[clue-tech] Re: Hello sidux?

[Collins Richey]

On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Nate Duehr <nate at natetech.com> wrote:
> Collins Richey wrote:
>

< but Ubuntu is what it is, and it's one of the better distros for
desktops... especially for newbies...

I agree. I just got tired of reinstalling.


>
>
> > You can run it if you choose - just like xfce or enlightenment or any
> > of a dozen other window managers. Nothing that sidux does will prevent
> > Gnome and other things from working as well as they always work in
> > sid. The difference is that no one in sidux land is filtering the
> > Gnome packages. If it's broken in sid, it will be broken for you.
> >
>
>
>  So the gnome packages are actually on/in their repositories, or are they
> using Debian's repositories?   Or a mixture.
>

The repositories are debian sid (all variants) plus the minimal extra
stuff in the sidux repository.

>

> > 3. sidux provides a stable method of implementing unstable software.
> >
>
>  Bwahaha... I like that one.

I like it, too. sidux is remarkably stable.

>
>
>
> > Almost nothing that sidux provides is not already in sid.
> >
>
>  Nice and vague.

Already succinctly stated elsewhere. To repeat, debian sid plus a few
extras provided by sidux.

>

>
> > 5. As stated earlier, sidux is designed for those folks who want a
> > more stable version of DEVELOPMENT level software and who can tolerate
> > a LOT of updates.
> >
>
>  And breakage.

Please let me know the distro that has no breakage. I've encountered
no more breakage with sidux than with any other distro I've tried.
Ever tried a Ubuntu development release?



>
>  But at least now I can be expecting a "support" call from someone now
> running Sidux, and I'll probably tell 'em... "You're on your own buddy.
> It's based on something a whole team of coders calls "Unstable", so those
> Sidux guys have pretty big egos to say they can make it work well all the
> time!  Hope they have a very active online community you can refer to...
> Debian does, but they'll tell you it's unstable and to pound sand or fix it
> yourself."

Yep, veractive, friendly, and helpful online community. Pound sand is
not a frequently encountered solution. Unlike the debian list of the
earlier days where the attitude seemed to be Ÿou're not a guru, so why
are you clogging up our list?",
sidux developers and users are more like the gentoo folks.

>
>


>
>  I guess I get it, but it's definitely weird.  I understand the desire to
> have the "latest and greatest" but trying to make new software less painful
> is always an exercise in futility.  Bugs are a fact of life, and testing --
> is almost non-existant in this biz.
>
>  I dunno.  Sounds interesting, but just like Sid, it DOES break -- someone
> is fixing the breakage for some things, is all.
>
>  They won't catch everything.  :-)
>

>  Sid = Broken.  That thread comes up annually and turns into a huge furball
> on the Debian lists... and the result from frustrated devs already working
> on it is always, "Fix it if you don't like it.  It's called Unstable for a
> reason!"

sidux = not broken in 99% of the cases. There is a very active team of
developers and users with thick skins for pain who do the heavy
lifting for testing. And I've encountered almost nothing broken - 3
incidents in 6 months, average time to workkaround or fix a few hours
to a few days. With any product like sid (and Ubuntu development for
that matter), there is the occasional instance of packages released to
the repositories without all the required dependencies. You have to
wait a few days for those glitches to be worked out, but no real
effect for your running system.

>
>  Having other devs fixing things and sending them upstream from Sidux is
> both a blessing and a curse.  If they're not DD's there will always be some
> of that "not invented here" mentality behind any "controversial" fixes they
> might accomplish.

Don't really know whether the developers are registered DD's. Don't
really care. The proof is in the pudding - works for me. I haven't
heard any real complainst from DD's, but then I haven't paid much
attention. By choice, I don't get involved in internal debian stuff or
politics. I just like the products - be it Ubuntu or Sidux or some of
the commercial choices.

>
>  To summarize, I think "institutionalizing" the running of something someone
> else who knows the code very well calls "Unstable", is likely to be a broken
> idea at its core... but who knows?
>
>  Maybe Sidux will become the "next big thing".  Hard to say in the wild and
> wooly world of Linux.
>

I rather doubt that an unstable release will become the next big
thing, but there is growing interest in the distro. In case it isn't
obvious, I'm not a Sidux salesman. I like it, but I'm not everyone.
The only way to tell whether your suspicions are correct (sidux =
broken because of sid) or whether it's good stuff is to try it and
work with the online community for a few months. I will say this much.
The one problem I encountered early in the game (miserably worthless
version of xorg) was far beyond the level that a newbie could deal
with all alone. That's why the online community is critical. If I had
paid closer attention to the online recommendations, I would have
sidestepped the issue entirely, as did most users. Meanwhile, I've not
encountered this type of breakage again, and the improvements in the
maintenance utility make it unlikely to repeat.

-- 
Collins Richey
 If you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the worries
 of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for.