Every two years or so, Debian puts out a new "stable" release. This is my favorite distribution because of the minimal number of bugs and the huge software repositories and the powerful package manager.

Subversion is a free/open-source version control system. That is, Subversion manages files and directories, and the changes made to them, over time. This allows you to recover older versions of your data, or examine the history of how your data changed. In this regard, many people think of a version control system as a sort of "time machine".

Since this evening, parallel booting is the default in Debian/unstable for machines using dependency based boot sequencing.

It has been argued both ways for years. Both sides have valid points, and experience varies so widely depending on so many factors that it seems impossible to come to a conclusion.

As I look through DistroWatch's list, I see a trend. The top ten at the moment are: Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, OpenSuSE, Mandriva, Debian, PCLinuxOS, Sabayon, Arch, and MEPIS. Strangely, we find two relatively non-n00b distributions in there...

There are several cases where two packages provide two different versions of a program, both of which provide the same core functionality.

When you rent a dedicated server nowadays, almost all providers give you FTP backup space for your server on one of the provider's backup systems. This tutorial shows how you can use duplicity and ftplicity to create encrypted backups on the provider's remote backup server over FTP.

Do you consider yourself to be fairly familiar with the Debian Linux distribution? I thought I was familiar with it enough to know its origin and history. There's one significant piece of the Debian puzzle that I didn't know about: Its Constitution.