After reading about Redhat's "new support plans" I decided it was time to check out another distro for my server. I initially setup a FreeBSD box and that installed rather nicely but then I was unsure what to do after that.. I was just staring at a blank command prompt with no ideas in mind..

After browsing thru some computer mags at work I ran across all this talk about how a lot of corporations are starting to embrace linux as the future, this lead me to wonder if my efforts should be placed on linux as opposed to the BSD side. After consulting a bit with a former coworker of mine I decided to check out debian (woody). My main goal was to setup a stable server that would get support (security patches and such) and would be around for a long time to come.

All I can say is that it is one slick OS! I was able to get it installed setting up apache/mysql/php rather quickly with good 'ol apt My only concern now is, can it be this easy? I've heard stories that debian and gentoo are some of the harder distros out there and I guess I expected much more coming from the redhat camp. One great thing I really love out debian is that it allows me to do what I want to do, sure there may be some tinkering a bit using nano (inherited from using pine to read email in college ) but other than that, I'm really amazed at how quickly things were able to get setup.

Is this really what it's like to be a debian user or am I just, uhh.. not sure of the word..


w.

I personally hate this distro with the fire of a thousand suns, but from what I hear it's "better" than most.

What are your thoughts of this one say versus, FreeBSD? One of the main things I like about debian is not needing to compile from source. I remember things taking quite a bit of time to compile using ports and FreeBSD.

What in specific do you not like? The only thing I've heard of causing an issue, and I've thought about this myself is that most things done in debian are via "the debian way". This is one of my biggest fears and concerns about debian with all of their configuration tools and such.. not sure tho. Any thoughts to share?

w.

The reason why most have difficulty installing Debian is because they lack a technical background. i.e. most come form a M$ background where most of the install is spoonfed to them. You obviously don't and therefore found the procedure quite painless. Yes it is that easy if you know how. Don't be afraid of Debian tools as they often make the job much easier than the normal way. Kernel compiling and install is a great example. However if feel enclined there is no reason why you should not use conventional methods as well. There will be occassions that a package is not available as a Debian binary and you will have go through compiling from source. If you want a plain simple server you cannot really go wrong with Debian.

You like it? Will it do what you like to do? Are you comfortable with it? If the answer to all of these is yes, then this is what it is like to be a Debian user. If any of them is no, then you may want to check out another distro. I use Debian, and I am quite happy with all of it so far. (It is within a month or so of being my longest distro next to Mandrake.)

I was going to reccomend the "get suggested" switch for apt-get but I can't find it
dselect (patience grasshopper) handles them otherwise.

Do not use dselect. Use aptitude. dselect will be removed, aptitude is replacing it. You can tell aptitude to automatically install recommended and/or suggested packages as well.

FreeBSD also has precompiled packages. You use pkg_add to install the package, with a -r option if you want to fetch the package from FreeBSD's servers. So if you wanted to install apache, the command would be "pkg_add -r apache". The downside is that not all packages are available precompiled and if you have a system with packages installed from source, there is a chance that the precompiled package cconflicts with installed dependencies that were installed from source. All in all, FreeBSD is a good alternative to Linux. Many software packages are available to both systems.

What's so bad about dselect? I find "apt-cache search" and dselect up to my needs.
aptitude only at 0.2.13 so it's got a ways to go.
aaah spoilt for choice again...life's tough in linux land.

Surely you aren't so naive to equate the version number with the capability level...

Aptitude is vastly superior to dselect in every way. Dselect is full of horrible user interface foibles. That and many other reasons are why dselect is being replaced.