Debian vs Fedora vs Slackware

[vamsi360]

Hi folks,

I am just starting a war here. After reading a lot about Linux history, I came to a conclusion that there are only a few( i mean the root nodes ) solid distros availble.

My analysis: I have chosen only the root nodes here. I mean that Debian is the root and Knoppix, Ubuntu are leaf nodes. So they are eliminated.

1. Debian
2. Slackware
3. Fedora / RedHat(non-free)

SUSE / Opensuse is developed from slackware and Mandriva is developed from RedHat linux. So they cannot be given a place here though they are enterprise class distros.

Of these, Debian GNU/Linux is the front runner in OSS with its wider variety and an excellent package manger. But, Redhat is on the move with its budding package kit.

Fedora on the other hand contributes the most to FOSS (confirmed even by GNU). This could be easily understood by the fact that every new version of the app is included in the distro. The distro helped GCC and others to become even stronger.

Debian is a stable distro . It doesn't bother about cleaning the bugs in newer apps and tried to use the solid apps which were tested thoroughly in other distros. Even when half stable, it doen't use the packages.

Slackware has its own domain. It enjoys its stature even now. But though we experiment with it and succeed its only the enterprise people who actually handle it.

[FilledVoid]

I'm not even sure what you meant by starting a war here.

I came to a conclusion that there are only a few( i mean the root nodes ) solid distros availble.

Define "Solid" as used in the above sentence.

[Rahim]

I think vamsi360 has gained some OSS knowledge here

[Cool G5]

Hmmm... Good Info vamsi but I see no war here.

BTW guys I need a lightweight distro for my P4 2.0 GHZ with 430MB of DDR RAM the rest 64MB is taken by onboard graphics.

I'm utterly confused between Arch, Debian, Slackware & Gentoo. Which one should I be installing? Which DE?

I can't install all of them & try as I have no time for that now

[a_k_s_h_a_y]

There are more Solid Distros better then those 3 mentioned, I know 2 very well and very confident, that is Gentoo and Arch. And they are not derivatives of the 3 given above.

And explain the exact purpose of this thread ?!! Installing packages ? System maintenance, is that the debate, about which is easier or better ? What parameters to compare and discuss ?

[hellknight]

OpenSUSE WAS developed from Slackware.. now it isn't.. so you can include it as a solid distro.. and where is Gentoo.. it is awesome too man...

Debian GNU/Linux is THE BEST.. and that for a very good reason.. it is not backed up by any company.. that's why.. and not to forget that awesome APT...

Fedora is the grand-daddy of current generation Linux distros.. its awesome... but at times it feels a bit slow...

Opensuse contributes a lot, I mean a lot to FOSS.. XGL, AppArmor, DeltaRPMs ( I love this feature) etc etc.. and it has YaST.. the most powerful tool to configure and maintain your computer (even Control Panel of Windows and System Preferences of Mac OS X are no where near it..)... Although now I don't use it due to that Microsoft-Novell deal...

My personal ratings would be :-

1. Debian GNU/Linux
2. Fedora
3. OpenSUSE
4. Slackware.

@akshay.. the exact purpose of this thread is to put some life back in the Open Source Section...

[Rahim]

Originally Posted by Cool G5

Hmmm... Good Info vamsi but I see no war here.

BTW guys I need a lightweight distro for my P4 2.0 GHZ with 430MB of DDR RAM the rest 64MB is taken by onboard graphics.

I'm utterly confused between Arch, Debian, Slackware & Gentoo. Which one should I be installing? Which DE?

I can't install all of them & try as I have no time for that now

If you dont mind configuring the system by youeself (editing conf files), then Arch Linux is the best for you. Install LXDE as your DE and it is very light and fast. However I have used it on Arch for a month, though I confess that i didint configure LXDE that much.

Bottom line is I do have P-4 system with 512MB RAM with Intel onboard and still all those distros mentioned by you run pretty stable and fast including mt preferred KDE4 Since you need a fast working environment, choose Debian/Arch as base and then install LXDE or OpenBox as WM. But after reading it again and since you dont have much time, use Debian.
================================================== =======

Guys just cool down and stop asking vamsi360 of the purpose of this thread. He is learning and gaining new information about this mammoth-community-driven-monster that we have come to love and gloat He may have jumped the gun calling this a war but considering his new entrance inthis world, we might bea little lenient.
AS for the distro, Debian have been preferred base for other distros and now Ubuntu has become the new fav of other forks. Fedora is too cutting edge to be stable and Slackware brings changes too slowly.

[amitabhishek]

Originally Posted by a_rahim

I think vamsi360 has gained some OSS knowledge here

.

Let Mr. Soumya be the next.

[Faun]

^^rotfl

[vamsi360]

Define "Solid" as used in the above sentence.

I mean "SOLID" in existence and service.

I think vamsi360 has gained some OSS knowledge here

Thanks...rahim

Guys just cool down and stop asking vamsi360 of the purpose of this thread. He is learning and gaining new information about this mammoth-community-driven-monster that we have come to love and gloat

+1

Fedora is the grand-daddy of current generation Linux distros.. its awesome... but at times it feels a bit slow...

Fedora is bleeding-edge technology. Slow?

There are more Solid Distros better then those 3 mentioned, I know 2 very well and very confident, that is Gentoo and Arch. And they are not derivatives of the 3 given above.

Gentoo is the porting of BSD features in Linux. Gentoo and arch come under a different categeory altogether.

[p_dude]

Originally Posted by vamsi360

I mean "SOLID" in existence and service.

i think you're getting it wrong vamsi if you want to compare all the solid version you have to take in account os like ubuntu and others too for past one year i was using fedora/ubuntu and i have noticed that ubuntu was far easier to use than fedora and it has also have a large community which can help you if there is some problem(doesn't all this factor in using a os/stability?)sure it came from debian but its not the same
the os like archlinux said to be stable but i don't think it is for everyone

we need to take more factors into account while deciding a stable distros...

[a_k_s_h_a_y]

Originally Posted by vamsi360

I mean "SOLID" in existence and service.
Gentoo is the porting of BSD features in Linux.

features ??
read Wikipedia, there are words like Architecture and Design. And Solid ? ROFL, no community like Gentoo out there. Now even Arch.

service ? now who the hell provides service and support for debain and slackware and fedora... did you mean updates and maintenance ? then gentoo and arch kick ass, bleeding edge.

I think by solid you meant number of users. FYI, gentoo has hell lot of users, you are not aware of it. Welcome to the world of gentoo and oss, Now Arch is catching up.

ubuntu, fedora are n00b optimized, debian is usability , admin optimized.
Arch is power user optimized.

[FilledVoid]

I mean "SOLID" in existence and service

In that case Solid refers to the beauty to the eyes of the beholder. Pretty much every distro that has been maintaining itself for the previous years comes under this category? You may say wait, Distro X is way too slow for my likes and forces me to be handheld along the install process. But hold on a sec, Distro X happens to have every thing a new user wants. Would a new user say that Distro X is solid . Yes as a matter of fact he would likely be only using the distro to the aforementioned extent. But give that distro to Geek XYZ and he would be ranting on every other Internet Forum what a piece of worthless code the thing is. Broaden the comparison criteria. To highlight what I mean further let me point to one of your quotes.

SUSE / Opensuse is developed from slackware and Mandriva is developed from RedHat linux. So they cannot be given a place here though they are enterprise class distros.

Why not? I quote again as far as these distros go both of them are very solid from multiple view points. Furthermore corporate companies do not roll out Distros on their Enterprise Systems for hoots. They do so because they see a benefit and worthwhile return on their investment.

In the end the question comes down to what are you actually comparing the distros for. Or are you looking for a thread to compare Debian ,Fedora and Slackware?

[Anorion]

The reason why I love slackware is the ease with which other distro makers can use it as a foundation. Of course, there are the arch lovers. The only leaf nodes of the Debian tree that I like is Linux Mint... and for no reason other than the default wallpaper, backtrack. I think there is one other solid distro... and that would have to be Gentoo. Don't ignore the Gentoo crowd. Sabayon works better for me than Mint, and that's based on Gentoo.

[mediator]

@filled_void

That seems to be the most sensible reply till now. The thread is like if butterscotch is better than chocolate or stawberry. I guess I've been using fedora for more than 6 years now. I'm still to know where exactly Fedora lacks stability or speed. Developers don't just code and throw the output to us. RedHat developers are highly respected for the amount of hardwork they put.

In some old discussion with my friend @infra_red_dude, we saw ubuntu to be using much more memory than fedora for almost the same number of processes and applications. Not that Ubuntu is a memory hog, but to each his own. Distro-hopping is a disease and a time waste I feel. The problem has always been "of plenty". One has to use more than 300+ distros if suffering greatly with this disease to fancy about his experience.

Its all "moh-maya". Use the stuff you want.

BTW, where are the "other people" of this section?

[a_k_s_h_a_y]

^^ They are all gone with the wind. now why don't you do a lengthy post in here. LOL.

[Anorion]

Originally Posted by vamsi360

Hi folks,

I am just starting a war here.

I missed that!

[FilledVoid]

^^ They are all gone with the wind. now why don't you do a lengthy post in here. LOL.

Technically everyone is still here. Everyone is just waiting for the right moment or thread to emerge on. With time passing by old members tend to drop out. Its the new members that are to pick up the pace.

[kalpik]

Out of the choices mentioned in the first post: Debian definitely.. But on the whole, i think i know where you're coming from, and if you want my suggestion, go with ArchLinux.. You wont regret it..

[hellknight]

Yup I agree that Fedora is bleeding edge.. but sometimes.. while launching GNOME's Nautilus, it felt a bit slow.. but it could be a problem with my machine's installation.. anyways.. i've downloaded the Fedora 12 CD image.. and will be installing it tonight.. can't wait..

Debian is just awesome, but the Debian 5.0 doesn't detects my ethernet card.. it is rock stable, awesome configuring options, uses very less memory as compared to other distros ( I can't figure out how).. but I fell in love with the DeltaRPMs of Fedora coupled with the awesome YUM.. and besides it was the very first distro that I installed on my computer, Fedora Core 4 to be precise...

[hellknight]

Installed Fedora 12.. boots very quickly.. nice splash screen.. but it has some issues with ATI.. the drivers doesn't support the new Xorg.. so if you guys are going to install Fedora with ATi cards.. then good luck.. detected full HD res though.. hardware acceleration not working..

[Cool G5]

Originally Posted by hellknight

Installed Fedora 12.. boots very quickly.. nice splash screen.. but it has some issues with ATI.. the drivers doesn't support the new Xorg.. so if you guys are going to install Fedora with ATi cards.. then good luck.. detected full HD res though.. hardware acceleration not working..

Do the proprietary ati drivers work fine under Fedora 12?

[axxo]

I have fedora 11 on my TP. Is FC12 any good that I should upgrade it to?
Also Arch is serving good enough for me atleast for my desktop(dual boot) that yet to find any reason to replace it with another distro.

[hellknight]

No the proprietary drivers from ATi aren't working as of now... but it detected my full HD resolution though..
@axxo.. yeah you should upgrade.. you see.. every package is now optimized for i686 processors.. and the updates are being compressed in the LZMA format for more compression.. and if that is coupled with Delta RPMs, then you'll have very little size of updates which are to be downloaded in Fedora 12...