On 27-Mar-09 16:22:13, Chris G wrote:

On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 03:07:01PM +0000, mick wrote:

...

On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:51:27 -0000 (GMT) (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk allegedly wrote:

[I plead guilty to all charges, m'Lud]

...

...

Hi Folks, Once upon a time I didn't need to ask this kind of question ...

I'm about to install Linux (probably Debian) on a laptop which has an Intel Core Duo T2390 CPU.

So I'm wondering whether it I should use i386 or ia64.

Ted

The processor will happily take a 64 bit installation - and that is the one I'd recommend, particularly if you want access to memory > 4Gig.

But there are one or two applications (adobe flash comes to mind) which don't have native 64 bit capabilities (though I think they may have addressed this in Flash 10...). Others on the list may have experience of the odd application which has problems.

I run xubuntu 8.10 64-bit on an Intel Core bla bla processor. There are *very* few issues with 64-bit now. I used to run a 32-bit version of Firefox because of issues with plugins but now I've moved to a 64-bit Firefox and (at least in Ubuntu) everything seems to play nicely. I had a minor issue with Java because I needed the 'proper' Sun Java and so I had to install that manually to get the 64-bit plugin but I think that's the only 64-bit issue I've had. The default Java installation works fine in 64-bit, I just needed something it didn't provide.

-- Chris Green

Thanks to all who have responded so promptly! (Keep coming if you have anything to add).

I think the gaps in my knowledge have been filled, and I feel that my uncertainties are resolved.

Chris: Your Ubuntu experience looks good! I've been running a Debian Etch for about 15 months, and on the whole feel very happy with it. I've also test-driven Ubuntu a few times.

My impression is that Debian is, on the whole, rock-solid, but it seems to me that the setup of /etc/apt/sources.list is less transparent than I would like! It's not clear what one should do with it to widen its scope. And I have at various times had what seem to be unresolvable problems with dependencies, of the form

package XYZ depends on ABC and it is not going to be installed

which at times have led me round in circles, each thing depending on something else which "is not going to be installed" until you come back to where you started! So I've become a bit wary of Debian.

Also, I have the impression that, once Debian has moved on from its current version, you're forgotten about. Plus, Debian have a very purist attitude about what software they will admit to their repositories.

On the other hand, Ubuntu is more liberal and seems to have more concern for "user happiness". But, that said, I can do without a lot of the Ubuntu "candy" -- I like a "clean & lean" system. And my main usage is in technical areas -- especially statistical and mathemtical computing, and typesetting, so I'd favour a distribution which caters well for those areas. On the whole, it seems Debian is well suited for that. My "test flights" of Ubuntu have not gone as far as digging deeply into its capabilities on such fronts.

So, while I have also been considering an Ubuntu installation as an alternative to Debian, I'm not sure whether it is the wisest choice. My attitude to a Linux distribution is that, once set up and running, it will on the whole stay as it is while I just use it. Although I have gone along with Debian's propositions for upgrades (with few regrets), I always feel a bit uneasy about it! And I suspect that Ubuntu may be even "busier" on that front than Debian.

One final question: Debian have very recently released their latest "stable" (5.0.0 "lenny" on February 14th, 2009). It seems that the next Ubuntu released is due in the very near future -- but I have not managed to discover a definite planned release date. Does anyone know?

Thanks again, Ted.

-------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 Date: 27-Mar-09 Time: 18:19:26 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------

On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 18:19 +0000, Ted.Harding@manchester.ac.uk wrote:

My impression is that Debian is, on the whole, rock-solid, but it seems to me that the setup of /etc/apt/sources.list is less transparent than I would like!

Synaptic offers a GUI method of activating additional repositories, and even adding 3rd party ones.

On the other hand, Ubuntu is more liberal and seems to have more concern for "user happiness". But, that said, I can do without a lot of the Ubuntu "candy" -- I like a "clean & lean" system. And my main usage is in technical areas -- especially statistical and mathemtical computing, and typesetting, so I'd favour a distribution which caters well for those areas. On the whole, it seems Debian is well suited for that. My "test flights" of Ubuntu have not gone as far as digging deeply into its capabilities on such fronts.

There are plenty of Ubuntu flavours that offer a minimal type installation rather than the full gnome experience. Have a look at crunchbang or xubuntu.

I don't know what sort of packages you aren't finding in the debian repositories though. About the only thing I have found missing recently is cinepaint and given the state of the project as a whole I am not surprised they lost their Debian maintainer...I can't even contact the author at the moment to help him fix his sourceforge checkout scripts (all his email bounces with unrouteable address)

So, while I have also been considering an Ubuntu installation as an alternative to Debian, I'm not sure whether it is the wisest choice. My attitude to a Linux distribution is that, once set up and running, it will on the whole stay as it is while I just use it.

This is a potentially dangerous attitude because vulnerabilities such as the relatively recent OpenSSH weakness would leave you potentially open to attack or your machine open to attack others. Generally a standard apt-get upgrade will not do anything drastic like remove packages, modify configurations, jump major version numbers etc. Even if you have no open inbound ports you could still be sitting vulnerable to say a serious flaw in Firefox.

In short, on any networked OS always install the updates :)

One final question: Debian have very recently released their latest "stable" (5.0.0 "lenny" on February 14th, 2009). It seems that the next Ubuntu released is due in the very near future -- but I have not managed to discover a definite planned release date. Does anyone know?

April 23rd, 2009 although you can install it in alpha state today.

However if you don't like updating the OS every 6 months then I would recommend you sit on the last LTS release (8.04) as at least security updates will be available up to and beyond the next LTS release in April 2010, although of course running LTS means you are on older versions of everything.

On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 09:58 +0000, Chris G wrote:

The releases are *always* April and October (hence the .4 and .10).

Except the ones that aren't like 6.06 LTS :)

Seriously though the normal schedule is a 6 monthly release that happens to fall in April and October, the first LTS release was delayed and there is a chance chance subsequent ones could be.