[huskerlug] Re: The Debain Leap
- From: Jerry Kreps <jkreps@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: huskerlug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 06:51:28 -0600
On Thursday 13 March 2003 10:33 pm, you wrote:
> Same here, I just installed knoppix on my machine this week and I just =
love
> it. I don't think that I will ever go back to Red Hat or Mandrake and I
> used to be a big fan of Mandrake. I just love to be able to install and
> update package with the apt-get.
Which version? I looked for 3.2 and haven't seen it yet.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve [mailto:steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 7:36 PM
> To: huskerlug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [huskerlug] The Debain Leap
>
>
>
> =09I started looking into Debian this week as a replacement for some
> OpenBSD
> bridging firewalls. Nothing against OpenBSD, but I want something that
> doesn't have a support "life cycle" of only 1 year. And, since the pat=
ch
> at
>
> bridge.sourceforge.net has been out and in use for awhile now, I though=
t
> I'd
>
> give Linux a try for the bridging firewall.
> =09I have experimented with Debian a little bit in the pre-woody days
> (3 or so
> months before it came out). I did like apt and dpkg, but was disappoin=
ted
> that it didn't support package signing, or some form of package
> verification
>
> (other than a simple md5 checksum).=09Now I see support is there for
> signing
> packages in woody, but it isn't being used yet. I hope this changes in=
the
> near future, because I think it's quite important for verifying package
> integrity & authenticity.
> =09However, after using apt-get, dpkg, and apt-cache, I can't help but
> come away
> with a feeling of how superior it is to rpm + RHN. Right now, the only
> benefits that RHN has over apt + dpkg (that I can see) is package signa=
ture
> verification and a management interface that allows you to manage a lar=
ge
> number of machines. However, I almost always update machines by hand,
> because I lock them down in a way that scheduled updates from RHN would
> fail
>
> without manual intervention. So, this feature doesn't really appeal to =
me
> that much. RHN also uses SSL, but if package sigs were used, this coul=
d
> just
> as easily be used to make sure that the package wasn't tampered with in
> transit. I think the benefits of dpkg + apt over rpm + RHN are probabl=
y
> too
>
> numerous to mention.
>
> I'll mention a few of the things I found that I like about dpkg + apt:
>
> =09I like that you can remove all of a package except it's
> configuration files
> in case you decide to re-install it. Although I probably wouldn't use =
this
> feature very often myself, I can see situations where it might be usefu=
l.
> =09I also like that you can have a package marked for removal so that
> as soon as
> another package is installed that can fill it's "function", you can hav=
e
> these "pending" packages automatically removed. For example, I tried t=
o
> remove exim before installing qmail, and it wouldn't let me since exim
> provides the "mta" (or whatever it is) function.
> =09I also like being able to search a list of available packages with
> apt-cache.
> Although RH has a database of RPMs you can install, it seems to remain
> fairly
> static. And, as I understand it, you could also add repositories of De=
bian
> packages to your apt sources that aren't officially part of Debian and =
have
> those packages be included in your search once you do an "apt-cache upd=
ate"
> (this would be true for other apt-* functions too).
> =09apt-get upgrade (need I say more?). Although RHN does have an
> up2date option
> that performs the same function, it won't upgrade a system from one rel=
ease
> to the next. Although I don't think it's officially supported using
> "apt-get
> upgrade", I've read about several people doing it successfully in the p=
ast.
> =09The package configuration features provided by dpkg are pretty nice
> too. For
> example, after installing OpenSSH, it asked me several questions about
> configuration and even talked about the new privilege separation featur=
e.
>
> =09Outside of dpkg+apt, my experience has been pretty good. Debian is
> definitely different, but that doesn't make it bad. I just need to get
> used
>
> to it's layout/setup. Probably the one gripe that I have is that
> "start-stop-daemon" is just too damn long to type! :-) (No flames ple=
ase,
> that was just a poor attempt at humor).
>
> =09I understand the concept of stable/testing/unstable, and that if you
> want the
> latest and greatest version of a package you usually have to go beyond
> stable. The only thing that bothers me about this is that when I tried
> Debian previously, it seems that you run the risk of not having very ti=
mely
> security updates with testing/unstable packages. I know that only "sta=
ble"
> is officially supported according to the FAQ, so the typical response w=
ould
> probably be along the lines of "stick with stable". However, I can see
> where
> packages from testing/unstable could be required to fulfill a need. At
> least
> there is always the option to patch the package by hand since its open
> source.
>
> =09Overall, I think Debian would make a top notch choice for a server.
> For a
> desktop where I want the latest KDE and multi-media programs, I think I=
'll
> stick with Gentoo.
--=20
--
JLK
----
Husker Linux Users Group mailing list
To unsubscribe, send a message to huskerlug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
with a subject of UNSUBSCRIBE
Other related posts:
