[CLUE-Tech] Fedora vs Debain

[Collins]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 21:11:05 -0600
Nate Duehr <nate at natetech.com> wrote:

> Collins wrote:
> 
> > I prefer Gentoo. The Social Contract is similar to Debian without the arrogance. 
> 
> LOL that's rich.  How about this example from the opposite viewpoint:
> 
> "We at Gentoo know that compiling from source is better for you ...
> because that's the One True Way."

[ rest snipped ] 

I don't know where you dug that up, Nate, but it's not the philosophy of Dan Robbins (founder of Gentoo). Here's a more appropriate excerpt:

"The Gentoo philosophy, in a paragraph, is this. Every user has work they need to do. The goal of Gentoo is to design tools and systems that allow a user to do their work pleasantly and efficiently as possible, as they see fit. Our tools should be a joy to use, and should help the user to appreciate the richness of the Linux and free software community, and the flexibility of free software."

If the desire to create better tools constitutes arrogance, then so be it. 

> 
> I say: Linux in general is arrogant, because it can be... and because we 
> all know that choice is good.  Lots and lots of choices leads to 
> confusion which then leads to people getting louder and louder about 
> their Linux distro religious beliefs.  ;-)
> 

IMO, horse apples. I don't know the origin of frenetic religious beliefs, but I doubt that confusion has anything to do with it. Small minds would be a better bet.


> > 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.
> 
> Nah... it's probably more to do with hype.  Gentoo has had it for a 
> while.  Debian used to have developers flocking to it in droves, next 
> Gentoo -- but another will come... and another... and another.  Plus 
> good results are not measured in how many developers are working on 
> something, but how good the code is that comes out!  (GRIN)

I honestly don't know anyone (developer or user) who has chosen Gentoo because of hype. Debian (and RedHat and SUSE ...) certainly have enough hype as well. Good results come out of Gentoo and Debian, et al.

> 
> The main thing I hope I mentioned about the Debian installer (and the 
> part the always holds it back) is a design issue.  It has to work across 
> all the platforms Debian supports.  And there's a LOT of them.

Not much different with Gentoo.

> 
> Example: I still run Debian on a Sun Ultra 2 in the basement to test 
> things out, and if I use Debian on an i386 machine for "production" and 
> Debian on the Ultra for "testing", stuff is EXACTLY the same.
> 
> There's zero learning curve other than knowing that it uses "SILO" to 
> boot instead of LILO or GRUB, really.  EVERYTHING, including the 
> installer, works, acts, and smells the same.  That's pretty impressive.

Not much different with Gentoo. Only platform-unique functions are different.
> 

> I don't know if Gentoo ever added anything other than i386 family, but > if they did, I doubt the installer looks the same/as pretty as their
> 386 installer.  Writing an installer that "does the right thing"
> across 16 (I think?) different hardware platforms is relatively
> difficult, I'd imagine.  

Except for the platform-unique stuff (booting, file system layout, etc.), the Gentoo install is identical across all platforms. It varies somewhat because there are options to install everything from source or start with a pre-compiled base.

> > A final note: Debian is certainly not the only distro with adequate
> > (even copious) docuentation. 
> 
> I never said that.  I was talking about their standards which were 
> mature and how those were well-documented LONG before the other Linux 
> distros.
> 

So Debian has been around for a while longer. So has Slackware. Gentoo hasn't. 

> > I've been running the so called bleeding edge version of Gentoo for 6 months now (total time with Gentoo 3+ years), and I've actually encountered fewer problems than I did with the stable version.

> How often do you update your Gentoo?

Sometimes weekly, sometimes monthly.

> 
> I have a reasonably fast machine here (Athlon XP 2500+), and even with
> the faster machine than the old P-III 450 I originally tried out
> Gentoo on, I eventually got really tired of the never-ending download,
> compile, fix whatever stupid thing the package maintainer forgot in
> some obscure config file, wash-rinse-repeat cycle that never seemed to
> never end with Gentoo on the desktop machine.
> 
> Ughhhh. And it just seemed to constantly get in the way of me ever
> getting anything DONE on the box.
> 

Sounds like you're not exactly a fan of install-from-source. I find the maintenance mostly painless. It's only when one of the mega packages (kde, etc.) enters a new cycle that thing get tedious. Even then, I just crank up the upgrade at 9PM ad sleep on it. Anything smaller, I just let it churn away while I read emails.

> To be honest, I can't really find a Linux I really like much right now > for desktop use -- and I've tried a bunch lately.  Mandrake 9.2, 10.0, > Xandros, MEPIS, Fedora, Debian... they all have problems that make one > thing or another unusable.
> 

Lots of people swear by Libranet, if you like the Debian setup.

> I'm typing this on the evil dreaded Winderz running Mozilla Mail.
> But if I were to purchase a new box right now, it'd be a Mac where OSX
> gives a beautiful desktop environment and voila... there's a nice BSD 
> tcsh shell there waiting anytime I need it. 

Apple is producing a fine product. They've grafted a superb desktop environment onto a stable base (BSD).

> 
> On servers -- I do like Debian.  Massive upgrades come along slowly
> long after all the weird bugs and tweaks have been figured out, and in
> the meantime security.debian.org is dedicated to putting out patches
> VERY fast for real security issues.

You'll find very much the same situation with Gentoo. How many servers
care about KDE or QT updates? Gentoo responds VERY fast for real security issues. 
> 
> Not bleeding edge, but rock-solid, secure, and just sits in the
> basement  and runs... and runs... and runs...

Those who run Gentoo servers say the same thing; runs and runs and runs.
Interestingly enough, Dan Robbins doesn't recommend Gentoo for servers, yet. Gentoo is still a work in progress. That doesn't stop a lot of Gentooers, however.

> 
> Even though it's been moved from one physical disk to two others over 
> the years (for more disk space), and it's killed at least one hard
> disk after years of spinning, the main "server" box here at home is
> basically running on the same Debian installation (with two or three
> apt-get dist-upgrade's in there, of course) that it was running on in
> 1995. 

You could probably get the same reliability out of any number of distros.


> Right now I'm in "stable, works, quiet, no forest fires" mode ...

Right now, I'm in a try out new things, quiet, no forest fires mode! The so called bleeding edge doesn't involve much bleeding with Gentoo. The real bleeding edge is with the developers and CVS versions of products. This laptop is within a few days of released, current stuff, and it works perfectly.

Enjoy,

-- 
 /\/\
( CR ) Collins Richey
 \/\/