19 Sep
2014
19 Sep
'14
9:32 p.m.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
On 09/01/2014 07:42 AM, David Christensen wrote:
That's exactly what my mileage does. If you're working with hardware
that's 2+ years old, you can install a fine, lean system with debian
stable and build the bleeding edge stuff you need. I've not tried
arch--at the moment, I installed ubuntu on a new laptop, since the
new-ness of the hardware called for newer OS software than I could get
from debian stable. After a while, I'll discontinue my ubuntu
installation, inventory the important updates and proprietary software
I need and rebuild the system with debian.
If you're building a DAW and running, say openbox/xfce... there's
about 99% of system updates you don't care about. Just get a good set
of consistent packages installed and wait until you reach some
specific bug or limitation that you need to fix. Of course, I don't
speak for everyone--depending on what kind of development work you do,
bleeding edge OS updates may be necessary.
Chuck
linux-audio-user:
I've been running a Debian Wheezy DAW (i386, Xfce, realtime kernel,
Audacity, Rosegarden, various synthesizers, etc.) for the past week or
two. It sort of worked. But, it's clearly not ready for taking on
stage for a performance.
Say what?
I've been running debian stable for ages (brief detours to arch and
ubuntu), and I just love it for the stability. What I *don't* want is an
update to break the system a day (or even weeks) before a gig. Yes, you
might have to compile some stuff yourself, to get bleed on some
software, but in my experience that boils down to about a handful of
packages.
YMMV
--
Atte