On Sunday 19 May 2002 14:33, Robert Ian Smit wrote: > Hi, > > I am using Windows as my main system at the moment. I have tried various > distributions in the past (Suse, Mandrake, Redhat). The Linux-systems I > tried could never fully replace my Windows desktop. Unstable application > software was one reason, the amount of hacking required another.
OK, I admit that the amount of hacking required is one thing that absolutely draws me to linux. I use Windows for playing games, but I do most of my work on Linux. > With some of the major applications reaching 1.x, I believe now is the time > to give Linux another shot. Besides I don't want to upgrade to WinXP. Never trust a 1.x release ;-) But honestly: most of the 0.9x's are perfectly fine as long as it's not commercial... commercial software tends to be system-independent in its errors. > I know Debian is more difficult to install, but I hope I will benefit by > learning a lot. The default install for Redhat 7.3 is quite nice, but > adapting it to my needs is a lot of work. I might as well try Debian and > only install things I really need to avoid bloat. In my experience debian is not more difficult, but it's looking different. OK, it doesn't have a flashy graphic installer, but you don't need a mouse to install it. If you're sticking to some defaults, you can install it with the numeric keypad. > [SNIP] > If I install software in /usr/local, as I understand it, I bypass Debian > package management. If I want to run current software (as in Redhat or > Mandrake current) will I need to install a lot of software in usr/local? Depends on what you need. I don't think anyone will be able to tell you unless you're more specific about what you want to do that's not possible with packaged software. > Basically I want to know if it's possible to have a system that respects > the Debian guidelines, but is more up to date in regards to > desktop/application software? I had a system running (until recently) that built upon debian 2.2something and that had survived some rather nasty upgrades (glibc... don't change this yourself if you don't absolutely know what you're doing!) without breaking the package management too badly. Of course, if you replace something like X with a more recent version bypassing the package management, there are _some_ problems, but none you can't avoid with some logical thought. If you "only" want to upgrade some applications, most often the easiest way is to use the packages for required support libraries and install the application from somewhere else if it's not available as a deb. If you keep to /usr/local or /opt, you're amazingly risk-free with this. > I want to avoid format disks and install again every three months, but > rather have a stable, open-ended system that I can adapt to my needs. Depending on how much you play with the system itself, I'd say a year is a good interval ;-) However, if you don't experiment too wildly, I don't see the necessity for a complete reinstall anytime soon. > I hope I have made clear what I want to do and would like to know about > experiences from other people. Please tell me if I am wrong in choosing > Debian for my needs. I want to and have time to learn, but would like to > have an indication whether my goals are reachable. <sarcasm> Yeah. Asks debian-user whether debian is good. Hmmm... What should I say? The truth and be flamed into oblivion? </sarcasm> Nicos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
