Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 12th Jul 2005 20:16 UTC
Debian and its clones Two companies previously mentioned as being involved with the project, Mandriva and Turbolinux, appear to not be participating at this time. Progeny Linux Systems continues to leading the way.
Thread beginning with comment 3451
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Re:Debian/Ubuntu
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 13th Jul 2005 10:29 UTC in reply to "Re:Debian/Ubuntu"
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Nope. Its entirely the responsibility of Ubuntu and Canonical which is doing this.

Yes, and why does Ubuntu/Canonical exist? Exaclty, because there is an ever-moving evolution in the world of distro's that's fed by the fact that everything is open, in all senses of the word.

Ubuntu feeding off Debian means that if Debian dies Ubuntu goes down with it.

Pure nonsense. Ubuntu's community is so large now, that they'll have no problems finding package maintainers. And IF Debian ever goes down (which it never will, so this discussion is irrelevant anyway), what do you think that those Debian devs are going to do? Stop working? Of course not; they will be going to Debian deriratives, including Ubuntu.

You along with the rest of the Ubuntu users need to understand that first

1) I'm a SuSE user since quite a while now;

2) There is nothing to understand, as explained in the above.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Re:Debian/Ubuntu
by g2devi on Wed 13th Jul 2005 11:56 in reply to "RE: Re:Debian/Ubuntu"
g2devi Member since:
2005-07-09

Exaclty, because there is an ever-moving evolution in the world of distro's that's fed by the fact that everything is open, in all senses of the word.

Just a bit of support.

I used to be on Red Hat Linux and Fedora. I evaluated Debian several times and tried to work with stable, testing, SID, and the various backports. I also tried Libranet. I've always found the Debian experience wanting. SID had always been too unstable (at the time sI tried to work with it, it broke my repositories a few time), and it still wasn't good enough because it lacks security patches and it was often still out of date (especially when it came to GNOME -- it was 2 releases behind). As the Debian FAQ warns, SID is so named because SID in "Toy Story" broke all the toys.

I tried using testing with some backports, but got frustrated and went back to Fedora. As imperfect as Fedora was, it worked as advertised with few real issues.

Then Ubuntu came on the scenes. It promised to be the Fedora of Debian. It would stabilize SID every 6 months and add and stabilize experimental packages like X.org to keep Ubuntu from being as stale as SID. It would provide security updates, and it would provide access to stabilized SID through the universe repository.

Ubuntu gave me something Debian never did. It fullfilled a need for me, and many other people, otherwise it would just die off. Debian is like Red Hat Enterprise Linux. It's great for servers with it's slow releases with security patches. Industries love never having to change unless absoletely necessary. But Debian does not make the greatest desktop distro. If Ubuntu didn't exist, I'd probably go back to Fedora, not Debian.

Anyway, I'm curious why people think that Ubuntu is harming Debian. If you look at the mailing lists, you'll see that great care is made to ensure that security patches to Ubuntu are also sent to Debian. Care is also given to starting each new release with SID and only freezing it late in the release testing cycle. It's stabilized X.org and helped it move from Debian experimental into SID. It maintained the latest version of GNOME and helped GNOME 2.8 move into Sarge. It employs Debian maintainers who contribute to Debian as well as Ubuntu. The regular predictable release cycle highlighted a need in the Debian world, and it now looks like Debian will release once every 1-3 years (I'm not sure what's been decided be the statement was that it's going to be predictable).

So as far as I can see, Ubuntu has been nothing but good for Debian, which is appropriate since Debian's roots and it's repositories has done nothing but for Ubuntu. Each exists and will continue to exist because they server very different but real audiences.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Re:Debian/Ubuntu
by Anonymous Penguin on Wed 13th Jul 2005 13:01 in reply to "RE[2]: Re:Debian/Ubuntu"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"Debian is like Red Hat Enterprise Linux. It's great for servers with it's slow releases with security patches. Industries love never having to change unless absoletely necessary. But Debian does not make the greatest desktop distro."

Indeed, not out of the box. But you can make Debian anything you want it to be: from the 100 MB Sarge installer which provides a fully working OS, to anything with an incredible choice of DEs and Windomanagers as well as apps.
You have 2 possibilities: do it yourself or chose one of the many derivatives: Kanotix and Libranet are my favorites because they are 100/% Debian compatible.

Reply Parent Score: 1