On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 10:06:10AM +0200, A. Lanza wrote: > Hi list, > > i've been running Fedora linux for about 3 years now but... i wanted to > explore Debian as well. Recently, i had to set up a mail system and i > installed Debian Sarge on an old Pentium 3 machine with 128 MB of RAM. > The new(?) Sarge installer is quite good and i had no problems to set my > system up from a net-install CD. apt-get is just *great*, i usually use > an apt-get port for Fedora as my package manager tool. > > I have to tell that i've been really surprised at the global performance > of Debian running on the machine i described above. apt-get runs faster > than in Fedora. I've liked quite a lot the configuration utility that > runs after installing some packages as Postfix or Postgresql. > > Though, i have some general questions and observations: > > * I have found Debian not very different from Fedora in the basics. I > would like to know what are the very differences among both distros. > > * kernel 2.4.27 was installed in my box. It's been a suprise since in > Fedora i'm running kernels 2.6.x. Why this 2.4 kernel? Does Debian > consider 2.6 kernels unstable? I'd like to upgrade my kernel; how can i > do it using apt-get? > > * There was no need for X in my mail server box, but i tried to install > Debian Sarge on my desktop machine and found some problems. My graphics > hardware (ATI Radeon 9250) was not supported. After looking at the XF86 > logs i decided to go to ATI site for some support and found a > proprietary driver (fglrx), that i compiled into a kernel module. Now i > can start X and get 1024x768 24-bit color. Seems that performance is > acceptable, but graphics system is not stable, it hangs my whole system > (no way to get a console) after some random time... I had some problems > also with a Wireless desktop (keyboard+mouse) from Logitech, i had to > change mouse configuration manually in XF86Config. > Now, i had no problems with this hw before while installing Fedora > (since FC1). I wonder why this? Could it be because of the 2.4 kernel? > Maybe Fedora has better hw support than Debian? > > * I noticed too that Debian runs XF86 instead of Xorg, as Fedora does. > Why this? What are the differences between them? Is video hw support > better in Xorg? Are there any licensing issues with Xorg? > > After running Debian in my mail server for some time, i think that it > can be a really good choice for a production server, but what about > desktop? For the moment, i think i'll keep Fedora... or maybe not, if > someone gives me good reasons :) > > Thanks for your kind attention. I'll be waiting and will appreciate your > answers and opinions. > > Alf
I jump in rather late on this thread with two thoughts: 1. There is a lot of support here for converts to Debian. You might even be overwhelmed with it ;-). 2. There is a system for controlling which (stable,testing,unstable) is the dominant distribution in your apt-get system. It is called 'apt preferences'. If you really want to complicate your life with a mixed distribution installation, you really must become familiar with apt preferences. It does work, but it is not easy to understand. I think I have figured it out, but I then found that having the very latest stuf wasn't worth the effort (for me). YMMV. -- Paul E Condon [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
