Jump to content
axel_2078

Ubuntu vs Mandrake

Recommended Posts

How do Ubuntu and Mandrake stack up? I'm using mandrake 10.0 right now, but I don't know anything about Ubuntu. I've noticed many users on here talk about it. What is different about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a lot is different. i will try to sum up the mayor differences...

 

- mandrake uses kde as default, ubuntu is gnome-based (kde is available via download)

- 3-7 cds in mandrake, 1 cd in ubuntu, rest is available via download

- mandrake uses its own urpmi tool, ubuntu uses the debian apt-get tool, as it is based on debian

- mandrake uses gui-installer, ubuntu the debian text-installer

- mandrake uses root environment, ubuntu uses sudo, root can be added if whished.

- you might have to pay for mandrake (depending on what you want), ubuntu is free and will ship cds to your home for free, if needed.

- mandrake uses the galaxy-theme as default, ubuntu uses the human-theme.

- mandrake is for i586/i686 boxes, ubuntu works from i386 upwards.

 

and... i find ubuntu more stable than mandrake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mandrake is a mature distro, though it's still somewhat cutting edge and has issues

ubuntu is beta and new...like debian unstable which is usually more stable than mandrake. Its devel are gnome and python devel which makes for the best gnome/gdesklets I've ever used. Both have great communities :D

Edited by bvc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate Gnome, Ubuntu logo and their philosophy behind.

But what I'd want in Mandrake is apt-get

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest aniken
I hate Gnome, Ubuntu logo and their philosophy behind.

But what I'd want in Mandrake is apt-get

:lol2:

apt-get is the result of that very philosophy, for lack of a better word. :woot:

 

I just returned from the dark side of fedora core with Yum and apt-get

 

I have just a couple of words "Apt-get generally sucks".

I had such a hard time with apt-get due to the lack of consistant mirrors and packages. With all the different ways of getting apt-get and yum to recoginse the repos. I even tried to use urpmi there. It worked great for a while until urpmi quit working due to a perl upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a lot of difference between apt-get and urpmi. They both do the same thing - resolve dependencies, and I don't find one technically superior in that regard. For either system the key is in the package maintainers and there debian probably has an edge IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hate Gnome, Ubuntu logo and their philosophy behind.

But what I'd want in Mandrake is apt-get

:lol2:

apt-get is the result of that very philosophy, for lack of a better word. :woot:

 

I just returned from the dark side of fedora core with Yum and apt-get

 

I have just a couple of words "Apt-get generally sucks".

I had such a hard time with apt-get due to the lack of consistant mirrors and packages. With all the different ways of getting apt-get and yum to recoginse the repos. I even tried to use urpmi there. It worked great for a while until urpmi quit working due to a perl upgrade.

apt has always sucked with rpm-based distros. Always. It also isn't good with a lot of repos unless you learn how to pin. No thanks.

Yum is a dog.

 

 

 

I don't see a lot of difference between apt-get and urpmi. They both do the same thing - resolve dependencies, and I don't find one technically superior in that regard. For either system the key is in the package maintainers and there debian probably has an edge IMHO.

urpmi rocks. I've gone from ML-9.2 to 10.2 cooker, same install. So no, apt is really no loger superior in this regard except that it's a lot easier and a little less buggy to accomplish, but that goes back to repos and maintainers. With apt, you pretty much only need one once you get all the good stuff and only enable those every now and again when needed. With urpmi, the mirrors change and are not consistant in maintainence, and then you have to have plf etc....Urpmi will not compile ;)

http://mandrakeusers.org/index.php?act=ST&...ndpost&p=156657

but it wouldn't take much for it to do so. In fact, I'd guess about the only reason it doesn't is the hassle of even more syncing and maintaining of the source mirrors.

man urpmi

       --src name
             Search a source package matching name and select all its  depen-
             dencies  by  default,  unless  --install-src is used in order to
             install the source package itself.

      --install-src
             Install only the source package  (no  binary  packages  will  be
             installed).

http://mandrake.vmlinuz.ca/bin/view/Main/UsingUrpmi

http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/twiki/bin/view/...umentation_in_E

Edited by bvc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apt-get in Fedora and Apt-get in Ubuntu/Debian are as far as I am concerned nothing alike. Worlds of difference to me. I've used both too and much prefer Ubuntu over Fedora.

 

FX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have Ubuntu, Libranet, and Mandrake. Generally:

1) urpmi works fine for rpm based systems.

2) Both Ubuntu and Libranet are "true" apt-get systems, and both work flawlessly.

3) When I want to try different stuff, it is easiest in Mandrake. But that is because Mandy is more familiar to me.

4) I prefer kde, but the gui's in all three are great.

5) Ubuntu is lighter and faster.

6) Libranet is the most sophisticated of the three.

7) Mandrake is the most bleeding edge.

8) If I use each at any time, it's all linux!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
apt has always sucked with rpm-based distros. Always. It also isn't good with a lot of repos unless you learn how to pin. No thanks.

Yum is a dog.

 

No point repeating everything bvc said but Ill quote for emphasis.

atp-get and Debian based distro's works great, server stuff a lot better than urpmi since it generally kicks off debconf straight after and everything is working by the time you finish...

URPMI tends to leave it unconfigured... in most cases if you know what you are doing its pretty minor to get whatever running but it still needs it.

 

Using apt-get on a RPM based system is kinda like using a wrench to knock in nails IMHO...

 

URPMI absolutely rocks for R)PM based systems... apt-get for deb based!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dont forget arch's pacman :D

i think the topic was: what is different in ubuntu and mandrake. not ubuntu, arch and mandrake. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...