Re: Which OS? Was "I do consider Ubuntu to be Debian" , Ian Murdock

[Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Michael M. wrote:
[snip]
>> Why don't we reframe this as:  What is the best OS/Distro for Michael?
>>
>> Perhaps you have some conflicting needs that requires a non-standard
>> answer?  I _think_ that what I hear that you want is:
>> 	
>> 	More recent software than what is in stable or testing (when its
>> 	frozen).
>>
>> 	Less dynamic than Sid
> 
> That pretty much sums it up, the important qualification being testing
> *when it's frozen.*  Prior to the freeze, and for at least a while after
> it began, I was happy with testing.  That's the only reason I am
> frustrated with Debian's reluctance/refusal to commit to a schedule.  If
> I knew, for example, that for up to six months out of every two years,
> testing will be frozen, I could live with that.  If that were the case,
> testing would be the optimal distro for me more than 75% of the time,
> which would be good enough.  But as past and recent history (Dunc-Tank
> tanking, etc.) has indicated, Debian has no inclination to do that, and
> many Debian users appreciate its reluctance to do so, for reasons I can
> understand.  I just don't happen to be one of them.

[snip]

> The "perfect" OS for me would be Debian testing in a non-frozen
> state ... it has everything:  the power of apt (with a truly awesome
> management tool in aptitude, which I love);

That is a reason not to use Sidux.  The devs of Sidux specifically say
that aptitude and Sid don't get along well because aptitude has trouble
keeping up with fast moving dependencies.

> recent-if-not-necessarily-bleeding-edge software versions, a huge
> software repository; plenty stable, with very infrequent breakage
> anywhere; manageable, rolling updates (I like, in general, to update
> about once-a-week) with no real need for upgrading; flexibility -- no
> preferred windowing environment; no binary blobs installed by default,
> but still available if you need them (I do use Flash, lame, w32codecs,
> Sun's Java, and non-free unrar; I don't use nVidia's proprietary driver,
> nor MS fonts, Adobe Acrobat, nor any other non-free software I can think
> of).  I like Gnome and would be reluctant to abandon it, but I could
> probably survive with XFCE or even just Openbox; I don't care for KDE.
> 
> Of those I've tried, my favorite non-Debian-based distro is Arch Linux,
> the caveat being that Arch is very bleeding edge and more prone to
> breakage here & there than Debian testing.  It's more like Sid, in that
> respect.  Arch was inspired by CRUX, which is probably too advanced and
> D-I-Y for me, and CRUX was developed along *BSD lines, like Gentoo.  In
> many ways, a *BSD might really be my best bet.  Is there anything else
> that compares favorably to Debian testing out there?

I would suggest you just wait a few weeks and use Lenny when it comes
out.  That should meet all your needs.  I take back my recommendation of
Sidux for you.  Sid is too much of a moving target from what you
describe you are looking for.

Joe
- --
Registerd Linux user #443289 at http://counter.li.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGDszNiXBCVWpc5J4RAqtHAJ9XLijz4BNlT8jmewhIehAIloi/xACgl2Us
e1HxSEXL+Enmi06F4YCzrpM=
=xovG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----