Debian vs. Debian

[blackbelt_jones]

In other words:

in view of the popularity of the Mepis vs. Ubuntu thread, how about opening it up to other debian-based distros? I think that Debian-based distros are a great choice for anyone who isn't quite up to the challenge of Slackware and Gentoo, and who doesn't want to mess with the whole RPM enchilada... the preceding definitely describes me. I think that it would be nice if we could put together an overview of how the Debians differ. Maybe if we gather enough information, somebody would organize it in a chart
or something.

My impression right now is that, assuming you want a desktop system, most Debian systems aren't that different from one another, in that you can do just about anything you want with any of them . They install differently, and come with different applications, but the flexibility inherent in the system compensates for that, and so it's largely a question of convenience, and what's easier to learn. For example, I may prefer the fact that Debian installs with ready access to both Gnome and KDE built in to Mepis installing with only KDE, however, I can (and have) installed Gnome in Mepis.

After using Debian enthisiastically for eight or nine months, I found that, all of a sudden, X wouldn't configure automatically when I installed. Rather than learn how to fix it (someday I intend to), I tried Mepis. So let me compare Mepis with Debian:

Mepis is less flexible than Debian, in that I wouldn't know how to install a non-desktop Mepis system. Twice now I have installed Debian without any desktop at all to create a non-gui "BashBox". Mepis also seems to be noticably slower than Debian on this old machine, even at the the command line.

But Mepis comes with MPlayer, which is great for me, because, since I can't install MPlayer with apt-get, I have no idea how to install it. It also comes with "unzip" installed, which fixes a flaw in the standard debian desktop install that I'm sure has flummoxed many a beginner. If you click on a zipfile in Gnome with Debian, you get fileroller... but if you don't install the corresponding command-line program "unzip", it doesn't work. Your zipfile doesn't open. You don't get an error message. You just sit there waiting forever.

I'll probably add more to this post at a later time. :)

[XiaoKJ]

very naturally, MEPIS, being a distro designed for the desktop, will be more desktop-live than debian by itself. But you can apt-get remove all the X11 stuff and it will be nice.

About mplayer and unzip --- I have them in my debian unstable! what were you talking about?

[GavinX]

Debian is indeed a great distro. Before I tried Xandros (another Debian-based distro) I used Debian experimental branch. It gave absolutely no problems, but as in most cases, I just felt like using something else.

Enter Xandros. If you're a person who likes to configure things for yourself and like to live on the edge, Xandros may not be for you. Xandros just works out of the box and it takes little to no knowledge of Linux to get going. It has its own sources and comes in different flavours, including an open circulation edition (the business and standard editions come with a monetary price, while the OCE is free.) All in all, a very solid distro. For my personal situation, it is the best distro I've used. By the way, proprietary software can be purchased directly at the Xandros online store for much lower than at other online stores. Membership can also be purchased and it brings great benefits and discounts on software.

(As for the concern which you raised about Mplayer and other Debian-based distros, Mplayer can be istalled using apt. However, you have to manually add the sources in your /etc/apt/sorces.list [I do not remember what they are but a Google will help.] After that, it's a simple as apt-get update, apt-get install mplayer.)

And yes, Mepis is a great distro. I've used that too. But as I said, my personal preference right now is Xandros.

Cheers,
GavinX

[nairanvac]

I'm using Sarge right now, and I've had some minor problems with it, such as Mplayer not working and zip files not unzipping. I've also tried Kubuntu and Ubuntu, and I haven't been too satisfied. They're so plain. By far Sarge is best.

For your problems here's how you solve them:

For Mplayer add:

deb ftp://ftp.nerim.net/debian-marillat/ stable main

to your sources list (/etc/apt/sources.list) Then run apt-get update
For the zip files, just do:

apt-get install zip unzip


Debian is the winner IMHO.

[thedreampolice]

Hmm Debian vs Debian




I vote Debian!

[blackbelt_jones]

Hmm Debian vs Debian




I vote Debian!

You know, now that my "good" computer is working, I'll be starting my linux blog again (The Debian Jones Project (http://www.debianjones.blogspot.com)) and I like the idea of a page comparing various debian-based distros and using the name "Debian vs. Debian". I picture a cartoon logo featuring two angular penguins, one white, one black, based on the old "Spy vs. Spy" from Mad Magazine. Damn, I wish I could draw!

very naturally, MEPIS, being a distro designed for the desktop, will be more desktop-live than debian by itself. But you can apt-get remove all the X11 stuff and it will be nice.

That reeeinforces my thesis. With work (and reading) you can probably get just about any debian to do anything that any other debian can do.

About mplayer and unzip --- I have them in my debian unstable! what were you talking about?

Hmmm. I think they still don't come with Sarge. Maybe it's time to trade up.

Got my P4 computer back last night with a new Asus MoBo and a new Rosewill 550 watts power source... It's pretty intense! It feels like my computer has been stealing my ADD medication. When I got it, I immediately installed Mepis. Then Ubuntu. Then Sarge. Then Mepis again.

Sarge is a big sentimental favorite, but there's no doubt that, now that I apparently have a sound card that it recognizes, Mepis is impressive. It has Mplayer all set up so I can listen to Ed Schultz and the Daily show, and it appears that I don't need to install flashplayer, either. These little things mean a lot. I prefer Gnome to KDE, but, as I've said before, once you download and install it with apt-get, Mepis appears to run Gnome nicely these days, much better than a previous version I downloaded just a few months ago.

I immediately uninstalled Ubuntu when a package that I had just installed from its mirrors was identified as "Ancient". I don't know what that means, and I just didn't want to deal with it. I like to make jokes about how "Ubuntu is an ancient African word meaning 'overrated', but the truth is that I still don't think I know Ubuntu well enough to have a knowledgable opinion of it. Maybe next time. I will say that I think it may be the best-looking Gnome desktop I've ever seen.

[keywi]

What about Kubuntu as being a webserver and maybe a fileserver or a mail server.

William

[Headfuzz]

Enter Xandros. If you're a person who likes to configure things for yourself and like to live on the edge, Xandros may not be for you.

I have to say I was thoroughly impressed with Xandros 3.0 OCE. Stable as Ayers Rock and everything worked straight out of the box (or rather the web downloaded ISO) My only gripe with it was, as GavinX rightly says, the lack of ability to customise the setup, for example upgrading KDE to 3.4 instead of the (if memory serves) 3.0 that came bundled. This unfortunately reminded me too much of having ones hands tied by Winblows so I bumped it for another more flexible distro (currently Suse 9.3 on that laptop). That said, for an it-will-work-perfectly-within-2-minutes-of-install distro, it's hard to find fault with Xandros.

I'm quite eager to try Sarge and other Debian derived distros tho, so will be keeping an eye closely on the comments on this thread :)

[mrBen]

Desktops:

In a business environment, Xandros would be fairly high on my list. The only downside, IMO, is that they are not really involved in the community at all. Thus I would place Ubuntu higher. Ubuntu is probably my favourite derivative - they appear to be doing a lot for the community, and contributing a lot back to Debian. They've also produced a fine distro. I've not tried Mepis. It may be worth checking out "Debian Pure" (http://debianpure.com/) too - basically its Debian but with all the post-install stuff that we all do for a desktop: mplayer, flash, etc, etc

Servers:
Debian would still probably be my choice, although I know people running Ubuntu on servers. I'm planning to move my home setup to a Debian server and an Ubuntu desktop quite soon.

[psych-major]

If comparing Debian to itself, don't forget Zen Linux (http://www.zenlinux.org/zenlinux). It's a really great way to dip your toes into the Debian waters, or else Debian, if that's your preference.

Also, you unfairly lumped Slack in with Gentoo in the 'difficult to install' category. I disagree. I got into Slack as an almost total noob, and after reading the docs for half an hour, I got a perfectly functional installation on my first try. And as a benefit of the experience, I now know how to ./configure && make && make install my way to application happiness... :cool:

[je_fro]

you can get anything, even mplayer, easily in debian.

http://www.apt-get.org/

[DavidMD]

Hello, everyone.

I now have a second (used) Pentium-based PC (3.0-GHz, with hyperthreading, Pentium 4: Dell Dimension 8300) and I am going to use it for running Windows -- at least until it overheats. :p I got a very good price on it and I am a sucker for new hardware. ;)

I have a self-built Pentium 4 PC (2.0-GHz Pentium 4, without hyperthreading) on which I have been dual-booting Windows XP Professional and SuSE Linux Professional. I have a strong sentimental attachment to this machine, because I built it myself, I guess (something I've done three times, but which scares me every time).

In the areas of cooling (fans), temperature monitoring via a display on the case, number of PCI slots, and the quality of the case (despite it being seven years old), I definitely have a strong preference for "my" machine over the Dell, which does not "feel" like it is a gigahertz faster than the computer I built myself. (I have no idea why.)

I would, of course, like for my self-built computer to have some of the features of the Dell (to use with Linux), such as SATA-150 drives, and a faster processor and memory (mainly) -- but I am looking for another technical-writing position, so my finances are very restricted right now. This machine will be my "Linux computer."

Before losing my job, I did purchase two larger, quieter drives (Seagate 120 GB) and a 128-MB 4X video card, the fastest type that the motherboard accepts.

I will install SuSE Linux 10.1 as my "production" OS on my Linux computer, but I want to experiment with other distributions. (I have always used SuSE Linux, and I am comfortable with it and like it.)

I have the opportunity to do some freelance technical writing about Linux, to earn a little income and, more importantly, to help new Linux users.

I want to learn about different Linux distributions (e.g., non-RPM-based ones) out of curiosity and in order to write articles, and I have always been impressed by what I have read about Debian, as well as Debian-based distributions.

I am currently slowly reading and researching the page on the Debian Web site about "Software distributions based on Debian (http://www.debian.org/misc/children-distros)." According to the Web page, the "known" Debian-based distributions, in alphabetical order, are as follows:

- Adamantix
- APLINUX
- BenHur
- Corel Linux
- Debian JP
- DemoLinux
- Demudi, a multimedia distribution.
- Embedded Debian
- ESware Linux
- Euronode
- Floppix
- Gibraltar
- GNUstep LIVE CD
- Impi Linux
- Kanotix
- Knoppix
- Libranet
- Linspire
- Linex
- Linuxin
- Linux-YeS
- Linux Router Project
- MEPIS
- M.N.I.S. Linux
- Morphix
- PingOO
- Progeny Linux
- Prosa
- RAYS LX
- Stonegate
- Stormix Technologies' Storm Linux.
- TelemetryBox
- Ubuntu
- Xandros

I am not interested in embedded distributions, live discs, Corel Linux, or Linspire. (You can probably guess my reasons for not being interested in the latter two.) :)

I have played with the Ubuntu, Kubuntu, and Knoppix live discs. (I use the latter as a rescue disc.)

My primary goal is to explore and learn, and I am willing to do extensive research. (I wish that O'Reilly would release a new edition of their out-of-print book on Debian Linux.) :(

Should I just go ahead and get the most recent stable release of Debian -- 3.1, "sarge" -- or should I explore another Debian-based distribution, perhaps one that is more recent than "sarge," which was relased almost a year ago on 6 June 2005?

I am one of those people who actually reads, and enjoys, books about Linux and particular distributions; I have quite a few books on SuSE Linux, for example.

(I realize that O'Reilly's book on Debian is out of print and out of date, but it has been a while since I searched Amazon.com for books about Debian GNU/Linux -- but I have to be very careful about spending any money right now.)

I have used Linux for a few years, but I have used SuSE regularly. It is possible, therefore, that Debian 3.1 might be overwhelming, but it might also offer the greatest learning opportunity. (Of course, if I follow this course, as soon as I install 3.1, the next stable version will finally come out.) ;)

I could, of course, install a popular Debian-based distribution, such as Ubuntu or Knoppix, but it might be interesting to try a distribution that is perhaps very popular in Europe or, perhaps, Russia, but not as popular in the United States. In addition, because I have experience with the live versions of Ubuntu and Knoppix, I am leaning toward Debian itself, or a slightly easier to use -- but "true to Debian" -- distribution.

Finally, if you think that it might be good experience for me to install a version of BSD, Plan 9 :D, or another open-source *NIX -- such as Syllable, which fascinates me but is in the very early stages -- please feel free to share such suggestions as well.

My goal is to learn, explore, and challenge myself, but I don't want to end up posting multiple daily queries to the JustLinux forums, out of frustration, either. :)

I would greately appreciate your objective and subjective comments, opinions, and suggestions.

Thank you very much, in advance, for your time and help!

Cordially,

David

P.S. -- If you actually read to this point of my post, you are truly a caring, patient individual interested in helping others. I thank you!

[je_fro]

DavidMD: If I were you I'd start with Sarge so you can appreciate the "enhancements" made by other distros. While you're there, there's one thing that has always irked me about debian - the so called "debian way". Even on a debian box, I install new kernels the "kernel.org way" by downloading the tarball to /usr/src, making the symlink /usr/src/linux and doing make menuconfig, make bzImage modules modules_install. I just don't get the debian "make kpackage" way, even though I've done it a few times. It seems like more of a hassle than it's worth.
Anyway, as long as you're writing articles, that's one article I'd like to see. A comparison of kernel installation methods.
That's my $.02
Later!

[DavidMD]

Hi, Jeff. Thank you for replying to my message and for warning me about "the Debian way."DavidMD: If I were you I'd start with Sarge so you can appreciate the "enhancements" made by other distros. While you're there, there's one thing that has always irked me about debian - the so called "debian way". Even on a debian box, I install new kernels the "kernel.org way" by downloading the tarball to /usr/src, making the symlink /usr/src/linux and doing make menuconfig, make bzImage modules modules_install. I just don't get the debian "make kpackage" way, even though I've done it a few times. It seems like more of a hassle than it's worth.
Anyway, as long as you're writing articles, that's one article I'd like to see. A comparison of kernel installation methods.
That's my $.02
Later!I will research the "make kpackage way," Jeff, so that I have a perspective from which to compare it to "the kernel.org way."

The latter method seems fairly straightforward, so I'll be curious to read how Debian instructs one to install new kernels. (I assume that I can learn this information from the Debian Web site.)

Somewhere, Jeff, I have the CD set for "Sarge," so I don't even have to worry about downloading and burning ISOs (easy, but time consuming, even with my cable-modem connection) or buying "Sarge" on CDs and waiting for them (not to mention having to pay for them at a time when I am looking for a new technical-writing job and have no discretionary money to spend).

I know that many Linux experts -- who include you, of course, Jeff --eschew buying Linux books, perhaps because there are so may resources on the Internet and/or because you already know so much. ;)

I am going to do a search on Debian ("Sarge") books on Amazon.com. (I realize that the Debian project team may release a new stable version at any time, but I have not been following their progress.)

I thank you for your advice, Jeff, and I think I will install "Sarge" after my retail copy of SuSE Linux 10.1 comes. (I am getting a free retail DVD from an "etailer (http://www.pctech101.com/) " as a gift for writing an audio Web ad for Linux for him. I just won't have the printed manual or installation support from Novell/SuSE.)

After I get SuSE 10.1 up and running, I will install "Sarge" next on that 120-GB hard drive (once I determine the best way to install multiple distros using GRUB, although I know many people prefer LILO).

Because I got a used 3.0-GHz Pentium-4 Dell Dimension 8300 earlier this year, I am using it as a Windows box, and the 2.0-GHz Pentium-4 machine that I built some time ago for Linux only, after a hard-drive(s) and video-card upgrade. (Unfortunately, my 2.0-GHz P4 lacks hyperthreading; I'd love to upgrade that system with another rebuild, but I cannot afford to do so right now; plus, I'd like to experiment with Xen, but I have no Intel VT processors.)

I know that "tinkering" with Debian will be more challenging than using a Debian derivative, but it will be the best way for me to learn Debian. As you point out, I will also gain a point of comparison between Debian and Debian derivatives.

The challenge of installing and using "Sarge" will, in the end, pay off in the knowledge I gain. I'd also like to write the article that you suggest. (The Linux forum that pays for such articles is not this one, but if I can find a job -- ideally a fulfilling one, which is rare for tech-writing, especially since I've become so interested in Linux and open source -- I can afford to write the article for free and to submit it to JustLinux.) :)

Thanks, again, Jeff! (I think I'll check on Debian books now, while I am thinking about it.)

Cordially,

David

P.S. -- You write, "That's my $.02," in your message, Jeff. I just wanted to let you know that your opinions and ideas are invaluable to me, and that I appreciate your reply and the work that you do as a moderator!

[je_fro]

I've never installed debian with any install media bigger than about 12MB. I used to use 4 floppies and do a netinstall of woody, and I'm sure you can install sarge from a few floppies or about a 12-20MB cd. Here's a good link to get you started on the kernel thing...
Good Luck!

http://newbiedoc.sourceforge.net/system/kernel-pkg.html

[IsaacKuo]

I know that "tinkering" with Debian will be more challenging than using a Debian derivative, but it will be the best way for me to learn Debian. As you point out, I will also gain a point of comparison between Debian and Debian derivatives.

If you're "tinkering", then plain Debian will be easier to mess with than a derivative thanks to the larger experience base and superior documentation. Most Debian derivatives have a relatively narrow scope, usually for some sort of desktop workstation use. For more sophisticated uses--especially servers--plain Debian is by far the most used.

So plain Debian is both easier and a better way for you to learn than tinkering with a derivative.

The challenge of installing and using "Sarge" will, in the end, pay off in the knowledge I gain.

I hope you aren't wishing for too much of a challenge. ;) The reason Debian is so popular with system administrators is largely because it's less of a hassle to flexibly administer than other flavors of Linux. Also, the Sarge install is not very challenging.

[crow2icedearth]

there is one thing i don't about debian sarge. why on earth is it using xfree86 ? xorg has been around for adleast 3 years. why are they still using the old xserver ? I know they have xorg in the unstable version but why not in the stable sarge. Or am i missing something. I also agree the debian way seems like more work when i build kernels the way kernel.org says to.

[Syngin]

I hope you aren't wishing for too much of a challenge. ;) The reason Debian is so popular with system administrators is largely because it's less of a hassle to flexibly administer than other flavors of Linux. Also, the Sarge install is not very challenging.

Yeah, they've come quite a ways with the installer since Potato.