Install with many broken messages

(Pedram Pourang) #41

(1) You’re free to experiment with all Linux distros or *BSD.

(2) Each Linux user may say a different thing and he may be right. I say:

(3) LTS (or Stable) = outdated = limited choice.

(4) Rolling distros are the opposite. Rolling = small updates everyday or 2-3 times a week = smooth transition = no re-installation.

(5) Among deb based systems, Debian itself is the best and among Debian’s versions, Debian Testing is up-to-date enough and damn stable.

I think with @agaida’s explanations above, everything should be clear.


Thanks a lot agaida and tsujan for that pleasant and instructive topic. It was nice to meet you.

(Alf Gaida) #43

@hedon - you might be surprised to hear - but i wouldn’t recommend testing as daily driver. It is true that there will be a few more hickups in sid, but normally these hickups are shorter. Imagine that some important packages don’t migrate to testing and the version in testing remains broken for some weeks …

A good forum might help. In our case it is the siduction forum - when ever things (shit) tend to hit the fan we will post upgrade warnings - same as you can find in the Arch Linux fora. Don’t know about Manjaro, but i guess it will be the same.

A golden rule for every rolling distribution is: Nobody force you to update daily, weekly or monthly. Really. Also true is that when in doubt, on should not upgrade - esp. if one has work to do (fixed dates like presentations etc - it is far more clever to upgrade afterwards)

Hmm, i mentioned backups, didn’t i? Upps, sorry, if not me someone mentioned it. Ok, to be honest - i don’t use backups for my workstation and other computer OS, only for my work.

Thats all :slight_smile:

(Pedram Pourang) #44

We’ve had this disagreement before.

A Debian user finaly gets tired of remaining a newbie forever, mixes the unstable repository with the testing one at will, and takes responsibility for his/her system. My Debian was based on Testing – it was a reliable ground – but, sometimes, it was 50% Testing and 50% Unstable, sometimes 80% Testing.

This isn’t a theory; it’s what I did in 8 years of using Debian without a single re-installation :wink: I owe those 8 years of stability to Debian’s high flexibility. That flexibility isn’t there to be ignored. IMO, Debian would lose its power without it.

(Jim Shriner) #45

Good info and insights Alf. Your argument regarding Sid vs Testing is compelling…I hadn’t thought of that but the way you explained it certainly makes sense. I haven’t made any decisions, but I’ve been keeping an eye on Siduction, Sparky, Arch, and Manjaro in VMs on my system. Each has their strengths & weaknesses, as well as “fitting my existing workflow.”

I had keyed in on Sparky and Manjaro, but some recent experiences with Sparky and some software I need for work that isn’t in Sparky repos have caused me to downgrade Sparky a little. Tsujans comments regarding Debian Testing have caused me to look into Debian proper, and switch repos to testing. I hadn’t thought of that before; I thought I had to find a ready-made distro using Testing repos. It was a revelation that I could use Debian proper, but change the repos…so I’ll be looking into that further too. Thanks for the tip Tsujan!

In the meantime, Lubuntu has been solid for me and I really like the distro. My only issue with Lubuntu is the 3-year support window, after which one must completely upgrade their entire underlying OS (and hope for the best) or re-install and replace the existing system. If Lubuntu was rolling, this discussion would be over. But it isn’t, and the most recent 18.04 LTS doesn’t support LXQt , but I’ve ripped out LXDE from Lubuntu 18.04, installed LXQt in its place, and actually located a PPA with LXQt 0.14.1, rather than LXQt 0.12 that is in Ubuntu repos. The 0.14.1 PPA has been pretty solid for me, so far, and that’s my fallback position until I can make a long-term decision as to which distro is the right fit for me.

I feel like I’ve outgrown the 'Buntus, but not sure I’m proficient enough for Debian, Arch, or Manjaro, etc… I’m a diligent backer-upper when it comes to data and /home partition, but I should probably be looking into TimeShift for the OS itself.

I appreciate the differing perspectives and opinions provided on here. Everything I know about Linux is because I copied someone else’s idea or philosophy into my own practice. Someone is going to share information someday that resonates with me (perhaps they already have, but it hasn’t germinated in my brain yet?!) and at that moment I’ll KNOW the right answer for me.

Until then, thanks for the additional info. I like learning new things, and the burgeoning LXQt ecosystem is full of learning opportunities! Feel free to keep sharing! :sunglasses:

(Pedram Pourang) #46

Desktop OS’s on the planet in a nutshell (all rights reserved):

Debian is flexibly stable and Arch is venturously flexible.

Manjaro is good for those who like Arch but without its cumbersome installation and with more stability.

OpenSUSE’s installer is too comprehensive. It’s far from being a light distro but is as stable as Debian.

Other Linux distros are good in their own ways (who can ignore Gentoo or Ubuntu, for example?). But, among them, rolling distros are better.

*BSD’s are nice. A *BSD user may not want to migrate to Linux and conversely.

MS Windows is a very nice OS because it encourages its users to stay away from it and come to Linux.

macOS? I don’t know. I’ve heard good things about it but don’t buy them. A Mac user once told me that I’d be a fool if I went to Mac from Linux; I didn’t ask why.

(Jim Shriner) #47

^ good synopsis, I can agree with all of that!

Have you ever used Mac OSX? A linux user would be right at home with the directory structure. Did a little research and OSX is, in fact, basically a locked-down version of BSD. Kinda goes against the linux philosophy, but that’s probably why they chose BSD as the base instead of linux…BSD license allows that sorta stuff. I could see myself using OSX, until you find out the OSX license allows installation ONLY on Apple-specified hardware. And if you’ve ever built your own computer, you can spec out a Mac machine for a build; and you’ll soon come to realize that a $2,000+/- Mac can be built with approximately $600-$700 of hardware, an approximately $30 OS, and an apple sticker. While apple stickers can be purchased fairly cheap, apparently the “official” apple stickers are quite pricey. It seems you can only buy them from apple, which kinda defeats the whole DIY ethos.

I think what your friend was saying is that Mac looks an awful lot like a locked-in OS with a walled garden of curated apps that people pay a LOT of $$$ for someone else to setup and maintain for them. If you have the linux skills to do this on your own, you’d be crazy to pay what apple charges. At least your Mac friend sounds rational. All the Mac users I know are RABID cult-like fanboys who resist to assimilate any information that doesn’t come from apple itself…cuz apple is looking out for them, and we’re all just haters. That’s MY experience! LOL!