[olug] Debian

[Robert A. Jacobs]

On Sun, 2004-02-01 at 16:22, John DiMartino wrote:
> Okay... I am checking out Debian (I have never used it before) and there 
> seems to be 3 types of Debian:  stable, unstable, and testing.  I have 
> no clue which to use.
> 

How much of a risk-taker are you?  None = stable; willing to deal with a
few problems and some occasional trouble-shooting = testing; willing to
deal with whatever comes in order to have access to the "latest" stuff =
unstable.

Also, once you get comfortable with Debian it is entirely possible to
mix and match your packages - i.e. you could run a "testing" platform
with a few "unstable" packages.  apt-get, which is already phenomenal as
a package management tool, has added a number of features over the year
that make it, in my opinion, the best package management tool out there.

> I am going to be using it as a desktop/test computer and I use a lot of 
> the latest hardware like USB keys and that type of thing.  

This really has more to do with which kernel you are running than which
distro -- unless you are looking for automatic detection and
configuration tools.  You might want to check out Knoppix; its basically
Debian with the Red Hat hardware detection tools.  Its a LiveCD that you
can install very easily to your drive.  Very cool, very easy, still
Debian.  The only downside that I have heard to it is that you end up
with a lot of stuff in your menus - this is not unlike many of the
mainstream distros but is one of the things that drove me to Debian in
the first place: you can get a very lean install accomplished with
Debian.

I will also 
> use it for homework and some student programming so I need something 
> somewhat reliable.
> 

Personally, I run "testing" but I know of a number of people who run
unstable without any problems.

I've heard it said that Debian's "testing" distro is more reliable than
what is commonly released by most other distros...likewise, Debian's
unstable is roughly equivalent to what other distros consider release
quality (but that is hear-say because I personally do not run Unstable).

> I figured I should go with unstable or testing but I'm not sure of the 
> difference.  What do you guys recommend?
> 

Start with testing; give it a whirl, get used to apt-get, apt-cache and
dpkg (the package management tools you are most likely to use) and then
move up to unstable as you need different tools.  You may find that you
never need to go to unstable.

One other thing to consider:  as much as I love Debian (I run Debian
Testing on my primary computer as my *only* OS), you need to be aware
that Debian is somewhat slower than other distros to adopt the latest
and greatest versions of software.  This is the price you pay for
stability - a very long testing cycle.

Final word of advice wrt Debian packages - stay away from "dselect"! It
is another package management tool that has been supplanted by apt.  It
is still present (I think) and some older tutorials may mention it. 
Learn apt-get and you'll save yourself a lot of headaches.

robert.a.jacobs