Please help me decide between gentoo and debian [Archive]

NleahciM

06-02-2004, 12:26 AM

Hi - I'm trying to figure out which of these two OSs I want to install and learn. I've been needing to get used to Linux for quite some time now. A little while back I tried out Mandrake (as I heard that it was a newbie linux distro) and I just found it to be way way too simplified. I don't think I'll ever learn anything with Mandrake. So after a lot of research - Gentoo and Debian are the two OSs that really stand out to me as the ones that seem to fit me best. So - could someone much more knowledgeable than myself please try to compare/contrast the two? If it matters - bandwidth isn't a problem (I'm on a ridiculously fast cable modem), and processing power isn't a problem (PM 1.6Ghz, 1GB RAM, etc.) - so downloading and compiling Gentoo is of no worry whatsoever to me. Could anyone try to help me please? Thanks so much!

T-Bird 151

06-02-2004, 12:35 AM

I'd go with Gentoo...it's really hard to learn and get up if you go from stage one, but going from stage 1 creates an oooo - so - fast system.

Anarchonixx

06-02-2004, 12:58 AM

I second Gentoo. You start learning as soon as you boot up to install it. The fact that the installation is all on the command line is a great way to get newbies familiar with it. And there's a bunch of other reasons, so pretend I just wrote really convincing arguments here. Also, emerge is a beautiful thing. You get the benefit of learning about Linux, but still get the simplicity emerge.

BillLeeLee

06-02-2004, 01:02 AM

I'd recommend Gentoo for almost complete control of the system. I like Slackware also, but Gentoo has been the easiest Linux for me to get accustomed to, and I've installed it probably about 7 times now from Stage 1. Portage is also the best 'package manager' (though technically it's not a package manager, but whatever) I've used (way better than RPM, yuck) and I like doing things "The Gentoo Way."

Bringing your system up to date is as simple as "emerge sync" and then "emerge -upDv world" says about what packages are outdated then choosing to update them.

Some distributions don't get you familiar enough with the workings, and I know of people who've gone years using Linux without compiling a kernel. Gentoo forces you to do these things as you install, so you really learn it. And did I mention the Installation Documentation is amazing?

Debian is nice and apt it good, but I just never saw the appeal, plus those people on #debian are a real bunch of jerks. Another of gentoo's strengths is the end user support from the community over at http://forums.gentoo.org and the Gentoo mailing list and Gentoo IRC channels on Freenode.

Choose Gentoo, it's fun.

edit: not to nitpick, but Linux is the OS. Debian and Gentoo are just different distributions. :D

deuce868

06-02-2004, 07:40 AM

Wooo! FLAME WAR!!

Oh wrong thread...anyway i will disagree and say Debian. This is why, emerge and apt sound fairly similiar. If I want to update my system I can do a nice
apt-get update
apt-get upgrade

Debian is a great system because you have a lot of control over everything. There are three different systems for package (stable, testing, and unstable) and it gives you a lot of control over the system you are using. All of my servers are running stable. Sure, it's old software...but it is tried, trusted and true. I am not afraid of updating any software on it because it is so stable and uptime of a year is great.

Am I saying that Gentoo is unstable...no, frankly I looked into gentoo once and didn't see what is would really offer me over Debian.

Other things that make Debian great is that it is available on 10 architectures. You can pretty much use it anywhere. It's got a great community and is really common out there. I have not checked out the #Debian IRC list, but I am on some mailing lists including two LUGs and the debian-laptop list. I have not seen much bad form on these.

As for kernels, yes...you can learn to build your own and I have done that. But I have to be honest...if you system has hardware supported by the base kernel you can even apt-get install a new kernel just like it was a peice of software. You have special needs, then by all means get the packages for building your own. It's all there.

I suggest you give both a try. I have been using Deb for a couple of years now and it sticks with you. I love that a base install on my servers with full web server/php/mysqlpostfix/dns/ and more comes in at under 400mb.

I know Gentoo is supposed to be such a fast OS, but the numbers I have seen suggest that the difference is negligible on most modern systems.

Debian has been around for a long time now, give it a shot. Try Gentoo as well and let us know what you think. :D

j4zzee

06-02-2004, 11:09 AM

I say try them both out also! Install Debian and play for a week, wipe it out and do Gentoo.
Remember though, to master Linux any distro will do. Take the lid off Mandrake or any flavor of Linux and you can go as far as you want.. just an opinion :)

ameoba

06-02-2004, 01:03 PM

That's not really a fair comparison...

Given a week with Gentoo, you still won't have KDE built :p

Of course, I'm a little biased; we have a full Debian mirror at work +)

Lowbatt

06-02-2004, 02:17 PM

I suggest Gentoo. I've been using it for over a year now and love it. I like to build the bas system and then install what I want and only what I want. If I dont want apache.. I dont ahve to have it even installed etc. Plus in the last year of using gentoo I've learned so much just trying to solve problems with installing apps and such. Also the Gentoo community is great. The forums are just awesome and filled with great advice and helpful people.

So thats my vote.

AchTuNG!

06-03-2004, 03:22 AM

AchTuNG! Loves Gentoo.... but that's just me... :D

ShimmyT

06-03-2004, 07:23 AM

I gotta go with Gentoo over Debian, just for the simple fact that with Gentoo it seems like the mirror severs are set up a little better, and it's easier to set up the newest software. Case in point to get the xfree 4.3.whatever just put USE="~x86" in your make.conf and then run emerge xfree. Now on debian I spent like 5 or 6 days trying to figure it out. With a couple of new installs. Plus the servers they said it was at were always down. So thats why I chose Gentoo. Plus it runs on macs better :)

complete

03-05-2007, 06:04 AM

Isn't Debian better than Gentoo in the sense that it is smaller and less complicated? I have an old Laptop computer and someone at work as suggested I use Debian over Gentoo.

fluxion

03-05-2007, 06:17 AM

i've used debian in the past, and it's a great distribution. gentoo sounds interesting, and i think for a new linux user who wants a fast system and a fairly intimate introduction to linux it would be a nice choice. i learned on slackware, and stuck with it for 5 years or so, and it made me very familiar with compiling kernels and doing everything that i need from a command line. after a while though, you get a little sick of compiling stuff, and the sense of satisfaction you get from doing everything from scratch is gone. you just want to be productive. at which point, a distro like Debian has a great appeal, though sadly, i see no reason to choose Debian over Ubuntu these days. same animal, but Ubuntu has so much steam behind it it's ridiculous.

fluxion

03-05-2007, 06:36 AM

Isn't Debian better than Gentoo in the sense that it is smaller and less complicated? I have an old Laptop computer and someone at work as suggested I use Debian over Gentoo.

neither system is inherently smaller, they're both "build from basics" to a point, though Gentoo to a higher extent. but once you get everything installed that a normal user would want, they'll have roughly the same complexity of applications and configuration directives.

it's a hard choice with a laptop. you want to ensure everything is running as fast as possible, but at the same time, compiling stuff on your laptop can take a hell of a lot of time. and if you're out and about, that equates to alot of precious battery life. with something like Debian, everything is precompiled, downloads/installs are quick.

also, laptops often have quirky hardware. getting a pcmcia wireless card working can be a pain for example, even a well-supported one. the prism cards for example, well mine at least, require a kernel patch to get kismet working. so if you want to do a custom kernel compiled to optimize the hardware support/performance of laptop, you dont really want some like debian. you can compile kernels in debian, but there's alot of extra steps involved in doing it "the debian way", you're somewhat compelled to stick with a precompiled kernel.

in short, gentoo will allow you to tweak your system and personally ensure all the hardware is being utilized efficiently, but installing software with be a pain. you'll sit down at lunch to get some work done, find out you need to install something 'real quick", and end up leaving with your laptop at 10% battery life, still compiling. debian avoids such hassles, and the performance differences will be fairly small.

personaly i ended up with slackware on my p2 266mhz laptop, and it has worked out well. this would be similar to choosing gentoo. i avoid new software like the plague however, and that's a bad thing. kernel compiles....i generally do those on a different computer. lol. last time i tried to compile a kernel on my laptop i let it run overnight and well into morning and it still wasnt done. i cancelled it before my laptop blew up.

also, if by "old" laptop you mean something that's still 1ghz+, none of these points really matter all that much.

eeyrjmr

03-05-2007, 06:47 AM

That's not really a fair comparison...

Given a week with Gentoo, you still won't have KDE built :p

Of course, I'm a little biased; we have a full Debian mirror at work +)

I dunno I had a full Gentoo-64bit (GNOME) desktop with everything (i need) bar openoffice compiled in less time it takes to install XP and update it all. Even then OO only takes 3hours on my Core2 CPU

Bones

03-05-2007, 05:03 PM

I mostly use Gentoo, and play with Debian on some virtual machines. The distros have very different philosophies that manifest themselves in how the systems are administrated.

Debian has periodic version releases (woody, sarge, etc), and further subdivide the versions by software "stability" (stable, unstable, testing). I think the idea is that each category guarantees that a package has had a certain level of testing. So basically, a system admin chooses which Debian software branch to run on a system based on whatever the needs are.

Gentoo is essentially versionless, and places more of the software selection burden on the shoulders of the system admin. It is easy to have a system that uses some old, proven stable packages mixed with the latest releases for others, or anything in between. Each package in portage gets some testing before being marked "stable", but it is really up to the admin to determine if a package is suitable.

I think that the whole compile time argument gets overplayed. But then, I'm a patient person and I can manage my time, so maybe I'm weird :D

nigerian_businessman

03-05-2007, 09:42 PM

Debian Sid.
It's fast enough and you'll actually get to use your system instead of watching it compile.

duby229

03-05-2007, 10:19 PM

I dunno I had a full Gentoo-64bit (GNOME) desktop with everything (i need) bar openoffice compiled in less time it takes to install XP and update it all. Even then OO only takes 3hours on my Core2 CPU

Look at the date this thread was created, and that should help explain the long compile times.... Back when the fastest you could get was a 3200 or 3400

CoW]8(0)

03-05-2007, 11:35 PM

That definetly explains why Ubuntu wasn't one of the OPs original choices.

Now that would be a better question, Ubuntu vs Gentoo.....

likewhoa

03-05-2007, 11:59 PM

nigerian_businessman

03-06-2007, 12:28 AM

you really can't compare Ubuntu with Gentoo as both handle and offer packages in different forms. for starters Ubuntu is a Binary Based Distro while Gentoo on the other hand is a From Source Distro. If you are looking for full configurability,kernel control, large package tree and bleeding edge packages that are compiled as you go, then go with Gentoo. IF you want everything to be done for you, like hand holding and packages that are pre-compiled for most packages you want to install, then use Ubuntu. The choice is simple.

Gentoo - From Source Distribution.
Ubuntu - Binary Based Distro.

make a choice.

If you separate your glaring bias from your statement, to some extent you are correct. Gentoo is, by its nature, set up to be more customizable. That doesn't mean you can't compile important packages on Debian based systems yourself for a speed increase.

It has been proven that the speed differences between a full on compile from source setup and a binary distribution are negligable and certainly not worth the amount of time and effort needed to compile EVERYTHING. The only time you might see a real speed improvement is if you are shooting for a system with weak specs, where every bit helps. But even then, Damn Small Linux or a minimal Debian install would suit well.

Frankly, I don't see where this whole attitude that compiling the stuff on your own makes you somehow better than using prepackaged binaries. Its not as though you wrote the software, so stfu with that already.

You can do the same thing with Debian, choosing only the packages that you want, without all the needless waiting for stuff to compile. Grab the net install CD, install only the base, and apt-get the packages you need instead of all the stuff you wont use that comes with a distro like Ubuntu. You can still get your hands dirty with the command line, or once you get x up and running, you can just apt-get synaptec and do it the quick and easy way.

The beauty of linux is that it's able to be suited to whatever you want. Installing Gentoo does not make you a better person than someone who uses Debian, or Slackware, or any other distro. Most people who install Gentoo just follow walkthrough instructions to build the system anyway. If you really want to learn Linux, pick up a book and read. Force yourself to learn the command line instead of going for the easy GUI apps. This is all stuff you can do on ANY distribution.

And finally:

Gentoo is was born for Enthusiast,Ricers & Innovated Developers.

Ubuntu is for the handicap.

If you're going to put yourself out there as somehow better than someone who uses Ubuntu, you might want to take a remedial english class first. "is was born for" is about as redundant as compiling KDE or Gnome from source.

c.d.e

03-06-2007, 12:36 AM

If you separate your glaring bias from your statement, to some extent you are correct. Gentoo is, by its nature, set up to be more customizable. That doesn't mean you can't compile important packages on Debian based systems yourself for a speed increase.

It has been proven that the speed differences between a full on compile from source setup and a binary distribution are negligable and certainly not worth the amount of time and effort needed to compile EVERYTHING. The only time you might see a real speed improvement is if you are shooting for a system with weak specs, where every bit helps. But even then, Damn Small Linux or a minimal Debian install would suit well.

Frankly, I don't see where this whole attitude that compiling the stuff on your own makes you somehow better than using prepackaged binaries. Its not as though you wrote the software, so stfu with that already.

You can do the same thing with Debian, choosing only the packages that you want, without all the needless waiting for stuff to compile. Grab the net install CD, install only the base, and apt-get the packages you need instead of all the stuff you wont use that comes with a distro like Ubuntu. You can still get your hands dirty with the command line, or once you get x up and running, you can just apt-get synaptec and do it the quick and easy way.

The beauty of linux is that it's able to be suited to whatever you want. Installing Gentoo does not make you a better person than someone who uses Debian, or Slackware, or any other distro. Most people who install Gentoo just follow walkthrough instructions to build the system anyway. If you really want to learn Linux, pick up a book and read. Force yourself to learn the command line instead of going for the easy GUI apps. This is all stuff you can do on ANY distribution.

And finally:

If you're going to put yourself out there as somehow better than someone who uses Ubuntu, you might want to take a remedial english class first. "is was born for" is about as redundant as compiling KDE or Gnome from source.

DSL is a great choice. Unlike Unbuntu, which is bloated and needs to be stripped, and unlike Gentoo where you start pretty much from scratch, DSL provides a great base and some supporting tools. DSL you build up to add what you want. You just don't need to worry about compiling the kernal specifically for that pc.

likewhoa

03-06-2007, 12:48 AM

It has been proven that the speed differences between a full on compile from source setup and a binary distribution are negligable and certainly not worth the amount of time and effort needed to compile EVERYTHING.

the speed difference is noticeable and if you can't tell then you're not tweaking your system correctly, and no I don't feel better than Ubuntu users I just prefer to have total control from the building of my toolchain to which kernel modules I want installed and what compiler flags, ldflags and basically control of my system. I don't need pre-compiled packages with features and support preconfigured that I really don't need nor that my CPU really can take advantage of or would like to. and compiling from source doesn't take long as we are in the age of multi-core processors and most everyone here run overclocked systems so compiling from source takes advantage and that's something you don't gain from precompiled binaries, sure you can _create_ custom .deb packages in Ubuntu but why would you do that? If that's the case then why not a compile as you go distro? Everyone has their taste. I like Gentoo because it's full of choices and configurability. so stop trying to show me i'm wrong because that won't work and stop being ignorant about "precompiled vs from source speed comparison".

@c.d.e he doesn't even know what Ubuntu it's all about, sure it's great and all it has brought alot of new users to Linux because of it's ease of use, but for people that like to tweak the OS from the ground up, Ubuntu is not an option.
What is DSL by the way?

nigerian_businessman

03-06-2007, 01:07 AM

the speed difference is noticeable and if you can't tell then you're not tweaking your system correctly, and no I don't feel better than Ubuntu users I just prefer to have total control from the building of my toolchain to which kernel modules I want installed and what compiler flags, ldflags and basically control of my system. I don't need pre-compiled packages with features and support preconfigured that I really don't need nor that my CPU really can take advantage of or would like to.

The speed gains are negligable. I challenge you to find any hard data (meaning benchmarks) to backup the claim that the speed difference is noticable. I do this knowing absolutely that except for a few isolated cases, you will not find any noticable speed gains from compiling your own software. The speed gains you do get are such that they would be considered within the margin of error when benchmarking, except for a few isolated cases, and again those individual packages that would gain say 5% increase (and thats being generous) could be individually compiled on any distro you choose.

You can recompile a kernel on any distro. You can do everything that you're doing in Gentoo on Ubuntu if you so desired. You could even compile emerge and go that route if you really wanted to.

and compiling from source doesn't take long as we are in the age of multi-core processors and most everyone here run overclocked systems so compiling from source takes advantage and that's something you don't gain from precompiled binaries, sure you can _create_ custom .deb packages in Ubuntu but why would you do that? If that's the case then why not a compile as you go distro? Everyone has their taste. I like Gentoo because it's full of choices and configurability. so stop trying to show me i'm wrong because that won't work and stop being ignorant about "precompiled vs from source speed comparison".

I'm not trying to show you that you're wrong. I'm just trying to cut the legs out from under this whole Gentoo-Elitist B.S.

You want to really compile from source and really learn something about Linux? Run Slackware. Why half step it? Satisfy your own dependancies. Install everything from source, edit your own menus in whatever window manager you choose. No emerge, no APT, no RPM. Take the path of most resistance and be proud of your pale emaciated basement dwelling unclean elitist self.

Don't get me wrong, Gentoo is cool. It's just not the greatest thing since sliced bread, it's not the most configurable linux distro, it's not anything more than any other distribution. It's just a different way of doing things. It is neither better than or lesser than any other way of running Linux. I can do everything you do on Gentoo on my Debian-from-Base install. Everything. The only difference is, I do it faster where it counts... you know, in actual time needed to complete a task. Why spend a whole day building KDE or Gnome when you can have it downloaded and installed in less than 15 minutes?

As I Lay Dying

03-06-2007, 01:09 AM

you really can't compare Ubuntu with Gentoo as both handle and offer packages in different forms. for starters Ubuntu is a Binary Based Distro while Gentoo on the other hand is a From Source Distro. If you are looking for full configurability,kernel control, large package tree and bleeding edge packages that are compiled as you go, then go with Gentoo. IF you want everything to be done for you, like hand holding and packages that are pre-compiled for most packages you want to install, then use Ubuntu. The choice is simple.

Gentoo - From Source Distribution.
Ubuntu - Binary Based Distro.

make a choice.

http://weboperative.com/gallery/qdig-files/converted-images/MAWP/med_Ghoney.png
Gentoo is was born for Enthusiast,Ricers & Innovated Developers.

http://www.ubuntux.org/files/images/ubuntu box.preview.jpg
Ubuntu is for the handicap.

that gentoo wallpaper is really ugly.....so is the ubuntu one, both are really bad wallpapers.... besides compile options (if you really wanted to you can) Ubuntu/Debian etc etc is just as configurable as gentoo...

the speed difference is noticeable and if you can't tell then you're not tweaking your system correctly, and no I don't feel better than Ubuntu users I just prefer to have total control from the building of my toolchain to which kernel modules I want installed and what compiler flags, ldflags and basically control of my system. I don't need pre-compiled packages with features and support preconfigured that I really don't need nor that my CPU really can take advantage of or would like to. and compiling from source doesn't take long as we are in the age of multi-core processors and most everyone here run overclocked systems so compiling from source takes advantage and that's something you don't gain from precompiled binaries, sure you can _create_ custom .deb packages in Ubuntu but why would you do that? If that's the case then why not a compile as you go distro? Everyone has their taste. I like Gentoo because it's full of choices and configurability. so stop trying to show me i'm wrong because that won't work and stop being ignorant about "precompiled vs from source speed comparison".

yeah...I have serious doubts about that noticeable speed difference I believe at best that 1% speed boost compiling from source. Secondly, the problem that arises with compiling as you go is as follows.......you do not have a dual monitor setup, so you do not use the xinerama flag or have them set to off.... two months later, you go with a dual monitor setup, oh wait now you have to recompile programs with the xinerama flag.....depending on how many apps, you have installed....you may need to re compile a lot of apps......

The other situation where gentoo bites is a buddy of mine, recently had networking issues, with his router, for some reason do not ask why (I never looked at it) but the router for some reason would not let any linux os connect to the internet. Well after a while he replaced the router, linux/internet issue is resolved, and he has 200 updates.... which means re-compiling 200 applications. He now has stopped using gentoo.

Or maybe I am missing something since gentoo does do binary installs as well now, and offer binary packages as well (if I am not mistaken)??

likewhoa

03-06-2007, 01:23 AM

that gentoo wallpaper is really ugly.....so is the ubuntu one, both are really bad wallpapers....

lol don't judge a book by it's cover.

besides compile options (if you really wanted to you can) Ubuntu/Debian etc etc is just as configurable as gentoo...

you can but not to the extend that it's possible with Gentoo. meaning CFLAGS,LDFLAGS,CXXFLAGS plus the ability to build a toolchain from scratch using a stage1 or 3 tarball with NPTL support.

yeah...I have serious doubts about that noticeable speed difference I believe at best that 1% speed boost compiling from source.

Well that depends on your compiler flags and what glibc/gcc version you have in your toolchain. maybe I should just do a real world comparison thread one day to prove that.

Secondly, the problem that arises with compiling as you go is as follows.......you do not have a dual monitor setup, so you do not use the xinerama flag or have them set to off.... two months later, you go with a dual monitor setup, oh wait now you have to recompile programs with the xinerama flag.....depending on how many apps, you have installed....you may need to re compile a lot of apps......

you don't need xinerama with Nvidia Cards FYI you can just use the twin-view feature, dunno about ATI but there are not that many packages in portage that have xinerama support. and with the processors we see these days those packages will compile in minutes not hours.

The other situation where gentoo bites is a buddy of mine, recently had networking issues, with his router, for some reason do not ask why (I never looked at it) but the router for some reason would not let any linux os connect to the internet. Well after a while he replaced the router, linux/internet issue is resolved, and he has 200 updates.... which means re-compiling 200 applications. He now has stopped using gentoo.

ok now that's weird and it was probably a router hardware issue. but compiling 200 packages is not that bad, try compiling 2000 packages :p
It only takes me 4 hours to go from no toolchain to a full blown Xorg desktop with Beryl running Gnome.

Or maybe I am missing something since gentoo does do binary installs as well now, and offer binary packages as well (if I am not mistaken)??

Gentoo gives you the option to pre-package all your programs so that you can keep a backups of them for easy restore. It's basically a way to make binary packages out of your compiled software. :)

nigerian_businessman

03-06-2007, 01:37 AM

When you get right down to it, the only real advantage that Gentoo (and other source based distros) have are their ability to run on almost any platform. If you can compile on it, you can run it. You will not have the issues with x86_64 that ubuntu has. You do not have to have a separate repository. This is one area where source based distributions truly shine. Beyond that, the differences are negligable at best. Compiling flags are great, but the true difference in speed is statistically insignifigant, and again if you really need that extra boost in speed you can recompile an application on any distro to get it.

If it makes you feel more empowered, whatever floats your boat. But when it comes down to it, the speed difference is negligable and for most users compiling from source is overkill and a waste of time. What do you do with your computer? Browse the web? Play media? Rip DVDs? Guess what, compiling from source isn't going to make these activities noticably different. Now if you're running a render farm, sure, you might convince me that using Gentoo has its advantages. But if you're doing the tasks that most people use their computer for, you're really just wasting your time. You'd be better off spending the hours you'd spend setting up gentoo reading a Linux book if you really want to learn something.

duby229

03-06-2007, 01:41 AM

bbz_Ghost

03-06-2007, 01:53 AM

Look at the date this thread was created, and that should help explain the long compile times.... Back when the fastest you could get was a 3200 or 3400

Wow... really, talk about reviving a long dead thread from the past. Nice to see the e-penis wars never die, eh? :D

Yanno, a lot of forums are now enforcing "rules" about reviving dead threads so this sort of issue doesn't happen. This one sat for what, almost 3 years then suddenly wham, it's right back at the top of the list like it was created just yesterday.

Maybe the [H]ardForum should look into a cutoff point... always an option.

likewhoa

03-06-2007, 01:58 AM

Ok, I'm not patient enough to try and address everything you said here I'm a Gentoo user so I'll just tackle this one and then leave it be where it is.....

First If your using Gentoo for its supposed "performance boost" then you are using it for the wrong reason. Please leave cflags, and ldflags alone... The only thing your doing is breaking your packages, whether you realize it or not, and pushing upstream devs away from the gentoo community. Respect the default options and leave them be... They are reasonable, and there is absolutely nothing you can do to increase performance noticeably in most apps....

Stop acting like a punk, and grow up. It's an OS... It's a tool, use it like a tool.

listen buddy, I can set any cflags,ldflags i wish and the performance increase it's noticeable, secondly I don't bother developers with problems as I fix them on my own, and any packages that don't compile correctly and that are not fixable by me are re-compiled with sane cflags before submitting bug reports. I have only reported probably only like 7 bugs since my 2 years using Gentoo. a tool it's meant to be tweaked to your needs. stop being so ignorant and getting me started. :D

This thread is about deciding between Gentoo and Ubuntu and both Distros have been explained, now let the user decide which one will be best for him/her.
enough said...

duby229

03-06-2007, 02:03 AM

Wow... really, talk about reviving a long dead thread from the past. Nice to see the e-penis wars never die, eh? :D

Yanno, a lot of forums are now enforcing "rules" about reviving dead threads so this sort of issue doesn't happen. This one sat for what, almost 3 years then suddenly wham, it's right back at the top of the list like it was created just yesterday.

Maybe the [H]ardForum should look into a cutoff point... always an option.

Well, nothing wrong with a little healthy conversation. I dont think the thread should be closed or anything, but I think it is important to look at the dates before posting into a long defunct thread.

Yeah in that sense I agree with you.

As I Lay Dying

03-06-2007, 02:20 AM

lol don't judge a book by it's cover.

you can but not to the extend that it's possible with Gentoo. meaning CFLAGS,LDFLAGS,CXXFLAGS plus the ability to build a toolchain from scratch using a stage1 or 3 tarball with NPTL support.

Well that depends on your compiler flags and what glibc/gcc version you have in your toolchain. maybe I should just do a real world comparison thread one day to prove that.

you don't need xinerama with Nvidia Cards FYI you can just use the twin-view feature, dunno about ATI but there are not that many packages in portage that have xinerama support. and with the processors we see these days those packages will compile in minutes not hours.

ok now that's weird and it was probably a router hardware issue. but compiling 200 packages is not that bad, try compiling 2000 packages :p
It only takes me 4 hours to go from no toolchain to a full blown Xorg desktop with Beryl running Gnome.

Gentoo gives you the option to pre-package all your programs so that you can keep a backups of them for easy restore. It's basically a way to make binary packages out of your compiled software. :)

Actually to my understanding you are wrong about twinview, it does use some xinerama meaning the screen is one giant screen but with two halves, if you explicitly disable xinerama in your xorg.conf what you literally get is one giant desktop. I learned that while experimenting with twinview. For example if you explicitly disable all xinerama and if you full screen a video, the video stretches across both monitors, however if you do not disable xinerama fullscreening a video only fullscreen on that monitor, the same holds true for the maximize/restore, hit maximize on without xinerama and you get a maximized window across both screens.......where as xinerama can be two separate screens, or two screens as one desktop.

duby229

03-06-2007, 02:29 AM

You actually dont have to use twinview or cinerama, if your using two seperate desktops.

you could create two different device sections, two monitor sections, and two screen sections.... Then put the second screen "leftof" or "rightof" of the first screen in the layout section.

It works well, and is how I used to have my system configured(when I had my TV), and I dont use twinview or cinerama The down side is that is spawns two seperate desktops, and all the resources that consumes.

As I Lay Dying

03-06-2007, 02:37 AM

right... this is true also this means you cannot drag windows between desktops either huh, since they are two different desktop right?

eeyrjmr

03-06-2007, 02:40 AM

Look at the date this thread was created, and that should help explain the long compile times.... Back when the fastest you could get was a 3200 or 3400

GAD-NAMMIT thread-necro's!!!

nigerian_businessman

03-06-2007, 03:06 AM

This thread is about deciding between Gentoo and Ubuntu and both Distros have been explained, now let the user decide which one will be best for him/her.
enough said...

Actually it's about deciding between Gentoo and Debian and you seem hell bent on grouping Debian in with Ubuntu when in fact they are geared to different groups of people altogether.

And as far as your compile flags go, the performance difference you're seeing is nothing more than patting yourself on the back for the time you put in to compiling stuff. It's a placebo effect. Hard numbers don't lie, and you and I both know that you can't produce any numbers to back up your claims of a performance edge. Again, I challenge you, or anyone else for that matter, to show me a statistically signifigant difference in performance between a compile from source install and a binary based install using the same packages.

Yes, there will be a difference between Gentoo with just the packages you choose and a bloated Ubuntu install. More stuff loaded at boot and more programs equals more overhead and less CPU cycles for other tasks. But if you do a Debian install using the base package to start and apt-get the same packages instead of emerging them, the performance difference is almost nonexistant. We're talking about less than the difference between a processor clocked at 2000mhz vs overclocked to 2030mhz. It's so insignifigant that in a benchmark comparison it would be considered within the margin of error and therefore disgregarded as an anomaly.

You can sit here and argue until you're blue in the face but until you produce some numbers you're just pissing in the wind, and I wouldn't be arguing this with you if I was unsure about your ability to produce those numbers. I'm not some newbie to this linux stuff. My first flirtations with UNIX were nearly 17 years ago, via a dial-up shell account, when you had to go on usenet to get into mindless arguments with others because the web didn't even exist. I've been running Linux in one form or another since mid-1994 when I installed slackware on an old Packard Bell 486. I've probably forgotten more than you know about Unix. So don't sit here and try to lecture me on the virtues of compiling your own software because you jumped on the Gentoo craze a few years ago. I've been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

For nearly everyone, Gentoo is more hassle than it's worth. Installing it is a masochistic (http://www.answers.com/topic/masochistic) masturbatory (http://www.answers.com/masturbatory&r=67) exercise that only gained popularity because it gave a bunch of basement dwellers something to brag about to the uninformed masses. Most of it's loudest proponents only managed to install it because there is a step-by-step guide on the website that you can copy verbatim to your command line. Is it somewhat educational? Sure. But not as educational as picking up a few (http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Guide-Commands-Editors-Programming/dp/0131478230/ref=sr_1_8/002-5436686-8856861?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173168177&sr=1-8) good (http://www.amazon.com/Power-Tools-Third-Shelley-Powers/dp/0596003307/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-5436686-8856861?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173168284&sr=1-1) books (http://www.amazon.com/Unix-System-Administration-Handbook-Nemeth/dp/0131480057/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-5436686-8856861?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1173168342&sr=1-1).