Cavan Mejias wrote: > > > 2008/8/31 Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > > > > On Aug 30, 2008, at 10:54 PM, sid wrote: > > > > > I am using dell latitude d531 laptop(amd64) with debian 4.0 etch on > > it. The 4 DVD's I downloaded contained outdated softwares. Even the > > linux kernel shipped by debian was not able to support most of my > > hardware so I had to recompile it to the new kernel(2.6.25.9 > <http://2.6.25.9>). > > The touchpad had problems too, so I had to follow some instructions > > about installing synaptics driver. etc... > > > > Now the problem is that I still cannot install many softwares. And > > even the synaptics package manager is out of date and does not even > > connect through a proxy. > > > > Also the official repositories are not available. And searching on the > > internet made me get the view that installing from unofficial > > repositories would make my debian system break down as some file would > > surely be overwritten by a new one and break the software chain. > > Please tell me whether it is true or not. and If not i'll really > > appreciate if someone can direct me to such stable repositories. > > > > I am fond of debian a lot, but the problems I am facing is making me > > want to ship to another distribution and I cannot stop thinking why > > people want to use debian if there are so many problems one has to > > overcome before making it usable. > > Debian itself is targeted more towards servers. It's much older > software, but it's rock-solid stable. If you get it on the right > hardware, it's nigh impossible to crash. For web and email servers, > that's an indispensable feature. If you're a desktop user, you're > probably best off sticking with Ubuntu, which is less stable, but more > up-to-date. > > Sorry you wasted those CDs, but hopefully you learned something from > it (I usually do, which helps me rationalize the CDs to myself). > > "best off sticking with Ubuntu, which is less stable, but more > up-to-date." > or debian testing?
Debian is not built for casual users of the computer. Debian testing might give you a working system, but it'll require you to have a larger degree of savvy about what you do with the system, whereas Ubuntu will be more forgiving if you're not fully aware of what you're doing. Debian is "more stable" in the sense that a correctly configured and maintained system is not subject to as many crashes and bugs as a similarly maintained system of another distro is. Ubuntu is less stable, so it doesn't necessarily have more bugs, but it undergoes less testing to discover bugs before the software is sent out to the users. So a expertly-maintained system running Ubuntu is potentially subject to more bugs that haven't been weeded out by the much more stringent Debian practices. Ultimately it's up to you, but if you're not interested in using Linux as an IT professional or as a dedicated hobbyist, then I'd suggest Ubuntu, which will be more reliable for a desktop user because that's the kind of workload it's designed to work best with. In an attempt to simplify things, Debian is built to be stable compared to other software, and Ubuntu is built to be stable when used by a human. Different distros for different purposes. I don't know your purpose in using Linux, so I might be incorrect in suggesting Ubuntu instead, but it's ultimately up to you. -- Registered Linux Addict #431495 http://profile.xfire.com/mrstalinman | John 3:16! http://www.fsdev.net/ | http://lordsauron.wordpress.com/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
