Re: [Hampshire] debian unstable vs ubuntu server
On 30 December 2011 17:00, Chris Malton chr...@cmalton.me.uk wrote: Apologies - I meant testing. s/unstable/testing/g on that last email! Go for Testing , Its more stable than all the ubuntu releases except the LTS one , since its been long since 10.04 was released , testing would be your best bet for stability+ recent packages . Regards, Pavithran -- pavithran sakamuri http://look-pavi.blogspot.com -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --
Re: [Hampshire] debian unstable vs ubuntu server
Is there a particular reason for running unstable on a server? do you need to support very recent hardware or something? I would advise that you run a stable distro (or if you really have to, testing). Running unstable will not be a pleasant experience, so I wouldn't do it without a REALLY good reason. Tim B. Sent from Samsung mobile -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --
Re: [Hampshire] debian unstable vs ubuntu server
Hi Leo, Unstable does throw a wobbly once in a while I'm running it on my desktop. Occasionally (maybe once a month or so) you get the odd broken package, but it's not a regular thing, and usually you can work around it. For me the only thing I have to remember is to run apt-get update apt-get safe-upgrade every so often to actually upgrade (because update-notifier seems a little broken). For a home server though, it's probably safe. Of course - this is just my personal opinion - what do I know? Chris On 30/12/11 11:09, Leo wrote: I'm going to do a reinstall of my home server which currently runs debian stable. I want to put a more up-to-date distro on it and am thinking either debian unstable or ubuntu server. I'm edging towards debian but, despite some googling, it's not clear to me how many broken packages/problems I'm likely to encounter with it. Has anyone much experience with it? Is it a hassle to maintain? Thanks, Leo -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk -- -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --
Re: [Hampshire] debian unstable vs ubuntu server
On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 11:09:38 +, li...@fractal.me.uk said: I'm going to do a reinstall of my home server which currently runs debian stable. I want to put a more up-to-date distro What problem are you trying to solve? -- You can have everything in life you want if you help enough other people get what they want - Zig Ziglar. Who did you help today? -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --
Re: [Hampshire] debian unstable vs ubuntu server
On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 11:09:38 + Leo li...@fractal.me.uk wrote: I'm going to do a reinstall of my home server which currently runs debian stable. I want to put a more up-to-date distro on it and am thinking either debian unstable or ubuntu server. I'm edging towards debian but, despite some googling, it's not clear to me how many broken packages/problems I'm likely to encounter with it. Has anyone much experience with it? Is it a hassle to maintain? I have been running Debian unstable on my main system with no serious problems for more than 5 years. There are occasional glitches but they are usually corrected within a few days. It isn't any problem to maintain, I run cron-apt on all my debian systems (other than laptops) and so get daily downloads of all updated packages without needing to run 'aptitude update' (I prefer aptitude to apt-get) and the first thing I do each day is run aptitude safe-upgrade. I don't normally run aptitude full-upgrade as that can delete stuff you probably want to keep as this example shows:- The following packages have unmet dependencies: acroread-dictionary-en: Depends: acroread (= 9.4.6-0.1) but 9.4.6-0.0 is installed. acroread-l10n-en: Depends: acroread (= 9.4.6-0.1) but 9.4.6-0.0 is installed. The following actions will resolve these dependencies: Remove the following packages: 1) acroread 2) acroread-data 3) acroread-debian-files 4) acroread-dictionary-en 5) acroread-escript 6) acroread-l10n-en 7) acroread-plugins Leave the following dependencies unresolved: 8) acroread-debian-files recommends acroread-l10n-en | acroread-l10n 9) acroread-debian-files recommends acroread-dictionary-en | acroread-dictio cancelling the full-upgrade and leaving acroread as it was for a few days solved the problem. I wouldn't suggest using testing for a server as IMHO it is more likely to be broken some of the time than unstable, it is of course used for the transition from unstable to (currently) wheezy so is going to change just as often as unstable. I am using debian stable for my local (geneweb) database server and on my VPS and it is rock solid with only security updates to be checked for. So unless there is a version of a package you absolutely must have, stick to stable for your server. It might be worth checking backports to see if there is a later version of the package you need as someone else may have needed it and packaged it up so it will install in stable. -- John Lewis using Debian sid -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --
Re: [Hampshire] debian unstable vs ubuntu server
On 30/12/11 11:32, Keith Edmunds wrote: On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 11:09:38 +, li...@fractal.me.uk said: I'm going to do a reinstall of my home server which currently runs debian stable. I want to put a more up-to-date distro What problem are you trying to solve? The main problem is that some of the audio/video encoders seem quite out-dated in comparison to my desktop. This manifests itself in (among other things) my tv box being unable to play back video encoded on my server correctly. (I don't have this problem when it's encoded on my ubuntu desktop though.) The other problem is that there appears to be a bug in acpi which causes it to reboot rather than shutdown frequently. Also, the root hdd is dying which prompted me to think about a re-install, and therefore investigate more up-to-date OSs. From the various comments here I'm wondering if ubuntu server is the way to go, although I'm really going off the major updates - they haven't successfully for me since about 9.10. Leo -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --
Re: [Hampshire] debian unstable vs ubuntu server
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 12:40:26PM +, john lewis wrote: I have been running Debian unstable on my main system with no serious problems for more than 5 years. It isn't any problem to maintain Eep! Please don't run Debian unstable unless like John you know what you're doing and you're happy to take those risks. Note that John says he's been doing it for 5 years. Please don't advocate normal users run Debian unstable either! The name should be a clue and you definitely get to keep both pieces if it breaks. It's an advantage if you hang out on Debian lists/IRC channels if you do run unstable but it really isn't a solution to the problem of I'd like more up to date packages. I wouldn't suggest using testing for a server as IMHO it is more likely to be broken some of the time than unstable, it is of course used for the transition from unstable to (currently) wheezy so is going to change just as often as unstable. Testing shouldn't suffer (as much) from the dependency problems of unstable and if there are serious bugs then they prevent packages migrating. In general though it is still much riskier than running Debian stable. So unless there is a version of a package you absolutely must have, stick to stable for your server. It might be worth checking backports to see if there is a later version of the package you need as someone else may have needed it and packaged it up so it will install in stable. This is a much saner approach to the I would like newer codecs/web browser/a funky new version of something. -- --( Wind the frog! )-- --( )-- Simon ( ) Nomis Htag.pl 0.0.24 -- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --
