Re: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
On Saturday 22 April 2006 09:50, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> Kamaraju Kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday 21 April 2006 09:53, Chris Lale wrote:
> > > Kamaraju Kusumanchi wrote:
> > > >6) Have something up and running in no time for a desktop
> > > > Ubuntu wins over debian any moment.
> > >
> > > I don't follow this. Install just one package (KDE or Gnome) and you
> > > have an instant, fully functional desktop.
> >
> > The point is that, in Ubuntu, you do not need to do EVEN THAT single
> > step. It will install gnome for you right away. It is basically a
> > defaults question. The Debian guys felt that the default set up is to not
> > have any DEs installed. The Ubuntu guys felt that it would be cool to
> > install GNOME without bothering the user. Both have different goals and
> > are targetted to different users. Both decisions are good. It is an issue
> > with defaults.
> >
> > raju
>
> During the install, Debian has a step of choosing the 'task', where
> you can choose between 'Desktop', 'Mail Server' and some others (the
> details are for the OP if he is still reading). Choosing the 'Desktop'
> task will get you *both* KDE and Gnome, and lots of other stuff useful
> on a Desktop machine. (K)Ubuntu skips this step altogether and installs
> a predefined set of packages, similar to the Debian 'Desktop' task. So,
> as you can see, the big difference is that Debian will let you choose,
> from the beginning, what your machine will be, while turning a (K)Ubuntu
> into a server requires additional steps, like installing an MTA,
> discussed in another thread.
i consider another procedure still better. leave task(sel) beside. install the
base-packages from the [*net*]-installer cd, and set-up as root [#] whatever
you want: in my case kdebase, libgtk-dev pacjages &&.
kind regards,
steef
>
> Andrei
> --
> If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
> (Albert Einstein)
Reply to: