Moving on from Gentoo

[hazel]

Well, I'm glad I tried it. But Gentoo isn't really for me. I like portage, it's hypnotic watching it work. I've got used to the discipline of the daily update. But I just don't like living on the bleeding edge. There's too much risk of things breaking. For example, an update of xorg initially left my keyboard and mouse unusable. That meant effectively no internet, as you can't really use lynx on modern websites. It didn't matter because I use Debian for serious work so I had plenty of time to fix xorg in Gentoo. But if Gentoo had been my only distro, I should have panicked completely. And the great advantage of Gentoo, that it's completely cusomisable, can really only be taken advantage of by people who know a lot more about both their hardware and their software environment than I have time to learn.

So what do I try now? Something even more challenging like Linux from Scratch? Or something more likely to replace Debian as my mainstream distro? I've been reading about Arch and I love the philosophy behind it; that's just how I think Linux should be put together. But again, it's bleeding edge software. Perhaps I should try Crux, which has a similar philosophy but uses tried and tested software. Or I could just stick with Debian, which I like very much, but then what do I do with this spare partition?

[oz]

I've always liked Gentoo but found it to be far too time consuming for my own needs. Out of the other distros you mentioned above, Crux was great and probably the fastest distro that I've ever run, but like Gentoo it was overly time consuming.

I used Debian for a while and liked it pretty well, but after familiarizing myself with Arch, it quickly proved to be the winner. I like the Arch philosophy, and found pacman to be the preferable package tool, over that of Debian's apt.

In the end, it's great that there are lots of options available to us so that we all have a better chance of finding something we really like.

Best of luck with your personal search!

[GNU-Fan]

Or I could just stick with Debian, which I like very much, but then what do I do with this spare partition?

I also like Debian very much and have the stable version on one, the unstable version on the other partition. If you care about Debian's future, you can install and test the newest packages and give feedback on compatibility to the developers early on. And also make suggestions how to make the software better.

[Jonathan183]

But I just don't like living on the bleeding edge. There's too much risk of things breaking. For example, an update of xorg initially left my keyboard and mouse unusable. That meant effectively no internet, as you can't really use lynx on modern websites. It didn't matter because I use Debian for serious work so I had plenty of time to fix xorg in Gentoo. But if Gentoo had been my only distro, I should have panicked completely. And the great advantage of Gentoo, that it's completely cusomisable, can really only be taken advantage of by people who know a lot more about both their hardware and their software environment than I have time to learn.

So what do I try now? Something even more challenging like Linux from Scratch? Or something more likely to replace Debian as my mainstream distro? I've been reading about Arch and I love the philosophy behind it; that's just how I think Linux should be put together. But again, it's bleeding edge software.

I suggest you try Arch ... I've found it to be fairly stable (only issue was xorg 1.6) but a live CD with a GUI can be used to fix the issue quickly. Stability is going to depend on what you run.

I have more than one system now, so I could always get on the net but if I only had a single system plus a live CD with a GUI then I would not worry about things anyway .

Ed: Arch is my main distro ... I have Gentoo as well but the rest of the family use Arch (running kdemod3).

[hazel]

I also like Debian very much and have the stable version on one, the unstable version on the other partition. If you care about Debian's future, you can install and test the newest packages and give feedback on compatibility to the developers early on. And also make suggestions how to make the software better.

Now that's a really nice idea! One of the problems with having two completely different distros is that you don't want to make the second one just a copy of the first, so you end up not installing a lot on it. At least, that was my experience with Gentoo. But if it's the same distro and you're using it for testing, then a duplicate setup is precisely what you want. And if anything broke on update, it wouldn't matter because you have a "mirror" system that you know works.

[Dapper Dan]

Hi hazel! If you decide on CRUX, Jay512 and I would be happy to assist if you want it. I used Gentoo for a while too, and the very things you mention are why I moved away from it. Not knocking Gentoo, it's just not for me. CRUX's philosophy is to "keep it simple" and that's what attracted me to it. It really is once you get it installed, kernel compiled and ports set up. I'm not going to lie to you, all that is fairly time intensive if you've never been through that process, but once you get through it, CRUX just runs and runs very fast and stable. I personally find CRUX a much easier distro than Gentoo, although with both you compile packages from source. And yes! It is fun to watch them compile!

[GNU-Fan]

Now that's a really nice idea! One of the problems with having two completely different distros is that you don't want to make the second one just a copy of the first, so you end up not installing a lot on it. At least, that was my experience with Gentoo. But if it's the same distro and you're using it for testing, then a duplicate setup is precisely what you want. And if anything broke on update, it wouldn't matter because you have a "mirror" system that you know works.

Right. But you have also to take into account that Debian Stable and Unstable are not only one, but two generations apart -- Testing being in between. So not all applications are the same. Some programs get retired, some have just graduated.

[jayd512]

Hi hazel! If you decide on CRUX, Jayd512 and I would be happy to assist if you want it...

You said it! I'm going through getting CRUX set back up in my spare time, and can't wait to have it rolling again. Nothing else I've run compares!

CRUX's philosophy is to "keep it simple" and that's what attracted me to it. It really is once you get it installed, kernel compiled and ports set up. I'm not going to lie to you, all that is fairly time intensive if you've never been through that process, but once you get through it, CRUX just runs and runs very fast and stable.

Very true! Once it's installed and properly configured, the ease of maintaining CRUX is simply amazing. Hazel, if you decide to give it a go, just let us know!

[hazel]

Hazel, if you decide to give it a go, just let us know!

I've downloaded Crux; I'll burn the disc and then install when I feel sufficiently energetic. I don't like to rush these things.

I'm beginning to see what my ideal distro would look like:

1) It should not be big and tightly integrated like Ubuntu, or eccentrically small like dsl; it should be a middle-of-the-road distro which preserves the traditional flexibility and modularity of Linux so that it can be adjusted to any size of memory by suitable choice of apps.

2) It should have a good package manager which handles dependencies intelligently, and well-stocked, well-maintained repositories. Ideally it should be binary as that allows packages to install faster.

3) It should not require major upgrades at frequent intervals. Either it should update continuously like Gentoo or it should have discrete upgrades at well-spaced intervals.

4) It should have a simple internal structure, easy to understand: no abstraction layers or other tricks to hide the works. If that means using CLI a lot, that's OK by me.

5) It should use simple text configuration files, not complex xml files that can only be managed by graphical tools.

6) It should use tried and tested software, no bleeding edges.

Debian scores well on 1-3 and 6, OK on 5 if you don't use gnome, not so well on 4.

[jayd512]

I've downloaded Crux; I'll burn the disc and then install when I feel sufficiently energetic. I don't like to rush these things.

I'm beginning to see what my ideal distro would look like:

1) It should not be big and tightly integrated like Ubuntu, or eccentrically small like dsl; it should be a middle-of-the-road distro which preserves the traditional flexibility and modularity of Linux so that it can be adjusted to any size of memory by suitable choice of apps.

2) It should have a good package manager which handles dependencies intelligently, and well-stocked, well-maintained repositories. Ideally it should be binary as that allows packages to install faster.

3) It should not require major upgrades at frequent intervals. Either it should update continuously like Gentoo or it should have discrete upgrades at well-spaced intervals.

4) It should have a simple internal structure, easy to understand: no abstraction layers or other tricks to hide the works. If that means using CLI a lot, that's OK by me.

5) It should use simple text configuration files, not complex xml files that can only be managed by graphical tools.

6) It should use tried and tested software, no bleeding edges.

Debian scores well on 1-3 and 6, OK on 5 if you don't use gnome, not so well on 4.

Then I think I have some really good news for you... I've never used Debian (on my to-do list)
but CRUX will score highly on every one of those marks!
Right now, I'm having a few xorg issues, but I've been reading that quite a few folks have been having trouble with xorg-server-1.6. I think, once you get it going, CRUX will find it's way into your heart!