Re: moving from Kubuntu 10.4 to squeeze
Am Sonntag, 27. Januar 2013 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:48:47 +0100, Martin Steigerwald
>
> <Martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 27. Januar 2013 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
> >> On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 13:18:37 +0100, Martin Steigerwald
[…]
> >> But you called Debian the mother of all.
> >>
> >> However, Debian tends to completely break production environments, if
> >> you
> >> update. I used Debian because it was said, that I'm not forced to use
> >> pulseaudio, that was correct, for two days, then I updated and got
> >> pulseaudio as a hard dependency, without a warning, there were no
> >> changelogs about this issue, that did break audio completely. This
> >> wasn't
> >> the only issue ;).
> >
> > Ralf, just short, cause I do not think I am going to want to waste any
> > more
> > time on such a "which distro is best" discussion.
> >
> > martin@merkaba:~> dpkg -l | grep pulseaudio
> > martin@merkaba:~#1>
> >
> > So what?
> >
> > First thing.
> >
> > It might be a hard dependency for you when using GNOME, but AFAIK that
> > has
> > been an *upstream* decision!
>
> That doesn't matter, Debian did break environments, when developers
> claimed before, it will not become a hard dependency. Other distros
This sentence lacks any proof whatsoever again. What developer exactly said
what? (+ link of proof of course).
> simply provide a gnome settings daemon without PA. So your claim simply
> is wrong, that Debian handles updates better than any other distro do.
Again: Actually I did *not* claim this. Again, what on earth is to difficult
to crasp about:
"From my perception Debian is the mother of upgradeability."
*my perception* is *my perception* and thats about it.
Different users can and will (!) have *different* perception.
Kubuntu might be easier for some. And then fine.
Arch might be easier for others.
And heck Debian developers are human beings, like Kubuntu developers. And
human beings make mistakes.
In now way I ever said that this won´t be the case with Debian.
Heck, I didn´t even compare with another distribution. I just reacted to the
comparisons made in this thread. Why didn´t I compare? I even explained
this:
I *frankly* do not care.
Debian works well for me. And that is *all* that matters for me.
Got it?
What I cared about was the bold matter of factly statements that Debian is
less upgradeable than Ubuntu to someone who is in the switch from Ubuntu to
Debian. On which you above seemed to provided the first sign of possible
evidence. But then on *one* single case. I can easily tell two cases where
this has been the other way around:
1) OpenSUSE shoveled KDE 4.0 on their users while the upstream project
clearly noted: No, no, this is just a developer preview. First KDE SC
version in Debian: 4.2(.4 I think).
2) All other distros, except for SLES and RHEL enterprise distros and thus
Centos and Oracle Unbreakable Linux, jumped onto KDEPIM 2 quickly and boy
did users complain about that. The software was *unfinished*, *incomplete*,
and *buggy*. KDEPIM version in Debian still: KDEPIM as of KDE SC 4.4.11,
while I tend to think that starting with KDE SC 4.9/4.10 KDEPIM 2 is getting
somewhere where it may make sense to upgrade.
So we can throw case against case.
But for what? Distro package maintainers make different oppinions. Some suit
some users better than others.
Again:
Without a study there will be no evidence what so ever.
Willing to provide one?
No? Then let us be done with it.
I do not need a comparison. And heck, I bet Mike doesn´t require one either,
as he is about to make up his mind *himself*. At least he didn´t ask for
one.
Thanks.
As of my perception (!) of Debian as the mother of upgradeability to more
notes.
1) Debian was upgradeable as Ubuntu didn´t even exist. And SUSE did not
support upgrades. I am not sure whether Redhat did.
2) Ubuntus upgradeability is heavily based on dpkg/apt/aptitude which all
originated on which distro again? Right, Debian.
See?
Heck, even recent zypper versions output is modelled almost verbatim after
that apt-get / aptitude output. So it seemed Zypper developers had a close
look at them and copied some of their good concepts. And they are perfectly
entitled to! Maybe Zypper developers even surpassed apt/aptitude a bit at
the moment. Its has gotten really fast.
Ciao,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
Reply to: