Should I move to Debian Stable?

[edin9]

After the PulseAudio problems that I have with Ubuntu, and the fact that Kubuntu is a continued bug and crashathon, I really think it's time to switch. All I want is a stable, longish supported Linux distro that I can just install, and not spend forever hacking to get it to (mostly) work, like I do with Ubuntu/Kubuntu. The only problem wih Debian that I remember is the fact that it is very cr*p with WIFI. Has this improved maybe?

[The Toxic Mite]

Give it some time, there's an LTS release coming out after 9.10. :)

[ssam]

the 'stable' in debian has nothing to do with not crashing.

it means that things don't change. i.e. after you install it you don't new versions of software. its what ubuntu's stable release upgrade policy is based on.

[SunnyRabbiera]

You may want to try debian testing instead

[schauerlich]

the 'stable' in debian has nothing to do with not crashing.

Actually, yeah, it does. They only put packages in stable after they have been tested extensively so that people know that it's stable. That's why packages don't change very often.

[Regenweald]

Yes.

[aysiu]

Actually, yeah, it does. They only put packages in stable after they have been tested extensively so that people know that it's stable. That's why packages don't change very often.
More importantly, they aren't tied to deadlines.

Whereas Ubuntu (with the one exception of Ubuntu 6.06, Dapper Drake) will release a new version of every six months, regardless of how many bugs are outstanding, Debian will not release a new stable version until it's "ready." That could be five years.

[mthei]

If Pulse is the only thing that's giving you issues, can't you just disable it? Unless you have your Home folder on a separate partition, you'd have to re do everything.
That said, I've been using Debian Lenny since August of last year after switching from Fedora, and am very happy with it. If you don't mind that the packages are older (yet still receive regular security updates), there will be little to complain about.
Don't do a clean install for something like this unless you really have to, it can be a pain at times.

[Xbehave]

I used lenny for a while (with kde), it is missing desktop tweaks, but i did find that it never crashed (i.e it's stable in btoh senses), but suspend/resume didn't work and atheros drivers were old so i replaced my kernel to get the new stack. Firefox was also old (3.0), so i had to replace that with the Mozilla version, if i did much word processing the same would be true of openoffice.

Basically while stable is a stable base, if you like new software you will need to add that yourself (this doesn't sound great but it lets you keep a stable system with shiny new versions of programs you care about)

[sliketymo]

After the PulseAudio problems that I have with Ubuntu, and the fact that Kubuntu is a continued bug and crashathon, I really think it's time to switch. All I want is a stable, longish supported Linux distro that I can just install, and not spend forever hacking to get it to (mostly) work, like I do with Ubuntu/Kubuntu. The only problem wih Debian that I remember is the fact that it is very cr*p with WIFI. Has this improved maybe?

:popcorn:MEPIS.

[cariboo]

In the amount of time since you posted this thread, you could have downloaded and installed Debian, and be running it now.

If you need approval from others, you may not be ready to switch.

[Grifulkin]

In the amount of time since you posted this thread, you could have downloaded and installed Debian, and be running it now.

If you need approval from others, you may not be ready to switch.

+1 that is what virtual box is for try it out or hell if you have an old machine just install it.

[undecim]

After the PulseAudio problems that I have with Ubuntu, and the fact that Kubuntu is a continued bug and crashathon, I really think it's time to switch. All I want is a stable, longish supported Linux distro that I can just install, and not spend forever hacking to get it to (mostly) work, like I do with Ubuntu/Kubuntu. The only problem wih Debian that I remember is the fact that it is very cr*p with WIFI. Has this improved maybe?
Are you sticking with LTS releases? If you want to focus on stability, stick with Hardy untill the next LTS, 10.04.

[Hallvor]

After the PulseAudio problems that I have with Ubuntu, and the fact that Kubuntu is a continued bug and crashathon, I really think it's time to switch. All I want is a stable, longish supported Linux distro that I can just install, and not spend forever hacking to get it to (mostly) work, like I do with Ubuntu/Kubuntu. The only problem wih Debian that I remember is the fact that it is very cr*p with WIFI. Has this improved maybe?

Debian Lenny is very good, and the packages are well tested. If you want a stable system with support for a long time, Debian Lenny is a good choice. However, the software is far from bleeding edge, but you could always add backports and install what you want from there.

Edit: What kind of wireless do you have?

[Xbehave]

In the amount of time since you posted this thread, you could have downloaded and installed Debian, and be running it now.

If you need approval from others, you may not be ready to switch.
Installing is quick but configuring and learning a new way of doing things (su v sudo, m-a instead of a gui driver app, etc) is not. Moving to a distro for a week only to realise it isn't what your looking for is not an efficient usage of time, especially if you have other stuff to do.

[cariboo]

There isn't that much difference between Ubuntu and Debian, after all Ubuntu is based on Debian. The real difference between the two is that Debian makes you set up a root account during the installation.

It would be more like the difference between driving a right-hand drive vehicle and a left-hand drive vehicle.

[RedSquirrel]

More importantly, they aren't tied to deadlines.

Whereas Ubuntu (with the one exception of Ubuntu 6.06, Dapper Drake) will release a new version of every six months, regardless of how many bugs are outstanding, Debian will not release a new stable version until it's "ready." That could be five years.

Debian decides to adopt time-based release freezes (http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090729)

[edin9]

In the amount of time since you posted this thread, you could have downloaded and installed Debian, and be running it now.

If you need approval from others, you may not be ready to switch.

I don't need approval, I was asking because I was hoping to get answers from people who run Debian Stable. I also couldn't have 'downloaded and installed' as I have no spare CDs ATM :)

[Xbehave]

I don't need approval, I was asking because I was hoping to get answers from people who run Debian Stable. I also couldn't have 'downloaded and installed' as I have no spare CDs ATM :)
how to install from linux w/o a CD (http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/apds03.html.en) I mean I agree that it's a good idea to ask but if you decide to go for it read that, oh and this (http://jaqque.sbih.org/kplug/apt-pinning.html) may come in useful if its too stable(not the crash sense) for you

[renkinjutsu]

What compression algorithm does debian use to archive their packages?

take a look at this screenshot :confused:

[Exodist]

OpenSUSE is a good option also.

[Hallvor]

Debian decides to adopt time-based release freezes (http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090729)

Time based release freezes does not equal time based releases. It just means developers will have a more predictable time table. It will still be ready when it is ready.

[HappinessNow]

Should I move to Debian Stable?How about move to the Carfax Abbey?

[RedSquirrel]

Time based release freezes does not equal time based releases. It just means developers will have a more predictable time table. It will still be ready when it is ready.

From the announcement:


releases will from now on happen sometime in the first half of every even year

In other words, they can't take five years to make it "ready".

[RedSquirrel]

I don't need approval, I was asking because I was hoping to get answers from people who run Debian Stable. I also couldn't have 'downloaded and installed' as I have no spare CDs ATM :)

In addition to Xbehave's post above, if you feel like keeping your existing system and setting up a dual-boot with Debian, you can drop the installer kernel and initrd on your hard drive and use grub to boot the installer. See here (http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/ch05s01.html.en#boot-initrd).

[Hallvor]

From the announcement:



In other words, they can't take five years to make it "ready".

Perhaps you should read this: http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090730

It will still be ready when it is ready; the assumption when all release critical bugs are crushed is an assumption. There is not a set date for release. If it takes longer, so be it. That is the Debian way.

[hoppipolla]

No Linux distro is perfect man. Take it from someone whose been using Linux almost exclusively for 6 years - Ubuntu is GOOD.

If you want a more techie distro though I dunno, yeah something like Arch or Debian or Slackware or something might fill that gap. openSUSE implements KDE better if you want that (the new version is also out quite soon).

I tend to just stick with this coz it's one of the best Linux desktops I've had, it provides a solid base for whatever DE I choose to run on it :)

[RedSquirrel]

Perhaps you should read this: http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090730

It will still be ready when it is ready; the assumption when all release critical bugs are crushed is an assumption. There is not a set date for release. If it takes longer, so be it. That is the Debian way.

If that's the case, then what was the point of the policy announcement?

From the announcement (http://www.debian.org/News/2009/20090729):

Since Debian's last release happened on Feb. 14th 2009, there will only be approximately a one year period until its next release, Debian GNU/Linux 6.0 (codenamed Squeeze). This will be a one-time exception to the two-year policy in order to get into the new time schedule.And from your link:

... the Release Team has additionally decided to revisit its decision on December 2009 as the proposed freeze date. A new timeline will be announced by the Debian Release Team in early September.
It seems to me they realized that trying to get into the new schedule for the next release was overly ambitious and now they are going to adjust the dates. This is appears to be an exception, not the rule. The new rule is to have a release every two years.

Your description of the situation makes it seem like the new policy has no effect. :confused:

[chris200x9]

no, ubuntu rules (well not for me :P) but it's awesome for a .deb :)

[Hallvor]

RedSquirrel: The decision was made at DebConf and it was not well received in the mailing lists or the community. Shortly after came the new message that it would be "revisited" and new plans would be announced in September.

To sum it up: There will be a freeze in December and a new version next spring - or maybe not. :)

[RedSquirrel]

RedSquirrel: The decision was made at DebConf and it was not well received in the mailing lists or the community. Shortly after came the new message that it would be "revisited" and new plans would be announced in September.

To sum it up: There will be a freeze in December and a new version next spring - or maybe not. :)

:D

Thanks for the information. I don't follow Debian very closely these days. I guess I should have known that policy announcements don't tell the whole story (but the mailing lists do :twisted:).