Mailing List Archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tlug] maybe a repetitive question about distros

Thankyou for all the help. So in resume taking the advices of all:

On Wednesday 12 June 2002 17:28, Jonathan Byrne wrote:
> Pietro Zuco ( wrote:
> > I'm sorry if that frase affect you in some way, but I don't think it's a
> > "bullcrap"
> Well, yeah, it's bullcrap.  It's bullcrap because Debian has an
> extremely strict definition of stable, and Red Hat and Mandrake
> have rather lax defintions of it.  At Debian, "stable" means
> something like "a high degree of certainty that there are no
> known bugs left" whereas at Red Hat and Mandrake, it's more like
> "we think there aren't any huge showstoppers left, but don't
> bet the farm on that."

This mean Debian is really stable.
BoTi, I'm sorry. Now I understand it was a bullcrap.

On Wednesday 12 June 2002 17:27, Josh Glover wrote:
> Luke Kearney wrote:
> > Try FreeBSD.
> >
> > It will give you a good comprehensive coverage of HW and it is *very
> > very* stable. It is not as *fat* as RH but just as functional. See
> >
> Right. FreeBSD is absolutely *renowned* for its comprehensive hardware
> support... *koff*

This mean FreeBSD is a good alternative. But it's not exactly Linux, and I 
love Linux although some problems I have with it.

On Wednesday 12 June 2002 17:52, Luke Kearney wrote:
> From: "Josh Glover" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 12:27 AM
> Subject: Re: [tlug] maybe a repetitive question about distros

> > AFAIK, Net is the best of the BSDs when it comes to hardware support,
> > and Free is the worst (though Open is also pretty slim). None come near
> > Linux in that category.
> NetBSD and OpenBSD are the pits when it comes to hardware so not sure why
> you give FBSD the
> thumbs down. I would put a FBSD system up against any of your linux
> varieties any day in terms of performance although Linux is nicer as a
> desktop if you want to have something close to winblows but not quite. I
> just feel that RH has gotten a bit too automated

I don't know FreeBSD and I never prove it. I'm according with you that a nice 
desktop is not important. The thinks I hate of Redhat and Mandrakre and all 
the distros like that are the automatism thay have. I don't want to use 
windows with a Linux kernel. I only would like that the hardware 
configuration part, was more automated, because it is the more diffucult part 
of the configuration and settingup process, I think.
I remember that the first time I could setup my soundcard I jumped of 
happiness but I can't pass through the same process for any thing I want to 
plug into my computer.
I don't want to use so automated distros like Redhat and Mandrake but I have 
to, because I don't have so many time to learn all the things I need to 
configure the hard. I would like to take the hardware detection part and the 
lightness of this distros and put it in Debian. I would be happy if this was 
Why the dostros have to divide in Distros for Experts and Distros for really 
really newbie! I would like that exist a Distro for the user with medium 

So the conclution is:

1. Use Debian and try to have time to read howtos and a lot of 
documentation to setup all hardware.

2. Use FreeBSD and let Linux appart.

Is it right? 


Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links