I hear Debian is hard

[djohnston]

An LXer discussion on the merits of Debian.

[patrick013]

I don't know, I'm finding Debian quite fun.

Got a 3.7 kernel (where besides Fedora can you get a working 3.7 kernel ?)
Probably Ubuntu.

Got an authentic Firefox, got a boot-repair-disk,  even projectM works,
which is mandatory for me, all from deb repos.

All +'s so far DJ

[konaexpress]

Yea, I think I found a home in Debian.......wow is this a big home..........hello!

Well?.....off to go paint my room again.......*wanders off*

[djohnston]

Got a 3.7 kernel (where besides Fedora can you get a working 3.7 kernel ?)

How about the Debian liquorix kernel?

[konaexpress]

So what is the Liquorix kernel anyway?

[patrick013]

So what is the Liquorix kernel anyway?

That's the one I installed, works like a clock.

Search the forum the last few days.

[melodie]

So what is the Liquorix kernel anyway?

It is a kernel which is compiled with options which makes the life of us users easier.

Would you like to try configuring and compiling your kernel yourself ? This is an experience to try, a very great one (not with debian method, or any distro method, but the one which works for all distros, with menuconfig and make menuconfig... )

Patrick, here my Archlinux kernel:

$ uname -a
Linux nounours 3.7.10-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Thu Feb 28 09:59:14 CET 2013 i686 GNU/Linux

I also have a kernel LTS installed and available in my boot stanzas.

I find Debian not hard, but upsetting, because it often behaves in a way I don't expect it to, which is not what I wish and which makes me use lots of time to seek for a solution, ask for help on forums or chans (mostly on chans) and once solved restarts the process for another upsetting issue... The best part in Debian really imo is it's community, mainly very great people, very knowledgeable and helpful! For the distro itself, it's not for me (the longest I lasted with it have been 3 months daily, at autumn 2004 when a buddy wanted to help me get out of... Mandrake. ^^ ).

[patrick013]

Patrick, here my Archlinux kernel:
I also have a kernel LTS installed and available in my boot stanzas.

Hi Mel,

When I install Arch's all I get is kernel panic's.     My machine is allergic to Arch
I guess.     They install but panic, so what.     Scorpio is as far as I'm going these
days.

But, any 3.7 kernel is tops.    Full Intel HD 4000 support, Nvidia improvements,
but they all have NVidia improvements.     So being tech-current is nice.

[melodie]

if you want to try installing it again one day future and seek help on a dedicated thread, maybe would you agree to bring detailed information about your hardware, and about the method you use to install it. Then we might have a chance to find out why it does not work on this machine of yours (is it an exotic hardware?)

[patrick013]

if you want to try installing it again one day future and seek help on a dedicated thread, maybe would you agree to bring detailed information about your hardware, and about the method you use to install it. Then we might have a chance to find out why it does not work on this machine of yours (is it an exotic hardware?)

No, that's OK.   Debian stuff installs but takes forever without a swap, then it's OK.
Arch stuff installs but kernel panics on boot.   Same with Slackware and several others
I tried.    No big deal today.   BSD stuff installs but panics my machine lately too.    Same
way I install everything else.     Menu.lst settings and so forth.

Surprisingly, Fedora installs like a champ, but their latest stuff is so developmental
I crash frequently after install.

Debian, PCLinuxOS, Fedora, Slitaz, Porteus, AntiX, TinyCore, all install.   But not
Damn Small Linux, Arch stuff, Slackware, or BSD.

It's just an ASUS netbook with Atom 1.6 processor, very standard hardware overall.

Enough excellent distros install I really don't care about the others then.    I've thought maybe
they need a fixed drive to install to rather than a flash, but, once again, with the
stuff that does install trouble free Linux is working for me.

thanks for the response.

patrick

[djohnston]

BSD stuff installs but panics my machine lately too.    Same
way I install everything else.     Menu.lst settings and so forth.

Patrick,

OpenBSD and NetBSD should run on it. They both still support everything from a 486 on up. You may be having boot problems with certain distros and BSDs due to a custom BIOS. See OpenBSD/i386 - Supported hardware: http://openbsd.org/i386.html

[patrick013]

Patrick,

OpenBSD and NetBSD should run on it. They both still support everything from a 486 on up. You may be having boot problems with certain distros and BSDs due to a custom BIOS. See OpenBSD/i386 - Supported hardware: http://openbsd.org/i386.html

Thanks for the response.

An Intel Atom is supported, plus all the standard Intel bus's etc..   It installed OK last year.
I'll wait a few months and try again, maybe they had to update something.

[djohnston]

Mageia3 beta. Kernel = 3.8.1. Mageia is looking better and better. Much better than Mageia2.

[patrick013]

Mageia3 beta. Kernel = 3.8.1. Mageia is looking better and better. Much better than Mageia2.

That's nice.   Mag3 sounds better than CentOS, a Fedora offshoot.   

[konaexpress]

That's nice.   Mag3 sounds better than CentOS, a Fedora offshoot.

Fedora good............yum sucks!