Best distro based on Debian/Ubuntu

[miggols99]

I just want know any other distros I could try that are based on Debian or Ubuntu so I don't have to leave apt. I would prefer that they are KDE.

[maxamillion]

http://www.debian.org/misc/children-distros

[miggols99]

I would prefer if you don't just direct me to big list of distros. It would be better if you give me suggestions or favourites. Thank you.

[scxtt]

DreamLinux

[ynnhoj]

if kde is a must-have, i'd probably go for kubuntu or maybe mepis (though i haven't used mepis very much at all; i just played around on the livecd once, a while back).

edit: also, you might want to flip through this thread (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=384494); not all of the distros mentioned will be debian-based, but it could give you some new ideas.

[Rodneyck]

I have tried many distros and I agree with you, I always come back to the Debian family. My personal favorite, just because it is the fastest of the debian clan, is Sidux.

www.sidux.com

It uses KDE and comes in the lite and full livecd versions. The lite just gives you kde-base and lets YOU add all the other KDE apps instead of loading you down with them. I like that. It always uses the most cutting edge apps (except during not-that-often Debian freezes) and you never have to physically upgrade with a disk/release. Updating is just apt-get dist-upgrade.

Read the manual on the left hand side of their webpage for 3D drivers and other howtos, and/or the Sidux section here on Ubuntu forums under Debian.

[miggols99]

Could you direct me to the link for the live cd? I'm lazy. :-P Thanks.

[Rodneyck]

here you go..

Livecds:
Full version
http://debian.tu-bs.de/project/sidux/release/SIDUX-2007-01-200702210759-CHAOS.ISO

Lite version
http://debian.tu-bs.de/project/sidux/release/SIDUX-2007-01-200702210952-CHAOS-LITE.ISO

64bit Full version
http://debian.tu-bs.de/project/sidux/release/SIDUX64-2007-01-200702210757-CHAOS.ISO

64 bit Lite version
http://debian.tu-bs.de/project/sidux/release/SIDUX64-2007-01-200702210952-CHAOS-LITE.ISO

[Jonathan2007]

Mepis is great. It is based off of Ubuntu (Dapper to be specific) and a new version is due to be out soon. It has the latest and greatest and the new version will include Beryl 0.2.0. It uses KDE and works great. I highly suggest you give it a try. http://www.mepis.org

[miggols99]

Thanks for the links. For some reason the full version failed, so I trying the lite version of sidux. Oh and just wondering, does mepis have up to date repos?

[Sweet Spot]

I've been checking out the Simply MEPIS live CD for a little bit now, and was going to say that it seems to be just the same as Ubuntu running KDE desktop. The question is then... what exactly is the difference between the two, or what are the benefits for using one Vs. the other ?

I've also downloaded and burned the Sabayon Live CD, and it looks to be quite nice as well, another KDE desktop too. I'd love to know what the differences between all of these similar feeling/looking destops' are, if only in the performance area, because I don't really see the point in them all being around, if they are truly are almost the same. I know that the code for them all is different, which affects performance in some ways obviously, but what's the point ? I'd rather all of the great coders get together and create just a couple universe shattering distro's, rather than 100 decent, similar ones.

I'm probably wrong about this though, aren't I. ? :lolflag:

[scxtt]

for one, Sabayon is based off Gentoo - which isn't debian ...

at the very least we're talking "emerge" (build from source) vs. "apt" (install from .deb) ...

i've used Sabayon 3.2 - very nice - a bit "bloated", but worth the extra space :)

[Sweet Spot]

How would you Ubuntu end users respond to this (not me saying it) Well a few interesting things. First of all, MEPIS was a derivate of Debian much like Ubuntu. And I see you've already learned one thing. GTK, and things derived from it such as Gnome, are steaming piles of crap. They're ugly, slow, unreliable, and designed for idiots.

Not only does KDE have a much better layout and feature-set, but it uses QT which is quicker, stabler, and better looking.

The issue is that MEPIS is now a direct derivative of Ubuntu so I don't see what you can really achieve by switching to MEPIS besides having KDE. The other issue is that MEPIS is designed for idiots, much like Ubuntu, so you won't gain much knowledge wise by switching to it. If I were you I'd install SUSE with a KDE desktop.

SUSE is somewhat more advanced than Ubuntu in the sense that you have a much wider range of configuration tools and options, however it still provides user friendly methods of doing all this (unlike Gentoo). By using SUSE you can learn even more about the workings and design of Linux to get you one step closer to an advanced distro like Gentoo.

I actually started on SUSE and I really liked it but I decide to up the stakes and switch over to Gentoo for several reasons. Gentoo was faster, as it was source-based, and far more configurable

And: Well first off, what driver are you speaking of? And basically, installing something means you download a binary and place the binary in the appropriate spot. When you compile you have to download the source code, convert that source code into a binary, and then place the binary into the appropriate spot.

And frankly Ubuntu is designed for idiots but it just makes it harder to use in the long run. I say just screw Ubuntu and try installing openSUSE. I'm sure you'll like it much better.

For the record, I've already told him just how unjustly snobbish and condescending he sounds, as well as immature and sort of talking out the ***-ish. But my question is more of a "why would someone using Suse, get the impression that GTK based apps/code are steaming piles of crap, compared to what's actually used in SUSE/Gentoo etc" ? I know it's a stupid question to ask on a Debian based user forum, but I'm curious none the less, to know what you guys think about this.

BTW, this all stems from a total noob *(not me) trying to get advice on how to install/compile drivers for his NIC.

[RAV TUX]

I just want know any other distros I could try that are based on Debian or Ubuntu so I don't have to leave apt. I would prefer that they are KDE.NepaLinux (http://cafelinux.org/forum/index.php/board,12.0.html)

[RAV TUX]

NepaLinux (http://cafelinux.org/forum/index.php/board,12.0.html)

and Aquamorph (http://cafelinux.org/forum/index.php/board,15.0.html)

[karellen]

Ubuntu

[miggols99]

I'm downloading Mepis now. A lot of people have recommended it to me, so I want to try it.

[igknighted]

Using Sidux right now... its awesome. Highly recommended.

[miggols99]

Tried Mepis and I agree with you Sweet Spot, it is mainly the same. I want to find a distro that works with my Broadcom wireless adapter, but that probably won't happen. What is Sidux like? Can you show me some screenshots of it?

[Rodneyck]

Tried Mepis and I agree with you Sweet Spot, it is mainly the same. I want to find a distro that works with my Broadcom wireless adapter, but that probably won't happen. What is Sidux like? Can you show me some screenshots of it?

Go to their website for info or look it up on distrowatch.com for screenshots.

www.sidux.com

[darksong]

Can you trust Sidux, alot of people have reported it breaking down when dist updated. Also the website looks crap, my dad made better one his own and he has no programming skills - if they aint putting in the effort on the website, how can i trust they put in the effort on the OS?

Saying that i am probably completely wrong, anyone can tell me if it is any good - should i choose it over mepis or ubuntu?

[SunnyRabbiera]

well in defense of Mepis I find it more stable then Kubuntu or ubuntu with KDE on it as I feel Mepis's KDE is far more stable.

[igknighted]

Can you trust Sidux, alot of people have reported it breaking down when dist updated. Also the website looks crap, my dad made better one his own and he has no programming skills - if they aint putting in the effort on the website, how can i trust they put in the effort on the OS?

Saying that i am probably completely wrong, anyone can tell me if it is any good - should i choose it over mepis or ubuntu?

Sidux is a bleeding edge distro. It forked from KANOTIX I believe, and his hence based on Debian Sid. It has the very latest version of every program in the repos within a day or two after release. Hence, there is a possibility of breakage when living on the bleeding edge. If you value stability over having the latest and greatest, Sidux might not be for you. But if you crave the latest, give it a try.

[Eddie Wilson]

I would try Mepis when 6.5 final comes out. Its much more complete and even the betas are much more stable than Ubuntu 6.10 or 7.04. I'm still on Dapper. When I had Edgy installed some days things would work and some days they wouldn't. I've never had a problem with Dapper. You just have to use old packages.
Eddie

[miggols99]

I agree with you darksong. I judge the distro by it's website. If it's some site uses the default Joomla theme or a site with no styles I just press the back button. On the other hand, Ubuntu has a beautiful layout. Next they need to change the Kubuntu website...

[rsambuca]

I agree with you darksong. I judge the distro by it's website. If it's some site uses the default Joomla theme or a site with no styles I just press the back button. On the other hand, Ubuntu has a beautiful layout. Next they need to change the Kubuntu website...As much as I hate to admit it, I agree with you guys. When I first started using linux a few months ago, I would basically try out any old distro. Now that the novelty has worn off, I still like to try out new distros, but if the website looks like crap or is hokey to me, I don't bother.

[igknighted]

I agree with you darksong. I judge the distro by it's website. If it's some site uses the default Joomla theme or a site with no styles I just press the back button. On the other hand, Ubuntu has a beautiful layout. Next they need to change the Kubuntu website...

I'd rather them focus on the distro than the website personally. In the case mentioned above, Sidux is a relatively new distro, so I'm sure the website will improve with time. Take PCLOS for example, one of the most popular distro's out there, but an equally lousy website as Sidux. I have tried all the usual suspects, so now I seek that up and comer. Often these will have poorer websites, so I rely on what I hear. If a bunch of people rave about a distro, I'll give it a shot eventually. But I can't say a website has ever detered me (well, not entirely true. If I can't find the download link thats a showstopper, and has happened a few times).

[rsambuca]

Take PCLOS for example, one of the most popular distro's out there, but an equally lousy website as Sidux.
Yeah, they pretty much both stink! Guess that is why I haven't tried either of them. I am missing out no doubt.

Alas, I must be shallow and am apparently just attracted to beauty.:(

[igknighted]

Yeah, they pretty much both stink! Guess that is why I haven't tried either of them. I am missing out no doubt.

Alas, I must be shallow and am apparently just attracted to beauty.:(

:) no shame in that. There are more than enough distro's, the website is as good a way as any to help filter them. I could never use Mepis because the default art was sooooo bad (even 6.5 isn't great). I change all the artwork on a distro anyway... and it still stopped me from using Mepis. *shrugs* You gotta filter them somehow, right?

[Rodneyck]

People who say they judge a distro by appearance alone are really meant to use ubuntu or windows os. Both of which I call the lazy man's distributions. "I don't want to learn how stuff works, just make it happen and make it pretty."

Most distros welcome help in the art dept and have an art section set up. If you don't like how something works or looks, get involved to help change it instead of sitting back and complaining. Linux is open source and much of it is done with the aid of contributions.

The good thing about Linux is that you can customize almost every aspect of it, so appearance is irrelevant. Change it to your liking.

[rsambuca]

People who say they judge a distro by appearance alone are really meant to use ubuntu or windows os. Both of which I call the lazy man's distributions. "I don't want to learn how stuff works, just make it happen and make it pretty."

Most distros welcome help in the art dept and have an art section set up. If you don't like how something works or looks, get involved to help change it instead of sitting back and complaining. Linux is open source and much of it is done with the aid of contributions.

The good thing about Linux is that you can customize almost every aspect of it, so appearance is irrelevant. Change it to your liking.First off, I must say I was just being honest. Secondly, I am not saying I judge the distro based on the appearance of the website, I am just using that criterion as to whether or not I try the distro out on my computer. Big difference there. Thirdly, to say I am lazy and do not want to learn how stuff works because of what distro's I care to try out is as big and shallow a pre-judgement on me as what I originally said. I enjoy learning how this "stuff works", and if you care to check my posts, I am active in helping out others as well.

[Rodneyck]

First off, I must say I was just being honest. Secondly, I am not saying I judge the distro based on the appearance of the website, I am just using that criterion as to whether or not I try the distro out on my computer. Big difference there. Thirdly, to say I am lazy and do not want to learn how stuff works because of what distro's I care to try out is as big and shallow a pre-judgement on me as what I originally said. I enjoy learning how this "stuff works", and if you care to check my posts, I am active in helping out others as well.

Funny, I don't remember saying that was directed solely at you. Did I mention your username? I suggest you check my post again.

Sounds like a guilty conscience to me.

[rsambuca]

Funny, I don't remember saying that was directed solely at you. Did I mention your username? I suggest you check my post again.

Sounds like a guilty conscience to me.

No, not guilty one bit. Might I suggest that in the future you be more explicit with the wording of your blanket accusations then.

[igknighted]

Honestly I don't much care... I think it was more directed at my comment on Mepis' poor looks detracting from it. I would say that the poor, outdated looks just add to the feel of old packages that I get, starting from the beginning when it boots a 2.6.15 kernel. I have the default look of Ubuntu even more than Mepis, but I use Ubuntu still, because Feisty (which will be out shortly after Mepis 6.5 goes final) uses much, much newer packages. For Mepis, the artwork is only a symbol of what I dislike. All this said, I agree with rodneyck... to judge a distro on only the artwork is rediculous.

[rsambuca]

All this said, I agree with rodneyck... to judge a distro on only the artwork is rediculous.
To me it's not just the artwork, it is the design of the website in general, including the artwork.

[Rodneyck]

To me it's not just the artwork, it is the design of the website in general, including the artwork.

I have no idea what that means, nor do I think I care.

Most of these distros run on zero dollars. Ubuntu use to look like poo warmed over in the beginning. Actually, I think it still does, but that's just a personal opinion. As far as website design, this also requires a good, well-paid web designer, thus the prefab selections most select to start. They are usually free with purchase.

It seems aesthetics seems to be the driving factor with you, again, and that is a pretty shallow basis to run on when selecting any distribution. Like I said, get involved and change it if you don't like it. That last thing anyone wants to hear is a whiner.

[darksong]

A poor website is not a good promotion for a linux distro, look at suse, fedora, ubuntu, pclinuxOS and linux mint- they all have very good websites.

Having a good looking website makes people want to try out that distro. Having a poor website gives Newbies like me a bad impression of the distro even before i tried it out. Look at the most sucsesfull distros on distro watch, all of their websites are easily navigated, there coulor scemes matches the distros.

Worst of all about sidux's website, they have no screenshots of what their destkop looks like. I had to go through distrowatch, and then through another website in order to see what it looks like.

This is in no way making it easy for people to like this distro from first impressions. They need to get 1-2 people from their community to get together and plan a half desent website.

Even myspace and Bebo websites made by total idoits look better than that. I aint saying that these guys are idiots but they are in no way promoting their OS by having a half assed website, which has very little usefull content on it.

[Rodneyck]

A poor website is not a good promotion for a linux distro, look at suse, fedora, ubuntu, pclinuxOS and linux mint- they all have very good websites.

Having a good looking website makes people want to try out that distro. Having a poor website gives Newbies like me a bad impression of the distro even before i tried it out. Look at the most sucsesfull distros on distro watch, all of their websites are easily navigated, there coulor scemes matches the distros.

Worst of all about sidux's website, they have no screenshots of what their destkop looks like. I had to go through distrowatch, and then through another website in order to see what it looks like.

This is in no way making it easy for people to like this distro from first impressions. They need to get 1-2 people from their community to get together and plan a half desent website.

Even myspace and Bebo websites made by total idoits look better than that. I aint saying that these guys are idiots but they are in no way promoting their OS by having a half assed website, which has very little usefull content on it.

I am going to make a safe assumption here and say that you spoke before even checking the facts. Had you done so, you would have been more informed on the following;

1. they are a brand new distro and these things take time.
2. There is an art revamp underway and a competition for outsiders to contribute their work in the form of a new wallpaper. From the chosen wallpaper, those graphic elements will carry over into the new icons, website, etc.

Again, it is about contributing instead of criticizing. The later is only self-serving.

[igknighted]

A poor website is not a good promotion for a linux distro, look at suse, fedora, ubuntu, pclinuxOS and linux mint- they all have very good websites.

Having a good looking website makes people want to try out that distro. Having a poor website gives Newbies like me a bad impression of the distro even before i tried it out. Look at the most sucsesfull distros on distro watch, all of their websites are easily navigated, there coulor scemes matches the distros.

Worst of all about sidux's website, they have no screenshots of what their destkop looks like. I had to go through distrowatch, and then through another website in order to see what it looks like.

This is in no way making it easy for people to like this distro from first impressions. They need to get 1-2 people from their community to get together and plan a half desent website.

Even myspace and Bebo websites made by total idoits look better than that. I aint saying that these guys are idiots but they are in no way promoting their OS by having a half assed website, which has very little usefull content on it.

www.pclinuxos.com

Distrowatch #4

This is your idea of a good website? When I got to this page I thought I was at the wrong one, like when you type in something close to what you want and end up with some crap search page.

[miggols99]

In a distro's website I want at least to see screenshots. It's not really hard take screenshots. When I visit one I always look for screenshots. I want a definite link to them. Also the Sidux website is partly in German. When I clicked on download, then live cd, it went to some German page. I can't read it! That's why I asked for links to the live cds.

[ThinkBuntu]

In a distro's website I want at least to see screenshots. It's not really hard take screenshots. When I visit one I always look for screenshots. I want a definite link to them. Also the Sidux website is partly in German. When I clicked on download, then live cd, it went to some German page. I can't read it! That's why I asked for links to the live cds.
You didn't learn another language to find the Live CDs? You must be, as you said, lazy.

[Rodneyck]

In a distro's website I want at least to see screenshots. It's not really hard take screenshots. When I visit one I always look for screenshots. I want a definite link to them. Also the Sidux website is partly in German. When I clicked on download, then live cd, it went to some German page. I can't read it! That's why I asked for links to the live cds.

The Sidux download links off their website do not point to a German website or are they in German. I gave you those links in another thread because you said you were to lazy to get them. I must refer you to my previous post above, re the lazy comment.

Stay with Ubuntu, it is made for you.

[rsambuca]

Most of these distros run on zero dollars. Ubuntu use to look like poo warmed over in the beginning. Actually, I think it still does, but that's just a personal opinion. As far as website design, this also requires a good, well-paid web designer, thus the prefab selections most select to start. They are usually free with purchase.

It seems aesthetics seems to be the driving factor with you, again, and that is a pretty shallow basis to run on when selecting any distribution. Like I said, get involved and change it if you don't like it. That last thing anyone wants to hear is a whiner.

The fact that a distro runs on zero dollars is irrelevant as to the website design. If they have enough money to maintain a website, then it can be either well made or not - their choice. A good well-paid web-designer is definitely NOT a requirement, as many small distros have professional looking, current, and up-to-date sites. In fact, all you have to do is find a web site you like and copy the source code to get the html code for the layout. You can then make cosmetic changes to it. Surely not as difficult as creating your own distro!

And as to your last point(s), like I said I am very active in the ubuntu community and try to help others as much as possible. However, by your logic, am I supposed to visit every distro's website, and then help them design better websites even though I haven't tried it? You are clearly missing my point here.

Anyways, sorry to all for hijacking this thread:(

If anyone wishes to carry on the discussion, I have created a new Poll/Thread (http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=391611) on the subject.

[ThinkBuntu]

I agree about site appearance. I think Debian has a great, easy-to-use professional website. I doubt they had to pay a web designer seen on ALA to build that one.

[miggols99]

The Sidux download links off their website do not point to a German website or are they in German. I gave you those links in another thread because you said you were to lazy to get them. I must refer you to my previous post above, re the lazy comment.

Stay with Ubuntu, it is made for you.

I searched for 'live cd' and somehow found it. I didn't use the downloads link because I don't really how it was set up.

EDIT: Lets get back to the topic please about the best distro based on Debian/Ubuntu.

[darksong]

www.pclinuxos.com

Distrowatch #4

This is your idea of a good website? When I got to this page I thought I was at the wrong one, like when you type in something close to what you want and end up with some crap search page.

My mistake - i meant dreamlinux - pclinuxOS page still is much better and easiyer to use than Of Siduxs, they got alot of good information and screenshots on that page.

[darksong]

I am going to make a safe assumption here and say that you spoke before even checking the facts. Had you done so, you would have been more informed on the following;

1. they are a brand new distro and these things take time.
2. There is an art revamp underway and a competition for outsiders to contribute their work in the form of a new wallpaper. From the chosen wallpaper, those graphic elements will carry over into the new icons, website, etc.

Again, it is about contributing instead of criticizing. The later is only self-serving.

Yes, but to add a couple of screenshots and make the site a bit more newbie friendly will go a long way in gaining popularity, atm it puts me and alot of other off.

[igknighted]

Yes, but to add a couple of screenshots and make the site a bit more newbie friendly will go a long way in gaining popularity, atm it puts me and alot of other off.

Any newbie should stear clear of Debian Sid/Sidux, so I'm not sure gussying up the website to attract those types of users is what they are interested in :). Besides, doesn't linuxquestions.org do screenshots of like every major distro anyway? Why not just go there?

[miggols99]

Ok, so Mepis is based on Dapper? Does it use the Ubuntu repos? The 6.5 version is looking pretty good. Will the next versions use the next release or will they stay with the LTS releases?

[igknighted]

Ok, so Mepis is based on Dapper? Does it use the Ubuntu repos? The 6.5 version is looking pretty good. Will the next versions use the next release or will they stay with the LTS releases?

I'm not really sure what they are doing. 6.0 used the Dapper repos plus some Mepis ones, plus some Debian ones. 6.5 still has the Dapper kernel, but xorg and a few other packags have been updated. Go to distrowatch.com and scroll to the bottom of the Mepis page, and it lists the apps included in each release, along with their version. You could also check Dapper and see how close they still are.

Mepis also includes some binary blobs. Nvidia drivers by default (no ATI), some wireless stuff, and I think codecs as well (although perhaps not, as their is/was an automatix version for Mepis).

Scrolling through quickly it looks like Firefox, k3b, mplayer, xine-lib and Xorg are the only thing upgraded from 6.0 (note thats not a complete list of software on distrowatch, just a sampling. But clearly theres not a whole lot of difference between 6.0 and 6.5.

[mgpower0]

6.5 rc3 mepis also comes with Beryl 0.2.0 installed. But yeah it does still use the dapper repos, although all are uncommented as default so you don't have to mess with your sources list to get certain repos enabled. Style is an individual thing, I much prefer mepis 6.5's default environment over Ubuntu or Kubuntu others don't. And the fact that you can select to run a kde sesion with or without beryl at login is a nice touch. As much as I like Beryl it can be annoying at times

[igknighted]

6.5 rc3 mepis also comes with Beryl 0.2.0 installed. But yeah it does still use the dapper repos, although all are uncommented as default so you don't have to mess with your sources list to get certain repos enabled. Style is an individual thing, I much prefer mepis 6.5's default environment over Ubuntu or Kubuntu others don't. And the fact that you can select to run a kde sesion with or without beryl at login is a nice touch. As much as I like Beryl it can be annoying at times

I usually use a launcher on my main panel to turn on beryl when I want it... the autostart annoys me. Also, if you set beryl up to use metacity or kwin by default, then just switch to the beryl window manager when you want, it does well that way too.