[plug] ComputerBank meeting Tues 24th 7:45pm

[Gary Allpike]

On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Peter Wright wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 19, 1999 at 04:05:14PM +0900, bob at contact.omen.com.au wrote:
> > 
> > In <Pine.LNX.4.10.9908191312500.20928-100000 at linux.spice.net.au>, on
> > 19/Aug/99 
> >    at 01:29 PM,((WST) GMT)
> > Gary Allpike <spice at spice.net.au> said:
> > >To install slackware would be complete insanity in my opinion.  It would
> > >have to be the hardest to install, and the most difficult to maintain by
> > >a very long way - on top of which, even the latest version is still very
> > >much libc5 based - which is certainly going to cause problems with almost
> > >everything now being compiled against glibc2.
> > 
> > Even on a 386 with 4Mb ram? It was my understanding that Slackware was the
> > distro of choice in this situation. Is Debian capable of being pared down
> > to that ?
> 
> I think it is, from a quick look at the Debian install document - you have
> to use a special bootdisk for low-memory machines, though.
> 
> I suspect I'd find myself installing Slackware in preference to Debian on
> low-memory 386s though... my laptop (a 486DX2-50/8meg RAM that I picked up
> from RioTinto's chuckout pile for $100 :-) runs Slackware for several
> reasons - mainly that I found Debian too much of a pain to install (I also
> tried FreeBSD). Slackware installed fine from floppies - got the base
> system working okay then installed the rest via PLIP.
> 
> In fact, that last qualification is an interesting one - I believe
> Slackware is the only remaining distro that you can still install from
> floppies - which is sometimes the only real option if you're dealing with
> an old machine.


What painful about a Debian install ??
People keep saying "debian is hard to install" - yet no one actually
states in any detail WHAT is hard, and WHY it was hard !!

Debian can be installed from floppies.

> 
> > >The other issue of course is support.  Come into #linuxaus on
> > >irc.linux.org.au and ask for assistance on RedHat - you're likely to draw
> > >a stoney silence, whereas a debian related question is going to get you
> > >numerous answers.
> 
> Erm - how about a "linux"-related question? :)
> 
> Seriously, paying too much attention to particular distros is risky. I'd be
> worried if anyone promoting themself as an experienced Linux user couldn't
> solve problems/perform general admin tasks on several different
> distributions. For god's sake, they're not _that_ different... 
>
> > >At the time of writing this email, the #debian channel
> > >has 98 people in it, #redhat has 11 .....  Then there is also support
> > >from savvy people such as myself, Christain and Matt.  I stand by my
> > >previous statement (right, wrong or otherwise) that I wont get involved
> > >with  installing RedHat or Slackware - yet I feel very sure that I could
> > >make a very valuable contribution.
> 
> You think you could make a valuable contribution only if it wasn't
> RH/Slack? Or, more precisely, you could make a valuable contribution only
> if it was Debian? :)
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate your attitude - to a point. But I
> think you might be overdoing it a bit. As I mentioned earlier, I use Debian
> at home and Redhat at work. I'd _prefer_ to use Debian at work (and my
> employer certainly wouldn't be too concerned if I did), but the other Linux
> machines floating around here are Redhat, so I felt it was more appropriate
> to stick to the same distro.
>
I really strongly believe that to use Slackware at all would be damn
foolish.  I believe this to the extent that I dont want to get involved
with a group that comes to the conclusion that slackware is the best
option.  RedHat I could live with, but I still believe that for the
application at hand Debian is the optimum solution.  I have heard that
ComputerBank in Victoria has standardised on Debian.

<snippage>

regards

Gary Allpike

 
PS. Debian works just FINE on low memory systems - I frequently install it
on 8 meg 486's