PDA

View Full Version : From Debian to Ubuntu



XubuRoxMySox
May 7th, 2011, 03:37 PM
Continuing from this post (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=10782520&postcount=651), I really wonder how many of us there actually are!


We always read about people who say they've "outgrown" Ubuntu, "graduated" to Debian, "removed the training wheels" by switching to "pure Debian," etc.

It is rare to hear of anyone coming the other way! Yet I, too, have "come from Debian to Ubuntu" in a way. Last summer I let my "inner geek" run wild and decided to install and build my own customized, perfect just-for-me Debian mixture. It took several weeks to get it all configured the way I wanted and get all the hardware to work as it should. It was a tedious, grueling process of Googling, searching (and by the way, the folks at Debian Forums don't like kids), and trial-and-error. But here's what gets me:

When I finally, after all that frustration and work, had my perfect Debian/Xfce custom mixture, what I ended up with was almost no different from Xubuntu! I was like, "Omygosh, I could have done this in 20 minutes instead of two months!"

There are so many who boast, in a way, about "moving on" from "kiddie distros" like Ubuntu, Mepis, etc to "The Source." Yet here's someone who has come the other way, as I have (kinda sorta).

Please understand, I love Debian! If it weren't for Debian, there'd be no Ubuntu! And no Mepis, AntiX, Mint, Knoppix, PureOS, and dozens more, all built on Debian's awesomeness!

It's just really striking and really rare to read in someone's introduction that they have come to Ubuntu from Debian rather than the other way around!

Is it as rare as it seems? I'm simply curious, so thanks for taking part in this poll!

-Robin

kevin11951
May 7th, 2011, 03:48 PM
I started with Ubuntu in 2006, then recently, I started using Debian Testing on my desktop, I used that for a few months, but then I moved back to Ubuntu...

There are just too many things Ubuntu has easier than Debian, and with both being almost identical internally. Anything Debian has, I can bring to Ubuntu if I need to...

That said, I will probably move back to Debian Testing at some point when I get bored again... ;)

Gone fishing
May 7th, 2011, 03:50 PM
I've tried a few distros both as desktop PCs and servers, I have to say I like FreeBSD but as a desktop Ubuntu takes some beating and is perfectly fast and stable. It annoys me sometimes people describe as a disto for newbies - and when you mature you'll use something else - rubbish Ubuntu is good, easy and it works, I like Unity too.

I have no problem if you prefer Slackware, I think that's just great but Ubuntu is a great desktop.

malspa
May 7th, 2011, 03:59 PM
None of the above. Started with other distros, later added Ubuntu, then added Debian, still using both distros along with some others.

I think phrases like "kiddie distros" and "distros with training wheels" are silly. Sometimes it just makes more sense to go with a distro that takes less time to install and set up, even if you've got some Linux experience under your belt.

wizard10000
May 7th, 2011, 04:17 PM
We always read about people who say they've "outgrown" Ubuntu, "graduated" to Debian, "removed the training wheels" by switching to "pure Debian," etc.

All respect to whoever said it but this is kinda ridiculous and I'm one of the folks who switched from Debian to *buntu. I'd offer that the folks who do feel that way need to run gentoo :D

For me it's all about choices and *buntu offers me *more* choices than most any other distribution. If I want to compile from source I can and if I feel like being lazy I can click an icon and let a GUI do the work for me - it's my choice.

"Outgrown" *buntu? Not possible, considering you can compile any package from source that you choose. Of course, some people's self-esteem is tied up in how difficult something is to do rather than who they are, but I don't see any of these people building their own refrigerators :D

A computer is a tool. It's also a hobby, and if you choose to do something because it's difficult that's always an option - but you can opt out of any GUI tool in *buntu any time you choose.

I run Debian on production servers because the codebase is a little more stable, but that's a solid business requirement, not because I need to take the training wheels off. I actually prefer *buntu's security model to Debian's, especially for inexperienced users.

And yeah, I've run gentoo. I got better, though :D

Ctrl-Alt-F1
May 7th, 2011, 04:44 PM
I started with Ubuntu and have tried many other distros. The only one that ever tempts me anymore is Fedora, but Ubuntu keeps a slight edge just by it's extra little touches. I don't have to do much to an Ubuntu install to have it just the way I want it.

Lucradia
May 7th, 2011, 04:45 PM
PCManFM in Debian is better to be honest. If I use openbox, I need Debian (PCManFM in Ubuntu has no desktop support, unless you get the PCManFM2 ppa, and that's dodgy at best anyway.)

wizard10000
May 7th, 2011, 04:58 PM
I started with Ubuntu and have tried many other distros. The only one that ever tempts me anymore is Fedora, but Ubuntu keeps a slight edge just by it's extra little touches. I don't have to do much to an Ubuntu install to have it just the way I want it.

I went Yggdrasil --> Slackware --> RedHat --> Fedora --> CentOS --> Debian --> Ubuntu --> Kubuntu. There were brief stopovers at SuSE, Gentoo and Vector on the way, though.

Once I got familiar with Debian I learned I don't care much for RH's package management - I know you can install apt in Fedora but that seems kinda like a crime against nature :D

aguafina
May 7th, 2011, 05:05 PM
Please understand, I love Debian! If it weren't for Debian, there'd be no Ubuntu! And no Mepis, AntiX, Mint, Knoppix, PureOS, and dozens more, all built on Debian's awesomeness!


Please understand, If it weren't for Minix, there'd be no Debian! bla bla bla

XubuRoxMySox
May 7th, 2011, 05:12 PM
PCManFM in Debian is better to be honest. If I use openbox, I need Debian (PCManFM in Ubuntu has no desktop support, unless you get the PCManFM2 ppa, and that's dodgy at best anyway.)

I love PCManFM! It's a great, awesome li'l file manager. I use it in Xubuntu 10.04 (LTS) with no issues. Perhaps it's the newer versions in the repos that are dodgy?

I've hopped alot too in my first year, trying to learn all I could when I had all kindsa time for it and my "inner geek" was insatiable. Ubuntu, Crunchbang, U-Lite (early Lubuntu), Mepis, Kubuntu, Mint, PCLinuxOS, Salix, Debian, back to 'buntu (Xubuntu).

My favorites: Xubuntu, Crunchbang, Mint.

-Robin

CharlesA
May 7th, 2011, 05:57 PM
I actually tried running Debian on my home server, but I had major problems compiling the driver for my RAID card. It worked fine on Lucid, but didn't work very well on Squeeze (which Lucid is based on) - go figure.

I've used Fedora, Debian, and Ubuntu before and they all are about the same imo.

krapp
May 7th, 2011, 07:20 PM
I started with Linux with Ubuntu a little over a year ago. This last month I replaced my Ubuntu partition with Debian Stable. The move from Debian to Ubuntu will always look to the user like a graduation because he thinks he's moving onto something better; otherwise he wouldn't be moving.

But it's not really so much a rite of passage as a total change in ideology. Debian isn't more difficult. It's larger repos and greater stability can actually make it easier. It just has a different philosophy. Debian at all time foregrounds the fact that you're using FLOSS. Ubuntu is more interested in getting people to use software for free (gratis). If they buy into the LOSS suffix then great.

Swagman
May 7th, 2011, 07:42 PM
I'm pretty sure I've mentioned this here but anyway...

My Journey into TuxLand (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=998632) started via a beta motherboard known as an AmigaOne (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSAhR7uXcCc) which was released quite a bit before the updated AmigaOS (4) was available. To cover the gap Debian Woody (PPC) was bundled with it with two sheets of typed destructions on how to install the Os.

Many curses were mouthed that night and day... and night before it was up and running.

Google didn't exist then so help was gleaned from Amiga forums. But I was up and reunning on Debbie and Ians Os.

The more I used it the more I liked it. It never once b0rked on the Amiga and as such everything you learnt is forgotten.

When I gave up videoing weddings & stuff I no longer had any need for my WinPc and naturally as an Amigan I hated Microsoft with a passion So I installed Debian64 on it.

Cue most of the problems I endured when I first installed it on my Amiga and I'd forgotten how I cured them.

I actually had to allow an Amigan (Mossup) to ssh into my machine to setup boincs (rosetta) and sort out the Ati graphics card <--- nothing changes there then !!

Actually iirc I still owe Mossup £20 for sussing that for me.

Anyway... Debian naturally ran sweet for eleventy million years until my graphics card caught fire (http://www.flickr.com/photos/10923285@N07/2144907384). I installed another ati card but things just kept going fuzzy and weird and I couldn't be botehred going through all that rigmarole just to get it working properly again.

I'd heard of this new "Ubuntu thing" which peeps said was really just Debian made easy so I thought... I'll give that a thrash.

Feisty Fawn (32 bit) was downloaded and....

What a revelation.. I loved it.



My systems then... http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2247/1791027671_c4c4db4bed_o.jpg

(Far right (Red machine) is a Classic Amiga (A1200 +060) with a P3 Pc in the same case and siamesed together. Left of Monitor is the AmigaOne (Thermaltake case) and far left (Shark case) was a AMD4200 (Watercooled).

Bold text are links... enjoy.

Thewhistlingwind
May 7th, 2011, 08:44 PM
I've used Fedora, Debian, and Ubuntu before and they all are about the same imo.

Minus fedora, +1.

Seriously, the only difference is the community surrounding the two.

wilee-nilee
May 7th, 2011, 08:50 PM
I actually tried running Debian on my home server, but I had major problems compiling the driver for my RAID card. It worked fine on Lucid, but didn't work very well on Squeeze (which Lucid is based on) - go figure.

I've used Fedora, Debian, and Ubuntu before and they all are about the same imo.

Exactly, at the command line and the packages you use linux is linux.


Minus fedora, +1.

Seriously, the only difference is the community surrounding the two.

They only seem different due to stereotype frames. This forum is so large, and covers so many types of releases, that the seeming attitude is diluted. You have the good the bad and the ugly on all forums and communities.

krapp
May 7th, 2011, 09:01 PM
They only seem different due to stereotype frames.

Not really. Branding (here shorthand for the projection of an ideology) counts for a lot and does real work, and Debian and Ubuntu are different in this regard. Writing off the differences as received stereotypes doesn't mean they're not actual. Even if you use Debian AMD64, which admittedly isn't that much different from 10.10 AMD64 you are tacitly supporting the use of an OS that aims to be truly universal. Ubuntu has its eyes much more on market demand, and what most consumers could want.

weasel fierce
May 7th, 2011, 09:03 PM
I'm pretty sure I've mentioned this here but anyway...

My Journey into TuxLand (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=998632) started via a beta motherboard known as an AmigaOne (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSAhR7uXcCc) which was released quite a bit before the updated AmigaOS (4) was available. To cover the gap Debian Woody (PPC) was bundled with it with two sheets of typed destructions on how to install the Os.

Many curses were mouthed that night and day... and night before it was up and running.

Google didn't exist then so help was gleaned from Amiga forums. But I was up and reunning on Debbie and Ians Os.

The more I used it the more I liked it. It never once b0rked on the Amiga and as such everything you learnt is forgotten.

When I gave up videoing weddings & stuff I no longer had any need for my WinPc and naturally as an Amigan I hated Microsoft with a passion So I installed Debian64 on it.

Cue most of the problems I endured when I first installed it on my Amiga and I'd forgotten how I cured them.

I actually had to allow an Amigan (Mossup) to ssh into my machine to setup boincs (rosetta) and sort out the Ati graphics card <--- nothing changes there then !!

Actually iirc I still owe Mossup £20 for sussing that for me.

Anyway... Debian naturally ran sweet for eleventy million years until my graphics card caught fire (http://www.flickr.com/photos/10923285@N07/2144907384). I installed another ati card but things just kept going fuzzy and weird and I couldn't be botehred going through all that rigmarole just to get it working properly again.

I'd heard of this new "Ubuntu thing" which peeps said was really just Debian made easy so I thought... I'll give that a thrash.

Feisty Fawn (32 bit) was downloaded and....

What a revelation.. I loved it.



My systems then... http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2247/1791027671_c4c4db4bed_o.jpg

(Far right (Red machine) is a Classic Amiga (A1200 +060) with a P3 Pc in the same case and siamesed together. Left of Monitor is the AmigaOne (Thermaltake case) and far left (Shark case) was a AMD4200 (Watercooled).

Bold text are links... enjoy.

Nice to see another amiga fan :)

K_45
May 7th, 2011, 10:22 PM
If you created a pure Debian XFCE install, it wouldn't be the bloated porky distro that is Xubuntu. Xubuntu is Ubuntu with way too many GNOME dependencies. So in my install I didn't install GDebi or Synaptic or anything else which drags in GiB's of dependencies. Ubuntu is a training wheel's distro. When you get tired of the handholding and increasing commercialization (it was always going to happen anyway), you choose something else, and a great choice is one of the OG's of the Linux world - Debian.

XubuRoxMySox
May 7th, 2011, 10:39 PM
If you created a pure Debian XFCE install, it wouldn't be the bloated porky distro that is Xubuntu.

It must have been awhile since you have experienced Xubuntu. The newest version is trimmed down, lean and mean. As for the Gnome dependencies, I don't mind some extra stuff stored on the hard drive, it's performance that matters to me, and Xubuntu delivers that as well as my superb Debian mixture did.


Ubuntu is a training wheel's distro. When you get tired of the handholding and increasing commercialization (it was always going to happen anyway), you choose something else, and a great choice is one of the OG's of the Linux world - Debian.

It is exactly this kind of snobbery that one finds in the Debian "community" and forums that keeps distros like 'buntu and Mepis growing in popularity and reaping much of the harvest that is said to be "rightfully Debian's."

In that single post, you have done more to hurt your "cause," whatever it is, than to make Debian more appealing, even to geeky tinkerers for whom a computer is an end in itself.

Rawr.

-Robin

K_45
May 7th, 2011, 10:45 PM
It must have been awhile since you have experienced Xubuntu. The newest version is trimmed down, lean and mean. As for the Gnome dependencies, I don't mind some extra stuff stored on the hard drive, it's performance that matters to me, and Xubuntu delivers that as well as my superb Debian mixture did.



It is exactly this kind of snobbery that one finds in the Debian "community" and forums that keeps distros like 'buntu and Mepis growing in popularity and reaping much of the harvest that is said to be "rightfully Debian's."

In that single post, you have done more to hurt your "cause," whatever it is, than to make Debian more appealing, even to geeky tinkerers for whom a computer is an end in itself.

Rawr.

-Robin

That extra stuff is installed on your HDD and takes up memory and processing cycles. It doesn't matter about other distro's growing in popularity. Debian will always remain for those that want to choose a better universal distro.

Thewhistlingwind
May 7th, 2011, 11:08 PM
That extra stuff is installed on your HDD and takes up memory and processing cycles. It doesn't matter about other distro's growing in popularity. Debian will always remain for those that want to choose a better universal distro.

As will the others.

And it doesn't really matter, most hardcore Linux users will end up using them all eventually.

EDIT: All the main root branches, anyway. (Fedora, Debian, Gentoo, SUSE, etc.)
EDIT2: Let me change that to most instead of a guarantee.

Melophonic
May 7th, 2011, 11:37 PM
I haven't done anything of the above.

Rasa1111
May 7th, 2011, 11:45 PM
Started with Ubuntu, tried Mint, tried Debian, neither of them felt as great as Ubuntu to me, so stayed with Ubuntu, and probably will.. <3

lisati
May 7th, 2011, 11:51 PM
I looked at Red Hat, decided it was beyond my skills to check it out let alone install it at the time, and eventually discovered Ubuntu. I've also looked at Debian, Puppy and a couple of others over the years.

NightwishFan
May 7th, 2011, 11:52 PM
I moved to Debian from Ubuntu because I really like the ideals of the Debian Social Contract and the terms of their Free Software Guidelines. Also I wanted something reliable (that I can make unreliable if I want). CentOS seems to just be "reliable". Also I am very proficient and familiar with Debian specific tools and less so for Red Hat variant ones. (Though still comfortable).

I have moved back a few times to Ubuntu because I really like how it feels like a polished product and has a vibrant community. I think I am switched for good to Deb now though.

wilee-nilee
May 8th, 2011, 12:07 AM
Not really. Branding (here shorthand for the projection of an ideology) counts for a lot and does real work, and Debian and Ubuntu are different in this regard. Writing off the differences as received stereotypes doesn't mean they're not actual. Even if you use Debian AMD64, which admittedly isn't that much different from 10.10 AMD64 you are tacitly supporting the use of an OS that aims to be truly universal. Ubuntu has its eyes much more on market demand, and what most consumers could want.

I would agree with you, basically, I just try to keep in mind that most of if not all my perceptions are projections of my own personal reality, keeps things in perceptive.

As far as your description of tacitly supporting a OS, this is a personal opinion, with little more then the proclaimed direction (by them) of the OS and a whole buncha myth.;)

None of us really knows what the other is thinking or perceiving this includes the ones you're closest to you, in reality.

TheNessus
May 8th, 2011, 12:12 AM
As will the others.

And it doesn't really matter, a hardcore Linux user will end up using them all eventually.

EDIT: All the main root branches, anyway. (Fedora, Debian, Gentoo, SUSE, etc.)

I don't use fedora because for some reason I always fail making a working live-usb for it. dunno why. (no cd on my lappy)

Thewhistlingwind
May 8th, 2011, 12:16 AM
I don't use fedora because for some reason I always fail making a working live-usb for it. dunno why. (no cd on my lappy)

Eventually, eventually.......

Just out of curiosity, how does the live-usb fail? Just won't boot?

EDIT: Just to note, I haven't tried them all yet myself, but I know I will eventually......

TheNessus
May 8th, 2011, 12:21 AM
Eventually, eventually.......

Just out of curiosity, how does the live-usb fail? Just won't boot?

EDIT: Just to note, I haven't tried them all yet myself, but I know I will eventually......

exactly, no boot. I tried with cli, I tried with UNETbootin, and other tools. through linux, through windows, through fedora's own tool. no work. And my usb driver is working just right and has plenty of space. works with other distros. weird.

krapp
May 8th, 2011, 12:34 AM
I would agree with you, basically, I just try to keep in mind that most of if not all my perceptions are projections of my own personal reality, keeps things in perceptive.

As far as your description of tacitly supporting a OS, this is a personal opinion, with little more then the proclaimed direction (by them) of the OS and a whole buncha myth.

None of us really knows what the other is thinking or perceiving this includes the ones you're closest to you, in reality.


Thousands upon thousands of pages have been written in the 20th-century alone on this topic under the heading of phenomenology, so it is really aimless to argue with you (although I very much want to, because I find your stance too conveniently erases the gap between Debian and Ubuntu by saying it all boils down to personal preference). All I can do is refer again to the stereotypes you mentioned earlier and emphasize that they visibly circulate in the intertubes and influence real users' choices and so transcend the solipsism you're describing. Debian's self-described mission to be a universal OS isn't a myth. It strives to support a broad range of architectures, not just the ones that have a near monopoly. Likewise Ubuntu's "Linux for human beings" tag isn't an empty slogan. It summarizes all the other decisions on Canonical's part to push the OS into the background, and make the experience OOTB as possible.

reyfer
May 8th, 2011, 12:37 AM
I started my Linux journey with Mandrake (original Mandriva name), then tried Fedora, then discovered Debian...I use both Kubuntu and Debian, Kubuntu at home and Debian on all the machines at my company, and I don't regret it....I'll probably try ZevenOS Neptune, Debian testing with KDE 4.6.2

krapp
May 8th, 2011, 12:40 AM
It is exactly this kind of snobbery that one finds in the Debian "community" and forums that keeps distros like 'buntu and Mepis growing in popularity and reaping much of the harvest that is said to be "rightfully Debian's."

In that single post, you have done more to hurt your "cause," whatever it is, than to make Debian more appealing, even to geeky tinkerers for whom a computer is an end in itself.

Rawr.

-Robin

Debian doesn't aim to be popular. It aims to be general. It looks for the lowest common denominator, which admittedly, might be just a degree higher than Ubuntu's ideal consumer.

As for your jab at Debian's community, it is much older and much more integral to Debian than Ubuntu's is to Ubuntu, as Debian is produced by the community and Ubuntu by Canonical.

phredbull
July 6th, 2011, 05:58 PM
...snip...
Likewise Ubuntu's "Linux for human beings" tag isn't an empty slogan. It summarizes all the other decisions on Canonical's part to push the OS into the background, and make the experience OOTB as possible.
This is highly debatable, and I'm sure that debate is raging on somewhere around here. I'll just say that that slogan both attracted me to and drove me away from Ubuntu.
Anyway, Ubuntu Karmic was my introduction to Linux, and it was a pleasant surprise to me how friendly the Linux desktop was. But over subsequent releases, I became increasingly disinterested in Ubuntu's direction. I dabbled in #!, (buntu base and Debian base), which I do like, in principle, but I really felt like Mint was more in line with what I wanted. Now Mint (Debian) XFCE is my main setup, it performs almost as well as an Openbox or Fluxbox setup, but much friendlier and prettier.
I still check out new Ubuntu releases, and have an install of Mint11, (buntu base), but it's just a temporary install. I like Ubuntu for the PPAs, specifically xorg-edgers, so I can run Compiz. I like using Mint11 w/Compiz, but it really makes my comp drag.
Not sure if this counts as Ubuntu ==> Debian?

jerenept
July 6th, 2011, 06:01 PM
Continuing from this post (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=10782520&postcount=651), I really wonder how many of us there actually are!



There are so many who boast, in a way, about "moving on" from "kiddie distros" like Ubuntu, Mepis, etc to "The Source." Yet here's someone who has come the other way, as I have (kinda sorta).

Please understand, I love Debian! If it weren't for Debian, there'd be no Ubuntu! And no Mepis, AntiX, Mint, Knoppix, PureOS, and dozens more, all built on Debian's awesomeness!

It's just really striking and really rare to read in someone's introduction that they have come to Ubuntu from Debian rather than the other way around!

Is it as rare as it seems? I'm simply curious, so thanks for taking part in this poll!

-Robin

I started with Ubuntu, then went to Gentoo. Got frustrated with the ridiculousness of Gentoo, returned to Ubuntu.

PCaddicted
July 6th, 2011, 07:38 PM
I've never tried or used Debian.

snowpine
July 6th, 2011, 07:40 PM
I followed the CrunchBang project from Ubuntu 9.04 to Debian Squeeze.

Honestly, if CrunchBang had stuck with Ubuntu, I would probably still be an Ubuntu-user. :)

Of course I like to experiment with other distros too. ;)

uRock
July 6th, 2011, 07:40 PM
I tried Debian first. It didn't offer any means of installing graphics drivers, so I moved to Ubuntu.

blueturtl
July 6th, 2011, 09:05 PM
Seeing this thread I realized I have unwittingly eradicated my last Ubuntu installation. Now all our computers run Debian. It had nothing to do with the perceived image of either product and everything to do with stability. Debian has more of it, period. A lot of the bugs that affect Ubuntu don't affect Debian. I have used Ubuntu since 2005 (Hoary) and still do when I need a LiveCD, but for personal use the signs were clear after some odd years put in. Rarely if ever did the bugs in Ubuntu appear to be addressed and if they were there'd always be new ones to make up for the lost ones. If you use Debian stable you basically have an older release of Ubuntu with a lot of the bugs ironed out. If you have a computer untouched by any of Ubuntu's many issues, you're in luck. I was not so lucky it seems.

However Ubuntu offers an awesome community and one without which I doubt I'd be nearly as well taught for my Debian. I always loved the brown theme and the message of humanity. Debian seems kind of persona-less.

Bart_D
July 6th, 2011, 09:26 PM
Like the majorioty of others....option 2 for me. Why re=-invent the wheel when Ubuntu has already done that....and then some. What a polished product Ubuntu is! I love it!

I gotta be honest, I have tried more than 30 distros and NONE of them offer the rock solid stability and user0-friendliness of Ubuntu! NONE! Sorry Fedora, bye-bye Linux Mint, later Open Suse.

I would put Fedora in 2nd...but a distant second. Ubuntu is the unanimous #1.

omns
July 6th, 2011, 09:41 PM
I chose one of the started with ubuntu options in your poll but there was many years of rpm he'll before that:) ubuntu was a breath of fresh air when I found it in 2005. Since then I've tried many things but mainly moved to Debian as my main OS. That said, in recent weeks I've been having a look at Unity (http://omnsproject.org/?p=1200) and it has thrown me into quite a dilemma. I had tried some of the betas and been unimpressed but the final release is very nice :)

Dry Lips
July 6th, 2011, 09:52 PM
Funny I should discover this thread right now. As I write this I'm copying an ISO of Mint Debian edition to a memory stick. I'm going to install it on one of my other computers (not my main computer.) Does Mint Debian edition count?

timZZ
July 6th, 2011, 10:02 PM
I remember when I bought a used 486 Compaq computer off E-bay and put Debian on it I got off a Linux Magazine CD. It ran for users running my website without a hitch and I was very pleased. During a move, however, the computer was dropped from the back of the truck and this was the end of my website as I know it. I just did not have the energy to start it again.

hhh
July 6th, 2011, 10:27 PM
I have used Ubuntu since 2005 (Hoary) and still do when I need a LiveCD, but for personal use the signs were clear after some odd years put in.
Debian has Live images now too...
http://www.debian.org/CD/live/

It's how I installed my current Debian system. I had to get off the Ubuntu 6 month release cycle, stability is what I want now. I install current packages that I want from testing, unstable, backports, Hadret's repo and occasionally from Ubuntu/Launchpad PPAs (not recommended for stability, but what the heck).

NightwishFan
July 6th, 2011, 11:07 PM
Does Mint Debian edition count?

Technically but Debian Stable is "where it is at" so to speak. Mint uses Testing with some added on codecs.

Dry Lips
July 6th, 2011, 11:21 PM
Technically but Debian Stable is "where it is at" so to speak. Mint uses Testing with some added on codecs.

Yeah, Mint Debian edition is a rolling distribution, right?
I've just tried to run update manager, (after a fresh install)
but it says "Could not apply changes! Fix broken packages first."
Is this perhaps because Mint uses testing, and not Stable?

Zero2Nine
July 6th, 2011, 11:26 PM
Debian has Live images now too...
http://www.debian.org/CD/live/

It's how I installed my current Debian system. I had to get off the Ubuntu 6 month release cycle, stability is what I want now. I install current packages that I want from testing, unstable, backports, Hadret's repo and occasionally from Ubuntu/Launchpad PPAs (not recommended for stability, but what the heck).

You don't necessarily need to go with the 6 month cycle. Nobody stops you from using a certain version longer. It is supported with updates for 18 months. And of course there are the LTS releases. However I do understand that it is very hard to resist a new Ubuntu version. I planned to keep Meerkat around for much longer.

phredbull
July 6th, 2011, 11:28 PM
...snip...
stability is what I want now.
...snip...
(not recommended for stability, but what the heck).
LOL! I guess we all want to be on the edge, to a certain degree, and we all don't want to be broken, to a certain degree.


Yeah, Mint Debian edition is a rolling distribution, right?
I've just tried to run update manager, (after a fresh install)
but it says "Could not apply changes! Fix broken packages first."
Is this perhaps because Mint uses testing, and not Stable?
Unless they've made a new spin in the last day or so, that Update Manager is designed for the Ubuntu-based versions. I've been dealing with updates in Synaptic for now. The good news is, they're releasing an update manager for Debian. Here's the details:
http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1781
Looks like Clem is on to some good stuff...
:popcorn:

Dry Lips
July 6th, 2011, 11:40 PM
Unless they've made a new spin in the last day or so, that Update Manager is designed for the Ubuntu-based versions. The good news is, they're releasing an update manager for Debian. Here's the details:
http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1781
Looks like Clem is on to some good stuff...
:popcorn:

Hmm... Since it is a rolling distribution, should it really
need an Update Manager? And if the Update Manager
is for the Ubuntu based versions only, why on earth
did they include it in the package then?

hhh
July 7th, 2011, 12:02 AM
And of course there are the LTS releases.

I was on 10.04. IIRC, a security update produced major breakage on my system. As you can see from my forum join-date, I'm no stranger to Ubuntu, and I wouldn't be the Linux fan I am today without having used it.


LOL! I guess we all want to be on the edge, to a certain degree, and we all don't want to be broken, to a certain degree.:)

omns
July 7th, 2011, 12:18 AM
Does Mint Debian edition count?

No, LMDE is not Debian.

Bandit
July 7th, 2011, 12:23 AM
I am back and forth more then a pregnant chick on the Morey show..

radar920
July 7th, 2011, 12:23 AM
Started with ubuntu and have recently switched to debian and i love it. I don't think i will go back to ubuntu although its still installed on one of my machines that i rarely use.

phredbull
July 7th, 2011, 12:28 AM
Hmm... Since it is a rolling distribution, should it really
need an Update Manager? And if the Update Manager
is for the Ubuntu based versions only, why on earth
did they include it in the package then?
Not sure about the second question, but as for the first, the blog explains that Debian testing is frequently subject to breakage and regressions. Their idea for the update manager is that they will do some preliminary testing for those that want a bit more stability. Ultimately, you end up installing broken packages and their fixes less often, hopefully getting more of the fixed pieces the first time around. And of course, you still have the option to have everything, now! I guess It's a compromise for those that aren't so good at fixing stuff, without having to offer a Debian Stable based version. Still rolling, but with pit stops...


No, LMDE is not Debian.

The Mint team should be pleased to be considered a full-fledged distro in it's own right, and not a mere re-spin.

BrokenKingpin
July 7th, 2011, 12:29 AM
I started with Debian and then switched to Ubuntu. This was mainly because I could get up and running quicker with Ubuntu. I am currently running Xubuntu on my main rig.

I still have Debian installed on one of my boxes though. The thing I really like about it is that it is a rolling release (testing branch), but I find things tend to break after a few months, which sort of defeats the purpose.

Either way I still consider Debian the king of the disros, being that so many top distros are based on it.

XubuRoxMySox
July 7th, 2011, 12:45 AM
Does Mint Debian edition count?

Um, no more than Ubuntu would (or Mepis or Knoppix or Crunchbang, etc) because BOTH are based on Debian!

-Robin

compmodder26
July 7th, 2011, 01:03 AM
Started with Gentoo back in 2003. Used it for about a year then switched to Ubuntu 5.04. Been using Ubuntu for primary purposes ever since. I dabble in other distros, including Debian, but really don't use them for more than playing around and testing.

Dry Lips
July 7th, 2011, 01:26 AM
Not sure about the second question, but as for the first, the blog explains that Debian testing is frequently subject to breakage and regressions. Their idea for the update manager is that they will do some preliminary testing for those that want a bit more stability. Ultimately, you end up installing broken packages and their fixes less often, hopefully getting more of the fixed pieces the first time around. And of course, you still have the option to have everything, now! I guess It's a compromise for those that aren't so good at fixing stuff, without having to offer a Debian Stable based version. Still rolling, but with pit stops...


OK, thanks for your clarification.



Um, no more than Ubuntu would (or Mepis or Knoppix or Crunchbang, etc) because BOTH are based on Debian!

-Robin

Darn! :-$

mamamia88
July 7th, 2011, 01:48 AM
i went to debian because of unity not because i wanted something more complicated

Tibuda
July 7th, 2011, 02:20 AM
Started with Ubuntu, switched to Debian, switched to something else, switched to something else, switched to something else, switched to something else, switched to something else, switched to something else, switched to something else.

Tibuda
July 7th, 2011, 02:22 AM
Um, no more than Ubuntu would (or Mepis or Knoppix or Crunchbang, etc) because BOTH are based on Debian!

-Robin

It is different, because Ubuntu uses its own repository, while LMDE/Mepis/#! use Debian repository. The repository you use is what makes your distro.

malspa
July 7th, 2011, 02:47 AM
It is different, because Ubuntu uses its own repository, while LMDE/Mepis/#! use Debian repository. The repository you use is what makes your distro.

True, although LMDE and Mepis do include some things from their own repos. For example, from the Mepis 11 /etc/apt/sources.list:


deb ftp://ftp.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.mepis.org/mepis/ mepis-11.0 main

BrokenKingpin
July 7th, 2011, 04:24 AM
It is different, because Ubuntu uses its own repository, while LMDE/Mepis/#! use Debian repository. The repository you use is what makes your distro.
++... LMDE is 100% compatible with the Debian repos, Ubuntu is not.

hhh
July 7th, 2011, 04:47 AM
Actually, Mint has it's own repo and Clem has just set up his own repository for LMDE, the "Linux Mint Debian Incoming" repo (also see comment 44)...
http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1781

Khakilang
July 7th, 2011, 04:50 AM
I started Ubuntu and stick with Ubuntu. But I had other computer to play around with other Distros. Maybe you should add this to your poll.

wizard10000
July 7th, 2011, 10:12 AM
I tried Debian first. It didn't offer any means of installing graphics drivers, so I moved to Ubuntu.

I'm not married to The Debian Way of installing closed-source drivers. If an *buntu user wanted to do things The Debian Way they could install module-assistant and have at it but the older I get the more I appreciate *having the option* of doing pointy-clicky things if I choose to.

I also prefer *buntu's security model - I'd rather use sudo than su and think it's a better option for inexperienced users.

Also, debian-multimedia.org needs more bandwidth, bigger servers or both ;)

RoflHaxBbq
July 7th, 2011, 02:11 PM
I started with Ubuntu 10.10 and switched to Debian 6.0.1a about a month before 11.04.

mamamia88
July 7th, 2011, 02:35 PM
Once setup debian is no more difficult to use than Ubuntu. I switched to debian on my netbook because it's more minimal. The only software I like to have the latest version of is Chrome and that is easy to keep up to date with because google adds a source when you install it from a deb. Personally, I don't like the direction ubuntu is heading in. One of the main draws I had to linux is the first place was how easy it was to personalize your gui, but now with unity there isn't much of an option for that. Also, if you are going to have an inflexible gui at least make it an awesome gui but unity isn't that imo. I will be sticking with debian for now on my netbook, and will give ubuntu another shot on my laptop when I finally get it fixed.

Arthur_D
July 7th, 2011, 04:16 PM
Went from Mandrake (Mandriva) to Debian Unstable to Ubuntu, and stuck with it until some months ago when I installed Debian Stable and I intend to stick with it. I left Ubuntu before the 11.04 release, so that was not the decisive reason.

So I don't know what to vote for... from Debian to trying Ubuntu and back to Debian would not be accurate, but is still the closest option in this poll (I've used Ubuntu regularly from 7.10 and up to 10.10, so I have spent more time with Ubuntu than Debian).

By the way, I don't see why Debian is said to be so difficult to set up... spend half an hour on getting a couple of drivers, and you'll have a stable system for "eternity". ;)

(That being said, I don't even find Debian Stable stable enough... sometimes, Gnome locks up and I need to restart it. Maybe I have some faulty RAM, idk.)

Bart_D
July 7th, 2011, 05:18 PM
++... LMDE is 100% compatible with the Debian repos, Ubuntu is not.

I don't think any Ubuntu users care.

uRock
July 7th, 2011, 05:21 PM
I don't think any Ubuntu users care.
I know I don't. I have no use for their repos.(Not that their is or isn't anything wrong with their repos.)

phredbull
July 7th, 2011, 06:54 PM
I don't think any Ubuntu users care.
There are more than just Ubuntu users here.

NightwishFan
July 7th, 2011, 07:05 PM
I'm not married to The Debian Way of installing closed-source drivers. If an *buntu user wanted to do things The Debian Way they could install module-assistant and have at it but the older I get the more I appreciate *having the option* of doing pointy-clicky things if I choose to.
Debian uses dkms now. Though granted after installing the packages you still need to run nvidia-xconfig as root. That is it though. I could set up a bash script to do it.


I also prefer *buntu's security model - I'd rather use sudo than su and think it's a better option for inexperienced users.
I use sudo on Debian. Just do not enter a root password while installing.


Also, debian-multimedia.org needs more bandwidth, bigger servers or both ;)
Debian Multimedia is not an official Debian project. Please donate.

diesch
July 7th, 2011, 07:10 PM
I've been using Debian since 1997 but was quite a bit annoyed when it seemed they never would manage to get Sarge ready in 2004. So when I read about a new Debian based distro with a regular release cycle that got my attention. Switing was simple as I could just keep about all my config from Debian.

I'm still using Debian on some servers but my Desktop is Ubuntu.

wizard10000
July 7th, 2011, 07:36 PM
Debian uses dkms now. Though granted after installing the packages you still need to run nvidia-xconfig as root. That is it though. I could set up a bash script to do it.

Not the same as a pointy-clicky thing. With squeeze I got to use module-assistant to install both nvidia and broadcom drivers - with *buntu I can use jockey *or* use m-a. Choices - and I don't have to run nvidia-xconfig *or* script it.



I use sudo on Debian. Just do not enter a root password while installing.

I know this but a n00b wouldn't - and wouldn't think to read up on it before installing. The Debian Way is su ;)


Debian Multimedia is not an official Debian project. Please donate.

I may - and others probably should too. If I'm not mistaken Debian multimedia is the parent of *buntu-restricted-extras. Folks what like playing mp3s and DVDs should probably contribute as well. Linkage here -

http://debian-multimedia.org/donate.php

I've used Linux for a lotta years - my first distro was Yggdrasil back in 1994. I've run slack, gentoo, RH, Fedora, CentOS, Vector, Debian and now Kubuntu. The short version for me is that although a Squeeze KDE installation leaves me with about 20mb more RAM available at idle on my netbook than my pared-down Kubuntu 11.04 install does, I've got RAM to spare and I like being able to choose whether to do the pointy-clicky thing or not.

One advantage Debian has is that I can still use sysv tools to manage the thing as I think upstart is a crime against nature.

But - Debian doesn't meet everybody's needs and neither does Ubuntu. I'm all about choices and my choices are different than others' ;)

cheers -

NightwishFan
July 7th, 2011, 07:44 PM
But - Debian doesn't meet everybody's needs and neither does Ubuntu. I'm all about choices and my choices are different than others' ;)

cheers -

A pointy clicky thing is irrelevant to a user that does not understand it. Even if they can accomplish what they want with it. The only proper way for a person that does not understand is to have it done for them.

I agree with the above though. Use what works.

wizard10000
July 7th, 2011, 08:04 PM
A pointy clicky thing is irrelevant to a user that does not understand it. Even if they can accomplish what they want with it. The only proper way for a person that does not understand is to have it done for them.

You know, this is a really good point. I built a quad-boot monstrosity in the mid-90s that ran Win 3.1, OS/2, a Win95 beta and Linux, but I can't remember whether it was Yggdrasil or slack.

I got better, though :D

For most a computer is a tool - for others it's a raison d'Ítre. I'm not bashing anyone and especially not you, but choosing a distribution based on difficulty is basically intellectual masturbation and all those folks should run gentoo or sit down and be quiet :D

Yeah, I got censored here for typing ST*U once ;)

I can roll my own kernel if I need to - when I started using Linux you *had* to. I can compile from source if an application doesn't have what I want - but to be honest, I'm in charge of desktop support for a few thousand users and the *last* thing I want at the end of the day is do low-level interaction with the OS unless *I* choose to.

Most people don't care how their refrigerator works; they just want it to keep their food cold. Although I disagree with some of the direction Canonical's taking they are putting Linux in the hands of people who wouldn't even consider it a year ago.

Ubuntu's documentation shows me how to do something but Debian's documentation shows me *why* stuff works - when I wanted to learn how to assign priorities to repositories or mix up packages from Wheezy, Natty and whatever PPA caught my fancy it was Debian documentation that showed me how to do it.

But - after learning how it works for pretty close to 20 years now I want it to just work with as little fuss as possible.

Unless I want to fuss with it, that is :D

mamamia88
July 7th, 2011, 08:19 PM
You know, this is a really good point. I built a quad-boot monstrosity in the mid-90s that ran Win 3.1, OS/2, a Win95 beta and Linux, but I can't remember whether it was Yggdrasil or slack.

I got better, though :D

For most a computer is a tool - for others it's a raison d'Ítre. I'm not bashing anyone and especially not you, but choosing a distribution based on difficulty is basically intellectual masturbation and all those folks should run gentoo or sit down and be quiet :D

Yeah, I got censored here for typing ST*U once ;)

I can roll my own kernel if I need to - when I started using Linux you *had* to. I can compile from source if an application doesn't have what I want - but to be honest, I'm in charge of desktop support for a few thousand users and the *last* thing I want at the end of the day is do low-level interaction with the OS unless *I* choose to.

Most people don't care how their refrigerator works; they just want it to keep their food cold. Although I disagree with some of the direction Canonical's taking they are putting Linux in the hands of people who wouldn't even consider it a year ago.

Ubuntu's documentation shows me how to do something but Debian's documentation shows me *why* stuff works - when I wanted to learn how to assign priorities to repositories or mix up packages from Wheezy, Natty and whatever PPA caught my fancy it was Debian documentation that showed me how to do it.

But - after learning how it works for pretty close to 20 years now I want it to just work with as little fuss as possible.

Unless I want to fuss with it, that is :D
True that reminds me of this video though http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxXD9WQWZck&feature=related

NightwishFan
July 7th, 2011, 08:43 PM
That is why I decided not to use Arch for any length of time. I set up Debian and then I can change what I want.

Noz3001
July 7th, 2011, 09:15 PM
Wheezy is very nice. Few hiccups every now and then but less problems than I had with unusable Unity. I'll probably try 11.10 but if Unity isn't up to scratch, I will probably never return. Everything I can do on Ubuntu, I can do on Debian.

hhh
July 7th, 2011, 09:33 PM
I know this but a n00b wouldn't - and wouldn't think to read up on it before installing. The Debian Way is su ;)
A noob would probably use a Live image, where sudo is installed by default. AFAIK, sudo is the Debian way as of Squeeze...
http://wiki.debian.org/sudo

wizard10000
July 7th, 2011, 09:44 PM
Wheezy is very nice. Few hiccups every now and then but less problems than I had with unusable Unity. I'll probably try 11.10 but if Unity isn't up to scratch, I will probably never return. Everything I can do on Ubuntu, I can do on Debian.

I had some trouble with Wheezy, but it's a testing distribution after all ;)

Wheezy didn't like my netbook at all - it refused to boot and I refused to troubleshoot. It might be fixed now - I'm certain it'll be fixed before Wheezy goes stable.

The bigger problem for me was devede - which is an application I use quite a bit. It's slightly broken in Natty and Squeeze (dvdauthor requires an environnment variable now that devede doesn't provide - but there's an easy workaround) but it's horrendously broken in Wheezy. Unless the video you convert to DVD format already has has AC3 audio embedded devede is unusable - you can use avidemux to reencode audio before rendering to DVD and that's just too much trouble for me.

devede's author has been either busy or not paying attention as he was notified of the environment variable bug back and January and a fix was committed for both issues last week and I guess has been provided for Oneric - I don't know how Wheezy gets the fix.

The reason I moved from Fedora to CentOS was Fedora was a little too bleeding edge for me - the reason I moved from CentOS to Debian was that I tried Debian and learned to appreciate the power of apt :D

wizard10000
July 7th, 2011, 09:47 PM
A noob would probably use a Live image, where sudo is installed by default. AFAIK, sudo is the Debian way as of Squeeze...
http://wiki.debian.org/sudo

The Squeeze installer prompts you for a root password. Hopefully if Debian's moving (moved) to sudo that prompt will go away and the people who really know how to use su can just set a root password ;)

benc1213
July 30th, 2011, 11:25 AM
I started with ubuntu but later switched to debian. I really like how stable is. The only thing I make sure I need to keep up to date is my web browser.

el_koraco
July 30th, 2011, 11:37 AM
I really like how stable is.

It's amazing. Everything works on first go! I've reconfigured the sound server to go from Alsa to Pulse and back, messed with GDM and Slim, even fiddled with installing packages from testing and Sid, and nothing breaks!

XubuRoxMySox
July 30th, 2011, 11:59 AM
Stability is the reason I stick with the LTS releases of Xubuntu! Especially now since they have changed the way they build LTS releases, not from Debian Unstable like the regular releases, but from Debian Testing. The Debian "stuff" that Lucid was built from, for example, has since been released as Debian Stable. And it's good for 2 more years! Works for me.