Most stable and tested distribution?
in [General Linux]
|
Prev: passive mode ftp high ports driving me nuts
Next: equivalent of f.circleup or CirculateUp for fvwm2
From: Giorgos Tzampanakis on 6 Jan 2010 15:01 Robert Heller <heller(a)deepsoft.com> wrote in news:zpCdnSeyKblYfNnWnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet: > Slackware basically has no package management (or a really > simple-minded one). There is not anything like apt-get or > yum at all. You need to check each package *manually* for > updates and you also need to *manually* deal with > dependencies (basically you rebuild from source and > re-install). Also, you cannot even try to update Slackware, > you can only do an install. This sounds like a lot of duplicated effort between Slackware users. A central software update channel would be much better, even if it was for the software less likely to break the system (anything except hardware drivers, X, desktop environments, the kernel etc.) It certainly doesn't sound enticing, to me at least.
From: Mumia W. on 6 Jan 2010 13:40 On 01/05/2010 06:18 PM, unruh wrote: > On 2010-01-05, despen(a)verizon.net <despen(a)verizon.net> wrote: > [...] > The problem is that the same set of programs will suddenly be given a > new name. thus gimp suddenly becomes gimp2. the upgrade will see that > there is no upgrade for gimp, and leave it on the system, but that gimp2 > is required and install it. The problem is that there may be overlaps of > files between the two, and thus what gets installed is buggered up for > at least one of them (usually the old one). >> I think release upgrades is an issue that can be conquered, >> it's just a matter of time. > > It is mainly a matter of proper housekeeping-- making sure that the > upgrade of an old package handles that old package properly. If they > have the same name, rpm does OK, but if the name has changed, it is a > mess. > > This is rarely a problem with Debian. The Debian package management system allows Debian maintainers to specify "conflicts" such as gimp2 conflicts with gimp. Apt-get won't install gimp2 without first uninstalling gimp--problem solved.
From: Mumia W. on 6 Jan 2010 14:06 On 01/06/2010 06:55 AM, Giorgos Tzampanakis wrote: > On 2010-01-06, Mark Hobley <markhobley(a)hotpop.donottypethisbit.com> wrote: > >> If you want stability, do not upgrade. There is always a risk of breakage >> unless you have total control of the distribution, do your own compilation, >> testing and auditing of the code. > > This is very disheartening. I personally believe that an upgrade should never > be pushed until there's been enough testing to all but guarantee it > will break nothing. > What you've described is Debian "stable" (Lenny). > In my experience, it's the Desktop Environment upgrades that most often break > systems, am I right? That's not my experience. However, I'm a careful Debian/Ubuntu user. With Debian "testing" (do not use) or Ubuntu "anything," you need to install apt-listbugs. Whenever you upgrade (using aptitude or apt-get), you'll be notified of potentially serious bugs. Whenever apt-listbugs warns me about a package during upgrading, I almost always put that package on "hold" and upgrade the rest. So far, I haven't had any breakages of my Ubuntu system or my Debian "testing" system. Everything you've said suggests that you want Debian "stable"; with "stable" you don't even need apt-listbugs because bad bugs are never allowed to get to stable.
From: Michael Black on 6 Jan 2010 16:32 On Wed, 6 Jan 2010, Giorgos Tzampanakis wrote: > Robert Heller <heller(a)deepsoft.com> wrote in > news:zpCdnSeyKblYfNnWnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet: > >> Slackware basically has no package management (or a really >> simple-minded one). There is not anything like apt-get or >> yum at all. You need to check each package *manually* for >> updates and you also need to *manually* deal with >> dependencies (basically you rebuild from source and >> re-install). Also, you cannot even try to update Slackware, >> you can only do an install. > > This sounds like a lot of duplicated effort between Slackware > users. A central software update channel would be much better, > even if it was for the software less likely to break the system > (anything except hardware drivers, X, desktop environments, the > kernel etc.) > > It certainly doesn't sound enticing, to me at least. > I tried Debian 9 years ago, and since I was trying it on a really limited computer, I had to do a tiny install. All that fuss about dependencies was very daunting for a first time installer. I dumped it because it didn't have Pine, that I needed, and at that stage I wasn't ready to try to install it separately. I found a beatup copy of "Slackware for Dummies" at the local bookstore, the price was really great considering the CDs were still in there, and I used that since it had Pine. It was a whole lot easier to install what I could on that 240meg hard drive than dealing with Debian. I've never seen a reason to stop using Slackware since. Michael
From: GangGreene on 6 Jan 2010 16:23
john(a)wexfordpress.com wrote: [putolin] > > In general Slackware is always stable when released. Most packages are > included in the original distro and may be behind the times. > Slackware 13 however has KDE4 and QT 4. QT 4 enables some packages to > run like the latest Scribus and disables some others, like Quanta and > Kpdftool. And KDE4 is itself an abomination. So I run Slack 13, but > with Xfce as the Gui. I also have a 12.1 partition > just for Quanta and Kpdftool. > > There are no automatic updates. You are always in control. > > John Culleton What version of slackware has kde 3.5.10? |