Fedora Core 6 and Other [part 3]
Published by Mircea Ungureanu [rastilin] on 2006/11/19 (4913 reads)
After attempting to use Fedora Core 6 and deciding to switch away from it, I went through a few other distributions. They didn't end well either. Rather than going through all their problems separately, I'll explain their Pros and Cons in bulk.
Debian
+ Debian package manager
Yum is great but apt-get is still king. Enough said. Plus, unlike with Ubuntu, running dist-upgrade to switch between versions won't break your system.
+ Stable
Packages tested to be secure, there's 12 cds of packages, all tested together. Better than Microsoft's guarantee.
- Stable
It uses the kernel 2.4 for the latest stable version. Open Office 1.1.3 and does NOT use Xorg, at least according to Distro Watch. Which means that if you're switching away from a more modern distribution, you might have to back-convert your files until they work.
- Dependency Problems
Seemingly normal packages output errors stating that their dependencies can not be found in the repositories.
I have no idea why this happens, it MUST be a fluke. Probably. But more fluke than I am willing to deal with. Especially without X.
- No X
X didn't configure itself properly. Possibly a fluke, probably. Startx didn't work either. Very annoying. Especially when you select "Desktop" in the installer.
Mandriva
- Looks / Works like windows
I didn't switch to Linux so that I could have a Windows Look-Alike. Users: you've switched, deal with it.
- Doesn't Install
Ok, probably a fluke here too. Nevertheless, after the X based installer choked on the graphics card. It's more trouble than I'm willing to deal with on this one. The screen just blacked out, came back and went black repeatedly for half an hour.
Distribution of Choice
Ubuntu
Ubuntu is great, perfect, wonderful. As good as OpenSUSE except without novell.
Theory
I've developed a theory from observing the various distributions. I figure that your best bet is to go with a distribution that's a derivative of another. Like Sabayon for Gentoo, Ubuntu for Debian or CentOS for Redhat. So it's like getting the base distribution except with more testing.
My basis for this is that most people would NOT put up with having the installers crash continually. Ubuntu works perfectly so odds are that other people have the idea but not the marketing.
Does this make any sense? What are other people's experiences?
Debian
+ Debian package manager
Yum is great but apt-get is still king. Enough said. Plus, unlike with Ubuntu, running dist-upgrade to switch between versions won't break your system.
+ Stable
Packages tested to be secure, there's 12 cds of packages, all tested together. Better than Microsoft's guarantee.
- Stable
It uses the kernel 2.4 for the latest stable version. Open Office 1.1.3 and does NOT use Xorg, at least according to Distro Watch. Which means that if you're switching away from a more modern distribution, you might have to back-convert your files until they work.
- Dependency Problems
Seemingly normal packages output errors stating that their dependencies can not be found in the repositories.
I have no idea why this happens, it MUST be a fluke. Probably. But more fluke than I am willing to deal with. Especially without X.
- No X
X didn't configure itself properly. Possibly a fluke, probably. Startx didn't work either. Very annoying. Especially when you select "Desktop" in the installer.
Mandriva
- Looks / Works like windows
I didn't switch to Linux so that I could have a Windows Look-Alike. Users: you've switched, deal with it.
- Doesn't Install
Ok, probably a fluke here too. Nevertheless, after the X based installer choked on the graphics card. It's more trouble than I'm willing to deal with on this one. The screen just blacked out, came back and went black repeatedly for half an hour.
Distribution of Choice
Ubuntu
Ubuntu is great, perfect, wonderful. As good as OpenSUSE except without novell.
Theory
I've developed a theory from observing the various distributions. I figure that your best bet is to go with a distribution that's a derivative of another. Like Sabayon for Gentoo, Ubuntu for Debian or CentOS for Redhat. So it's like getting the base distribution except with more testing.
My basis for this is that most people would NOT put up with having the installers crash continually. Ubuntu works perfectly so odds are that other people have the idea but not the marketing.
Does this make any sense? What are other people's experiences?
| Navigate through the articles | |
H-Craft Championship
|
GPL3 and how it affects linux
|
|
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
|
