete? I find it mildly ironic that people who flock to a distribution supposedly for it's social contract are some of the most anti-social one can run across. I think that's similar the point Chris was trying to make ;-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 05:38:13PM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 10:55:00AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > > Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > For example, if the licensing restrictions on the downloadable firmware > > > > for > > > > a particular network adapter prevent it from being included on the > > > > install > > > > CD, then perhaps the install CD can be made to look for additional > > > > software > > > > on a USB pen that can be used by the installer to provide license > > > > restricted > > > > software. Or perhaps we can find a way to make it easier for people to > > > > avoid buying hardware that relies on license restricted software in the > > > > first place. > > > > > > IMHO, just as Joey Hess pointed out (in his missing post), there are > > > lots of efforts going into this direction. Just install msttcorefonts > > > and you'll know what I'm talking about. I just can't get easier than > > > that. You apt-get the package and the install scripts will download all > > > the font files and install them for you. You won't notice the > > > difference unless you watch apt's output. > > > > Ah yes, but the problem is - how do I apt-get the network adapter > > firmware mentioned in the example above when > > a) the network doesn't work because it needs the firmware, and > > b) Debian is not installed yet, because the installer needs the network... > > > > Again for those that missed it - I am entirely happy with the method for > > installing license restricted packages using alternate repositories > > after a Debian system has been successfully installed on the hardware... > > Sorry, I missed that, but see below. > > > My comments above (and the initial comments comparing Debian and Ubuntu) > > were specifically addressing ease of getting an initial working system > > installed. > > > > Or have I misunderstood what you are saying in some way? > > > > I suspect that there are more misunderstandings of what people are saying > > than actual disagreements in this thread... > > Exactly. I can now understand Joey Hess's frustration about his > message. Let me quote: > > [quote] > Some, like the ndiswrapper, are even in > Debian proper. It should be even easier to integrate such drivers into > the installer. For example all that needs doing for ndiswrapper is: > > 1) Someone doing the work to keep ndiswrapper kernel modules in Debian >up-to-date with the current version of the kernel in Debian, which is >not currently being done. > 2) Someone writing the necessary code to let the installer prompt or a >windows driver CD, pull the windows drivers off it and feed them to >ndiswrapper. > > (I'll tell you what: someone take care of #1, and I'll do #2.) > [end quote] > > Or are you talking about more complicated cases? If that is the missing quote to which you were referring, then yes, it was more relevent than the later reference to apt-get'ing msttcorefonts. But I didn't interpret it as meaining 'there are lots of efforts going on in this direction'. It sounded to me like he was saying that lack of manpower was more of an impediment to easier installation than lack of technology or licencing issues. If you are reading it differently, then perhaps it needs clarification. I don't really see the reason for the frustration you are referring to. Ubuntu has some differences in priorities, so it is not unreasonable that in any objective comparison between it and Debian, there will be advantages and disadvantages on both sides. I think the originator of this thread was probably just interested in what peaples impressions of the differences are, rather than going into the philosophy behind each difference and long discussions about what can be done to address any area where Ubuntu seems to have an advantage. I'll grant that there may well be good reasons for the Debian installer not to be able to use my Wireless hardware when the Ubuntu installer managed it, but I think it would be a stretch to argue that that was not a disadvantage from the point of view of someone attempting to do an installation on hardware that uses it - especially someone who may not be experienced with Linux. That is not a criticism of Debian or a request for change. It is just information that may be useful for someone deciding between the two distributions if ease of installation is a priority. It just seems difficult to make such observations without evangelists getting defensive. Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com http://www.digbyt.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 01:20:37AM +0200, Hans du Plooy wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 15:58 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > > And, of course, why there's UBUNTU and KUBUNTU. Waiting for XUBUNTU > > myself. ;) > > I want IceBUNTU :-) > > Hans > how about wmUbinti? A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 05:15:06PM -0500, Kent West wrote: > Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > > On Saturday 22 April 2006 14:14, Steve Lamb wrote: > > > >> Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > >> > >>> Well, debian is pretty obvious about its purpose. It's a link right > >>> from the front page. Maybe people should be choosing other distros if > >>> they don't like bullet item number one of the social contract. Debian > >>> without the social contract would be just another distro. In other > >>> words, there would be no point to using debian without the contract. > >>> > >> Funny, the #1 point for most people is apt, not the social contract. > >> #1 for *you* maybe. > >> > > Include my name in the list of "people for whom socila contract is the #1 > > point". I use debian because of its commitment to free software (which is > > part > > of social contract) not because it has apt or some other cool software. > > > > raju > > > > Include my name in the list of "people for whom social contract is the > #1 point" also. When Debian ceases to be Free, then Debian ceases to > retain my loyalty. > > -- > Kent 1 more here. A signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
chris roddy wrote: > so, just switch to mepis and unsubscribe from debian-user already. your > show has gotten tiresome. Might I suggest a filter? Or maybe just pressing delete? I find it mildly ironic that people who flock to a distribution supposedly for it's social contract are some of the most anti-social one can run across. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Steve Lamb wrote: > A little more pragmatism and a little less haughty zealotry. > so, just switch to mepis and unsubscribe from debian-user already. your show has gotten tiresome. cmr -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 10:55:00AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > > Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > For example, if the licensing restrictions on the downloadable firmware > > > for > > > a particular network adapter prevent it from being included on the install > > > CD, then perhaps the install CD can be made to look for additional > > > software > > > on a USB pen that can be used by the installer to provide license > > > restricted > > > software. Or perhaps we can find a way to make it easier for people to > > > avoid buying hardware that relies on license restricted software in the > > > first place. > > > > IMHO, just as Joey Hess pointed out (in his missing post), there are > > lots of efforts going into this direction. Just install msttcorefonts > > and you'll know what I'm talking about. I just can't get easier than > > that. You apt-get the package and the install scripts will download all > > the font files and install them for you. You won't notice the > > difference unless you watch apt's output. > > Ah yes, but the problem is - how do I apt-get the network adapter > firmware mentioned in the example above when > a) the network doesn't work because it needs the firmware, and > b) Debian is not installed yet, because the installer needs the network... > > Again for those that missed it - I am entirely happy with the method for > installing license restricted packages using alternate repositories > after a Debian system has been successfully installed on the hardware... Sorry, I missed that, but see below. > My comments above (and the initial comments comparing Debian and Ubuntu) > were specifically addressing ease of getting an initial working system > installed. > > Or have I misunderstood what you are saying in some way? > > I suspect that there are more misunderstandings of what people are saying > than actual disagreements in this thread... Exactly. I can now understand Joey Hess's frustration about his message. Let me quote: [quote] Some, like the ndiswrapper, are even in Debian proper. It should be even easier to integrate such drivers into the installer. For example all that needs doing for ndiswrapper is: 1) Someone doing the work to keep ndiswrapper kernel modules in Debian up-to-date with the current version of the kernel in Debian, which is not currently being done. 2) Someone writing the necessary code to let the installer prompt or a windows driver CD, pull the windows drivers off it and feed them to ndiswrapper. (I'll tell you what: someone take care of #1, and I'll do #2.) [end quote] Or are you talking about more complicated cases? Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 21:56:41 -0600 "Monique Y. Mudama" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Er, Christopher, you might want to take a look at the email address > Joey uses and consider the context of his message. > > Hint: http://people.debian.org/~joey/ Mmmm, wrong Joey, I think. Maybe this one is the right one: http://kitenet.net/~joey/ Cybe R. Wizard -- Press 'START' to stop Winduhs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 10:55:00AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote: > Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > For example, if the licensing restrictions on the downloadable firmware for > > a particular network adapter prevent it from being included on the install > > CD, then perhaps the install CD can be made to look for additional software > > on a USB pen that can be used by the installer to provide license restricted > > software. Or perhaps we can find a way to make it easier for people to > > avoid buying hardware that relies on license restricted software in the > > first place. > > IMHO, just as Joey Hess pointed out (in his missing post), there are > lots of efforts going into this direction. Just install msttcorefonts > and you'll know what I'm talking about. I just can't get easier than > that. You apt-get the package and the install scripts will download all > the font files and install them for you. You won't notice the > difference unless you watch apt's output. Ah yes, but the problem is - how do I apt-get the network adapter firmware mentioned in the example above when a) the network doesn't work because it needs the firmware, and b) Debian is not installed yet, because the installer needs the network... Again for those that missed it - I am entirely happy with the method for installing license restricted packages using alternate repositories after a Debian system has been successfully installed on the hardware... My comments above (and the initial comments comparing Debian and Ubuntu) were specifically addressing ease of getting an initial working system installed. Or have I misunderstood what you are saying in some way? I suspect that there are more misunderstandings of what people are saying than actual disagreements in this thread... Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com http://www.digbyt.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Digby Tarvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For example, if the licensing restrictions on the downloadable firmware for > a particular network adapter prevent it from being included on the install > CD, then perhaps the install CD can be made to look for additional software > on a USB pen that can be used by the installer to provide license restricted > software. Or perhaps we can find a way to make it easier for people to > avoid buying hardware that relies on license restricted software in the > first place. IMHO, just as Joey Hess pointed out (in his missing post), there are lots of efforts going into this direction. Just install msttcorefonts and you'll know what I'm talking about. I just can't get easier than that. You apt-get the package and the install scripts will download all the font files and install them for you. You won't notice the difference unless you watch apt's output. Regards Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 04:14:27PM -0600, Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > On 2006-04-23, Kevin Mark penned: > > [some snippage] > > > In this context, free software user can never buy the software from > > a company because their is no company and their is no legal monetary > > contact between Debian and its developers and thus no one can make > > the free software developers do anything. The free software model > > does allow a free market whereby any other developer can be paid or > > convinced to do what you want. > > > > But it seems the free software developers are usually simply > > 'scratching their itch' to their satisfaction and others may or may > > not like the result. And the average users is more or less > > powerless to force the free software developer to listen to them > > sans forking over money and the developers accepting a contract to > > do what they want. > > > When you say that the average user is powerless to force the free > software developer to listen to them, I'm wondering what you're > comparing this experience to. Have you ever, as an average user, been > able to convince a commercial software company to do something for > you? I'd love to hear about it, because that hasn't been my > experience. I agree that users do not have any say indivually but company try to see what most folks may want in order to keep them buying stuff. And then there are the mega-corps that pay software co.'s to customize stuff--money does talk there. This is as true for Adobe(for acrobat) as it is with Novell( for the gnome desktop) or Ubuntu. FLOSS users also dont have much say either, so they're in also most the same boat. But of course floss users have the source and that is an advantage if you can pay someone to make your changes but this still does not mean the original dev will accept your paid-for patches. > > I don't understand why the idea of spending money to get an open > source solution seems, apparently, unreasonable to you. I'm grateful > for all of the free (as in beer) open source software I'm able to use. > But as a developer, I'd get mighty P.O.'ed if someone told me I "had" > to code something. Offer me money, and I might accept. (Note: I'm > not a debian developer. I don't mean that anyone should offer me > money to write something for debian, although if enough money were > offered, I might consider it *grin*.) I have nothing against paying FLOSS devs and also grateful for their work. And as you said FLOSS folks might get PO'd if someone demanded a feature but proprietary devs do not have that luxury becuase PO'd = out-the-door. cheers, Kev > > -- > monique > > Help us help you: > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 12:34:46AM +0100, Merlin, the Mage wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:14, Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > > I don't understand why the idea of spending money to get an open > > source solution seems, apparently, unreasonable to you. I'm grateful > > for all of the free (as in beer) open source software I'm able to use. > > But as a developer, I'd get mighty P.O.'ed if someone told me I "had" > > to code something. Offer me money, and I might accept. (Note: I'm > > not a debian developer. I don't mean that anyone should offer me > > money to write something for debian, although if enough money were > > offered, I might consider it *grin*.) > Hi, > > I can do this, but I can't write every single change someone think could be > useful in my OS projects for free imediatly on request. That would be a > fulltime job, that I would happly take, but that don't pay my bills. If I had > some incoming stream that paid my bills, I would take more time with my OS > projects, would implement more features, and would try to make everyone > happy. > > For now, for free, the most I can do is make what I code for myself > available, > and consider the sugestions that are made to me. If someone want something I > don't have time to implement, will have to buy me time. Cheapper, but yet > enought to pay my bills. > > I think the same happens with most OS devels. > > Hugs and Kisses, Hi Merlin and Monique, as Merlin has shown, FLOSS devs have limited time. Commercial time + FLOSS time + IRC time + fun=total time to do stuff. This leads to tradeoffs. Most floss devs do not get paid to just do floss. And thus can only modify their floss project with mostly their own goals in mind because they do not have the luxury to spend more time on them. This non-floss time is usually taken up by paying-the-bills. I do not begrudge anyone for what they do or do not do but am just stating that 'there are only so many hours in a day'. And for most floss folks their project are usually created to achieve some goal, possibly work and money related and sometimes not. cheers, Kev -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 12:24:34AM +0100, Digby Tarvin wrote: > software. Or perhaps we can find a way to make it easier for people to > avoid buying hardware that relies on license restricted software in the > first place. Now *that* would be useful! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sunday 23 April 2006 23:14, Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > I don't understand why the idea of spending money to get an open > source solution seems, apparently, unreasonable to you. I'm grateful > for all of the free (as in beer) open source software I'm able to use. > But as a developer, I'd get mighty P.O.'ed if someone told me I "had" > to code something. Offer me money, and I might accept. (Note: I'm > not a debian developer. I don't mean that anyone should offer me > money to write something for debian, although if enough money were > offered, I might consider it *grin*.) Hi, As Monique I'm not a debian developer, but I'm an opensource (OS) developer, as in beer and as in speech. I write web aplications. I'm currently working on 5, all of them in HTML::Mason: * BWPMS (www.bwpms.com), a multisite content manager, design independent, modular, that I use mostly to create small business web sites. The sources aren't yet available, as I didn't had time to redraw and reimplement www.code.online.pt, the site where I share all my os webapps. I call it, currently, 0.1.0 and will release the version 0.1.1 when I redraw the code online site. * MaBliki (www.code.online.pt/view/MaBliki), A Bliki implementation, now with 0.2.0 under development, already being used in www.cultodavida.com, that is multisite, and uses the same template engine that BWPMS, consequently, completly design independent. 0.1.x is available, 0.2.0 will be when some few more features are implemented (Edit posts, RDF and Atom feeds, etc). * Hercules (being used in stats.camelot.co.pt), a webstats engine, based in POE (Perl), capable of handling the stats for a small Portal (large for Portuguese standard, as it was in use, in my time, at www.iol.pt), processing 2 millions pageviews a day. I want to improve him for multi-host capabilities (having several servers processing stats in parelel). * Comercium (not a sharable install yet), a simple ERP for small business. It's designed to have Sells (Prospecting, Clients, invoices, repeated sells), Buys (vendors, buy, repeated buys), Products (with and without Stocks - fisical products have stock, and services don't have), Finances (Control cash and cashflow, clients payments and prepayments, vendor payments), and accounting (that will have accounting reports, to be defined yet). This already allow me to invoice my clients, but almost everything else is yet to be implemented. * Tendere (an ecommerce plataform), mostly specified, but yet to be started. And this is just to say that, as an opensource developer a mostly code for my self, release my code for those who may want it, and in true I only implement those "sugestions" that keep the project on the path I thought to it, as part of the project. But I'm also a paid devel. I need to pay my bills, so I have to get paid for something, and that happens with most OS devels. So, most time I'm paid for eight (8) hours a day coding, most time added by two (2) more hours in public transports (metro, train, whatever), from home to the client, and back home, and yet one (1) more for lunch. That makes eleven (11) hours a day. And this assuming everything work fine in the paid projects. At times that don't happen. The point is: after eleven hours I'm tired. I'm as human as most, and even if by definition a coder is someone who turns caffeine into code, and even if every single day I drink 2+ liters of "Coca-Cola", the time I have to concentrate in the opensource projects is limited. And that happens with most OS devels, I assume. As a freelancer/self-employed coder (SEC), sometimes I have idle days, that I use as much as possible to my OS projects. But as a SEC, I also need to prospect new clients, I also need to manage my business, I also need to meet my consultants (Accounting, Lawyer, etc), and again, my idle days are not that idle. So, yes, I limit the change I make in my OS projects to those I think will improve the project the way I need it improved or in a way I think will really be an improvement to the project. Obviously there are other ways to make me think on a change as an improvement... money. If someone ask me "I need this change in an OS project, and I don't mind if that change is open sourced", then I will make the change lowerpriced that If it was a closed source application. If someone come to me and say "I liked your project XX, but I need some special future", I will happly make the change below my regular rate. I can do this, but I can't write every single change someone think could be useful in my OS projects for free imediatly on request. That would be a fulltime job, that I would happly take, but that don't pay my bills. If I had some incoming stream that paid my bills, I would take more time with my OS projects, would implement more features, and would try to make everyone happy. For now, for free, the most I can do is make what I code for myself available, and consid
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 03:55:27PM -0600, Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > > In general, I agree. A suggestion to change something to be more > useful shouldn't be met with derision. > > In this case, however, it seems to me that several people, including a > debian dev, have tried to explain why the request is contrary to the > goals, in fact the very purpose, of debian. It strikes me as kind of > like a consumer telling Ferrari their fuel efficiency sucks ... > > Or maybe I'm missing Steve's whole point. But that's how it seems to > me. I think this thread was originally an attempt to describe the differences between Debian and Ubuntu in a way that would help others make the most appropriate choice for their needs. Unfortunately, while both systems have their advantages and disadvantages, I think some on this list have interpreted praise for any of Ubuntu's features as criticism of Debian, or demands for Debian to change (and to be fair, I think some have muddied the waters with such suggestions). I think it is certainly fair for a Debian developer, or any other user, to argue against requests that would be contrary to the Debians stated goals. But it is not reasonable to object to someone pointing out the disadvantages of those goals when considering the relative merits of two distributions. There is also some confusion in that some people have been talking about software/firmware that is not excluded because it is covered by a licence that would make it illegal to do so, and others have been talking about software which could legally be included but is not because of philosophical objections to the license conditions. My impression is that there is a tradeoff betweem simplicity and versatility, and Ubuntu leans further toward the former, and Debian toward the latter. Personally I would rather talk about how we can simplify the Debian experience, in particular the installation procedure, without violating the charter or reducing the versatility of the system. For example, if the licensing restrictions on the downloadable firmware for a particular network adapter prevent it from being included on the install CD, then perhaps the install CD can be made to look for additional software on a USB pen that can be used by the installer to provide license restricted software. Or perhaps we can find a way to make it easier for people to avoid buying hardware that relies on license restricted software in the first place. Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com http://www.digbyt.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On 2006-04-23, Kevin Mark penned: [some snippage] > In this context, free software user can never buy the software from > a company because their is no company and their is no legal monetary > contact between Debian and its developers and thus no one can make > the free software developers do anything. The free software model > does allow a free market whereby any other developer can be paid or > convinced to do what you want. > > But it seems the free software developers are usually simply > 'scratching their itch' to their satisfaction and others may or may > not like the result. And the average users is more or less > powerless to force the free software developer to listen to them > sans forking over money and the developers accepting a contract to > do what they want. When you say that the average user is powerless to force the free software developer to listen to them, I'm wondering what you're comparing this experience to. Have you ever, as an average user, been able to convince a commercial software company to do something for you? I'd love to hear about it, because that hasn't been my experience. I don't understand why the idea of spending money to get an open source solution seems, apparently, unreasonable to you. I'm grateful for all of the free (as in beer) open source software I'm able to use. But as a developer, I'd get mighty P.O.'ed if someone told me I "had" to code something. Offer me money, and I might accept. (Note: I'm not a debian developer. I don't mean that anyone should offer me money to write something for debian, although if enough money were offered, I might consider it *grin*.) -- monique Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On 2006-04-23, Hal Vaughan penned: >> >> Here's what I don't understand: If you like what other distributions >> do better, why are you so busy trying to convince debian to change? >> Why not just switch to one of the several distros you've mentioned? > > This may not be a logical fallacy. If not, it should be: the idea > that if you don't like something, find a substitute. Those that > criticize something (like Debian) often have a high regard for it, > which is why they take the time and effort to provide constructive > criticism. If they didn't like it and didn't care, they would jump > ship. Then we'd have something with no disagreement and a project > that would become more and more esoteric until it met only the needs > of a few developers. > > If everyone had this attitude, nothing would ever improve. In general, I agree. A suggestion to change something to be more useful shouldn't be met with derision. In this case, however, it seems to me that several people, including a debian dev, have tried to explain why the request is contrary to the goals, in fact the very purpose, of debian. It strikes me as kind of like a consumer telling Ferrari their fuel efficiency sucks ... Or maybe I'm missing Steve's whole point. But that's how it seems to me. -- monique Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Hal Vaughan wrote: > I do know this: after the one bug report I filed recently and the lack > of dialog and negative response I got from a developer, I'll be rather > unlikely to ever file bug reports again. It's a different situation, > but the same frustration: This is the way it is, and if you don't like > it, well, I do, and that's what matters. The only bug report you've ever filed[1], besides being filed on a package that had nothing to do with the actual problem you were experiencing, received a response the same day pointing you at how to configure your system to work the way you were asking it to act. I'm not sure what else you're looking for.. Chip, meet shoulder. -- see shy jo [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/[EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:23, Steve Lamb wrote: > Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > > Who are these most people, and why should it matter to the > > developers what "most people" want when they're not paying > > customers? > > Go through the archives of this list and read how many times > people cite Apt as the reason they use and stick with Debian. The > social contract gets hardly the same number of mentions. Why should > the developers care? One presumes they have some interest in what > the people whom are using their distribution are interested in. > Otherwise they would be one very self-involved and isolated bunch. Count me as one for apt. I like the social contract, but I have to run a business. While I try to avoid non-FOSS, I'm not going to let my business fail or spend months or years working around it. I've spent 5 years writing special software and at some point I have to make sure I make a living on it. Isn't there an archive for non GPL'ed software, as well? I think it is great Debian is free, but as someone running a business who needs his software to do certain things, I think such an archive is an important side-project. (I probably even have it in my apt sources, but forgot about it -- don't have time to check now, gotta run for an appointment.) Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sunday 23 April 2006 12:47, Joey Hess wrote: > Hal Vaughan wrote: > > From my observation, whenever something like this comes up on this > > list, there are those who listen and are willing to pay attention > > to constructive criticism and others who can't and keep saying > > things like the above comment or developers that can't accept > > criticism and become quite nasty with the users. > > As far as I know I'm the only DD participating in this thread. Please > show an example of me being thin skinned and nasty with users in this > thread. Read it again. "Whenever". Actually, as a DD, you're not being as stubborn as some I've dealt with. In this thread, you are not the overreactive person. Sorry. I wrote that after 5 hours sleep and was not as specific as I could have been. I tried to point out that it's only a few that behave that way, though. I was referring specifically to the person I was responding to, and really should have pointed out it was not just developers. My bad. I do know this: after the one bug report I filed recently and the lack of dialog and negative response I got from a developer, I'll be rather unlikely to ever file bug reports again. It's a different situation, but the same frustration: This is the way it is, and if you don't like it, well, I do, and that's what matters. Hal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Hal Vaughan wrote: > From my observation, whenever something like this comes up on this list, > there are those who listen and are willing to pay attention to > constructive criticism and others who can't and keep saying things like > the above comment or developers that can't accept criticism and become > quite nasty with the users. As far as I know I'm the only DD participating in this thread. Please show an example of me being thin skinned and nasty with users in this thread. Steve Lamb wrote: > No, it's not, Joey. There's a difference between "Debian's policy not > allowing it to support" and "has been made to install just fine". Debian, as > a project vs. Debian as the OS. I'm pointing out the difference between "Oh, > you're on your own kid because that's BAD AND EVIL AND WRONG AND YOU'LL BURN > IN HELL!!!" versus the pragmatic approach (one that was much more evidenced in > Debian of years past) of "This'll get'cha going, it works but it's BAD AND > EVIL AND WRONG and you really should convert to something else." You continue to show evidence of not having actually read <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, which gives ample evidence of the latter approach continuing to exist in Debian today. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 10:52:33PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > Christopher Nelson wrote: > > Did you buy it knowing you were going to use it under linux? If so, > > it's you problem. If not, the answer's simple--don't give them any more > > money and tell us, so we don't give them money until they rectify the > > situation. > > I bought it based on recommendations *on this very list* as well as > pointers *from this list* to sites that recommended it. Then you could have asked this very list for easier instructions if the ones you got were too confusing. > > No, but the driver and module source are in non-free, and this page: > > http://xoomer.virgilio.it/flavio.stanchina/debian/fglrx-installer.html#install > > lists 4 seperate ways to build the module, none of which seem difficult. > > Sub kernel-source for linux-headers and it should all work smoothly. > > That's the page I was referring to. "none of which seem difficult" tells > me you've never done it. Thank you for proving me right. Actually, I've done it using two of the methods quite easily, the 'make.sh' on a 2.4 kernel and 'make-kpkg' on a 2.6. 'make-kpkg' is exceptionally easy, as I mentioned other places requiring a total of 5 commands (6 if you don't start in /usr/src/) and maybe 7 minutes. unless you're running oldstable, one or the other should work for you. > > They do address their userbase--the people who want to follow the social > > contract. They also allow the most common 'non-free' things to be done > > easily. What more do you want? > > A little more pragmatism and a little less haughty zealotry. It's not zealotry. There's a reason non-free things are non-free and can't be distributed in the base install. If Debian lost its integrity, I'd be forced to find something else. -- Christopher Nelson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Generated by Signify v1.14. For this and more, visit http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:28:43AM +0100, Doofus wrote: > Christopher Nelson wrote: > > >On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 07:31:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > > > > >>Christopher Nelson wrote: > >> > >> > >>>I have no idea what post you're talking about since you didn't quote it. > >>> > >>> > >>I was referring to my only other post to this thread, namely > >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > >> > >> > > > >Okay, after some searching I found it (at: > >http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20060421.170836.4a9c52cc.en.html > >for the interested) and I'm afraid I cannot comment too much on it. I > >also don't know how much useful response you would get here, even if the > >post weren't buried in a thread such as this (I know the detail would be > >way over my head). Maybe sending a similar message to the install team > >(of which, by you sig in that message, I assume you are a member?) would > >prompt more interest? > > > > I can't see Joey's referenced original at lists.debian.org. > Confused... I couldn't either, which is part of why I lost context. -- Christopher Nelson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- When you speak to others for their own good it's advice; when they speak to you for your own good it's interference. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 10:13:34PM -0500, Kent West wrote: > I believe you misunderstand Joey's post. He's not asking for any help. > He's just pointing out to Steve Lamb that Steve has ignored his previous > post, which follows this timeline (as I recall it). Thank you Kent and Joey and Monique for pointing out my error in understanding. I apologise for the wasted bandwidth, and will endeavour to read a bit more carefully before posting! (As an aside, I think it apropos what signify generated for me, considering my folly--sometimes I think the program sentient!) -- Christopher Nelson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- What fools these mortals be. -- Lucius Annaeus Seneca -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sunday 23 April 2006 00:01, Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > On 2006-04-22, Steve Lamb penned: > > Same drivers installed on Mepis, one mouseclick, not even 5 > > minutes. And Mepis is Debian based so there's nothing there > > that Debian couldn't do if it wanted to be more than a badge of > > pride and actually attempt to address t he userbase every once > > and a while. > > Here's what I don't understand: If you like what other distributions > do better, why are you so busy trying to convince debian to change? > Why not just switch to one of the several distros you've mentioned? This may not be a logical fallacy. If not, it should be: the idea that if you don't like something, find a substitute. Those that criticize something (like Debian) often have a high regard for it, which is why they take the time and effort to provide constructive criticism. If they didn't like it and didn't care, they would jump ship. Then we'd have something with no disagreement and a project that would become more and more esoteric until it met only the needs of a few developers. If everyone had this attitude, nothing would ever improve. From my observation, whenever something like this comes up on this list, there are those who listen and are willing to pay attention to constructive criticism and others who can't and keep saying things like the above comment or developers that can't accept criticism and become quite nasty with the users. It's a good thing not all Debian developers are as thin skinned and unwilling to accept constructive criticism as the vocal minority who refuse to face different ideas. (And if you missed it, I'm not slamming Debian developers as a whole, I have great respect for most of them, but, as in every group, there are a few prigs who speak loudly enough to make everyone look narrow minded.) Hal
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > Who are these most people, and why should it matter to the developers > what "most people" want when they're not paying customers? Go through the archives of this list and read how many times people cite Apt as the reason they use and stick with Debian. The social contract gets hardly the same number of mentions. Why should the developers care? One presumes they have some interest in what the people whom are using their distribution are interested in. Otherwise they would be one very self-involved and isolated bunch. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > Here's what I don't understand: If you like what other distributions > do better, why are you so busy trying to convince debian to change? > Why not just switch to one of the several distros you've mentioned? Several? I've mentioned one. Why? Because at the core it is Debian and I think like any good open source project when a fork occurs one should look honestly and what the fork is doing and incorporate what it is doing better into the mainline project. The alternative, of course, is that the mainline project dies out. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On 2006-04-23, Rogério Brito penned: > > He translated a helluva strings and, still, after talking with the > responsible people on IRC (to get the work of this student > integrated soon), I asked if they were willing to feed it back to > Debian or upstream and the response I got wasn't that "human" or as > kind as Ubuntu is promoted. :-( > > Still, having some core Debian developers working for Ubuntu is a > good thing for Debian. Wow, great of your student to take the initiative and do that! Even if Ubuntu doesn't feed it back to debian, since it's open source, how hard would it be for debian to leverage those files? -- monique Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Multiple ubuntu-based distributions (was: Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN)
On 04/21/06 19:58, Steve Lamb wrote: > And, of course, why there's UBUNTU and KUBUNTU. Waiting for XUBUNTU > myself. ;) Indeed. I'm on the same boat here... After using "pure" ubuntu on an old laptop of mine I wouldn't expect it to run s poorly. With all the talk about Gnome getting leaner and snappier, with a focus on reducing the amount of RAM needed to run, I expected that it would be a nice thing to base a course of mine regarding Linux to some co-workers, but given that we don't live in the richest country of the world, our machines are not as fast as some developers think that they should be. I installed xubuntu and it worked much better. My only complaint regarding it was that I could not hibernate my system, as I could when I booted with Gnome. Actually, I'm right now with both installed on this "sacrificial" machine, but I am surely waiting for xubuntu to get slightly more polished... Regards, Rogério. -- Rogério Brito : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito Homepage of the algorithms package : http://algorithms.berlios.de Homepage on freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/projects/algorithms/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Hi there. On 04/20/06 17:21, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > If all the Ubuntu patches make into Debian then that would be a > huge boost for Debian! Well, this seems to be a point where there must be some work left to do: not all patches are being feed back to Debian (or upstream, for that matter). For instance, I installed dapper flight-4 on my old laptop and the translations to Brazilian Portuguese were bad. I tried registering to Launchpad and then translated some strings from Abiword (or was it another program?). I got tired of the web interface and it was late at night. I then mentioned this opportunity of getting involved with Free Software development to a student of mine. He translated a helluva strings and, still, after talking with the responsible people on IRC (to get the work of this student integrated soon), I asked if they were willing to feed it back to Debian or upstream and the response I got wasn't that "human" or as kind as Ubuntu is promoted. :-( Still, having some core Debian developers working for Ubuntu is a good thing for Debian. Regards, Rogério. P.S.: And then, there's, the utnubu project... Which, in an ideal world, would not have to exist. -- Rogério Brito : [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito Homepage of the algorithms package : http://algorithms.berlios.de Homepage on freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/projects/algorithms/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 11:11:06PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > Steve Lamb wrote: > > No. I am not advocating that Debian do anything legal. But there is a > > Of course I meant illegal here, not legal. Oh for the ability to stop > sending upon seeing errors like this a split second after hitting send. :) Typos are obvious after the manuscript is in the mail, never before. -- hendrik > > -- > Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your >PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. > ---+- > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Christopher Nelson wrote: On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 07:31:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Christopher Nelson wrote: I have no idea what post you're talking about since you didn't quote it. I was referring to my only other post to this thread, namely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Okay, after some searching I found it (at: http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20060421.170836.4a9c52cc.en.html for the interested) and I'm afraid I cannot comment too much on it. I also don't know how much useful response you would get here, even if the post weren't buried in a thread such as this (I know the detail would be way over my head). Maybe sending a similar message to the install team (of which, by you sig in that message, I assume you are a member?) would prompt more interest? I can't see Joey's referenced original at lists.debian.org. Confused... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Steve Lamb wrote: > No. I am not advocating that Debian do anything legal. But there is a Of course I meant illegal here, not legal. Oh for the ability to stop sending upon seeing errors like this a split second after hitting send. :) -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Joey Hess wrote: > Er, my point is that whinging about Debian's policy not allowing it to > support installing to hardware that needs non-free drivers is pointless > when there are examples of hardware that needs non-free drivers which > Debian has been made to install to just fine. Most of this thread is > based on false assumptions. No, it's not, Joey. There's a difference between "Debian's policy not allowing it to support" and "has been made to install just fine". Debian, as a project vs. Debian as the OS. I'm pointing out the difference between "Oh, you're on your own kid because that's BAD AND EVIL AND WRONG AND YOU'LL BURN IN HELL!!!" versus the pragmatic approach (one that was much more evidenced in Debian of years past) of "This'll get'cha going, it works but it's BAD AND EVIL AND WRONG and you really should convert to something else." -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Kent West wrote: > I believe you misunderstand Joey's post. He's not asking for any help. > He's just pointing out to Steve Lamb that Steve has ignored his previous > post, which follows this timeline (as I recall it). I haven't ignored it. I am just not prone to "me too" posts. If I agree with a post what's the point of sending a message with that little content? > Steve ignored this bit in favor of continuing to argue that Debian > should be doing something for Steve's benefit which is neither legal nor > in line with the Debian philosophy. No. I am not advocating that Debian do anything legal. But there is a wide gap between what is legal and what is acceptable by the DSC and thus a focus of Debian at large. Joey's pointed out a fine example of what would be a problem and a possible work around. But that is but one, specific, example and not applicable to all possible scenarios. Point is not all proprietary drivers have such complex issues as the one he cited. Not all proprietary software have the licensing issues that Java has. Debian, as a project, can gain a whole lot more if it were to address more of that middle ground instead of turning it's nose way up when it comes to such issues. Hell, if people think Debian has so much clout why not approach these vendors asking permission for distribution! These vendors don't seem opposed to other OSes packaging up their drivers for redistribution. I mean, as I wrote this message I decided to do some research and find out why ATI drivers aren't included based on a legal precedence and not one based on the social contract. After 10 minutes I had yet to find a license on ATI's page much less one restricting redistribution. Could someone please provide a pointer, I honestly want to see for myself. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Christopher Nelson wrote: > Did you buy it knowing you were going to use it under linux? If so, > it's you problem. If not, the answer's simple--don't give them any more > money and tell us, so we don't give them money until they rectify the > situation. I bought it based on recommendations *on this very list* as well as pointers *from this list* to sites that recommended it. > No, but the driver and module source are in non-free, and this page: > http://xoomer.virgilio.it/flavio.stanchina/debian/fglrx-installer.html#install > lists 4 seperate ways to build the module, none of which seem difficult. > Sub kernel-source for linux-headers and it should all work smoothly. That's the page I was referring to. "none of which seem difficult" tells me you've never done it. Thank you for proving me right. > They do address their userbase--the people who want to follow the social > contract. They also allow the most common 'non-free' things to be done > easily. What more do you want? A little more pragmatism and a little less haughty zealotry. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 10:08:12PM -0600, Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > On 2006-04-22, Steve Lamb penned: > > > > Funny, the #1 point for most people is apt, not the social > > contract. #1 for *you* maybe. > > Who are these most people, and why should it matter to the developers > what "most people" want when they're not paying customers? > Hi Monique, propietary software developers are paid to make the company profitable and this is done when users buy the software. If the users dont buy the software, the company finds out why and asks the developers to fix things that will make the users buy the software. This is not a complete model as users do not get a direct say but things like photoshop or quicken seem to get high praise from users after every new release. In this context, free software user can never buy the software from a company because their is no company and their is no legal monetary contact between Debian and its developers and thus no one can make the free software developers do anything. The free software model does allow a free market whereby any other developer can be paid or convinced to do what you want. But it seems the free software developers are usually simply 'scratching their itch' to their satisfaction and others may or may not like the result. And the average users is more or less powerless to force the free software developer to listen to them sans forking over money and the developers accepting a contract to do what they want. There are other reasons free software developers listen to users including their commitment to social and moral principals and issues but it does not guarentee the same result as in a commercial setting. Obviously one difference is that propietary software developers use restrictive licenses. cheers, Kev -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System| go to counter.li.org and | | `-http://www.debian.org/ |be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On 2006-04-22, Steve Lamb penned: > > Funny, the #1 point for most people is apt, not the social > contract. #1 for *you* maybe. Who are these most people, and why should it matter to the developers what "most people" want when they're not paying customers? -- monique Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On 2006-04-22, Steve Lamb penned: > > Same drivers installed on Mepis, one mouseclick, not even 5 > minutes. And Mepis is Debian based so there's nothing there > that Debian couldn't do if it wanted to be more than a badge of > pride and actually attempt to address t he userbase every once > and a while. Here's what I don't understand: If you like what other distributions do better, why are you so busy trying to convince debian to change? Why not just switch to one of the several distros you've mentioned? -- monique Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 22:13 -0500, Kent West wrote: > Christopher Nelson wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 07:31:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > > > >> Christopher Nelson wrote: > >> Major snips > > -- > Kent Thanks Kent. I was lost, and you gave me some light. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On 2006-04-23, Christopher Nelson penned: > On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 07:31:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: >> Christopher Nelson wrote: >> > I have no idea what post you're talking about since you didn't >> > quote it. >> >> I was referring to my only other post to this thread, namely >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > > Okay, after some searching I found it (at: > http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20060421.170836.4a9c52cc.en.html > for the interested) and I'm afraid I cannot comment too much on it. > I also don't know how much useful response you would get here, even > if the post weren't buried in a thread such as this (I know the > detail would be way over my head). Maybe sending a similar message > to the install team (of which, by you sig in that message, I assume > you are a member?) would prompt more interest? Er, Christopher, you might want to take a look at the email address Joey uses and consider the context of his message. Hint: http://people.debian.org/~joey/ -- monique Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Christopher Nelson wrote: > Okay, after some searching I found it (at: > http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20060421.170836.4a9c52cc.en.html > for the interested) and I'm afraid I cannot comment too much on it. I > also don't know how much useful response you would get here, even if the > post weren't buried in a thread such as this (I know the detail would be > way over my head). Maybe sending a similar message to the install team > (of which, by you sig in that message, I assume you are a member?) would > prompt more interest? Er, my point is that whinging about Debian's policy not allowing it to support installing to hardware that needs non-free drivers is pointless when there are examples of hardware that needs non-free drivers which Debian has been made to install to just fine. Most of this thread is based on false assumptions. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Christopher Nelson wrote: > On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 07:31:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > >> Christopher Nelson wrote: >> >>> I have no idea what post you're talking about since you didn't quote it. >>> >> I was referring to my only other post to this thread, namely >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. >> > > Okay, after some searching I found it (at: > http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20060421.170836.4a9c52cc.en.html > for the interested) and I'm afraid I cannot comment too much on it. I > also don't know how much useful response you would get here, even if the > post weren't buried in a thread such as this (I know the detail would be > way over my head). Maybe sending a similar message to the install team > (of which, by you sig in that message, I assume you are a member?) would > prompt more interest? > > I believe you misunderstand Joey's post. He's not asking for any help. He's just pointing out to Steve Lamb that Steve has ignored his previous post, which follows this timeline (as I recall it). Steve Lamb was arguing that Debian should support hardware as best as possible, even if that means including non-free drivers. He was also essentially claiming that Debian's position of refusing to use non-open software is the antithesis of "open software", by removing the choice of using closed software. Joey, a Debian Developer (DD), essentially said that nothing is stopping Steve from developing an open solution for any particular piece of hardware. Joey continued on with an example of a closed driver for a certain NIC, which actually would be illegal for Debian to distribute. Note that it's not Debian that is not being "open"; it's the proprietary driver. Steve, in this thread, appears to care less about the principles of Free Software than he does the practical use of free software. Others have pointed out that the "Freedom" aspect of Debian is very important (as in "very!") to some of us Debianites; the implication being that Debian is for those who care about the philosophy of Freedom, and perhaps another distro would be more suitable for those who care about practicalities. Joey Hess (aka "see shy jo") seemed, to me, to be pointing out that Steve ignored this bit in favor of continuing to argue that Debian should be doing something for Steve's benefit which is neither legal nor in line with the Debian philosophy. Apologies to Joey and Steve if I've misrepresented you in any way. Curious on-lookers are encouraged to read the entire thread for themselves, which appears to start here: http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2006/04/msg02779.html -- Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 07:31:56PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Christopher Nelson wrote: > > I have no idea what post you're talking about since you didn't quote it. > > I was referring to my only other post to this thread, namely > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Okay, after some searching I found it (at: http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20060421.170836.4a9c52cc.en.html for the interested) and I'm afraid I cannot comment too much on it. I also don't know how much useful response you would get here, even if the post weren't buried in a thread such as this (I know the detail would be way over my head). Maybe sending a similar message to the install team (of which, by you sig in that message, I assume you are a member?) would prompt more interest? -- Christopher Nelson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- It's been a business doing pleasure with you. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Christopher Nelson wrote: > I have no idea what post you're talking about since you didn't quote it. I was referring to my only other post to this thread, namely <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 06:13:42PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Congrats on ignoring my message to this thread and contining with > semi-uselesss discussions on issues that were addressed in it, rather > than doing anything useful or interesting.. If you didn't get an answer to a question, care to bring it up again? I have no idea what post you're talking about since you didn't quote it. If you bring it up and I have knowledge, I'll try and answer it. -- Christopher Nelson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Keep cool. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 02:30:34PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > Paul Johnson wrote: > > First, there isn't an Ethernet card Linux can't find these days, so that's > > kind of an empty argument. > > Bull, Paul. Want me to mail you the one that's useless for me since it > wasn't detected and the documentation to get it going was beyond confusing? > It's best use right now is a paper weight. Did you buy it knowing you were going to use it under linux? If so, it's you problem. If not, the answer's simple--don't give them any more money and tell us, so we don't give them money until they rectify the situation. > > Second, so you go spend five minutes on nvidia.com downloading the drivers, > > and another five to install them. Big fat hairy deal. If you're so pent > > up > > about it, why not go make your own apt-source and slap it into your own > > unofficial/non-free? > > *looks at the ATI card in his machine* > > What good will those nVidia drivers do me? Okay. :%s/nvidia/ati/g > Have you built the ATI drivers > from scratch? No, but the driver and module source are in non-free, and this page: http://xoomer.virgilio.it/flavio.stanchina/debian/fglrx-installer.html#install lists 4 seperate ways to build the module, none of which seem difficult. Sub kernel-source for linux-headers and it should all work smoothly. > If you're saying 5 minutes I'm betting you're talking out your > posterior if you claim you have. It wasn't even 5 minutes the first time I > did it *following a well written, step-by-step guide on the web!* It was more > like an hour. Subsequent installs when I knew the basic process droped to, > maybe... 30 minutes. It seems you're doing something wrong then. It should take about 5 commands, and take less than 7 minutes (I just did it while writing this email). However, you can't be using xorg 7 as fglrx-driver currently depends on <6.9.99 -- but that'll be cleared up quickly. Two commands after it's built--one 'dpkg -i', one 'modprobe'. > Same drivers installed on Mepis, one mouseclick, not even 5 minutes. And > Mepis is Debian based so there's nothing there that Debian couldn't do if it > wanted to be more than a badge of pride and actually attempt to address the > userbase every once and a while. They do address their userbase--the people who want to follow the social contract. They also allow the most common 'non-free' things to be done easily. What more do you want? -- Christopher Nelson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Did YOU find a DIGITAL WATCH in YOUR box of VELVEETA? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 01:34:51PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Saturday 22 April 2006 13:04, Steve Lamb wrote: > > Paul Johnson wrote: > > > There's nothing stopping you from installing nonfree software on your > > > system. You just probably won't be able to apt-get it. Case in point: > > > You can get games for Linux at WalMart for around $20 per title. > > > > Sure there is. We're talking about the install here. Network card not > > found. Hmm, kinda hard to install if I can't get to the net to install > > anything. Video card not configured, there goes games. Hm, no net, no > > video, there goes Debian. > > First, there isn't an Ethernet card Linux can't find these days, so that's > kind of an empty argument. > > Second, so you go spend five minutes on nvidia.com downloading the drivers, > and another five to install them. Big fat hairy deal. If you're so pent up > about it, why not go make your own apt-source and slap it into your own > unofficial/non-free? Afraid I have to back Steve Lamb here - The Debian Etch net install I downloaded on April 12th failed to detect both ethernet *and* CD drive on my Fujitsu Lifebook - either one would have been a bit of a show stopper. The CD drive problem was resolved by a fix to the problem workaround instructions in the release notes - thanks to some help from the kind help from the Debian install developers (a switch to the daily build and alternate workaround instructions also worked). The failure of the ipw2200 networking was a Debian policy issue preventing the firmware being included on the install CD. My Debian install is working fine now, but the bottom line is that the Ubuntu install was up and running a lot sooner and with a lot less effort. For the record, my distribution of choice at the moment is still Debian, because I prefer flexibility over simplicity. That is why I am on this list. But the original assertion was that Ubuntu is simpler to install, and my experience supports that. Of course ease of setup isn't everything, otherwise we would all be using what came pre-installed ;) Regards, DigbyT -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com http://www.digbyt.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > On Saturday 22 April 2006 14:14, Steve Lamb wrote: > >> Monique Y. Mudama wrote: >> >>> Well, debian is pretty obvious about its purpose. It's a link right >>> from the front page. Maybe people should be choosing other distros if >>> they don't like bullet item number one of the social contract. Debian >>> without the social contract would be just another distro. In other >>> words, there would be no point to using debian without the contract. >>> >> Funny, the #1 point for most people is apt, not the social contract. >> #1 for *you* maybe. >> > Include my name in the list of "people for whom socila contract is the #1 > point". I use debian because of its commitment to free software (which is part > of social contract) not because it has apt or some other cool software. > > raju > Include my name in the list of "people for whom social contract is the #1 point" also. When Debian ceases to be Free, then Debian ceases to retain my loyalty. -- Kent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Congrats on ignoring my message to this thread and contining with semi-uselesss discussions on issues that were addressed in it, rather than doing anything useful or interesting.. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Paul Johnson wrote: > First, there isn't an Ethernet card Linux can't find these days, so that's > kind of an empty argument. Bull, Paul. Want me to mail you the one that's useless for me since it wasn't detected and the documentation to get it going was beyond confusing? It's best use right now is a paper weight. > Second, so you go spend five minutes on nvidia.com downloading the drivers, > and another five to install them. Big fat hairy deal. If you're so pent up > about it, why not go make your own apt-source and slap it into your own > unofficial/non-free? *looks at the ATI card in his machine* What good will those nVidia drivers do me? Have you built the ATI drivers from scratch? If you're saying 5 minutes I'm betting you're talking out your posterior if you claim you have. It wasn't even 5 minutes the first time I did it *following a well written, step-by-step guide on the web!* It was more like an hour. Subsequent installs when I knew the basic process droped to, maybe... 30 minutes. Same drivers installed on Mepis, one mouseclick, not even 5 minutes. And Mepis is Debian based so there's nothing there that Debian couldn't do if it wanted to be more than a badge of pride and actually attempt to address the userbase every once and a while. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Saturday 22 April 2006 13:04, Steve Lamb wrote: > Paul Johnson wrote: > > There's nothing stopping you from installing nonfree software on your > > system. You just probably won't be able to apt-get it. Case in point: > > You can get games for Linux at WalMart for around $20 per title. > > Sure there is. We're talking about the install here. Network card not > found. Hmm, kinda hard to install if I can't get to the net to install > anything. Video card not configured, there goes games. Hm, no net, no > video, there goes Debian. First, there isn't an Ethernet card Linux can't find these days, so that's kind of an empty argument. Second, so you go spend five minutes on nvidia.com downloading the drivers, and another five to install them. Big fat hairy deal. If you're so pent up about it, why not go make your own apt-source and slap it into your own unofficial/non-free? -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpYuPthyigAp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 01:04:09PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > Paul Johnson wrote: > > There's nothing stopping you from installing nonfree software on your > > system. > > You just probably won't be able to apt-get it. Case in point: You can get > > games for Linux at WalMart for around $20 per title. > > Sure there is. We're talking about the install here. Network card not > found. Hmm, kinda hard to install if I can't get to the net to install > anything. Video card not configured, there goes games. Hm, no net, no video, > there goes Debian. Net: There are plenty of network cards supported by the debian installer, and a little research will turn up what they are. If you can get one, you find and download the cd with, for example, madwifi-source and linux-headers- and install them that way to get your network card working. Video: Usually all it takes is knowing what video card you have and what driver it uses and choosing that when you configure X. Even less research than network cards. And if it isn't supported by a driver 'vesa' will almost always work. Would you buy hardware for Windows on an i386 without checking if it was designed for an incompatible machine? Or seeing what other people's experience with it has been? Neither should you for Debian, or for any other GNU/Linux system. If you check back in the archives from earlier this month, you'll see people asking for suggestions for hardware that works under Debian, and getting kind responses. If you want your software vendor to be in bed with your hardware vendor, it's either Windows or a Mac or other proprietary system. Sorry. -- Christopher Nelson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- List each check separately by bank number. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 11:14 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > Monique Y. Mudama wrote: [snip] > > > I don't even understand this paragraph. > > 1% = total Linux install. I'd say 5%, but that's just a quibble. > Subset of 1% = Debian's cut of the above. More like 20%. > IE, if Debian users have some dillusions of the power they currently wield > with hardware vendors they really need to be disabused of that notion. > Increase the Linux install base to 10% which would put Debian's install base > about on par with Mac OSX now and you might see hardware vendors giving a > crap. Until then Debian is doing itself no favors my being obstructionist and > driving people away based on it's own restrictive use clauses. Oracle seems to be waking up to Debian. You can now install Oracle 10g Express. deb http://oss.oracle.com/debian unstable main non-free ii oracle-xe 10.2.0.1-1.0 Oracle Database 10g Express Western European Edition ii oracle-xe-client 10.2.0.1-1.1 Oracle Client 10g Express Edition -- - Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA All of the "reporting" about Laci Peterson & Michael Jackson reminds me of the Don Henley song "Dirty Laundry": "Can we do the operation? Is the head dead yet? You know, the boys in the newsroom got a running bet. Get the widow on the set, we need dirty laundry." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Paul Johnson wrote: > There's nothing stopping you from installing nonfree software on your system. > > You just probably won't be able to apt-get it. Case in point: You can get > games for Linux at WalMart for around $20 per title. Sure there is. We're talking about the install here. Network card not found. Hmm, kinda hard to install if I can't get to the net to install anything. Video card not configured, there goes games. Hm, no net, no video, there goes Debian. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Saturday 22 April 2006 11:14, Steve Lamb wrote: > Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > > Well, debian is pretty obvious about its purpose. It's a link right > > from the front page. Maybe people should be choosing other distros if > > they don't like bullet item number one of the social contract. Debian > > without the social contract would be just another distro. In other > > words, there would be no point to using debian without the contract. > > Funny, the #1 point for most people is apt, not the social contract. > #1 for *you* maybe. I arrived in late 1996 after my Windows install floppies would no longer work. Being a high school freshman at the time, I had no way to afford new install media. The DFSG was exactly what I was looking for in a new operating system. > Until then Debian is doing itself no favors my being obstructionist and > driving people away based on it's own restrictive use clauses. There's nothing stopping you from installing nonfree software on your system. You just probably won't be able to apt-get it. Case in point: You can get games for Linux at WalMart for around $20 per title. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpqrWRBl00Ig.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Saturday 22 April 2006 14:14, Steve Lamb wrote: > Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > > Well, debian is pretty obvious about its purpose. It's a link right > > from the front page. Maybe people should be choosing other distros if > > they don't like bullet item number one of the social contract. Debian > > without the social contract would be just another distro. In other > > words, there would be no point to using debian without the contract. > > Funny, the #1 point for most people is apt, not the social contract. > #1 for *you* maybe. > Include my name in the list of "people for whom socila contract is the #1 point". I use debian because of its commitment to free software (which is part of social contract) not because it has apt or some other cool software. raju -- http://kamaraju.googlepages.com/cornell-bazaar http://groups.google.com/group/cornell-bazaar/about -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Monique Y. Mudama wrote: > Well, debian is pretty obvious about its purpose. It's a link right > from the front page. Maybe people should be choosing other distros if > they don't like bullet item number one of the social contract. Debian > without the social contract would be just another distro. In other > words, there would be no point to using debian without the contract. Funny, the #1 point for most people is apt, not the social contract. #1 for *you* maybe. >> And if more people are won over and stay here and start >> demanding for the same from those developers stuff gets done. >> 1% ain't gonna cut it. And a subset of 1% certainly ain't >> gonna cut it. > I don't even understand this paragraph. 1% = total Linux install. Subset of 1% = Debian's cut of the above. IE, if Debian users have some dillusions of the power they currently wield with hardware vendors they really need to be disabused of that notion. Increase the Linux install base to 10% which would put Debian's install base about on par with Mac OSX now and you might see hardware vendors giving a crap. Until then Debian is doing itself no favors my being obstructionist and driving people away based on it's own restrictive use clauses. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On 2006-04-21, Steve Lamb penned: > > Because Debian sucks just as much. What wins people over? It > certai nly isn't "Oh, well, that can work if you do this and > this and this..." Know what most do "Ok, fine, hi Bill, here's > another $300 for the pro edition this 3 years. See you in 3 > more." Well, debian is pretty obvious about its purpose. It's a link right from the front page. Maybe people should be choosing other distros if they don't like bullet item number one of the social contract. Debian without the social contract would be just another distro. In other words, there would be no point to using debian without the contract. > And if more people are won over and stay here and start > demanding for the same from those developers stuff gets done. > 1% ain't gonna cut it. And a subset of 1% certainly ain't > gonna cut it. I don't even understand this paragraph. -- monique Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 08:55:15AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > Digby Tarvin wrote: > > > > My personal experience has been that it us much easier and faster to get > > a workable system installed using Ubuntu, but Debian is the more versatile > > once you have spent the time getting it setup correctly. > > That has not been my experience at all. I can get a "workable system" > installed just as fast or faster with Debian as with Ubuntu. I really > see no difference in this respect. Well, I did say 'My personal experience', and gave specific examples where I hope the difference was clear enough. Feel free to give counter examples of where Debian worked better.. > > Ubuntu is certainly much better at providing a quick indication of how > > well supported your hardware is. > > > How so? Ubuntu told me that it was possible to get my wireless device running under Linux. If I had just tried a Debian install disk, I would not have known that it wasn't working because the firmware was deemed non-kosher. It is all very well to say I can find out by searching the web, but I would rather see it working before buying the computer and hoping that the manufacturer hasn't changed something.. The Ubuntu installer also seemed to be more successful getting hardware to work even when there was no licensing problems, such as my CD/DVD, which is pretty crucial to a successful install. I am sure there are many systems, probably a majority, where Debian and Ubuntu will both install equally well. But my personal experience has been that when one doesn't work, it is more likely to be Debian. I don't think ease of installation is a good reason to base your final choice of distribution, because with luck it is something that is done fairly infrequently. But I have found Ubuntu a good quick start to get me up and going while I work on getting the wrinkles ironed out of a Debian install. > > I have both installed on my notebook currently. Ubuntu installed very > > easily, > > although didn't manage to get Xorg configured optimally. Debian's installer > > did not detect my CD-ROM drive till I moved to the latest testing installer, > > and used a problem workaround from the web site. When the install completed > > I > > still had to manually configure and install the X system before I had a > > workable X server, but now it is working even better than the Ubuntu > > installed server. Ubuntu configured and used my wireless interface > > correctly > > during install, but Debian don't support using it for installation, and the > > installation does not install what is needed because of licensing/openness > > concerns. Having gone to the Intel web site and downloaded the firmware > > manuall, it now works. But as a user this is an inconvenience - I don't > > think many people are going to decide not to use some key piece of hardware > > on their computer even though a driver is available, purely on the grounds > > of > > open source philosophy. And once you have bought the machine, it is no skin > > off the manufacturers nose either way. > > > > Consequently I think Debian's more restrictive policy on hardware support > > during and after installation is a disadvantage. By all means give > > preference > > to free and open software where there are alternatives, but the time to > > worry > > about the open source friendlyness of the hardware is when making the > > original > > purchase, not during the install. > > > Then Debian's goal of a completely free and unecumbered operating system > are not completely in sync with your goals of a system with maximum > functionality. Basically there is a tradeoff to be made. Take Java for > example. Debian cannot distribute the Sun JVM. This is because part of > Sun's terms for distributing their JVM is that you don't simultaneously > distribute anyone else's. Thus, if Debian agreed to those terms, it > would not be possible to have Kaffe, SableVM and other free Java > implementations officially as part of the distro. I think driver support for the hardware you have paid for is a somewhat different issue to software applications. I am entirely in agreement with Debian's goal of achieving a free and unencumbered operating system, but we differ slightly in views on how best to achieve the goal. Fujitsu, and hence Intel, is not going to care one little bit if I and other Debian users forgo the use of our wireless interfaces once we own the hardware. If, on the other hand, I (and many like me) had walked into the store with a 'Debian hardware evaluation CD' and rejected the machine because the CD recognised the ipw2200 device warned about the manufacturers shortcomings, then we achieve out goal of providing an incentive for manufacturers to improve their game. In the case of Java, there are alternatives so by all means go for the unencumbered ones only. If there are no alternatives, then the current scheme of using separate repositories is fine. > Additionally, i
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Saturday 22 April 2006 09:50, Andrei Popescu wrote: > Kamaraju Kusumanchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Friday 21 April 2006 09:53, Chris Lale wrote: > > > Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > > > >6) Have something up and running in no time for a desktop > > > > Ubuntu wins over debian any moment. > > > > > > I don't follow this. Install just one package (KDE or Gnome) and you > > > have an instant, fully functional desktop. > > > > The point is that, in Ubuntu, you do not need to do EVEN THAT single > > step. It will install gnome for you right away. It is basically a > > defaults question. The Debian guys felt that the default set up is to not > > have any DEs installed. The Ubuntu guys felt that it would be cool to > > install GNOME without bothering the user. Both have different goals and > > are targetted to different users. Both decisions are good. It is an issue > > with defaults. > > > > raju > > During the install, Debian has a step of choosing the 'task', where > you can choose between 'Desktop', 'Mail Server' and some others (the > details are for the OP if he is still reading). Choosing the 'Desktop' > task will get you *both* KDE and Gnome, and lots of other stuff useful > on a Desktop machine. (K)Ubuntu skips this step altogether and installs > a predefined set of packages, similar to the Debian 'Desktop' task. So, > as you can see, the big difference is that Debian will let you choose, > from the beginning, what your machine will be, while turning a (K)Ubuntu > into a server requires additional steps, like installing an MTA, > discussed in another thread. i consider another procedure still better. leave task(sel) beside. install the base-packages from the [*net*]-installer cd, and set-up as root [#] whatever you want: in my case kdebase, libgtk-dev pacjages &&. kind regards, steef > > Andrei > -- > If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. > (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Kamaraju Kusumanchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 21 April 2006 09:53, Chris Lale wrote: > > Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > > >6) Have something up and running in no time for a desktop > > > Ubuntu wins over debian any moment. > > > > I don't follow this. Install just one package (KDE or Gnome) and you > > have an instant, fully functional desktop. > > The point is that, in Ubuntu, you do not need to do EVEN THAT single step. It > will install gnome for you right away. It is basically a defaults question. > The Debian guys felt that the default set up is to not have any DEs installed. > The Ubuntu guys felt that it would be cool to install GNOME without bothering > the user. Both have different goals and are targetted to different users. Both > decisions are good. It is an issue with defaults. > > raju During the install, Debian has a step of choosing the 'task', where you can choose between 'Desktop', 'Mail Server' and some others (the details are for the OP if he is still reading). Choosing the 'Desktop' task will get you *both* KDE and Gnome, and lots of other stuff useful on a Desktop machine. (K)Ubuntu skips this step altogether and installs a predefined set of packages, similar to the Debian 'Desktop' task. So, as you can see, the big difference is that Debian will let you choose, from the beginning, what your machine will be, while turning a (K)Ubuntu into a server requires additional steps, like installing an MTA, discussed in another thread. Andrei -- If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. (Albert Einstein) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Saturday 22 April 2006 00:11, Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > On Friday 21 April 2006 09:53, Chris Lale wrote: > > Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > > >6) Have something up and running in no time for a desktop > > > Ubuntu wins over debian any moment. > > > > I don't follow this. Install just one package (KDE or Gnome) and you > > have an instant, fully functional desktop. > > The point is that, in Ubuntu, you do not need to do EVEN THAT single step. > It will install gnome for you right away. It is basically a defaults > question. The Debian guys felt that the default set up is to not have any > DEs installed. The Ubuntu guys felt that it would be cool to install GNOME > without bothering the user. Both have different goals and are targetted to > different users. Both decisions are good. no. not in my opinion. want to make my own choices. what you consider as 'bothering' is for me a free choice. reg., steef > It is an issue with defaults. > > raju > > -- > http://kamaraju.googlepages.com/cornell-bazaar > http://groups.google.com/group/cornell-bazaar/about -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Friday 21 April 2006 16:31, Steve Lamb wrote: > Paul Johnson wrote: > > Instead of ranting at how Debian sucks for taking the moral high ground, > > why not rag on developers that take the moral low ground with inferior > > and proprietary licensing? Why should Debian play nicely with developers > > that won't play nice themselves? Why should Debian accomodate them? > > Debian's not the one who sucks here... > > Because Debian sucks just as much. What wins people over? It > certainly isn't "Oh, well, that can work if you do this and this and > this..." Know what most do "Ok, fine, hi Bill, here's another $300 for the > pro edition this 3 years. See you in 3 more." Maybe on a planet where there are no people to make intelligent IT decisions. In the real world, organizations are looking to move away from Windows but are stuck by some obscure proprietary NT-only industry-specific program. If this isn't reality, then I guess the last five companies I worked for are unique. > Ultimatism and zealotry on both sides are just as bad. "You can't use > this because we say you can't." "You can't use this because we say its > BAD." What-ever. Nobody's saying you can't go get your proprietary software from the appropriate sources. Nobody is telling you otherwise. Debian just isn't the appropriate source. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpUXu71Bbvju.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 03:58:20PM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > > The Ubuntu guys felt that it would be cool to install GNOME without > > bothering > > the user. Both have different goals and are targetted to different users. > > Both > > decisions are good. It is an issue with defaults. > > And, of course, why there's UBUNTU and KUBUNTU. Waiting for XUBUNTU > myself. ;) Assuming you're talking XFCE, there is one: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Xubuntu Not sure of it's 'doneness' though, may be alpha quality, I haven't looked at Ubuntu in awhile. -- Christopher Nelson -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- The trouble with telling a good story is that it invariably reminds the other fellow of a dull one. -- Sid Caesar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Paul Johnson wrote: > Instead of ranting at how Debian sucks for taking the moral high ground, why > not rag on developers that take the moral low ground with inferior and > proprietary licensing? Why should Debian play nicely with developers that > won't play nice themselves? Why should Debian accomodate them? Debian's not > the one who sucks here... Because Debian sucks just as much. What wins people over? It certainly isn't "Oh, well, that can work if you do this and this and this..." Know what most do "Ok, fine, hi Bill, here's another $300 for the pro edition this 3 years. See you in 3 more." And if more people are won over and stay here and start demanding for the same from those developers stuff gets done. 1% ain't gonna cut it. And a subset of 1% certainly ain't gonna cut it. Ultimatism and zealotry on both sides are just as bad. "You can't use this because we say you can't." "You can't use this because we say its BAD." What-ever. Like I said up front, freedom, true freedom, means both the capacity to succeed and fail. Succeed at running a pure OSS system or fail to do so. But that is *MY* failure or *MY* success and not something that should be dictated from on high on *either* side. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 15:58 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote: > And, of course, why there's UBUNTU and KUBUNTU. Waiting for XUBUNTU > myself. ;) I want IceBUNTU :-) Hans -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Friday 21 April 2006 14:03, Steve Lamb wrote: > Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > > What if the not-so-open alternative is not redistributable without some > > sort of licensing agreement. Then the Debian project can strike an > > agrement with the developers, but then you would not be allowed to make > > copies and give them to your friends. > > I'd be fine with that if it were like Mandrakes "community" and > "professional". Share one, use the other. > > Look, comes down to this. I'm tired of wrangling with my machine to do > anything on both sides of the fence. Windows is pissing me off daily and > this constant fighting for the basic stuff now on the Linux side is pissing > me off just as much. Instead of ranting at how Debian sucks for taking the moral high ground, why not rag on developers that take the moral low ground with inferior and proprietary licensing? Why should Debian play nicely with developers that won't play nice themselves? Why should Debian accomodate them? Debian's not the one who sucks here... -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpxUM6lzf99Y.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > The Ubuntu guys felt that it would be cool to install GNOME without bothering > the user. Both have different goals and are targetted to different users. Both > decisions are good. It is an issue with defaults. And, of course, why there's UBUNTU and KUBUNTU. Waiting for XUBUNTU myself. ;) -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Friday 21 April 2006 09:53, Chris Lale wrote: > Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: > >6) Have something up and running in no time for a desktop > > Ubuntu wins over debian any moment. > > I don't follow this. Install just one package (KDE or Gnome) and you > have an instant, fully functional desktop. The point is that, in Ubuntu, you do not need to do EVEN THAT single step. It will install gnome for you right away. It is basically a defaults question. The Debian guys felt that the default set up is to not have any DEs installed. The Ubuntu guys felt that it would be cool to install GNOME without bothering the user. Both have different goals and are targetted to different users. Both decisions are good. It is an issue with defaults. raju -- http://kamaraju.googlepages.com/cornell-bazaar http://groups.google.com/group/cornell-bazaar/about -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > What if the not-so-open alternative is not redistributable without some > sort of licensing agreement. Then the Debian project can strike an > agrement with the developers, but then you would not be allowed to make > copies and give them to your friends. I'd be fine with that if it were like Mandrakes "community" and "professional". Share one, use the other. Look, comes down to this. I'm tired of wrangling with my machine to do anything on both sides of the fence. Windows is pissing me off daily and this constant fighting for the basic stuff now on the Linux side is pissing me off just as much. For a time my Linux box did what I wanted to do. World zipped by and not the restrictions are mounting. :/ If only more game developers would produce for the Mac I'd switch in a heartbeat. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Chris Lale wrote: > Ha! This put Debian 4th on my list - use with caution. On the other hand it is how I found about Mepis. :D -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Chris Lale wrote:
Andrew Schulman wrote:
I am new to LINUX and somewhat dismaid/confused about the various
distributions.
Maybe the Linux Distribution Chooser can help:
http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/index.php?firsttime=true .
Ha! This put Debian 4th on my list - use with caution.
Chris.
Ha! indeed. That web page requires both cookies and java,
both of which are themselves security risks. I guess I'll
never find out which distro is right for me.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Steve Lamb wrote: > Digby Tarvin wrote: > > Consequently I think Debian's more restrictive policy on hardware support > > during and after installation is a disadvantage. By all means give > > preference > > to free and open software where there are alternatives, but the time to > > worry > > about the open source friendlyness of the hardware is when making the > > original > > purchase, not during the install. > > I agree. I'm all for openness and freedom, don't get me wrong. But I > hardly see how openness and freedom that forces people into a certain position > is either open or free. It's just another close position. If it is our > machine then where's the fault in us doing what we want with it? Especially > in cases where a free and open alternative often doesn't exist. You know, there's nothing stopping anyone who wants Debian to support installing to hardware that needs a non-free driver from adding that support. For example, the NSLU2 is a sub-$100 network attached storage device that can run Debian. It's one of the cheapest and best ways to add an ARM architecture machine to your network and makes an excellent tiny and silent Debian server. Its ethernet controller needs the extremely non-free ixp400 driver which has a license that only allows it to be distributed after showing a click-through license to the user. This prevents including the driver in Debian (main or non-free) (or in Ubuntu AFAIK); it would be really annoying if installing Debian meant clicking through dozens of licenses like this. However, the NSLU2 is already well-supported by Debian, and will soon be excellently supported; you can click through the license and download an installation image including the problimatic driver from www.slug-firmware.net, the installer will soon take care of copying that driver onto the system it installs and automatically loading it. The installer's documentation points users who need an image with the ethernet driver to www.slug-firmware.net (those who have a USB NIC can instead use it with images distributed directly by Debian), and there are support packages in Debian that provide hooks for using the driver. This solution is entirely consistent with Debian's principles of freedom, while also being extremely pragmatic. IMHO it will also help lead to a free version of the ixp400 driver eventually, by expanding the community of freedom-concious NSLU2 users. This is actually an extreme case, since most non-free drivers are not quite as obnoxiously non-free as the ixp400 driver; many of them are included in Debian non-free. Some, like the ndiswrapper, are even in Debian proper. It should be even easier to integrate such drivers into the installer. For example all that needs doing for ndiswrapper is: 1) Someone doing the work to keep ndiswrapper kernel modules in Debian up-to-date with the current version of the kernel in Debian, which is not currently being done. 2) Someone writing the necessary code to let the installer prompt or a windows driver CD, pull the windows drivers off it and feed them to ndiswrapper. (I'll tell you what: someone take care of #1, and I'll do #2.) This solution would again be completly consistent with Debian's principles while also as pragmatic a solution as is possible. There are other approaches possible for other sorts of non-free drivers, but in all cases the limiting factor is someone to do the work to integrate it into Debian. -- see shy jo, with his debian-installer team hat on, sending this message via a NSLU2 that acts as his dialup internet gateway and squid cache, and that's running the non-free ixp400 driver signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Steve Lamb wrote:
Digby Tarvin wrote:
Consequently I think Debian's more restrictive policy on hardware support
during and after installation is a disadvantage. By all means give preference
to free and open software where there are alternatives, but the time to worry
about the open source friendlyness of the hardware is when making the original
purchase, not during the install.
I agree. I'm all for openness and freedom, don't get me wrong. But I
hardly see how openness and freedom that forces people into a certain position
is either open or free. It's just another close position. If it is our
machine then where's the fault in us doing what we want with it? Especially
in cases where a free and open alternative often doesn't exist.
This is a very reasonable and sensible position. Unfortunately,
in fora like this one, making such a reasonable and straightforward
statement can get you flamed. I once made some statements about
Open Office, and how it has some shortcuts which really shouldn't
be there, and why I used MicroSoft Word to do a resume when
a prospective employer specifically asked for Word format, and
got flamed (not here) severely, and chastised for "playing their
game" and contributing to everything evil (presumably to global
warming as well :-).
Not here, it's true (I won't mention the mail echo name), but
you may need to gird your loins with asbestos underwear.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote: 6) Have something up and running in no time for a desktop Ubuntu wins over debian any moment. I don't follow this. Install just one package (KDE or Gnome) and you have an instant, fully functional desktop. Chris. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Andrew Schulman wrote: I am new to LINUX and somewhat dismaid/confused about the various distributions. Maybe the Linux Distribution Chooser can help: http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/index.php?firsttime=true . Ha! This put Debian 4th on my list - use with caution. Chris. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Fernando Augusto Bender wrote: > On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 09:01 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > >>Steve Lamb wrote: >> >>>I agree. I'm all for openness and freedom, don't get me wrong. But I >>>hardly see how openness and freedom that forces people into a certain >>>position >>>is either open or free. It's just another close position. If it is our >>>machine then where's the fault in us doing what we want with it? Especially >>>in cases where a free and open alternative often doesn't exist. >>> >> >>What if the not-so-open alternative is not redistributable without some >>sort of licensing agreement. Then the Debian project can strike an >>agrement with the developers, but then you would not be allowed to make >>copies and give them to your friends. >> >>-Roberto >> > > > I don't think so. I moved to Debian because it has a strong appeal for > the concept of freedom, and what is close to - to be on your own. > > The Debian community is an effort t overcome this loneliness without > taking of the freedom. > > In my humble opinion, GPL is the only agreement we need. > > Fortuna fortes adjuvat. I agree with you. I simply responding to Steve's idea that even free and open alternatives don't exist, we should do something. For example, if wireless card A has no free drivers, but there are drivers available from the manufacturer under some ornerous license, we should provide those since something (even under restrictive terms) is better than nothing. My point was that doing such things might make Debian to the point where redistributing it becomes impossible. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 09:01 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > Steve Lamb wrote: > > > > I agree. I'm all for openness and freedom, don't get me wrong. But I > > hardly see how openness and freedom that forces people into a certain > > position > > is either open or free. It's just another close position. If it is our > > machine then where's the fault in us doing what we want with it? Especially > > in cases where a free and open alternative often doesn't exist. > > > > What if the not-so-open alternative is not redistributable without some > sort of licensing agreement. Then the Debian project can strike an > agrement with the developers, but then you would not be allowed to make > copies and give them to your friends. > > -Roberto > I don't think so. I moved to Debian because it has a strong appeal for the concept of freedom, and what is close to - to be on your own. The Debian community is an effort t overcome this loneliness without taking of the freedom. In my humble opinion, GPL is the only agreement we need. Fortuna fortes adjuvat. -- Ms. Eng. Fernando Augusto Bender Pesquisador em Controle Automático 51 8401 4413 Use Linux: http://www.debian.org Comer, beber e amar. O resto não vale um níquel. Lord Byron -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Steve Lamb wrote: > > I agree. I'm all for openness and freedom, don't get me wrong. But I > hardly see how openness and freedom that forces people into a certain position > is either open or free. It's just another close position. If it is our > machine then where's the fault in us doing what we want with it? Especially > in cases where a free and open alternative often doesn't exist. > What if the not-so-open alternative is not redistributable without some sort of licensing agreement. Then the Debian project can strike an agrement with the developers, but then you would not be allowed to make copies and give them to your friends. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Digby Tarvin wrote: > > My personal experience has been that it us much easier and faster to get > a workable system installed using Ubuntu, but Debian is the more versatile > once you have spent the time getting it setup correctly. > That has not been my experience at all. I can get a "workable system" installed just as fast or faster with Debian as with Ubuntu. I really see no difference in this respect. > Ubuntu is certainly much better at providing a quick indication of how > well supported your hardware is. > How so? > I have both installed on my notebook currently. Ubuntu installed very easily, > although didn't manage to get Xorg configured optimally. Debian's installer > did not detect my CD-ROM drive till I moved to the latest testing installer, > and used a problem workaround from the web site. When the install completed I > still had to manually configure and install the X system before I had a > workable X server, but now it is working even better than the Ubuntu > installed server. Ubuntu configured and used my wireless interface correctly > during install, but Debian don't support using it for installation, and the > installation does not install what is needed because of licensing/openness > concerns. Having gone to the Intel web site and downloaded the firmware > manuall, it now works. But as a user this is an inconvenience - I don't > think many people are going to decide not to use some key piece of hardware > on their computer even though a driver is available, purely on the grounds of > open source philosophy. And once you have bought the machine, it is no skin > off the manufacturers nose either way. > > Consequently I think Debian's more restrictive policy on hardware support > during and after installation is a disadvantage. By all means give preference > to free and open software where there are alternatives, but the time to worry > about the open source friendlyness of the hardware is when making the original > purchase, not during the install. > Then Debian's goal of a completely free and unecumbered operating system are not completely in sync with your goals of a system with maximum functionality. Basically there is a tradeoff to be made. Take Java for example. Debian cannot distribute the Sun JVM. This is because part of Sun's terms for distributing their JVM is that you don't simultaneously distribute anyone else's. Thus, if Debian agreed to those terms, it would not be possible to have Kaffe, SableVM and other free Java implementations officially as part of the distro. Additionally, it would be doubtful that the license to redistribute would be extended to users as well. That is, today you can take all the CDs of the Debian distribution and copy/distribute them to your heart's content. However, if Debian started uncluded "not-so-open" components, then this would not be possible. For example, look at SuSE and Mandrake. They have "open" or "community" editions and "professional" editions. The "professional" editions are restricted from further distribution becuase they usually contain proprietary components. Hopefully this helps somewhat clear it up for you. > I think I will keep both OSs side by side for a while, at least until I > have Debian configured as a strict superset of what Ubuntu could do out > of the box. If I share the common directories (home, tmp, swap etc) it > should only cost me about an extra 3GB (5%) of my disk space to have > the choice. > -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
> I am new to LINUX and somewhat dismaid/confused about the various > distributions. Maybe the Linux Distribution Chooser can help: http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/index.php?firsttime=true . -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 08:10:36AM -0400, Attila Horvath wrote: > Jon > > My question was/is genuine. It's not my intention to start a flamewar. > However, I will search thru the archives for past opinions/suggestions. I > apprecaite your response. > > I am new to LINUX and somewhat dismaid/confused about the various > distributions. I'd like to set up a LINUX-based server for mail, web, > personal commerce, etc. Since this is for personal purposes, I decided on > LINUX based system because [1]it's free and [2]my perceived notion that > it's more stable than windows environment. > > Being new to LINUX, a GUI-based system like GNOME adds some convenience > but ultimately is not necessary. BASH command line-based system is > sufficient. I [initially] chose UNBUNTU simply because it was handed to me > to try out. After a couple of weeks of playing around, I discovered a > wealth of information as well as 'choices'. Then the free disk has served its primary purpose. Welcome to the rather loose Linux (dis)organisation. The wealth of "choices" is precisely because it's free -- anyone can go off and make his own variant of anything. And quite a few do. The successful variants survive. There is, shall we say, ecological diversity in Linux. -- hendrik > > Attila > > On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 07:56:07 -0400 > > From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: "Mutsuura Associates, Inc." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Fwd: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > From: Jon Dowland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Apr 20, 2006 6:10 AM > > Subject: Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN > > To: debian-user@lists.debian.org > > > > Have you tried searching the list archives? There is already a lot of > > coverage for this set of questions. Also, your subject-line is very > > likely to provoke a flamewar. > > > > -- > > Jon Dowland > > http://alcopop.org/ > > > > > > -- > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > _ > Mutsuura Associates, Inc. /\ \ > Vienna, VA 22181 / \ \ > / /\ \ \ >/ / /\ \ \ > E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /_/ \ \ \ > WEB: http://www.mutsuura.com / \ \ / \ \ > / /\ \ \/ /\ \ \ > MAIN:(703)281-9722 / / /\ \/ / /\ \ \ > CELL:(703)863-1933/ / / \ / / \ \ \ > FAX :(703)281-9744 / / /\/_/\ \_\ > SBA/SDB CERTIFIED\/_/ \/_/ > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
