Re: linux distro recommendations?

[Jonathan Kulp]

Graham Percival wrote:
> Not really.  Ubuntu is debian, minus a working package system[1],
> minus a decent initial install[2], plus hordes of newbies[3].
>
> [1]  I consider the "package system" to be the package manager
> software -- which I admit is (virtually) identical in Debian and
> Ubuntu -- plus the community of package maintainers.  Debian's
> package maintainers are miles ahead of ubuntu's, redhat's,
> freebsd's, etc.

Does this mean that, for instance, Debian's repo will have more 
up-to-date versions of things like texi2html and fontforge?  I've had 
problems with outdated versions of certain packages on Ubuntu.  I've 
used Ubuntu for 18+ months now, and it was my first Linux distro.  It 
was a good way to get started because in general things just work.  I'm 
much more advanced now and am considering something like Arch or Debian. 
 I wiped my Windows partition yesterday (now I can't test any Lilypond 
issues on Windows anymore...) to install xubuntu 9.04 and see if it's 
ready to use as my main system yet, but I might turn right around and 
try Debian on that partition.  I've been curious about it for a while.

BTW I hear that Linux Mint (an Ubuntu derivative) is even more 
noob-friendly b/c it contains all the proprietary drivers and media 
codecs already and you don't have to go hunting around for them.  Grab 
the (indecent) Live CD and give it a spin. ;)

Jon

--
Jonathan Kulp
http://www.jonathankulp.com