On Sun, 30 Jan 2000, Hidong Kim wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As long as this thread keeps getting spun, I've always been curious
> about the difference between Red Hat and Debian. What is it? I've
> never used Debian. Except for a very brief experience with slackware,
> I've used only Red Hat and Mandrake. The difference between Red Hat and
> Mandrake is that Mandrake has more broken stuff.
>
1) Debian has _no_ non-free software. (This means, incidentally, that they
don't include Pine!)
2) Debian is extremely rigid about adhering to "standards" like FHS. (This
is actually a good thing.)
3) Debian uses .deb instead of .rpm package files. Opinions vary on that.
You can, however, also use .rpm files.
4) Debian has an incredibly tedious install, all character mode.
5) Debian does make updates simple and smooth. (Red Hat does not.)
6) Debian has no commercial company behind it. It is generated, tested and
put out by hundreds of volunteers across the internet. As such, it isn't
subject to the vaguaries and whims of large corporations.
7) New versions take a very long time to come out.
8) Support? Same as the Red Hat list. Debian's list may be slightly more
active.
9) Because of the volunteer testing and such, Debian may be more stable
than Red Hat.
10) Debian has very little in the way of admin tools. Prepare to hack
configuration files. (Real Men Use Debian.)
11) Typically, cost is less than Red Hat. Of course that depends on how
you get it. But you won't spend $79 on it, that's for sure.
Bottom line: If you can deal with the tedious install and you're more than
intimate with the way Linux works (and not scared of config files), Debian
is very stable and upgrades easily. Likewise, if you're afraid of the
vaguaries of large corporations like Red Hat or SuSE, Debian may be for
you.
Paul M. Foster
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
