General Debian advice ?

[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 the following:
- I find the RH/Fedora admin interfaces easy and intuitive how do they compare to debian ?

- How difficult will it be to get the ipw2200 package up in debian ?

- I see that the stable version of debian is based on a 2.4 kernel but there are 2.6 packages available. How do I upgrade to 2.6 and if I do do I still have the 'stable' debian version?

- how do I keep the system up to date? I think I saw that apt-get works with debian, does apt-get manage dependancies for me?

- How difficult is the install compared with the Fedora gui-based install ?

[Vergil83]

- I find the RH/Fedora admin interfaces easy and intuitive how do they compare to debian ?

It will most likely be more difficult. You might be able to install friendly programs, but debian itself tends to be more text based.

- How difficult will it be to get the ipw2200 package up in debian ?

I have never tried to, but they have the driver debian-package-search

- I see that the stable version of debian is based on a 2.4 kernel but there are 2.6 packages available. How do I upgrade to 2.6 and if I do do I still have the 'stable' debian version?

When you install you can choose the 2.6 version (or you can always upgrade later using apt-get). Technically stable is 2.4, but it will still be plenty stable in my book.

- how do I keep the system up to date? I think I saw that apt-get works with debian, does apt-get manage dependancies for me?

Debian invented apt-get, so it works great.

- How difficult is the install compared with the Fedora gui-based install ?

It is text based, but IMHO it isn't to bad. If you follow the on screen directions you should be fine.

[jjmac]

- I see that the stable version of debian is based on a 2.4 kernel but there are 2.6 packages available. How do I upgrade to 2.6 and if I do do I still have the 'stable' debian version?

When you install you can choose the 2.6 version (or you can always upgrade later using apt-get). Technically stable is 2.4, but it will still be plenty stable in my book.
[quote="kkempter"]


Yes ..the 2.6.x --- is a fine kernel.

I'm currently using the 2.6.12 vanilla with the ck3 patch from Con Kolivas. The desktop is just so much smoother/responsive than v2.4.x. Once you try 2.6, you won't want to go back.

Manual kernel compiles are very easy to do as well. There isn't any drama involved, once you have been through the, some what longish config a few times initially And have a config setup for your particular hw requirements and preferences, all a person needs to do is save it between updates and then just check on what additional options a version upgrade may provide. Updating manually via patches to a vanilla package will save on the file size if dload/bandwidth should be an issue.

I would suggest a vanilla kernel, with the Kolivas patch, which incorporates a number of the others -=- for desktop improvements/schedualing issues. But that does tend to become a preference issue really. It can be fun to experiment and you can have more than one kernel setup in your boot loader.

RH tend to patch their kernels quite a lot too, so it may pay to look into just what fedora have been applying to their kernels. But as it's probably a lot of A. Coxes stuff ... which is usually included in the Kolivas patch as well ...

All the links are over at kernel.org of course.


jm