Re: tlug: libc or glibc,easy install

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull@example.com>]

>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Stone <sstone@example.com> writes:

    Scott> On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Jonathan Byrne - 3Web wrote:

    >> Generally?  TurboLinux.  It's got both libc5 and glibc (Scott,
    >> is this going

    Scott> 3.0 will still support libc5 binaries, but the system will

Hell, 2.0-J (and maybe 2.1.1) won't let you throw away the a.out
support!

    >> A lot of people seem to also like Debian, although I've read
    >> that Dselect is kind of scary for Linux beginners (Steve, Joe,
    >> is it really?)

dselect is a superset of the current features of turbopkg, basically.
turbopkg does have a slick x interface.  But the scary thing with
current dselect is the sheer number of packages.  The other aspect is
that dselect has a relatively keyboard driven user interface.
Basically in turbopkg you use arrow keys and the space bar to navigate
and select, plus a small number of function keys.  Options are
selected from a menu.  dselect provides a subset of the navigation
features of less, several different ways to select or deselect a
package, and various display and functional options.  All of these are 
mapped to keystrokes.  You don't have a point and click alternative,
so you have to keep looking at the help until you've learned the keys
you use most.  Mendoukusai more than kowai.

Once you get past the initial install, usage is very similar.  You
point them at an URL (local CD-ROM, FTP site, NFS mount, etc) where
updates are to be found.  For turbopkg, you see only the updates, for
dselect, they're presented first.  <DOWN> <DOWN> <SPACE> <DOWN>
<SPACE> <RET> to select the packages, answer the dialog box about
resolving dependencies, and then select the "install packages"
command.

    Scott> I've heard that it's gotten better.  In some ways it's more
    Scott> of a matter of taste - TL gives you sysV init scripts, RPM,

Debian also gives you SysV init scripts, and the Debian scripts are
far better documented.  But a new user is not going to poke around in
there.  RPM vs. dpkg is a dead heat; noone in their right mind (Craig
Oda is arguably not in his right mind :-) would build a system from
scratch using them from the command line.  No advantage either way.

    Scott> turbopkg, turbodesk, and the turbolinux tools that I've

Turbopkg vs dselect: user interface hell.  They are both so clumsy I
could cry (sorry, Scott).  When you're dealing with hundreds (in
Debian's case, over 1500) of packages, flat menus of all of them just
suck.  Even if movement by category or outlining capabilities are
provided.  dselect gives more kinds of information in more detail
about each package.

Both make bad decisions about when to insist on dependencies (early
versions of dselect had to be forcibly killed sometimes; this is why
Craig hated dselect), but rarely in both cases.  (This is really a
function of the package database, not the programs.  The Debian bug
where it would get wedged was a real bug, of course.)

If you make a mistake in creating a custom combo, turbopkg doesn't let
you go back to your previous list, you have to go back to the default
state and start all over.  This is a big win for dselect, although
this functionality is promised for turbopkg.  Both present you with
long lists of packages although Debian's grouping is finer and more
mature.  OTOH TL's grouping is somewhat more topical.

Turbopkg has a lot of promise, especially in the xturbopkg interface.
dselect is not going to be maintained, Debian is developing a new
package management interface.  Who knows where that will go.
Turbopkg, on the other hand, is actively in development, and Scott is
working hard to improve functionality.

If you have a lot of space (for my usage pattern, it's been hard to
fit a functional TL system into 650 MB; the same functionality easily
fits into 450 MB with Debian) TL does offer the convenience of
pre-selected system lists, which you can just load and install.  Good
deal, not available with Debian at all as far as I know.

Turbodesk.  I've learned to live with it.  I don't use any of its
special tools.  I don't miss it when I go back to a vanilla fvwm2.
And Turbodesk has a big potential minus:  it really can't be used on
less than a 16bpp display.  A lot of its gadgets tend to puke and die
if they can't allocate PinkPantyPolkadot for their background color.
Your favorite backdrop of Lake Hakone in fall will come up with yellow
water because it can't allocate an appropriate blue.[1]  Most personal
workstations this doesn't matter these days, but you can't use it on
mono Sparcs (no, there isn't a Sparc version of TL yet; surprise! your
window manager can run on a different host, and I did just that with
fvwm2 over RHL 4.2 on the Sparc, I hate fvwm95.  Hate, hate!) or in a
lab full of cheap old PC workstations.  The docs suck (not for the
truly Turbo part, but for the WatchYourStep window manager which is
the centerpiece of TurboDesk).

Turbodesk is pretty, and does have some tools that would be useful in
many circumstances that I don't happen to match.  (For example, my TL
machine is a notebook, so rather than fiddle with the modem---useless
from about 2 hours before telehodai starts, anyway---I sneaker it in
to school and hook it up to the LAN.  So the ppp related tools are
irrelevant.)

The other tools are excellent, but I don't use them once the install
is over.  Debian's install is equally easy in my experience.  Except
that Debian requires you to make about 7 floppies plus a boot floppy.
Which is actually an advantage IMO, because in the rare case that
something goes wrong with a TL install, you're stuck.  You usually do
not have a usable Linux system.  You don't even have a boot/root disk.
With Debian, you usually do, and you can usually find a way to get the
upgrade you need from there to here.  If you don't like solving that
kind of puzzle, but would prefer to get tech support from Scott, then
the 7 floppies are a big minus.

One thing that Debian has that's nice is a menuing standard.
Uninstalled packages do not end up on your menus; installed ones do go 
there.  The same thing is true for documentation, especially Info
documentation.

    Scott> made.  Debian gives you arguably more goodies if you go
    Scott> through all the optional packages in the Debian archives,

Hands down Debian wins on number of distribution packages.  Probably
not if you are willing to risk the RedHat contrib archives.

    Scott> and it has what Steve Turnbull likes to call "fine grained
    Scott> dependencies" if you're really concerned about conserving
    Scott> disk space, which many people are.  Personally, I like TL

There are some things that you don't want lying around on some
systems, either.  But that's not an issue on a personal workstation
not providing Internet servers.

    Scott> better (duh!), but there's definitely room for all the
    Scott> distributions to coexist, since they each have their own
    Scott> uniquities that different people will like.  My 2 cents, at
    Scott> least.


Footnotes: 
[1]  Be quiet, X gurus.  I'm making a point here.

-- 
University of Tsukuba                Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences        Tel/fax: +1 (298) 53-5091
---------------------------------------------------------------
Next Nomikai: 20 November, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
Next Meeting: 12 December, 12:30 Tokyo Station Yaesu central gate
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp