Re: Switching to Debian (from Fedora)
A. Lanza wrote:
>* I have found Debian not very different from Fedora in the basics. I
>would like to know what are the very differences among both distros.
>
>
1. Philosophy. Debian is focused on Free (as in Freedom) software. If it
ain't Free, it doesn't get into Debian. Things like Java, Flash, etc,
are therefore not in Debian, and must be installed from other sources.
On the other hand, you never have to worry about licensing issues with
pure Debian.
2. Philosophy. Debian is not released until it's ready, whereas many
other distros release when the marketers tell them to release. Therefore
Debian "just works" (as far as stability and upgradeability go). Whereas
many distros require a reinstall to install the next version, you only
install Debian once; then you upgrade forever.
3. Package Management. Until a few years ago, Debian was pretty much the
only one that got it right. That's not so much true anymore, as other
distros have done pretty well lately with their package managers.
>* kernel 2.4.27 was installed in my box. It's been a suprise since in
>Fedora i'm running kernels 2.6.x. Why this 2.4 kernel? Does Debian
>consider 2.6 kernels unstable? I'd like to upgrade my kernel; how can i
>do it using apt-get?
>
>
It goes back to the stability issue (as in "not changing", not as in
"not crashing") When Sarge was released, I believe 2.4 was deemed
"safer" as a default, for whatever reason. 2.6 is available during the
install, or can be installed later rather simply:
apt-cache search kernel-image-2.6
apt-get install kernel-image-2.6[whichever is appropriate]
Or you can roll your own.
>* I noticed too that Debian runs XF86 instead of Xorg, as Fedora does.
>Why this? What are the differences between them? Is video hw support
>better in Xorg? Are there any licensing issues with Xorg?
>
>
X.org wasn't ready in time for Sarge's release. It is migrating into
Unstable. Many desktop users (myself included) run Unstable rather than
Stable (whereas we tend to keep Stable on the servers). That way we get
the newer toys/support, albeit we sometimes have to live with "glitches"
(such as X being broken right now in Unstable).
"What are the difference between" what? Debian and Fedora, or X11 and X.org?
There are licensing (and other) issues with newer versions of X11; this
is why the Linux world is tending to move to X.org.
>After running Debian in my mail server for some time, i think that it
>can be a really good choice for a production server, but what about
>desktop?
>
I'd give Unstable (or Testing) a try on the desktop. Many people install
Ubuntu or Kanotix, and then convert to pure Debian from there.
--
Kent
Reply to: