Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Your thinking of the personal user, which isn't Linux's strongsuit right now. Corporate customers are looking at the Calderas and RedHatters of the Linux distributions. Without commercial support, they won't even bother to *look* at Debian. Without the attention of the corporate world, Debian won't get enough advertising, or word of mouth, to become a player in the end user market (whenever it develops). -- Ed C. I don't think that is such a bad thing for debian to remain non-commercial. What happens when RH or caldera becomes 50.0001% owned by a company like Sun, HP or Novell? Do these companies act any different than M$? Would such a redhat CEO consider the ideas of the Linux Developers as important as the marketing strategies of his new parent company? Will RH Linux become secondary to the success of a proprietary version of unix? Maybe. Hopefully Debian won't. Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
fockface dickmeat wrote: Your thinking of the personal user, which isn't Linux's strongsuit right now. Corporate customers are looking at the Calderas and RedHatters of the Linux distributions. Without commercial support, they won't even bother to *look* at Debian. Without the attention of the corporate world, Debian won't get enough advertising, or word of mouth, to become a player in the end user market (whenever it develops). -- Ed C. I don't think that is such a bad thing for debian to remain non-commercial. No ones arguing that Deb should not remain non-commercial. The debate centered around George Bonser's idea of a commercial company providing a commercial distribution based on Deb. What happens when RH or caldera becomes 50.0001% owned by a company like Sun, HP or Novell? Do these companies act any different than M$? No argument; thats part of why we are using Debian isn't it? Although to be fair ... Would such a redhat CEO consider the ideas of the Linux Developers as important as the marketing strategies of his new parent company? To be fair, RH has handled itself very 'honorably' up to this point, but as RH becomes increasing popular (or is bought out), will it continue to consider the larger Linux community? That's the question. And the answer is simple: Debian. Will RH Linux become secondary to the success of a proprietary version of unix? Maybe. Hopefully Debian won't. I don't see this. While Linux (regardless of which distribution we are talking about) might not affect the mainstream PC OS market any time in the future, its effect on the Unix world will be more pronounced and imminent. After all these years, no proprietary unix has come to dominate the Unix world, though they tried. For middle and low end uses as a server OS, Linux is ideal (if there is commercial support for it). I just don't see a commercial unix taking over, and pushing Linux aside (unless this commercial unix actually goes OpenSource). The issue is how can Debian survive in a market where RH has become an 800 pound gorilla, and we're not talking about the personal end user market. The middle and low end of the server OS market is at the center of this topic. Debian will always be non-commercial, thats not at issue, nor will it disappear (if the polls are right, Deb may be #2 right now). Can a commercial company (which will be able to provide commercial level support) using Deb as its base distribution, ensure Deb's popularity in the market that matters at this time? Or can Deb keep up with RH in terms of market share, without a commercial company giving it visibility and 'legitimacy' in the server OS arena? -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Fri, 5 Mar 1999, Frankie wrote: ) Obviously recommending debian to colleagues/associates/friends ) sticking a debian logo on your website ) pestering major sites to display a debian logo ) Making sure that articles are written for stuff like slashdot/32bitsonline etc that mention debian. This is reasonable. When potential customers discover Debian is purely a volunteer effort, they will assume that Debian is some kind of slap-dash, low quality product. Most of these companies will want a distribution that has corporate support available for it. Unfortunately, I don't see any improvement of the situation, unless such a commercial company actually gets established. Valid point - couldn't the volunteer nature be made into a positive thing? Like that the people who work on debian are every bit as qualified, but WANT TO. This isn't. Why should we agonize over explaining to coroporations that Debian is a volunteer effort but really it's all right and doesn't hurt anything, when GNU, Gnome, X, etc. are also largely volunteer programs? And for that matter, DJGPP, Nethack, a half dozen compilers and assemblers running in MS-DOS, all of DECUS, most standards setting efforts, and probably a whole lot more. There's a name for societies so dominated by material concerns that all issues must be economic ones: savagery. And a name for societies which have solved their immediate need for sustenance and allow portions of their populations to strive toward transcendent goals: Civilization. Debian wouldn't be possible if we weren't part of civilization; its existence is one of the thing historians a thousand years from now will take into account when appraising our culture. So why apologize? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Shupp California State University, Northridge Graduate Student, Dept. of Anthropology http://www.csun.edu/~ms44278/index.htm
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
But TECO was the greatest, most programmable, powerful editor ever. If only it had run on a *NIX OS :-( - I remember when working at DEC being told that teco was more than an editor, it was a language. Infact someone had written a StarTrek game in teco. (They also wrote a startrek game in Cobol ... YUCK!) == Amateur Radio, when all else fails! http://www.qsl.net/wa2mze Debian Gnu Linux, Live Free or . _ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Ed Cogburn wrote: Frankie wrote: snip You are perhaps referring the Linux Standard Base that RH and Deb have, for the moment, agreed to? The problem is that the greater RH's dominance becomes, the greater the chance that they will no longer see this kind of cooperation as desirable, and in effect decide on their own that RH *is* the Linux Standard Base. If they don't try too hard too quickly, then I fear they just might get away with it. This is exactly what I meant in my original post, when I asked if redhat were the next MS. The thing that worried me most about the poll I saw, was that there was only one major distro, and such a huge gap between the others: If all of the distros are growing at a rate of, say, 30%, then where does that leave us in 1 years time? the bigger get bigger and the smaller get smaller, relatively. That is, debian has to grow at 130% just to stay in the same league as redhat. This is, perhaps, an inherent flaw of capitalism, although lets not go into that. With MS, once they were the biggest, (corporation/market share/whatever) it became very hard for them to be knocked. They always had the upperhand against any of their competitors. (Plus they may (pending result of US suit against MS) have been prepared to play dirty) Thus Redhat, being 3 times as large as debian will be able to push debian aside if it desires, or to impose conditions on debian if it decides to do so. At the moment that seems impossible, and I think it is, but as linux stops being a geeky sideline OS (as is happening at the moment), but becomes a serious player, both in the server and desktop markets, then linux will be mainstream, and then there will be no more friendly cooperation between the distros. This is why debian needs to expand its user base, apart from anything else. We're in agreement, although I'm more pessimistic about Linux's chances in the desktop market. The problem is how can Debian grow its user base any faster? Debian is not a commercial company that defines its success by its market share. Even if Debian had the money to spend on advertising, I'm willing to bet there will be a significant number of developers who would consider paying for advertising as a waste of money. Quite possibly - if everyone who has a website were to stick a debian logo on it, it would increase visibility and knowledge of debian. This would cost nothing. I know I've said it before, but if I say it again it will do no harm. Slashdot has a redhat logo, for example, and linus t and alan c are known to use redhat - I think I read that rms uses debian (or has recently installed it or sthg). Couldn't this info be disseminated to a wider audience? The bloke that wrote (or whatever) the majority of the programs you use uses debian? Like George Bonser has said previously, I think the only way that Debian is going to grow its market share better than its currently growing is for the creation of a commercial company which adopts Debian as its base distribution. This company can provide corporate support to enhance Debian's position in the corporate world, and improve the install and maintenance of the system, by adding new software which isn't a priority for current Debian developers. That may be true, but debian has become deputy leading distro with NO paid advertising, and no commercial backing, So it must have reasonable marketing anyway. This is my list of ways to improve the position of debian for free: (the more times I repeat it on debian user, the more it will sink in hopefully :-) ) Obviously recommending debian to colleagues/associates/friends ) sticking a debian logo on your website ) pestering major sites to display a debian logo ) Making sure that articles are written for stuff like slashdot/32bitsonline etc that mention debian. ) When potential customers discover Debian is purely a volunteer effort, they will assume that Debian is some kind of slap-dash, low quality product. Most of these companies will want a distribution that has corporate support available for it. Unfortunately, I don't see any improvement of the situation, unless such a commercial company actually gets established. Valid point - couldn't the volunteer nature be made into a positive thing? Like that the people who work on debian are every bit as qualified, but WANT TO. (that hopefully implies dedication/committedness/quality or whatever) frankie -- Ed C. -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null -- Confession is good for the soul only in the sense that a tweed coat is good for dandruff. --Peter de Vries http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk - Drum'n'Bass music, samples and links. ICQ://25576761begin:vcard n:;Frankie x-mozilla-html:TRUE
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Fri, Mar 05, 1999 at 05:13 (-0800), Kenneth Scharf wrote: But TECO was the greatest, most programmable, powerful editor ever. If only it had run on a *NIX OS :-( - I remember when working at DEC being told that teco was more than an editor, it was a language. Infact someone had written a StarTrek game in teco. (They also wrote a startrek game in Cobol ... YUCK!) I remember someone standing up at a DECUS meeting and suggestin DEC write Fortran-77 in teco, since teco was the _ONLY_ language portable across all DEC platforms. -- your man pann
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Kenneth Scharf writes: I remember when working at DEC being told that teco was more than an editor, it was a language. Infact someone had written a StarTrek game in teco. And some guy at MIT wrote a text editor in TECO... -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
And some guy at MIT wrote a text editor in TECO... -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler) Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI - Opps, yeah that's right. The ORIGINAL Emacs was written in Teco. RMS must be more talented that I thought. Teco's syntax was even less clear than Lisp! (I gave up writing teco macro's longer than 3 lines!). == Amateur Radio, when all else fails! http://www.qsl.net/wa2mze Debian Gnu Linux, Live Free or . _ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
mike shupp wrote: On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote: Like George Bonser has said previously, I think the only way that Debian is going to grow its market share better than its currently growing is for the creation of a commercial company which adopts Debian as its base distribution. This company can provide corporate support to enhance Debian's position in the corporate world, and improve the install and maintenance of the system, by adding new software which isn't a priority for current Debian developers I dunno. There's a lot of people who would like to find out about Linux, but aren't prepared to bet the whole farm on it sight unseen. Without advertising, how are we supposed to get to these prospective customers before RH does? They'll pay say 1100 bucks for a white box PII machine with Windows 98 installed without a qualm however (I did anyhow a couple months ago). Would they demur at paying say 1115 dollars for the same machine with Win 98 on one partition and Debian on another? Of course not-- and some dealers would even think WINDOWS AND LINUX!!! worthy of advertising. Short of DOJ intervention, M$ has made sure the OEMs don't ship their machines with anything other than a M$ OS. Even the dealers don't dare advertise their support of Linux, for fear of M$ retribution. We have to understand their position; they are *scared* of M$ revenge tactics. I don't see any great problem getting Debian onto a million new boxes, in other words, if someone takes the trouble to assure PC sellers What I was talking about was a market share 'gain' that would mean we could keep up with RH, and not simply end up being ignored. I don't know what the actual numbers are. that installing Debian is simple and easy and exceptionally cheap. I thought there was something of a consensus that Deb wasn't as easy to install as RH? Although I like it, I can understand the complaints about dselect. There'd be a potential problem dealing with newby customers who had Debian on their systems and weren't quite hip on the subject of Linux, but that's another issue. Your thinking of the personal user, which isn't Linux's strongsuit right now. Corporate customers are looking at the Calderas and RedHatters of the Linux distributions. Without commercial support, they won't even bother to *look* at Debian. Without the attention of the corporate world, Debian won't get enough advertising, or word of mouth, to become a player in the end user market (whenever it develops). -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
I'm going to start a co that builds cheap boxen with debian. I have what I believe a creative marketing scheme. My target market is mid to low income families. Contact me if you have an interest. I'm ready for some serious planning/implementation. NatePuri Certified Law Student Debian GNU/Linux Monk McGeorge School of Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ompages.com On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, mike shupp wrote: On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote: Like George Bonser has said previously, I think the only way that Debian is going to grow its market share better than its currently growing is for the creation of a commercial company which adopts Debian as its base distribution. This company can provide corporate support to enhance Debian's position in the corporate world, and improve the install and maintenance of the system, by adding new software which isn't a priority for current Debian developers I dunno. There's a lot of people who would like to find out about Linux, but aren't prepared to bet the whole farm on it sight unseen. They'll pay say 1100 bucks for a white box PII machine with Windows 98 installed without a qualm however (I did anyhow a couple months ago). Would they demur at paying say 1115 dollars for the same machine with Win 98 on one partition and Debian on another? Of course not-- and some dealers would even think WINDOWS AND LINUX!!! worthy of advertising. I don't see any great problem getting Debian onto a million new boxes, in other words, if someone takes the trouble to assure PC sellers that installing Debian is simple and easy and exceptionally cheap. There'd be a potential problem dealing with newby customers who had Debian on their systems and weren't quite hip on the subject of Linux, but that's another issue. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Shupp California State University, Northridge Graduate Student, Dept. of Anthropology http://www.csun.edu/~ms44278/index.htm -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 12:44:20PM +, Mark Brown wrote: Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for ^ This is an excellent summary of why you should not use emacs :-) Hamish (in nvi) -- Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Hamish Moffatt wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 12:44:20PM +, Mark Brown wrote: Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for ^ This is an excellent summary of why you should not use emacs :-) :-) Please, Hamish, lets not start *that* thread again! (-: -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Ed Cogburn wrote: Hamish Moffatt wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 12:44:20PM +, Mark Brown wrote: Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for ^ This is an excellent summary of why you should not use emacs :-) :-) Please, Hamish, lets not start *that* thread again! (-: But TECO was the greatest, most programmable, powerful editor ever. If only it had run on a *NIX OS :-( -- Ed C. -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null -- - Ralph Winslow [EMAIL PROTECTED] The IQ of the group is that of the member whose IQ is lowest divided by the number of members.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Ralph Winslow writes: But TECO was the greatest, most programmable, powerful editor ever. If only it had run on a *NIX OS :-( I believe I recall once reading of a Linux port (or clone) of TECO. Personally, I've done my best to suppress all my memories of it. -- John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will. Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind. Elmwood, Wisconsin Do not send email advertisements to this address.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote: I dunno. There's a lot of people who would like to find out about Linux, but aren't prepared to bet the whole farm on it sight unseen. Without advertising, how are we supposed to get to these prospective customers before RH does? Advertising is expensive and not exactly what I had in mind. I'm not sugggesting we rely on millions of consumers marching off to computer dealers shouting We must have Debian on our new systems-- nice as that might be. What I'm suggesting is that when the customer finally takes his/her machine from the dealer and gets the empty boxes that contained his video card, etc, the Windows 98 CD-ROM in its jewel case, the wad of component documentation, etc., that a couple of Debian CD-ROMs could also be in the handover, and that it would be even nicer if some standard really bug-free distribution had been installed on a partition of that 6.3 or 8.4 or 10 Gigabyte disk. I.e., we can get something out there in the hands of consumers if we're willing to give that something for nothing. This would not be cheap from our viewpoint admittedly, and one could argue we'd not be getting exactly the new customers we wanted. But over time, we'd be getting a fair number of people who felt that a computer wasn't complete with Linux, and a fair number who made the mental equation Linux=Debian. Some of these folks would eventually be in a position to affect corporate purchasing. The trick is to do this at minimal cost, financially and otherwise. For a first hack, I suppose we might approach PC sellers with Here's something you can throw in for all your customers really really cheap that adds lots of functionality and makes your outfit stand out from CompUSA and all its clones. (Unless we swing over CompUSA of course..) Short of DOJ intervention, M$ has made sure the OEMs don't ship their machines with anything other than a M$ OS. Even the dealers don't dare advertise their support of Linux, for fear of M$ retribution. We have to understand their position; they are *scared* of M$ revenge tactics. Well, we might get the DOJ intervention the way things are going. But I'd be surprised even now if Microsoft really has the power to keep PC sellers from putting Linux on their machines, especially if Linux goes on as a second operating system at no charge. And while MS may have friendly arrangements with gateway and Dell and Packard Bell and so forth, I doubt that it has bothered to make contracts with any teeth that apply to the thousands of hole in the wall retailers who put together and sell 25 % or so of the computers sold in the USA. I thought there was something of a consensus that Deb wasn't as easy to install as RH? Although I like it, I can understand the complaints about dselect. That's another issue. We'd need an initial setup system that would let users play around with Linux for several months and get comfortable with the OS before they had to start adding packages. That might mean tailoring Debian to half a dozen likely hardware configurations, but if I read the computer ads correctly, half a dozen configurations (PII with 64M SDRAM, 56 K modem, Sound Blaster clone, 3D accelerator video card, etc, for example) make up most of the market for new machines. Alternately, we'd need to coach the dealers through their initial installations. Anybody here a dealer? Alternately alternately, we could just hand over CD-ROMs with a couple of printed sheets to guide the buyer through the installation process, but this would probably be a waste of resources. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Shupp California State University, Northridge Graduate Student, Dept. of Anthropology http://www.csun.edu/~ms44278/index.htm
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Frankie wrote: snip You are perhaps referring the Linux Standard Base that RH and Deb have, for the moment, agreed to? The problem is that the greater RH's dominance becomes, the greater the chance that they will no longer see this kind of cooperation as desirable, and in effect decide on their own that RH *is* the Linux Standard Base. If they don't try too hard too quickly, then I fear they just might get away with it. This is exactly what I meant in my original post, when I asked if redhat were the next MS. The thing that worried me most about the poll I saw, was that there was only one major distro, and such a huge gap between the others: If all of the distros are growing at a rate of, say, 30%, then where does that leave us in 1 years time? the bigger get bigger and the smaller get smaller, relatively. That is, debian has to grow at 130% just to stay in the same league as redhat. This is, perhaps, an inherent flaw of capitalism, although lets not go into that. With MS, once they were the biggest, (corporation/market share/whatever) it became very hard for them to be knocked. They always had the upperhand against any of their competitors. (Plus they may (pending result of US suit against MS) have been prepared to play dirty) Thus Redhat, being 3 times as large as debian will be able to push debian aside if it desires, or to impose conditions on debian if it decides to do so. At the moment that seems impossible, and I think it is, but as linux stops being a geeky sideline OS (as is happening at the moment), but becomes a serious player, both in the server and desktop markets, then linux will be mainstream, and then there will be no more friendly cooperation between the distros. This is why debian needs to expand its user base, apart from anything else. We're in agreement, although I'm more pessimistic about Linux's chances in the desktop market. The problem is how can Debian grow its user base any faster? Debian is not a commercial company that defines its success by its market share. Even if Debian had the money to spend on advertising, I'm willing to bet there will be a significant number of developers who would consider paying for advertising as a waste of money. Like George Bonser has said previously, I think the only way that Debian is going to grow its market share better than its currently growing is for the creation of a commercial company which adopts Debian as its base distribution. This company can provide corporate support to enhance Debian's position in the corporate world, and improve the install and maintenance of the system, by adding new software which isn't a priority for current Debian developers. When potential customers discover Debian is purely a volunteer effort, they will assume that Debian is some kind of slap-dash, low quality product. Most of these companies will want a distribution that has corporate support available for it. Unfortunately, I don't see any improvement of the situation, unless such a commercial company actually gets established. -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote: Like George Bonser has said previously, I think the only way that Debian is going to grow its market share better than its currently growing is for the creation of a commercial company which adopts Debian as its base distribution. This company can provide corporate support to enhance Debian's position in the corporate world, and improve the install and maintenance of the system, by adding new software which isn't a priority for current Debian developers I dunno. There's a lot of people who would like to find out about Linux, but aren't prepared to bet the whole farm on it sight unseen. They'll pay say 1100 bucks for a white box PII machine with Windows 98 installed without a qualm however (I did anyhow a couple months ago). Would they demur at paying say 1115 dollars for the same machine with Win 98 on one partition and Debian on another? Of course not-- and some dealers would even think WINDOWS AND LINUX!!! worthy of advertising. I don't see any great problem getting Debian onto a million new boxes, in other words, if someone takes the trouble to assure PC sellers that installing Debian is simple and easy and exceptionally cheap. There'd be a potential problem dealing with newby customers who had Debian on their systems and weren't quite hip on the subject of Linux, but that's another issue. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Shupp California State University, Northridge Graduate Student, Dept. of Anthropology http://www.csun.edu/~ms44278/index.htm
Re: dselect Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Wayne Cuddy wrote: If there is one feature that I would LOVE to see in dselect it would be to save all the packages I have selected and allow my to load the selection on a new system so I don't have to do it everytime. Maybe this feature is already there and I don't know about it... Wayne you want to use dpkg --get-selections file , dpkg --set-selections file frankie -- Confession is good for the soul only in the sense that a tweed coat is good for dandruff. --Peter de Vries http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk - Drum'n'Bass music, samples and links. ICQ://25576761begin:vcard n:;Frankie x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk adr:;;;Birmingham;;;UK version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Mr x-mozilla-cpt:;-8160 fn:Frankie end:vcard
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
snip You are perhaps referring the Linux Standard Base that RH and Deb have, for the moment, agreed to? The problem is that the greater RH's dominance becomes, the greater the chance that they will no longer see this kind of cooperation as desirable, and in effect decide on their own that RH *is* the Linux Standard Base. If they don't try too hard too quickly, then I fear they just might get away with it. This is exactly what I meant in my original post, when I asked if redhat were the next MS. The thing that worried me most about the poll I saw, was that there was only one major distro, and such a huge gap between the others: If all of the distros are growing at a rate of, say, 30%, then where does that leave us in 1 years time? the bigger get bigger and the smaller get smaller, relatively. That is, debian has to grow at 130% just to stay in the same league as redhat. This is, perhaps, an inherent flaw of capitalism, although lets not go into that. With MS, once they were the biggest, (corporation/market share/whatever) it became very hard for them to be knocked. They always had the upperhand against any of their competitors. (Plus they may (pending result of US suit against MS) have been prepared to play dirty) Thus Redhat, being 3 times as large as debian will be able to push debian aside if it desires, or to impose conditions on debian if it decides to do so. At the moment that seems impossible, and I think it is, but as linux stops being a geeky sideline OS (as is happening at the moment), but becomes a serious player, both in the server and desktop markets, then linux will be mainstream, and then there will be no more friendly cooperation between the distros. This is why debian needs to expand its user base, apart from anything else. frankie -- Confession is good for the soul only in the sense that a tweed coat is good for dandruff. --Peter de Vries http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk - Drum'n'Bass music, samples and links. ICQ://25576761begin:vcard n:;Frankie x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk adr:;;;Birmingham;;;UK version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Mr x-mozilla-cpt:;-8160 fn:Frankie end:vcard
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 28-Feb-99, Mark Brown took time to write : 3) No documentation on how to load/use the original programs that loaded when installing. That is, can I load again the program that allowed me to Hmm... This problem seems to apply to all the distributions I've tried. They have a nice menu in the installer, but not once you've installed. You could try looking at the boot-floppies package source to see if you can figure out where it comes from. You could also try asking the maintainer. the program used during the installation to deal with modules is called modconf and is available after installation in /usr/sbin Thanx, now I know about it I'll go and modularize a _LOT_ of my kernel, I only use some of the thing irregularly and I'd rather not have a 820k kernel if I could help it :) Hope this helps. It has. Thanks.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Ed Cogburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christian Kurz wrote: Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote: Now, I have a few problems with it. 1) No IDE for the compiler. Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for compilation and interactive debugging within an Emacs session, and has hooks for using version control systems and syntax highlighting for most programming languages you're likely to care about. Hm, but there are people, that don't want Emacs or XEmacs, because they prefer some other editor or vim. :-) We got xwpe as an IDE as Debian-Package and there's also an IDE called rhide[1], but it isn't a Debian-Package yet. Maybe someone creates one of it. Didn't rhide begin in the DOS world? It would have to be heavily modified to be usefull in the Unix world, wouldn't it? No, I looked at the homepage yesterday and the authors are porting it to Linux. You can get the sources and static compiled binaries. For the compilation you need the source of gdb, AFAIK. But that shouldn't be a problem with Debian. Ciao Christian -- /* http://www.rhein-neckar.de/~jupiter/Christian Kurz */
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
http://www.userfriendly.org/static/ Bob Nielsen Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tucson, AZ AMPRnet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DM42nh http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
of them becoming developers, Deb's weaknesses such as the install problems will be addressed as well (am I the only one who likes dselect? :-) ). While dselect does have an odd interface, I definitely like it. I can see the original author's motive for force-feeding help screens, which IMHO is the oddest part of it. But I've got the sequence of dselect ENTER SPACE-BAR / parameter ENTER down pat! :-) -- Regards,| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Linux: superior operating . | http://www.golgotha.net | system tools for those Randy | | who know how to use them.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Peter Ludwig wrote: snip January 1999 have net account will download! At the beginning of the year I'd gotten very bored with everything and decided to attempt to download and install debian off the net. This time things went great. To summarize the good points I have found with debian :- 1) Package list is very large, and so provides a large amount of options for its users. 2) Software is free. This is good for me who is broke. 3) dselect. Yep, I think dselect is very good. requires a little fine tuning to me (like search facility, faster loading of package lists, etc), but pretty decent job. I believe there is a search facility in dselect - the / key will search the package names for a string, the \ key will search again. I think it would be useful to be able to search the descriptions as well, though. snip 3) No documentation on how to load/use the original programs that loaded when installing. That is, can I load again the program that allowed me to setup the modules??? If so where is it? Those programs are very helpful for initial installation, but sometimes (as in my case) you might change your mind later on and want to use that program to go over something again. snip I think modconf is what you're after. The other program on the install disks, pkgsel, (the one where you select the groups of packages) doesn't get installed unfortunately. -- Confession is good for the soul only in the sense that a tweed coat is good for dandruff. --Peter de Vries http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk/ - Drum'n'Bass music, samples and links. ICQ://25576761begin:vcard n:;Frankie x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk adr:;;;Birmingham;;;UK version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Mr x-mozilla-cpt:;-8160 fn:Frankie end:vcard
dselect Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
If there is one feature that I would LOVE to see in dselect it would be to save all the packages I have selected and allow my to load the selection on a new system so I don't have to do it everytime. Maybe this feature is already there and I don't know about it... Wayne On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Randy Edwards wrote: Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 06:46:05 -0500 From: Randy Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Ed Cogburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Debian-Users debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point? Resent-Date: 1 Mar 1999 17:29:34 - Resent-From: debian-user@lists.debian.org Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ; of them becoming developers, Deb's weaknesses such as the install problems will be addressed as well (am I the only one who likes dselect? :-) ). While dselect does have an odd interface, I definitely like it. I can see the original author's motive for force-feeding help screens, which IMHO is the oddest part of it. But I've got the sequence of dselect ENTER SPACE-BAR / parameter ENTER down pat! :-) -- Regards,| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Linux: superior operating . | http://www.golgotha.net | system tools for those Randy | | who know how to use them. -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: dselect Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Wayne Cuddy wrote: If there is one feature that I would LOVE to see in dselect it would be to save all the packages I have selected and allow my to load the selection on a new system so I don't have to do it everytime. Maybe this feature is already there and I don't know about it... Wayne From dpkg --help: dpkg --get-selections [pattern ...] get list of selections to stdout dpkg --set-selections set package selections from stdin I use it like this: dpkg --get-selections my_selections dpkg --set-selections my_selections --David Teague Debian GNU/Linux: Because software should not be expected to crash, and reboots are for hardware and kernel upgrades.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Tom Pfeifer wrote: Ed Cogburn wrote: As Deb becomes bigger, attracting more users, with some of them becoming developers, Deb's weaknesses such as the install problems will be addressed as well (am I the only one who likes dselect? :-) ). No, there's at least two of us :-) I think dselect, especially in combination with the apt access method, is terrific - it just takes some time upfront to get used to it. Waay back when, I used Slackware. Then, one of my users suggested that I try Redhat. He raved about the ability that RPM files give you to upgrade your system automatically. So, I tried it. I installed Redhat on a system and it worked okay, so I installed it on another. On the second system, I chose not to install X initially. Later, I changed my mind and went looking for the text-mode package selection utility so that I could install X. I couldn't find one. Now, I KNOW that there is one (for the install runs such a beast) but I couldn't find out what it was called or determine any references to it. The only Redhat package selection utilities I could find were X based. Since I didn't have X installed (installing X, after all, was why I was trying to find a text mode installer) I wound up having to run RPM for each of the parts which meant I had to figure out what all the parts were. It was not a fun process. However, there were other distributions and one of the CD-ROMs that I had had a copy of Debian on it. Debian doesn't force me to install X on my computer. Even if I don't install X initially, I can still select and install packages on my computer. So, I freakin' LOVE dselect. Don't ever get rid of it. -- Jonathan Guthrie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Brokersys +281-895-8101 http://www.brokersys.com/ 12703 Veterans Memorial #106, Houston, TX 77014, USA
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Ed Cogburn wrote: As Deb becomes bigger, attracting more users, with some of them becoming developers, Deb's weaknesses such as the install problems will be addressed as well (am I the only one who likes dselect? :-) ). No, there's at least two of us :-) I think dselect, especially in combination with the apt access method, is terrific - it just takes some time upfront to get used to it. Tom -- Try Debian GNU/Linux - it's free, it's open source, and it rocks http://www.debian.org
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Hello, Several years ago , I said that debian should use some of the tools of marketing to increase the potential universe of users awareness of debian. i received such flack that i realized that there was a political bent in many free software users that was anti marketing or maybe were totally unaware of its value. now it is time to reconsider this philosophy and look at what the real objectives of the linux community are? regards. allan bart ---Frankie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know where to post this to, but this seemed as good a place as any. This is not a Debian vs Redhat flame war email, so please do not treat this posting like that. A couple of weeks ago there was a poll, which showed that redhat hat had about 2 or three times as many users as debian, and that redhat was first with debian was second, but far closer to the other distros than to redhat. Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is symbolic of the backlash against the large corporation ethos of many of its competitors, rather than its reliability (let alone it's ease of use :-)) OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably although I think) sacrifices reliability over commercial factors. (eg rushing distros to get them out to coincide with the marketers strategy). I know that redhat have done a good job in promoting linux for the masses etc, but does redhat seem like the next MS to you? On the basis that linux is soundly based on ideology and a belief that the internet should remain free, debian may well be the best distribution, and on that basis, redhat the worst. Yet most linux users opt for redhat. This is perhaps because they don't really care or understand about the history of linux or the philosophy behind it. Essentially debian at the moment has the potential of becoming the linux distro for RMS wannabes and noone else. Personally, I want my distro to be the best distro, and I believe it is. But the vast numbers of users who prefer redhat to debian means that when (as will probably happen, due to their commercial nature), redhat decide to consolidate their position, debian will lose out. I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing policy, to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have professional marketers counts in redhat's favour. For example, in the last month or so, I have seen one debian logo on a website, about 15 redhat logos, and no logos for any other distro. This could easily be corrected, by, for example, the debian organisation writing to major linux sites (eg /. , freshmeat etc) and asking them to display a debian logo. Or, failing that, every reader of this posting with a website to display the debian logo when it comes out on their website. This would provide an amount of free advertising for debian which would help to raise its profile. /rant cos I'm tired. frankie -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null == Allan W. Bart, Jr. Strategic Analyst _ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
I think dselect, especially in combination with the apt access method, is terrific - it just takes some time upfront to get used to it. Many people switching to Linux from the 'Other ' OS may equate spending time to learn an install package, with difficulty of use and/or other nameless difficulties. I use Win95/NT at work and I was using RedHat at home for the last one year and I made a few unsuccessful attempts to switch to debian, but was stopped everytime by the rather steep learning curve and the forbidding front end of dselect. Just a few weeks back I succeeded in installing hamm from a CD. I am now experimenting with all the distros I can lay may hands on - I will try and post my experiences. (Currently I am struggling with Suse 5.3 after having installed Mandrake last evening) It appears to me dselect is more a sysadmin's install tool. Even Yast looks a little easier. for my $0.02 i would strongly suggest ywo install programs a simpleone with less choices and another for the more adventurous. If I want to write an install program, whom do I get in touch? I do know C fairly well and I would give this a crack. Will someone point me to areas of study, persons to contact? P Asokan
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, P Asokan wrote: It appears to me dselect is more a sysadmin's install tool. Even Yast looks a little easier. for my $0.02 i would strongly suggest ywo install programs a simpleone with less choices and another for the more adventurous. It's an interesting thought. The installer gives you a bunch of preselected options, and then you go into dselect. If the installer made dselect *optional* if the user selected a preselected list, this might make the steep learning curve disappear while still offering lots of flexibility for people like me who always select Custom on Windows install programs.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you write: I think dselect, especially in combination with the apt access method, is terrific - it just takes some time upfront to get used to it. Many people switching to Linux from the 'Other ' OS may equate spending time to learn an install package, with difficulty of use and/or other nameless difficulties. Just my two cents: I find dselect annoying to use simply because there are so many packages to install. You keep scrolling down and down through the list and loose all perspective as to what order they appear in, what the hierarchy of the sections is, and how far to the bottom of the list. I think it would be really good if you could hide and unhide certain sections (unless this is already possible??). Eg hide all packages under - Up-to-date Required packages -, including everything under --- Up-to-date Required packages in section base ---, --- Up-to-date Required packages in section base ---, etc. OR hide everything under --- Up to date installed packages --- full stop (ie all installed up-to-date packages). Doing this would hide packages that you don't want to know about, for instance, if you are upgrading to a newer debian distribution. Also: I would find it extremely helpful if there was some indicator indicating how far down the list you have scrolled. (eg 75% down from the top? or maybe 20 lines from the top, 100 more to go?) I short, I don't think there is anything wrong with dselect, but the user interface needs to be updated with the increased number of packages.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Also, I think Red Hat is a linux virgin distrib -- first time Linux users have probably only heard of Red Hat, and a lot of people feel the Red Hat installation is easier. Same way with me when I started, but I had only heard of Slackware. Once I knew more about Unix administration and the like, I realized that a better package system must exist, one that's FHS compliant. I don't worry about how many people use Debian, because I figure Debian's user base and developer base will never decrease, and the quality of the Distrib will also never decline. My only concern is a Linux split: things that work for Red Hat, but not Debian, or the other way around. As long as Linux distribs remain compatible with each other, there should be no worry about the distributions. You are perhaps referring the Linux Standard Base that RH and Deb have, for the moment, agreed to? The problem is that the greater RH's dominance becomes, the greater the chance that they will no longer see this kind of cooperation as desirable, and in effect decide on their own that RH *is* the Linux Standard Base. If they don't try too hard too quickly, then I fear they just might get away with it. Yes that is a real danger - as long as the various distros were seen as different and approx. equal, it is one thing. But if one (RH looks a likely candidate) is seen as dominant and the others are seen as fringe, then the self-sustaining chain reaction will set in. SOmethings will only work well (or at all) only with RH, because peoplwe write only for it because it has the user base, because more people write for it ... you get the picture I started with Slackware four years back, about a year back switched to RH and a few weeks back succeeded (many earlier failed attempts) in getting Debian installed. I would hate to see a world where Linux zone is Unipolar as the commercial software zone. P Asokan
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, P Asokan wrote: If I want to write an install program, whom do I get in touch? I do know C fairly well and I would give this a crack. Will someone point me to areas of study, persons to contact? There is already a big plan for this, you might start with: http://www.debian.org/~hp/gnome-apt.html which is the Gnome frontend for the thing, and be sure to follow the link to Wichert's Apt UI design which also considers the terminal frontend. You can see code by checking it out of CVS, apt and gnome-apt modules, as explained on that page. If you are really interested I would start by reviewing and understanding the source for apt-get, which is in apt/cmdline/apt-get.cc in CVS. There is a start on the non-Gnome frontend in the apt module as well. Havoc
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Subject: Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point? Date: Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 01:47:38PM +1100 In reply to:Brian May Quoting Brian May([EMAIL PROTECTED]): In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you write: I think dselect, especially in combination with the apt access method, is terrific - it just takes some time upfront to get used to it. Many people switching to Linux from the 'Other ' OS may equate spending time to learn an install package, with difficulty of use and/or other nameless difficulties. Just my two cents: I find dselect annoying to use simply because there are so many packages to install. You keep scrolling down and down through the list and loose all perspective as to what order they appear in, what the hierarchy of the sections is, and how far to the bottom of the list. In addition to a quirk I found today. I did an apt-get update on potato. As expected there some dependicy errors after a 40 Meg upgrade. So, no problem, I'll go to dselect to work them out. I select the 2.2.1-1 kernel source while I was there. Select then got the kernel source and about 6-8 other libs I hadn't asked for. It seem that dselect and apt-get must use two different Package lists. I would have expected them to use the same one as they both use dpkg. I 'thought' I was beginning to finally get a handle on dselect but this threw me off again. -- There are two ways to write error-free programs. Only the third one works. ___ Wayne T. Topa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It seem that dselect and apt-get must use two different Package lists. Right. I would have expected them to use the same one as they both use dpkg. There's various levels to dpkg - apt just uses it to install packages, dselect uses it to manage the available file too. The easiest way to get the package lists in sync is to choose apt as the access method in delect, and use `dselect update' instead of `apt-get update'. -- Carey Evans http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/c.evans/ And so, New York has joined the fraternity of cities whose only admission requirement is to be overrun with evil zombies.http://www.sluggy.com/
Re: Debian and Redhat-are most linux users missing the point?
Wasn't gonna do it, but what the hell... _My Linux Story_ In 1994, after learning of it from a friend, I purchased a 4 disk set of Linux CDs from Infomagic. I soon threw in the towel in frustration, never getting my proprietary cdrom hardware and that distribution's installation software to jibe. The CDs did come in handy last month when I needed a copy of libc.so.4... About 6 months ago I bought Redhat 5.1 along with the official Redhat book. It was RPM (and Redhat's marketing) that won me over, and for a couple of months I used Redhat. I actually *used* it, because of its easy installation, and its control-panel, which held my hand every step of the way. Print a test page Y/n? Did it stair-step? Click this box to fix it. Easy. But just what did clicking that box *do*? What does the easy to set up ppp *do* on the system level? What it doesn't do is offer a way to learn Linux basics--it just makes things work, and well, I must add. I discovered Debian about two months later, falling all over myself in Debian's technical superiority. I loved it, but how the hell do I fix stair-stepping? It was easy. Early on I learned that all I had to do was set up a print filter. It just took a few Sunday afternoons of reading, and trying this, and more reading, and try something else, and reinstalling something that broke because I thought this might work, and didn't, and I'll be damned if I'll be afraid to try something. And so with PPP, and X. And I learned a lot about my shiny new operating system, and enjoy it. Now it's a fun project, a pita, and a way of dismissing MS. I expect I'll soon use Debian as my regular OS. Just my story... Here's another: Today I browsed a local computer superstore, Micro Center, which had a Redhat display in a prominent (for Linux, anyway) location. Retail boxes were stacked fronts facing outward, stealing attention from the surrounding area. There were some Caldera CDs of various vintages nearby, and no Debian in sight. Sigh. Back six months ago, Redhat appeared the best game in town. What's Debian? Some hack tossed together by a bunch of college kids, thought I. They don't even exist as a company. Little did I know the hidden truth. Thanks to all the folks who develop Debian, and to all who've contributed the information I've gathered here and elsewhere. Burt Model Northeastern U.S. bmodel @ mindspring.com ...and it's only 1AM...
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Frankie wrote: snip OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably although I think) sacrifices reliability over commercial factors. (eg rushing distros to get them out to coincide with the marketers strategy). I know that redhat have done a good job in promoting linux for the masses etc, but does redhat seem like the next MS to you? snip I agree with much of what you say, but I would point out that Red Hat seems to be a good citizen - they pay programmers to write GPL (I think) software so at least they give something back. However, I am troubled by their dominant postion. The reason for their position as I see it are: 1. You can buy it at computer stores. Perhaps some company can box a Debian CD, include a book, and distribute it to computer stores. 2. If IBM or whoever want to talk about installing and supporting Linux they can pick up the phone and call Red Hat. They can sign a contract with Red Hat for support. Can they do the same for Debian? 3. Red Hat has the reputation of being the easiest distribution to install and get started with. I'm not sure it's true, but that's the perception. What can Debian do? If I'm right and Debian addresses the above points, Debian may gain market share. It's going to be tough because once IBM, etc, sign up with Red Hat, it's going to be hard for them to change. My two cents worth King Lee
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, George Bonser wrote: snip I am not sure how gaining market share improves Debian. I think you could say that Debian is better than Red Hat for servers. In other words, get the message over that Red Hat might be easier for the single-user desktop but Debian is the proper choice for the unattended server. Market share is only important to you if your goal is to make money. Otherwise, it is a pain in the hips. It just means more users to support without any additional resources available with which to support them. If you made money, you would have the resources to provide more support. Great success of something that is free can sometimes kill it. We would be better off to develop a commercial distro based on the free Debian model that would generate resources that could be fed back into the free project. Sorry, bad choice of words. I hope that if debian gains market share Red Hat may not be so dominant. If Slackware gained market share at the expence of Red Hat, that would be equally good in my eyes. Not that I have anything against Red Hat, but as I said in my original post I am troubled by one distro becoming so dominant. King Lee
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
I've just gotten my mail down, so sorry for the lateness of this :) A Short Linux History (by me) In 1992/3 I was looking at getting myself a new operating system, well after chatting to a couple of friends, I heard about debian linux, now I hadn't heard of linux before so when I found it was a free operating system, I was wrapt! Anyhow, I went out and bought the Infomagic CD-set (I didn't have internet access then), and well, lo and behold, there was a number of different distributions on the CD! Well, I recognised debian, so I attempted to install it *BAM* problems. First thing I created the install disks like the documentation suggested, and booted up, well, it installed the base system, then said something about not being able to find the debian cdrom. Well, here's the fun bit, it seems that due to the fact that I own (yep still own it) a cm205(MS) cdrom drive I would be unable to get the cdrom usable under linux (something to do with the driver code not being released for people to program a driver for it under linux)... hmm.. so I put the cd's on the shelf for a few years... 1997 I got myself an IDE cdrom drive (notice the delay, yep, I'm always broke!). So I dusted off the infomagic CDroms and tried installing debian again, well, infomagic hadn't provided all the BASE packages for debian, so I was pretty stuck here, I had a half-installed system... hmm... (couldn't even get on the internet). So I deleted and tried to install redhat, well it installed perfectly... I sense a kick-back here... so on a whim I tried slackware off the cd's... again they forgot to include all the packages for slackware... anyhow I ran redhat for a while, but got tired of it (not enough options, little availability of word proccessing software, etc..) so I left off on linux for a while.. January 1999 have net account will download! At the beginning of the year I'd gotten very bored with everything and decided to attempt to download and install debian off the net. This time things went great. To summarize the good points I have found with debian :- 1) Package list is very large, and so provides a large amount of options for its users. 2) Software is free. This is good for me who is broke. 3) dselect. Yep, I think dselect is very good. requires a little fine tuning to me (like search facility, faster loading of package lists, etc), but pretty decent job. 4) availability of support, I've been able to get almost all of my questions answered via this mailing list. Now, I have a few problems with it. 1) No IDE for the compiler. 2) Still no support for my old CDROM drive (I have a new computer/cdrom/etc. but I still have the old machine, and would like to use the old cd in the old system). 3) No documentation on how to load/use the original programs that loaded when installing. That is, can I load again the program that allowed me to setup the modules??? If so where is it? Those programs are very helpful for initial installation, but sometimes (as in my case) you might change your mind later on and want to use that program to go over something again. Basically of all the distributions of Linux, I prefer Debian over the others for installation and use, mainly because it is (to me anyway) easy to use, and decent installation of the packages. I aplaud the developers of Debian, but I really would like to see an IDE (Integrated Development Environment for those who don't know what I mean) for the compiler. I'd do what I could to fix any problems I had with installation, etc if I had one. I never liked (even under DOS) doing the code-compile-run-fix_code-compile-run cycle manually. Sure once I've gotten into the swing of how it works I'd be happy to ditch the IDE but until then, I guess I'll have to do all my coding under DOS/WIN98 (other partition)... This is Linux's main failing to me (all distributions, not just debian you'll notice). Regards, Peter Ludwig.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote: Now, I have a few problems with it. 1) No IDE for the compiler. Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for compilation and interactive debugging within an Emacs session, and has hooks for using version control systems and syntax highlighting for most programming languages you're likely to care about. I think there's also an IDE being built for GNOME (called GIDE or something) but personally I can't see any reason why I'd use it rather than Emacs. 2) Still no support for my old CDROM drive (I have a new computer/cdrom/etc. but I still have the old machine, and would like to use the old cd in the old system). Unless the manufacturer are willing to provide specs (you might try asking them - it's old enough that they might not care any more) or someone's very enthusiastic, the support is unlikely to appear. 3) No documentation on how to load/use the original programs that loaded when installing. That is, can I load again the program that allowed me to Hmm... This problem seems to apply to all the distributions I've tried. They have a nice menu in the installer, but not once you've installed. You could try looking at the boot-floppies package source to see if you can figure out where it comes from. You could also try asking the maintainer. -- Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness) http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/ EUFShttp://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/filmsoc/
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On 28-Feb-99, Mark Brown took time to write : 3) No documentation on how to load/use the original programs that loaded when installing. That is, can I load again the program that allowed me to Hmm... This problem seems to apply to all the distributions I've tried. They have a nice menu in the installer, but not once you've installed. You could try looking at the boot-floppies package source to see if you can figure out where it comes from. You could also try asking the maintainer. the program used during the installation to deal with modules is called modconf and is available after installation in /usr/sbin Hope this helps. /\//\/\/\\/\/\//\/\\/\/\\/\\/\//\/\\/\//\/\\/\//\/\\/\//\/\\ Patrick M. [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.patoche.org/
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Mark Brown wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote: Now, I have a few problems with it. 1) No IDE for the compiler. Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for compilation and interactive debugging within an Emacs session, and has hooks for using version control systems and syntax highlighting for most programming languages you're likely to care about. I think there's also an IDE being built for GNOME (called GIDE or something) but personally I can't see any reason why I'd use it rather than Emacs. I kinda like to see an IDE myself. I know emacs is powerfull (I've got xemacs on my sys and am still experimenting with it), but its still an editor with a *lot* of fancy features. If emacs could do what those of us who are familar with IDE's in the DOS/Win world, then we wouldn't need DDD for example. If you can merge DDD capability into emacs *then* I'd use it. In the meantime, I've got my fingers crossed for the gIDE project. No offense intended against emacs lovers. -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote: Now, I have a few problems with it. 1) No IDE for the compiler. Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for compilation and interactive debugging within an Emacs session, and has hooks for using version control systems and syntax highlighting for most programming languages you're likely to care about. Hm, but there are people, that don't want Emacs or XEmacs, because they prefer some other editor or vim. :-) We got xwpe as an IDE as Debian-Package and there's also an IDE called rhide[1], but it isn't a Debian-Package yet. Maybe someone creates one of it. Ciao Christian [1] http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/~sho/rho/rhide.html -- Menschen, die bloß arbeiten, finden keine Zeit zum Träumen. Nur wer träumt gelangt zur Weisheit. SMOHALLA (Nez Perce) /* http://www.rhein-neckar.de/~jupiter/Christian Kurz */
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
George Bonser wrote: On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote: In other words, the value is the process and not the content. What do mean by content here? The software? I'm saying the 'process' has been positively influenced by the 'politics' (the Social Contract is perhaps a good example of the 'politics' of Debian). And I think the process has been influenced more by the simple fact that they have a lot of developers spread all over the world and that FORCED them to develop strict standards if they were to produce anything at all. I see the benefits coming more out of the distributed development environment than out of any free software issues. You are almost certainly right here. The distributed development is a factor in the end result, but I don't think these factors are mutually exclusive, however. I think all the factors we've talked about are influencing the end result. In fact, at this point, only a detailed poll of the developers would shed any further light on this debate. I would rather not waste their time, as this debate really isn't that important. Whatever the factors that have influenced the Debian process, its the end result that speaks for itself. :-) I like the Enterprise Debian idea and believe it could work. Actually, all Deb really needs to start out with, is a corporate services and support company that will provide support for the use of Debian in corporate areas. A modified Deb could be built incrementally as the needs (that are different as compared to the needs of the current developer community) of the coporate market require. Deb is *already* usefull in a business environment. The Linux Journal magazine is running Debian on their machines, IIRC. -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Christian Kurz wrote: Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote: Now, I have a few problems with it. 1) No IDE for the compiler. Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs an editor - it's far, far more than a mere editor. It has support for compilation and interactive debugging within an Emacs session, and has hooks for using version control systems and syntax highlighting for most programming languages you're likely to care about. Hm, but there are people, that don't want Emacs or XEmacs, because they prefer some other editor or vim. :-) We got xwpe as an IDE as Debian-Package and there's also an IDE called rhide[1], but it isn't a Debian-Package yet. Maybe someone creates one of it. Didn't rhide begin in the DOS world? It would have to be heavily modified to be usefull in the Unix world, wouldn't it? -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, George Bonser wrote: On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, King Lee wrote: Sorry, bad choice of words. I hope that if debian gains market share Red Hat may not be so dominant. Well, I am not sure that Red Hat being so dominant is anything Debian can change unless they want to get closer to commercial software vendors which is not exactly their goal. There IS room for a commercial distribution BASED on Debian that might be able to penetrate the business market (where the vast majority of installed platforms are). I hope that some company gets close to commerial software vendors and distributes Debian (or at least use dpkg). This would be good for everyone because it gives users choice of dpkg or rpm If Slackware gained market share at the expence of Red Hat, that would be equally good in my eyes. Not that I have anything against Red Hat, but as I said in my original post I am troubled by one distro becoming so dominant. Slackware MIGHT be able to do it but without a decent package tool, I doubt it since Corel is not exactly going to ship you their source for compiling on your system and there is little configuration control with Slack. As a matter of fact, this is how both Debian and Red Hat evolved ... making a standard configuration with a decent package manager originally based on Slackware. Were you a Linux user back when Slackware (or SLS) was the ONLY distribution? Corel has now announced that they are going to produce their own distribution. That might put a bit of a hurt on Red Hat. I don't see why Slackware doesn't adopt dpkg (or rpm). I did use it a long, long time ago - I learned alot. I didn't know that Corel will produce another distribution - I hope that they base it on Red Hat or Debian. We do not need another file system layout - that makes it harder for software developers to produce software that runs on all forms of Linux (and BSD, and Irix, and ...). I hope all distributions settle on one file system and one packaging tool (I prefer dpkg); the distributions can differ on adminstrative tools glint versus dselect. Different packaging tools and file layouts hurt Linux where it is weakest (IMHO): getting getting commercial software developers to for Linux. King Lee
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 03:44:55PM +0100, Christian Kurz wrote: Mark Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 08:36:38PM +1000, Peter Ludwig wrote: 1) No IDE for the compiler. Try Emacs or XEmacs. Don't be mislead by the fact that they call Emacs Hm, but there are people, that don't want Emacs or XEmacs, because they prefer some other editor or vim. :-) We got xwpe as an IDE as THE HERETICS MUST BURN!!! Or something. Debian-Package and there's also an IDE called rhide[1], but it isn't a Debian-Package yet. Maybe someone creates one of it. rhide looks very much like the old DOS IDE of Borland's Turbo products. I used it for a while when I first used Linux, but I'm a bit dubious about running things suid root and I didn't like the way it really wanted to be tied to the console. I also had a few stability problems, but I imagine they're long gone. There's also a GNOME IDE called GIDE, although that's still in moderately early development and is only packaged in unstable. -- Mark Brown mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trying to avoid grumpiness) http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~broonie/ EUFShttp://www.eusa.ed.ac.uk/societies/filmsoc/
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Were you a Linux user back when Slackware (or SLS) was the ONLY distribution? Corel has now announced that they are going to produce their own distribution. That might put a bit of a hurt on Red Hat. Has anyone suggested to Corel, that they base their new distribution on Debian? Cheers, Mark. _/\___/~~\ /~~\_/~~\__/~~\__Mark_Phillips /~~\_/[EMAIL PROTECTED] /~~\HE___/~~\__/~~\APTAIN_ /~~\__/~~\ __ They told me I was gullible ... and I believed them!
Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
I don't know where to post this to, but this seemed as good a place as any. This is not a Debian vs Redhat flame war email, so please do not treat this posting like that. A couple of weeks ago there was a poll, which showed that redhat hat had about 2 or three times as many users as debian, and that redhat was first with debian was second, but far closer to the other distros than to redhat. Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is symbolic of the backlash against the large corporation ethos of many of its competitors, rather than its reliability (let alone it's ease of use :-)) OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably although I think) sacrifices reliability over commercial factors. (eg rushing distros to get them out to coincide with the marketers strategy). I know that redhat have done a good job in promoting linux for the masses etc, but does redhat seem like the next MS to you? On the basis that linux is soundly based on ideology and a belief that the internet should remain free, debian may well be the best distribution, and on that basis, redhat the worst. Yet most linux users opt for redhat. This is perhaps because they don't really care or understand about the history of linux or the philosophy behind it. Essentially debian at the moment has the potential of becoming the linux distro for RMS wannabes and noone else. Personally, I want my distro to be the best distro, and I believe it is. But the vast numbers of users who prefer redhat to debian means that when (as will probably happen, due to their commercial nature), redhat decide to consolidate their position, debian will lose out. I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing policy, to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have professional marketers counts in redhat's favour. For example, in the last month or so, I have seen one debian logo on a website, about 15 redhat logos, and no logos for any other distro. This could easily be corrected, by, for example, the debian organisation writing to major linux sites (eg /. , freshmeat etc) and asking them to display a debian logo. Or, failing that, every reader of this posting with a website to display the debian logo when it comes out on their website. This would provide an amount of free advertising for debian which would help to raise its profile. /rant cos I'm tired. frankie
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Further to my previous posting: I have just found this article: http://www.zdnet.com/devhead/stories/articles/0,4413,2217609,00.html Is it any wonder redhat are number one when they can find people to write articles like this? frankie
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Frankie wrote: On the basis that linux is soundly based on ideology and a belief that the internet should remain free, debian may well be the best distribution, and on that basis, redhat the worst. Just for perspective: Red Hat is by far the best commercial distribution from this point of view. They GPL all or almost all of the stuff they develop - admin tools, RPM itself. They are paying 6 guys to work on Gtk, Gnome, and Enlightenment. The CEO of the company and other important people there have specifically said that their business model involves writing free software and contributing to the community. There is relatively little non-free software with the distribution, and most of it is clearly labelled as such. They took a stand against KDE (back when that was necessary/appropriate). Contrast with Caldera and SuSE: they bundle all sorts of non-free software, generally do not release their code as free, and deliberately obfuscate which bundled software is free and which is not. They both did the wrong thing with KDE (and similar lower-profile cases), and neither has made any public statements supportive of free software. So I wouldn't target Red Hat. They may include a few semi-free programs like qmail or mysql in their distribution, but other than that they have been model corporate citizens and everything we can ask for in a commercial free software support vendor. Havoc
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably although I think) sacrifices reliability over commercial factors. (eg rushing distros to get them out to coincide with the marketers strategy). I know that redhat have done a good job in promoting linux for the masses etc, but does redhat seem like the next MS to you? I think that the main reason for redhats success in numbers has more to do with the installation program. Many of us can peice together a broken install and get it working. But we are now venturing into a different and larger world. We are attracting windows users and they come to us with no linux experience. I tryed debian a while ago and (I run an ISP and have about 6 years experience with linux) became so frustrated with dselect that I gave up twice. I have heard that work is being done to help this, and I hope that the new installation program will be tested on at least some novices. I have noticed that developers do not have the same expectations that a novice would have and do not create systems that are easy to use. I do hope that dselects replacement will be much more friendly. The second reason that RedHat was popular (at least around here) was its packaging system, and having a book published about it does not hurt. But I must say that their install is very easy, sort of like buying a japanese car, pick option group a,b,c,d,e,f and if you realy want go and look whats in there. They have had their problems and to some extent they do have presures to get the new stuff out more than debian would, and being commercial ha a lot to do with that. However because they are commercial they can do some things that debian cannot. Ok lets say they have a lot of complaints about package x and the management decides to fix it right now. They can put all the developers in one room and sort it out. Thats not so easy when people are in 7 timezones and all around the globe. I wish Red Hat well but I think those prices for supported (24x7) packages are way out of line. But only time will tell if they are a money pit or a boon. I wish debian well as well I like some of what is happening but can't stand that dselect.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Subject: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point? Date: Sat, Feb 27, 1999 at 03:54:04AM - In reply to:Frankie Quoting Frankie([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I don't know where to post this to, but this seemed as good a place as any. This is not a Debian vs Redhat flame war email, so please do not treat this posting like that. [ snip ] This could easily be corrected, by, for example, the debian organisation writing to major linux sites (eg /. , freshmeat etc) and asking them to display a debian logo. Or, failing that, every reader of this posting with a website to display the debian logo when it comes out on their website. This would provide an amount of free advertising for debian which would help to raise its profile. /rant cos I'm tired. frankie Good rant Now I wish I had a web site so I could help! -- I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them. -- Isaac Asimov ___ Wayne T. Topa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
We need, to work on the install. Debian is so awesome. Yet, will not be noticed by the masses unless the install method becomes better than RH. RH's method is open sourced. So there should be a way for debian to make it better. I'm willing to participate in a marketing effort. Such an effort will grow when there are entrepreneurs willing to base their tech biz efforts on debian. Perhaps, a 2 tier approach could ensue. 1) logo visibility effort; 2) (in debian there are users, networkers, and developers) there are also entrepreurs; the entrepreneurial types should begin discussions on best support methods, custimization for particular industries, and policy. my $0.02 NatePuri Certified Law Student Debian GNU/Linux Monk McGeorge School of Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ompages.com On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Frankie wrote: I don't know where to post this to, but this seemed as good a place as any. This is not a Debian vs Redhat flame war email, so please do not treat this posting like that. A couple of weeks ago there was a poll, which showed that redhat hat had about 2 or three times as many users as debian, and that redhat was first with debian was second, but far closer to the other distros than to redhat. Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is symbolic of the backlash against the large corporation ethos of many of its competitors, rather than its reliability (let alone it's ease of use :-)) OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably although I think) sacrifices reliability over commercial factors. (eg rushing distros to get them out to coincide with the marketers strategy). I know that redhat have done a good job in promoting linux for the masses etc, but does redhat seem like the next MS to you? On the basis that linux is soundly based on ideology and a belief that the internet should remain free, debian may well be the best distribution, and on that basis, redhat the worst. Yet most linux users opt for redhat. This is perhaps because they don't really care or understand about the history of linux or the philosophy behind it. Essentially debian at the moment has the potential of becoming the linux distro for RMS wannabes and noone else. Personally, I want my distro to be the best distro, and I believe it is. But the vast numbers of users who prefer redhat to debian means that when (as will probably happen, due to their commercial nature), redhat decide to consolidate their position, debian will lose out. I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing policy, to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have professional marketers counts in redhat's favour. For example, in the last month or so, I have seen one debian logo on a website, about 15 redhat logos, and no logos for any other distro. This could easily be corrected, by, for example, the debian organisation writing to major linux sites (eg /. , freshmeat etc) and asking them to display a debian logo. Or, failing that, every reader of this posting with a website to display the debian logo when it comes out on their website. This would provide an amount of free advertising for debian which would help to raise its profile. /rant cos I'm tired. frankie -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Paul Nathan Puri wrote: We need, to work on the install. Debian is so awesome. Yet, will not be noticed by the masses unless the install method becomes better than RH. RH's method is open sourced. So there should be a way for debian to make it better. I'm willing to participate in a marketing effort. Such an effort will grow when there are entrepreneurs willing to base their tech biz efforts on debian. Perhaps, a 2 tier approach could ensue. 1) logo visibility effort; 2) (in yes I do strongly think that logo visibility could make a huge difference - specially if the logo had 'debian' AND 'linux' on it - this would help stop people associating linux with redhat. Plus putting a debian logo on your website, I suppose, is the least that you can do to thank the developers, making sure their work doesn't go unthanked or unnoticed, I suppose. frankie -- Confession is good for the soul only in the sense that a tweed coat is good for dandruff. --Peter de Vries http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk - Drum'n'Bass music, samples and links. ICQ://25576761begin:vcard n:;Frankie x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.skunkpussy.freeserve.co.uk adr:;;;Birmingham;;;UK version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Mr x-mozilla-cpt:;-8160 fn:Frankie end:vcard
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is symbolic of the backlash against the large corporation ethos of many of its competitors, rather than its reliability (let alone it's ease of use :-)) That is the reason I am here. I have paid that bastard gates every year I have owned an ibm compatible. Add to that computer crashing on a regular basis and I should have done it years ago when I had my atari. I became interested in Linux via a mag over here called apcmag(Australia) which did a review of all the Linux dists and summarised that for the home user Redhat was the sys to use Caldera for business( I think) but it stated that the system which would eventually be the best and stay free is Debian so here I am. I have been trying to get this bugger to run for months and I still haven't got it right but I will hang in there until I do. The whole philosophy of Linux and Debian sits very well with me, especially taking into account the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. I would say you are wrong. I think most people use Debian because of its technical superiority, not for political reasons... I got frustrated once trying to get Debian Linux running and loaded Redhat 5.2 but realised I had to learn another set of rules so reinstalled Debian. Being a newbie who doesn't particularly want to be a programmer I will be a happier chappie as installation and updates get easier to install although they are pretty easy(I must be missing something). On reflection my reasoning is basically political, I don't want the poor to be further impoverished. So I desperately want Debian to remain successful. I look forward to the day when my kids easily install and use linux from a Debian distribution. They are 9 and 12 I believe/hope that next year they will be able to do it with just a little assistance from me. OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably although I think) sacrifices reliability over commercial factors. (eg rushing distros to get them out to coincide with the marketers strategy). I know that redhat have done a good job in promoting linux for the masses etc, but does redhat seem like the next MS to you? Yep, sort of, service prices seem too high to have much altruistic thinking in there. I would not be surprised that if Red Hat ever went public, Microsoft would buy them the next day. There would be very little that the management of Red Hat could do about it. The stock is on the free market ... Microsoft just buys it all. If that happened it would be a disaster.Somehow they would find a wasy to turn open source into products we would have to buy. On the basis that linux is soundly based on ideology and a belief that the internet should remain free, debian may well be the best distribution, and on that basis, redhat the worst. yep. Whatever ... it is about the code, screw the psycho-socio babble. I can't screw the psycho-socio babble. I live in an area close to people too poor to buy win95 let alone 98 who at their best may be able to afford a 486 with 8 to 32 of ram and probably a 520 meg disk. Yet most linux users opt for redhat. Yep, but as Debian keeps going it will eat into redhat. At the moment lots of people bought a pocketbook with redhat5.2 on it for $14.95 from apcmag. Won't be long before it will be debian as the choice on those cheap booklets with the disks.. Because it is the only distribution that many have heard of. If you look at the big news stories, they talk about Red Hat, Caldera, and S.u.S.E. Why? because there is no money in it for them to talk about Debian. No PR person to stroke them, whisper sweet nothings in their ear and maybe buy them a round of golf at a fancy club. You have to pay to get press unless you really do something that is noteworthy. Correct, but I am certain Debian will do something noteworthy, good and useful and thereby get the press. I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing policy, to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have professional Naah. Word of mouth , word of net will get there in the end. Or do you want to become a millionaire through Debian? I fail to see how having more users will make Debian better. It WOULD make it easier to sell to IT management if they have heard of it. AFAIK user in programmer talk = idiot. If that is so having us users/idiots puttiing in our 2 cents worth with the programmers paying attention to what we say and need to know then implementing changes to suit eventuallly Debian will be the system of
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Geoffrey Deasey KD4WVF [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think that the main reason for redhats success in numbers has more to do with the installation program. Many of us can peice together a broken install and get it working. But we are now venturing into a different and larger world. We are attracting windows users and they I strongly agree. I have personal convictions that debian is the higher quality dist, but I cannot reccomend it to the corporation I work for simply because of the install process and dselect issues. nathan -- Nathan O. Siemers - Transcriptional Profiling, Bioinformatics - Division of Applied Genomics - Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute - Hopewell Building 3B - P.O. Box 5400, Princeton, NJ 08543-5400 - 609 818-6568 - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
I have now finally figured out the main issues (for me) concerning the Linux install-and-get-it-running problem. Through all this, It (Linux) has simply verified what I have always suspicioned. That is: Bill Gates is similar to a drug dealer. He got everyone hooked on windows, and we now must buy the fixes from him and his cartel. PLEASE do not take this seriously, though. I am a windows user and have praised Gates and his gang before. The above thingy was just to propagate a little humor into all this debate. -Original Message- From: Mike Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: debian-user debian-user@lists.debian.org Date: Saturday, February 27, 1999 13:35 Subject: Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point? Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is symbolic of the backlash against the large corporation ethos of many of its competitors, rather than its reliability (let alone it's ease of use :-)) That is the reason I am here. I have paid that bastard gates every year I have owned an ibm compatible. Add to that computer crashing on a regular basis and I should have done it years ago when I had my atari. I became interested in Linux via a mag over here called apcmag(Australia) which did a review of all the Linux dists and summarised that for the home user Redhat was the sys to use Caldera for business( I think) but it stated that the system which would eventually be the best and stay free is Debian so here I am. I have been trying to get this bugger to run for months and I still haven't got it right but I will hang in there until I do. The whole philosophy of Linux and Debian sits very well with me, especially taking into account the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. I would say you are wrong. I think most people use Debian because of its technical superiority, not for political reasons... I got frustrated once trying to get Debian Linux running and loaded Redhat 5.2 but realised I had to learn another set of rules so reinstalled Debian. Being a newbie who doesn't particularly want to be a programmer I will be a happier chappie as installation and updates get easier to install although they are pretty easy(I must be missing something). On reflection my reasoning is basically political, I don't want the poor to be further impoverished. So I desperately want Debian to remain successful. I look forward to the day when my kids easily install and use linux from a Debian distribution. They are 9 and 12 I believe/hope that next year they will be able to do it with just a little assistance from me. OK, so the two leading distros are redhat and debian. debian, on the one hand, is run as a voluntary organisation etc, whereas redhat is (or is going the way of) a corporation, in the sense that it employs programmers, is very far ahead of any of the competition and (arguably although I think) sacrifices reliability over commercial factors. (eg rushing distros to get them out to coincide with the marketers strategy). I know that redhat have done a good job in promoting linux for the masses etc, but does redhat seem like the next MS to you? Yep, sort of, service prices seem too high to have much altruistic thinking in there. I would not be surprised that if Red Hat ever went public, Microsoft would buy them the next day. There would be very little that the management of Red Hat could do about it. The stock is on the free market ... Microsoft just buys it all. If that happened it would be a disaster.Somehow they would find a wasy to turn open source into products we would have to buy. On the basis that linux is soundly based on ideology and a belief that the internet should remain free, debian may well be the best distribution, and on that basis, redhat the worst. yep. Whatever ... it is about the code, screw the psycho-socio babble. I can't screw the psycho-socio babble. I live in an area close to people too poor to buy win95 let alone 98 who at their best may be able to afford a 486 with 8 to 32 of ram and probably a 520 meg disk. Yet most linux users opt for redhat. Yep, but as Debian keeps going it will eat into redhat. At the moment lots of people bought a pocketbook with redhat5.2 on it for $14.95 from apcmag. Won't be long before it will be debian as the choice on those cheap booklets with the disks.. Because it is the only distribution that many have heard of. If you look at the big news stories, they talk about Red Hat, Caldera, and S.u.S.E. Why? because there is no money in it for them to talk about Debian. No PR person to stroke them, whisper sweet nothings in their ear and maybe buy them a round of golf at a fancy club. You have to pay to get press unless you really do something that is noteworthy. Correct, but I am certain Debian will do something noteworthy, good and
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Nathan O. Siemers wrote: I strongly agree. I have personal convictions that debian is the higher quality dist, but I cannot reccomend it to the corporation I work for simply because of the install process and dselect issues. The install is actually quite easy in the 2.1 release. Here is what you do when you see the dselect screen: - Choose apt access method - Do the update (get list of available packages) (automatic). - Leave the package selections as they are; don't even fool with the select screen. (no effort here, this is the usual hard part) - Install (automatic). - Quit. So it's all just pressing return, except for answering a couple of questions when you choose the access method. Then, apt-get install any other packages that you want. If you're installing more than one machine it's easy to just make a list of these. Or you can use gnome-apt to install more packages. Long-term maintenance is much *easier* than Red Hat because you can simply apt-get upgrade to get any security fixes, and if you want package foo just apt-get install foo and it will magically be found on the internet and installed. apt-get will also refuse to break the system; this is a good thing. Many Red Hat systems end up every bit as broken as many Windows systems. Havoc
Re: Debian and Redhat-are most linux users missing the point?
I don't think Debian has to be the number one distribution in order to be successful. Any growth in Linux use, no matter what the distribution, is good for the whole community. It is important to understand the developer/user relationship is, or should, be different in a volunteer structure than that of a commercial one like Redhat. It is not necessary for Redhat's success for users to understand or affirm Gnu ideology. I think it is much more important, and much more likely, for Debian to be into the Gnu/Linux thing. Debian should cultivate that philosophical connection with all its users to strengthen the sense of community. The response I received, to a suggestion that Debian go after more of the commercial sector by developing web business tools, several months ago of go do it yourself says in essence if you're not a developer go F yourself is not helpful to this purpose. You are right, Debian could probably use some improvement in the marketing area. The sense I have is that most Debian developers are a little paranoid about losing power to a marketing division. Their fear and suspicion are not without good reason. Though a few dedicated marketing people might be a good idea. I think the most important thing is to decide whether you want to establish a traditional Seller/ buyer relationship with users or more fully cultivate a sense of community. Neither of these will guarantee being the number one distribution, but that is not the only measure of success. However Debian must think more strategically to maintain its longterm sustainablity and growth One last thing I think it is unfortunate that Debian is know as the geekiest distribution of a geek os. I have no CS backround but, I downloaded 0.93 from the net and have used Debian ever since, except the time when my ex girlfriend took my computer. I have never had a serious problem. Well my current install is pretty hacked but that's another story
Re: Debian and Redhat-are most linux users missing the point?
Tommy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: One last thing I think it is unfortunate that Debian is know as the geekiest distribution of a geek os. I have no CS backround but, I downloaded 0.93 from the net and have used Debian ever since, except the time when my ex girlfriend took my computer. I have never had a serious problem. Well my current install is pretty hacked but that's another story Debian should be pro-geek, but not limited to geeks, if this is possible. While I may be a geek, I don't enjoy being able to upgrade a system without knowledge about each of its parts. -- Kevin Dalley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
George Bonser wrote: On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Frankie wrote: A couple of weeks ago there was a poll, which showed that redhat hat had about 2 or three times as many users as debian, and that redhat was first with debian was second, but far closer to the other distros than to redhat. Understandable given the amount of press they get. How much is the Debian PR staff paid vs. Red Hat? How many drinks, rounds of golf, or theatre tickets does the Debian PR staff hand out to various journalists? Now I may be wrong, but I believe that many (if not the majority) of linux users are attracted to linux because its free, and because it is symbolic of the backlash against the large corporation ethos of many of its competitors, rather than its reliability (let alone it's ease of use :-)) I would say you are wrong. I think most people use Debian because of its technical superiority, not for political reasons. I have brought Debian into our workplace because it is better. I will also dump it in a minute if they compromise quality in exchange for political correctness. I have a love/hate relationship with Debian as it is now. Their attitudes about certain things have nearly caused me to abandon it a few times but the truth is that I have found nothing better. I have wanted to develop my own distro based on Debian for use by us at work and may well get that done this year. A major devel project (commercial one) has delayed me for nearly 9 months. George, I'm afraid I've got to disagree here. First, I think a *lot* of the Debian users are using it at least in part based on 'political' issues such as Debian being the only non-commercial distribution (myself included). For one thing, as another poster mentioned, a lot of the press that Debian gets explicitly points out its noncommercial, volunteer-based status, which means a lot of people who are sensitive to that kind of politics, are coming to Debian. Second, and perhaps most importantly, Debian's 'politics' have a lot to do with its technical superiority. Debian releases only when the dist is ready and not a day before. Deb can do this because the developers aren't working on a management-imposed release deadline. Deb is basically rock-solid, with a package manager thats technically superior to RPM. These things happen because the Deb developers picked these issues as being important to them. As Deb becomes bigger, attracting more users, with some of them becoming developers, Deb's weaknesses such as the install problems will be addressed as well (am I the only one who likes dselect? :-) ). [big snip] -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
At 11:51 PM 2/26/99 -0500, Geoffrey Deasey KD4WVF wrote: We are attracting windows users and they come to us with no linux experience. I tryed debian a while ago snip and became so frustrated with dselect that I gave up twice. Exactly true. I used apt-get to install Slink and believe apt-get is excellent. The issue for me is that it needs a top level package selection system. For example. It would be nice to have a category called mail transport agents and one called mail clients. I would browse the list of candidate packages and make my choice. Then apt-get would find all the dependencies and install them. There should also be a top-level package remove option that would remove a package and all orphaned dependencies. I'll bring this idea up with the apt-get maintainer but I wanted to let people know that I found apt-get to be much easier to use than dselect. Until I installed apt-get, I had given up on dselect and was simple downloading packages and running dpkg recursively until I got a given package fully installed. Disclaimer: I am a Debian amateur so my comments may be uninformed. -- Copyright(c) 1998 Lyno Sullivan; this work is free and may be copied, modified and distributed under the GNU Library General Public License (LGPL) http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lgpl.html and it comes with absolutely NO WARRANTY; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
They easiest way to use dselect is to choose the source, then do not select extra packages outside of the defaults. Except scroll down and select apt. Then hit return. This will install the default base system. Later use apt-get install to install the mail client, mta, etc that you want. This will also save disk space. NatePuri Certified Law Student Debian GNU/Linux Monk McGeorge School of Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ompages.com On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Lyno Sullivan wrote: At 11:51 PM 2/26/99 -0500, Geoffrey Deasey KD4WVF wrote: We are attracting windows users and they come to us with no linux experience. I tryed debian a while ago snip and became so frustrated with dselect that I gave up twice. Exactly true. I used apt-get to install Slink and believe apt-get is excellent. The issue for me is that it needs a top level package selection system. For example. It would be nice to have a category called mail transport agents and one called mail clients. I would browse the list of candidate packages and make my choice. Then apt-get would find all the dependencies and install them. There should also be a top-level package remove option that would remove a package and all orphaned dependencies. I'll bring this idea up with the apt-get maintainer but I wanted to let people know that I found apt-get to be much easier to use than dselect. Until I installed apt-get, I had given up on dselect and was simple downloading packages and running dpkg recursively until I got a given package fully installed. Disclaimer: I am a Debian amateur so my comments may be uninformed. -- Copyright(c) 1998 Lyno Sullivan; this work is free and may be copied, modified and distributed under the GNU Library General Public License (LGPL) http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/lgpl.html and it comes with absolutely NO WARRANTY; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
I like the machine name, skunkpussy. Hehe. On Sat, Feb 27, 1999 at 03:54:04AM -, Frankie wrote: ... I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing policy, to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have professional marketers counts in redhat's favour. For example, in the last month or so, I have seen one debian logo on a website, about 15 redhat logos, and no logos for any other distro. ... I personally don't worry about these political/commercial issues. I really like and support the Debian ideology, but I use Debian because it works best for me. I'll use the distro that's the best, as long as it's free. I'm a Linux user, not a distribution marter. Also, I think Red Hat is a linux virgin distrib -- first time Linux users have probably only heard of Red Hat, and a lot of people feel the Red Hat installation is easier. Same way with me when I started, but I had only heard of Slackware. Once I knew more about Unix administration and the like, I realized that a better package system must exist, one that's FHS compliant. I don't worry about how many people use Debian, because I figure Debian's user base and developer base will never decrease, and the quality of the Distrib will also never decline. My only concern is a Linux split: things that work for Red Hat, but not Debian, or the other way around. As long as Linux distribs remain compatible with each other, there should be no worry about the distributions. If all the time spent bickering and debating distributions was used for general Linux development and enhancement... MG -- Matt Garman, [EMAIL PROTECTED] They're always havin' a good time down on the bayou, Lord, them delta women think the world of me. -- Dickey Betts, Ramblin' Man
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
George Bonser wrote: On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Ed Cogburn wrote: First, I think a *lot* of the Debian users are using it at least in part based on 'political' issues such as Debian being the only non-commercial distribution (myself included). For one thing, as another poster mentioned, a lot of the press that Debian gets explicitly points out its noncommercial, volunteer-based status, which means a lot of people who are sensitive to that kind of politics, are coming to Debian. That is fine but you are never going to get too far beyond personal use if your claim to fame is a political issue. 90% of computer use is in business. In that application, technical issues are the main criteria. They are not worried about the belief of the programmer so much as they are the performance of the program. I never referred to it as 'claim to fame'. I don't think that Debian should advertise itself as a non-commercial, volunteer-based operation. They should talk about its technical benefits. This won't change the fact that the publicity Deb gets will often refer to its non-commercial, volunteer-based operation, as distinguishing characteristics. Which means we'll attract folks who think the 'politics' of Deb are at least partially important to them. Second, and perhaps most importantly, Debian's 'politics' have a lot to do with its technical superiority. Debian releases only when the dist is ready and not a day before. Deb can do this because the developers aren't working on a management-imposed release deadline. Deb is basically rock-solid, with a package manager thats technically superior to RPM. I fail to see how the differences between RPM and dpkg have anything to do with politics. Both are licensed under the same license. You are correct in stating that Debian is more stable on initial release. THe cure for that in Red Hat shops is to never upgrade to ?.0 ... always wait for .2 When the core Deb developers decide something is necessary, they set about fixing the problem in a coordinated, group effort. Like the kernel itself, the number of eyes on the code determines its quality to some extent. I don't think RH can equal this when it comes to the development of RPM. How many developers does Deb have now? How many programmers does RH have? Also, to an extent, Deb developers are interested in doing what is right, not what is expedient. Thus it is not a surprise to me that .deb is equal if not better than .rpm. I'm not trying to compare RH to Deb on technical grounds; thats already been gone over. Sure, waiting for 1.02 instead of 1.00 is a smart thing to do not only for RH, but others as well. It is good practical advice. All I was getting at, is the 'politics' of Deb does have influence on the issues of new deb users and deb's overall technical state. Debian's superiority is process related, not so much content. The fact that I can upgrade a machine over the net while logged into the target machine over the network through a firewall that does not pass X is a big advantage. The way debian sticks to standards for building packages that ensure that all the packages will integrate together is better ... also has nothing to do with politics. When/if debian decides to eliminate key packages or libraries for political reasons (almost did this with pine) that make the distribution a pain to use in the real world then it is time to build a different distro using the Debian process but with different content. In other words, the value is the process and not the content. What do mean by content here? The software? I'm saying the 'process' has been positively influenced by the 'politics' (the Social Contract is perhaps a good example of the 'politics' of Debian). A newcomer to Debian will read the 'About' and 'Social Contract' sections on the web site and immediately realize Debian is far different when compared to the other distributions. That leads to the attraction of developers (and users) with a slightly different 'take' on Debian and free software, and its the developers that Deb has recruited over time that is responsible for the superior process you refer too. Its ok for you to be interested only in the end result, Debian does not require potential users to give allegiance, or worship, to Debian (or FSF) before using Debian. The 'politics' may be irrelevant to you, and thats ok too. To issue a blanket determination that the 'politics' are irrelevant to Debian's success though, simply isn't true. I've seen many comments from different people on this list over time that suggest the 'politics' are important to Debian to some degree for many people. -- Ed C.
Re: Debian and Redhat - are most linux users missing the point?
Matt Garman wrote: I like the machine name, skunkpussy. Hehe. On Sat, Feb 27, 1999 at 03:54:04AM -, Frankie wrote: ... I think that debian needs to adopt a (slightly) aggressive marketing policy, to increase its userbase. The fact that it doesn't have professional marketers counts in redhat's favour. For example, in the last month or so, I have seen one debian logo on a website, about 15 redhat logos, and no logos for any other distro. ... I personally don't worry about these political/commercial issues. I really like and support the Debian ideology, but I use Debian because it works best for me. I'll use the distro that's the best, as long as it's free. I'm a Linux user, not a distribution marter. Also, I think Red Hat is a linux virgin distrib -- first time Linux users have probably only heard of Red Hat, and a lot of people feel the Red Hat installation is easier. Same way with me when I started, but I had only heard of Slackware. Once I knew more about Unix administration and the like, I realized that a better package system must exist, one that's FHS compliant. I don't worry about how many people use Debian, because I figure Debian's user base and developer base will never decrease, and the quality of the Distrib will also never decline. My only concern is a Linux split: things that work for Red Hat, but not Debian, or the other way around. As long as Linux distribs remain compatible with each other, there should be no worry about the distributions. You are perhaps referring the Linux Standard Base that RH and Deb have, for the moment, agreed to? The problem is that the greater RH's dominance becomes, the greater the chance that they will no longer see this kind of cooperation as desirable, and in effect decide on their own that RH *is* the Linux Standard Base. If they don't try too hard too quickly, then I fear they just might get away with it. -- Ed C.
