Best stable distros based on Debian, CentOs, Slackware and FreeBSD?

Originally Posted by Martial-law After searching I found the best deriative for Red Hat Enterprise Linux and that is Scientific Linux. I would prefer it over CentOs.

I'm using Scientific Linux since v.5.5. I still use 6.2 but as a VM. You'll get a 'bit' better out of the box things like ntfs support in SL over CentOS right after installation. I must've recommended it.

Regards.

if you are brand new to gnu/Linux meaning do you know basic linux jargon ect if you are then that's another vote for mepis from me. mepis is generally the distro I recommend for new users anyways. If you know a little bit about linux, go plain debian. I'd describe it as the 'easiest' to use out of the listed distros. you asked about the DVDs. only the first DVD is required to get a nice full featured working system, the rest are just more packages for people with low bandwidth, which I doubt you have since you were able to download all 8 (that would take me 8 months) I purchased the set when I first tried debian. you will be asked to scan those extra DVDs during the install but this is only for the purpose of setting up the appropriate repositories. later on once debians running you can use them DVDs to install most things. its recommended to use an online repository though to make sure you get the latest updates.

Originally Posted by Martial-law Some people say that Mepis is in fact Debian Stable. But even if it is not pure Debian stable, for me it would be sufficient to know if it is as stable as Debian. I am looking for stable deriatives of Debian, CentOs and Slackware. I have deleted FreeBSD from the list. As it is not Linux.

Debian 'stable' can be considered 2 ways-

1- its 'stable' in the sense that all the packages have been tested, bugfixed and shouldnt have any major software problems.
2- its 'stable' in that the packages/software doesnt change. There are security updates, but its very very rare to see 'new' packages/software for 'stable' debian releases.

So if you take debian stable, and for example change firefox from 3.X to 10.X+, the software hasnt been tested to work with all the other software in debian. So its no longer as tested, bugfixed etc. as 'true' debian stable.

Its also no longer 'stable' as in 'packages dont change' either.

Originally Posted by Martial-law Regarding Ubuntu and its deriatives, though they are Debian testing based; they are far from stable.

Ubuntu 'normal' (non-LTS) releases are based on debian 'sid', only LTS releases are based on debia 'testing'.

Originally Posted by Martial-law 3- CentOs: Though it itself is a deriative of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, it is a not commercial like Red Hat and is freely available for everyone to use. I have read that it is as stable as RHEL and is exactly the same thing. But one thing which discourages is that it is just an OS for enterprises. Its not a general purpose OS like Debian and Slackware and their deriatives. I am very surprised that no one tried to create a user friendly, general purpose deriative of CentOs which works out of the box. Are there some legal problems?

There are a few CentOS and RHEL based distros around. Like the distros they are based on, they tend to be for server/networking use.

Its the same thing as with debian stable, the stablity of Red Hat and CentOS is due to testing. Getting CentOS or Red Hat, then adding a whole boat-load of newer software means you now have a whole system that hasnt been tested to work together.

To compare CentOS 6.2 (released 2011-12-20) and debian 6.0 (released 2011-02-06) as an example, CentOS has older versions of quite a bit of software, even though it was released after debian 6.0.

IMO CentOS and Red Hat are great server releases. While you can beat almost any linux distro into doing whatever you desire, debian is probably a better distro to base a 'general purpose' OS on when you compared to CentOS or Red Hat.

Not that I see much point of 'based on' distros in a lot of cases, quite often its just a different software selection, or a different installer. I'm mainly talking about debian based distros here, there are a few 'based on distros' I've been impressed with, like Salix. I'm not a big slackware user though, I cant really comment on salix vs slackware as far as stablity goes.

If you want to run debian stable, run debian stable. If you want to sod around with tiny distros like SnowLinux, go ahead. I dont think its going to make your life much, if any easier in mosty cases..and gettign help could be a lot harder than if you are running the bigger distro release.

Originally Posted by 273 I still don't know why Debian is said to be hard. In my experience I had to do the same things to get Ubuntu installed as I did Debian. With Ubuntu you still have to mess around getting CODECs working, for example, and adding the Debian multimedia repository is hardly difficult.

Adding debian multimedia isnt hard at all. I sometimes wonder how much people who are having post-install problems with debian actually use a search engine to get answers.......

Originally Posted by 273 Smilarly, restricted drivers install is still a manual stwp under Ubuntu even if it is a bit quicker than the ticking boxes and changing packaged under Debian.

%&^$ jockey (ubuntu 'hardware drivers' tool) is a lot of the reason why debian has a reputation for being 'harder' than the *buntus.

1- Some people seem unable to find the debian page on how to get/install closed drivers.
2- Some people just flip out at the idea of modifing sources.list and adding non-free.
3- Some people dont like having to 'use command line to add non-free (and going back to point #1, they dont seem able to search and figure out you dont have to use command line to do that).

Possibly #4 as well- "ubuntu is meant to be easier, I've run it, it works, now I've installed debian and I cant figure it out, therefore everyone was right and debian is harder"

I've even heard people say that debian is harder "because there are 2 passwords, and sudo doesnt work".........

There is also the difference between debian and ubuntu users. Yeah, I'm making a massive generalisation.

Debian users are more likely to want to install only what they need, and if it takes a few more minutes, or they have to go back to command line/synaptic to get gstreamer-plugins-ugly, that is better than loading up all the gstreamer packages. Ubuntu users are less likely to care about 'cruft', unneeded packages, etc.. So they just install the ubuntu-restricted-extras package and that is that.

Originally Posted by Martial-law Anyway, I think I should just begin with Debian 6 Squeeze as some of you have advised. I have downloaded the 8 DVDs for Debian 6. I know that the first one is for installing the system. Kindly inform me about the remaining 7. Are they required to be installed with the first DVD just after the OS installation or they can be kept after installing the OS and used later whenever to install the required apps?

If you have an internet conenction, you only need CD#1, or even the 'netinst' (a very basic and small image, that just allows booting and then gets the rest of the software from the debian software repository).

DVD#1 to #8 is great for installing offline, you have access to all the debian software on discs. If you've got a decent internet connection, getting more than DVD#1 is a waste, as you can get the same software from the repository. The versions if the repository will be the newest with current security fixes, etc..

Originally Posted by cascade9 There are a few CentOS and RHEL based distros around. Like the distros they are based on, they tend to be for server/networking use.

Scientific Linux, which is one of them, provides the Icewm because some of the desktops and laptops at CERN are too old to run Gnome or KDE; evidently they don't think its only for servers. And Red Hat offers two versions: server and desktop.

Originally Posted by cascade9 If you want to run debian stable, run debian stable. If you want to sod around with tiny distros like SnowLinux, go ahead. I dont think its going to make your life much, if any easier in mosty cases..and gettign help could be a lot harder than if you are running the bigger distro release. Adding debian multimedia isnt hard at all. I sometimes wonder how much people who are having post-install problems with debian actually use a search engine to get answers.......

I think you've just explained why some of use don't like Debian! The tone of the clique at the Debian forum...

To return to the questions of the original poster:

1 The difference between Mepis and Debian Stable.
Debian Stable comes out in alternate years. That means that after a year there will be many programs in the Testing repository that are just as well tested as those in the Stable repository, but they can't go in the Stable repository because it's not due to come out yet. Distros like Mepis and SalineOS have a new version every year, so they can add such programs to their repositories.

2 The difference between Salix and Slackware
Salix has a rather simpler installer, probably the best system for installing from USB for those that want it, a graphical package manager by default, Xfce by default, and more software. They also use a package manager that sorts out the dependencies for you, while Slackware leaves you to do it yourself. But where a program is in both distros, it's identical. If fact, it's not physically present in the Salix repository at all. All they have is the dependency information, and the files are actually downloaded from Slackware.

Originally Posted by Martial-law After searching I found the best deriative for Red Hat Enterprise Linux and that is Scientific Linux. I would prefer it over CentOs. Anyway, I think I should just begin with Debian 6 Squeeze as some of you have advised. I have downloaded the 8 DVDs for Debian 6. I know that the first one is for installing the system. Kindly inform me about the remaining 7. Are they required to be installed with the first DVD just after the OS installation or they can be kept after installing the OS and used later whenever to install the required apps?

You don't need to guess; Debian has excellent documentation!

http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/installmanual

Assuming you have an internet connection, you only need CD1/DVD1, to install the base system, then you install additional packages from the internet using aptitude/apt-get.

If you don't have an internet connection, then it may be helpful to have a complete CD/DVD set to use as a local repository. The CD/DVD's are divided by popularity of packages, so the most frequently-installed stuff is on DVD1.

With the help of this forum, (This forum is a great place to get advise and has some very good and cooperative members indeed!)I have somehow received the answer to my first question regarding stable distros based on, as below:




1- Debian 6 Squeeze: Simply Mepis, Saline OS, Solus OS, Snow Linux. (Though they are not pure Debian stable but usually quite stable distros)


2- Slackware: Salix OS. (Quite stable)


3- Red Hat Enterprise Linux: Scientific Linux (As stable as RHEL and a general purpose OS; not just based on Enterprise). Dropped CentOS!



I would begin with Debian 6 squeeze. I have found two installation instructions on google. The first is about how to install Debian with Windows 7 dual boot which I intend to follow. There is another guide just for reference.


http://www.linuxbsdos.com/2011/02/17...and-windows-7/


http://www.howtoforge.com/perfect-se...ze-ispconfig-2



I downloaded all the 8 DVDs in my office PC where the internet is very fast. At home where I wish to install Debian on my own PC, I have a slow internet connection. So I would request you to kindly inform how to properly use these DVDs. I intend to use the first DVD just for installing the OS and the remaining 7 to keep them with me for apps installation later. So during installation the installer would require the 7 DVDs for scanning. And would it just scan the DVDs or install some apps too. I would like it to just scan and allow me to keep the DVDs for later use. Kindly throw some light of this process. How it all would be done? Inform kindly.

as I said in my previous reply, during the install it will request you scan any additional discs. once your system is up and running you just open the terminal su to root, and aptitude install Foo and it will do some calculations and then it will tell you to insert one of the discs and it will tell you which one too. you insert it and it will install Foo package, that simple.

Originally Posted by Knightron as I said in my previous reply, during the install it will request you scan any additional discs. once your system is up and running you just open the terminal su to root, and aptitude install Foo and it will do some calculations and then it will tell you to insert one of the discs and it will tell you which one too. you insert it and it will install Foo package, that simple.

Thanks Knightron.

If you want a Stable Debian that is easy to use get DebianLive. Give it a run before you install it and then just click the install icon. Others have mentioned about adding repositories, it's easy and it is Stable.

I wanted to switch to Linux this year. I'm tired of Windows and I want something new. Since I'm complete noob for anything other than M$, I look around to find the "best" distros (for noobs like me), and downloaded few of them for a test drive. And here is my experience for Linux Mint 12, Linux Mint 12 KDE, Ubuntu (latest) and Zorin.

They are all fast, nice looking, absolutely great when run from USB. Installed .... Oh my God ... Cannot install drivers for my ATI card. The one that they recommend (Jockey I think) doesn't work ("Unsupported model" notice on the screen with extremely high flickering. Unusable). I managed to download official ATI driver, but it cannot be installed before old one is uninstalled. But Jockey says that old driver is not "Active", and yet it is installed if someone can guess from the message on the screen and ATI installer. After one hour of learning linux basic principles, I finally managed to manually uninstall old one, and install official driver. But there is no HD acceleration so watching 720p videos is really painful (on Windows there is HD Acceleration for this card).

On the straight 12 version (Gnome?) shell is restarting on almost every mouse click. KDE on the other hand, did not have problems with restarting shell, but as soon I installed Skype - everything goes to pieces. On both versions.

Maybe it is on Mint only. Let's try Ubuntu ... Crap. Same thing, absolutely same thing on all distros. So either I'm professional Linux OS destroyer, or something is wrong here.

Zorin is the example how Linux should look for all the noobs like me. However, it has the same problems as previous three mentioned. For some reason, Skype successfully kills every distro after few hours of work.

Gnome, on all distros is restarting all the time and freezes from time to time. Absolutely unusable. And BTW, It's UI/UX in the latest iteration is absolute nonsense.

All versions had problems with waking up after lid close. They will not wake up, no matter what button you press, so hard restart is the only solution. That god damned skype doesn't work until you tweak it with pulseaudio volume control - left mic 100%, right mic 0%. WTF?

My conclusion? Unbelievable unusable and unstable systems. UNBELIEVABLE! On my previous netbook I had Ubuntu, I think version 10, and I cant remember that I had this type of the problems. To test if my notebook is a problem, I've installed Zorin on my wife eMachines netbook (Intel Atom / 2GB DDRAM). Completely same thing but without GPU driver problems. Freeze, restart, crash ...


And what about my machine? Acer Aspire One 722, AMD C60 processor with integrated graphics and 2GB of DDRAM. All systems are installed as ONLY ONE, so no dual boot, plain and clean.

Conclusion - If you need Skype and stable system for everyday work - avoid Ubuntu, Mint and Zorin. Pitty, 'cause I really like Zorin

Originally Posted by H4N5O1 My conclusion? Unbelievable unusable and unstable systems. UNBELIEVABLE! On my previous netbook I had Ubuntu, I think version 10, and I cant remember that I had this type of the problems. To test if my notebook is a problem, I've installed Zorin on my wife eMachines netbook (Intel Atom / 2GB DDRAM). Completely same thing but without GPU driver problems. Freeze, restart, crash ... And what about my machine? Acer Aspire One 722, AMD C60 processor with integrated graphics and 2GB of DDRAM. All systems are installed as ONLY ONE, so no dual boot, plain and clean. Conclusion - If you need Skype and stable system for everyday work - avoid Ubuntu, Mint and Zorin. Pitty, 'cause I really like Zorin

Waow! You are either an M$ troll, truly jinked or just have no idea about how to install anything but W$.

I am using Kubuntu 12.04 with Skype and I have no problems whatsoever. I have used Skype on Mepis, Suze, Antix, etc... with no issues either. I would not be surprised thought if Skype started to become a problem on account that it is now owned by M$!

If you are truly interested in Linux start by picking a distro, Zorin, if you like it so much. The distro should be the latest one so that it will be based on a recent Kernel that would support the latest hardware. Join the distro forum and share your issues there to learn how to resolve them, Linux forums are helpful and welcoming.

Linux is way more stable than W$ by any account. Yes there are issues with some drivers like ATI. But even those vendors that are complete M$ poodles are finally coming around and supporting Linux.

Michel

Originally Posted by michelm Waow! You are either an M$ troll, truly jinked or just have no idea about how to install anything but W$.

11 months after the previous post you join and decide to call someone a troll! Aren't you off to a great start.

I was browsing the thread and I did join to call the spade a spade. Just could not help myself.

The OP started the thread to get an honest answer for his query and that guy (who also happen to have just one post!) jumps in and posts his biased and scare mongering post (If you want to use Skype DON'T even think about Linux!).

I just felt I had to set the record straight for anyone who would happen to read this thread in the future. It's a great thread with a lot of useful info.

Michel

I totally understand setting the record straight but calling someone a troll who hasn't even logged in for 10 months is a little strong. Anyway welcome to LQ.

One that hasn't been mentioned that might be considered is Stella (CentOS derived):

http://li.nux.ro/stella/

As for the others, Salix for Slackware, Crunchbang for Debian, PC-BSD for FreeBSD (I know you said you dropped FreeBSD, but worth considering).

Note: Crunchbang is Debian testing, but pretty stable in my experience.

Good luck! (But I say, just throw yourself headlong into Slackware, you won't regret it!)