[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ossig] Enterprise Linux: UserLinux, Debian
I didn't mean for this to get into a FC/Debian
yum/apt-get religious debate - but of course, I
shoulda known, huh? :-P
--- Uwe Dippel <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Knoppix/Gnoppix, UserLinux). That is, instead of
> > others like Fedora or Slackware or Gentoo. Anyone
> > thoughts / experiences as to why this might be?
> > it's more than simply "apt-get" and .debs?
> Interesting. Could we not make out, that there *are*
> reasons, then ?
> Reasons to not use Slackware, Gentoo or Fedora ?
> Try and ask them, and apt will be a good reason;
> including lots of ports
> (packages). Others ? I'd be curious. I doubt
> religious motives.
I dunno, apt-get is just a package manager, really.
There are numerous others which could do the same job.
> (This isn't supposed to be religious neither; only
> my two sen trying to
> answer your question.)
Thanks but it's not really what I had in mind. :-)
> > I just find it weird that a distro whose "stable"
> > release is consistently about 2-3 years old
> > could be so popular.
> What is weird in it ? Some shops want 'stable' with
> security backports
> (a branch of a local bank runs basically on Woody);
> no breakage allowed
> in 24/7.
Right. That is understandable. But I already know that
What I was asking is why is it popular for those
*interesting* projects like knoppix? Is the design of
debian different, somehow? Is it nice/easy to maintain
Bruce Perens also chose Debian for UserLinux (although
that might have some 'sentimental' reasons) but
consider also that Lindows and Lycoris are also based
on Debian. The awesome skolelinux.org project is also
based on debian. People just seem to *prefer* it for
their respective purposes.
What I'm getting at is, is the "way of debian" somehow
extra conducive to distro specialization in some way?
Is it really *that* flexible? What gives it this
quality that other 'base' distros do not have?
I've used Mandrake and Red Hat. Both are horrifying to
customize. The config files are messy and all over the
place, for example. Slackware (my favoured distro,
currently) is extremely sane by comparison (a bit like
FreeBSD). It's easy to configure stuff. Files are as
you expect them and where you expect them. Slackware
is the least surprising, IMHO, which makes my life
But, again, apart from Slax (a liveCD distro) and
Movix not many interesting specialized distros are
based on Slackware.
You might be asking why am I asking these questions?
Well, if we know the answers, we'd be better able to
recommend distros to fit either our own purposes or
other people's (if they asked, say).
> commodisation (does this word exist ?).
Close, it's "commoditization". It seems to be used a
lot in the press but it does not seem to be in the
dictionary. Yet. :-)
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
To unsubscribe: send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
with "unsubscribe ossig" in the body of the message