Ubuntu first time

[Thomas Milne]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:54 AM, Alejandro Imass <aimass-EzYyMjUkBrFWk0Htik3J/w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Thomas Milne
> <thomas.bruce.milne-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Alejandro Imass <aimass-EzYyMjUkBrFWk0Htik3J/w at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Lennart Sorensen
>>> <lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 02:41:13PM -0500, Alejandro Imass wrote:
> [...]
>
>> That's EXACTLY LENNART'S POINT. That _never happens_ with Debian.
>> Ever. But as you yourself say, it does happen with Ubuntu. A lot.
>>
>
> It does happen with Debian also and just saying it doesn't mean it's
> true. You post is typical Debianite zealotry that ultimately leads to
> errors like the ssh scandal, which you seem to have deliberately
> ignored in my last post. They do happen in Debian, *very publicly and
> shamefully so* - it was Debian stable, so don't say they don't happen
> "Ever", because it undermines the credibility of your whole post.
>
> I can understand why Debianites are pissed off at Ubuntu but it
> doesn't justify creating FUD on it, on ANY Linux distro for that
> matter.

I don't care about Ubuntu at all. You claim that it is more usable
than Debian Unstable, I am merely asking you to back that up with
facts. Don't get all upset about it, just answer the question.

>>> Same thing we've done since we started using it circa Ubuntu 5.04
>>
>> Wow, that sounds like amazing fun. Why not just load Debian and never
>> have to even worry if some or other release of Ubuntu is going to be,
>> as YOU describe it, 'somewhat broken'?
>>
>
> I don't install _any_ software on it's point o version. In Ubuntu it
> seems they have adopted Microsoft's approach to client beta testing
> but at least they don't charge people for it. The .10 versions seem to
> be quite stable, and people should wait for those.
>
> [...]
>
>> How _exactly_ is Debian Unstable 'unusable' (I'm assuming that's the
>> word you meant)?
>>
>
> [...]
>
>>
>> You mean like 'Debian Unstable is unusable'?
>>
>
> Oh my god! I have a typo, please spare my life!
>
> If you are a Debian user you know for a fact that Debian unstable is
> so quirky it makes it unusable, un-usable, not-usable, or whatever you
> wanna call it, like it's very name: unstable and hardly good for any
> practical use.

No, I don't know that at all, you just keep saying it. Can you give me
an example, other than the one that everyone seems to be repeating
about sshd?

The name 'Unstable' has absolutely nothing to do with its performance.
An experienced user would know that.

> "Testing" is quite good and probably the best choice for doing
> anything on the desktop that requires some relatively new version of
> anything. Stable is great for servers yet the packaging is so old it
> can be challenging sometimes to get things done and you may wind up
> compiling many things from source.
>
> Debian is a great OS, but so is Ubuntu and it's unfair to create this
> FUD just because YOU think Debian is awesome and Ubuntu is crap,
> because it's not.

Uh, try again. YOU said Debian Unstable was 'unusable'. I'm asking you
to simply back that up with some facts, since that and the sshd thing
are your entire argument for using Ubuntu.

> They satisfy different needs and to solve real-world problems, and so do the other Linux distros, and non Linux OSes as well.
>
> --
> Alejandro Imass
> --
> 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



-- 
Thomas Milne
--
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