Need a new distro?

[ponder]

My Ubuntu 10.04 is giving me endless schit, instead of fixing it I think I would rather install a distro based on debian proper (stable), 64bit.

So I reckon maybe I should use Crunchbang (Openbox or XFCE?) as a base and just add Gnome to it?

Any other recommendations wrt debian based?

I would like to start downloading a iso *now* so I can use up the last bit of the months bandwidth and install the sucker tomorrow.

EDIT: I think I might just get the XFCE version of Crunchbang which I can add add openbox & gnome3?

Why not Arch? To many updates that chows bandwidth, fine on my minimal laptop though.

 

[ponder]

Never mind, decided to download crunchbang xfce 64bit.

 

[DrJohnZoidberg]

Well its not Debian, but you could consider Fedora 14/15 (depending if you want Gnome2 or 3). Makes use of DeltaRPM packages which can cut bandwidth usage down quite considerably if that is something that you need. Been running F15 for a few months now and doubt I'll ever go back to Ubuntu unless they really pull something miraculous out the bag (which I doubt judging from the latest 11.10 alpha release I tried over the weekend).

 

[ponder]

I looked at F15 but they update every 6 months and support does not last that long either. I'm not a fan of rpm based distros or at least I wasn't in the past.

I think XFCE will actually be more than enough for me.

 

[koffiejunkie]

Why not just use Real Debian?

 

[BigAl-sa]

Just be aware that to install anything out-of-the-ordinary under squeeze (stable) is a pain in the butt. You have to include wheezy (testing) and pin the bits you want. What is nice is the minimal amount of updates (what you're looking for). Wheezy otoh, has been through close to a gigabyte of upgrades in the last fortnight, including two new kernels (which is also a pain if you install your own graphics drivers).

 

[ponder]

Why not just use Real Debian?

I looked at that and saw the iso images are bigger and I was not sure how much configuring I would have had to do on my own. I decided to go with crunchbang as it's essentially real debian(squeeze) + some custom configs and I like the look of crunchbang.

Anyway wish me luck as the iso is burned to usb and my /home is backed up... time to hit the reset button...

 

[ponder]

Ok, installed and it was very! quick.

Busy doing updates (~100MB) after which I will install nvidia drivers.

I don't find it super snappy at the moment compared to arch+openbox on my ancient celeron laptop (1995) running on my desktop, see sig for specs. Hopefully it's due to a lack of gpu drivers so I will know for sure after nvidia drivers are installed.

 

[koffiejunkie]

I looked at that and saw the iso images are bigger and I was not sure how much configuring I would have had to do on my own.

You only need the first CD. If you download all the images (a couple of DVDs) you get nearly every piece of software that's actively maintained but there's little sense in doing so because it will get updated soon enough. So just install off the first CD (they have Gnome, KDE and XFCE versions) and let it fetch whatever else it needs off the net.

 

[bin3]

http://www.linuxmint.com/

 

[ponder]

http://www.linuxmint.com/

That's based on Testing.

 

[bin3]

That's based on Testing.

For a moment I read: That's based on Turing, and I seriously did not understand that ...

But yes: I have been using it for a while on my laptop and so far quite impressed. Picked up all my hardware without any issues, installed quick and seems quite stable.

 

[HavocXphere]

Why are you under such hectic cap restrictions ponder?

I'd go with Arch.

 

[ponder]

Why are you under such hectic cap restrictions ponder?

On a full blown system the constant updates can be quite hectic. With ubuntu I just disabled all non-security related updates. Got about 10GB a month but don't want the OS to eat into that.

Right now I'm battling my ass off to install the nvidia drivers.

 

[koffiejunkie]

On a full blown system

What is a "full blown system" ?

the constant updates can be quite hectic. With ubuntu I just disabled all non-security related updates.

You're comparing apples with oranges. Ubuntu is a 'stable' release. There are very few applications that get updates other than security updates - Firefox and Thunderbird are the only exceptions I've noticed so far. The rest will only get backported security fixes to existing versions of packages, so the number of updates stays fairly low.

Debian Wheezy is the 'testing' release, which is in active development at this stage, and will be getting new versions of just about everything constantly. As it stabilises over time, the number of updates per day declines until there are hardly more than a handful per week, and then it gets released as stable.

Debian Squeeze, which is the stable right now, won't give you gigabytes worth of updates, unless you were stupid enough to install the entire distro with all it offers (8 DVDs).

 

[HavocXphere]

I see. Else just get yourself some WA cap and run the updates against that...their *nix ftp is freezoned. Might be hit & miss though...last time I tried the ftp was giving me hassles (That was Arch...not sure about others).

 

[ponder]

What is a "full blown system" ?

About 7GB used in / for apps.

You're comparing apples with oranges. Ubuntu is a 'stable' release. There are very few applications that get updates other than security updates - Firefox and Thunderbird are the only exceptions I've noticed so far. The rest will only get backported security fixes to existing versions of packages, so the number of updates stays fairly low.

Debian Wheezy is the 'testing' release, which is in active development at this stage, and will be getting new versions of just about everything constantly. As it stabilises over time, the number of updates per day declines until there are hardly more than a handful per week, and then it gets released as stable.

Debian Squeeze, which is the stable right now, won't give you gigabytes worth of updates, unless you were stupid enough to install the entire distro with all it offers (8 DVDs).

How am I comparing apples to oranges when I'm comparing Debian Squeeze to Ubuntu? I'm not comparing it to Arch or Debian Wheezy.
I'm saying if I had to do a full blown install of Arch on my desktop (which I have before) of the size taken by Ubuntu with Gnome or KDE there will be a lot of updates eating bandwidth.
I have a light weight setup of Arch on my laptop which means there are way less updates than if I would have installed the Gnome DE for example.

I'm fully aware of the differences between a rolling release cycle and a fixed release cycle.

Maybe you just understood wrong or I was not clear enough.

 

[koffiejunkie]

How am I comparing apples to oranges when I'm comparing Debian Squeeze to Ubuntu?

Sorry, looking over this I realise I confused your comments with Big-Al's.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Right now I'm battling my ass off to install the nvidia drivers.

Check my squeeze thread on p2 of this sub forum. If you're sukkeling, use sgfxi to do the install for you. Works pretty much like the envy scripts for ubuntu.

 

[BigAl-sa]

You're comparing apples with oranges. Ubuntu is a 'stable' release. There are very few applications that get updates other than security updates - Firefox and Thunderbird are the only exceptions I've noticed so far. The rest will only get backported security fixes to existing versions of packages, so the number of updates stays fairly low.

Ubuntu is nowhere near as stable as squeeze. IIRC, there were four updates for squeeze in Aug. There were a whole boatload for Ubuntu 10.04.3, never mind the later versions.