Re: Switch MDK -> Debian, probably
See in-line replies to your specific questions below:
--- Olaf Marzocchi <olaf_lists@virgilio.it> wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm a MDK user and I'm evaluating a switch to Debian
> mainly because of
> the better package management system.
>
> To make my mind I need to know few things:
>
> -> with MDK, to update the main packages I have to
> reinstall the OS
> every 6 or 12 months. I don't use linux as main OS
> (I use Mac OS X), so
> it's pretty annoying... the time I spend mantaining
> the OS is too much.
> What about Debian? Can I update the whole system
> (without adding
> packages, I mean, only updates) without the need of
> a complete
> reinstall? (MDK main OS installer is not really good
> in doing
> upgrades). I don't want to reconfigure everything
> every 6 months...
Of course! That's one of the (if not THE) strongest
points about Debian. "apt-get update" followed by a
simple "apt-get upgrade" (or "apt-get dist-upgrade" if
it's been a while) will keep your entire sytem
completely up to date.
>
> -> In MDK, when I had to upgrade from KDE 3.1.x to
> KDE 3.2 (I had
> MDK9.2, I tried to update only what I needed), I had
> to force the urpmi
> system to uninstall all the kde packages (I had to
> force it because
> urpmi keeps track of every dependency: a wonderful
> system, it always
> worked beautifully except this time, not like the
> original rpm).
> Unfortunately, the process wasn't flawless. When I
> started kde 3.2, I
> found that kdm (login manager) lost every WM other
> than kde... OO.org
> never started anymore... and similar things. I heard
> a friend saying in
> Debian the process would have been as simple as a
> single cmdline. Is it
> true (I mean, *facts*, not "it should be so",
> please...). Remember that
> a traditional update would be simple even under MDK,
> I take KDE 3.1.x
> -> 3.2 as example because the packages number/names
> changed, urpmi
> couldn't cope with this. What about .deb? This point
> is important.
You don't have any of these silly collision issues
with Debian. Occasionally, something like this might
happen, but probably only with sid, the unstable
branch. Apt handles dependancies far better than any
other package manager. Bar none.
>
> -> what about the kernel? Did the 2.4 -> 2.6 change
> require a complete
> os install?
>
Of course not. This wouldn't require a reinstall in
ANY Linux distribution that I know of.
> -> kernels: are they patched? MDK ships a kernel
> heavily patched as
> standard, in my opinion this is really useful. If
> debian kernels are
> "clean", can I take a MDK kernel (let's suppose I
> compile it, but what
> about taking the rpm with the kernel?) and use it in
> Debian? (I suppose
> yes, but who knows)
There are "Debian" kernels, yes, that are included in
the apt repositories. But, there is nothing stopping
you from compiling your own kernel. (There is also a
mix of the two -- compiling your own kernels the
Debian Way)
>
> -> rpm packages are everywhere... what about .deb?
> I'm able to compile
> apps, but, since having a package allow me to
> uninstall it cleanly and
> simply, I always prefer prepackaged apps. Will I be
> able to use rpms?
>
You will rarely, if ever, have to install an RPM.
(But when that time comes, yes, it's possible)
Welcome to apt.
> -> will I be able to use MDK, SUSE and Fedora (the
> latter doesn't
> matter that much, I never seen them) configuration
> tools? AFAIK, Debian
> leave the user alone, there are no "debian" tool to
> configure the OS (I
> originally chose MDK due to this). Note: this point
> is a must. Without
> GUI tools to speed up system configuration, I won't
> choose Debian.
>
This question is a highly sticky one. In general, GUI
configuration tools limit the user. No system
administrator worth his salt EVER touches a GUI
configurator. That being said, though, there ARE some
tools available for Debian -- but these are available
for all other distributions as well. I'm talking
about things such as "Webmin" -- Debian does not have
its own "system configurator" -- unless you count
Debconf, but that's not really what you're talking
about.
> If you need to know, I'd choose the testing branch,
> even if don't
> remember the kernel it ships... I hope 2.6. [update:
> no, it ships
> 2.4.something. What about 2.6? I want it]
> Last thing: what about reiserfs4? will it be among
> the FS choices? if
> not I'll choose reiserfs, but is a rfs3.6->rfs4
> upgrade possible
> without format?
>
All of the above are possible, and sound like a rather
smart decision. Testing will be the new stable, btw,
in a short time.
> Thanks in advance to anyone, you seem to be the
> tighter community among
> the distros but I really asked many questions...
>
> Olaf Marzocchi
>
>
You're welcome!
~Zaq
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
> debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
Reply to: