Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 19:18:15 +0200
Date: Wed, 17 May 2000 19:18:15 +0200
> Dpkg vs RPM > Both managability and build packages. I have heard a lot > of "good things" about dpkg.
Have a look at http://www.kitenet.net/~joey/pkg-comp/ for a detailed overview by Joey Hess of various package management formats.
> Customization of the distro > We do a lot of customization to our distro. Can this easily > be done with debian?
Sure. And if you think your customisations may make sense for others as well, don't forget that Debian is developed in an open fashion, so you may want to submit patches to the package maintainers, or perhaps even volunteer to maintain some packages yourself.
Ray
Dpkg beats RPM hands down for anyone who has to actualy administer a number of boxes and wants everything as automatic as possible (for upgrades).
As far as being able to customize the distro - go all out. You can of course edit config files at the "vi" level ;) There are also tools to take the administration of a large number of machines to an even higher level.
I don't know if the mass installs is a possibility. I imagine it depends on your idea of an automated install.
Nathan
> >Autoinstall (Red Hat's kickstart) > > This is also something fairly important. We need this as we do a > > lot of mass installs. > > For mass installs, just make a standard issue CD, boot from that CD, > and copy over the OS. Or you could even make a disk image and dd it > onto the hard drive. That assumes you have the same hard drive in all > the machines. You can turn a 20GB drive into a 10GB drive. :) But > even if you have 4 or 5 different hard drives in your organization, > using disk images will still save you tons of time.
even better, you can make a tar.gz image of your "standard install", stick it on an nfs server and then create a boot floppy with nfs support.
when building a new box, boot with the floppy, partition the disk (scriptable using sfdisk), mount the nfs drive, untar the archive, and then run a script which customises whatever needs to be customised (e.g. hostname, IP address, etc). then run lilo to make it bootable from the hard disk.
alternatively, put it on a CD-ROM and make that CD bootable - just insert the CD and reboot for a fully-automated install. say 10 meg or so for boot kernel & utilities, leaves you up to around 640MB of compressed tar.gz containing your standard install file-system image.
btw, this tar.gz idea is how the debian base system is installed on a machine in the first place. the only significant difference is that you're installing your own tar.gz system image rather than the standard base.tar.gz.
automating debian installs is pretty easy - IF you have a good understanding of how debian works.
craig sanders
> > I agree - dpkg and apt are great compared to rpm's. However, that's all > > assuming that there are debian packages out there that are up to date > > (which they're generally not).
>Actually, unstable is usually pretty close to up-to-date. I know (of) >quite a few people who run unstable on their production boxes; they just >do a little bit of in-house testing first.
The only real difference between stable and unstable is that unstable has up to date packages. The only thing stable has over unstable is the track history of "yeah all this stuff has worked together for a LONG time".
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:36:31 -0700
After a year with Redhat, I'm considering moving to Debian. I'm doing some research this time, so a year from now I don't feel like I've made a mistake. The summary below is what I've learned from reading the newsgroups searching with terms like 'redhat vs debian'. Comments are welcome, especially experiences as a user.
Major advantages of Debian:
Upgrades easier more reliable. APT package manager best in the industry.
Choice of stable, testing, latest releases. Easy upgrades of any or all packages.
Very active and enthusiastic community for support.
Candor and Transparency. Bug system is open. You can even get ratings on how well each package maintainer has handled bugs in the past. This is where the lack of commercial constraints is most apparent.
Major advantages of Redhat:
More likely to find a new package as an rpm than a deb. (e.g. latest release of Python). But I see Debian's repository is bigger. I'm confused.
Redhat systems more commonly seen in corporate settings, and other places you might find yourself working.
Redhat is the standard "platform" that major applications like Oracle are ported to. Use another platform, and you might have trouble getting application support.
Questions:
What are the differences I'll need to learn in moving from Redhat to Debian? Filesystem, procedures, etc.
How much effort in setting up peripherals, network services, etc.? I've heard that Libranet helps with this setup. What about Progeny? Any experiences?
Any likely disappointments - things that I will discover *after* making a big effort to move.
Can rpm packages be converted to deb packages? I've heard 'alien' can convert deb's to rpm's, but is not reliable. Going the other way should be easier, since the rpm features are fewer than deb package features.
Will package management ever be as easy as Windows? The XP System Restore utility is a life saver.
Thoughts:
Redhat seems to be putting all its effort on *enterprise* systems, where setups are done by certified professionals. This makes it rough on small offices and individuals.
I understand their strategy of concentrating on the enterprise accounts. I just wish they would make it more clear, and not raise expectations among smaller users like me.
Can Redhat be making any money on individuals and small office users? I know they've lost on sales to me. I've purchased three releases from them ( 7.3, 8.0, and 9 ), and each time I've had to call tech support, sometimes multiple calls. One call wipes out their profit on that sale.
I think Redhat may be engaging in wishful thinking. Just make a "one-size fits all" distribution (RH9), add patches as necessary, but don't increase costs by assigning a new revision number, and use the support hotline as a "training ground" for new employees that might eventually be good enough for enterprise support.
Dave
I can't comment on Debain, being a Redhat user myself, but I have recently discovered apt (Advanced Package Tool), which is used by Debian, but has recently been ported to work with rpm's on Redhat systems, for example. It makes life much much easier when you want to download and install or upgrade your system. There is even a nice gui frontend for it called synaptic.
You can check it out at freshrpms.net.
Good luck.
Randy
If you want to know if Debian has a package, then look at those lists again.
Install Debian on a spare box or partition, there's no need to just dump Windoze…errr, Redhat.
System Restore is a "lifesaver" on a crappy OS that needs it.
On Linux you backup your important files on a regular basis with a script run out of cron, but will probably only need the backups if there is a hardware failure.
"Running Linux" and "The Rute User's Exposition and Tutorial" (http://rute.sourceforge.net) are both written for Debian and Redhat, and there isn't a lot of difference.
If you run Linux from the commandline (and I don't mean a raw tty: there are great tools like screen and mc that make it very nice and a good deal more free and efficient than with a gui…) all the distros are pretty much the same: It's Linux, after all, and the distros all amount to window dressing.
As for package managers, they are rather like the GUI: They make simple things easy and complex things a drag if not impossible.
Much better to take a little time to learn to install from source, and you will be able to make use of any application, even those your distro disdains.
And you can customize them to boot….
Alan C
> searching with terms like 'redhat vs debian'. Comments are welcome, > especially experiences as a user.
I moved to debian from redhat a little over a year ago. I used redhat versions 4.1 through 7.3 but i didn't really like the direction they were going with the gnome desktop in 8.0 and later. I figured I'd check and see what another distribution had to offer.
> Major advantages of Debian: > > 1) Upgrades easier more reliable. APT package manager best in the > industry.
Yes, apt is very nice. However, the there are a number of package tools with somewhat overlapping functionality — dpkg, apt-get, aptitude/dselect. Man pages are you friend but It takes a little time to get used to what can do what with the functionality scattered around a bit.
> 2) Choice of stable, testing, latest releases. Easy upgrades of any or all > packages.
I have run all three. I would choose stable if you hardware is old for it to support it properly. Otherwise, I would choose sid/unstable. Stable, is well, stable and things work and you get security updates. Unstable is where a lot of newer stuff comes out, sometimes a thing will break, but usually an update comes out within a day or so.
Testing is a newer in-between thing which picks up packages which have aged enough in unstable to vet their most glaring bugs. Unfortunately, it doesn't work as well as I'd hoped. The problem is that testing bugs can be longstanding as new updates don't come in until dependencies clear. Unstable bugs aren't really much more frequent in my experience and they get fixed quickly.
Your mileage may vary, see what you like. Be aware it is easy to dist-upgrade to a newer package set, i.e., from stable to testing to unstable but difficult to go in reverse order.
> 3) Very active and enthusiastic community for support. > > 4) Candor and Transparency. Bug system is open. You can even get ratings > on how well each package maintainer has handled bugs in the past. This is > where the lack of commercial constraints is most apparent. > > Major advantages of Redhat: > > 1) More likely to find a new package as an rpm than a deb. (e.g. latest > release of Python). But I see Debian's repository is bigger. I'm > confused.
Yes. A big weakness of debian is that if you have new hardware, there might not be a debian package for you. For example, if your video card needs XFree86 4.3 (because it is recent), then you can be out of luck with debian since they only offer 4.2. (Yes, I know you can compile XFree86 yourself, and I know about the experimental packages. But it's still a pain.) Stable has an even more ancient 4.1. This is a major reason for people not being able to use debian stable.
> 2) Redhat systems more commonly seen in corporate settings, and other > places you might find yourself working.
Redhat offers support. Debian does too. Redhat will do both hand-holding and bug fixing in exchange for a fee. It is easier to contract with one entity like redhat than a potential legion of debian developers.
> 3) Redhat is the standard "platform" that major applications like Oracle > are ported to. Use another platform, and you might have trouble getting > application support.
True. And redhat is a fine linux distribution. People use it because of a lot of reasons.
> Questions: > > 1) What are the differences I'll need to learn in moving from Redhat to > Debian? Filesystem, procedures, etc.
You have to survive the installation. You will want to know what hardware you have and what some of the major kernel modules you need are called.
> 2) How much effort in setting up peripherals, network services, etc.? I've > heard that Libranet helps with this setup. What about Progeny? Any > experiences?
I found that debian network setup was easier than redhats. Printers are similar, you can use redhat's printtool in debian too.
> 3) Any likely disappointments - things that I will discover *after* > making a big effort to move.
Check that your video card works with Xfree86 4.2 or 4.1 depending on if you want to go unstable or stable.
> 4) Can rpm packages be converted to deb packages? I've heard 'alien' can > convert deb's to rpm's, but is not reliable. Going the other way should be > easier, since the rpm features are fewer than deb package features.
Yes, but I haven't done much of the that.
> 5) Will package management ever be as easy as Windows? The XP System > Restore utility is a life saver.
Backup your /home, /etc and /usr/local. I like to have a seperate /home partition. That way you can tar up /etc and /usr/local, store them in somewhere under /home and proceed to blow away your system. In addition to swap, you probably want more than two partitions, but i consider / ` /home ` <swap> to be the minimum number of linux partitions.
Don't worry about debian maintained packages. To make a list of your packages, use
dpkg --get-selections > file
After restore or to setup a new machine with the same stuff
dpkg --set-selections < file apt-get update && apt-get -u upgrade
Package management sucks under windows AFAICT but I haven't used XP. You have to go uninstall, then install fresh. Sometimes you can lose config information, sometimes you are updating a screen driver and your screen goes to crap in the gap between uninstall and install. In short, Windows is such a lose.
> Thoughts: > > Redhat seems to be putting all its effort on *enterprise* systems, where > setups are done by certified professionals. This makes it rough on small > offices and individuals. > > I understand their strategy of concentrating on the enterprise > accounts. I just wish they would make it more clear, and not raise > expectations among smaller users like me. > > Can Redhat be making any money on individuals and small office users? I > know they've lost on sales to me. I've purchased three releases from them > ( 7.3, 8.0, and 9 ), and each time I've had to call tech support, sometimes > multiple calls. One call wipes out their profit on that sale.
You can use newsgroups and mailing lists for both redhat and debian. And with debian, you don't have anyplace to call. If making tech support calls is important, you may want to stick with redhat.
Johan KULLSTAM
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux,linux.debian.devel
>Is Debian compatible with rpm?
If you want to install software from RPMs on a Debian system, you'll need Alien
>Can I use commercial RPMs (not open-source) on a Debian machine?
Sure, just because the fine people at Debian believe in free software doesn't mean you have to.
dowe@sierratel.com