Re: Debian is not a "main distro"?
olet@ifi.uio.no (Ole Jørgen Tetlie) writes:
> Taken from COLA:
>
> ----
> These are just a few. The second thing I would like to bring up is that we
> are in the process of building tutorial on Linux Installation/Configuration
> for beginners. We plan to cover the two main distros, Redhat and Slackware.
> (I like OpenLinux, but I want a specific enough selection so we can offer
> the kind of detail that is helpful for beginners.)
> ----
> It seems that we still need to create some more interest in Debian.
> Perhaps some developer would volunteer to eat a RedHat CD on television
> or jump from a plane with a laptop and try to install Debian before
> ha lands (using a parachute is OK I guess).
Not me, it takes me under 10 minutes to install a rather complete
RedHat system (incl. about 5 minutes to install all of the packages)
and at least an hour to install Debian.
(Here "rather complete" means a full development system with X and
TeX.)
In addition to the packager apparently being slower, and the
unnecessary interaction, many Debian packages do a lot of unnecessary
computation: recompiling elisp files 3 or 4 times, recompiling TeX
formats, etc.
While Debian is easier to upgrade, and Debian packages seem to be of a
higher quality, Red Hat has Debian beat on installation.
Steve
dunham@cse.msu.edu
Reply to: