[lug] Debian is better?

[David Morris]

On Sun, Dec 15, 2002 at 05:42:52PM -0700, jdavis wrote:
> Hello,
>   While at BestBuy this weekend I spoke to there Linux install
> tech. He informed me that I am almost a looser for using
> RedHat and not Debian, he then proceded to hit me about the
> face with a CDRW. Just kidding about the CDRW. So I installed
> Debian on a extra hardrive. After a weekend of Debian use I
> wonder if I am missing something. I did not find apt-get easier
> to use than rpm, givien this is 2 years of rpm exp vs. 1 weekend
> apt-get exp...but I am a much more Linux informed user than I was
> 2 years ago...even 6 months ago. I could not get the video drivers
> from Nvidia to compile either, error was...the compiler you are
> trying to use is not the same one that compiled your kernel?? 

As noted by someone else, try the debian drivers...usually
makes everything easier.  There are also sites on using
NVidia/Debian you can look at for more info.  Myself, I
always compile my own kernel, so there is never an issue
between compiler versions.

My best guess here is that the 2.95.x compiler was used on
the kernel (as 3.0 compiler and the kernel have some
unresolved issues), but you used the 3.0 compiler on the
NVidia driver....you can install the older compiler, though
I don't know if it gets installed as a second compiler, or
instead of the 3.0 version compiler.  I know I saw some info
on the web about this somewhere....

> Anyway, I like the idea of using new distros and would like
> to continue to explore Debian as a replacment desktop distro..
> (due largley to dislike of rh8) Is Debain a good option for
> a Desktop distro? I ask this because Ximian Gnome wont work for
> Debian3.0 (3.0 is the stable right?) and xine bitched when i used
> apt-get...mplayer cried, Evolution worked :) So i just want to know
> if I am wasting my time or...I just need to learn more (with in reason)
> about Debian and non-Redhat Linux. I also once heard refrence on this
> list to stale and broken being the main Debain relases..is this cause 
> for concern when picking a desktop distro. The tech at Best-Buy also

I've said it before, and I'll likely say it countless times
again:  Debian is NOT about having the most current
packages.  It is not about having every package.  It is not
about what is the easiest for the least-common-denominator.
The purpose of Debian is to provide a distribution that is
absolutely stable.  If I install a package from the stable
tree, I know that all dependancies will be met, and that the
program will run (with a few exceptions, of course, but
these are only in packages where it is impossible for
automation to do everything).

Yes, you loose a bit from this:  Sometimes, the core system
packages get to be quite out of date.  Other packages might
not be available at all until a new major release.  One of
the single biggest drawbacks to a corporation is that you
cannot get a support contract for Debian...you have to
actually have someone who (gasp!) knows something about the
systems he is managing.

On the other hand, someone who is equally knowledgeable in
both Debian and Red Hat (and similar) can, in most cases,
have a far easier time managing a group of Debian
systems.  They are more stable, easier to configure, and
easier to update; especially on a mass-scale, but also for a
single machine.

If you want to sacrifice these benefits of debian for the
latest and greatest, use the unstable release.

> said that Debian is more powerfull than Redhat...I dont really know
> what he means by that. I actually think its the dumbest thing I have
> heared in a while. Really, what makes a Linux distro more powerfull than
> another? I would say support contracts and software that *works*...
> as well as the ability to customise. I think Redhat comes *closer* than
> most to to gettting a 10/10 on all. Back to the subject...I would
> like to hear peoples desktop distro choice and why, and exp you have
> had with other distros to make $X your default.

Now for this, I would take the tech out back and shoot him.
No distro is more powerful than another.  Period.  End of
story.  Red-Hat (and some others) have the benefit of having
a support contract and having a greater least-common
denominator look and feel.  Debian has the benefit of
stability and the fact that it is the only 100% free distro.
Gentoo allows you an unprecedented amount of control over
the system by compiling the packages at install time.

You get the idea.  In the end, though, no distro can
*possibly* be more powerful than another, just each has a
slightly different set of value-added features.  In the two
biggest markets, Some people prefer the customer-support and
simplicity of Red-Hat, others prefer the guarantee stability
and ease (for the more knowledgeable user) of self-support
of Debian.  Many people have never actually even *tried* the
other of the two big names and stick to their guns at all
costs using often meaningless arguments.

Myself, I don't *want* someone else supporting my system.  I
also don't give a hairy-rat's-ass about simplicity, in fact
I think that is actually a bad idea....but that is a
different discussion I won't get into.

--David