[nmglug] Installing apt on RH8

[Karl Hegbloom]

On Wed, 2005-01-12 at 15:44 -0700, Andreas Rechtsteiner wrote:
> Karl Hegbloom wrote:
> 
> >If the machine will also serve as a desktop workstation, I suggest
> >Ubuntu.  
> >
> 
> What is it about Ubuntu that you suggest it over Debian?

Mainly that quite a lot of systems integration work has been done, and
that the installer leaves you with a complete working Gnome Desktop
Environment, rather than a bare-bones base system.  So instead of
spending another hour or two selecting the desktop stuff you want,
something that requires a certain amount of expertise, you can get right
to work.

The Gnome Desktop is very nicely configured.  It works a lot better than
the stock Debian version of it.  Hotplugging Just Wroks.  The first user
created, during install, has a 'sudoers' entry, and is an admin user who
can use the 'sudo' command at will.  I gather that Mac OS X does
something similar.  I don't even know the root password anymore.  In
fact, it's actually locked.

The development branch, Hoary Hedgehog, has the X.org server, replacing
XFree86.  It works a lot better -- my fonts are crisper and easier to
read, and GLX has DRI finally.  I could never get that to work under
XFree86.

> I gather they make distributions available regularly. Are upgrades as 
> easy and continuous as now on Debian with apt-get?

Upgrades work the same way.  They have their own repository, and do work
on many of the packages that they always, by policy, submit directly
back to Debian.  There is a "main" repository, containing core supported
packages, and a "universe" one containing mostly unsupported material,
which is almost but not all of the remainder of Debian take out Ubuntu
"main".

They promise to release every six months, and have a security archive
for emergency package releases.  Upgrades from one release to the next
will probably work very reliably.  There will be a thing where you put
the upgrade CD in, and it automatically recognizes that CD and offers to
perform the upgrade.  Or, you can simply use 'synaptic', 'aptitude', or
'apt-get'.

You can buy a support or support escalation contract from Canonical
Limited, if that's a requirement of your IT department.  They encourage
other companies to offer support contracts as well, optimistically
expecting a large demand for such.  The community support is also very
good, and actually accessible.  (Answers go to the list and lists
archive... you can find them later without purchasing a Red Hat
product...  Many times when I've googled and gotten a hit from a Red Hat
e-mail support list, I see the question but the answer went back in
private e-mail.)  You can also probably use all of the Debian resources,
for things not Ubuntu specific.  They have a great Wiki happening also.

I think that the whole process is much more "open" than the Fedora
project is.  Being based on Debian, Ubuntu benefits from the inheritance
of those years of development and refinement of the Debian system, plus
the help of all 500+ (last time I checked; was quite a while ago)
volunteer engineers in Debian.

The "Ubuntu" concept is nice.  I like the idea of "people are people
only through other people".  We share, and they share, it benefits all.


> Is stability better?

If you stick with the release version, it's rock solid.  If you track
the development version, it changes out from under you from time to
time, and things are occasionally broken then fixed again a few days
later, much like tracking Debian unstable.  Tracking the development
release is fun if you're into it and know how to fix things when they
break, but if you have work to do, stick to the stable release.

Remember that "stable" and "unstable" refer to changing software, not
buggy software.  Stable just means that the system is set up and you're
not changing to new versions or rebuilds of software every other day.
Unstable means things are moving and changing, as they work on getting
the best configuration whilst performing the systems integration magic
dance -- it rocks the boat a little.