Debian Sid and Arch

habtool · 2007-10-25 10:48:36

Is it fair to compare Debian Sid and Arch, as they bother rolling releases?
If so, how come is Arch so much more stable than Debian Sid. seen as Arch has a handful of developers VS Debian with a over a thousand?
Or is that the answer itself?

Allan · 2007-10-25 10:54:23

Don't things that Debian developer actually expect may break you system go into Sid? Given they have such a large testing base, perhaps they are slightly more relaxed about shoving packages there. Any, its probably better compared to Arch testing.

dolby · 2007-10-25 11:04:20

simplicity and pacman/makepkg is the answer

habtool · 2007-10-25 11:04:32

From Wikipedia:

Software packages in development are either uploaded to the project branch named unstable, also known as sid, or the experimental branch. Software packages uploaded to unstable are normally versions stable enough to be released by the original upstream developer, but with the added Debian-specific packaging and other modifications introduced by Debian developers. These additions may be new and untested. Software not ready yet for the unstable branch is typically placed in the experimental branch.

So unless its in experimental repo, it is in unstable and if one wanted to use Debian nearer the edge then SID would be the way esp when Sarge was out for a few years and no Etch was in sight.

Yet Sid is very unstable from my few times I played with it

The main thing for me is Arch stays pretty up to date with such a few developers yet Debian cant with so many, just seems odd.

Then one needs to use Ubuntu that tries to tame Debian every 6 months, just odd that Debian could not do what Arch does with so few DEV's?

I think I may be missing the bigger picture of debian?

Last edited by habtool (2007-10-25 11:07:42)

habtool · 2007-10-25 11:06:45

dolby wrote:

simplicity and pacman/makepkg is the answer

I must say I am loving Arch, very cool Distro

nothing against Ubuntu/Debian, just find Arch very solid and up to date, with little effort required from the user

habtool · 2007-10-25 11:11:09

Ok, looks like:

Debian Testing would be the one to compare to Arch:
(But i found problems found in testing where fixed in Sid, so was better than testing, as odd as that sounds

From Wikipedia:
After a version of a software package has remained in unstable for a certain length of time (depending on the urgency of the software's changes), that package is automatically migrated to the testing branch. The package's migration to testing occurs only if no serious (release-critical) bugs in the package are reported and if other software needed for package functionality qualifies for inclusion in testing.

habtool · 2007-10-25 11:15:06

Allan wrote:

Don't things that Debian developer actually expect may break you system go into Sid? Given they have such a large testing base, perhaps they are slightly more relaxed about shoving packages there. Any, its probably better compared to Arch testing.

Thanks testing was the right comparison

Sorry, Will edit in the future, did not know that was the correct procedure

Last edited by habtool (2007-10-25 11:28:05)

Allan · 2007-10-25 11:23:43

There is an edit button for a reason... Four posts in a row! (Shakes fist.... )

superkevjr · 2007-10-26 10:59:25

I've been an debian/sid user for more than 4 years. It's very stable indeed, as I just use apt-get upgrade to update the system and apt-get dist-upgrade occationally.
BTS of debian works well also and plus huge packages db, which makes debian/sid a wonderful desktop os.

Compared with debian/sid, arch has newer packges, fewer packages db and more homework to do after packages installation, though It's much simple to make packages by yourself in arch. And some apps works not so stable as those older ones under debian/sid some times, the latter pocesses more patches.

foxbunny · 2007-10-26 11:38:44

More homework after pkg install is NOT a point that can be compared to other distros, IMHO. That is the Arch philosophy. I want/like to do post-install config myself, and that is what I like about Arch.

Arch Linux

#1 2007-10-25 10:48:36

Debian Sid and Arch

#2 2007-10-25 10:54:23

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

#3 2007-10-25 11:04:20

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

#4 2007-10-25 11:04:32

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

#5 2007-10-25 11:06:45

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

#6 2007-10-25 11:11:09

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

#7 2007-10-25 11:15:06

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

#8 2007-10-25 11:23:43

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

#9 2007-10-26 10:59:25

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

#10 2007-10-26 11:38:44

Re: Debian Sid and Arch

Board footer