Etch users: What are your impressions, compared to Sarge?

RavenOfOdin · 07-24-2006, 09:30 PM

I realize the "testing" branch name of Etch implies that crashes or instability will occur more often than with the stable distribution, but does it work good enough for a non-critical computer (iMac 333 G3 with 32 MB RAM) ?

JimBass · 07-24-2006, 09:41 PM

Testing is fine for nearly any computer. Sarge is only for servers. Even with unstable, I have not had more than one problem in 18 months of usage, and that was corrected within 48 hours. Sarge is a rock. If you're doing a desktop, you'll be fine with testing, and probably ok with unstable as well should you choose to go that route.

Peace,
JimBass

JackieBrown · 07-24-2006, 11:23 PM

I run purely unstable (or as purely unstable as a dist-upgrade into gets you.)

rickh · 07-24-2006, 11:33 PM

Etch is probably more stable than any non-Debian distro you could choose.

JaseP · 07-25-2006, 09:28 AM

I never used Debian before and really like Etch... It's very flexible to configure... especially compared to SuSE (which I use on my desktop and used to use on my laptop that now runs Etch).

Only one pet pieve... No ported configuration gui's from other distros... I can understand not porting YAST... since its such a pig... But there are a lot of nice configuration tools out there, especially for Video and other devices that are just totally lacking... Why not make them optional packages??? It would save a lot of hassles.

jdog006 · 07-25-2006, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaseP

I never used Debian before and really like Etch... It's very flexible to configure... especially compared to SuSE (which I use on my desktop and used to use on my laptop that now runs Etch).

Only one pet pieve... No ported configuration gui's from other distros... I can understand not porting YAST... since its such a pig... But there are a lot of nice configuration tools out there, especially for Video and other devices that are just totally lacking... Why not make them optional packages??? It would save a lot of hassles.

Why port someone elses config apps when debian has their own?

That just wouldn't make any sense.

I understand that you are coming from a different distro background. Debian is full-featured and generally has it's own way of doing things. IMO the Debian way is the BEST way. Why stoop to someone else's level?