Re: Choosing a distribution (was: Just a simple query)
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 15:00:26 +0530
Linux Tyro <ubuntu.bkn@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
>
>
> Okay, what I meant is that Debain is for Testing for the self
> stability only (not commercialized like Fedora for RHEL...). Of
> course, it should be the testbed for Testing before integrating into
> the stable version, but that it does (...I am sure) for only the free
> use of operating system, worldwide, of course. Unstable is good only
> for tech-wizards, but for me, who are new in Linux and who really get
> less time to work on it, I guess, instability matters a lot, since as
> you (also) say that new users don't expect surprises out of the box
> but only a rock solid system with no viruses attacking the machine
> and for that Debain definitely provides the solution, as all (and
> you) say.
>
>
>
> Ubuntu does, however, install easily on new hardware, and sometimes
> > Debian Stable has problems there.
>
>
> I didn't know this and that's why asked. Thanks for this information.
> However, my hardware is not that old but is not shining too. I guess
> (not sure) Debian could work....Ubuntu LTS works (live CD).
>
>
> > Knoppix is generally felt to be best
> > of all in this respect, but Knoppix really is just a live-CD
> > distribution, and is not suitable for installation as it cannot be
> > upgraded.
>
>
> If it cannot be upgraded, it would be stable version with no possible
> changes (for what I know, may be I am wrong).
Yes, but it doesn't get security fixes either. That doesn't matter much
for an OS that is only fired up for an hour or so from read-only media,
but it would be dangerous as a fixed installation on a hard drive.
>
>
> > It is extremely useful for finding out what software is
> > necessary for difficult hardware, and Debian users usually keep it
> > available for this reason. Both Knoppix and Ubuntu are real Debian
> > underneath, using the same software installation system, and mostly
> > the same system file locations, but they draw heavily on Sid rather
> > than the more stable variants, so they can be a bit unreliable.
>
>
> But for what I heard, Debian is a rock solid distribution (like
> openSUSE), so it must be very good, excellent. If some hardware
> issues come with Debian (as you say), are these with only the old PCs
> or with newer ones also? However, I have a PC which is neither old
> nor new.
>
That's the best place to be. Too old and it can't use enough RAM to be
useful, too new and the hardware hasn't yet been reverse-engineered to
write drivers, as few manufacturers bother producing good drivers for
Linux. That's not specific to Debian, it's a Windows/Linux thing, many
manufacturers are only interested in the Windows segment of the
computer market. If an open-source driver is available for Fedora, it
can be compiled for Debian even if nobody has yet packaged it for
Debian. Compiling isn't hard in Linux, almost the first thing I did
when I first played with Linux (Red Hat 5.something, I think) was to
compile a new kernel.
Sometimes it's necessary to look outside Debian Free Software for
drivers and again Knoppix is useful, as it does not stick rigidly to
the Debian philosophy. Having found out what drivers work, we can then
decide whether to risk using them or wait for open-source versions.
--
Joe
Reply to: