Debian User Forums

I think Gentoo, BSD and Slackware are possible alternatives to Debian.
As far a home server (apache, gitolite, tor, i2p) is concerned, i think that: Gentoo is too wild and BSD lacks the comfort.
Is Slackware suitable as a (very easy) server?

Kinda: you set it up once, without geting headaches, and then you just let it run.
That is what i am looking for.

Thanks in advance.

We had our problems, in the past, but it has been a pleasure to get to know you.

You know really much (you probably realize it yourself), but, first of all, i never heard a bad word from you
(I am pretty sure that it isn't that hard to get angry when having to deal with my "moods" ... ).

Nothing but respect from me.


The most short version: Thanks.

twoflowers wrote:That was to be expected. Well, good bye Debian

Pretty much that.

having said that i understand crap of your script and just as much about debugging:
1) bash seems to use -x for debugging, perhaps -v too. for ksh you will have to search the web or manpage (seems like it is at least similar)
2) you are probably looking for the command "time" to check the time of a function running (from what i see you use functions when it comes to #main script, right? Just put time in front of them).

What dasein tried to say is that he doesn't know. But then one would wonder ...

Looks like a good approach to me.

On another note: Don't trust random people in a random forum. Might well be that i (in this case i) simply can't see the - best or better - solution.
I am pretty sure of what i wrote, but that doesn't make it more valid. And many rant about things they don't really understand.
One quick solution would be to ask in IRC too (kinda: i got that and that problem, i was told that and that is the answer, can someone confirm that).

Sorry for your trouble. Doesn't ...

similar to a Windows System Restore.

You can't do that.
Well: you can. It is called backup. But if you had one you would know about it and there was no need to ask here.

When reinstalling you can keep the old /home, as long it is on a different partition.
There are several, at minimum 2, ways to do that
(one is to point the new home to the old home partition and not format it, the other is to put everything, including home, to one partition, and after installation edit /etc/fstab and mount ...

install debian on a different box or in Virtualbox or qemu or such.
copy the broken etc packages from there to the broken box.
(you might want to make a list of all packages installed, on the broken box, and install them on the new box, then simply replace all of etc. I guess).

in general i agree with "asking the wrong question" (or he said: "solving the wrong problem").
to me it sounds as if it were possible, in the way i said, but i never had to do such. I did copy single etc packages ...

linuxuser423 wrote: Ill be posting logs to pastebin or something tonight

You seem to have missed that we are asking you to do us a favor:

dasein wrote:I still think it's all about pr0n

You can post the logs in addition, but i am mainly interested in the pr0n link.

Still no feedback bout all the info you got regarding the original question .... by several people.
I assume nothing of that works.

This is not "your" thread. It is a thread in a public forum, where all kind of people are looking for help or info.

You made the OP, with a statement not many would agree with, and 7 further posts (or 6 or 8).
None of them contains detailed information, the very first, the OP, makes some claims (mainly one: Debian is bloatware).
If you think this is your thread ...

thanks saulgoode for the elaborate answer.

In the end it looks as if our specs would be the same though .... :-) And even the expactations
(i still wouldn't call a 1 Gig low specs, but that is really just about giving a name)

I ain't got problems with the cost. Simply looks as if my machines would do anything (and as i have around 10 machines, it doesn't make sense to upgrade the really bad ones. I simply use the good ones, and of those i don't even use all).

I bought 2 machines, the rest is ...

Wondering what they did 5 years ago. Not to speak of 10.
Or back in the days when Eric Raymond considered 64 MB to be "plenty of, where you barely need swap".
Perhaps people didn't work ... ?

To work one sure needs round the lines of 40 tabs open in a browser. Mainly facebook, twitter and other social media, i guess.

Doesn't look as if he/she/it would be interested in the answer.
Perhaps it needs time to sink (a metapackage is a metapackage, and a rose is a rose. That is not an easy one).

I already listed the problems several times.
So did others on this board.
So does the WWW.

If you can't figure out the problem, that is really your problem.

I could just as well repeat that sysv is running fine here, all the time. And of course it does. But that is neither the problem nor the question.

So, I've been keeping away from this discussion since it has started, but I will just quickly give my impressions
of a newly installed Debian Jessie system with systemd, slim login manager, openbox and a few programmes and scripts.
This is a notebook used as an all-around-desktop machine.
I usually choose stability over fresh packages, meaning that I'd have removed this system if it had even the smallest annoying bugs.

* Things work as they did before (settings, personal bash scripts, etc ...

More short:
You, saulgoode, think too that 2 Gigs is not enough?
Even though 5+ years ago 512 was pretty common and most were very happy with it.
(We already had modern browsers and modern DE's back then).

Well: I got machines with more ram too.
Thing is: none of them uses more than +/- 300 (with claws, firefox, pidgin and tilda running). Most of that being used by firefox, of course.
Not that sure what would be the point to get more ram .... so that more sits idle?
Linux will use any available spare RAM for caching disk blocks. This can greatly speed reloading of programs, libraries, and data files.

For example:
root@thevenin:~# free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 428 406 22 ...

Oh ya, and I went to turn on my second laptop today, the one which had windows installed on it. Nothing, absolutely nothing. The power light doesn't even come on when it is plugged in. It is as dead as could be. It doesn't even try to start
A virus which can infect a computer not being turned on during the attack sure is something new.
You soon will be famous.
Pick a cooler nickname for that. The_Man or such.

My other PC didn't boot neither. I simply assumed it is broken, but perhaps i am ...

dzz wrote:

Tell me as soon you find an OS which can run with 512 MB RAM, or less.

? Machines in use here with 512 ram and single-core cpu, running squeeze, wheezy, jessie, sid with xfce4, TDE, openbox.

Well: I got machines with more ram too.
Thing is: none of them uses more than +/- 300 (with claws, firefox, pidgin and tilda running). Most of that being used by firefox, of course.
Not that sure what would be the point to get more ram .... so that more sits idle?

I take any bet we will hear of him never again, after this thread....
First post, such a content ... dunno: am i the only one who considers it weird ?
(obviously i am not, just look previous posts).

I imply that it doesn't matter if you are male or female.
And first of all that you could tell me anything, i can't check it. Just like i could tell you anything, and you couldn't check it. And so on.

Post what the editors are.
I asked 3 or 4 times now.