On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 01:30:19PM -0600, Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote: > > if that's true, why do they have the 'nonfree' repository? > what about all the 3rd-party repositories for packages that don't come close > to being free? > like this one, straight from my sources.list: > # w32 codecs, incl. quicktime > deb http://marillat.free.fr unstable main Let me clarify, debian = what comes on the CD sets, from 'official' debian repositories. > > debian is about forcing you to take the hard path to prove your manhood, > > I fail to see what's so hard about using Debian. debian on the command-line > is about as easy to use as RH on the command line; just that files are in > different places (and IMHO, more sensible ones on Debian). > > Does Debian have many distro-specific GUI tools for system configuration? > no; that's not their goal. they want to use generally-available, > non-distro-specific tools, instead of wasting effort duplicating someone > else's work. Besides, once you do without those tools for a while, you > realize how much they end up hampering you in the long run. (tho they > definitely have a good value for the new administrator). I never use the config tools, I was referring to things like dselect, the lack of a basic XF86 configuration during install, hardware detection (ie, kudzu), a few prompts for system configuration during install... It would solve 90% of the install issues people have. A few other items include no skeleton equivalent of rc.local, lack of useful sample configuration files (depends on the package), poor documentation.. I think that's enough for now. Debian is built on the premise that you should have to do absolutely everything the most difficult way possible, perhaps to scare off any lowly creature that isn't worthy. > > debian is about making you either run > > an out of date system (stable), a broken system (unstable), or an up to date > > but probably broken system (testing). > > that's not an entirely inaccurate assesment; but that said, things usually > don't stay broken for long in Unstable. But everyone tells me how stable debian is.. ("only if you run -stable!"), it's useless if it doesn't have the functionality I need. > probably. it's the simplest upgrade path, and hopefully the least painful... > but I don't have full faith in the Fedora organization to *not* become > another Debian, just with a different package format. (and a lot less > maturity in their quality-control process, since they're newer). Simple? Please, it's like moving into a cardboard box from a townhouse. <alright, maybe not that extreme ;-> -- Matthew S. Hallacy FUBAR, LART, BOFH Certified http://www.poptix.net GPG public key 0x01938203 _______________________________________________ TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list