Linked by Ben Mazer on Wed 15th Oct 2003 20:58 UTC
A few months ago I was a Slackware Junkie. I loved it, and laughed at those who used 'more automatic' distributions (ok, I didn't actually laugh). Then Arch Linux 0.5 came out and I was very intrigued by it. I was getting tired of having to compile updated packages myself.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
The dependency problems and bad package builds mentioned are the very reason Gentoo is so cool. As long as there is source code out there (and there always is) Gentoo ebuild simply grab it with a list of dependencies and compile it for your system and its version of glibc, gcc etc. Regular users often create their own ebuilds for new software simply by pointing to new source code.
As for "accomplishing tasks" in business... I agree that the distro choice for business server use and desktop home use will likely be very different. However, it is essential that an IT person understand the guts of the O/S in order to solve problems. Ie. it may be easy to set up XYZ on Redhat and take a lot longer in some other distro, but a real set of tasks would be to diagnose and solve problems ABCDEF in this server and see who can cope without simply re-formatting/rebooting like windows "system administrators". That is a real test.
I agree these "reviews" are very personal. That's not the problem. The problem is the people writing them demonstrate so little experience in writing about a given distro. For instance, describing how quickly or slowly something installs really means very little unless you are installing it all the time.
However, ongoing use (longitudinal experience) such as the easy keeping up with security and feature updates and new versions (ie. latest kernel versions, beta and latest Gnome 2.4 etc) is much more important. Here, Gentoo shines as I have been using the latest stuff long before release. I can keep another system up to date despite the fact it is locked into an older glibc (ie. commonly-available binaries are no good for it) because of Gentoo's source code focus. Perhaps Arch has similar long-term strengths, but who knows?
Let's put installation and screenshots and all that stuff in perspective. It's really not worth much these days. Long-term use is what's key and Gentoo is the only distro I've kept using without a single stop for ages. There's no need to reformat. The latest software is an "emerge sync && emerge world" away. Perhaps Arch is too... but who knows?
This is like those crappy car reviews in the papers and magazines. The only good stuff is the long-term Consumer-Reports type reviews that talk about using the same thing for months and months and months and months!
The dependency problems and bad package builds mentioned are the very reason Gentoo is so cool. As long as there is source code out there (and there always is) Gentoo ebuild simply grab it with a list of dependencies and compile it for your system and its version of glibc, gcc etc. Regular users often create their own ebuilds for new software simply by pointing to new source code.
As for "accomplishing tasks" in business... I agree that the distro choice for business server use and desktop home use will likely be very different. However, it is essential that an IT person understand the guts of the O/S in order to solve problems. Ie. it may be easy to set up XYZ on Redhat and take a lot longer in some other distro, but a real set of tasks would be to diagnose and solve problems ABCDEF in this server and see who can cope without simply re-formatting/rebooting like windows "system administrators". That is a real test.
I agree these "reviews" are very personal. That's not the problem. The problem is the people writing them demonstrate so little experience in writing about a given distro. For instance, describing how quickly or slowly something installs really means very little unless you are installing it all the time.
However, ongoing use (longitudinal experience) such as the easy keeping up with security and feature updates and new versions (ie. latest kernel versions, beta and latest Gnome 2.4 etc) is much more important. Here, Gentoo shines as I have been using the latest stuff long before release. I can keep another system up to date despite the fact it is locked into an older glibc (ie. commonly-available binaries are no good for it) because of Gentoo's source code focus. Perhaps Arch has similar long-term strengths, but who knows?
Let's put installation and screenshots and all that stuff in perspective. It's really not worth much these days. Long-term use is what's key and Gentoo is the only distro I've kept using without a single stop for ages. There's no need to reformat. The latest software is an "emerge sync && emerge world" away. Perhaps Arch is too... but who knows?
This is like those crappy car reviews in the papers and magazines. The only good stuff is the long-term Consumer-Reports type reviews that talk about using the same thing for months and months and months and months!