Re: [gentoo-user] Re: I'm up, at long last!

[Mick]

On Tuesday 19 April 2011 04:35:09 Pandu Poluan wrote:
> On 2011-04-19, Harry Putnam <reader@×××××××.com> wrote:
> > Alan Mackenzie <acm@×××.de> writes:
> >> I think there's really only two ways to install Linux: you either go the
> >> Ubuntu route, where everything's done for you and you accept somebody
> >> else's defaults, or you go with Gentoo, where you do everything
> >> yourself.  I think anything in the middle, like Debian, just leads to
> >> confusion and uncertainty.  I don't know where Fedora and SuSE fit into
> >> all this.
> >
> > Jumping into the asbestos drawers... the sterling things about Debian
> > are that it is more oldschool than ubuntu and its good for when you
> > get sick of compiling everything from scratch over and over.
> >
> > For some things, I don't care if I'm accepting someone elses' defaults.
> >
> > I've stuck with Gentoo for several yrs now for my main desktop and
> > would be very unwilling to switch for that usage, however, I prefer
> > Debian for virtual guests on windows.  It just installs right off,
> > when you need a full linux OS in a bit of a hurry.
>
> I still think Debian installed too many things I don't use. When I
> need a Linux VM in a hurry, I'd go Arch. Some people worry about its
> unsigned packages, but as long as I stick to well-known mirrors, I
> should be okay.
>
> The beauty of Arch is that its installation is very granular; I can
> truly pick components I want to have, and leave out those I won't ever
> use.
>
> But if I *do* have the time, I'll always take the Gentoo-route :)

Perhaps I'll try Debian next time I'm in a rush.  In the past I've run CentOS 
and it was a relatively quick exercise to get it installed and running as a 
webserver.  However, I still ended up spending some time I hadn't budgeted for 
shutting down (unnecessary) processes, uninstalling apps and what not.
-- 
Regards,
Mick