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: unruh on 5 Jan 2010 19:18 On 2010-01-05, despen(a)verizon.net <despen(a)verizon.net> wrote: > Stan Bischof <stan(a)newserve.worldbadminton.com> writes: > >> Giorgos Tzampanakis <gt67(a)hw.ac.uk> wrote: >>> >>> Suggestions? >> >> debian Stable. >> >> Or if you don't mind spending a few $$, RedHat ( NOT fedora ) >> >> Never "upgrade" a major release, do clean reinstall Redhat is GPL and is just as free as fedora. However they tend to want you to buy a support contract, which is what costs the money. Find a friend who has the Redhat DVDs and copy and use them. > > I just did an "upgrade" from FC10 to FC11. > Pretty smooth. The problem is that the same set of programs will suddenly be given a new name. thus gimp suddenly becomes gimp2. the upgrade will see that there is no upgrade for gimp, and leave it on the system, but that gimp2 is required and install it. The problem is that there may be overlaps of files between the two, and thus what gets installed is buggered up for at least one of them (usually the old one). > > I think release upgrades is an issue that can be conquered, > it's just a matter of time. It is mainly a matter of proper housekeeping-- making sure that the upgrade of an old package handles that old package properly. If they have the same name, rpm does OK, but if the name has changed, it is a mess.
From: Robert Heller on 5 Jan 2010 19:34 At Tue, 5 Jan 2010 23:12:39 +0000 (UTC) Giorgos Tzampanakis <gt67(a)hw.ac.uk> wrote: > > Robert Heller <heller(a)deepsoft.com> wrote in > news:mOidnSEqiIK3WN7WnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d(a)posted.localnet: > > > RHEL ($$) or CentOS/Whitebox/Pink Tie/Scientific Linux > > (free) (7 years) Ubuntu LTS (3 years) > > Debian Stable > > This looks like a nice list. Is it possible to use KDE with any > of them and still get the same reliability? I know some > distributions have a prefered Desktop Environment. > > I prefer KDE to Gnome, however I will compromise for reliability. RHEL (and free clones thereof) includes KDE, but defaults to the Gnome desktop. You can tell it to install KDE as well as Gnome (or maybe instead of Gnome). Once KDE is installed (either initially or as a post install), you can then switch your desktop to KDE. I don't know about Debian or Ubuntu. > -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows heller(a)deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/
From: Sidney Lambe on 5 Jan 2010 19:39 On comp.os.linux.misc, Giorgos Tzampanakis <gt67(a)hw.ac.uk> wrote: > I've tried linux twice, both with ubuntu, first time plain ubuntu > and later kubuntu. Both times my system was working fine until an > update broke it. Now, I understand limited hardware support in > linux, because it stems from the small market share. I am willing > to go out of my way to buy only linux-supported hardware. > > However, I *can't* stress this enough: I can't accept official > updates breaking a system. It's just horribly and undeniably > unacceptable. A user should not be afraid to update their system, > unless he's knowingly installing beta software or touching > something he shouldn't. > > So, since I still want to switch to linux, I want some > suggestions on which distribution is the most stable and most > well-tested. I don't care that much about cutting-edge features, > and I can wait for a while until a new version of some software > hits the official repositories. But this is important: When the > system asks to update itself, there shouldn't be a chance that it > will break X, or gnome, or KDE, or the kernel, or whatever. > > Suggestions? The bloated and overly-complex package managers of the konsumer Linux distros are the main real difference between these distros, and how they keep you hooked: You spend, over time, hundreds of painful hours learning the stupid things and are naturally very reluctant to go through it all again with another distro that uses a different one. They don't want to teach you how the process works because then they'd have fewer chains on you. For most apps you just put the executable and new libs and docs and man page in the standard places or where the maintainers tell you, and run ldconfig to link the executable and the libraries. Slackware use a few simple bash scripts to get the job done, It's a little more work in the short run, but a lot less in the long run, and a lot more freedom. The other chains the konsumer distros put on you are artificial, Windows-clone user-interfaces like a customized KDE or one they've created themselves (GDEs). The distros are illusions. It's just Linux. Myself and many others disdain the GDEs and bloated package managers and run Linux from the commandline from an x-terminal-emulator. Computers will never be simple, but why make them more complex than they need to be? Sid
From: Robert Heller on 5 Jan 2010 19:41 At Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:18:09 GMT unruh <unruh(a)wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote: > > On 2010-01-05, despen(a)verizon.net <despen(a)verizon.net> wrote: > > Stan Bischof <stan(a)newserve.worldbadminton.com> writes: > > > >> Giorgos Tzampanakis <gt67(a)hw.ac.uk> wrote: > >>> > >>> Suggestions? > >> > >> debian Stable. > >> > >> Or if you don't mind spending a few $$, RedHat ( NOT fedora ) > >> > >> Never "upgrade" a major release, do clean reinstall > > Redhat is GPL and is just as free as fedora. However they tend to want > you to buy a support contract, which is what costs the money. Find a > friend who has the Redhat DVDs and copy and use them. The source RPMs are GPL (and freely available). RedHat does not make a binary / install CD set/DVD available (unless you pay them). There are de-branded binary / install CD sets/DVDs available: CentOS, Whitebox, Pink Tie, and Scientific Linux are all available and are generally binary compatible with RHEL (CentOS and Whitebox are, not sure about Pink Tie or Scientific Linux). > > > > > I just did an "upgrade" from FC10 to FC11. > > Pretty smooth. > > 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. > > > -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 Deepwoods Software -- Download the Model Railroad System http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows heller(a)deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/
From: Giorgos Tzampanakis on 5 Jan 2010 19:50
Sidney Lambe <sidneylambe(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in news:slrnhk7mu7.5fn.sidneylambe(a)evergreen.net: > The distros are illusions. It's just Linux. Myself and many > others disdain the GDEs and bloated package managers and > run Linux from the commandline from an x-terminal-emulator. That doesn't sound very bad, but can I still use applications with graphical environments, and have sound support? |