[nmglug] Installing apt on RH8

[Tim Emerick]

Yes, that description prompted me to download the Ubuntu distro last night. 
I'll probably try it out today.

Tim
--- Andreas <andreas at lanl.gov> wrote:

> That was very informative and convincing, Karl, thanks!  :-)
> 
> btw, after being very happy with my Debian install on my laclinux laptop 
> from Gary, I tried to install Debian on my workstation about 6 months 
> ago. I used the new installer for testing (back then beta, now a release 
> cadidate, I believe) and it was so easy, that I don't even remember 
> anymore what I had and did not have to do. Definitely searching packages 
> wasn't a problem, i chose a meta-bundle of packages the installer (or 
> aptitude) offered. Everything else I needed later was extremely easy to 
> 'apt-get'. All hardware got detected without a problem.
> To me the installer is no excuse anymore to not go with Debian.
> 
> 
> 
> Karl Hegbloom wrote:
> 
> >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.
> >
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >nmglug mailing list
> >nmglug at nmglug.org
> >http://www.nmglug.org/mailman/listinfo/nmglug
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nmglug mailing list
> nmglug at nmglug.org
> http://www.nmglug.org/mailman/listinfo/nmglug
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo