LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Linux - Distributions (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-distributions-5/)
-   -   Please suggest me a good rollin release distro (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-distributions-5/please-suggest-me-a-good-rollin-release-distro-779470/)

Ben_the1st 01-02-2010 06:13 PM

Please suggest me a good rollin release distro
 
Hi everyone!

Sry, if this is going to be a "hundred times posted thread", but I decided to find a distro for me this way.
I'm not new to linux, I've been using linux (several distros) for nearly 3 years now, but I still couldn't find one that suits me. I've read a lot of comparsions, reviews about several distros.
The most important thing is that I would like to use a rolling release distro, I would like to have a system always up-to-date with newest softwares. The second thing is, that I would like to have just those things that I need, I dont want to have packages installed what I'd never use,a system what I build from the base, and I can configure it to my needs.
I've tried Gentoo, but compiling everything takes much time (I havent finished building the full system, I havent used it too much, but I think upgrading also takes much time, correct me if I'm wrong).
I've also tried Arch, but after Gentoo it looks to me less customizable. Maybe I just have to get used to it (I've installed it a few days ago).
Is there any distro similar to these to, or it knows the things I've written. (I'm also thinking of trying FreeBSD, but I don't know much about that).
So, which distro would you suggest me?

Balazs

pixellany 01-02-2010 07:25 PM

Arch....

Starts with NOTHING, and then you add only what you need. Does that count as customizable?

XavierP 01-02-2010 07:45 PM

Debian Sid and, I guess, Gentoo would also be suited.

Ben_the1st 01-03-2010 12:51 PM

Thanks for the replies.
I have another question, this isnt the best thread for it, but I dont wanna start a new one:
Building a gentoo system takes a lot of time (my computer was compiling nerly for 36 hours, and I only had the base system with KDE and Alsa, and KDE's base applications bt nothing else), but does it take that much to "maintain" it? I mean keeping your system up-to-date with regular updates.

Balazs

P.S.: Pls still feel free to suggest distros :)

~sHyLoCk~ 01-03-2010 08:43 PM

Arch Linux.

Quote:

but does it take that much to "maintain" it?
Of course it does. Every time a new upgrade comes along you need to spend hours compiling that.

Ion Silverbolt 01-04-2010 12:45 AM

I do most of my Gentoo upgrades in a background terminal while I do other things. It doesn't slow you down unless you're doing something that needs a lot of cpu.

If there is a major update, then I may just let it run while I am away, or asleep.

Gentoo is probably the most customizable distro out there. Arch is about as close as you're going to get as far as a binary distro goes. If the compiling thing turns you off in Gentoo, try sticking with Arch for a while. I think it's a good distro. And it's fast.

justaguynpc 01-04-2010 04:07 PM

Everyone has their favorite distros. I am no exception to that rule. I prefer debian, the package management is simple while ensuring all dependencies are met, or the software is not installed. You can't complain about the number of software packages available ... well over 20,000! "Rolling-Release" I have sidux installed with the smxi script managing what to install to avoid breakage. You can't get more cutting edge, nor can you maintain as easily a flavor of debian unstable.

Sure, if you are knowledgable enough to not need smxi, not a problem, as the sidux maintainers frown upon a "3rd-party-script" being introduced into sidux. I on the other hand am not savy enough, nor have the spare time to learn all that would be needed to run / maintain a rolling release distro.

Cheers

Ben_the1st 03-28-2010 03:05 PM

Hi everyone!

I still couldn't decide, I've used Arch until my computer died, but I had some problems with it. For example there are "not so much" packages in the main repos,still you can find a lot in AUR, but half of it I wasn't able to compile. People always say that Arch is stable, but always suggest to get to their main site before update, to make sure everything will be ok after update, so I'm still "worried". About Gentoo I heared it's stable, but on distrowatch they say that "Occasional instability and risk of breakdown", so I can't decide wich one is true.
I would like to have a system always up-to-date with possibly the newest sofware versions, but still stable, so if I want to use something it will work (even currently after the latest update). I have to work on my computer almost every day (i have to write my thesis in the next one-and-a-half months) so it's crucial that everything works. Is still Arch my best choice, or you suggest me something else?

snowpine 03-28-2010 03:15 PM

Hi Ben, in the Linux world, a "rolling release" distribution is BY DEFINITION "unstable." Picture a rock that is "rolling" down a hill; would you say that rock is "stable" or "unstable"?

"Stable" in Linux-speak means "packages are frozen at their current version and receive only bug fixes and security updates."

If you are writing your thesis and it is "crucial that everything works," I recommend a truly stable distro like Debian Stable, CentOS, etc. These distros use slightly older applications that are thoroughly tested and known to be rock-solid, and you will never ever get an update that unexpectedly changes the functionality of your system.

Once you have a stable distro installed for your mission-critical work, you can install a rolling release distro (Arch, Gentoo, Sidux, etc.) as a dual boot, or in a virtual machine, or on a spare computer. This will give you the best of both worlds. I personally have a dual boot between CentOS (for getting my everyday work done) and Arch (for learning and experimenting).

Alexvader 03-28-2010 03:34 PM

ArchLinux... :)

Y have a base install of 200~ Megs...

you enable the services you need at startup, that gives you a boot time of 15-20 sec... probably less if you care to tweak the kernel more deeply...

You start without X, a CLI only system, and then you add whatever you need with Pacman, dependency resolutions are automatically handled.

Ben_the1st 03-28-2010 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snowpine (Post 3915746)
Hi Ben, in the Linux world, a "rolling release" distribution is BY DEFINITION "unstable." Picture a rock that is "rolling" down a hill; would you say that rock is "stable" or "unstable"?

"Stable" in Linux-speak means "packages are frozen at their current version and receive only bug fixes and security updates."

If you are writing your thesis and it is "crucial that everything works," I recommend a truly stable distro like Debian Stable, CentOS, etc. These distros use slightly older applications that are thoroughly tested and known to be rock-solid, and you will never ever get an update that unexpectedly changes the functionality of your system.

Once you have a stable distro installed for your mission-critical work, you can install a rolling release distro (Arch, Gentoo, Sidux, etc.) as a dual boot, or in a virtual machine, or on a spare computer. This will give you the best of both worlds. I personally have a dual boot between CentOS (for getting my everyday work done) and Arch (for learning and experimenting).

Thanks very much. Looks like I just have to realize, that I can't have everything I want, cause they're opposite things...:) I don't know why I couldn't see this obvious thing...
Still, I meant by rolling release (sorry if it doesnt mean that, and I misunderstood) that there are no major updates , new version cycles, that usually means a full reinstall, but continous minor upgrades. In this case Gentoo looks to me a good decision (despite long compile times...:S).

DCOH 03-28-2010 09:24 PM

PClinuxOS is pretty much a rolling distro it's now going from 2009 to the version 2010 and it does it through updates.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:11 PM.