[lug] Debian is better?

[jdavis]

On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 14:59, David Morris wrote:
> 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
> 
I dont know why you keep bringing up least common denominator...
or the idea that only uninformed people use support contracts.
when it comes to any job "KISS" goes a long way. And if some guy
on the phone can help me resolve my issues faster than me googling
for it, im all over it. Now i do realise that some sys-admins
never need any help...they know it all..never have a second
thought about how there gonna feed there kids..well, im not one
of them..I want support and alevel of expertiese that surpasses 
my own...and a corporation of people to help me share the responsabilty.

also don't give a hairy-rat's-ass about simplicity, in fact
> I think that is actually a bad idea...

uh...sure pal

FYI...my Redhat distro is far from default...so nothing low
or common there..

Also the only thing I give a rats about is getting the job done.
and keeping my customers happy...and a nice desktop :)

Thanks for the input. I will continue to evaluate Debian...
proablly for server use.I really liked how small the install
was...even when i try to get a redhat install tiny, I just cant
seem to get it under 500 megs.

jd