I am trying to figure out which Debian flavour to use, but the more I read, the less I seem to 'get it'.

I am currently using PCLOS, which is a rolling release (mostly, at least). This is the important part for me! I am not interested in having the latest and most bleeding stuff, but am trying to avoid having to do reinstalls over version shift... hence rolling for me.

From what I understand:

SID - the unstable one, although rolling, a bit of a chance, stability-wise. Probably not for me.

Stable - not a rolling release and requires reinstall when the year cycle for updates is over (if a new version is out, of course).

Testing - seems the compromise I am after: Fairly (!) stable, rolling and thus does not require reinstalls... ever...


Is the above correctly understood?
If yes, then next question: what the .... is backports? I can't seem to figure out if they are more or less stable than the 'normal' packages in testing?

I am happy with PCLOS, but with all the great choice out there, one does get the urge to 'sleep around' from time to time. Also, never know what I might be missing out on, right?!

Cheers!
CJ

Stable does not require a reinstall. Debian Stable upgrades are actually pretty nice.

You have Sid and Testing right. Also, the CUT (Constantly Usable Testing) project started recently, so watch for that.

backports is.. backports for Stable. IE, packages from Testing rebuilt on Stable.

I only run sid and never have an issue, although I use the Liquorix kernel, so maybe thats why it's pretty stable?

So... now you just added another one into the mix? My, if I weren't confused before...

But regarding stable, are you sure about this? Everywhere I read, people say that stable is only supported with updates for a year after release.

Re. backports: So... if I understand you correctly, the backports for stable are actually newer? I.e. backports are new packages for stable, not more stable packages for testing?

Yup, you can see that I am still confused. Am I doing it to myself, is it really much simpler than I perceive it to be?

Cheers!
CJ

Not quite.
Once Stable becomes 'Oldstable' it is usually supported with security updates for about a year.
So when Squeeze is the new Stable,Lenny will become Oldstable, and still have security updates for approximately a year.

Yes,Backports are newer packages for the Stable branch,not for Testing.

To answer a few of your questions, in no particular order:

No branch of Debian requires a reinstall, ever. The upgrade process is tested and tested and tested until it is determined to be bug-free, and not released until it's ready (Debian has no fixed release dates, unlike some other distros).

Each release is supported with updates for 1 year after the next release (at which point its name changes to 'old-stable'), so roughly 3 years in total.

Backports is a project that was started so users of Stable could easily choose to have up-to date versions of certain applications. It does not apply to users of Testing or Sid.

Based on your needs, I would say Unstable/Sid (two names for the same thing) is what you're looking for. You might be interested in the Aptosid project, which packages Debian Sid into a nice Live CD and has a very knowledgeable community. Debian is not really designed first and foremost as a "rolling release" distro (the project is very conservative with a primary emphasis on creating a very stable finished product), but the Aptosid people come awfully close.

I am not sure about that. As said, I use PCLOS currently, and this has a high emphasis on stability, and yet that sometimes annoys me when bugs are introduced.

As for my needs, I really push my main PC: Development, VirtualBox, aMule, trading stuff... so I can't really have it throw fits, something that still happens too regularly as is. I guess it would be hard to avoid with such a plethora of different uses.
Feel free to disagree and say so!

Got it. Soooo... that then means that I could/should use stable with backports and thus have both rolling and yet be fairly updated, yet in a reasonably stable environment?
Is it just a matter of pointing to different repos, simple as that?


So, combined with the above, after approx. three years, it will still update to next version. Ok, about as close to rolling that it gets (for the reason I require it)!

I actually came across that, but it seemed slanted as a bleeding edge release. Maybe I misunderstood.


One way to see what is best for me would be to just go ahead and try it out, though I would like to take aim at what's seems best for me as there is only so much time and motivation (for me, that is) to keep installing and trying out different distros.


Thank you all for your comments, much appreciated!
CJ

In the context of the Debian project, the words "stable" and "unstable" have a very specific meaning:

Stable = Unchanging. All applications are locked at a specific version and receive only bug fixes and security patches.

Unstable = Constantly changing. You should expect newer packages and frequent updates.

It is a common myth that Debian Unstable contains bleeding-edge, untested software. This is simply not true. Every application in Sid has been released as "stable" by its upstream developer. If you compare the following lists, you'll see that in fact most packages in Debian Sid are older than you're used to in PCLinuxOS (and if you choose Debian Stable they will be older still):

http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=pclinuxos
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=debian

I think you are misunderstanding the meaning of the phrase "rolling release." Debian Stable is not a "rolling release" in any way (even with Backports). It is, however, an excellent choice if you're looking for a very stable distro.

This is a fair point indeed!
I guess one could argue that the newer 'inter-versions' of a package is more stable as it has had bugs ironed out, so older is not necessary better for stability... but I think that would be a leap of faith, as reality seems to dictate otherwise.

But isn't it also true that packages are first thrown in Sid, then after a teething period moved to testing; and then only to stable when a new release is out? That does seem to indicate a certain amount of uncertainty in Sid. I mean, if not, why bother having both Sid and testing in the first place? Not arguing with you, mind you... just trying to understand.


No, that's one of the few things I do get, happily. I was just pointing out what part of 'rolling' that was important for me.

So... what is the consensus at present? It sounds like people think I should go with Sid, is that where the wind blows?

Cheers!
CJ

I agree there are two conflicting schools of thought on this. Some people believe stability is achieved by "freezing" a package and then fixing all the bugs (and remember, packages in Stable get bug fixes for 3 years). Others believe stability is achieved through always having the latest version of that package, as the upstream developer intended (this is what "rolling release" means to me--but remember that while new versions fix old bugs, they often introduce new bugs).

Certainly the former approach is preferred in many server/production/corporate environments (and not just in the Linux world; look at how many organizations are still using Windows XP), while the latter approach is popular with desktop end-users, hobbyists, and those who have the latest hardware (for example if you have a brand new netbook, Debian Stable might be extremely "unstable" for you, in the sense that it simply doesn't support your hardware at all).

You are correct (and in fact there is one level above Unstable called Experimental, but nobody actually uses it). Debian has a three-step quality control process (as opposed to two steps for most distros) because they believe it produces a more stable end product.

Testing is essentially the "beta" for the next release. It is important to the project to have a "this is what we're planning to release next; please help us test it" phase of development.

Unstable is not like that; it's just a mish-mash of the latest "stuff" and serves a different niche (users who want "rolling release").

You'll have to make that call for yourself. I think that Sid is the best choice for a "PCLinuxOS replacement" which is what I originally thought you were looking for. But if stability is your number one goal, and you prefer older, well-tested applications, then the choice is obvious.

So, I basically have to make a call as to where in this process I want to slide in - and stay, in case of Sid and Testing.

So, choosing Sid will practically get me closest to the next stable release at anytime, but with a little to pay in respect to stability, right?


Hell, I just want it all: the newest, stability and no work!
Seriously, you are right, also to change your mind. There are many things to like about PCLOS, but if I had to choose one above all else, it would be stability.

All in all, it seems - at least as a starting point - Sid seems to be the right choice for me, after all. I have changed my mind since I came here - which is a good things, as I actually listen to what is recommended. Now, if I actually understood it fully to make the right choice is another matter altogether!

Thanks for you help, much appreciated.

Last thing: What iso do I go for? Do I choose Testing net-install and then change the repos, is that rightly understood?

Cheers!
CJ

I started with stable, which currently is Lenny. But it didn't cover what I wanted it to. So I jumped over to SID (Which is Squeeze.) I am staying with Squeeze for right now but I am impressed enough that after a few months when Squeeze becomes stable I will be going with SID.

Uh, no. Sid is Unstable will always be Sid.

Testing is currently Squeeze.

Ugh, you are right of course. My mind seems to have flipped the two over the last couple of days.

Ok let me try again. The same reply with the corrections.

I take it from this you are intending on going for Unstable/Sid?.
Yes you can install using a Testing disc and upgrade,you could also download the business card iso.
Using the business card iso,you can select 'expert' from the installer menu.
This will will then let you choose which branch of Debian you want to install later in the install process.