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

Re: Ubuntu vs. Debian (was Re: Introduction)



On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 04:44:22PM -0500, Michael Pobega wrote:
> tom arnall wrote:
> >> tom arnall wrote:
> >>     
> >>> I booted from the Ubuntu CD the other day and was very impressed. It got
> >>> my wireless card right off. Back 6 months ago when I did a Debian install
> >>> from the minimal cd, I had to recompile the kernel etc to get my card to
> >>> work. Does anyone know if this has changed?
> >>>
> >>> I am thinking seriously of recommending Ubuntu as a starting point for
> >>> new users. Comments on the advantages/disadvantages of this idea are
> >>> encouraged.
> >>>
> >>> What is involved for a user to switch from Ubuntu to Debian?
> >>>       
> > what about Dapper? is using stuff other than stable? if Debian (stable of 
> > course) is more stable, i don't think there's any question about where the 
> > beginner should start.
> >
> > tom arnall
> All versions of Ubuntu are based off of Debian Sid, which is the
> unstable branch of the Debian triplets.
While Ubuntu's release is based upon a snapshot of Debian unstable, it
is not left as such. The ubuntu folks use this and create a stable
version from it. The difference is in the team involved and the number of
packages. Debian has 16,000 packages and 1000+ developers while Ubuntu
has 1000+ packages and 100+ developers. For that small a team and a 6
month timeframe, they do great work.
-- 
|  .''`.  == Debian GNU/Linux == |       my web site:           |
| : :' :      The  Universal     |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/|
| `. `'      Operating System    | go to counter.li.org and     |
|   `-    http://www.debian.org/ |    be counted! #238656       |
|   my keysever: subkeys.pgp.net |     my NPO: cfsg.org         |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: