|
Home > Archive > Linux Debian support > November 2004 > Gentoo kicks Debian over the horizon :)
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Gentoo kicks Debian over the horizon :)
|
|
| Rolleston 2004-10-31, 5:45 pm |
| Feeling somewhat displeased with the whole "emerge"
situation, I thought I'd sample the good life and
dabble with Debian. What a despicable traitor, you
say. Not so fast. I'm back in Gentopia where the
air is pure and bzflag flies.
The X-window rendering was vile in Debian. Whether
that's an XFree86 issue or not, I cannot say.
Nothing I did to the XF86Config-4 file helped, and
"dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xfree86" was no use at all.
What I set up in a few seconds with Gentoo I could
not do in four hours with that pustulent pile of
putrefying pimples that is Debian. I exaggerate
only a little 
Then there's the DRI situation, a whole other
nightmare, made worse because "X.org" does not
seem to be available in any of the "standard"
Debian releases. Needless to say, the source
to be compiled for XFree86 did not compile
successfully (I think it may be designed to
go with a 2.4.x kernel, the sort of antique
item Debheads so love).
I could rant on and on for hours, a line of
dribble trailing from my foaming gob. I will
not, because, back in the company of Gentoo,
I feel an overwhelming sense of calm.
Now, onto the important bit: how to get the
universal live cd bootup screen on my system
(the one with the cow image). Any suggestions?
Cheers,
R.
| |
| Jim Bowering 2004-10-31, 8:45 pm |
| Rolleston wrote:
> Feeling somewhat displeased with the whole "emerge"
> situation, I thought I'd sample the good life and
> dabble with Debian. What a despicable traitor, you
> say. Not so fast. I'm back in Gentopia where the
> air is pure and bzflag flies.
>
> The X-window rendering was vile in Debian. Whether
> that's an XFree86 issue or not, I cannot say.
> Nothing I did to the XF86Config-4 file helped, and
> "dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xfree86" was no use at all.
>
> What I set up in a few seconds with Gentoo I could
> not do in four hours with that pustulent pile of
> putrefying pimples that is Debian. I exaggerate
> only a little
>
> Then there's the DRI situation, a whole other
> nightmare, made worse because "X.org" does not
> seem to be available in any of the "standard"
> Debian releases. Needless to say, the source
> to be compiled for XFree86 did not compile
> successfully (I think it may be designed to
> go with a 2.4.x kernel, the sort of antique
> item Debheads so love).
>
> I could rant on and on for hours, a line of
> dribble trailing from my foaming gob. I will
> not, because, back in the company of Gentoo,
> I feel an overwhelming sense of calm.
>
> Now, onto the important bit: how to get the
> universal live cd bootup screen on my system
> (the one with the cow image). Any suggestions?
>
> Cheers,
>
> R.
And the cow jumped over the Moon.
--
OS squared: open software times open standards.
| |
| The B. 2004-11-01, 5:45 pm |
| On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 23:36:56 +0000, Rolleston wrote:
<TROLL snipped>
> Now, onto the important bit: how to get the
> universal live cd bootup screen on my system
> (the one with the cow image). Any suggestions?
Yes. Go away.
| |
| Moe Trin 2004-11-01, 8:45 pm |
| In article <pan.2004.10.31.23.36.55.118358@tiscali.co.uk>, Rolleston wrote:
>What I set up in a few seconds with Gentoo I could
>not do in four hours with that pustulent pile of
>putrefying pimples that is Debian. I exaggerate
>only a little
It's normal to prefer your first $FOO
>Needless to say, the source to be compiled for XFree86 did
>not compile successfully (I think it may be designed to go
>with a 2.4.x kernel, the sort of antique item Debheads so love).
Ah, so you are a complete failure and couldn't find a clue if
surrounded by them. No, troll - it doesn't depend on the kernel,
but I guess you don't know the first thing about reading documentation.
Troll O Meter
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
________________________________________
___________
| | | | | | | | | | |
---------------------------------------------------
^
|
Normally, I'd say "Sorry, try a little harder next time.", but I can't
be bothered. I'm actually surprised you aren't using Fedora, or Mandrake
as that would better fit your skill level.
<PLONK>
Old guy
| |
| Brian Brunner 2004-11-01, 8:45 pm |
| On Mon, 01 Nov 2004, (Moe Trin) wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
Hey! Watch yer mouth!
AssSprain.
--
Brian Brunner
911: Gov't Sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.
1911: A gun in the hand beats two on the phone.
9-11-01: Four Hijackings, and thousands of deaths,
because Gun Banners disarmed the pilots to keep us safe.
..45ACP: Cure for the Common Criminal.
This is not a .sig, it's a .glock! *jeesh*
| |
| Rolleston 2004-11-03, 5:45 pm |
| Moe Trin wrote:
>
> Ah, so you are a complete failure and couldn't find a clue if
> surrounded by them. No, troll - it doesn't depend on the kernel,
> but I guess you don't know the first thing about reading documentation.
No, you are completely wrong.
If one chooses the compilation route, one needs to compile a DRM
module, a kernel module. A patch needs to be applied to Daenzer's
DRM module source (in the package "drm-mach64-module-src") to get
it to compile against the 2.6.7 kernel.
The patch is available here:
http://www.hjsoft.com/~glynis/mach6...-2.6.patch.txt.
Even then, the DRM source it will not compile unless the the file
"<kernel-src>/debian/rules" has been generated. That is, it will not
compile against vanilla source obtained from "http://www.kernel.org".
And even if one generates the "rules" file, the compilation fails on
some modules. Fortunately, the mach64 module is not one of them,
so you can choose to compile that alone.
Take note: in case you find my words challenging: "source to be
compiled for XFree86" is not equivalent to "XFree86 source".
No doubt you will dismiss what I have written as the words of a troll,
because, for thin-skinned individuals like you, any criticism of your
beloved Debian must be the work of a troll.
Oh, btw: in which century will an official Debian X.Org package be
made available?
Cheers,
R.
| |
| Jim Bowering 2004-11-03, 5:45 pm |
| Rolleston wrote:
> No doubt you will dismiss what I have written as the words of a troll,
> because, for thin-skinned individuals like you, any criticism of your
> beloved Debian must be the work of a troll.
Well, it looks as if the jig is up. He's seen through us. I guess that
would be easy, what with our thin skin and all. Maybe we should all switch
to Gentoo. It seems to make people superior human beings.
--
OS squared: open software times open standards.
| |
| Rolleston 2004-11-05, 5:45 pm |
| Jim Bowering wrote:
> Well, it looks as if the jig is up. He's seen through us. I guess that
> would be easy, what with our thin skin and all. Maybe we should all switch
> to Gentoo. It seems to make people superior human beings.
It wouldn't harm you, but I can't say it'd make you any less dull.
Go on, entertain us with your story about the time when you, ahem,
"lost" ldconfig. Any bids for the serialization rights?
R.
| |
| Jim Bowering 2004-11-05, 5:45 pm |
| Rolleston wrote:
> Jim Bowering wrote:
>
> It wouldn't harm you, but I can't say it'd make you any less dull.
>
> Go on, entertain us with your story about the time when you, ahem,
> "lost" ldconfig. Any bids for the serialization rights?
>
> R.
This is where the insults go from general to personal. Right on schedule.
For the record: I don't blame Gentoo for this user's rudeness.
--
OS squared: open software times open standards.
| |
| Rolleston 2004-11-05, 5:45 pm |
| Jim Bowering wrote:
> For the record: I don't blame Gentoo for this user's rudeness.
An eternal record of your profound utterances?
The world simply couldn't survive without it.
Bring forth the bronze. We'll inscribe it at once.
R.
| |
| Jim Bowering 2004-11-05, 5:45 pm |
| Rolleston wrote:
> Jim Bowering wrote:
>
> An eternal record of your profound utterances?
>
> The world simply couldn't survive without it.
>
> Bring forth the bronze. We'll inscribe it at once.
>
> R.
He thinks he's hooked a live one. Watch him reel me in.-)
--
OS squared: open software times open standards.
| |
|
| I think that Gentoo is those who want to build and tweak their own linux
system with easy way. And Debian is for those who want to have working
stable system fast even thought it would not be very fast. However I
cannot say anything about this subject since I haven't tested debian yet...
I hope that if Debian is at least half of fast that Gentoo it is ok for
me since every one knows that Redhat/Fedora is the slowest distro on
earth. S.U.S.E S.u.c.ks and Mandrake is for n00bs. ;)
And I think that since in debian I don't have to compile every package I
donwload just to get it optimized. Of course I can donwload precompiled
pakages in Gentoo also, but those aren't very stable. And every pakage
isn't available as precompiled.
However I have to say that screenshots I have seen from Debian installer
that Debian installer sucks. I liked Gentoo way to install things. It
followed pure source install path.
But Debian has one trick to offer. It has multiple installation
programs. Debian official installer isn't the only one.
-Antti-
| |
| Jan Braun 2004-11-07, 2:45 am |
| Antti schrob:
> I think that Gentoo is those who want to build and tweak their own linux
> system with easy way. And Debian is for those who want to have working
> stable system fast even thought it would not be very fast. However I
> cannot say anything about this subject since I haven't tested debian yet...
Well, my (secondary) P1-133 running woody is fast enough for most tasks,
so it can't be that bad ;)
Seriously tho:
One of the main reasons why I'm using Debian is their dedication to
Free Software. Using only "main" and knowing my system is 100% pure, or
giving Debian the userbase to push authors (or even the FSF - think
GFDL) into making their works more free are things that matter to me.
Another aspect I like a lot is how they allow and respect user choices.
There's always a couple of programs doing the same job: you can pick
one you like and it integrates properly with the rest of your system.
And no one is going to overwrite your changes in /etc or similar, as I
had a SuSE box repeatedly doing to me.
I haven't tried gentoo yet, but I imagine they could be one of the
distros that get that right as well, with their focus on (re-)compiling
stuff.
> But Debian has one trick to offer. It has multiple installation
> programs. Debian official installer isn't the only one.
Hehe, see what I mean?
Jan
| |
| Rolleston 2004-11-07, 5:45 pm |
| Jan Braun wrote:
> Well, my (secondary) P1-133 running woody is fast enough for most tasks,
> so it can't be that bad ;)
I'd like to do some benchmarking to see what difference those
compile-time flags really do make. I have a Debian Sid test system
set up. I may carry out some tests when I feel more sure that the
system is functioning properly.
> Seriously tho:
> One of the main reasons why I'm using Debian is their dedication to Free
> Software. Using only "main" and knowing my system is 100% pure, or
> giving Debian the userbase to push authors (or even the FSF - think
> GFDL) into making their works more free are things that matter to me.
I can't object to that. However, their free software does not appear to
be, in general, quite as up-to-date as that you can get using Gentoo's
"emerge". That may not be a big issue for everybody.
> Another aspect I like a lot is how they allow and respect user choices.
> There's always a couple of programs doing the same job: you can pick one
> you like and it integrates properly with the rest of your system. And no
> one is going to overwrite your changes in /etc or similar, as I had a
> SuSE box repeatedly doing to me. I haven't tried gentoo yet, but I
> imagine they could be one of the distros that get that right as well,
> with their focus on (re-)compiling stuff.
I must say I'm very impressed with "apt-get", "debfoster" and so on.
In comparison to "emerge", "apt-get" is extremely efficient in its
implementation (even when one ignores compilation time), and without
the need to build so much from source, I was able to test a lot of
software in very little time. Downloading and setting up the X-window
system took a mere half hour.
Of course, there are some pre-compiled packages available to download
using "emerge", but the archives I've seen aren't very complete, and
even the installation of binaries is slower on Gentoo.
If I can succeed in sorting out this dratted DRI issue, and the Debian
system is fast enough, I may well switch to it. At the moment Bzflag is
faster with software-only rendering on this Gentoo system than it is
with hardware acceleration on the Debian setup. It's all very mysterious,
since the diagnostic tests carried out so far indicate that direct
rendering _is_ enabled. I've written about it here:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/...7&forum_id=6511
R.
|
|
|
|
|