[CLUE-Tech] Fedora vs Debian

[Brandon N]

--- Collins <erichey2 at comcast.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 22:13:05 +0000 (UTC)
> Angelo Bertolli <angelo at freeshell.org> wrote:
> 
> [ snips ]
>  
> > This kind of sums up the main idea behind why it's taken me until
> now
> > to even try Debian:  it's never been cutting edge.  Sarge features
> the
> > all brand-speanking new kernel 2.4! Wow!  
> 
> > Another annoying thing is that Sarge by default installs the i386
> > kernel instead of the i686 kernel.  
> 
> > I had been wondering why on earth it was so much slower than my
> > previous RH installation until I noticed this.  I never knew that
> the
> > kernel architecture could make such a difference
> 
> > Luckily they're not as slow as the HURD group ;)
> > 
> 
> <on the soapbox>
> 
> Angelo provides a good summary of the reasons why I have never been
> impressed with Debian. When you combine the incredible arrogance (we
> know what is best for you; your opinion seldom counts; don't even
> mention commercial products: they are evil) with an ancient version
> of everything, well ... it's clear to me that I'll never be a Debian
> fan.

I've never really experienced any of this, unlike the Redhat "best of
breed" only, Debian provides most different versions of software. 
Policy is generally decided by a vote, and while they do have strict
policies on how packages are designed, this is to maintain consistency.
 

> Sure, Gentoo prefers GPL'd software, but they
> even make available easy installs for non-GPL or proprietary stuff
> where it is legal and practical to do so. Example: RealPlayer. You
> need to sign up and download via the RealPlayer site, but Genoo
> provides a standard ebuild to integrate the software properly into
> your system.

Debian provides non-free packages as well, they are in the non-free
section. 

> Somebody mentioned that the Debian installer would be much better if
> there were only more volunteers.  There would be more volunteers if
> it were not for the stifling, stodgy atmosphere. Gentoo attracts
> hundreds of volunteers from around the world. So why didn't these
> volunteers gravitate towards Debian? Maybe it's because they would be
> embarrassed to offer a two-generations-old version of KDE and a
> kernel that is getting long in the tooth.

I don't quite understand why everyone thinks that debian is so
outdated, I'm currently running the stable version with a 2.4 kernel,
and 2.6 is available in both sarge and sid.  I personally like the
three different levels of development.  I run woody (stable) on
production servers that are accessable to the outside, because it is
the most stable and secure, and then on workstations I run either sarge
or sid, depending on how current I need to be.  

I, and I think most on here, aren't of the mindset that one
distribution is good, and the others are evil, because each
distribution serves a portion of the population.  As long as they all
collabarate on the big issues, like LSB, I think it's good to have
several options.  

Brandon


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash