pandian - MARK2.5

Which distribution should be provided on next version of pandian?

  • stable - aka wheezy

    Votes: 10 27.0%
  • testing - aka jessie

    Votes: 23 62.2%
  • unstable - aka sid

    Votes: 4 10.8%

  • Total voters
    37

stackshadow

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
176
Location
Germany
Actually pandian is on debian-sid.

Debian-Sid breaks to often for me and this is not nice for many users.

So for pandian MARK2.5 i suggest the testing-distribution.

So what the people out there think about ?

( Some info for MARK2.5: It will come with pnd-support :) )

Some words on the distris: To not double informations, read: https://www.debian.org/releases/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: rSl
~ nice ~ Debian with pnd suppot,  thankz ; )

Upgrading is easy so the obvious choise is wheezy or stable. I believe wheezy won't automatically upgrade to jessie when "she" becomes stable? I never actually tried cuz one of the fist things I do on a fresh install is upgrading to testing
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Testing is now debian jessie, but at a more stable point Alpha 1 came out recently, which turns into nextstable. I think targeting jessie rather than a rolling testing makes more sense than stable.

Its easy enough to keep rolling, so maybe a static target makes more sense for all of everyone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pandian Wheezy (your first big release) has turned out to be perfect for me.  I tested your unstable-based version as well, but I didn't need newer versions of anything and it didn't work as well, so... maybe you should work in terms of -stable until the "word on the street" is -testing is in good shape, then cut over?  Even on my desktop (which is also armhf wheezy) I'm only now starting to run into an occasional need to build my own software version because the repository version is too elderly.  golang, for instance.

I suppose this is the point where I'm supposed to add "but..." and list something really hard which I want.  But the truth is that Debian Wheezy on the Pandora, for me, is just a perfect fit.  If there's a reasonable upgrade path by the time Wheezy really starts to get long in the tooth, I think I am a totally satisfied user.  Thanks!
 
Testing.

Testing is a nice mix.You won't get a package that will break your computer often at all whereas wheezy....Wheezy is just for servers really.

The packages are so incredibly old. Is Firefox version 19 in Wheezy still? For reference the newest firefox is 28.

And dude that is sweet to hear :D PND support will be killer. I notice also that I could not get bluetooth to work. I install bluemon but it didn't recognise any adapters.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So on my desktop i run siduction, an sid-based debian. It works fine since years :)

I suppose this is the point where I'm supposed to add "but..." and list something really hard which I want.  But the truth is that Debian Wheezy on the Pandora, for me, is just a perfect fit.  If there's a reasonable upgrade path by the time Wheezy really starts to get long in the tooth, I think I am a totally satisfied user.  Thanks!
Cool, nice to hear :)

And dude that is sweet to hear PND support will be killer. I notice also that I could not get bluetooth to work. I install bluemon but it didn't recognise any adapters.
I like also the pnd-system, and it will come for the actual pandian-versions also :) ( it's just an debian package, yeah! )

I don't use bluetooth, but i will check it later on ( #007 )
 
Debian on Pandora is a must to have.

We need more mainteners to have two versions.

Don't know if we have people in the community to work on Jessy and Wheezy.
 
Debian on Pandora is a must to have.


We need more mainteners to have two versions.


Don't know if we have people in the community to work on Jessy and Wheezy.
Jep, i think also, for me alone its a litte bit much. But never than less, today ( well we have a party, so i dont know if i can finish it today ) or tomorrow, when the version 0.5 of all packages get online, there will be also the Source at openpandora.org for the packages.


I've use mercurial as vcs, but is actually only local. It will become online if i found the time for it
 
So on my desktop i run siduction, an sid-based debian. It works fine since years :)

I suppose this is the point where I'm supposed to add "but..." and list something really hard which I want.  But the truth is that Debian Wheezy on the Pandora, for me, is just a perfect fit.  If there's a reasonable upgrade path by the time Wheezy really starts to get long in the tooth, I think I am a totally satisfied user.  Thanks!
Cool, nice to hear :)

And dude that is sweet to hear PND support will be killer. I notice also that I could not get bluetooth to work. I install bluemon but it didn't recognise any adapters.
I like also the pnd-system, and it will come for the actual pandian-versions also :) ( it's just an debian package, yeah! )

I don't use bluetooth, but i will check it later on ( #007 )
FYI i removed the blueman package and installed bluedevil and that was also unable to recognise any BT adapters
 
You can always get rid of iceweasel and get latest Firefox from Linux Mint repo on Wheezy Stable
Can you supply a URL?  I just searched around and can only find the 64- and 32-bit x86 support.
Sorry for not being clear.  That's what I meant 64 and 32-bit x86 as I'd thought ExquisiteCorpse was referring to x86.   :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let me throw in a word about people favoring testing over stable.

It surprises me how people are willing to have faith in open source programmers to the extent that even their preliminary work could do no wrong.  Just because it is the latest, doesn't mean that it is the best!  And what good is software that doesn't work?  Are you going to tape it to your wall like a swimsuit model just because it is rad?  It is almost like everyone here is on Ritalin for ADHD and can't get enough of new versions of software because of hyperactivity over simply just using the freakin' software.

Who cares that Debian lags behind other distros a tad in terms of their stable trees?  I thought that this is what made Linux better than Windows, IT'S STABILITY!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Let me throw in a word about people favoring testing over stable.

It surprises me how people are willing to have faith in open source programmers to the extent that even their preliminary work could do no wrong.  Just because it is the latest, doesn't mean that it is the best!  And what good is software that doesn't work?  Are you going to tape it to your wall like a swimsuit model just because it is rad?  It is almost like everyone here is on Ritalin for ADHD and can't get enough of new versions of software because of hyperactivity over simply just using the freakin' software.
As I understand it a package doesn't even make it into unstable until it's it's been released (ie after it's already out of beta) and it has to have been in unstable for a certain amount of time before it gets added to testing.   You make it sound like every earliest beta is going to be included and it just doesn't work that way.  The testing release is for putting together the next stable release and ensuring that the different packages work together as a distro, not for beta testing individual packages.

- Neelix
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I understand why the testing tree is so popular.  I am not totally against it.  However, to me, having everything 100% guaranteed working and not having to wonder why something that doesn't work definitely has to do with you rather than faulty software makes it all worthwhile.  I believe it is Knoppix being the first fork of Debian that made people feel comfortable using the testing repository for everyday use.

Stability gives me the warm & fuzzies.  Testing (and newer) seems to give these other peoples the warm & fuzzies because they won't be lagging behind their other Linux-using friends in terms of features.

I can already see that testing is going to win, and I am personally ok with that.  However, I hate the idea of risking embarassment when trying to explain away to someone NOT Linux-based why I put personal value into something that doesn't work correctly as it might come up in a 'testing' scenario.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I understand why the testing tree is so popular. I am not totally against it. However, to me, having everything 100% guaranteed working and not having to wonder why something that doesn't work definitely has to do with you rather than faulty software makes it all worthwhile
So basically you'll choose stable over testing for what amounts to a false sense of security?  Stable does not mean 100% guaranteed working.

- Neelix
 
I understand why the testing tree is so popular. I am not totally against it. However, to me, having everything 100% guaranteed working and not having to wonder why something that doesn't work definitely has to do with you rather than faulty software makes it all worthwhile
So basically you'll choose stable over testing for what amounts to a false sense of security?  Stable does not mean 100% guaranteed working.

- Neelix
Of course.  Stable represents the official, polished, final product.  It must be the best they can offer.  Otherwise, they wouldn't offer it.  Plus, what about security updates?

I understand that the individual versions of the software versions themselves dictate where the software is at in terms of functionality.

However, when someone slaps that 'final' or 'stable' label on the package, that MEANS something.  It has gone gold.

I find it to be rather disorganized to have pride in the working nature of testing trees, simply because the title says it all.

Debian seems now to force everyone into the "bleeding edge" mentality.  To me, this really "feels" dirty, even though I worship apt-get.  Other distros are much more organized for the stable nature of newer packages.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top