Re: What are some common problems when using Debian GNU / LINUX?
Le 20.01.2013 07:46, Yaro Kasear a écrit :
On 01/20/2013 12:26 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Debian probably won't be doing the switch to systemd. Systemd
required very Linux-specific kernel features and Debian has a couple
non-Linux ports that'd make going systemd impractical (However I
believe systemd is available in the repos and officially supported.)
True. I think there will not be a big switch, since Debian sounds like
to support a BSD kernel. (I think I'll try it someday)
But this does not meant that Debian will not do the switch for it's
linux' port. I do not think so, since it would mean that *BDS and linux
based debian would rely on different tools, and so I guess there would
be no interest to keep the name "Debian" for both. I do not know, I'm
not in developer's minds.
Le 20.01.2013 11:21, Andrei POPESCU a écrit :
On Du, 20 ian 13, 08:23:59, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
A disadvantage for Debian compared to Arch IMO is, that Debian e.g.
installs and starts all kinds of services, installs all kinds of
apps etc. a user might not need.
There is no such thing as "Debian installs". Even in normal mode of
the
Debian Installer (as opposed to expert mode) one can still unselect
all
check boxes and get only 'base'.
Kind regards,
Andrei
Yes. And you can also choose to not have desktop environment. Which
means no xserver.
IIRC, there are several boxes, depending on your needs:
_ desktop environment
_ ssh server
_ laptop tools
_ base tools
_ and one I can not remember...
If you uncheck them all, as I usually do, you start with a system with
almost nothing. Even "less" is not present in such an installation :D
About being unable to install proprietary firmwares at installation if
you have no wired network connection, it's not true. The installer asks
you if you want to install some from an external source, IIRC. Never
tried it, but I perfectly remember the question.
OT :
About arch, I tried to install it. It worked fine in TTYs. But xserver
had broken dependency (I am not sure about the exact one... maybe dbus
or cups... something ugly anyway, that debian have not on it's xserver).
I know that this distro is a rolling release, but I think that xserver
is one of the most used softwares on linux distributions.
I have no hatred for arch, and working hard for installing something
reserved to experts does not surprise me, but I like to be able to at
least a working system before having to tinker it.
In this domain, Debian is really great, because depending on your
needs, you have multiple flavours:
_ old-stable (no install CD I am aware of, it is the one which will be
deprecated after all)
_ stable
_ testing
_ unstable (codename: sid. It needs to be upgraded from a working
distro AFAIK, since there is no installation CD)
_ experimental (which needs to be completed with one of others, since
it does not include all packages. So, again, no install CD AFAIK.)
For users who just want something working, stable is good enough. It
will become an old-stable in 2 years if Debian follow the guideline they
want to follow, and will stop to be maintained 2 years later. It means 4
years of support on security flaws, if I am not wrong.
But I recommend stable only for servers and public accessible desktops,
because it is really stable and does not needs many time to maintain
system up to date.
Open source softwares evolve quickly, and I see no reason for desktop
users to have almost deprecated softwares.
For a normal usage, testing is better, even if the project claims it is
not for production environment. More recent kernels and drivers which
means more supported hardware, and updated web browsers are some obvious
interesting points here. They are simply the most obvious.
For tinkerers, Debian is really great, because you can start from an OS
which run out of the box on most hardware (as it has been said, except
for hardwares without FOSS drivers, and in many cases you can install
them at installation or later by enabling non-free and contrib
repositories). Then you can start to add/remove packages just for
discovering, and even makes your system in a state you do not know how
to recover it (I did it many times to learn roles of some essential
packages :D ) and of course, playing with their configuration. Debian
often provide a widely commented and explained configuration files, and
I've learn many things from those files.
Debian packages does also have many optional dependencies, so you can
really have a lightweight system.
When I look at other distros I have tried: Ubuntu had big, hardcoded
dependencies, arch xserver was broken the 2 days I tried to install it
(but, hey, it is a rolling release, such problems can appear I guess),
gentoo is giving me problems to make the kernel booting correctly and I
still have no idea about how to install brcm4313 and fedora asked me
question I did not understood at installation.
But I must admit, I did not dig long for fedora and arch :D
I have not tried other, but I think that even if gentoo could become my
toy distro, Debian will stay my reference for ease of use and tinker.
Please, user of Arch, gentoo, Ubuntu and fedora, my wishes are not to
start a war here, just to relate my experiences.
Reply to: