Debian

[rch-tech]

I am thinkin of making the switch to Debian...
I can't seem to find out which kernel it comes with and whehter it supports 2.4 or not.

Anyone out there know?

[inkedmn]

www.debian.org (http://www.debian.org) :)

[rch-tech]

Heh, smart a** =)

I was on that site and coudln't find it, then I found found it...I had to dig a helluva lot further than I thought I would but I found it. And for those who want a "quick" answer...
it looks like 2.2.19 and there are some ways to get 2.4 to work but you have to install some recompiled stuff, and it isn't guaranteed.

[solo]

Not pushing a commercial brand, or anything, but you can try Libranet instead:

www.libranet.com (http://www.libranet.com)

The install gives the choice of kernel version, and also a choice of regular, or ReiserFS. It's Debian Potato. I've heard that Progeny is decent also (though I've not tried it).

[Joeri Sebrechts]

Originally posted by rch-tech:
<STRONG>I am thinkin of making the switch to Debian...
I can't seem to find out which kernel it comes with and whehter it supports 2.4 or not.


Anyone out there know?</STRONG>

You have to understand how debain works to be able to get an answer to that question. Debian isn't release oriented, debian is distribution oriented. That is, they continually improve their stable version, which is actually called testing, and when they're sure that it's so solid you couldn't pierce through it with a laser straight out of a James Bond movie they pronounce it to the world by calling it stable and then promptly forgetting about it. Or in other words, the only thing they'll change stable for is if something has a security flaw, in which case they'll only fix the security flaw, and not roll in any other new features.

So that means that unless you're going to run a server which needs to be up for 5 years (in which case kernel 2.4 isn't the smartest move) your best bet is to look at what testing offers. And if I'm not mistaken that is kernel 2.4.

Having said that, the easiest way to get to testing is to install stable and then upgrade your distro with the sacred command-line "apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade". Which almost dictates a broadband connection. You can upgrade your system without broadband, but debian is so much more easy to use with it.

Don't go to debian unless you're ready to use the command-line a lot. Debian is centred around the files in /etc, not around some gui tools. Some people like that (like me), and some people don't. All I can say is that my debian systems require a lot less maintenance than my redhat installs ever did.

[rch-tech]

Originally posted by Joeri Sebrechts:
<STRONG>Don't go to debian unless you're ready to use the command-line a lot. Debian is centred around the files in /etc, not around some gui tools. Some people like that (like me), and some people don't. All I can say is that my debian systems require a lot less maintenance than my redhat installs ever did.</STRONG>


Okay, thanx for the great info. I'll tell what I want then and you can tell me if Debiain is right or not.
I want a good distro that I can install what I want, I don't need 100 different text editors in X. I know vi and sure I would like an "office like" editor, or "notepad/UltraEdit like" editor in X.
I am not afraid of the command line at all.
However, my big concern is upgrading and installing packages. RPM is great and all but I get the feeling it isn't clean. I've heard nothin but good stuff about apt-get which is the main reason I am looking at it.
I currently run Mandrake. Too much crap...is Debian the one or would SuSe be better. (Not sure if I want slackware or not).

[ 02 October 2001: Message edited by: rch-tech ]

[rattus]

Progeny Debian (http://www.progeny.com) is another commerical distro based on Debian - and they've done a fair bit of work to make the install easier, has Xfree 4 (.02 IIRC), KDE 2 (again, .1.1?) and a 2.4 kernel (2.4.2) on the supplementary CD.

OTOH, apt moos so loudly that it's fairly simple (note: simple is a relative term &lt;g&gt; ) to install a base potato system and simply upgrade the bits you want.

Or, you could do what I did - install Progeny, grab some extra bits of a potato cd distro and then apt-get dist-upgrade to sid.

I always chuckle when the login banner says "testing/unstable" - unstable is also a relative term &lt;g&gt;

[slacker_x]

I use the unstable version of debian. A.K.A. sid. All the latest and greatest packages. You just have to be sure to check #debian on irc.debian.org before you update to avoid broken packages.

[klamath]

You have to understand how debain works

Well, YOU don't seem to very well...

isn't release oriented, debian is distribution oriented

That is very debatable -- Debian spend a huge amount of QA on fixing RC critical bugs for each release, building boot floppies, and basically shipping a very stable release. Which makes it release oriented, IMHO.

That is, they continually improve their stable version, which is actually called testing,

Uh, no. 'stable' is called 'stable', 'testing' is called 'testing' -- they are different. You've also totally neglected to mention unstable.

they pronounce it to the world by calling it stable and then promptly forgetting about it.

Well, they don't exactly forget about it -- as you said, they still release security updates, as well as updates where the improvement is substantial and the chance of affecting other stuff is minimal.

So that means that unless you're going to run a server which needs to be up for 5 years (in which case kernel 2.4 isn't the smartest move) your best bet is to look at what testing offers

Or unstable -- that's what I always run and I've haven't had any problems (although the recent libc6 + mozilla bug was a bit annoying).

All I can say is that my debian systems require a lot less maintenance than my redhat installs ever did.

Definately. FreeBSD and Debian are the only 2 OSs I prefer to run servers on.

However, my big concern is upgrading and installing packages. RPM is great and all but I get the feeling it isn't clean. I've heard nothin but good stuff about apt-get which is the main reason I am looking at it.

Yeah, apt-get is awesome. Also, the packages for Debian typically are higher quality, more consistent and have fewer bugs than the packages distributed with other distros.

[error27]

Joeri Sebrechts was pretty much right.

There are actually 3 versions of debian. Stable, Testing and Unstable.

I advise newbies to stay away from unstable. I like it because it has a bleeding edge feel but occasionally stuff will break for a couple days.

Last week the whois command was broken and mozilla was broken for some people and some versions of netscape. For me this isn't really a problem because I know how to work around this stuff. But I advise newbies to stay away from unstable. (All those problems are fixed now btw)

I would say that you should buy progeny Linux. You can switch from progeny Linux to regular debian at any time if you want later. (In some ways you can think of progeny as debian with a better install).

[rch-tech]

If I go with Progeny, is it going to "Mandrakenize" it? By that I mean, is it going to throw every little editor in there with a million different desktops? What I've heard about Debian itself is that its a minimalistic approach and then add on stuff later.