Looking for opinions on a stable distro

[kkempter]

Hi List;

I've been running Fedora since Core 2 (RH 9 before that). I've run SUSU but I don't really like the admin interface. I've noticed that since fedora came out with Core 4 the packages released for general consumption seem to be more problematic and there seems to be much less quality control compared to their past behavior (IMHO).

I would like to find a distro that is consistently more stable. I've heard loads about debian but I wonder if some of you can give me your thoughts per stable distros to try and how they would compare to the useability of the fedora admin gui. For wexample one of the big problems I had in SUSE was getting a cups printer to work. Fedora on the same box with the same printer was immensly easier to get the printer configured.

Thanks in advance...

[techieMoe]

CentOS is a Redhat-based distribution that comes from Redhat Enterprise Linux. It's very stable, in my opinion.

[oz]

I think Slackware and Debian are probably about as stable as they get...

[Cabhan]

Fedora Core is a bleeding edge distro, so yeah, it's not gonna be so stable.

If Debian still has it, Debian Woody is probably the most stable that you will ever get. It's still on the 2.4 kernel, but every package is tested in like 75,000 different situations before being moved to a stable repository.

SuSE, as a commercial distro, also tends to be extremely stable, but you already said that you don't like it.

[genesus]

Slackware and Debian are both very stable distros, Gentoo can be as well, although you can also mess it up quite easily...the distro that I've had the least problem with so far is OpenBSD though...plus it is very fast, very very fast...

[techieMoe]

the distro that I've had the least problem with so far is OpenBSD though...plus it is very fast, very very fast...

OpenBSD is not a distro.

[the0r3tic]

the distro that I've had the least problem with so far is OpenBSD though...plus it is very fast, very very fast...

OpenBSD is not a distro.

Yep, it's a variant of BSD.

[genesus]

the distro that I've had the least problem with so far is OpenBSD though...plus it is very fast, very very fast...

OpenBSD is not a distro.

Guess it should be kicked out of distrowatch.com then...

[techieMoe]

the distro that I've had the least problem with so far is OpenBSD though...plus it is very fast, very very fast...

OpenBSD is not a distro.

Guess it should be kicked out of distrowatch.com then...

I never quite understood why BSD was included on DistroWatch to begin with. OpenBSD is a flavor (that's the actual term) of BSD, not Linux. Distribution is a term used for Linux variants. I'm being a grammarian here, but I want to point out that there is a difference between BSD and Linux, as any fan of either could no doubt tell you.

[a12ctic]

the distro that I've had the least problem with so far is OpenBSD though...plus it is very fast, very very fast...

OpenBSD is not a distro.

Guess it should be kicked out of distrowatch.com then...

I never quite understood why BSD was included on DistroWatch to begin with. OpenBSD is a flavor (that's the actual term) of BSD, not Linux. Distribution is a term used for Linux variants. I'm being a grammarian here, but I want to point out that there is a difference between BSD and Linux, as any fan of either could no doubt tell you.

Originally, the site covered Linux distributions only. However, after numerous requests from readers, BSDs and BSD-based projects were added to DistroWatch in May 2004. The reasoning behind this move was simple - Linux and BSDs have much in common - both are free and open source operating systems, and they both use many of the same open source packages available on the Internet. Best of all, the various BSD flavours are widely used and considered by many to be great operating systems.

Similarly, Sun Microsystem's Solaris was frequently requested to be included in DistroWatch, especially after the release of version 10 with a much less restrictive license than previous releases. However, Solaris is listed here purely for reference purposes and not as an endorsement of the product.