on Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 09:51:59AM -0400, Hall Stevenson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > I've recently built a new box for myself and would like to put Linux back > on it. I started with RH back between their 5.0 and 5.1 release, switched > to Mandrake for a while, and have been running Debian (unstable) for a > couple years or more. I'm tempted to take the easy way out and just add the > old hard drive to my new machine and run things this way, but there's a few > good reasons not to. 1) Old cruft I don't want to deal with. 2) New, fresh > installs from scrath are always better. 3) The old hard drive is > partitioned up between EXT3, Fat32, and Fat16 partitions. It is a 20gb > drive total, with approx 10gb as EXT3 (and likely not even half-filled at > that). So for me, wiping it clean and running all 20gb for Debian may be > wasted space, but still the easiest to do. > > As mentioned, I ran Debian unstable for years with no problems. Why > unstable ?? I often want newer versions of packages than stable provides... > Why do 80% of unstable users use it ?? Probably the same.
http://www.debian.org/releases/
Specifically: see testing.
> So, would people suggest sticking with "pure" Debian or possibly going with
> a Debian-based distro ?? If an off-shoot, which one ?? I'm looking at
> Knoppix's site right now...
Knoppix aims to produce a bootable, runnable, fairly complete desktop
system. It succeeds relatively well at this. Installing to HD is
possible, but the mix of stable, unstable, testing, and other sources is
somewhat ungodly.
I'd pick straight Debian myself.
Peace.
--
Karsten M. Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
user-agent considered harmful. Encourage W3M standards:
http://twiki.iwethey.org/Main/UserContentString
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
