I know Linc was happy with his install of Debian during his recent distro try-out on his blog, and Dave at Lotta Linux Links is an avid Debian fan and does amazing stuff with it. For what it's worth - I was very pleased with Debian when I installed it last year .
Also, for me, it has - for lack of a better term - a coolness or feel-good factor to it. The kind of coolness that comes from going from "humble" beginnings (I guess you could say that, if Ian could name it after his wife), staying true to the principles of being free and open, and achieving what it has.
The only knock I used to hear, was that the repositories were messed up, or weren't kept up, or something like that.
Is that bogus?, or if not, has it improved?
Debian
Moderators: snarkout, Patrick, dann
-
johnnywtllts
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 9:40 am
- Location: North Carolina
- Contact:
Re: Debian
I've never heard that about stable. The only complaining I've heard is from people running unstable or testing and wondering why things break. There are also the Debian based distros that base on testing or unstable that give Debian a bad name when they totally crash (Arch is a good example).johnnywtllts wrote: The only knock I used to hear, was that the repositories were messed up, or weren't kept up, or something like that.
Is that bogus?, or if not, has it improved?
Debian is known for being pedantic about keeping stable... stable. If you know what you're doing and understand that unstable means unstable, and is expected to be unstable at times, you won't have a problem.
Re: Debian
FYI, Arch is not based on Debian at all.Gomer_X wrote: There are also the Debian based distros that base on testing or unstable that give Debian a bad name when they totally crash (Arch is a good example).
Ego contemno licentia
Re: Debian
I am teh wr0ng! Don't know why I thought it was Debian based.Patrick wrote:FYI, Arch is not based on Debian at all.
It has on occasion caused problems by using slightly unstable software (in my experience).