Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 30th Oct 2009 12:07 UTC
Linux I'm in a bit of a pickle here. I have an Atom 330-based tiny computer which I use as my HTPC. It performed its job fine running Windows 7 and Boxee, and over the past few months, it ran Mac OS X Leopard with Plex. Now, however, I want to try Linux as an HTPC operating system, but I kind of ran into a roadblock there with Ubuntu 9.10 - so the question is: what is a good HTPC Linux distribution?
Thread beginning with comment 391981
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

If you want to try new things and be on the bleeding edge, use Ubuntu 9.10, but don't complain when there are bugs, post them on launchpad instead.


A release is a release. There is no testing warning or whatever on Ubuntu's site. Why are you defending such an epic fail on Ubuntu's end? I mean come on - Intel video chips causing freezes all over the place?

That's unacceptable.

Reply Parent Score: 2

spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23


A release is a release. There is no testing warning or whatever on Ubuntu's site. Why are you defending such an epic fail on Ubuntu's end? I mean come on - Intel video chips causing freezes all over the place?

That's unacceptable.

I'm not defending Ubuntu in any way. Ubuntu is based on Debian testing.
Look, if you use Fedora, you know it's a bleeding edge distro and it's a testing ground for new things.
It's your choice to use it, nobody put a gun over your head. There are bugs, yes and we all know it.
Now if you don't like unstable software, use Red Hat and pay for support, or use CentOS, or Debian stable.
There are literally more than 500 distros to choose from. YOU make the choice, according to what YOU want. Now if you want stability, DON'T USE BLEEDING EDGE DISTROS!!! Slackware, Red Hat, Debian (stable), etc... are made just for you! use that and stop whining.
If you still use bleeding edge distro, don't go around saying stupid things like 'linux is buggy', 'Windows is stable', etc... you just chose to use testing software.

Edited 2009-10-30 15:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

If you still use bleeding edge distro, don't go around saying stupid things like 'linux is buggy', 'Windows is stable', etc... you just chose to use testing software.


I did not say such a thing. All I said was that if the most popular Linux distribution has major problems for the second release in a row with Intel video chips, then that's an EPIC FAIL. Bleeding edge blah blah or no, that's just totally unacceptable.

Reply Parent Score: 2

phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

I'm not defending Ubuntu in any way. Ubuntu is based on Debian testing.


No, it's based on Debian Sid (debian unstable). They rebase their packages on Debian Sid every 6 months, and then spend a couple weeks re-integrating everything, then spend a couple week testing, and then release it. It's not that great of a release process, IMO.

Reply Parent Score: 4

twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11


That's unacceptable.


Just read what linux "fanboys" just use to say: maybe linux is not for you:

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

Reply Parent Score: 0

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I had Debian 6 Testing on my machine for a few weeks. Some of the additional software was great (OpenVAS) and I actually liked KDE4 now that it's had a few point releases since. Ultimately, I ended up dropping the notebook back to Debian 5 Stable though. KDE4 and the additional apps did not justify some of the breakage I was getting with updates. That's not a complaint about Debian, I knowingly ran a testing status distribution. I've since obtained OpenVAS through backports and KDE3 runs lighter on the system so I can wait for Debian 6 to go stable or at least much closer to stable release.

I think the point the previous poster is trying to make is this same thing; when you run a testing distro you have to accept that your using the beta of the next release. When you run an RC or Beta Windows release, you have to accept that it's in development and may break or lack features.

This should not excuse Canonical for so many having issues with such a generic chipset and GPU. It does indicate a potential cause and justify reverting back to an LTS, trying the parent distro Debian or another distro entirely.

(I have to admit I'm a fork snob also; why use a forked distro if the parent distro provides all the same functions and/or more.)

Bottom line; popularity has never indicated the quality of software. Canonical is popular but there are other distros more applicable to given tasks.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Johnny Member since:
2009-08-15

Thom, I agree. That is an epic fail. I'm very surprised that Ubuntu didn't catch that bug during the alpha-beta-rc cycle. As you pointed out, it's not like Intel's integrated chipset is some kind of obscure graphics chipset. How did they miss that bug?

--Johnny

Reply Parent Score: 1

gustl Member since:
2006-01-19

How they missed this bug?

Simple: Time based releases!

If you have a release date, you are always going to have a huge number of bugs, that is simply unavoidable.

The last Debian STABLE (lenny) was released, when the number of release critical bugs was just less than 100. Now imagine how many more bugs a distro must necessarily ship with, if debian sid is taken as a base and 6 Months of bugfixing goes into the system.

You might have hardware which works like a breeze, then it's a very fine system. If you don't have this hardware, you are out of luck.

In this case it seems like buggy Intel drivers are a major cause of pain.

Reply Parent Score: 2