As the first Debian release to use the new installer, version 3.1, a.k.a. Sarge, goes a long way to detonating the myth that Debian is hard to install. Moreover, because it includes — for the most part — up-to-the-moment software while conforming to strict free software guidelines and offering better than average security, 3.1 is easily the most accessible version of Debian ever released.
Review: Debian 3.1
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Quite decent review for a great GNU/Linux distribution. If I weren’t halfvay in bed with FreeBSD I would run Debian for sure.
… so you say, releasing several security fixes only a few days after releasing sarge is better than average?
…
it’s fine but i don’t know anybody who’d want something as old as sarge as a desktop (i’m running it as headless server, so i’m not talking about that) – for desktop use ubuntu is much better.
or are there some ppl here using it as primary desktop? if yes why and which progs? (no flaming please, i’m serious)
Oh yeah – you are so right!
This single incident should definetly be the only thing to take into consideration when looking at debian. Because after all, it’s only a small distro ran by a few hobbyists that has not been around long… 😛
no, of course not. but it should make you want to write something else in a review than “above average security”.
note, i’m not dissing sarge. i’m dissing the review.
The 3.1 install fails if you want it to go to a high partition, such as /dev/hda21, while /dev/hda11 works fine. It looked like it was mkinitrd that was failing. There is no problem with this with other distros, so I’m guessing that Debian is using an old version of mkinitrd (just like they are using an old version of XFree86, rather than X.org).
I use sarge on my laptop, running gnome 2.8 with firefox and thunderbird. Works great.
I love Debian package management and it’s very easy to setup and work with, but every Debian based distribution I’ve tried is horribly sluggish :compared to Vidalinux.
What’s the point of Debian these days? Unless you choose your software based on the ideology of its developers, what’s on offer that hasn’t been available for months elsewhere?
and I’m running Sid.
I like the review (thanks Eugenia!) but there are a couple of things that puzzle me a little:
1. Root cannot log in using the graphical interface? That only happened to me when I was running Gnome, but not when I’m running Xfce, Fluxbox or FVWM…and you can change the settings under Gnome control center to log in as root. Surely this is a Gnome thing and not a Debian related issue?
2. I haven’t tried the Sarge installer yet, but using the testing/unstable installers (RC3), I COULD choose to let the installer try and detect my video card, or to manually select one myself…I wonder why the Sarge installer would not do this? (or at least the author says so?)
By the way I switched to Linux exactly one year ago and Debian was the first distribution I tried. So far i’ve also tried Mandrake and Fedora. I honestly don’t know why people would think it’s any easier with Mandrake or Fedora…
I run debian on all my machines since a few years back. At first it was only because it was the only moderatly up-to-date and usable distro for my UltraSPARC, but when I got me a new PC and an old powerbook last year It just followed. =)
On a daily bais I use firefox, abiword, evolution, gaim, xmms, vlc, irssi, aterm, ssh, valknut (homebrew from CVS) and konqueror. I use WindowMaker and my ~/GNUStep folder has followed me since something like -99. On a less than daily basis I use Knoda, MySQL, Umbrello, GIMP, k3b, OpenOffice and a handfull of commercial applications (vmware, rational rose etc, etc).
I absolutly love apt-get.
Some of us use Debian on our servers for it’s stability. There isn’t a single Linux distro out there that can beat Debian stable in Stability.
Also, Debian package management and dependency checking and resolution is leaps and bounds better than any other distro.
Before you knock Debian, why don’t you try it.
“or are there some ppl here using it as primary desktop? if yes why and which progs? (no flaming please, i’m serious)”
Yes, I am going to. It is Debian, do you remember? You can fetch packages/metapackages from unstable or even experimental.
No Ubuntu for me, thanks. I have a big sources.list and 17912 packages available. When I want something not included all I have to do is a google search for “packagename deb” and in most cases I find a repository which has what I am looking for or a tutorial (beagle, for instance)
I doubt I could do the same with Ubuntu, as itsn’t really Debian compatible.
“what’s on offer that hasn’t been available for months elsewhere?”
Sarge packages are about as old or more recent than Mandriva 2005. But with many differences: apt. Choice of packages (many more in Debian). In Debian you can run a mixed system, from stable to experimental (I am doing just that), flexibility…
Want another example? SUSE 9.3. You can make Debian as bleeding edge. But with Debian you need to install only once. And no costs involved, no buying a bulky, expensive box every 6 months. And *I* choose how I want my Debian install, not some commercial linux company.
Clearly if you are a nOOb Debian might not be for you, or you won’t get the best out of it. In that case go Ubuntu.
Can you share your sources please. lugnug(at)gmail(dot)com
Yes I will, but really sources lists reflect personal needs/tastes.
It’s easy to set up Debian to be as fast as any other distro, just learn the system and read the docs.
I used to run *woody* as my primary linux desktop – but that’s because I only gave Linux an old Pentium 166 with 32 Mb RAM to play with.
I recently found ntfsresize on a Knoppix CD, and am now dual booting my real laptop with sarge as my primary desktop, and WinXP.
I have everything I need in sarge, but I’ll keep with the testing branch probably. I probably have a lot less software install than most linux users – I just use my desktop for entertainment and to keep in touch with friends, mainly. Not enough free time to do much else…
The software I use:
Sarge has an up to date version of firefox (1.04 right now), some version of GAIM, some version of Xine to play movies, etc etc, basically compared to WinXP my software is probably newer using Debian sarge.
I run e17 from cvs as my Window Manager, but that’d be the same no matter what distro I was using.
I don’t really know about what “newer” software is supposedly out there in unstable that I am really missing out on – Xorg is maybe the only thing, and I don’t actually care myself what XServer I am running. The one I have right now gets the job done. e17 does cool stuff without special XServer extensions, too.
As I say, I don’t actually know what I’m missing out on, but in the majority of cases I think the software I have with sarge is pretty much the latest versions. But, besides e17, I don’t really care whether I have the latest bleeding edge stuff or not.
[i]What’s the point of Debian these days? Unless you choose your software based on the ideology of its developers, what’s on offer that hasn’t been available for months elsewhere?</i?
Some people choose to use only free software and debian is the only practical solution to do so AFAIK.
For what it’s worth, I just installed Ubuntu 5.04. That does not have the described mkinitrd problem.
but every Debian based distribution I’ve tried is horribly sluggish :compared to Vidalinux.
From the VidaLinux feature page:
http://desktop.vidalinux.com/index.php?option=content&task=blogcate…
Vidalinux Desktop OS is based on Gentoo Linux, a special flavor of Linux that can be automatically optimized and customized for just about any application or need. Extreme performance, configurability and a top-notch user and developer community are all hallmarks of the Gentoo experience.
Could it be that VidaLinux has been optimized and is a i686 distro while Debian is i386 out the box? Maybe thats why you supposedly see a speed difference. You can always download apt-build, read the docs for it, and accomplish the same thing. Also use an i686 kernel.
I don’t really know about what “newer” software is supposedly out there in unstable that I am really missing out on – Xorg is maybe the only thing,
Nope, X.org still hasn’ made it into unstable (as I type and post this) yet. Will be soon though (I hope!).
Was it really necessary to post that nonsense? Both distros can co-exist with each other and benefit one another. There is perfectly no reason to start a useless “distro religious war” between the Debian & Ubuntu camps.
yea i run old sarge and i am missing out on everything, i can only install thousands of packages and they ALL work, they dont crash or conflict, i can update without worry and I never need to re-install unless i just wanna….
oh whoa is me….. poor old me
LOL!
i’m running ubuntu breezy, works without problem, most debian packages also work and sometimes i just like compiling something into the mix.. i’ve been a longtime debian Sid user but as wanting to be bleeding edge i switched to ubuntu. i haven’t regretted but if you’re happy on sarge i’ll let you be – nothing against debian – it’s just a bit rusty for my taste.
Why Debian, that is developed by hundreds of volunteers all over the world, can’t get enought stable faster?
Slackware has a shorter release cicle than Debian, is driven by “just” one man and is enought stable to run as a server, just like Sarge (or not?).
By the way, if the new installer for Sarge was the reason to delay the release (that was announced still for 09/2004), I think it did not worth the wait.
IMHO the Debian team must seriously reconsider the way they release the “stable”.
For example, release the base “stable” system faster and at lower speed aditional components (apps) for the system. This way, there would be, let say, “debian base 3.x stable” and “kde 3.z for debian base 3.x stable” or “kde 4.y for debian base 3.x stable”, so it would be better for the desktop, since only the apps would need to be updated and for the server, where I would not need to update kde, but as the technology changes very fast on these days, it would be a most up to date base stable version, with better hardware support.
i can update without worry….after you fix the security thing, right? Debian’s the first distro I tried and one I really really really love the way it works and the ideals behind it, but c’mon…4 years wasn’t long enough for testing to have found that error? It’s really no wonder that they’ve lost so much ground to ubuntu; ubuntu’s debian for regular users done right. Perfection (“stable MUST be stable! on 11 architectures!”) is a really nice goal, but if no one notices you’ve achieved it (which they haven’t,) then what’s the point?
Why Debian, that is developed by hundreds of volunteers all over the world, can’t get enought stable faster?
Slackware has a shorter release cicle than Debian, is driven by “just” one man and is enought stable to run as a server, just like Sarge (or not?).
Last time I checked, Slackware doesn’t have ports for all of the architectures that Debian supports.
By the way, if the new installer for Sarge was the reason to delay the release (that was announced still for 09/2004), I think it did not worth the wait.
IMHO the Debian team must seriously reconsider the way they release the “stable”.
For example, release the base “stable” system faster and at lower speed aditional components (apps) for the system. This way, there would be, let say, “debian base 3.x stable” and “kde 3.z for debian base 3.x stable” or “kde 4.y for debian base 3.x stable”, so it would be better for the desktop, since only the apps would need to be updated and for the server, where I would not need to update kde, but as the technology changes very fast on these days, it would be a most up to date base stable version, with better hardware support.
That’s being done by backports.org for a few packages. However, you can’t do a naive notion for classifying arbitrary subsystems (such as “kde 3.z for debian base 3.x stable” et.al) that easily as there might always be some things that would break with a change of versions (which usualy brings in changes in behavior or API or both).
i dont consider that a security thing…. I consider it a “holly shit look at what we forgot, damn thats funny” screwup that brings to mind the saying “the devil is in the details”
if this wasnt noticed for a couple months or something then yea I MIGHT would consider it a security thing but everything in sarge is up to date so no biggie….
part of the reason debian has been held up is that anything in a organization as large as debian is going to take gut-wrenching time, a lot of internal changes and so forth, and most importantly working and implementing infrastructure to make sure we can release a bit quicker
as well as providing a “volatile” section for ongoing updates to packages that are considered volatile!
of course to be honest most any good debianite would just say something like
“we release when it is ready, and we always make sure it has been long enough to piss off anyone who expects us to release sooner”
or something like
“you need to go back to your mandrake and leave the real linux to the real linux guys”
I do have a question – Why is having bleeding edge packages so important, especially when they are unstable or cause conflicts? Can you name me a bleeding edge package that provides some missing functionality over what sarge has in it? What am I missing? Please enlighten me….
btw-so if debian had a 12mo to 18mo release cycle would that satisfy you’ll (cause you just might see it soon)
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Debian has more than 17000 packages for each of the 11 architectures it supports, while slackware has maybe 2-3000 for the only one it supports. Sarge wheighs in on 14*11=154 CDs without source, while Slackware 10.1 is distributed on 2 CDs.
It’s really no wonder that they’ve lost so much ground to ubuntu; ubuntu’s debian for regular users done right.
Maybe some small percentage of Debian users have switched to Ubuntu but these are mostly newbies who haven’t yet learned what one can accomplish with Debian. I don’t think that Debian has lost any ground at all to Ubuntu — Ubuntu has just conquered some new ground and some new users switching from MS Windows. Notice that Ubuntu exploits Debian’s resources and technologies, so all Ubuntu users are essentially Debian users.
As for Ubuntu being “Debian for regular users done right”, I’d reply that Debian is “Ubuntu for advanced users done right”. Notice that in Debian’s stable releases all that abundance of software has been carefully tailor-made to work together. This is something very different from installing the Ubuntu base desktop and installing some packages from the universe repository, which may or may not work. Debian Sid is called “unstable” precisely because different packages haven’t yet been made to work together seamlessly. By the time the packages reach Debian “testing”, most of the rough edges have been polished. Some poster said that Sarge is too “rusty” for his/her taste but I’d say that Sarge is polished and Ubuntu is too “rough on the edges” and “wet behind the ears” for my taste.
Actually I prefer to use Debian’s “testing” branch, currently called Etch. It is polished and stable enough, and it gets constantly updated from “unstable” while Ubuntu users have to wait six months to get their applications upgraded. (Please don’t mention Ubuntu’s development branch because it’s way too unstable for daily use.) For me Debian Etch gets the best of both worlds — it really is “Ubuntu done the right way”, the Debian Way.
… debian’s software will become obsolate, AGAIN
they’re again already two years behind when released (with couple expections like gnome “only” 8 months old, xfree only 1-1,5-years old.. well firefox is current, props for that, at least…)
Debian will be forgotten again in next few months and everyone whining for spartan-timed software.
hehe … I find that funny that you say that th, … debian is never obsolate…..
debian (at least on the desktop) is generally updated to the newest versions of software monthly.. or sometimes weekly (depends on the user).
The simple fact that you would say something so ignorant means you have either never used debian, or you have never learned how to use it. I used debian for a couple years and loved it.. I always had an up to date system and rock solid.
I have since moved to Gentoo and now have a bleeding edge and quite stable system. that is the basic difference between the two (debain exceedingly stable and very slightly out of date, Gentoo not quite as stable, but still very stable and bleeding edge).
Debian is an awesome distor and I would recommend it to anyone.
distro
i installed Debian stable on a Sparc a couple of years ago. it was pretty straightforward, although i am not a fan of taskel and dselect. i opted to do a minimal net install, then add packages as needed.
i downloaded and installed Sarge RC3 (x86 version) a couple of weeks ago. again i did a net install (110 meg ISO), and it was even more straightforward. X got configured wrong, so i used xf86config and manually appended “-4” to the conf filename. might throw a newbie, but still pretty simple.
i’d rate Debian’s install and usage difficulty as similar to Slackware. but apt-get is quite powerful.
I’m currently 17 years old and have used Linux for about a year now, my first distro was mandrake i used it for a while until ubuntu came out, ubuntu was ok but i didn’t like the community and the way they seemed to customize packages. I got a new PC about 3 months ago (AMD 64 3200, geforce 6600, 1GB ram etc) i decided to install sarge (would be testing at the time) with the net install, and i loved how i could use aptitude and customize what i wanted to install. I’m now using debian etch (the new testing) and it’s great! I love how debian doesn’t customize packages or add bloated admin tools. Debian on the desktop beats ubuntu and any other distro hands down.
my top 3.. in this order…. Gentoo, Debian, and OneBase…..
all have awesoeme package management and depending on the purpose of the installation…. I would almost always recommend one of them…. OneBase being the easiest (but least powerful), and gentoo and debian are equely powerful and easy to use if you know how to use them. Gentoo is my favorate (faster than debian)…. but debian still rocks
Debian can keep you on the bleeding edge better then most other linux distributions out there. Add its stability and flexability to that and you can’t do any better.
In case it is a matter of quality:
If it is going to be linux it is going to be Debian, if not OpenBSD.
DoctorPepper: I have used Debian, starting with 2.1. I wasn’t knocking it, just asking a question. Does evidence exist to suppoprt the frquet claim about serve stability? Debian’s package management is, in fact, god, but I think the focus on package management is overblown.
Anonymous Penguin: You’ve compared Debian with only two other distributions, and only in terms of packages. BTW, I don’ believe SUSE is commonly considered a “bleeding edge” product. As for you ability to “choose”, well, it’s your choice to not buy SUSE. Some folks might choose to use Linux without incurring the burden of learning Debian. Would you begrudge someone making the choice to use Linux if they did so by buying a commercial distribution with a much flatter learning curve?
Zen Lunatic: People who think it is important to only use free software are, in fact, ideologues.
Is there a Debian distribution that comes optimised for speed out of the box?
Debian will be forgotten again in next few months and everyone whining for spartan-timed software.
I don’t think so. Sarge will be usable for a long long time to come. Otherwise, since you state “Debian will be forgotten” and not specifically Sarge, I have to say you and the like are dead wrong. Also back a few dozen opinions someone asked why would anyone use Debian these days since others also have what it takes. The answer is simply: because it just is one [if not the] best linux distro this planet has ever had on its back. Stability ? You have one for it, choose stable. New stuff ? You have it, chose testing or sid. And don’t forget: many of those others wouldn’t be there if there wasn’t Debian, since many are based on Debian distros.
Those people who always complain about Debian always being too old and two steps behind obviously have no real Debian experience. I’ve been using sid for >3 years now as a desktop, rockingly good, solid, frequently updated, wouldn’t want anything else [although I even currently have an ubuntu, a progeny, and a slack installed – notice 2 of them are really debian]. I’ve been using stable and testing for years now on servers, wouldn’t want anything else on those either.
Ignorant bashing doesn’t give you a grip on debian.
With all the Debain bashing I see pointing to release cycles and “outdated” software; this brings me to this question:
Do any of these people actually use GNU/Linux for production or server purposes, or do they just spend thier time upgrading thier software?
Sure, I understand that things involving security are king in all of this, but if I spent all my time in apt-get updating my system, tweaking and reconfiguring everything to work together seamlessly, I would never get anything done.
I guess some people still have yet to learn the difference between running Gnu/Linux and using GNU/Linux.
I use debian.
1) best package management in the business.
2) I can install the base system with a 100MB download. None of this 8 cdroms nonesense. After the base install, I can set up my system the way I like it.
3) debian is seriouly commited to free.
i find debian to be one of the fastest distros out there, can you narrow down what is so slow? what type of system and so forth…….
“Debian will be forgotten again in next few months and everyone whining for spartan-timed software.”
I personally prefer a stable desktop over the latest features but that’s just me. If you want the latest and greatest feel free to use just don’t force your ideals on the rest of us. I started using Linux because it was stable and that’s what I want from my workstation.
“You’ve compared Debian with only two other distributions, and only in terms of packages.”
I couldn’t possibly compare it with all of them! I made it clear those were only examples. And not only in terms of packages.
Quoting myself:
“Sarge packages are about as old or more recent than Mandriva 2005. But with many differences: apt. Choice of packages (many more in Debian). In Debian you can run a mixed system, from stable to experimental (I am doing just that), flexibility…
Want another example? SUSE 9.3. You can make Debian as bleeding edge. But with Debian you need to install only once. And no costs involved, no buying a bulky, expensive box every 6 months. And *I* choose how I want my Debian install, not some commercial linux company.”
So I am clearly giving some reason why I believe Debian is better.
“I don’ believe SUSE is commonly considered a “bleeding edge” product.”
Kernel 2.6.11, KDE 3.4 (and kept updated), Gnome 2.10, Xen, beagle… How more bleeding edge do they come?
I find what you say very nice, especially coming from a young person: tons of common sense
AMD 3000, 1Gig ram and 9700pro is my system.
I find programs are slow to start up, and windows are slow to draw and update when I move them. Installed ATI drivers so I got 3000 in GLX gears but it’s still unresponsive and sluggish.
Vidalinux on the other hand is nice and snappy with no noticeable redraw without tweaking anything. I found Arch Linux to also be quite snappy.
Have tried Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Debian sarge, Xandros, Libranet, Knoppix, Feather Linux. They all made my PC feel slower than I know it is.
You gave an example of why you thinkj Debian is better than Mandriva or SUSE.
Kernel 2.6.11, KDE 3.4, Gnome 2.10, Xen in SUSE are the current mainstream versions, not bleeding edge. (if they are beeding eedge, then Linux has a problem with developers released major components that aren’t fully tested.) You’re right about Beagle, though. It isn’t ready for release.
“You’re right about Beagle, though. It isn’t ready for release.”
So your idea of bleeding edge is: “not ready for release”?
the window redraw sounds more like a problem with X….
have you tried comparing your x config file from vida to debian/debian based systems? Have you tried a different kernel? dont know that would do anything but it might! Dont have a AMD system so I cant really help….
Sounds like you got all around dragging ass huh?
http://www.gnome.org/~davyd/footware.shtml
If you look there, only a few distributions ship with GNOME-2.10 as their default, so saying that Debian is ‘already obsolete’ shipping only GNOME-2.8 is really not accurate.
Serious destributions use much older releases of GNOME, like Novell Linux Desktop (2.8) or Sun Java Desktop (2.2) (!)
gah, Novell Linux Desktop ships GNOME-2.6, not 2.8