|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
Slashdot is not responsible for what they say.
.
( Switch to Flat mode | Reply )
<
Down One |
This Page's Threshold: 0 |
Up One >
(Warning:this stuff
might be beta right now)
|
Okay, convince me.
by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 01, @11:59PM
|
Debian is very political. Debian is the only distribution which hold true to the GNU and Linux opensource policy.
The Debian deb format for packages are very different from RPMs. You need rpm to actually install an rpm or even to look what's inside. With debs, you can use ar to break them apart and then use tar an gunzip to look at the rest. Debs also allows the ability for the package to run setup scripts and prompt the installer for information, while rpms simply puts the files where they go. RPMs are so much simpler to make, while debs require complex control files.
There are no lack of debian packages with 2.1 at 2600+ and potato at 3000+
With sys administration, why do you need a program like linux conf? I personally think its dumb. Just go into the config file and edit the thing anyway.
If you've never used Debian don't rip on it.
|
| [ Reply to
this | Parent ] |
| |
Okay, convince me.
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 02, @12:30AM
|
| i prefer debian because
- i think dselect/apt (a fortiori gnome-apt) is a very nice little package management tool, the likes of which i have not heard from Red Hat
- debian seems more stable, solid.
- dpkg + alien offers more versatility than just rpm (and i believe one of the developers is planning to add .rpm support to dpkg...?)
- little things like having a decent suite of utilities (compared to Red Hat) when you "drop down into a shell" during the initial install to check things like ifconfig and dmesg.
- easy access (including searching) to all packages from the web site
- ok, the philosophy, too.. 8)
just top-of-the-head stuff... i'm sure other users could share more... (note: i still commend and respect Red Hat, very much)
|
| [ Reply to
this | Parent ] |
| |
Okay, convince me.
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 02, @12:31AM
|
I would like to note that Debian is essentially a high quality distribution. It has around 400 volunteer mantainers. It is guaranteed that bugs will pop out much less frequently than on redhat. dpkg never breaks.
Package management is superior to rpm. Whan Window Maker? Just type apt-get install wmaker in your root prompt. It will determine the dependencies and will download and install all stuff that you need. You can even upgrade the whole system with just 2 apt commands.
System maintainance is a snap. Installation AND configuration of "difficult" programs like sendmail is rediculuosly easy. Unlike rpm, dpkg also gives you a choice between the 4 or 5 most common sendmail setups for example.
I would say that RedHat is easier to install. Debian is easier to mantain.
|
| [ Reply to
this | Parent ] |
| |
|
Debian is much better (Score:1)
by mfearby on Tuesday March 02, @02:57AM
(User
Info)
|
I agree with previous replies to your message. My experience has been that Red Hat doesn't configure as nicely as Debian and seems far less stable.
Debian is also much easier to install, in my opinion. Red Hat only gives you Disk Druid (isn't very nice to use) and plain-old fdisk - not even cfdisk (which is much easier to use).
Red Hat seems to "do their own thing" more than Debian, who adheres to the GNU/Linux ethos better. I know this sounds "religious" but Debian is just so much better in so many ways that I would never consider Red Hat.
|
| [ Reply to
this | Parent ] |
| |
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
Slashdot is not responsible for what they say.
.
( Switch to Flat mode | Reply )
<
Down One |
This Page's Threshold: 0 |
Up One >
(Warning:this stuff
might be beta right now)
|
