Slashdot Mirror

Will I be able to have Debian perfectly handle [all] my basic multimedia requirements well by default? I would like to play Yahoo, CNN, ABC, BBC andd FOX video and audio by default. Let a slashdotter inform a soul.

No, because many of those are proprietary formats, which Debian will never support out of the box. However, it is very easy to enable those formats by adding any number of alternative package repositories at apt-get.org.

Why the author of this article is going all that trouble to install firefox and real player and the such manually?
apt is the only program you need to install every package you want.
There are gazillions of deb repositories around the world which offer almost everything you want.
go to apt-get.org and search for your package, then add the repository's address to your sources.list file.
In the process of search on apt-get.org, you will find some great repositories, some even on universities offering whatever free software they use intenraly. Many of them do the hard job of packaging everything not present in official Debian repositories.
Find your way into the apt, (or if you are a GUI guy, use aptitude), instead of trying to shoot yourself in the foot by making manual symlinks here and there.
Seriously, do they hire clueless amateurs for writing these kinds of 'reviews'? So that they can point out 100 times in their writings that 'a user in the discussion forum attached to this article told me that I should do this and add that to my blabla.conf'? It's not even funny.

If you have the time (like I do), it's fun to search through the Debian unstable/ repository and any interesting ones you can find at http://apt-get.org/. I've found many useful things in there; gotta love it.

Not dselect/synaptic. But even synaptic/aptitude can (or will?) search by debtags, which brings us exactly for the type of keyworded-search (webservers, productivity) you want.
Let's try an example. Say I want to install some electrical circuit design/simulation in my computer. So, I do "apt-cache search electrical":

atlc - Arbitrary Transmission Line Calculator
electric - electrical CAD system
ksimus - KDE tool for simulating electrical circuits
partlibrary - Electrical and processing parts and symbols for QCad 2
transcalc - microwave and RF transmission line calculator
vipec - network analyzer for electrical networks
x10 - Operate X-10 electrical power control modules.
xfig-libs - XFig image libraries and examples

In a cursory examination, I select ksimus and qcad (with partlibrary). Now, I can kynaptic/aptitude away and voilà: I have what I wanted. That's the system I have used for the last five years (four of them in MS-less desktops). If it's not in Debian, I search for it in http://apt-get.org/

Real simple.

The package frontends are getting better. But we desperately need better backend apps. The interpackage dependencies are getting more complex, and broken dependency references abound. And we need a structure that represents a further distinction than just source/binary: we need -dev structure, so packages that depend on the headers and config tools of other packages can find them automatically, without having to figure out their (distro-dependent) development package name. For that matter, a single, universal "lib-config" tool that spits back the versions, headers and filesys locations of any library installed by the package client, would really improve productivity and reliability.

The really big leap in backends would be a distributed repository. Instead of just a network of (unsync'ed) mirrors of a single monolithic repository, we need a mirrored or otherwise distributed directory of repositories, each with an overlapping fraction of the current repositories. That will accommodate the bandwidth and storage requirements for installing specific versions of packages, across the exploding Internet userbase, especially as the mirror:client ratio gets worse. Alternate repositories should be the rule, not just the exception.

Umm, no. Debian controls their main repository, as does Red Hat. Debian has no control over the many alternative repositories listed at http://www.apt-get.org/, and Red Hat has no say about the contents of http://rpmfind.net/.

Any system that lets users can add unofficial package sources to their management system is subject to dependency hell. RPM-based systems happen to get the lion's share of bad publicity in this department, but any Debian user who experimented with the alternative KDE packages people were sending out before the official packages were available knows that it is every bit as susceptible as Red Hat.

Maybe the main difference is that darn near every program you've ever heard of is available from the official Debian sources, so there's almost never any need to use third-party sources. If Red Hat packaged everything under the sun, then their users would probably use those packages and there would be many fewer problems. I'm not suggesting that Red Hat do this, but I do believe that's the reason for their reputation.

So they will google for apt-get and discover http://apt-get.org/ and maybe http://debian.org/. Good thing.

I have limited experience with it, but Xandros seems to be a nice balance. It is currently based on Debian sarge (testing). It loads up a nice, friendly desktop that will feel very comfortable and familiar to most Windows users. However, with very little work, it can be set up to update from Debian directly and from any other sources of Debian packages.

I use debian pretty much exclusivly now. While I do appreciate and enjoy other distros from time to time, debian is the distro with which I am most familiar, and most comfortable.

I'm presently running unstable, and yes I do have non-free packages installed. I do however very much encourage debian to dump non-free.

For those who fear they may be inconvinienced by the lack non-free need only look toward apt-get.org or other unofficial apt repositories. Or of course you can simply install non-free packages from source or binary form direct from the software creator.

If debian does drop non-free, I will continue to use debian, and I will still likely have non-free software on my system (nvidia-glx), though the inconvinience (if any) will encourage me to give free alternatives more attention.

Debian works for me. I've not found any software that doesn't have up-to-date packages; if they're not in the main tree it's normally for a good reason, and apt-get.org can usually find them. Failing that there's Google and the helpful IRC channel and mailing lists.

apt-rpm, while much nicer to deal with than native rpm, still suffers from the fact that nothing beats Debian's own apt repositories for sheer quality and stability, thanks to the zealous adherence to quality of the majority of Debian package maintainers. Actually, it's this QA which puts Debian ahead of almost every other distro, especially the (IME) terminally crashy Gentoo.

I wouldn't say that Debian is the perfect distro, but I think it's as close as you'll come to one.

Specifically, Daniel Stone's backport of 4.3, since June, on a laptop.

Finding more recent but unofficial packages for Debian isn't any more difficult than finding ones for Redhat.

Try this site for more info on apt-get. I'm not sure if brookgpu packages are there (yet?), but I figured I'd let you know about the site in case you didn't already.

Which Debian do you use, BTW? Anyone know the best version right now (Woody/etc.)?

It seems to be a common misconception that you have to compile open source software manually, and that you have to be a skilled 1337 programmer to do it.

Ever heard of rpm? apt-get? swup?

RedHat offers a complete server, just burn the ISOs and install. If you think that's too difficult, then fine. It's your money.

Also, there are tons of third party Debian repositories. A whole lot of stuff can be found at Apt-Get.org

In a word, no.

There are backports and loads of repositories, which again are largely backports from testing/unstable.

You might be prepared to compromise, using only unstable packages for things which are non-critical, but you're bound to get bitten by the new packages' dependency trees invading libraries etc which you wanted to keep from stable.

Secondly, if you want to use more than one third-party repository you're simply going to have to pray they're orthogonal.

Finally, and most importantly, note that testing and unstable have no security patches created in an organised way. You might find yourself either downgrading to stable or trying to patch source packages by hand (rather defeating the point of repositories..).

All three of the above problems have bitten me.

I use Sid (unstable) on my laptop, but on my new desktop PC I haven't bothered to upgrade from Woody, other than KDE 3.1, OpenOffice.org, Privoxy, and a few home-compiled apps. Actually, I find it refreshing to have a rock-solid and stable system. On my Sid laptop, I get all kinds of weird problems. Not often, but occasionally... Like when the printer stops working, or the USB mouse doesn't work anymore, or when X is no longer 3D accelerated. These are the kinds of issues you have to deal with once in a while when running Debian unstable. Not a big deal, but if I could choose again, I would have chosen Woody (with a few selected upgrades) on the laptop as well.

1. CheckInstall will generate DPKG files (among many package formats) for anything you build from source. Makes it easy to uninstall the files.

2. What APT repository were you using? Did you search for the package at apt-get.org to see if there were any third party repository? You know that you can have several repositories in your sources.list file, right?

How should a package manager handle the user overwriting files left and right with different versions? The policy is that you put YOUR stuff in /usr/local and leave the rest alone. If you don't want to do that, creating your own Debian packages _really_ isn't that hard.

It's not always a choice between stable and unstable, either. For example, I run a mostly stable system at home, but I use a few backports for packages that I need newer versions of, or don't exist in stable. apt-get.org is your friend when looking for backports. Just copy and paste the relevant sources line(s) into /etc/apt/sources.list, then apt-get update and apt-get upgrade. Works for me.

The "latest RPM" is, by definition, not stable. It has not had the testing period that a "stable" package has.

If you want a more recent version than is available in stable, pin your machine at stable and install the "testing" package(which satisfies dependancies), or run testing itself.

You can also find a third-party debian source(eg http://marillat.free.fr), or compile it yourself, though that also defeats the testing period.

Check out http://www.apt-get.org/ for all your unofficial debian source needs.

Did you mean to link to apt-get.org? Apt-get.com seems like a completely useless site (all links point to index.html, which it says doesn't exist).

While I'm a big fan of this guide, and have used it myself, the post that references it is misleading -- or at least, not totally accurate. You do not need to upgrade to unstable/testing to get the latest version of a specific package. Edit your /etc/apt/sources.list to include an apt repository for the packages you want (e.g., gnome2.2, kde3.1, mozilla-firebird, etc,) and then do apt-get update, and apt-get install whatever-it-is. Check apt-get.org for apt-get repositories for newer stuff. Adding new stuff to older versions of debian may break stuff, caveat emptor.

i highly recommend going with stable (currently woody) and using backports to stay up-to-date on packages that you need/want.

# snort (from the debian maintainer himself)
deb http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/snort-stable-i38 6/ ./
deb-src http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/snort-stable-i38 6/ ./

# kde
deb http://download.kde.org/stable/3.1.2/Debian stable main
deb-src http://download.kde.org/stable/3.1.2/Debian stable main

for spamassassin, take your pick.

for nessus, look here again.

for other packages, search here.

apt repositories on people.debian.org are not official packages, but unofficially maintained/packaged by official debian maintainers, so these people are familiar with debian policy (and "policy" is an official document, not just a familiar way of doing things).

email the official maintainers and ask if they can recommend a backport repository for their package. or backport the package yourself using apt-src (which you first have to backport by hand from unstable; as easy as wget, dpkg-source -x *.dsc, cd package-version, dpkg-buildpackage -b -us -uc -rfakeroot, cd .., dpkg -i *.deb). i've personally backported airsnort, alsa, dia, esound, ethereal, freeswan, gaim, gnucash, gnupg, grip, jabber, kismet, nessus, psi, spamassasin, tcpdump, wget, wine, xcdroast, and more lesser known packages, so it's possible, but usually you can find someone else who's already backported the package you want.

let debian stable take care of the parts of your system that you just want to work, and use backports to allow you to trade aged stability for new features.

i highly recommend going with stable (currently woody) and using backports to stay up-to-date on packages that you need/want.

# snort (from the debian maintainer himself)
deb http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/snort-stable-i38 6/ ./
deb-src http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/snort-stable-i38 6/ ./

# kde
deb http://download.kde.org/stable/3.1.2/Debian stable main
deb-src http://download.kde.org/stable/3.1.2/Debian stable main

for spamassassin, take your pick.

for nessus, look here again.

for other packages, search here.

apt repositories on people.debian.org are not official packages, but unofficially maintained/packaged by official debian maintainers, so these people are familiar with debian policy (and "policy" is an official document, not just a familiar way of doing things).

email the official maintainers and ask if they can recommend a backport repository for their package. or backport the package yourself using apt-src (which you first have to backport by hand from unstable; as easy as wget, dpkg-source -x *.dsc, cd package-version, dpkg-buildpackage -b -us -uc -rfakeroot, cd .., dpkg -i *.deb). i've personally backported airsnort, alsa, dia, esound, ethereal, freeswan, gaim, gnucash, gnupg, grip, jabber, kismet, nessus, psi, spamassasin, tcpdump, wget, wine, xcdroast, and more lesser known packages, so it's possible, but usually you can find someone else who's already backported the package you want.

let debian stable take care of the parts of your system that you just want to work, and use backports to allow you to trade aged stability for new features.

i highly recommend going with stable (currently woody) and using backports to stay up-to-date on packages that you need/want.

# snort (from the debian maintainer himself)
deb http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/snort-stable-i38 6/ ./
deb-src http://people.debian.org/~ssmeenk/snort-stable-i38 6/ ./

# kde
deb http://download.kde.org/stable/3.1.2/Debian stable main
deb-src http://download.kde.org/stable/3.1.2/Debian stable main

for spamassassin, take your pick.

for nessus, look here again.

for other packages, search here.

apt repositories on people.debian.org are not official packages, but unofficially maintained/packaged by official debian maintainers, so these people are familiar with debian policy (and "policy" is an official document, not just a familiar way of doing things).

email the official maintainers and ask if they can recommend a backport repository for their package. or backport the package yourself using apt-src (which you first have to backport by hand from unstable; as easy as wget, dpkg-source -x *.dsc, cd package-version, dpkg-buildpackage -b -us -uc -rfakeroot, cd .., dpkg -i *.deb). i've personally backported airsnort, alsa, dia, esound, ethereal, freeswan, gaim, gnucash, gnupg, grip, jabber, kismet, nessus, psi, spamassasin, tcpdump, wget, wine, xcdroast, and more lesser known packages, so it's possible, but usually you can find someone else who's already backported the package you want.

let debian stable take care of the parts of your system that you just want to work, and use backports to allow you to trade aged stability for new features.

But since debian is based on volunteer work, and has some religious beliefs, great packages like xfree 4.3

mplayer are missing.

Find the Woody backport for gnome 2.2 on apt-get.org.

You're going to need the XFree backport with it, since the X in Woody doesn't support the goodies that gnome2.2 needs.

This is probably why Ximian won't support woody, they'd have to not only do gnome, but X along with it.

That's great news. Now it seems that I don't have to move to Gentoo to get some very recent packages.

FYI: This is also a good please to find your deb-packages.

Mostly right, except

1. XFree86 is still at 4.2.1 -- branden is working on 4.3, but you can get them now from dstone's repo (check apt-get.org for the lines)

2. Gentoo is only stable if you never upgrade it. I can't count the number of times a friend of mine has had to spend hours fixing things that a careless ebuild-writer left slip in that essentially hosed the whole system. On top of it, who the hell wants to recompile every tiny little update?

And don't forget that many of the prominent software packages that are either too new to go into unstable, or have other such issues preventing their official inclusion, can be found at apt-get.org.

For example, if you're interested in mplayer, apt-get tells you that you can add
deb http://marillat.free.fr/ unstable main
to your sources.list file, which allows easy download and install of mplayer (you even have your option of optimizations for 686, k7, and others) as well as W32 codecs, etc.

Well, apt-get.org has gone online recently, which contains pre-release .debs that haven't yet made it into unstable. You can go here to find alot of software packages.

I do know that mplayer is there, along with the w32 codecs, which I have running on my machine and works very nicely. I don't know about the other packages you were looking for.

BTW, do you really find it easier downloading several tarballs, unpacking, doing the ./configure, make, make_install, for each package? Or is this somehow automated in slackware? I find possibly editing sources.list, doing "apt-get update" and "apt-get install mplayer-686" to be incredibly simple.

Do you really find the manual install easier? I can totally see someone preferring it to keep very up-to-date and control all level of installation, but EASIER?

Just curious. I've run slackware before, but found it a PITA to admin over debian, so I switched back.