Slashdot Mirror
Debian Fastest-Growing Distro, Says Netcraft
Oskuro writes "According to this story at news.netcraft.com, Debian was the fastest growing distribution in the last 6 months, closely followed by SuSE and Gentoo. RedHat, while still reigning, has started to lose sites in Netcraft's survey after they announced the end of support for their desktop releases. The survey is based on the stats from webservers which include the distribution name in their webserver's header." Maybe it would grow even faster when Java issues are worked out -- read more below on that.
adamy writes "For people like me that use both Free/Open Source software and Java, the two have come together with two major exception: The Java Virtual Machine and the Base Libraries. Seems the folks trying to get Java packages ready for Sarge could have listed the issues. This is an interesting example of dependency tree pruning: Several packages are orphaned because they depend on Ant, which depends on Swing. Swing has been lower priority for the Classpath because most of the java pacakages are server side or lack a UI componenet."
"Debian has been the fastest growing Linux distribution when measured by counting active sites which contain the name of a Linux distribution in the Apache Server header... A distribution name is present in a little over a quarter of Linux based Apache sites."
To me it says that 75% of the Apache administrators on Linux boxes have tought about security.
Sure, it's an Apache server, but do you really need to show which distribution you are using ?
...is right here.
Lots of discussions on library dependencies and Kaffe and such like are in the January archives.
The Army reading list
What do Java, Ant, and Swing have to do with surveying which Linux distribution is run by web servers? I'm baffled.
Debian would be the one. It has the ring of solidity that characterises a lot of open-source stuff. For people actually *using* Linux rather than playing with it, reliability's a big issue.
:-)
I'm not saying the others are unreliable, I'm saying that the perception is that Debian is more true-to-the-roots, and therefore more favourable. Perception is all - a statement that can mean two distinct things, and be simultaneously correct
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
I'm absolutely in agreement.
These days you need a couple of CDs for Debian.
When I was a lad we used to fit a full Debian distribution on one side of an 8" floppy disk.
Norman Cook's Ode to Sl
Can we trust these results? I'd always been under the impression that the percentage values in Netcraft surveys of operating systems were only accurate to the nearest 10 to 15 percent. Have they improved their methods recently?
FloodMT: crapflood Movab
Namaste
~Darl
Not suprised one bit. Both Debian and Gentoo are the only two usable UP TO DATE distro's that will run on a sparcstation. They obviously care to encompass EVERYONE who might use their OS, and gladly, Ill join that line.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
We are migrating from RH to Debian.
I thought Gentoo Linux was the fastest growing distro.
This illustrates perfectly how the free-market can work without overbearing monopolistic influence: Red Hat ends support for certain software, users can (and apparently do) go elsewhere.
Cutting support in a proprietary environment means a forced upgrade or outright migration which would cost a bundle. In the free software world this could just be a lateral shift, nothing more than a speed bump.
Consider this: in the very odd chance SCO wins lawsuits and Linux crumbles there wouldn't be much involved to move Linux web servers over to *BSD as they're likely all running Apache/PHP/*SQL anyhow.
Trolling is a art,
Seriously. I'm a long-time Redhat (and FreeBSD before that) user and would like to know why I'd consider switching.
---------
George W. Bush in 2004!
We were debating the Progeny support system ourselves. We're going to stick with Freshrpm for a while to see if that fills the need (we can even contribute RPMs back in. We looked at SuSE, but it seemed to have the same problems that Redhat has.
The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
I think we might have some cause in that.. The UserLinux team is working hard to improve elements of debian and try to organize everything.. And we still need a lot of help IMO... SUPPORT USER LINUX!
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
But I've used the distro more than once. I really like it: the package system is better than rpm IMO, it comes with tons more packags than most distros, and it's arguably more secure than RedHat. My only complaint is that it doesn't come with my favorite text editor, pico.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
And it doesn't.
It just goes on and on, never crashing, never getting it's knickers in a knot. Just an endless stream of prime software, at my finger tips, or at the beck of a quick apt-get. And the upgrades and patches, just happpen. The dependencies? It all just sort's itself out.
I've been in this business for a very long time, and every time I look at the list of things that "aptitude" is going to upgrade today I chuckle and say, it going to break now.
And it just doesn't!
And I'm not even on the "stable" distribution!
Duh.
Debian is more than just Linux. It is possible to use The HURD as your kernel, for Debian/HURD, and similarly, Debian/NetBSD, Debian/OSX, and Debian/FreeBSD efforts are under way. I believe there is even a Debian/Cygwin port in usable shape, although I haven't heard of progress on development in a while.
Now that you can find cheap SCOWare license packs up and down ebay, ubid, Silcon Auctions and the likes, perhaps it's time to take Debian in a new direction.
May I be the first to propose:
I await your comments.
~Darl
So what about Slackware (among others)? IMHO this survey is biased towards a few major distros.
"The chief enemy of creativity is 'good taste'" -Pablo Picasso
If you look at the numbers on the Netcraft report
A) Redhat has more installations than all the other Distros combined
B) Growth of Redhat is greater than all the other distros combined. Of course the percentage is slightly less than the others.
- Kill Yourself, spare us all! -
I thought Windows had the distro that was fastest-growing:
Windows 1.0: 1.2 meg
Windows 3.11: 5 meg
Windows 95: 20 meg
Windows ME: 40 meg
Windows XP: 300 meg.
By the end of the decade, it will have an install distro requiring a stack of DVD's.
the logo still looks like "SuSE", but that's cos the chameleon's sitting on it.
all the text is SUSE, so get with the program!
98% of the world doesn't care
As a Linux developer, one main annoyance is the difficulty to build binaries that work on every system. With Windows, if I compile something and make sure that the end system has the proper MS runtime library for for C++/C, and it should work. The installation requirements can be a few standard packages. If directx is needed, it can simply require this simple to install package. However, with Linux, there is no unified set of libraries. A complex application may require the proper version of 30 libraries. It would be nice if these were in easy to install "packs" that were unified across distributions and installations. Then, if you compile against version X of a general group of libraries, it can simply require this version or higher for the entire group. If you are not up to date, utilities to automatically offer to update to the latest group (rsync or something) would make it easier. This would be easier than requiring 15 different RPMs/debs to be installed.
It's easy to be the fastest growing when you have a tiny market share.
--
In London? Need a Physics Tutor?
American Weblog in London
I find recent versions of Suse, Mandrake, and Redhat to be alot more flakey and buggy then their 5.x and 6.x pasts from years ago.
I switched to FreeBSD for this reason.
A distro today is getting more and more complex and not all the api's for many programs are well tested so bugs get passed on.
Some programs like Gnome have improved tremendously but I do notice alot more apps core dumping out of the box without an update then 3 years ago.
Debian like FreeBSD is stable and the developers do not have the pressure to get the latest and greatest apps and versions of kde out of the door to increase sales.
Mandrake started this tradition.
For a server this is important. Especially a webserver.
If I had highbroadband before trying out FreeBSD, I would use Debian. I need a full integrated feel by the same teams and BSD and Debian provide that.
http://saveie6.com/
See what happens when you leave apt-get update all running overnight?
Back to being serious, I love Debian (I use Fink on my PowerBook) but for the life of me I have NEVER EVER NOT ONCE gotten it to install on my desktop without some serious hacking. I just can't get it to install out of the box...or not the box, as it stands, and I'm not running some odd hardware config. RedHat, SuSE, Mandrake, easy. Debian? "Please get a MS in Comp. Sci and try again."
Once it is installed, Debian is the best. Hands down, you Gentoo trolls can go compile Mozilla for the next 4 days, it rocks. But where, oh where, is a decent installer for Debian?
"Life's funny sometimes." "And sometimes it isn't." --Cat's Cradle
...started using FreeBSD.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I use linux on my desktop . My distro is Redhat but I would like to try Debain can any post a link for Redhat users to migrate to Debian.
The only problem with Debian's fast-growing deployment is the recklessness of the scientists creating Debian.
... but, and I swear this is true, amongst the growth was a single eye.
I have become increasingly concerned with the blatant disregard of safety protocols of the people in charge.
When we started this project it was only to help people but now they've gone crazy. I'm typing this on the only computer in the building not being monitored. Almost 16 months ago, some army generals came to visit the project leader and since that time I've noticed some strange happenings.
Firstly, an entire level of the Debian building has now gone top security. Truckloads of materials enter but never leave.
Secondly, the project leader used to be this really nice person, but for about eight months she just hasn't been the same. She's lost her sense of humour and frankly, if I didn't know it was impossible, she's become like some sort of automaton.
And what has happened to the distro? I was doing some routine checks on the source but found some weird library call named "void launchInvasionFleetAugust2004". I immediately checked with the project leader but she went all angry and demanded me to ignore what I had seen. It was almost a threat. As I left, I heard her telling one of the generals that I was "harmless".
Now, finally, I can't keep quiet about the disappearances. My floor used to be a bustle of activity. But now there are only three or four of us left. I was told it was because of cut-backs, but we're a hobby project and no-one gets paid! When I said this, they announced that a lot of people had moved onto new projects, and that I was being paranoid.
I called the local newspaper and they sent out reporter, but now he's vanished too.
Then, earlier tonight, I walked out onto the factory floor where we make Debian. It was after dark, so I thought it would be empty, but the whole place was running at full speed. I picked up a Debian case and opened it. Inside was not a normal CD. It had some sort of growth on it, like tentacles or slime
I have to get the word out. The fast spreading of Debian is not what it seems... please, you've got to believe me!!!
There's someone at the door! I have to go before th
apt-get install deathstar && deathstar alderaan && echo "You're far too trusting"
Debian Stable's new motto:
Good things come to those who wait.
Now maybe we can start using kernel 2.2...
But the more powerful driving factor behind Debian's recent growth is its having become the first Linux distribution to partner with SCO. In an industry shaking maneuver, Bruce Perens has brokered a deal between SCO and the Debian team, in which Debian has agreed to share 15% of net revenue in exchange for full idemnification for any and all use or misuse of SCO's intellectual property.
As soon as the ink has dried on the mutually signed contract, SCO will be in receipt of Debian's financial statements. This 15% of Debian's commercial revenue will surely mean a powerful boost for SCO's next fiscal quarter. The Boies back home will be proud.
~Darl
Visual Studio .NET is 1GB installed. Imagine 1GB of buggy shit installed on your buggy shitty OS. The horror!!!
Gentoo Rocks!
... well you know ... everyone has one and every thinks everyone elses stinks ... but anyway ... that's mine.
I know opinions are like
--J
-- [Sig] Rome did not create a great empire by negotiation; They did it by killing everyone who opposed them.
Aren't these the same people who told us BSD is dying? (yes, I'm joking).
I've been a long time Redhat user, both on the server AND desktop (yeah, that's right, desktop).
After Redhat's new policy on Redhat Linux was announced, I knew I had to switch. Why? Redhat had made it clear it didn't want me as a customer.
I need patches and that's it, I don't need hand holding and I don't need a 5 year plan (if that really turns out to hold). I'd gladly pay for patches, but the Enterprise options are why too expensive both for my current workplace and me personally. Fedora sounds like a good idea, looks good for messing around. But serious server work? No thanks.
I read you load and clear Redhat, so I'm moving on.
I looked at all the distros and kicked the tires. Gentoo is promising, but not mature enough (portage needs some work and not just technical). Slackware, well, I started with Slackware and I just can't go back. Debian (stable mind you) takes a little getting used to, but it's heart is in the right place and I look forward to being a contributing member of the community.
Anything is possible given time and money.
At work we dumped Redhat because they stopped support for workstations. There was no budget for their Enterprise package, and other admins thought that Fedora was too bleeding edge. So, another admin got us using Arch Linux. That's right, we went from using one of the top distros, because of no support, to using one of the smallest distros, with no support. It's nice and minimalist,though.
good to hear that ppl are finally realizing that Debian is one of the most stable linux distros (hence the UBER slow updates).
hell...I'm using debian on my server too.
http://www.hadrons.org/~guillem/debian/debtakeover /
I have RH 7.1 on my Internet facing boxes, but when the support stopped for 'demo' accounts I grabbed the latest 2.4.x kernel from kernel.org and rolled my own (about time I learnt anyway).
But I always had the 'announcements' of what I was running turned off anyway (apart from saying was Apache HTTPD on Linux), so... stats don't mean a thing.
So this just like politicians that only ask people that agree with them the state of affairs (obtruse comparison, but you see what I am getting at).
Nick
Because the
is reportedly directly out of the mouths of Red Hat salesmen as in plural.
Debian, like many good tools (vi), can be hard for beginners. It has a lot of new commands to remember like apt-get, apt-cache and dpkg. It has "the debian way" of doing things, which newbies often tangle with before learning. It doesn't have an X based installer, etc.
The key is that once you do spend some time and learn it, the payoff is huge. Debian is a lot eaisier to run then most distros. When managing a lot of servers, you can do it more reliably and with less time using Debian over something else, due to the well-thought-out layout, and the killer package management system.
Its heartwarming to see that lots of people are willing to accept a learning curve for a better operating system. Long-run learning instead of short-run clicking.
One of my favorite reasons for using debian (besides the ideology of a 100% free OS) is the one givin by HP. If you write software or drivers for RedHat, they may only work on RedHat. But if you write software/drivers to go into debian, they work on ALL linux platforms.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" - George Orwell
I had installed Redhat 9 perfectly with oracle and everything else. Then came next day the sudden slashdot news of redhat dropping support for regular linux in full support for advanced servers. Turning redhat to fecesdora.
I am now debating debian since it seems to have a real community behind it. But what if debian pulls a redhat. What's stopping them from turning into another greedy anti-free distro.
First tier vendors to start supporting Debian again. HP used to, but hasn't for some time (pre-Compaq merger, back when Bruce Perens worked with them).
"Debian Fastest-Growing Distro, Says Netcraft"
How about:
"Debian Fastest-Growing Webserver Distro on the Internet, Says Netcraft"
Or perhaps:
"Debian Fastest-Growing Webserver Distro on the Internet setup by admins who don't know how to secure webservers so that it includes the dist name in the webserver header, Says Netcraft."
I work at a small web hosting company. My 10+ Web Servers do not report the distro used (In this case Slackware) as I have "rolled my own" Apache from source and do not want such details
reported. Many of the Admins I know at other web hosting companies, do the same. How accurate can such a survey be, when based on the assumption that the distro is reported? Then again, Netcraft is not well noted for it's accuracy and well know for it's use of false assumptions.
I made up my own distribution this morning. I took a recent kernel, hacked my own init that just sleep()s in an infinite loop, and called it a distro. Its use went from 0 to 1 user, demonstrating a growth percentage larger than any other reported by Netcraft!
Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
at first thought, that doesn't sound like an important award. when i was a kid, our soccer team had a "most improved" award. its a lot easier for the worst player to improve a lot % wise, than for a good player. from what i remember, a few months ago they still used kernel 1.02. ;-) so if they just updated to version 2.4 they doubled their kernel growth!!! however if the kernel version is considered to be a logarithmic scale, then theyve grown by over 1000%!!!! go debian!
Fastest growing distro overall? Or rather fastest-growing server distro?
Tons of us are using on the desktop and not running an open web server.
I'd be curious how Mandrake vs. Gentoo vs. SUSE vs. Fedora etc. etc. would figure into things, if it were feasible to easily obtain such stats...
[If it's not obvious: italic text comes from the parent post, which has already been modded into oblivion.]
;-)
I like Debian because it works on my Powerbook (big-endian non-x86 architecture with slightly odd hardware) just as well as it does on my (ordinary, mainstream) PC, and because it also managed to work on my friend's mutant box-of-bits (Cyrix 500MHz cheap-knock-off CPU, ancient AT keyboard port, USB mouse due to no PS/2 ports, serial and parallel ports on an expansion card, graphics card that didn't do VESA... the thing was extremely dodgy).
I also like
- the fact that the packages are made by control freaks (in the nicest possible sense of the words...) who care about consistency and things working nicely together to a sufficient extent that they have formal policies for large classes of packages, but package things in such a way that you can apply local hacks if you don't like how they did it, and make a great effort to preserve local changes to configuration
- the way the development process is usually as transparent and open as the source code of the packages themselves
- the fact that they've built a complete operating system out of software held to standards of freedom and openness high enough that even the Free Software Foundation's "Free Documentation License" doesn't qualify.
- the fact that no one entity controls Debian, so as long as someone's interested in developing for it, it won't go away
- the social contract that sets out the principles Debian will work by.
Debian sucks because
Debian rocks because
* Out dated packages, even in unstable
* Packages are tested (and compiled on more architectures than I care to imagine), and even unstable is actually usable
* Buggy and hard to use installer, people are told to use 3rd party installers because the developers cant be assed to fix it
* A text-mode installer which doesn't blithely assume that graphics mode works properly, or even that you *want* graphics mode (very handy if your hardware is bizarre, like my friend's old PC which couldn't do some of the standard VESA video modes)
* More security flaws than any other distro
[To parent: Really? Please provide links to back that up, I'm interested]
* A transparent mechanism for security updates and bulletins which doesn't introduce new and untested code at the same time, and takes all reported security flaws seriously
* Contains too many redundant and legacy apps
* Contains a huge choice of apps
* All the people who actually used Debian have fled to other distros such as Slackware, Gentoo and Fedora. Only the eleetist pricks are left now
* um... how to answer that one... how about "I actually use Debian, you insensitive clod?"
I was surfing along or maybe I was on IRC anyhow something pointed me to this Its a SPOOF on Debian.
:)
My favorite is apt-get install finger
I run about ~30 servers and all have been RH for years. When they anounced the end of desktop support, I started looking that day. I looked at all the major distributions, and Debian was the simple choice for a server environment. Community based so I won't be at the mercy of profit. Apt for easy updates. The only bad thing is of course the installer. Stick with it though and you get used to it. I literally installed it about 10-15 times before I was remotely comfortable. I had to rebuild the kernal to get some video and multiple IP address support, but it was SOOO easy with Debian, took about 1/2 hour my first time! I was amazed. Now I'm in 'apt' heaven, and I'm not looking back.
I use Debian for one year already. It is so easy to use it.. I will never change it. However, there are several 'stability' problems. The stable KDE is 2.2.2, so if you want to use a newer version of kde, you should make combinations between stable and unstable. This implies installing new libraries, that are rather untested and make problems. For instance I have lots of problems with libc6, because I have managed to combine stable and unstable.
You always have to choose between stability and 'features'. This is why debian is much stable for server applications which may be a bit more older, but definitely more reliable.
First I wanted to be a chef. Then I wanted to be Napoleon. My ambitions have continued to grow ever since.
Wow, Mandrake's low scores really surprised me. I've been using it for quite a while, and find it to be the best there is for the desktop. It's sitting there right above Gentoo, and with gentoo's current growth, will probably be at the bottom in about a year.
I think mandrake has one of the best desktop distros around. I had some friends who installed fedora a few weeks back. They just made it a little too un-linux for me. Mandrake still maintains that linux feel, without making everything a bitch to use.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
We started in about September. At this point approximately 70% of our servers have been switched to Debian from Red Hat.
Love that Debian.
Yesterday "apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade" fully broke Sid's Gnome on my desktop, prompting me to reluctantly replace it with Fedora. I don't think that Debian on the desktop is growing or even going to grow anytime soon if ever. The long release schedules for stable and constantly breaking unstable and the infrequency in adding important packages to testing means that it's nearly impossible to have a modern working desktop with Debian unless your interest is more in getting it to work rather than getting other things done.
On the server side, I'm one of the people representing the statistics showing a decline in RedHat users late last year at the expense of
Debian. The very same long release schedules that frustrate desktop usage translate into very secure and stable servers, and I'm very happy to call my self a satisified user of Debian as a server. The netcraft and slashdot headlines are very misleading, but they are probably accurate of server usage instead of overall Linux usage.
501 Not Implemented
Woop woop. So good to here about your experiences.
I'm 'vi' all the way. On any Unix/Linux system there is always a vi... until I tried Gentoo ? by the default it comes with nano...
To me it says that 75% of the Apache administrators on Linux boxes have tought about security.
Sure, it's an Apache server, but do you really need to show which distribution you are using ?
Exactly. There's little reason for a distribution to identify itself. Security wise, it's a lousy default.
Of course, not providing distro identification doesn't help when trying to brag about market share...
try crux, it can be stripped down pretty easily...
I have plenty of common sense, I just choose to ignore it. -- Calvin
Since LindowsOS is based on Debian Linux, does anyone know whether Apache servers running under LindowsOS have Debian headers? If that's the case, I wonder how many of the Debian headers are actually from LindowsOS?
I need to get a life :)
Debian Fastest-Growing Distro, Says Netcraft
Must be all that SCO IP that did it.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
Netcraft rates servers. Debian is being lauded as a replacement for Red Hat servers aggressively (like Server Beach did while I was with them). Debain stable is a good replacement on the server, so expect these numbers to continue to climb a bit (the whole Red Hat thing probably shook up a lot of people and left a big opening for a wholly OSS, stable solution).
I've seen a few posts mentioning their favorite distro scoring suspiciously low, but remember: Mandrake [yours here] is a distro mainly targeted at the desktop, not the server.
Quack, quack.
Linux Counter would be a good start, but information is on a voluntary basis, and the data could use some pruning for old/obsolete records.
http://counter.li.org/
Who moves to RH - first time users ("Oh, I want to try this Linux 9") and corporations ("Give me a Linux OS, certified, piece 1").
Now, I believe many first time users will change to Debian (server), Gentoo (cool desktop), Mandrake (nice desktop), SuSE (powerful desktop) or some other.
As for corporations, in that space SuSE will catch up with Red Hat - SUSE is the Benz of Linux (and cheaper than RH!). Many small and medium enterprises will move to Debian, SuSE, and other cheaper commercial distros with support....
I seriously think apt-get is the reason to use Debian, coming from a semi-new Linux user.
Sure, people say Debian is harder to use, but how can you argue with avoiding the headaches of downloading and compiling everything?
From my experience, download/install systems like apt-get and emerge
(dare I say Lindows' Click'N'Run) are the real killer apps
for desktop Linux.... and Debian had it first!
Does it now take a 12 ISO download to do a base system install?
Matt
Or... More Red Hat Administrators put default Apache server rpms configurations online, while 200'000 gentoo admins emerged apache with a config that has ServerTokens Prod
For my file/print server at home when Redhat made their announcement. Never have to worry about Debian selling out.
I will be switching to Debian, but just not quite yet. Why?
I looked at Debian stable ("Woody") and found it to be too old for me - I need the 2.4 kernel at least for my workstation, and I need the same basic system running on my workstation as my server, so that testing has some validity. For example, the USB support for reading my Zio! CompactFlash reader just isn't there in 2.2. I don't wish to mess around with combining stable and unstable - my systems are running pretty well at this point, and I don't really relish taking a giant step backwards to Woody. Sarge will be a lot closer to what RH 7.x is now.
I had two subscriptions to RHN for 7.3, which I have now switched to Progeny for support.
So: If you're using RH 7.x, try subscribing to Progeny and waiting until Sarge becomes stable before switching, it seems like a safe path to me...
LOL, these anti redhat activists are entertaining.
The end of life for RH distros was not a surprise, they gave plenty of warning that this was coming
If you want enterprise level support, $349 is not a bad price
You claim fedora is an "untested hobby distro" which tells me you've never seen it. I actually installed and tested it on several boxes, and can best describe it as "red hat 9 done right" as a number of irritating RH8/9 bugs are absent from fedora, and it is noticeably snappier.
you claim it requires a complete reinstall - again, you are 100% wrong - I have upgraded several RH 8 and RH 9 servers to fedora, remotely, and they remained in service the whole time. A reboot is required to load the new kernel, but that can be done at a time of your choosing, or never if you prefer. Also, apt-get makes it a dream to keep up to date.
None of the commercial vendors impressed me with their technical support, which is funny since I paid them for it. Red Hat of course dropped support for their desktop distribution altogether.
Both gentoo and Debian, in my experience, have extremely friendly communities who are willing to answer even my worst inane questions ("How can I get video1394 to load automatically on boot?")
I ran gentoo for probably six months, but the cost of compiling everything once a week to keep up-to-date just wore me down, especially on the laptop. I know it has binary packages, but not for everything, and anyway I was all proud of myself for having optimized binaries for AMD...
Well, no more. Now I'm on Debian and I'll probably stay there. It has the best "everything just works" rating out of all of them, even the commercial distros. Well, it has the best rating after you've installed discover. (And why doesn't discover load video1394 when it sees my firewire cable? It seems to know to load raw1394...)
My only complaint is that there needs to be kernel-image packages that have ACPI compiled in.
I'm impressed enough with Debian that I intend to install it on 50 desktops at work, if only I can convince management of the benefits of doing so. (Especially with Fully Automated Installation, woo hoo.)
Wow, a lucrative publishing contract! I don't have to be evil anymore. --Meteor
Who wants to advertise their distro name and all Apache modules together with exact version numbers with EVERY SINGLE HTTP RESPONSE?
A lot of people, it seems. I just don't understand why.
Coincidentially, I switched my home network's Internet gateway from slackware to debian just today! Slackware was the first and only linux I used until a friend recommended that I use Debian Woody as my gateway. The security updating with apt-get on Woody keeps everything up-to-date and closes exposed holes automatically. In slackware I did not keep track of much except the odd openssh patch.
:\
Approximately 7 hours after the switch, I can honestly say that I'm pleased with Debian so far, although I do feel guilty for ditching Slackware
Debian rules.
Omar
I have used Debian for years.
I recently went and bought RED HAT "professional".
It cost $90 dollars. I started the install on a fairly old laptop and everything went fine (looks just like the old red hat..). Then in the middle of the install it stopped and said "Red Hat Professional is not supported on this hardware" and quit.. end of story..
The only thing I can figure out is that the machine didn't have the minimum 256 megs of ram (it has 128). No message nothing just "not supported"...
RED HAT SUX! It has always SUCKED (who wants to chase RPMs around?). Now it sucks more and is expensive!
RED HAT is in trouble... Solaris 10/intel is going to kick its ASS..
Debian/Solaris/OpenBSD are it...
tm
http://tinyurl.com/globalwarmingisascam
Another leftie who's opposed to free speech eh?
---------
George W. Bush in 2004!
Yes, the X packages are well behind in Debian, but it's for a number of good reasons. One being that the packages underwent a massive reorganization for 4.3. This was, in part, to prepare to accomodate the oncoming packages of the freedesktop.org stuff. The libraries have been split in to individual packages, rather than massive bundles. Once the freedesktop packages go in, the infrastructure should be there for you to mix and match X libraries from both XFree and f.d.o as you need them.
Another reason is that, simply put, XFree86 produces unportable code. Tons of the porting work must be done by the Debian team itself, and that isn't easy. The fact that a lot of the code itself is crappy is an issue too.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
If you look at Netcraft's number redhat went from 1,231,986 sites to 1,451,505 and Debian from 355,469 to 442,752
So debian did get a larger growth rate in terms of percentage but redhat gained 220,000 sites while debian gained only about 87,000 sites. I don't think this means that redhat is going to die anytime soon. Debian still has a long way to go to catch up to redhat.
Meanwhile that new linux distro that came out in December that went from 1 user to 5 had a growth rate of 500% easily dwarfing debian's measily 24% growth rate.
"When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it
Huh? What's wrong with "apt-get source foo"; cd foo-version; dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot"? You've got your freshly compiled package all right there for you, and you can play with it all you like. It's not as easy as gentoo, but it's really not much harder either.
And, of course, compiling normal tarballs works fine. I never have any troubles getting dependencies for compiling those, because when they show up I just grab missinglib-dev and all is well. I never understand why people think it's so hard.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
Yup, very silly move of Red Hat. Pure short termism. It's almost like they forgot they had competition out there from other distros. I'd still be using RH if they hadn't abandoned me in an attempt to charge extertionate rates (hundreds per year) to support software they never wrote. Red hat were THE one stop shop for a good Linux Distro IMHO, and that changed overnight, now I wouldn't touch their distro with a barge pole and I'm still a happily getting on with my computing. This will have serious longer term repercussions for them.
Sadly, testing and unstable have _no_ security updates.
Unstable is handled by basically updating to whatever the upstream developer produces, which usually includes the security fix, but getting those fixes into testing is not in any way reliably prioritized. It can be weeks to months before serious open currently exploited bugs get fixed in testing.
I really love a lot of things about debian, but the security policies are rather incomplete.
-josh
the parent post was a joke, a satire, to be exact (and a quite funny one at that).
If you find 1 instance of disto x now and 2 in juli 2004, this will mean an increase of 100%! Surely that'll be the fastest growing disto next time. In absolute numbers Redhat is the fastest growing distro.
not nearly as entertaining as migrating all my servers.
The end of life for RH distros was not a surprise
no. they gave plenty of warning. i used that time to look at other distros.
If you want enterprise level support, $349 is not a bad price
true. although it's significantly more than the cost of rh9 rhn entitlements.
You claim fedora is an "untested hobby distro" which tells me you've never seen it.
this tells me that you are a hobbiest.
I have upgraded several RH 8 and RH 9 servers to fedora, remotely, and they remained in service the whole time
score one for fedora. woot!
let's get this straight: i spent a lot of my life in a red hat world. i have bought boxed sets of 5.1, 6.2, 7.3, 8 and 9. i bought bob young's mediocre book. i fought tooth and nail to roll red hat into my previous place of employ. i have been a red hat evangalist since 5.1.
so dismiss me as an "anti red hat activst" or whatever, if that sort of label makes you feel comfortable but you know what i really am? the kid who goes to the 7/11 in 1986 and sees shelves of "new coke".
2 1337 4 u!
Not anti-redhat, just wanted to point out the following:
# If you want enterprise level support, $349 is not a bad price
That is for the Workstation version, the Server versions cost more. In addition, $349 gets you no support, just updates. $749 gets you support for a Workstation.
Can I get an eye poke?
Dog House Forum
I mentioned that in another post. XF86 4.3 on x86 is stable and has been for nearly a year. The x86 packages for debian unstable are, to the best of my knowledge, in a releasable state. They aren't being released because the upstream code from xfree86.org isn't stable on other platforms. When I worked at a company that had a tested, releasable prodcut that customers were asking for, and they refused to release it because they didn't see a market for it, I quit. It just doesn't make sense to me. It's ready, it works, we want it, give it to us!
Anyway, I'm tired of making this rant for now. I think I'll wait until the next debian discussion to revisit it.
Why is Slackware "dying?" It's stil number 7 on Distrowatch, which isn't half bad considering that the most recent version of Slackware was released in September. It doesn't need crap like RPM updates every day, and Patrick knows that. If we actually want desktop and library updates that don't interfere with the distro, there is always Dropline, which takes care of most major needs between Slackware's 6-month upgrade cycles. And, if Slackware's upgrades are a problem, you can always keep "current" with Swaret.
Slackware is a distro for the power-user that doesn't need dependancy checking. The only other real alternative is Gentoo or doing it with LFS.
Besides... I can compile most anything within a minute and have it work to perfection, instead of going out ant tracking crappy user-made RPMs that don't run worth a shit from RPMFind. Slackware just works, and require minimal maintenance once you know its ins and outs. Slackware is perfectly functional because it is fast and practical, kinda like BSD.
I do have to agree there. Unfortunately, one of the big problems is that some of the porters simply weren't building 4.3 pre- packages on their arches for a while. They really dropped the ball, and x86 seemed to hurt for it. Unfortunately, I don't think all the work for x86 was really done, even though the packages worked for most people. Hopefull now that the big reorganization is over with, and 4.4 packaging has already begun, things will move quicker in the future. If get time, I'm going to help out with the 4.4 testing/packaging effort, but that probably won't happen until post-sarge. FWIW, Branden does want people to help him, hence the move to svn.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
Does this 'search' end up including Debian derivates like knoppix, libra and mepis?
and no, I didn't RTFA.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I've installed RH 4 times on the same machine. I've only installed debian once on the same machine. Nowdays I run apt-get update and apt-get upgrade sometimes. I can only recommend Debian nowdays :)
A quick trip to the redhat website confirms that for $349 you get Redhat Enterprise ES, and indeed, the support is for installation. But, that's all you really got with RH 9, so no biggie. But it's better than that, upgrades from EOL'd Red Hat ditros to RHES are half price, so it's more like $175 -
Now, for the full blown, 24x7 phone support, it gets more expensive - but have you priced comparable support from HP, Sun or microsoft products?
It is interesting that Timothy posted my submission underneath the one about which distros are most used. While they are related topics, I think they should have been posted separately.
I submitted this article to be posted under developers.
There have been several comments about Swing in Ant. Yes the Sun JDK comes with Swing. But Debian cannot redistribute the Sun JDK due to Suns licensing.
The Debian goal is to come up with a complete set of Java tools that are available under the oipen source license. While there are several compilers that work just fine (jikes and gnu javac among others) that does not address the libraries. The gnu classpath project, (I didn't included a link to keep from slashdotting their already slow servers) is attempting to fill the missing step, but needs help.Most of the classes that have not been completed are UI specific either under AWT or Swing.
As a post script, my submitted articles list shows this one as being rejected. Oh well...
Open Source Identity Management: FreeIPA.org
Anyone have any thoughts?
Thanks.
First, have you used slackware? It's been traditionally the fastest distro since its inception 10 years ago. Gentoo doesn't beat it on speed, and isn't likely to.
Second, Gentoo does a lot of things in interesting but non-standard ways. Slackware users like tgz's, standard startup scripts, the usual directories, manual installs, etc. Basically, slackware is as close to unix and BSD as linux gets.
I'm not saying Gentoo is bad - I'm thinking about trying it just to see what all the fuss is about - but it's not right for every possible situation, which a number of gentoo users try to imply. For people who want a stripped-down, screaming box that does exactly what they want and absolutely nothing more...well, that's a job for Slackware.
this tells me that you are a hobbiest.
I assume you mean hobbyist, but in any case, I am a professional systems administrator. For the company payroll database, you bet I'll demand RHAS and Oracle - but for my desktop, fedora is great.
I'm not just a redhat fanboy, in the past year I've deployed quite a bit of SuSE, as well as looking at debian based distros like progeny.
Red Hat can and do maintain support for their desktop releases. RHEL3 Professional is $130 Australian, which IIRC is $fuckall US. For God's sake, could the editors either do some fucking research, or listen to anyone that keeps posting in reponse to these continual troll submissions.
And to the troll above: er, you can upgrade Red Hat 9 to Fedora just fine. Since Fedora is maintained and worked on by Red Hat employees, and is merely a Red Hat 10 from a technical POV, the 'untested' claim is pretty ripe. But if you want support, you'll pay for it by purchasing RHEL3.
I ran rh on all my workstations and servers for quite some time. I had been using rh since 5.0 ... Then, rh started becoming a serious bitch to keep things updated. I never got those silly up2date rpm packagers to actually work correctly. Then there was a period where there was serious changes to binary names, locations, etc that really screawed up a number of things that I did. I had to re-write all these .spec files, modify and re-compile some apps, etc.
:P
Enough was enough. I was getting a replacement server in a few weeks, I figured that was a great chance for me to finally make the switch to Debian. At first, I only inteded to switch my server over to it. After using it for a month, I switched my 2 workstations and laptop over to it.
My biggest complaint about Debian, is out of date packages. By the time the next upgrade comes along, all of your applications are seriously out of date.
I found apt pinning, which works great for some applications to solve this. But, others like KDE from testing, have made things quite a mess. It took a while to solve some dependices, but at this point all of gnome is broken while trying to find libjava.so, I hope to fix this soon
Debian might not be the best for workstations (Lets face it, people want the newest crap for a GUI), but by far the best distro for servers.
until (succeed) try { again(); }
Just curious. What type of industry? ISP? Web Hosting? Thanks
When will people learn? ;-)
When they break their installation and complain on slashdot and read the replies that explain what they did wrong? Worked for me!
501 Not Implemented
Of course, this is because it has more software than any other distribution, and many multiple supported versions of MTAs, web servers, inetds, and so on. So if any piece of software has a security flaw, Debian has a security flaw.
There aren't that many kinds of security flaws that really apply to a distribution in particular, as opposed to the software that it uses -- I suppose if a package was created with the wrong permissions it could be considered a distribution security flaw. I don't think that's a particularly common problem, and most actual Debian systems don't display a large number of security flaws relative to other distros.
Well, since 200 Gig HDs are not uncommon now a days, wouldn't it be more practical to bundle every app as a complete ready to run package and never have to worry about dependencies again.
I would switch in an instant if I could run a distro without ever having to touch the internet for updates to anything. Just be able to buy applications on CD and move on.
I think this is the biggest thing that developers don't get about most end users: I don't care about the OS. It should get out of my way. I care very deeply about my APPLICATIONS because that is what I use as tools to get my work done.
This is also why I would like to see most distros go poof. Even one crappy distro is better than a forest of choices.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
First my disclaimer: I don't like Bush and I don't support half of his policies, but I did vote for him last turn around and I do believe he won the Florida elections (especially since both camps tried to cheat)
As to the Venezuela question, since you want a credible source, look at the Forbes magazine from April 8th through April 12th. Forbes magazine does not give you definitive proof that the US spurred the coup in Venezuela, but it gives good circumstantial evidence that Chavez and Saddam both fired the first shot against the US on April 8th.
By firing the first shot, Chavez pulled a Fidel Castro on us, he made us attack before we were ready. It's a classic Chess move and one that really helped him consolidate his position.
If you still don't believe me, look at what spurred us to do our first coup in Iran. The official reason is not a secret anymore, go look it up. The circumstances are eerily similar.
seems that the current version of debian comes with a 2.2 version kernel by default. I believe I read (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that SCO has stated that the 2.2 linux kernel branch does not contain any of the "stolen" code they are claiming appeared in the 2.4 branch...
kosh
Do you have any resources that help turn the knoppix install into a real install?
/usr/local/bin after booting from live CD) to install linux on a few machines now, i.e. from a Knoppix live-CD to a hd partition.
/etc/lilo.conf to make sure the correct partitions were mentioned. That last step relates mainly to the dual-boot setup that I wanted to end up with, and not so much to the knoppix installation itself.
I had Knoppix and used both of the methods that were recommended (there was a newer one that was supposedly better that I tried, when it didn't work I tried the older method).
Well, in case this helps: I've had no trouble in using the 'knx-hdinstall' script (located in
The result of doing this, after answering the install questions appropriately, is a Debian testing/unstable setup, in which the root user has a password, and the 'knoppix' user also has a password -- none of the 'no-login' features of the live CD setup.
(I did first tweak the script a little, but that was only because -- for unconnected reasons -- I wanted to locate the debian setup on a pre-prepared partition, _without_ allowing the script do its own reformatting. Normally the script will abort if instructed not to reformat the chosen partition).
What I had to do to get the machine bootable, besides using the knx-hdinstall script, was to make a boot floppy when offered the chance to do that while using knx-hdinstall, and then after installation, to reboot from that floppy, and finally, to run lilo from the floppy-booted linux os after inspecting and editing
Best of luck if you try it again.
-wb-
Most versions of apache send the server type and what it is running on in http headers. (curl -i http://slashdot.org) Usually says only something like "unix" but it is enough to judge.
The .deb package spec has the same dependency information as .rpm, but the rpm program doesn't use dependency information. That's why projects like apt4rpm can use unmodified rpms to do their job.
Karma: Contrapositive
Red Hat added far more new installations than any other distro -- over 200,000. By the definition used in this article, a distro that goes from 1 site to 2 sites is the "fastest growing", with a 100% growth rate!
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
"I started with Slackware and I just can't go back."
Why the hell not? Jeez, it's not like this is an old girlfriend.
RedHat grew from 1,231,986 to 1,451,505, a difference of 219519.
So an alternate headline could have been "RedHat grows 2.5 times as fast as Debian".
Please stop feeding the trolls, slashdot.
If you like compiling, FreeBSD is also a good choice. Have you heard about the FreeBSD ports? FreeBSD has to ways of installing software - packages or ports. The ports are directories with makefiles and stuff. Both systems the ports and packages autoresolve dependencies as well.
/usr/ports/java/jdk13 && make install clean
h andbook/index.html
:-)
Ports: As easy as cd
Packages: pkg_add -vr something
There are more than 10,000 ports!
http://www.freebsd.org/ports/index.html
Another good thing about FreeBSD is that you won't have a bunch of kernels + gnu things + lots of differentes libs; FreeBSD is a consistent complete OS. You can also upgrade your entire system by compiling the kernel and the userland. The FreeBSD Handbook is a great book too; http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/
On my PC, FreeBSD is the fastest OS, then Slackware Linux.
So why don't you try both and decide yourself?
Open source may be good, but there is one example that sticks out like a sore thumb as a problem with open source. Debian gnu/Linux. It is offically the Worst Linux Distribution ever made.
/lib/modules, as you are going to need it.
First of all, Debian has the most out of date software packages of any major mainstream distros. Even in the unstable version, is KDE 2.2 and Gnome 2.0, with Xfree86 4.1 (A version that really sucks). There are literally years that pass between each update of Debian.
Secondly, its a pain in the goatse to set up, first of all, you are forced to use Kernel 2.2, which is horribly hacked with "backports" to get any use on any modern machine (Read, made after 1999). Good luck memorizing all the *.ko files in
Configuring XFree86 is hell! If you don't have a Thick X11 orilley book, and a list of your horizontal sync values from your monitor's intruction manual (if you even have one), BOOM! There goes your monitor.
Even then, good luck getting anything over 640x480@16 colours.
The most common response to help questions on the Debian mailing list is "n00b, READ THE FUCKING MANUAL, you idiot, go back to WINDOWS XP if you can't learn to use dselect", true too, search the archives if you think I'm lying. Other distros give you comprehensive PRINTED MANUALS, PHONE SUPPPORT and/or freindly forums where repling RTFM gets you banned!
Debians support for any decent hardware, including USB mice, scanners, Sound cards, heck even Serial devices struggle. If you can even get 80x25 text mode with PS/2 input devices you are really lucky.
Apt-get has many flaws. First of all it uses a non standard package format (the rest of the world uses RPM, deprecate the DEB format!), has broken respetories, and out of date software to install. All this combined with the kludgey dselect user interface make package management a nightmare.
And if you think I'm joking about this, find out why THOUSANDS of Debian users are switching to REAL distributions Debian is falling to pieces, if it is to survive any market share it will be through its superior forks (Xandros, Lindows, K/G-noppix) and unoffical package respetories.
Of course, while all this is going on, the only thing the Debian maintainers do is argue about politics on the mailing lists. The distribution decays while its creators argue over inane details like software licensing and the virtues of Marxism. Please! Spare me the political rhetoric and just give me a working distro!
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and I'm happily using distros such as Mandrake, SuSE, Gentoo and Fedora. But I'm sick to death of zealots that push obsolete Distros on me EVERY FREAKING TIME linux is mentioned. I'm speaking from real world experiance here.
Indeed. I've heard it said that stable is for people who need stability, unstable is for people who can cope with instability, and testing is for people who're not paying attention.
Debian is Slow, Worse, Expensive
/lib/modules, as you are going to need it.
Open source may be good, but there is one example that sticks out like a sore thumb as a problem with open source. Debian gnu/Linux. It is offically the Worst Linux Distribution ever made.
First of all, Debian has the most out of date software packages of any major mainstream distros. Even in the unstable version, is KDE 2.2 and Gnome 2.0, with Xfree86 4.1 (A version that really sucks). There are literally years that pass between each update of Debian.
Secondly, its a pain in the goatse to set up, first of all, you are forced to use Kernel 2.2, which is horribly hacked with "backports" to get any use on any modern machine (Read, made after 1999). Good luck memorizing all the *.ko files in
Configuring XFree86 is hell! If you don't have a Thick X11 orilley book, and a list of your horizontal sync values from your monitor's intruction manual (if you even have one), BOOM! There goes your monitor.
Even then, good luck getting anything over 640x480@16 colours.
The most common response to help questions on the Debian mailing list is "n00b, READ THE FUCKING MANUAL, you idiot, go back to WINDOWS XP if you can't learn to use dselect", true too, search the archives if you think I'm lying. Other distros give you comprehensive PRINTED MANUALS, PHONE SUPPPORT and/or freindly forums where repling RTFM gets you banned!
Debians support for any decent hardware, including USB mice, scanners, Sound cards, heck even Serial devices struggle. If you can even get 80x25 text mode with PS/2 input devices you are really lucky.
Apt-get has many flaws. First of all it uses a non standard package format (the rest of the world uses RPM, deprecate the DEB format!), has broken respetories, and out of date software to install. All this combined with the kludgey dselect user interface make package management a nightmare.
And if you think I'm joking about this, find out why THOUSANDS of Debian users are switching to REAL distributions Debian is falling to pieces, if it is to survive any market share it will be through its superior forks (Xandros, Lindows, K/G-noppix) and unoffical package respetories.
Of course, while all this is going on, the only thing the Debian maintainers do is argue about politics on the mailing lists. The distribution decays while its creators argue over inane details like software licensing and the virtues of Marxism. Please! Spare me the political rhetoric and just give me a working distro!
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux, and I'm happily using distros such as Mandrake, SuSE, Gentoo and Fedora. But I'm sick to death of zealots that push obsolete Distros on me EVERY FREAKING TIME linux is mentioned. I'm speaking from real world experiance here.
Responder lacks reading comprehension :P
I browse at +5 Flamebait- moderation for all or moderation for none.
You can't say which distros own which percentage of the overall market by looking at server numbers alone. Doing so completely ignores workstations (for that matter, it also ignored embedded Linux as well, but let's not quibble) - and presumably there are a lot more (potential) workstations to run Linux on the desktop than (potential) servers to run Linux.
Get off my launchpad!
I knew as soon as I posted a Deb fan would get me. I'd agree, Deb's pretty good - if I couldn't use slack, I'd use Debian.
A default debian install does not include gcc or ssh. Slackware uses BSD style init scripts (not traditional SysV init style). Although a rare problem, this causes compatibility problems in some apps.
Sure does, I could even name some. ;) I absolutely hate the SysV style scripts, though, so for me the choice was easy. But you're right, if that's a real concern, go for Debian.
TGZ packages are not as common as debian's DEBs, nor as plentiful.
I'd seriously question that - I've never seen anywhere other than *.debian.org have DEB's but not TGZ's. I've seen RPM but no TGZ, although usually 1) they're binaries, and I don't want them, and 2) slack has a useful rpm2tgz utility that works like a charm. Basically, if you want to compile from source, tgz is the most offered format. And anything else is easy to convert. I think the days of non-interconvertible package formats are largely behind us (thank *diety*).
Its only problem is real enteprise support for any of the distros, which I'm pretty sure is buyable from other people. Assuming you can get it with enteprise support, debian is THE distro for the enteprise.
That's saying a lot though, as usually enterprise only uses something if it has support. As such, Red Splat and Li'l Suzie are the only real enterprise options right now.
Ultimately, I think we'd both agree that, for a small, light, fast, barebones linux install, you aren't installing Gentoo.
-matt
Solaris is a much better operating system than Linux, so why bother with it if you have Sparc hardware?
You do little but confuse everyone by referring to standard source tarballs as .tgz -- yes, some are named .tgz but (especially) when talking slackware, calling them .tgz is going to make people confuse them for the slackware packages (also .tgz, but not the same.)
It's a lot worse than the $59.99 or whatever I was paying before! More power to RedHat if they judged their market correctly, but I suspect that only a few big corporations will find their support and services justifiable at this price. Most organizations would do better to hire a couple skilled sysadmins and set up a local apt repository. They're also going to lose their grassroots support. Watch for their numbers to drop again right after they stop supporting RH9. Count my four machines in the Debian camp!
Man I have switched every darn box I admin to Mepis. It is debian but damn easy to install and up to date. I was running nearly 30 redhat servers some of them under a support contract...no longer they can blow me..
Got Code?
Debian does get referenced more than anyone else (or at least has in the past, I haven't checked recently) on security stuff. No surprise, it has 4000 packages. Compare Debian with every MTA under the sun included to Redhat with only a couple and gee, I wonder what's going to happen. As long as you don't happen to be running 15 different programs that do the same job simply because debian has them you'll be far safer on Debian than most anyone else (very low security incidence per package.) That said, the recent gpg thing kinda upset me. El Gamel key's.. Redhat/Fedora had the updates out in November I think, and Debian just released an update in the last week for it. Not a major security flaw, but boy a long time to fix it.
No, I think he meant to say you're a hobbit.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Well - I never really got this one. I actually like Debian's strict policy on software licenses even if it now and then causes some inconvenience. As for Java - well - it didn't take me long to realize that I needed the original - and that Blackdown have a ready made Debian package that can be included in apt's sources.list. That's all - one line in a configuration file and you've got perfectly working Java in Debian.
And here's the line:
deb ftp://ftp.tux.org/pub/java/debian/ testing non-free main
By the way - I would assume this problem to be exactly the same on all other Linux distro's due to SUN's licensing. Isn't that so?
redhat, mandrake, slackware, suse and debian for just a short while and I can say that
GENTOO ROCKS baby!
why?
ports rock!
long live FreeBSD too (I run freebsd on my server, gentoo everywhere else)..
-dirtbag
the kid who goes to the 7/11 in 1986 and sees shelves of "new coke".
Yeah, but if you switched to Pepsi after trying New Coke, then you're an idiot.
I protest this unfair representation of Gentoo that Netcraft is spewing. Of course, when you consider the source, it's not surprising. These guys have been saying for ages that Microsoft has fewer web servers than apache.
Netcraft claims that, of the Linux distros represented, Gentoo has a microscopic 0.86% of the servers, and is only growing at 19.5% per year. While this data may be true at present, it is misleading, since it does not take into account the number of Gentoo servers on which apache is not running because it is still compiling.
Just wait till my compile finishes, and those of the many others compiling apache RIGHT NOW! You'll see that Gentoo is a force to be reckoned with!
They really aren't that different. Sure they all have different installers, and different strategies for updates, and different philosophies about when and what should be updated. But they all tend to have much more in common than differences.
For example, they all will be based on a reasonably current version of the kernel. There will be a current-ish version of libc.
Then whatever open source applications are available, will either be installed, or there will be an option to install. There is an enormous amount of variety here within the SAME distribution. The variety is only marginally increased between distros.
My laptop runs redhat, for no reason other than the fact that I felt like trying it out that day. I installed apt and dpkg on it, and it's pretty much a custom hybrid of redhat and debian now. (Not recommended: not only do you need to know precisely what you're doing, but you also have to be completely willing to wipe the whole thing if need be:-)
The whole "this distro or that" is really silly, and stinks of consumerism and label consciousness. It's all the same stuff, they all hit the same walls with hardware compatability and software availabilty. I don't find any of the distro's I've used to be particularly distinct from the others in terms of ease-of-use.
Debian has always been, by far, the easiest to install. I suppose the command set for dselect is pretty stupid, but really, it could hardly be easier to install and maintain. Redhat totally blows in the ease-of-installation and maintenance department. It *LOOKS* like it's easier. People *SAY* it's easier. But it actually turns out to be a royal pain. It's all the same software, all roads lead to Rome, and you get to the same place. Why all this argument about which one's better? That kind of talk is appropriate for Coke and Pepsi, Ford and Chevy, and so forth.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Of course, those of you who have been paying attention might recognize as a major FreeBSD buff (which I am), but if I'm going to go Linux then it's going to be Debian.
I experimented with a lot of distros right from the beginning (it seemed to be my favorite thing to do; people often joke that I enjoy installing and learning to set up systems more than actually using them, which, to some extent, may be true). Gentoo may be the one major distro I haven't tried, but I've got a few under my belt that most linux regulars don't. The list: Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSE, TurboLinux, Debian, Slackware, Red Flag Linux (truly--it's on my secondary hard drive right now).
Okay, the list is smaller than I thought...
ANYWAY, after doing the thing with all those distros, I finally settled on Debian. I must confess that I never got around to installing Gentoo, but I plan to do it some time in the future (heard lots of good things about it).
My general opinion of it was that it was a very sane, standardized, and well-laid-out system (something very important to me, which is why I migrated to BSD) that is both stable and flexible. Debian installed on my machine without a hitch and worked just great, taking just about anything I could throw at it in stride.
I think Debian's growing popularity is somewhat inevitable. Whether this is wrong or not, I always get the impression that Debian is the Linux (though to some it's Red Hat, and others Slackware). A Linux user's Linux, if you will.
Debian's package system suffers a little bit from being overshadowed by the almighty RPM, but if enough weight gets thrown behind it then perhaps we'll start seeing as many up-to-date Debian packages floating around as RPMs, which would be quite nice (don't really care for RPMs myself).
Enough of my hambling, though--three cheers for Debian!
> Sadly, testing and unstable have _no_ security updates.
Untrue; you haven't been correct since shortly after the current testing (Sarge) was started. unstable is where the security fixes go first.
Testing has its own equivalent repository for security fixes a la' stable.
The only time apt did not work for me was a migration from potato to woody. It failed because I did not have a large enough var partition. An extra 500M drive, mounted up as var with coppies of what was on my 150M partition saved the day. That was a simple self inflicted failure. I could have avoided it all together by writing out configuration files and simply installing Woody instead of upgrading Potato.
Other wonderful magic is how older hardware continues to be useful. The package continuity is awsome. People still maintain the OLVWM and that is still a great UI for a Pentium class machine. Nicer still is that newer pacages like Black Box run even better. It completely contradicts the bloat and obsolescence comercial software suffers as well as comercial software's instability. Bit rot is planned obsolescence and it does not exist in the free software world.
Three chears for the package maintainers! Free software rules.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I'd love to try Debian but I can't install it. I'm a Windows expert and have done installs of Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake, Peanut, and Turbo, but Debian's install is a) ugly text, b) gnarly. By that I mean that it asked me way too much about installing packages with which I'm not familiar, then it failed on first boot. No time for that, back to Mandrake.
FREE JAVA!!!
You can't handle the truth.
scripsit Frymaster:
Could you explain this comment? I'm not sure I wholly follow your logical steps to arrive at that conclusion -- possibly I'm just undercaffeinated...
In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
I haven't done much with java, but you should be able to do better than that with make.
:
Completly untested, but you get the idea:
javacompile : ${ClassFiles)
$(JAVA_CC) $(JAVA_CC_ARGS) `cat rebuild.list`
rm rebuild.list
touch javacompile
.java.class
echo $@ >> rebuild.list
"* More security flaws than any other distro
[To parent: Really? Please provide links to back that up, I'm interested]"
Actually, I think the reason people think Debian has the most security flaws, is that if you run a Nessus scan against it, it comes up with a shitload of holes. The reason for this is that nessus relies on banners to determine version numbers, and version numbers to determine vulnerabilities. Debian backports security fixes, so though it says it has Apache version 1.3.4, it really isn't 1.3.4 because it has security fixes from 2.0.55 or whatever. This makes auditing a pain in the ass, and I hate debian's policy of backporting instead of upgrading, but Debian is just as secure as anything else, because of backporting.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
More people are realizing this since Redhat yanked the carpet out from under them, that's why Debian use is on the rise. I know that's why I switched.
"And now, Frank N. Furter, your time has come. Say 'goodbye' to all of this, and 'hello'... to oblivion!"
Actually, I don't have first hand experience with Debian on a server, but I do recognize that Debian's strengths and weaknesses are a better match for servers than desktops.
I've played around with Debian on my workstation. It's good, and stable. Apt-get is really nice. But hardware support and ease of installation just aren't up to par for a dope like me. It's Mandrake for my Linux half of a dual boot desktop.
That said, servers are fine with Debian. No X, no audio, no tv tuner, no dual-boot, no palm pilots, etc. All these little annoying things can probably be setup with enough patience, but I don't have it. Yet on a server, these things just don't matter. Plus, the benefits of a stable distribution and ease of (security) updates is much more valuable.
why isn't slackware on the list?
Fedora is easy to maintain/patch, with yum and apt-get.
Debian is a good distrib, but please stop this fanatism. Other than Debian could be viable solution.
* Packages are tested (and compiled on more architectures than I care to imagine), and even unstable is actually usable
Even unstable? My parents use testing... I setup the box, configured everything, and I run apt-get update and upgrade occasionally, and they keep on ticking. Sure, applications crash every once and a while (once every other week or so, mainly mozilla and kmail), but X and debian itself are rock stable... Never had a system or X crash in the last 6 months. In fact, testing mozilla crashes less than IE.
If my computer-illiterate parents can use debian testing for their home desktop, I'm pretty sure many other people can as well.
-=Lothsahn=-
Taking out the distribution name will *not* improve security. Do you seriously believe that a script kiddie is going to go thru all the trouble of getting headers from your server and matching them up against a "known vulnerable" list, before he runs his exploit? Well, let me tell you, they don't. And I wouldn't either.
Besides, why do you think the distribution name reveiled in the headers is the "true" distribution name? It could, after all, be that some administrators put in fake names, in the same misguided persuit of security by obscurity, as those who remove the distribution headers all together.
In other words; Headers have nothing to do with security. Attackers don't use them and they would be stupid to do so. Your IIS will still be 0wnz3d if you put Apache in its header. Your Exchange will still be 0wnz3d if you put "*****" (which seems to be common between exchange administrators) in the headers. And your old insecure Apache install is going to be rooted no matter if you disclose that it runs on RedHat 5.1 or not.
I had a collegue start on a Linux system, and he had a few operations to perform, so I tell him to use nano, as it's easier. The fourth step of the operation was to add a crontab job... back to reality, crontab -e puts you in vi ;-)
One can produce theories but the facts are always more important than journalism PR.
According to this survey the numbers show that 60% of the newly installed computers were Redhat. Debian was the second with 24%, Suse was the third with 15%.
Gentoo and Mandrake has marginal share in the newly installed linux boxes market.
Distribution - July 2003 - January 2004 - Growth in numbers - Share in Growth
RedHat - 1231986 - 1451505 - 219519 - 60,35%
Debian - 355469 - 442752 - 87283 - 23,99%
SuSE - 240411 - 296217 - 55806 - 15,34%
Gentoo - 20273 - 24229 - 3956 - 1,09%
Mandrake - 51299 - 52543 - 1244 - 0,34%
Cobalt - 553012 - 548963 - 4049 - 1,11%
Summa - 2452450 - 2816209 - 363759
This is...
O
U
T
R
A
G
E
O
U
S
!
Just because debian had a smaller user base to begin with (and so its percentage growth happens to be more) does not mean that debian is growing faster than Red Hat.
No. It exactly means that debian is growing faster. Not more, just faster. If the percentage growth is mantained, debian would catch redhat at some time (not saying that this can happen).
so dismiss me as an "anti red hat activst" or whatever, if that sort of label makes you feel comfortable but you know what i really am? the kid who goes to the 7/11 in 1986 and sees shelves of "new coke".
Fucking brilliant comment. Mod Parent Up!
who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
Debian, my arse! Everybody knows that Ninnle Linux is the one true distro! It's been the most popular since Al Gore invented the Internet!
But it's better than that, upgrades from EOL'd Red Hat ditros to RHES are half price, so it's more like $175 -
Red Hat does not allow upgrading from RH Linux to RH Enterprise Linux. Installing will mean a clean wipe.
In addition this is for each purchased copy of RH Linux. How many places do you know would purchase RH Linux for each server they run? Not many, why? The license allows you to install on many machines and updates are available via yum or autorpm (IMHO yum is much better than up2date).
I'm just surprised that more people aren't turning to White Box, CentOS, or TaoLinux. All of which are excellent distributions and do an amazing job of keeping in sync with Red Hat.
Can I get an eye poke?
Dog House Forum
If you want to learn more about the slackware .tgz format, read the section on Slackware packages from the slackware book.
Maybe it's because I just switched to Deb from RedHat, but it took several tries to get Deb to correctly install kde. You'd think an "apt-get install kde" would 'just work' (maybe I'm spoiled because everything else in Deb just works) but that didn't even bring an X server onto the system. I mean, really, is not kde dependent on X?!
Oh well. I eventually got it. But it took a bit of tweaking.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent