[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: How to make Debian more attractive for users, was: Re: The number of popcon.debian.org-submissions is falling



Hi again, Russ:

On Thursday 22 July 2010 14:21:09 Russ Allbery wrote:
> "Jesús M. Navarro" <jesus.navarro@undominio.net> writes:
[...]

> I don't agree; I think it's very hard to say the same thing about testing.

I already told you that's about perceptions and that each one has his own so 
I'll try this once more, after that I'll leave.

> Yes, sid sometimes breaks hard,

It's more than that: Sid is *intended* to break hard; it's not a undesired 
side effect.

> although I think if you've been running 
> Linux for a few years the degree to which sid really breaks is somewhat
> exaggerated.

Just currently: it won't boot on some archs (the lilo/grub/grub2 issue).  Even 
if it boots, it won't start X on some systems (the Nvidia problems).  Even if 
it runs and it's able to run X you'll find it cumbersome on your desktop 
environment (the KDE problems).

> I've never had something happen in sid that risked real data 
> loss, for instance; I know we've had cases, but I think they've been
> really rare.  I've had an unbootable system where I needed to boot from a
> rescue CD I think once, and a few cases where X didn't start until I
> rolled back some package upgrades.  For breakage, that's not bad.

Not.  For *Sid* that's not bad.  For a "bleeding edge end user usable ala 
Fedora" that's awful.

> But on testing, it's been rock-solid for me for years.

Again, Testing has been rock solid... considering it is Testing, nothing more, 
nothing else.

> It's not just 
> somewhat less breakage.  I think it's almost no breakage.  Occasionally
> packages get stranded for a long time at back revs because of various
> migration problems, and once or twice I've had to pin something (usually
> because of non-free drivers like fglrx or nvidia that aren't really part
> of Debian), but it's an experience that I can comfortably recommend.

If that's your recommend for an "end user usable quite bleeding edge 
distribution", sorry I can't support your opinion.

> > If anything Sid/Testing could be compared to a "rolling release"
> > distribution ala Gentoo or Arch but not to any "fast releasing" like
> > Fedora or Ubuntu.
>
> No, having run both, I honestly think Debian testing is a superior
> experience to Ubuntu

No, having run both, I honestly think Debian Testing is not superior for a 
plain end user to Ubuntu.  I have about 75 end users that support my opinion 
with facts.

> Packages in Ubuntu
> universe break all the time, and worse, they release broken, and it can be
> harder with Ubuntu to temporarily install just that package from a newer
> release than it usually is with testing to temporarily install something
> from sid.

I sorrily have to say that if that's really your opinion you live in a 
different Universe than myself.

> *boggle*.  Something breaking almost daily is *completely* alien to my
> experience even with running Debian unstable.

*boggle* Something potentially or even in fact breaking on Debian Unstable 
daily is my very day to day experience with Sid as it seems to be that of 
members of debian-users and debian-devel lists.  The fact that I'm able to 
workaround the worst breakages (i.e.: by avoiding upgrading package groups I 
know by the devel list that are in active development) or manage them (by 
forcing upgrades, pinning, reinstalls, etc.) doesn't make any less true that 
Sid is breaking daily -and I wouldn't expect anything else.

Cheers.


Reply to: