Early adopters bloodied by Ubuntu's Karmic Koala
tbrucemilne-TcoXwbchSccMMYnvST3LeUB+6BGkLq7r at public.gmane.org
Fri Nov 6 21:52:00 UTC 2009
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 4:16 PM, D. Hugh Redelmeier <hugh-pmF8o41NoarQT0dZR+AlfA at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> | From: Thomas Milne <tbrucemilne-TcoXwbchSccMMYnvST3LeUB+6BGkLq7r at public.gmane.org>
> | Running a mixed Testing and Unstable system, I've never experienced
> | one single serious breakage.
> With Ubuntu, you are directed to run the latest version, with updates,
> or the latest LTS version, with updates. That seems pretty simple.
> Whenever people recommend Debian, the recipe seems more complicated.
> Simple version:
> - Run stable is you want stability (and movement at the rate of tectonic
> - Run testing even though it may be unsafe. Really, it is supposed to
> be almost safe.
> - Run unstable if you "like to live on the edge"
> The actual recommendation from people I trust is "run some mixture of these".
> How is one to know what mixture to run? It seems like it would be a
> lot of work to figure this out correctly.
> Oh, and another confusion: at any one time, stable and testing each
> have a name (of a character from Toy Story). When a new stable
> release is released, the name of the old "testing" becomes the name of
> the new stable. But unstable is always called Sid. So new name is
> invented for testing. At least I think that is how it works.
> I don't run Debian mostly because I don't know what mixture to run and
> I don't have to decide this with the distros I do use (CentOS, Fedora,
> and Ubuntu).
> Continuous (as opposed to discontinuous) updating is attractive.
> Lennart seems to say that works with Debian, even when a new version
> becomes stable or testing. But Lennart seems to be capable of easily
> solving problems that others find daunting.
I can assure you, I am nowhere near the level of experience that
Lennart has, and I have not found anything about Debian nearly as
confusing as you make it out to be. I had to ask about the version
name thing once, but Lennart must be gifted at explaining things too,
because I got it :-)
I think it comes down to what I've been hearing from most of the
responses to this thread: there's really no specific show-stopping
reason people choose Ubuntu, it seems to come down to a more general
preference for the way it is packaged, and to some slightly more
polished tools for configuration, particularly for newer wireless
hardware and such.
The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
More information about the Legacy