Debian or Ubuntu?
"Terrell Prudé Jr."
microman at cmosnetworks.com
Tue May 13 05:23:25 UTC 2008
Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2008 10:10 am, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Can you give an example of something that is worse in Ubuntu than Debian
>> for servers? That is, if you didn't already have Debian would there be
>> a reason to use it?
> In the past 10+ years every Debian upgrade that fails was 100% my own
> fault. For example, the last one was because I started off with Progeny
> and later swapped over to base Debian without removing all of the
> Progeny custom packages. I can't blame Debian for not knowing that the
> kernel that ended with -progeny could be replaced, can I?
> On the other hand in the past ~2 years of *buntu (KU specifically) I've
> had at least 2 upgrades go kaplooie when a fresh install worked fine.
> I have yet to have an *buntu upgrade go through without a hitch. Given
> that my server is a VM on a box in some colo a few thousand miles away I'm
> not about to trust my servers to an upgrade between versions to anything
> but something that is complete, utterly rock solid. Fresh installs on a
> local workstation is one thing. Fresh installs of VM on a single image is
> something else.
Up until Feisty came along, I would've agreed with you. *buntu upgrades
didn't always go as planned, unlike my Debian upgrades (smooth as ice).
However, that seems to have improved significantly of late. In two
cases, I did what I thought were my regular security upgrades and ended
up actually doing a Feisty-to-Gutsy upgrade. It was so smooth that I
didn't know I'd done a complete distro upgrade until a couple of weeks
later! Upgrading both boxes from Gutsy to Hardy was equally painless.
I suspect that the distro-upgrade problems that Ubuntu had were simply
growing pains that are pretty much resolved now. As someone else noted,
Debian was not without its own challenges when it was still young.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ubuntu-users