[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

gEDA-user: unsubscribe



unsubscribe
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 08:48 -0700, Adrian Nania wrote:
> Al,
> 
> Your review is great and I could not agree more. Just a small detail:
> Ubuntu default gEDA packages are to old to be of any use.
> 
> Adrian Nania
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: geda-user-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:geda-user-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of al davis
> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 6:45 AM
> To: gEDA user mailing list
> Subject: Re: gEDA-user: Help request
> 
> On Friday 16 June 2006 16:21, Svenn Are Bjerkem wrote:
> > What is it with Ubuntu or Kubuntu that makes you _not_ use Debian 
> > directly?
> 
> I use Debian directly, but I think I can explain it...  
> 
> First, take a look at what Debian offers...  There are 3
> variants:  "stable", "testing" and "unstable". 
> 
> "Stable" is in the opinion of many, too stable for comfort.  It has two
> important distinguishing characteristics.  The first is that it is
> reputed to be extremely reliable, making it well suited for servers that
> absolutely must work, with a minimum of down time.  The second is that
> it is a long time between releases, and even when a version is released
> it is a year or so behind.  With a 2 year release cycle, this means it
> is about
> 3 years behind when the next major release comes out.  I have heard it
> called "Debian Fossil".  This is ok for a server, usually, but "desktop"
> users usually want something more recent.  It gets a lot of criticism
> for this.  Between major updates, the only changes important bug fixes.
> Security related bugs are addressed very fast.  When there is such a fix
> in a new "upstream" release of a package, they won't use the new
> release.  Instead, they patch the old release to fix the bug.
> 
> On the other extreme is "unstable" which tries to be always current.  It
> usually includes the most recent "stable" release of most packages.  It
> usually doesn't go so far as the development snapshots.  To do this, it
> means daily updates.  
> Sometimes a single package can be updated several times in a week.
> Occasionally it breaks.
> 
> "Testing" is somewhere in between, but much closer to "unstable".
> Basically, if a package survives 10 days without serious bug reports in
> "unstable", it automatically moves to "testing".  There are daily
> updates, but they are not as big as in "unstable".  When a package is so
> volatile to be itself updated daily, these versions do not propagate to
> "testing".  Occasionally it breaks.
> 
> This set of 3 does not provide what a typical casual desktop user wants,
> which is fairly stable, but not so much as to be years behind.
> 
> Debian is a distribution for techies.  There are certain aspects of it
> that make it appeal to the more technically oriented.  
> Beginners are often intimidated by this.
> 
> Looking at these two issues, this is where Ubuntu comes in.  It provides
> a sort-of stable release, with major updates about twice a year, then
> holding except for important updates between them.  As I understand,
> they take a snapshot of Debian (testing or unstable, I am not sure
> which), freeze it, and harden a subset of packages that are important to
> mainstream desktop users.  It is a similar process to Debian stable, but
> only on a subset of the packages and a subset of the platforms.  This
> becomes the "main" part of the distribution.  The rest of Debian becomes
> the "universe" part of the distribution, without any additional testing.
> You need to enable the universe.  It is off by default.  It is a check
> box in the graphic installer.
> 
> The latest version (Dapper) of Ubuntu has a graphic installer and a live
> CD.  You can run off the CD like Knoppix with a subset of the packages.
> Then click the install icon to install on your hard disk if you want.
> It is a nice graphic installer, with a few issues that are expected on a
> first release.  The previous release (Breezy) used the Debian installer.
> 
> There are several variants of Ubuntu, but they are all on an equal
> level, with different focuses.  There is "kubuntu" which substitutes KDE
> for Gnome.  There is a server version.  There are a few others.
> 
> As I understand, Ubuntu gives the changes back to Debian, which it
> respects as sort of a master distribution.  Lots of the Debian packages
> do have Ubuntu entries in the change logs.
> 
> So, it is a fairly up-to-date, newbie friendly variant of Debian.  I
> think of it as the Debian variant between stable and testing.
> 
> When you want to move on to Debian (testing or unstable), just change
> some info in /etc/apt/sources.list, then "sudo apt-get update" and "sudo
> apt-get dist-upgrade".
> 
> Regarding Stuart's comment about a disproportionate share of install
> problems on Ubuntu (but not Debian).  The difference is that Ubuntu,
> being more newbie friendly and being marketed as such, attracts more
> newbies who are likely to have trouble by overlooking things that people
> who have been around consider obvious.  I think it is good that it is
> bringing these people into the fold, who would still be on MS-Windows
> otherwise.  
> Most of them who try to use the CD don't realize that Ubuntu packages
> for gEDA already exist.  You just need to "sudo apt-get install geda".
> 
> I am not trying to convince anyone to use any particular distribution.
> I am just conveying what I believe their intent is.
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
> _______________________________________________
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
> 

_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user