Which Distro?

[tanna]

I can't use Knoppix, I could never boot into it because it doesnt like my monitors frame buffer mode, so when I choosed on its framebuffer mode choices, it messed up my monitor so I tried different ones but it was just really messed up and I couldn't fix it so I had to use another monitor, and it doesn't work with this one also, and I'm not going to pick a mode this time.

[Darkbolt]

Originally posted by bosox79
check this out Darkbolt
Solaris Operating System for x86 Platforms (http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/x86/index.html);)

& I had solaris 7 running on my box at one time also:cool:
I'm mistaken :D
though I'm assuming its still propriatery? (though I dont see a pricetag anywhere, i do think that's a safe assumption)

[deanrantala]

Tanna, did you ever consider slack? Gentoo (from the little bit I've had experience with) is also alright - once you get it going. But compile times kill you, and the "ebiulds" from what I hear are not that great. But if you like control over your system, and want one of the best distros for compiling from source, Slack is a good canidate. Most config is through text-files, but it is not hard to learn and is also a very "lightweight" distro. Not a lot of bloat. The slackware package system is also nice, it WILL tell you if a package requires something, but it does not even try to stop you from trying to install a slack package if you want to do so. Somewhat cruder than Red Carpets package system, but in my experience far more dependable and has rarely gave me problems. (rather than one package fits all, it's one slack package fits slack) But even if you do run across a RH package, slack also has an RPM app for installing PRM's just like any other distro.

Anywho.. I was over at the Solaris web site. From the "percentages" of price comparison, Solaris still seems like it will be a little expensive. And the supported hardware list is not as rich as Linux in the multimedia department. Can you compile and use linux driver/modules under Solaris? They say that it is 100% linux compatible. Also, they were rather fuzzy with their description of the included software. Heres the kicker: Does it have a gcc compiler? And also, is it just a basic CLI-based OS or does it already include X and a basic desktop?

Hmm.... It is 9:37 AM. I'll be back - I got cold pizza waiting for me in the fridge:)

[tanna]

deanrantala, is slack going to configure with my printer easily? :)

Then i would be more than glad to try it.
how would I do that? is setting a cups a server going to allow slackware to print? or is it something else I have to do? will slackware check hardware on startup so it will configure my printer ro do I have to go searching for drivers?

[o0zi]

Slackware's "apsfilter" may not work with your printer, so you need to grab the extra CUPS package off the Slackware FTP server.
Install it, go to localhost:631 in whatever web browser you use, and set up CUPS from there.

So yes, your printer should work, but it might take a little more work than with some other distros.

[dysharmonic]

Hello all

I've been wondering if there's a need for me to use Debian and why.

My main Linux is RedHat 8 and been using it lightly for more than a year now. I'm also using Mandrake 9.0 but soon to be replaced w/ 9.1.

My experience w/ Linux is not that extensive for so far it's only for learning purpose, just to broaden my computer knowledge and to probbaly help other ppl who are new comers to Linux.

I'm assuming that if I knew a lil abt another distro which is rather different than the more widely used ones, I could also use it to my said advantages above, and perhaps could use this in my resume :D if anyone's interested in hiring a guy w/ some Debian knowledge...

Any advice is appreciated.

Thanx.

[otbibb]

I have CUPS running now on my Slack-current machine. I have to print through Samba, so setup was a little bit hairy, but otherwise it works great.

[Jata]

I swapped from RedHat 7.2 to Debian 3.0 about four months ago. I swapped because of dependencies in RH which were starting to wind me up, mainly because I had an older version of GCC.
The thing I love about Debian though is Apt, mainly because it's fun to watch, knowing the kind of trouble you could have had in RH / Mandrake.
Though to be honest I've not really explored it much because I've been too busy, something which I hope to address in the next few weeks. I'd try Gentoo but I've only got a 56K modem and I don't see it really being feasible, especially if I need to re-install.
Why don't you just get an old box to experiment with it? If you like it you can put it on your main one. Go on give it a go, you know you want to :D

[tanna]

Samba is the windows thign where you print through that right?? I can print wihtout that tright? :)
okay, I am looking the slackware install guide. looks like it might take a long time. and I am unsure that I know enough about my hardware its asking for? is there any command I can do to find out what redhat(JAMD) currently is assuming for my hardware and settings?

o0zi, even though it takes alot somewhat, it won't be too hard right? :)

[jlmb]

Honestly, you should give it a try.
I can't give you any comments about how debian is different from other distros since i have not tried other distros enough to comment.
Being a Debian user almost all my "linux life" i've never had any serious dependencies problems. There are lots of other not big distros that worth a try. Personally, i think those "smaller" distros provide a pretty nice learning experience since they aren't so mature.

[carrja99]

I'd definately suggest Debian, as it sounds like you're on the same track I was. I started with Mandrake 8.2, then got Mandrake 9.0 and used that and Red Hat 8. Then I gave Debian a try.

Although people claim frequently it's a hard to install distro (even claiming it's harder than gentoo... wtf) I installed it correctly and painlessly the first time around. Make sure you read up though. Debian defaults to stable with apt-get... which is really quite old (But it's rock solid). Read on how to change your apt to sid and just get current packages you need that are current (like KDE 3.1.1) as doing a simple apt-get dist upgrade can wipe out your config files and install alot of broken/unstable packages (like a GCC that can't compile "Hello World")!!

Seriously, give it a try... I'm sure you'll find it superb.

[o0zi]

No, it shouldn't be too hard. You don't need Samba unless you're connecting to a Windows machine which is connected to a printer.
Pity I didn't know about the CUPS package when I was trying to get my printer to work with Slackware:(

[Gertrude]

Debian good.

[bosox79]

Originally posted by Darkbolt
I'm mistaken :D
though I'm assuming its still propriatery? (though I dont see a pricetag anywhere, i do think that's a safe assumption)

yeah solairs is not OSS :( but my may reason for posting is that it can & will run on x86 hardware:D

[bosox79]

tanna, have you tried out libranet 2.7 classic? printer setup was pretty painless and it's debian based check Click here to go to the download page (http://www.libranet.com/download.html) :D BTW I have an HP deskjet 672C

[Drago]

Give it a go....you will like.:D

[bosox79]

Originally posted by Fahrenheit451
Hello all

I've been wondering if there's a need for me to use Debian and why.

My main Linux is RedHat 8 and been using it lightly for more than a year now. I'm also using Mandrake 9.0 but soon to be replaced w/ 9.1.

My experience w/ Linux is not that extensive for so far it's only for learning purpose, just to broaden my computer knowledge and to probbaly help other ppl who are new comers to Linux.

I'm assuming that if I knew a lil abt another distro which is rather different than the more widely used ones, I could also use it to my said advantages above, and perhaps could use this in my resume :D if anyone's interested in hiring a guy w/ some Debian knowledge...

Any advice is appreciated.

Thanx.

it wo'nt hurt to give debian a shot & see if it suites your needs and wants if you want an installer that pretty much auto detects everthing check out Version 2.7 Classic Edition
FREE (http://www.libranet.com/download.html) Just an FYI libranet 2.7 did'nt load the emuk101 module for my soundcard. I had to setup my soundcard. The standered debian installer is preety straight forward also
:D

[jlmb]

Originally posted by carrja99
I'd definately suggest Debian, as it sounds like you're on the same track I was. I started with Mandrake 8.2, then got Mandrake 9.0 and used that and Red Hat 8. Then I gave Debian a try.

Ummmmm, almost the same road as me.

Mandrake8.2, Redhat7.3, Debian, Debian, Debian, Debian and so on :)

[deanrantala]

The only piece of hardware that slack usually won't auto-detect it the sound card. Just do a "lsmod" at the cli and take note of what sound module your card uses.

Printing is not that hard. I also had to install cups. Word of advice, stay away from the slack package for cups. Just compile from source. It is less of a headache IMHO. If you got an epson or HP, you are pretty much in there. I am not too sure about other models.

Of course there are several tweaks you will want to do to get everything else running really nice. After a 20 minute insstall (full), it takes me an extra 15 minutes to adjust all the tweaks I want. The result is a really fast box that runs great.

[ehawk]

Heard Libranet is an easy Debian install. I have installed knoppix to my hard drive. It is pretty easy to set up.

[nothingbutlinux]

I went from SuSE to Dedian and will never go back because of Apt. It's the best way of loading software ... period. I second the nod to Knoppix, it does a lot of the 'busy' work for you, things like installing Java, all the Office aps, games, etc. The thing I use Apt most is for upgrading ... I upgrade KDE as soon as it's posted via Apt, same with Gnome.

Definitely give Debian a try!

[o0zi]

I also agree with the Knoppix suggestion, as once you've installed it it's basically Debian, but with newer packages and better hardware support.
I've found that Knoppix needs some trimming down once you've installed it - it has lots of software you'll never use.

[Loki3]

I used red hat for almost six months and then decided to change to debian. I actually had a pretty easy go of installing. Just make sure you read the manual beforehand and keep a copy handy while your installing. Apt-get owns. Period. There's nothing cooler than typing apt-get install program and that's it. Try it, you'll like it. You know you will. :D

[bazoukas]

I used RedHat from 7.1 all the way to 8.0
I used for a little while Mandrake 8.1 ( i think)
Then went to Suse 8.2.
Now I am in knoppix (which is based on Debian) for the last month.


In all honesty, the best distros I used are knoppix and suse. Knoppix takes the cake because of apt-get and for its speed.

[dysharmonic]

I've heard enuff of this apt-get thingy that I'm beginning to wonder if I need to be connected to the net for it to work, or does it browse the CDs for packages to get installed too? :D

[jlmb]

apt is very flexible. You can set it up to use the net, cdroms, local hard drive archive, etc....almost anything. But most times the net is the preferred way since you'll get newer packages.

[dysharmonic]

Thanx, that explains :)

[huntermcdole]

I am wondering if anyone can recommend a distribution of Linux to me. My boss wants to setup 2 old computers that we have for video conferencing. The camera is going to be some webcams we have, that upload the pictures to a web server. The computers will be hooked to projectors. These are old P I’s (around 200 MHz at best) and around 32 MB of RAM at most . I want to find the best way to run them so they are fast but can also get on the internet and have good graphics (The projectors rely on the video cards). I have tried Red Hat 7.3 but it ran way to slow.


Also Another P I will become our Intranet server, any suggestions on what one to use for this? (All it needs is Apache and an FTP server, I think, so this can be text line only if need be)

[deanrantala]

Hmmm...
Well, if you wanna go the debian way, gentoo is a distro that is rather quick and can very well be fit for low spec machines - but it will probably take two weeks to "emerge" a fully working GUI on them things:( For multimedia and video use, I usually recomend Mandrake or SuSE - but since you got some slower boxes, I would most definately go with a Slackware based distro. If the thought of installing and configuring slack is scary, then check out vector linux. It is a "freindly" slack version.

I have my latest client, Southshore Mortgage and affiliates, inc set up with a P133 for their server. It is a full time samba server, light weight FTP server, and firewall/router. The PC has 32 megs RAM and a 10 gig HD. It boots to the CLI in about 15 seconds and will launch the window maker Desktop in another 8 seconds. It runs Slack 9.0....

[biscaynesix]

I havent looked in to a lot of different distros, but Im running Debian on my server, installed with the net install boot disk (10 megs), and I love it. I just download whatever I need with aptitude.

[Dr. Shim]

Originally posted by huntermcdole
[B]I am wondering if anyone can recommend a distribution of Linux to me ...

Well, I'm currently using Debian 3 on an old Sony Vaio F160. It's a sleek lookin' laptop, but has a Pentium II running at 200Mhz, with 128Mb SDRAM. My father spent an arm and a leg trying to max out the memory for the thing! Debian works fine with GNOME 2.2 as it's Desktop-Manager, and I even use GDM for a really slick login. I'm using the theme with the flower... I like flowers...

Anyway, I believe the latest Debian 3 ought to work with your ol' clunkers. In case it helps any, when the setup boot-screen appears, I typed in bf24 to get the new Linux 2.4 kernel. All my hardware worked (yes, everything, just not sure of the soundcard). I used the bf24 option since I wanted to utilize the EXT3 filesystem.

So, to simplify: Debian 3 runnin' GNOME 2.2 with Metacity as Window-Manager should work just fine! KDE probably is a bit to big, but give 'er a try. 700Mb for the aformentioned GUI setup.

Note: I used Jigdo to assemble the first CD, then selected bf24 from there, and got the rest of the packages via apt-get from the Web.

[JKlebs9225]

When someone asked the forum which linux distro is the best, you get 144 pages of comments from the forum users. This can mean only one thing. Use the linux distribution that you like the best. Of course, the question is quite useful to tell you which ones will work better with your hardware, and questions of that nature, but my suggestion would be to try them out and see if you like them. You can always get two hard drives, one to keep a stable distro on, and one smaller, cheaper one to test out other distros. That's what I do. My permanent distro is slackware 9.0 I just love slack, I think it's the most straight forward and user non-friendly. I started out with red hat 7.2 (before I had two drives), and that one was good, but then when they came out with red hat 8.0, I hated it. I don't suppose that I would like red hat 9.0 either. I have also tried out suse and debian, but I still like slackware better.

[huntermcdole]

ok so far i have tried, Red Hat 6.2, 7.3; Debian Woody release, Dragon Linux, Vector Lunix, and Slackware 9.0 with no luck. Red Hat and Debian was to slow. Vector and Dragon I couldn't set up X. Slackware I couldn't get the windowmanager that they wanted to work. and Damn Small Lunix works other than the hard drive install so thats a no go too. Any more ideas?

[l01yuk]

When you say Debian and Red-Hat were too slow. Do you mean they were also too slow in console mode or were you suffering under a slow desktop like KDE or Gnome. It may be worth trying a more stream-lined window manager such as iceWM which has decent features but is much faster if your PC doesn't have a large amount of RAM.

[Dr. Shim]

Debian too slow? Why, I never! Actually, it all depends on what Desktop-Manager or Window-Manager yer usin'. KDE is sloow as hell for smaller computers. I already mentioned I have GNOME + Metacity going on an 200MHz laptop. It's just as slow as Windows 98 was (the OS it came on), but not unbearably slow.
Just have to wait a few seconds.:D

[skeen]

Hello everyone;

There isnt a General Discussion forum on this board, so this seems like the correct place to post this.

Is there an incredibly simple distribution if Linux which would allow me to program using C++, Java2 in which I could connect to remotely from anywhere around the world? Now... I dont want a GUI as it would tempt me to manage files the "easy way" instead of learning the ins and outs of the Linux terminal... I also feel it would provide me with a good programming environment, having to always use the keyboard and all.

I hope this makes sense. I have only installed one version of Linux before which was Mandrake 8.0, I was always far more interested in using the terminal though.

Would you also be able to tell me the lowest PC specifications I would need to run this version of Linux? I just want to build a simple, very low-cost PC in which I can do all of my Linux stuff on. Also, if anyone has any recommendation for books, that would also be incredibly great.

Thank you very much.
- Skeen.

EDITED: When I meant it would provide a good programming environment, I meant that it would provide a good environment for me to learn how to program.

[jme]

Hi there, there I would say that a good distribution for you to use is Debian (http://debian.org) as you can install as much or as little as you want to. Basically, you install a very basic base system and then use 'apt-get' to install anyother things that you need/want. A few people get put off by the install process as it isn't grapjhical like Red Hat/Mandrake etc.., but there are some really good duides out there to walk you through the installation (check the doc's on the Debian website, or for an excellend walkthrough try The Very Verbose Debian 3.0 Installation Walkthrough (http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=2016) by Clinton De Young.

Depending on what you wnat the system for and what you install you can install Linux on a system with a P133, 32MB RAM...I have one of these acting as a server, but it is very basic and slow.

I only have the one book on linux at the monent but it has verything that I have ever needed and I would recommend it to new or old Linux user: O'Reilly's Running Linux (http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/runux4/) .

BTW: There isnt a General Discussion forum on this board, so this seems like the correct place to post this. The general discussion forum is /dev/random (http://justlinux.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=21) :)

Hope that this helps.

[Tabu]

Hi all,
What's your favorite flavor of Linux? RedHat, Mandrake, Suse or something else and why? I'm getting ready to install Linux on one of my boxes and just what some opinions before I decide which why to go.

Thanks in advance!

[deathadder]

theres lots of threads like this includin one called Main What Distro Thread, or something very similiar have a look here for more

http://www.justlinux.com/forum/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=749498&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending

now ive said that im goin with debian

[Tabu]

Thanks deathadder. But why do you use debian and not another Flavor?

Thanks again

[X_console]

Please refer to the following: http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110030

[Hayl]

Originally posted by X_console
Please refer to the following: http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110030

thanks for closing it. i just merged it into the MAIN one in /dev/random.

:)

[CrashTestDummy9]

LMAO....It never gets old.I love it.For "easy install" and a little less steep learning curve go MandrakeRedhatSUSE.If you wanna learn fast try DebianSlackGentoo....yadda yadda yadda.

Try em all.200gb drives can be had for less than 150 bucks US if you look hard and are willing(or remember) to fill out the rebate forms.:(

[Dr. Shim]

Isn't that the grand thing about Linux? Such variety!

[Bones_28]

Hi everyone!
For me this new and wonderfull world called Linux was brouth through Mandrake Gnome. it has been 2 weeks now and I just learned how to configure my modem in the terminal. I love it! My wife loves it too! So much that I have to buy myself another computer so I can work and learn cause she's hogging my machine playing games and chatting. :(

Oh well, I just might as well learn networking trhough Linux now...


After my marriage, Linux is the best thing that I have!

[dysharmonic]

Originally posted by Bones_28
Hi everyone!
For me this new and wonderfull world called Linux was brouth through Mandrake Gnome. it has been 2 weeks now and I just learned how to configure my modem in the terminal. I love it! My wife loves it too! So much that I have to buy myself another computer so I can work and learn cause she's hogging my machine playing games and chatting. :(

Oh well, I just might as well learn networking trhough Linux now...


After my marriage, Linux is the best thing that I have!

I suppose you could have another terminal (monitor, mouse, keyboard) attached to the same system, tho not sure if that would be easy configuring, maybe you'd want to try that out too. If you do want to dabble in it, do some researching and read some docs, they'd be helpful for sure.

And nice Linuxing :D

[skeen]

Originally posted by Bones_28
Hi everyone!
For me this new and wonderfull world called Linux was brouth through Mandrake Gnome. ... I love it! My wife loves it too! So much that I have to buy myself another computer so I can work and learn cause she's hogging my machine playing games and chatting. :(

I really dont mean to go off-topic here... but what exactly is it that you love about Linux? What have you been doing on it that you like so much? Just curious to know how peope enjoy Linux...

[dysharmonic]

but what exactly is it that you love about Linux?


It's like 2 new shiny P4 or Athlon systems w/ lots of disk space, lots of RAM, lots of VGA RAM, and come complete w/ everything else and they both could do most needful software things out there w/o much of a fuss.

One of them requires you to shell out a hefty amount of $$$, while the other one is completely (or almost) free...

Which would you prefer? :D

What have you been doing on it that you like so much?

Using the console alone makes you feel like wanting to learn the insides of the thing thoroughly, not to mention other numerous apps for the platform and for free... :D

[Bones_28]

I bought my present machine for about 550$ CAN and i'm actually looking at one similar for about 500$ now. For what i'm doing now, the specs of these machines are plentyfull. I'm not a programmer but i'm a digital artist, so to say. Photo montage, digital photo, movie clips, etc.

I know i've been general about my love for Linux but if I get into specifics, I would say that it's the little things that make the difference. For example; the cd trays. When Linux espects me to insert a CD, it opens the tray for me. Its like a physical manifestation of my computers demand for a CD! And on top of that, once I closed the tray, I don't have to wait for the computer to read its lead-in before it kmows there is actually a physical CD in there. For me this kind of thing is like saying "please" and "thankyou". This is without mentionning the security level of Linux and the cool graphical interfaces it offers. Like Farenheit said, it pushes me to want to know more of the inner workings of the system.

So there you have a small sample of why my love for linux is growing as i learn more each day.

[o0zi]

Bones_28, try typing eject at the console:) Oh, the possibilities for havoc...

[je_fro]

> Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 2:23:49 PM US/Central
> To: comsoc-announce~lists.cc.utexas.edu
> Subject: [COMSOC-ANNOUNCE:21] Wednesday-Which Linux Is Best?
> Reply-To: somebody@overt.org
>
> The topic for this Wednesday's meeting will be a panel discussion of
> the strengths and weaknesses of the various Linux distributions.
>
> Panel discussion is a nice way of saying that we're getting our distro
> zealots up on stage to duke it out for your viewing pleasure.
>
> Linux distributions is a general way of saying Linux, *bsd, and Mac OS
> X. No it's not exactly accurate, but we try not to sweat the small
> stuff.
>
> If you're interested in Linux but don't know which one you want to work
> with you should definitely show up.
>
> When: Wednesday, 7pm
> Where: ENS 109
>
> See you there,
> george
>


Ya know I might have gone at one point! Hanging around in #justlinux has cured me of that!!!

[dysharmonic]

I've been putting off getting Mdk 9.1 and was abt to order them, but there's been mentions of 9.2 RC2 in these forums, so I'm wondering when would 9.2 be finally released?

[chesskidd]

how about some of you guys making a "JustLinux 1.0" linux distro for the members :p
that way, we don't have to argue which one is the best :D
i think it sounds pretty cool

[je_fro]

That's an AWESOME idea!!!

Where's oubipaws when you need him.....?

[o0zi]

*cough* Dux Linux or whatever it was...

[dysharmonic]

Originally posted by chesskidd
how about some of you guys making a "JustLinux 1.0" linux distro for the members :p
that way, we don't have to argue which one is the best :D
i think it sounds pretty cool

That's a damn good idea there chesskid :D

Give everyone here the chance to participate if he/she wishes so :D

[Richard Craneum]

I bought the MDK 9.1 Pro Suite about 6 months and I am very pleased with it. I downloaded the 9.2 RC1 and I have the RC2 on ISO that I have not burned yet. I might stick to 9.1 until the next huge change.

[Wolface]

I was a HUGE Mandrake fan. I was so close to get a silver membership when I stepped (literally) on a gentoo cd. Since then I forgot everything about any other distro

[Wolface]

je_fro, i LOVE ur avatar

[StupidDrivers]

Ok, I need to know, from your recommedations, which distro will most likley satisfy the following:

I want every single dependancy known to man to be installed from the beginning. No more "Failed Dep" errors. I want every lib, every dep to come with the original install, so that software can be loaded with almost no issue. (Gotta have some, how else would one learn?) But everytime, there has to be a better way.

I want a distro that is rich in features and packages, so that I can install everything, and be able to play when I am ready, and not have to hunt down mods to add functionality (i.e., apache, samba, etc.)

I want something stable, so that it won't crash, however, new enough to take advantage of newer software. Yahoo's new IM Client for UNIX comes to mind.....


Any thoughts? I am currently running Slack 9.0. And would stay with it, if perhaps there is a package with said libs and deps out there somewhere i can install for my kernel V.........................

[MasonS]

I don't think you've redefined the discussion. You want either Debian or Gentoo. Those, and some others, will install all dependencies for you with no hunting. They won't do it on a default install meaning that you'll have to give some input with regard to what packages you want, but it's quite easy.

[clw54]

Debian. Once it's installed, it runs great and handles dependencies automatically. The only drawback is not having the latest and greatest releases of software.

Gentoo is nice, but if you want to install software it can take a long time to compile.

I have two machines, one with Debian, one with Gentoo. If I had only one machine, I'd use Debian.

[ph34r]

Like the first reply said, Debian or Gentoo. Or get that massive (multiple DVD IIRC) version of SuSE and just install every fsckin package.

But you'll be happier with Gentoo or Debian.

[Mirrorball]

You might install an rpm based distro and use apt-rpm and synaptic to install software. They are easier to setup easier than Gentoo or Debian. See JAMD, Redhat (have a look at http://freshrpms.net/apt/), Mandrake (urpmi) etc.

[curdiss]

So I have two computers that I'm going to install Linux on.

1) Dell Pentium4 3.5 PowerEdge series (Red Hat v9)
2) Apple G4 400 PCI (Yellow Dog 3.0)

I interested in ppl's thoughts on which set up would be better for Hosting Sites (Apache,PHP,mSql,CGI,SendMail,etc)

I was thinking of using the Apple G4 as the web server because there is probably more developed Apps on the "PC Red Hat" platform.

No? or can I use the open source applications on both platforms?

Sorry if the question seems very elementary to everyone, but that why I'm here!

Thanks,
curdiss

[YogaFrog]

Hey all,

I started out a few years ago with Redhat 5.2. After a few months of intensive typing commands making my way into the Linux world i switched to Slackware. I used Slackware for a year or so.

Then i got my education and a job plus a girlfriend...she moved in so slackware had to move out.

Dual booting for some time with mandrake.

After that i installed Yellowdog on my Ibook, this really speeded things up :)

Well now i just had some time where i didnt use Linux at all. I just installed Redhat 9.0 to get the touch of it again...

Must say i have had some good experiences with the Redhat. It comes highly recommended ;)

[pvd212]

MANDRAKE9.1 IS THE BEST FOR BEGINNERS IT HAS AUTO DETECT THAT MAKE'S INSTALLING EASY AND IS PRETTY USER FREINDLY ITS ALSO RED HAT BAST SO IT HAS POWER

BUT FOR USERS THAT ALREADY NOW HOW TO GET AROUND ID SAY RAD HAT

[AbortedFetus]

Hi, newbie here that just installed RH9 and got all the upgrades and stuff, which took a hell of a long time. I've heard RH is good for starting out, but I saw another post that said Slackware would get you to start messing around with stuff and wouldn't be so hard that you couldn't figure it out. Should I make the switch? I don't mind formatting and installing again, even though it took so long. I hear it's faster as well and not bloated. I'm willing to take the time to figure it all out, but do you think it would be too hard for someone new to Linux to start with?

[ashibaka]

Originally posted by pvd212
MANDRAKE9.1 IS THE BEST FOR BEGINNERS IT HAS AUTO DETECT THAT MAKE'S INSTALLING EASY AND IS PRETTY USER FREINDLY ITS ALSO RED HAT BAST SO IT HAS POWER

BUT FOR USERS THAT ALREADY NOW HOW TO GET AROUND ID SAY RAD HAT

Psst... when someone can't spell or use proper grammar, it is best not to follow any of their advice...

[ryn1727]

what do u think is better Red Hat, Mandrake, or Suse??

[stumbles]

Originally posted by ryn1727
what do u think is better Red Hat, Mandrake, or Suse??


Oh boy, not another one of these. The answer is very very simple.

The better one is THE ONE YOU LIKE BEST


Moderators please lock this thread.

[quamaretto]

I thought I'd crap my two cents here..

I just installed ThizLinux Desktop 7.0 on my laptop, and
I have very few complaints.

The installer is graphical and intuitive, for a linux distro. I don't remember having to configure anything by hand, except for altering lilo to also boot Slackware . I should mention I've been struggling with different installers (Debian, Slackware, Morphix...) for quite sometime, and there has always been some hitch; but not this time.

I don't care that they didn't include GNOME since I don't use it, but some people would be bugged, obviously. The KDE setup, however, really exudes a desktop user-oriented feel, instead of h@xx0r h3aV3n or something. There's also a nice graphical utility (thizconfig) for setting up your internet connection, adding and modifying users, and so on.

My major gripe is that there isn't acpi support in the kernel, and there isn't an acpi kernel available like Slackware. (I'm not a hardcore Slackware fan, it's just what I've been messing with.)

So anyway, thiz has been a good experience for me.

It's a two disc iso download free from the web site. (thizlinux.com)

FYI. Yeah. Over and out.

[je_fro]

Originally posted by ryn1727
what do u think is better Red Hat, Mandrake, or Suse??

Red Hat

[dutchman3000]

Hello,

Ok, right now I'm running Mandrake. But I want to try some other distros. I've played with the Slackware Live cd which was interesting. I'm considering unistalling Mandrake and installing Slackware. However, I can't give myself any good reasons for doing this other than for the sake of exploration.

Can you Slackers give me some solid reasons as to why I should make this switch?

Thanks

[hyp_spec]

well,
1) full control of your system
2) full control of your system
3) full control of your system
4) Faster speeds
5) no dependency hell

[JohnT]

It prevents you from cross-posting in two different forums on the same topic:p

If you can't determine any advantage from your experimentation, I would suggest, just stay with Mandrake.

[serz]

Originally posted by hyp_spec
well,
1) full control of your system
2) full control of your system
3) full control of your system
4) Faster speeds
5) no dependency hell
Besides that, Slackware is "simple" :)

[rid3r]

It's just clean, simple (as mentioned above), it feels right.
You have a sensation it is a "classic Linux".
I think Pat has a good taste.

[dutchman3000]

Thanks for the info.

What did you(hyp_spec) with no dependency hell. Did you mean most dependencies you'll likely ever need are already installed?


(maybe I should go into e-marketing; that cross-posting technique might come in useful someday...:D )

[bandwidth_pig]

As a ex-Slackware user, I must say I learned more about Linux in the two years or so that I used Slackware than in 4 using RedHat. (roughly). The beauty of Slack is pure opportunity. You have to get more involved with what is going on. So if your interested in increasing your knowledge of Linux, Slackware is a wonderful way to accomplish that goal. And honestly, the reason why Slack has such a devoted following in my opinion is once you start using it, it's really hard to stop. You don't want to stop. It works so well in my opinion. The only reason I stopped using Slack was I became very curious about Debian. Which I have to say I love just as much. But if I for some reason couldn't use Debain anymore, I would go right back to Slackware. No Gentoo, no Drake, no RedHat. Try it. The install is much easier than I thought it would be. After all, if Drake met all your expectations, would you have that desire in the back of your mind to try something else?

[bandwidth_pig]

Originally posted by dutchman3000
Thanks for the info.

What did you(hyp_spec) with no dependency hell. Did you mean most dependencies you'll likely ever need are already installed?


(maybe I should go into e-marketing; that cross-posting technique might come in useful someday...:D )

I was curious about that as well. I still ran into issues with dependencies when I ran Slack. I think a person will encounter that with every Linux distribution period. Which is a heck of a lot better than 50 milliion DLL files you'll never use or need.

[psi42]

Mandrake makes installing software needlessly difficult. Go ahead and try to compile something...it will complain about -devel packages that you don't have even though you told the install program to install all development packages. Stuff like GTK-devel...

Slackware doesn't have a -devel and a non-devel package for every single library...just one package. :)

Also slackware is A LOT faster. Mandrake has a lot of unnecessary services running. Yes you can turn them off, but unless you know exactly what each service is, you can't tell whether you need it or not. I ended up disabling a lot I was sure I didn't need, only to get some errors on start-up and have my dialup connection dial but nothing able to access the net. :(
Most of slackware's services are turned OFF by default, and if you do need one of them, you will KNOW you need it. :)


Regarding Dependencies:

Since there is no separte package for devel stuff, it's easy to compile stuff from source. Dependencies of course exist, but they are MUCH easier to resolve, and a ton of stuff is already installed, unlike mandrake, which installs gtk2 but leaves out what you need to compile gtk2 applications. When you do get a dependency, resolving it is as simple as downloading its source and compiling it. No need to search endlessly for the exact rpm compiled for your version of mandrake that is the exact version you have to have. :):)

When you install binary .tgz packages on slackware, it doesn't check for dependencies. When you try to run the program, it will tell you if it can't find a library, so you just have to install that library. That way you are installing dependencies to make the program work, not to satisfy your package manager.

[hyp_spec]

Originally posted by bandwidth_pig
As a ex-Slackware user, I must say I learned more about Linux in the two years or so that I used Slackware than in 4 using RedHat. (roughly). The beauty of Slack is pure opportunity. You have to get more involved with what is going on. So if your interested in increasing your knowledge of Linux, Slackware is a wonderful way to accomplish that goal. And honestly, the reason why Slack has such a devoted following in my opinion is once you start using it, it's really hard to stop. You don't want to stop. It works so well in my opinion. The only reason I stopped using Slack was I became very curious about Debian. Which I have to say I love just as much. But if I for some reason couldn't use Debain anymore, I would go right back to Slackware. No Gentoo, no Drake, no RedHat. Try it. The install is much easier than I thought it would be. After all, if Drake met all your expectations, would you have that desire in the back of your mind to try something else?

That sums up my Linux history too lol (cept RH for 3 months and Slack for 1yr)

[dutchman3000]

Well, I'm pretty much convinced. I like the idea of getting more 'inside' and learning linux. The dependency issue is also appealing.
So it shall be done. From this day forth, I proclaim that the 23d of October shall henceforth be known to me as 'Install Slackware Day'.~rant:rolleyes:.
Anyways, looking forward to it.

My eyelids won't hold up much longer, time to sleep.
Goodnight people.

Dutchman

[bosox79]

Originally posted by je_fro
Red Hat

RH gets my vote also

[jailbreaker]

Red Hat

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Originally posted by stumbles
Moderators please lock this thread.


Nope.

We put this thread up here at the top so we don't have to endure it all over the rest of the forums! :D

[Satanic Atheist]

Goodnight.

Hell, it's only 3 in the afternoon! I've only just dragged myself into work (9am start? Forget that!)

I've been using Slackware for months and I must say, it's by far the best Linux I've installed and used so far. The .tgz packages are numerous and easy to get hold of. There are no dependencies as such (as listed above) and problems are easily overcome.

Lastly, the only thing you may have difficulty in is doing things "properly". RedHat and Mandy have "shortcut" programs like "ifdown" and "ifup" that don't exist in Slackware. You have to use "ifconfig ethX up/down" instead. Chkconfig doesn't exist there either since it uses the BSD style init scripts. You may have trouble configuring those at first, but they are easier.

James

[hard candy]

Slackware-because it's the best, purest, easiest, kindest, most efficient, prettiest, most robust, well-laid -out disto of linux that exists. So there, try it already, like the other 118,000 people who have asked the same question. Why should I use Slackware? (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=why+should+I+use+slackware%3F&btnG=Google+Search)

[sclebo05]

its pure linux in my opinion. if you look up some info on how to do something, if the answer isn't totally distro specific it will work on slackware. all of the 'standard' stuff applies with slack, like compiling the kernel, etc.

i skipped from distro to distro for about 3 years, but i landed on slack about a year ago and now i am stuck there. i thought about installing something else on another machine a while ago, but i could not find a good reason to. that to me sums it all up.

you ask:
"why slackware"

i say:
"why not?"

[axfalk]

I am a Linux Newbie, transpalnted from Microsoft and looking for an advice as to which distribution to start off with. At this juncture I just want to get a feel for Linux as an alternative for Windows XP.

Thanks.

_ Alex

[jailbreaker]

did you not read this thread:confused: :confused:

but here is what most recommend

Red Hat (http://www.redhat.com)
Mandrake (http://www.mandrakesoft.com)
SuSE (www.suse.com)
JAMD (Red Hat Based) (http://www.jamd-linux.com)

[DFo3D]

Hardly a word about Gentoo.

Slackware may be the purest form of "Linux" in that it is standardized.
However, Gentoo is the most optimized depending on your skill.

Dare I say that perhaps Gentoo is "more Linux" than slack?

Dare I also say that, portage is the best package management system I have ever seen in my life?

However, n00bs, STAY AWAY from Gentoo, unless you have 3 cases of Jolt cola or surge, and want a straight 48 hour period through a weekend of no sleep.

[jedthehumanoid]

Originally posted by DFo3D
Hardly a word about Gentoo.

Slackware may be the purest form of "Linux" in that it is standardized.
However, Gentoo is the most optimized depending on your skill.

Dare I say that perhaps Gentoo is "more Linux" than slack?

Dare I also say that, portage is the best package management system I have ever seen in my life?

However, n00bs, STAY AWAY from Gentoo, unless you have 3 cases of Jolt cola or surge, and want a straight 48 hour period through a weekend of no sleep.

whatever, i always felt like sleeping when trying to run a gentoo box. hell, just during install i had to sleep off hours at a time during compile times. sorry but IMHO, gentoo is such a hype......

[sclebo05]

i am talking to the fellow who is lost and needs a starter distro. get jamd my friend, my main 'desktop' box has recently switched to jamd and it 'just works'. i grew tired of configging for hours just to get some minor thing accomplished. i just want to get stuff done, and jamd lets me accomplish that right after install

[viperlin]

http://www.gentoo.org/images/powered-by-gentoo2.jpg

[saurya_s]

Hello veterans!!
I came to know about Linux after my miniscule experience with UNIX. So, which one should I start with - Red hat, mandrake etc? there are so many to cinfuse a beginner.
My comp is 866MHz P3, 128 MB Ram which I am planning to upgrade 20Gb.
Thanks for the suggestion.

[mrBen]

This question has been asked frequently enough that it has been amalgamated into 1 single big thread (http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110030&highlight=which+distro) . Can I suggest you look at that first.

Thanks.

[jme]

Originally posted by saurya_s
Hello veterans!!
I came to know about Linux after my miniscule experience with UNIX. So, which one should I start with - Red hat, mandrake etc? there are so many to cinfuse a beginner.
My comp is 866MHz P3, 128 MB Ram which I am planning to upgrade 20Gb.
Thanks for the suggestion.

As you will prob find the large consensus is that a good starting distro for the beginner is RH or Mandrake as teh install is pritty painless and pre-installs all of the GUI's to make the config easier.

It might be worth looking at the distros docs to get a better idea ofeach distro before you start.

RH Linux
http://www.mandrakelinux.com/en/fdoc.php3

Mandy
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/

Jme

[Dark-Prophecy]

Hi guys, I'm new to linux and would like to try it out. Can anyone suggest a distro to start out with?
I downloaded mandrake 9.1 already and was wondering if it was suitable.
THanks!

[Dennizlerim]

Originally posted by Dark-Prophecy
Hi guys, I'm new to linux and would like to try it out. Can anyone suggest a distro to start out with?
I downloaded mandrake 9.1 already and was wondering if it was suitable.
THanks!

lol, I wonder how many times this question already has been asked.... but instead of yelling "use the search engine" lets do it the nice way.....

Which country are you from?
Do you want to have a commercial or a free distro?

I use SuSE right now, because I like yast and it is pretty easy to config.
I'm thinking of switching to Debian, because of they are really "free".


It all depends on what you want to have

D

[b00zer]

I think this is like the 3rd time this question has been asked this week alone. And its only tuesday night ! Well early wednesday anyway..

if you do a forum search for something like 'which distro', you should get plenty of results to ponder through.

However, mandrake is well known for being a great distro for n00bz. What led you to think it might not be suitable?

a couple of links that could be of interest:

http://www.distrowatch.com

http://www.linuxiso.org

[jailbreaker]

Red Hat (easy to use) (http://www.redhat.com)
JAMD easy to use Red Hat based distro (http://www.jamd-linux.com)
Mandrake also easy to use (http://www.mandrakesoft.com)
SuSE easy to use but no free download (http://www.suse.com)
Slackware a bit more advanced (http://www.slackware.com)
Debian also more advanced but has a nice apt (http://www.debian.org)
Gentoo good advanced distro but takes forever to install (http://www.gentoo.org)

There you go take your pick:D

[Icarus]

I'm sure this will be asked by someone else three times today...

Look throught the Main "Which Distro?" thread (http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110030) for more...I think the ~3000 posts might be of some help ;)

[av8or]

Ok, I've been a loyal RedHat user for a long time. I started playing around with Linux when RedHat 5.2 was the latest and greatest. Now, RedHat is telling me that they're moving away from "free" distributions. They're moving toward a project instead of a product. It's a little frustrating.

My question is this -- Should I switch distributions or will it be safe to upgrade my RH 9 installation to the next release of Fedora?

Now, before you fire off a flame saying that I should switch from RedHat to distro X just because distro X is simply better, there's a few things that I'm looking for in a new distro:

1. Ease of installation - I want the distro to be very easy to install, unfortunately I don't have a great deal of time to spend on installation.

2. Ease of use - I don't want to have to (re)learn a new OS.

3. Looks - I want a distribution that is pleasing to the eye. Is that wrong?

4. FREE! - Totally FREE


Some of the distributions that I've been looking at:

1. Easilix
2. ELX
3. Gentoo
4. Lycoris
5. Mandrake
6. Slackware
7. SuSe
8. Turbo Linux
9. United Linux

I'm not leaning toward any of these distros, I simply listed them in alphabetical order.

Please don't turn this into a flame. I'm just looking to coleagues for suggestions and advice.

Thanks.

GW

[rbrimhall]

Fedora sounds like the choice for you ;)

I think upgrading any distro is not recommended... I think there is something to be said for a fresh install... just make sure your /home has it's on partition and you can keep your data...

I love the ease of use of Red Hat... I will enjoy the ease of use of Fedora once it is released... A rose by any other name... c'mon it is still Red Hat it's just not named "Red Hat"

[dboyer]

I switched to slackware (not really because of the fedora ordeal, but prompted by it). Its a scary ride... if it works, don't try and fix it :-)

[Doc7]

hi there,

i tried linux about three times (suse, redhat and mandrake) in the last 3 years and always had problems on getting my hardware all recognized. as i didn't want to configure and test for every peace of new hardware these tryouts never lasted for much more than a week.

now i tried suse (free version 8.2 per ftp-install) and it worked great.
- load an boot image
- boot and set up network
- install

It recognized ALL of my hardware and the basic configuration (ADSL, Firewall + NAT) was done in a couple of hours.

overall it took me about 10 hours (from downloading the disc-bootimage to using konqueror as well as using the inet-access on my other (Win-)boxes.

now there is still some stuff left i need(dhcp, VPN Client+Server, DNS, etc.), but all configuration i do now, i can use the same way with different hardware components. (i think/hope :p )

right now, i just wanna setup the linux box as a router (with some special functions though)

but i already think of trying it as desktop-os.

btw.... i think suse's yast2 is great (especially compared to yast x in suse 6.x and 7.x) as i didn't need (though i did) to edit one file manually yet. (bothered me especially for any hardware recon...)

i probably still will have loads of reading, testing, etc.
BUT nobody said it would be easy........

thats all for now

(think i won't get off a win-box that fast due to special apps for midrange systems on the job and some games (maybe they run using wine :confused: ) i won't live without right now ;) , but we willl see)

[dysharmonic]

Originally posted by Dark-Prophecy
Hi guys, I'm new to linux and would like to try it out. Can anyone suggest a distro to start out with?
I downloaded mandrake 9.1 already and was wondering if it was suitable.
THanks!

YES it is! :D

That should be nice. And if you're having problems let us here know, perhaps after if you could do yourself a favour and do a search first. :)

Welcome and have fun w/ your new OS. :)

[Mirrorball]

If I were you, I would try them all. Even though my favorite distribution is Gentoo, I install others from time to time in a different partition and play with them. It's free and fun and you have nothing to loose. The distro of your dreams is out there waiting for you.

[Pedro Laia]

Hi, I bought a Pentium II MMX with 32 MB Ram.

Can I install Red Hat 9.0, or it's better to install RHL 7.0?

Thanks for the help...

[linuxnewbie42]

Hi I would recommend Redhat Linux 7.0 over 9.0 because the new version of gnome in 9.0 would probably run really slow with the system you got. If you are really looking for speed I would recommend Gentoo Linux. With Gentoo everything is compiled for source for your machine. So that every program is optimized for your machine. I have a tohsiba Pentium II 266Mhz laptop which runs Gentoo really will. Anyways that just me. And as always good luck on the install http://www.justlinux.com/forum/newreply.php?s=&action=newreply&threadid=116072#

[BOFH1]

You could always buy a stick of 128MB SDRAM and stick it in. Wouldn't set you back but about $40, maybe even less. That would be sufficient to put RH9 on it.

[blackhawk714]

What distro should I install if I want to run a webserver? The specs are Pentium II 350Mhz 64 MB ram (soon 128) 64 MB savage video card (AGP). The distro should be an easy install. Thanks :)

[eric1]

I'm using Trustix 2.0 (now called Tawie) to run a webserver. The install is fairly easy and comes with a good assortment of programs like apache, bind, mysql, php...etc. Being that Trustix is a non gui distro I installed webmin and manage the box from another pc on the network.
There are probably easier distro's, but i found this one to be pretty intuitive.

Just remember to have fun!


Eric

[sclebo05]

if you want something stable and don't mind it being a little outdated, try slackware 9. many would argue it isn't the easiest to install, but if you have used linux at all you should be fine

i run slack9 on a pentium 200mhz with 64 megs of ram and under light traffic it performs on a level that surprised me. i don't have a gui interface on that machine, which might help explain it, but still surprising....

just an opinion...
post back with what you decide on

[Traymar]

Hi Folks

Just a quickie for a complete linux newbie!!!!

I have a copy of mandrake 9.2 and am currently downloading a copy of suse 9 pro

Which one should i use??????

:D :D :D

[siyeclover]

I like mandrake 9.2


siyeclover

[jailbreaker]

Red Hat (easy to use) (http://www.redhat.com)
JAMD easy to use Red Hat based distro (http://www.jamd-linux.com)
Mandrake also easy to use (http://www.mandrakesoft.com)
SuSE easy to use but no free download (http://www.suse.com)
Slackware a bit more advanced (http://www.slackware.com)
Debian also more advanced but has a nice apt (http://www.debian.org)
Gentoo good advanced distro but takes forever to install (http://www.gentoo.org)

There you go take your pick:D and next time use the search button before posting:)

[Traymar]

:D :D :D Cheers Peeps :D :D :D

[SunOfTux]

If you are new to Linux, I would start with Mandrake. It is very user-friendly.

SuSE can tend to overwhelm you. 5 CD's with more 'rpm's than you could imagine.

SuSE is nice, and has a very professional look, but I would stick with Mandrake as a newbie.

Best of Luck. Hang in there.

Regards,
SunOfTux

[hard candy]

If you'd like to see >2000 arguments for "Which distro should I use?" look in /dev/random.

[bcsekhar]

Hi,

I'm new to linux. I looking to migrate to linux OS from windows.

I came to know that there are many linux distributions in the market. Can anybody tell me which distribution is good for me.

I'm looking for a distribution which is low cost, easy installation & compatible with my hardware.

My System configuration is as follows :
Pentium II/400 MHz, 13 GB HD, ATI Graphics card, NIC card, Telephony WinModem, Toshiba DVD-ROM.

Thank you

bcsekhar

[questionasker]

check here

http://www.justlinux.com./forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110030

i like JAMD, witch is based on redhat.
mandrake is always a good choise for starting out with.

[SuperNu]

Well, if you want to see if your hardware is compatible with Linux, a great distro to start out with is Knoppix (http://www.knoppix.org). All you need is one cd-r, access to a burner and time to download the iso file. It runs off of the cd-r, so you don't need to touch your hard drives. If you have a fat32 partition, it can even create a swap file to make it run smoother. I used Knoppix to see if the used laptop I purchased would be compatible with Linux.

But, going to your question about what distro you should run is completely up to you. I started with Red Hat (http://www.redhat.com) 7.1 and now I run Red Hat 9. I installed Debian (http://www.debian.org) unstable onto my laptop. Both have their plusses and minuses. From what I have read, a very newbie friendly distro would be Mandrake (http://www.mandrakesoft.com/) . I haven't used it personally, but I have heard good things. It seems that most people start out with a RPM based distro and go from there. I still want to try out Slackware (http://www.slackware.org/), Arch (http://www.archlinux.org/) and Gentoo (http://www.gentoo.org/) (once I get some better hardware).

BTW, the WinModem will most likely give you problems under Linux unless a driver has already been written for it. Go to Linmodems.org (http://www.linmodems.org/) for help or more info.

--SN

[serz]

My suggestion would be to try both.


Moving this to /dev/random.

[Citadel]

Redhat Fedora is a free download < http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/1/i386/iso/ >. It's a community project.

And if you want a commercial version of Linux than SUSE is going to be one of the best, especially now that Novell is behind it.

[av8or]

Ok, I've tried a few of these distributions. The ones I've tried are:

Gentoo
Mandrake
Slackware
SuSE

There are things I like about them all. However there are things I don't like about them as well.

Gentoo -- Way too much trouble installing. I'm sure it's a great distro but I don't want that much trouble installing.

Mandrake -- I'm not sure what it is about Mandrake. I've tried several versions over the years and I just don't really like it.

Slackware -- Like it a lot. The installation wasn't very difficult at all. Installed it at work with no problems at all. Took it home and attempted to install it there and can't even get it to boot into the installation. I have a post in the Installation section if you'd like to check it out: http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=116502

SuSE -- I've always been attracted to SuSE. I tried 8.2 and like it pretty well. I'm going to try it out on my laptop with Ximian Desktop 2 and see how it goes.

Over all it looks like Slackware is in the lead for my distribution at home. Just need a little more testing.....

[deanrantala]

SLACKER 4 LIFE

But seriously...

Slackware for work

SuSE for play

Slackware is good for play as well if you are hardcore geek as I am :P

[afaiq]

Hey Traymar - where are you downloading SUSE 9.0 from, I thought only the live-eval was available for download, not the real thing? Please enlighten, I would love to get my hands on the 9.0 version.

[bogomip2]

I have used over 20 Linux Distros since about 1996. Slackware is for hackers and advanced users. It is probably the best Linux distro in terms of being a *nix like OS.

I now use Fedora and am a total convert. I am installing it on all my friends computers who have never used Linux because they see how nicely constructed the GUI is and also because of the endless apps that are free.

Fedora is the cat's meow baby.

[BOFH1]

I'm a little wary of using Fedora, atleast in a production-server enviroment. From what I've read/heard, some of the code going into Fedora is experimental code, which is all fine and dandy as long as it works, but what happens when it doesn't? Your phone suddenly starts ringing off the hook because about 500+ users can't get to their website/e-mail/chat/fileshare/etc. I'm probably going to stick with RH9 for now, and update what needs updating when I have to by hand (which I pretty much do anyway), and slowly migrate everything over to Slack or SuSE.

[serz]

Originally posted by afaiq
Hey Traymar - where are you downloading SUSE 9.0 from, I thought only the live-eval was available for download, not the real thing?
Yes, you can download the Live Evaluation for free, but not SuSE 9.0 or whatever the version is, that would be illegal.

[Adder1st]

Hello everyone. I'm new here so the question I'm going to ask was probably asked before. Please bear with me...

Which flavor of Linux (or any other Unix variety) would be best for a home network/web server for a novice to the OS? I'm looking for one with above average security features but fairly easy to learn and administer. Setup is not too much of a concern since I am quite versed in testing new programs (I beta tested WINXP for example).

I have a system ready to go to act in the capacity mentioned above, but after extensive research online and reading numerous articles in magazines and books (Linux Desktop Starter Kit and Unix Secrets for example), I still can't decide which to install.:confused:

The system will serve as the gateway for four other systems. The first, my workhorse, which has multiple OS' (only three Windows at the moment but will include 4 more Windows versions, several Linux workstation/desktop OS', several BSD OS', and a few emulators), will be used primarily for webpage design and administration. The second is a powerhouse system that is just about complete which will be used strictly for gaming. :D The third and fourth will be my test/work systems used for everyday tasks and as test systems for new programs and hardware (and as backups for the other systems).

The need for security is high since I also dabble in whitehat hacking endeavors (such as skip-tracing) and security issues relating to the computer industry and have made a few enemies in the hacking world in the process.

The server will connect through a Linksys Hub/Router and has SCSI as well as PCI and USB hardware installed.

Any advice on this would be greatly appreciated.

[Adder1st]

Sorry. I didn't take notice to this forum & thread down here until I tried to find my post. After reading through the last few pages of this thread though, my question still stands since I didn't take notice of any posts addressing the security issue.

Any thoughts or opinions?

[randrade]

http://lwn.net/Distributions/index.php3#nontech

Is there any advantage to using non-tech distros like the ones listed above?? Has anyone actually use them?? Can a newbie learn anything by using a non-tech distro??

[bosox79]

Originally posted by randrade
http://lwn.net/Distributions/index.php3#nontech

Is there any advantage to using non-tech distros like the ones listed above?? Has anyone actually use them?? Can a newbie learn anything by using a non-tech distro??

I would recommended either mandrake SUSE or JAMD/RH
and as far as advantages using these distro's over the more technical ones if you want to call them that, like slack gentoo or Debian, I really don't see one from a newbie perspective I fell it is best to get started on an easy to setup and administer distro one with gui tools to help you do so is better then starting out with a more hardcore distro. You don't even have to use the tools that the non technical distro's provide they are just a nice option to have in case you get into a spot where it may just be easier to use them. you can administer any Linux distro from the CLI heck you don't even need to install x-windows if you don't want to. And the beauty of Linux is you are free to switch or install as as many distro's as you wish so ounce you get your feet wet you can then switch
the choice is all yours:cool: underneath all the distro tools Linux is the same it's just how it's packaged.

thats my .02

[BluEyedGuy]

I am a Windows "user," well, more or less. I saw some screenshots of Lindows, and was wondering if it's worth it. And if not, what Linux Version is easy to learn? I also want to know if I can run linux without installing it as my bootable OS, because until I learn it, I still want to run Win XP.

[serz]

That's no problem, if you install Linux, you will be able to configure the boot loader so you can boot both.

As for the distros, as I always suggest: give a try to Mandrake, SuSE and Red Hat.

Take a look to the very long Main "Which Distro" (http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=110030) thread.

Also, take a look to DistroWatch (http://www.distrowatch.com/), which has a lot of information about most (all?) of the distros out there.


Moving this to /dev/random.

[Drago]

http://www.distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=knoppix
Knoppix is what you need until you decide to make the switch.:D

[Icarus]

Traymar, did you miss what serz said? Downloading the SuSE 9 ISOs are illegal!

Do not post links to 'warez' and try reading the
posting guidelines (http://www.justlinux.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=91067) and you will know why it your post was deleted

The only official download distribution of SuSE that is legally available is thier FTP install...if you want an ISO, CompUSA, Best Buy, Boarders and almost anyplace else that sells software have these available for purchase

[jonnyw]

My dad has just bought an IBM thinkpad t20, 700 Mhz, 256 MB RAM, 20GB hard disk and wants to install linux.

We're bothe newbies to it (well i managed to install Mandrake last weekend, but previously had loads of problems with debian and lycoris).

Anyone got any suggestions as to which distribution would be the best for this laptop (taking into consideration the hardware drivers, and ease of instalation).

Any help appreciated, cheers :)

[lerninlinux]

Okay, please give me a fast hit of what flavor of Linux you would install. I have a Packard bell P120, 16megs of Ram, 2 gig HD. I am going to leave it as is and install Linux. I want a GUI. This is just to learn about Linux, not as a daily use PC.

Any suggestions?

Thanks!

[fredg]

I'm pretty sure your system will be inadequte for the purpose intended.

You might be able to squeeze one of the more popular distros onto a 2GB drive if you don't install a lot of packges.

You probably don't have enough RAM, either at all, or to run X to be able to run a GUI.

The CPU speed is so low, that even if you overcome all of the above, you'll probably very quickly lose patience with the whole thing.

You might try visiting some of the various Linux distribution sites and seeing what the minimum sugested requirements are.

[ph34r]

Slack or debian with a lightweight wm like blackbox. Be sure to make a swap partition of about 100mb or so.

[Jata]

You could try Slackware. The minimum for that is:
# 386 processor
# 16MB RAM
# 50 megabytes of hard disk space

You could do a minimum install and then try a very light window manager like waimea or maybe fluxbox.
As said above though I think it will be a little slow.
Good luck anyway.

[Icarus]

I had Debian with IceWM running on a p100 w/16mb memory and a 600mb hard drive

Now granted, it really couldn't DO very much but it worked. Using Dillo a web browser made it useable and nethack made it enjoyable...
Also had DOSemu working ok running the old AD&D gold box games...

Just don't expect too much from it, the PB was designed to run Windows95...7 years ago!

[lerninlinux]

Thanks for the recomendations. I will check out Slack and Debian. Have any recomendations on which release to use?

fredg -- Thanks for the info but I don't think you really read my post. It will be perfectly adequate for my purpose.

It may be real slow but the goal is learning to installing Linux and getting to work, not toto have a daily use PC. The PC doesn't even have a NIC right now--I just want the experience. Call it an exercise, an experiment, whatever. I want to switch to Linux on my main PC but I use it for work and can't do it yet. I have that old P120 laying around so why not use it for a temporary fix for my Linux Jones by slapping a distro into that?

Also I did look at the web pages of various distros and the specs were hard enough to find for the latest version, never mind somethign that is out of so out of date. Also, I wanted to know what real users had experienced, not what a site told me.

[knute]

Originally posted by fredg
I'm pretty sure your system will be inadequte for the purpose intended.

You might be able to squeeze one of the more popular distros onto a 2GB drive if you don't install a lot of packges.

You probably don't have enough RAM, either at all, or to run X to be able to run a GUI.

The CPU speed is so low, that even if you overcome all of the above, you'll probably very quickly lose patience with the whole thing.

You might try visiting some of the various Linux distribution sites and seeing what the minimum sugested requirements are.

Excuse me here, but I have in the past installed Redhat 5.0, and also Several of the Slack versions from 4.0 to 9.0 on a 486DX/40 w/o a math co-processor, and 8MB of ram on a 128MB Drive.
Granted I only used the cli, but I used it for browsing the net, and getting email, and playing games.
The assumption that you have to have X installed in order to use linux is extremely bogus, and shouldn't be a deterant in deciding to use linux.
The intent was to learn linux. And using the cli will definately teach you how to use linux. :D
Those of us from the dos world (my self included Dos 1.0 was my first OS), have a tendancy to make assumptions about the power of the command line in linux, and normally those assumptions are way below what it can actually do. :)

So even if you can't use X-apps, there are still a whole host of command line options that you would have. And quite a few of them have some nice bells and whistles as well. :cool:

[fredg]

Originally posted by knute
Excuse me here, but I have in the past installed Redhat 5.0, and also Several of the Slack versions from 4.0 to 9.0 on a 486DX/40 w/o a math co-processor, and 8MB of ram on a 128MB Drive.
Granted I only used the cli, but I used it for browsing the net, and getting email, and playing games.
The assumption that you have to have X installed in order to use linux is extremely bogus, and shouldn't be a deterant in deciding to use linux.
The intent was to learn linux. And using the cli will definately teach you how to use linux. :D
Those of us from the dos world (my self included Dos 1.0 was my first OS), have a tendancy to make assumptions about the power of the command line in linux, and normally those assumptions are way below what it can actually do. :)

So even if you can't use X-apps, there are still a whole host of command line options that you would have. And quite a few of them have some nice bells and whistles as well. :cool:

Please read his original post again. He wants a GUI. I didn't put those words into his post, he did. That means X.

Now if you want to insist that he forgo X and just use the CLI because that's what you did when you learned Linux, that's fine. All you need to do is hang your elitist attitude off HIS post, not off my reply. Get it? Got it? Good.

[knute]

There was nothing elitist about my post.

Basically all that I was saying was that there's more to linux than X.

X is only a very small part of it.

He said that he wanted to learn linux, not just X.

Saying that his system would be inadequate for learning linux is elitist in my opinion, as that says that all that there is to linux is X.

All the blinky lights and purdy eye candy are extra's, granted they are nice extras, but extra's none the less.

It's not elitist to learn how to navigate linux using the command line, and actually knowing how to do more than point and click. If it is, then knowing such things as the rules of the road or what the gauges mean in your car before you start driving is being elitist.

"Hello, Triple-A?"
"Yeah."
"My car won't go."
"Is the battery dead?"
"Does it take A or D?"
"No, when you turn the key, does it even click?"
"You mean you have to turn the key?"
"Yes."
"Where do I get a key?"
"It should have come with the car."
"Oh. Well, where would it be located then?"
"In the steering column."
"Uhhh... Steering column?"
"Yeah. The thing that the steering wheel is mounted on."
"Steering wheel?"
"Yeah. The circle thing..." :rolleyes:

[lerninlinux]

Sorry for posting in the wrong area.

...wait, maybe some of my verbage was wrong. I said I wanted a GUI. What I meant is that I don't want to be limited to just using a command prompt. I want a windows like environment--even in the most basic sense. I am not sure if saying that is the same as saying I want a GUI. (Nothing wrong with the command prompt, just not what I am looking for at the moment.)

Also, I have no clue on the diff between X and CLI. I think X might be some sort of WE or WM. I will research it and post if I cannot find an explanation.

Thanks all!

fredg -- Come on, my friend, chill out a little. You did sort of get negative pretty quickly. Have a great day.

[fredg]

I think you need to learn how to read.

He's the one who wanted a GUI, not you, not me - him. That means X. You disagree with his requirements, you tell him, not me. He's the one you're going to have to convince, not me.

He never mentioned learning X. Why do you?

I never said his sytem would be indaquate for learning Linux. I said it would probably be inadequate for the purpose intended - Linux with a GUI with a tiny bit of RAM with a slow CPU. If he wants to click around and wait on the swap all day, fine with me. It better be fine with you because you don't have a vote on it.

And with a GUI there is nothing preventing him from opening a terminal and doing it from the CLI, if and when he wants to. He could even init 3 from there and do it all your way from a full black screen. But without the GUI he wants, he has no choice but to do all it your way, and that's not what he wants to do. If it was, he would have said so straight out.

I have nothing further to add to your part of this thread so I'll just ignore you from now on init (pun intended).

[lerninlinux]

fredg -- no need to get nasty. Say you'll ignore it if you want, you know you'll look.

From my post:
This is just to learn about Linux, not as a daily use PC

Actually pretty much every line you originally posted was incorrect or off the point of my post. You did say it would be inadequate for my use, and you were wrong. Yours was the only post I didn't really learn anything from. I wasn't going to point that out until you got self righteous and attcked one of the other posters that was closer to the mark than you and did help me.

...actually maybe I learned from you how NOT to speak to the other folks in this community. Nothing wrong with some nice-ness.

Thanks to all who have helped.

[knute]

ROFLMAO

Thanks lerninlinux. :D

hehehe...

The difference between the command line and X is simple.

It's the same difference as between windows and dos, only the linux command line is much more powerful than dos. :)

Alot of it is personal preference.
And there are different window managers and desktop environments that can be run inside of X as well.

Desktop environments are things like Gnome, KDE, XFCE. They are the things that have the panels and eye candy and things of that nature. They are optional in the X environment, and will most likely slow your system down to the point where using it would be painful. (This, I believe was fredg's point.)

Window managers are what manages the different windows. Different window managers are sawfish (my favorite), blackbox, fluxbox, icewm, oroborus, enlightenment, evilwm, etc.... Basically there's a ton of different ones out there, that have varying resource requirements. A window manager is required in X, otherwise you have a grey screen, a mouse pointer and no way of opening any programs or doing anything with them once they are open. :)

Did that answer some of your questions?

[lerninlinux]

Hmm it answered quite a few but brought up some more.

I am familar w/ Windows--95, 98, NT, ME, 2K, XP and DOS. I am familiar with the command line use. I also used to program in BASIC years and years ago. I can install and trouble shoot MS dektops OSs and apps pretty well, can do some beginner/intermediate networking.

I understand the WE and WM are used to get Linux to look somewhat like the Mac/Windoze environment. Gnome, KDE, et al. I am cool with. I believe the DM is part of the whole DE.

Where I am not clear is what exactly X is and where it lies in the continuum. I think maybe that is what provides the command line or maybe just after that but before a DM?

Here's my problem. I would like more than a command line. I don't have a problem with it, I just want to see something other than text. It sounds like Gnome and KDE will be too robust. Is there a happy medium. Is there a step between cammandline and WM? Maybe the alternative is a very skinny WM?

Thanks very much!!!

(Is this post off topic now?)

[knute]

You aren't off topic, and I think that you are getting it.

KDE and Gnome would provide a more window-esque type environment, in that you would have the panels, and even control panels where you can set everything up. The cost of that would be resources. You could try them, but it would most likely be painfully slow.

The other option is to use just a window manager. All that it will do is manage the windows, and in some cases provide a task bar as well. (icewm).

Ok, let me see if I can put this into terms that you are familiar with.

X is kind of like a hal. It communicates between the window manager/desktop environment/X-apps and the hardware. If you take a look at the /etc/X11/XF86Config or /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 files (they are the config files for X), they define the hardware, and the parameters that hardware will be working with, in a more advanced way than the command line. Don't get me wrong, you can change resolution and such in the cli as well, but this is in a different way, that I'm not quite sure how to describe.

I hope that clears it up better than the consistency of mud. ;)

As for window managers, if you are looking for a light windows like interface, you may want to check out icewm. If you are looking for something else, there are sites out there that compare them. Any of the box wm's (blackbox, fluxbox, etc.. ) should work for you as well as waimea, or kahakai. They have some nice features, but it's about choice and what you like, and your hardware can handle.

Here's a site that lists different window managers and desktop environments and may help in your decision of what to try first. :)

http://www.plig.org/xwinman/

HTH

[DMR]

Originally posted by Drago
http://www.distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=knoppix
Knoppix is what you need until you decide to make the switch.:D Yes, Knoppix is a "live" CD distro, which means that you can run it directly off the CD without having to install anything to your hard drive (although you can install it to your HD if you want); a good way to take Linux for a test-drive.

If you want a distro that would make for an easy migration from the Windows world though, I'll second serz's recommendations of RH, Mandy, or SuSE. The best thing to do if you go that route would be to get a cheap second hard drive and install Linux on that. As serz said, one of the Linux bootloaders (lilo or grub) can be set up to boot both Linux and Windows.

[BluEyedGuy]

I downloaded Damn Small Linux, and also Vector Linux LiveCD 3.2, and neither of them worked. DS Linux booted, but than crashed, and Vector wouldn't even boot for me. I want a good LIVEcd version, what is a good one, and a good place to get it? I want to boot up from CD, and not install until I can learn Linux well.

And second question, if/when I do get a version up and running, what are some basic commands?

[lerninlinux]

knute -- well, you answered questions but opened a hundred more. You are going over my head and I need to do some homework before adequately addressing what we spoke about. If it is okay, I would like to email you on the address on your profile. I think we got away from my original question but you opened an area on learning about Linux I didn't realize was there. That will help me in the longrun. I am going to try to get an answer to the original question in the dev/random area.

Thanks very much!

[lerninlinux]

Here's a different way to ask somewhat of the old question...

Please tell me what you would do in this hypothetical situation. Say I have a P120, 16MG Ram, 2 gig HD PC running Win95 and *while it is slow, I am okay with that.* (That is the important part.) I just use it for surfing the web, web based email, listening to MP3s and nothing else.

One day, Win95 crashes into an unrepairable state. I have no access to any Windows install CDs. You visit me that very afternoon and say I should install Linux. I tell you since I am incredibly smart I can figure out the install, but please tell me what release of what distro I should use to approximately replicate the *performance and functionality* I had before Win95 died. (Okay, this is hypothetical so let's say I am buying a downloaded and burnt CD from eBay.)

You start to tell me about how I should upgrade or it will be too slow or some other problems with the HW setup I have but I am resolute. I tell you I only used it for web and MP3s. I tell you I am a patient person so the speed didn't bother me. I get on my knees and implore you to tell me a Linux distro which will let me use a browser and a mouse and play MP3s on that old PC just like Win95 was doing that morning.

You turn to me and say...

[jts]

Here's a broad enough question which I think would be nice to have answered for new comers to the Linux world. What are the key differences between the numerous distributions out there?

For example, I've always been a Red Hat person, and have always upgraded to the latest version. I have not been very pleaseed with their constant changing of script locations in each new version, but in general the ease of use is there. With Red Hat's straying away from Red Hat, and calling it Fedora, I've become a little uneasy and went searching for a new distribution. What would Mandrake buy me? What would Debian buy me?

Does anyone know of any sites that in very generic terms, try to tackle the difference between distributions?

[andysimmons]

www.distrowatch.com

[jts]

Thanks! Here is a list of all the major distributions and both their strength and weaknesses.

http://www.distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major

[jodef]

I am a newbie to linux would like a lightweight yet easy to install linux distribution any suggestions please.

[jailbreaker]

Fedora Core (http://fedora.redhat.com)

[blkmage]

Is there a distro, or a version of a distro that will be able to run a desktop manager that will be able to run smoothly with only 48 megs of RAM?

[jailbreaker]

humm slackware would run, it's also a geat way to learn linux:D www.slackware.com

[andysimmons]

Originally posted by blkmage
Is there a distro, or a version of a distro that will be able to run a desktop manager that will be able to run smoothly with only 48 megs of RAM? You could try Damn Small Linux (http://damnsmalllinux.org). The distro itself is only 48 megs, so I'd bet you could pull it off with 48 megs of RAM.

[TheCatMan]

I used Mandrake on 48MB for years (check the ugly screenshot below, I haven't updated it since) then got a job and decided to upgrade... not really sure what to do with all that extra power yet, those moving backdrops hardly make a dent :D

[hydan]

I read in another post, that debian and xandros are the same?

[hydan]

Using DistroWatch's summary (http://www.distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=major) of each major linux distrobution, I've narrowed my favorites down to Fedora, Mandrake, Debian, and Knoppix(in no particular order). I'm looking for a distro to use on my next computer, and I have a few questions...
Can Knoppix be installed on a hard drive? What's the future of Knoppix like w/ the European laws(or whatever is going on)?
I would like to hear stories from all of you concerning your experiences w/ these various distros, so I can make my choice of which distro to install.

[rizlaking]

I have tried RedHat (pre-Fedora era) but I didn't use it with apt-get for the RPMs. That is quite handy. I prefered it to Mandrake (which I used for a time after that). Not at all happy with that one. I was used to the locations of scripts and so forth and there were subtle differences between the two that made me bang head on keyboard!

Knoppix is interesting (it sits on my 2nd partition at the moment). You can do a harddrive install using the live CD, AND you can upgrade it using Debian apt-get sources so in effect you are running a Debian set up.

As for the European laws...?? Wait and see I suppose. Hasn't stopped me yet so not too worried.

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Distro choice is something purely personal. I mean, to boil it down, you can do anything with one distro that you can do with another.

Knoppix can be installed onto your hard drive. Try doing a Google search or a forum search for it-- many people have tried it, apparently.

[MorphiusFaydal]

out of mandrake and redhat, i would say redhat (i used 9) and right now, fedora isnt supposed to be too much different..

but i dodnt use apt4prm, which is supposed to be really good...

knoppix is debian made easy.. no hard install, really.. i have knoppix 3.2 installed on a friends old pc.. and its pretty good...

knoppix hd install (http://articles.linmagau.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=181&page=1) <-- i printed this off and used this as my installation manual... its pretty good, uses v3.2, but i dont think theres that many differneces between 3.2 and 3.3..

yeah..

of the four i would say fedora w/ apt4rpm or knoppix.. personal preference being knoppix...

but hey.. like Alex Cavnar said, distro is all personal choice..

Chris

[hydan]

So far, Knoppix and Fedora are in the lead.

What are the differences between Knoppix and Debian?

What proprietary components do SuSE and Xandros contain?

[bosox79]

Originally posted by hydan
So far, Knoppix and Fedora are in the lead.

What are the differences between Knoppix and Debian?

They are pretty much the same OS after all knoppix is a live cd distro based on debian unstable. But knoppix comes with some of the best hardware detection tools I have seen in any OS very :cool: and knoppix can be installed to the hard disk via a script. knoppix also seems to be a bit more polished then the slandered Debian unstable packages. IMHO if you want to run Debian unstable use knoppix, then you can have a fully functioning Debian unstable system in pretty short order. :D

again just my humble opinion :cool:

[amgeex]

I was wandering, as XandrOS is Debian based, does it has apt-get? Is it a good distro? Any feedback on this would be great, I may buy it if it's any good. I really need to replace my XP desktop with something that looks alike, for my bro 'n mom.

:p

P.S. If it was for my sole use I'd be running slack/debian/gentoo/bsd and fixing the stuff that ain't broke, lol.

[hydan]

I'm thinking that I will:

Initially, use Knoppix, and then once familar w/ the GUI, and linux in general, I'll switch over to Debian since it seems that a lot of good distros are based off Debian.

or

Dive straight into Debian and learn as I go, just like I'm diving straight into C++.

And amgeex, PC Magazine has an article (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1373604,00.asp) that reviews other OSs besides Windows, and, according to PC Mag, Xandros is scored as the overall better linux distro compared to the others reviewed.

[bosox79]

Originally posted by hydan
I'm thinking that I will:

Initially, use Knoppix, and then once familar w/ the GUI, and linux in general, I'll switch over to Debian since it seems that a lot of good distros are based off Debian.

or

Dive straight into Debian and learn as I go, just like I'm diving straight into C++.

And amgeex, PC Magazine has an article (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1373604,00.asp) that reviews other OSs besides Windows, and, according to PC Mag, Xandros is scored as the overall better linux distro compared to the others reviewed.

:cool: although knoppix is Debian just with a better hardware auto detection. Although the new anaconda based installer looks very promising :) and good luck, have fun

[SunOfTux]

Caldera is now known as SCO....

Regards,
SunOfTux

[SunOfTux]

OK, on the subject...

I think either Mandrake or Fedora would be best for a beginner....

[hydan]

Don't forget Xandros, it has a '4 click install,' it's supposed to be real easy for beginners.

[lerninlinux]

I read the article on the different OSs as well. Remember that that article did sort of have a non-techie type of slant. It was from a non-Linux type of view. They liked it because it was cheap, easy and simialr to Windows. If you are going Linux for the technical aspect, that may be a negative. If you just want to get away from Microsoft, it may not matter.

[HyBriDJoKeR]

Just curious what everyone uses. Also reasons why are good too. I was thinking of switching from Mandrake Linux 9.1

[DerekKraan]

Gentoo for me. I've run Mandrake, Debian, and Slackware at one point or anyother for extended periods of time.

[bae127]

I started with RedHat b/c it was supposed to be reasonably user friendly with the RPM's. As I learned more about Linux, I switched to Slackware for the performance/stability. RedHat started too many features by default for my old laptop. Now I have everything running Slackware-current.

[freakmn]

SourceMage (www.sourcemage.org)

Advantages:
Sourcemage compiles all programs from source, so they are faster
Has a fix option to check all installed programs for missing/corrupted files and replace them with the correct ones or reinstall that program.

Disadvantages:
Compile takes a while
No gui install


I used to use Mandrake, but I found that I could get the latest features (i.e. working drivers for newer hardware) by compiling my own kernel. I also got cold in the winter months here in Minnesota, and I needed to heat up my processor somehow. ;)

[Grettir]

For me its mandrake, tried SuSE and Slackware, didnt like SuSE as much as mandrake because their was something really screwed up with the display. I probably will be switching to slack soon, when i put it on before the default X fonts were Extremely small, and havent quite figured out how to fix this short of compiling X myself (if anyone knows what file to edit to fix this feel free to post here please) Eh well, Mandrake is pretty nice, i really dont have any complaints, but i dont use the rpm at all

[psi42]

Slackware!

[serz]

Slackware ;)

[nextbillgates]

I run a variety of operating systems.

My main home machine runs Windows XP Pro. It runs the games and It Just Works[TM]

My mom's machine runs Windows 2000 Pro. It would be running Windows XP, but with only 128MB, the memory usage of XP becomes a problem. My home firewall runs IPCop Linux, as it's easy to use and maintain.

At work, my workstation dual-boots between Windows XP Pro (It Just Works[TM]) and Red Hat 9 (testing purposes). The office server that I administer runs Windows 2000 Server (not my choice). Everything else is Windows XP, except for one development workstation running Gentoo.

[bwkaz]

LFS (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/)

It JustWorks[TM]. For me, at least. I suppose if you like Microsoft deciding what your OS needs to do, then XP would JustWork[TM] for you, but hey, whatever...

[Gertrude]

4 run Debian
1 runs on Gentoo
1 runs on FreeBSD

[stumbles]

The distro is entirely, totally inmaterial what really matters is the OS that runs my machine is open source/GPL.

[nextbillgates]

Originally posted by bwkaz
LFS (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/)

It JustWorks[TM]. For me, at least. I suppose if you like Microsoft deciding what your OS needs to do, then XP would JustWork[TM] for you, but hey, whatever...

The fact that your recommended LFS, of all distros, over Windows tells me that you completely misunderstand why I use it.

:rolleyes:

[twilli227]

Whats Running Your Computer?

I am running my computers.
Me, myself, and I.:cool:
Doesn't matter what distros, I am happy with them.:D

[steve301]

suse 9.0, used it since 6.3 with quake3 tin box for linux.

http://home.comcast.net/~machaevich/wsb/html/view.cgi-photos.html-MerchantID-241193-Publish-t-makestatic-true-skip-10.html

[MandrakeRookie]

I use Mandrake 9.1. When I get my new drive I will load up a dual boot linux with debian. Being a rookie at this I will use the Mandrake because it works so well out of the box for me. I will use the Debian to learn and experiment with. The kids use XP Home one the computer upstairs, however when they get older we'll be GNU/Linux household.:cool:

[Bowtie]

Suse baby!! I run Suse on all my home systems and Drake 9.1 on the laptop. Wierd LCD configuration that I've only been able to solve in Drake. I've started with Red Hat and then tried a few and fell in love with Suse. I'll try anything just to see how it is. Slack is next on my list. Never could get Debian going, must not like my hardware.

[rbrimhall]

I started with Red Hat 8... quickly switched to 9... have now moved on to Fedora. I've tried Slack, Mandrake, Debian, and Gentoo but I just like the simplicity of RH/Fedora... I remove the bloat and it runs fine for what I need it for (surfing, word processing, occasional game, and music). I like the gui configuration tools! Apt get and Synaptic have solved most dependency woes that I had in the past.

[rdeschene2]

SuSE 8.2 currently, and SuSE 7.2 and 6.3 prior to that.

I have generally found the hardware auto-detection of SuSE to be getting better and better, and they always have added value as far as supplying browser plugins that work, etc.. That has not been my experience with some other distros.

Given Novell's purchase of SuSE though, I'm probably going to try out Libranet (Debian) as well shortly to have a good fallback position. Novell has unfathomably screwed up lots of decent products in the past, and SuSE might be next !

Rick D.

[tmcG]

In response to rdeschene2's comment about Novell screwing up previous products I would have to disagree, because I think that Novell has one of the best names in server OS's for stability and features. (Based on my experience and not wanting to start a flame ware here!!) :D

That remains to be seen however as they are now moving away from their own OS and porting NetWare services to Linux and Windows.

Personally I use Mandrake 9.1 at home and test Slackware 9.0 at work (in a test lab!). Due to the fact that I want to learn much more about the inner workings of Linux, I will be upgrading to Slack at home soon too (once I get the Nvidia driver issues sorted, which thanks to this site won't be too long!):)

[carbon-12]

Ive gone from:

Mandrake -> Red Hat -> SuSE -> Debian -> Slackware


Right now ive got Slackware 9.1 running.

IMO its the best distro ever!

[rdlevan]

ahh, the never ending cycle of Linux Distros.

Slackware-> Red Hat-> Slack -> SuSE-> Debian-> now Gentoo

I'm comfortable where I'm at now so I probably won't change for awhile

[mocnicom]

Originally posted by nextbillgates
I run a variety of operating systems.

My main home machine runs Windows XP Pro. It runs the games and It Just Works[TM]

My mom's machine runs Windows 2000 Pro. It would be running Windows XP, but with only 128MB, the memory usage of XP becomes a problem. My home firewall runs IPCop Linux, as it's easy to use and maintain.

At work, my workstation dual-boots between Windows XP Pro (It Just Works[TM]) and Red Hat 9 (testing purposes). The office server that I administer runs Windows 2000 Server (not my choice). Everything else is Windows XP, except for one development workstation running Gentoo.

Not the most crowd friendly setup you got there :D , a preconfigured firewall distro at home, some lightly used linux at your workplace, and a whole pile-o-MS all over. Well, whatever floats your boat.


Anyways, I run Gentoo on my Desktop, and I often experiment with different systems on my old server(debian,slack,BSD's etc).

[The Linux Kid]

Slackware and Doze 2k

[nextbillgates]

Originally posted by mocnicom
Not the most crowd friendly setup you got there :D , a preconfigured firewall distro at home, some lightly used linux at your workplace, and a whole pile-o-MS all over. Well, whatever floats your boat.


Anyways, I run Gentoo on my Desktop, and I often experiment with different systems on my old server(debian,slack,BSD's etc).

Heh. Don't get me wrong, I love Linux. However, now that I'm employed, I have a lot less time to spend playing with Linux. And since I spend all day fixing various complicated computer problems, I don't want to come home to various complicated computer problems.

Linux has it's place. It's the perfect OS for the embedded product my company is developing, and it's an excellent replacement for the crappy Linksys router they were using. I would also use it on the office server if I had a choice. But on the corporate desktop, Linux still has a long way to go before it can be replace Windows. Red Hat is getting close, though :)

[zmerlinz]

i have Gentoo on my main machine, and it rocks, well worth the wait for compile, just need to get the sound working properly :p

i have redhat on my firewall machine (don't ask why, been having distro issues with that machine!!!)

and i have redhat on my laptop but will be putting slackware on it at some point :p

[Ninja_Squirrel]

I am thinking of buying suse 9.0 and was wondering how do you like it. I have been using linux on and off for a couple of years. I just want something really easy to use.

[James McGee]

Originally posted by Ninja_Squirrel
I am thinking of buying suse 9.0 and was wondering how do you like it. I have been using linux on and off for a couple of years. I just want something really easy to use.

Go for it!! Installs like a greased pig, found everything I had and came up to desktop and everything worked. Been using it for a week and I am a raw noob to linux... Love it...

[steve301]

Been using Suse since 6.3 and have 9.0 installed, this is the best suse has done yet. Even got my new wireless mouse working right out the bat with it, Black leather micro**** wireless mouse with tilt ( no tilt though) looks great with the SB61G2R - 20th Anniversary Special Edition and samsung 151v lcd.


http://home.comcast.net/~machaevich/wsb/html/view.cgi-photo.html--SiteID-1060428.html


heres a piture of my setup minus the mouse, got it afterward as the old mouse's was driving me crazy, the overall profile of it was so low that while play quake3 or ut2003, I was dragging my hand on the table and could not get a good grip on it and often had to pick the mouse up get back where it needed.

If you want to get dvd's working try this link, got dvds working without any hickups, works better with latest movies than cyberdvd or windvd and they've got rpms for suse9.0 using xine/gxine.

http://packman.links2linux.org/

[carbon-12]

I tried SUSE 9.0 via FTP install a few days ago. It has absolutly amazing h/w detection, very clean interface, and powerful/easy to use system tools(YAST). The only really big problem I had was that it felt sluggish on my AMDXP-2200+/256MB system. Right now im back on slackware 9.1 and am planning on giving MEPIS ( www.mepis.org ) a try.

[Parcival]

Bought it the day it got into our stores, and I'll never give it back again. :)

[Ninja_Squirrel]

Yeah I just installed it and it is working great. I just have to get my drivers installed and should be all good then.

[kempfera]

I am brand new to Linux, I've only been using it for a week or so. I purchased SuSE 9 Proffessional and installed it on a 486 box that I had. I was amazed at how easy it was. Honestly all I had to do was feed in the CD's. It found and configured all of my hardware and even found my network.

My lack of knowledge is the only thing stopping me from being able to unleash the full capabilities that Linux offers.

[Ninja_Squirrel]

Yesterday I also got this old pentium 200Mhz laptop from where I work. All I need is a new pwr adapter and I will try to install suse on that. One thing about it is that it has only 2.1gb for hard drive. Time to be very selective on what I put on there.

[LinPenguinux]

I'm looking for a distro for Linux. I'm new to linux. I heard on TechTV that SuSe and Mandrke are good for beginners. I have:

120 GB HD
513 MB RAM
AMD 1400+

I'm going to Dual-Boot with XP Pro, should I make a 3rd partition so i can access files on both OSes. Would that partion be FAT32?

Any advice is helpful

[sclebo05]

fat32 would be the best choice for that partition, i have one just for mp3s, movies, and the like. mandrake is a good first try at linux distro. best of luck to you

[DMR]

Originally posted by sclebo05
fat32 would be the best choice for that partition Right- Both Linux and Windows can have full access to a FAT32 partition without any trouble. Writing to NTFS Linux is still not reliable, because the the NTFS filesystem differs quite a bit from FAT/FAT32, and being proprietary code, it hasn't been fully reverse-engineered yet.


Originally posted by sclebo05
mandrake is a good first try at linux distro. The latest SuSE versions are good as well if you're coming from a Windows world and don't want too much of a culture shock.

:)

[LinPenguinux]

Linux has an option to use a NTFS partion? What does it normally use?
And can i make the FAT32 partion when i install Linux?

[sclebo05]

honestly, i would make the fat32 partition BEFORE you install linux, this will be the most reliable way to format it and make sure it works before you throw linux into the mix. as DMR said, linux can use NTFS if you must, but not all distros have it set up out of the box - and all of them have unreliable support. if you care about your data, use a fat32 formatted by either windows or a dos floppy.

[LinPenguinux]

Will SuSe automaticly find my network/internet connection? I dont want to hassle with finding it since i new to Linux

[sclebo05]

most of the more refined distros WILL set up your network to some extent, as long as you dont have some bizarre and obscure network card.

[LinPenguinux]

is this an obsure one. Its on the motherboard. SiS 900 Fast Ethernet Adapter.

[Thelgord]

System:
Compaq LTE 5300
80mb ram
1.6g hd (currently, will be upgrading soon)
16 bit sound
display is limited to 640X480 or 800X600
P133 (bechmarks at 138mhz) (no mmx)

I would like to use the latest version of KDE (but that may run slow) and I will be getting a NIC and a wi-fi card soon as well (for net access at home and when i am road, wich is a LOT) I am not trying to start a flame war or anything, i am just looking for a stable distro that will be able to handle OpenOffice, a web browser, and e-mail client, and i toy around with creating graphics, and i would also like to be able to play SimCity 3000 ( i have the linux version.)

Any help would be most welcome :)

[b00zer]

probably the most common answer for this scenario would be slackware. Kde will definately be rough though, as would gnome. A light window manager like fluxbox would be highly recommended.

[psi42]

Originally posted by Thelgord
System:
Compaq LTE 5300
80mb ram
1.6g hd (currently, will be upgrading soon)
16 bit sound
display is limited to 640X480 or 800X600
P133 (bechmarks at 138mhz) (no mmx)

I would like to use the latest version of KDE (but that may run slow)

Erm... Yes, VERY very very slow.


i am just looking for a stable distro that will be able to handle OpenOffice, a web browser, and e-mail client, and i toy around with creating graphics, and i would also like to be able to play SimCity 3000 ( i have the linux version.)

Sorry, but my 133Mhz desktop with 128MB of RAM has trouble enough running AbiWord, and would never run openoffice at a satisfactory speed. :(


I'd recommend you try out Slackware, with a lightweight wm (icewm, *box, xfce, etc...)


~psi42

[Loki3]

Debian might be advantagous because .deb packages don't require compling to install programs. That an apt-get is the best.

www.debian.org

I also agree that a lightweight window manager will run much better than KDE or Gnome.

[serz]

Forget about running KDE or GNOME, unless you want it really slow. You will have to use Window Managers, such as Fluxbox/Openbox/PekWM/IceWM.

This has been asked a few times here.. you should be able to find the others by doing a search.


Moving to /dev/random.

[DMR]

Originally posted by LinPenguinux
is this an obsure one. Its on the motherboard. SiS 900 Fast Ethernet Adapter. Not obscure at all; SiS 900 adapters use (surprisingly enough) the SIS 900 driver/module. It should come as a built-in module with current distros.

:)

[solo]

You may want to try Vector Linux (http://www.vectorlinux.com/).

One version of it is designed to work with older systems.

[DSwain]

i think you could use a mainstream distro (MDK, Red hat, etc.) but just an older version of one, like MDK 8 (at least) if not older.

[mm-sources]

damn small linux (http://www.damnsmalllinux.org) maybe

[LinPenguinux]

would i download the i386 version of SuSe?

[LinPenguinux]

and do i burn an image, because i dont see one.

[sclebo05]

yes, you want the 386 version.

[LinPenguinux]

there is no .iso

[Thelgord]

Thanks for the tips. I will check out damnsmall linux, see what happens.

[0versight]

http://jamd-linux.com
http://archlinux.org/
http://www.trustix.net/

Im looking at these three Linux distros since RH is no more.

Ive heard nothing but great reviews about archlinux, saying that its significantly faster than slackware and otherwise a great light distro.
http://undeadpenguin.org/reviews/arch.5.html

Ive never heard of anyone using trustix so I cant really say anything about it.

On the other hand Ive found several people using jamd linux.

So the question I have about jamd linux is there quick updates, patches, etc? How is that part done?

please do not friggin reply and say try this or that distro, I am just wanting info about the distros I have mentioned. Thank you for any help, I greatly appreciate it.

[hard candy]

Arch linux- last I tried it, no choice in installation-it was too automatic. This was 1 1/2 months ago. If you have an empty hard drive-go for it.
Jamd- get Fedora since Jamd is basically a knockoff.
No experience with trustix.

Now for the FRIGGIN part- look at Mepis linux (http://www.mepis.org/) -beats every distro out there, every one in all ways-Gentoo, Fedora, Mandrake, Slackware, Suse, LFS, all of them. Otherwise you'll be installing a runner-up. You only need the first disk and it's live. So you can try it before you install. (Ducks for cover)

[Jata]

Red Hat isn't really dead, it's just split into Red Hat Enterprise for business etc and Fedora which is basically what Red Hat was before.

Fedora (http://fedora.redhat.com/)

As for the distros, tried jamd but it buggered up before the install even started. Wasn't a bad iso, I think it might just have been an unfortunate hardware mix. Everything I've read elsewhere has been very positive though saying it's nice and quick with useful stuff pre-installed like apt-get for RPMs. That's why I got the isos. Will try again some day.
Arch sounds fun too, so I'll add that to my 'must try' list.:D

[0versight]

Actually I am boycotting redhat for their stupid tactics, im really pissed off about what they are doing even if they do have fedora out. Even if fedora is just as good as redhat, its the politics. I have never been pissed off like this toward a Linux community.

[omniuni]

I have worked with a Pentium 200 with 64Mb of RAM. RedHat 7.3 works very well, and is quite updated from earlier versions. The graphical installer is great, and even tells you some interesting facts about the origin of the companys name! Unfortunately, It does not include an office suite other than an old verion of KOffice. AbiWord and a few other good programs for spreadsheets etc. are included, however. Good Luck!

[jonathan89]

i have been using mandrake 9.1 for the last two or three months, but now i think it is time i move on. i recently downloaded and installed Fedora. i like it a lot. however, since i am a programmer, i would like a distro which doesnt have RPM dependencies, something like debian or slackware. i have been looking at both...and since they seem to be both GREAT distros...i need some advice/help in choosing which one to go with. i am looking for the following things:

**Easy Installation. since i am a newbie, i really dont know much about partitions and cfdisk. i really dont want to hurt my fedora partitions. graphical installation (like in mdk 9.1) would be nice :) but i dont think either of them support it (do they?)

**Up-To-Date Packages. i also heard that there are not that many updated packages for debian, and i would have to use a old version of java.
is this true?

**Stability. like i said, i will be using this for WORK. i cant take any chance of losing any information, or the system "freezing". which distro is more stable?

**Compatibility. i didnt have too many problems with mdk and fedora hardware compatibility. will this be the same in debian and slackware?

PLEASE do not start a flame war here ;) , but please give me your honest opinion on the two, and show me the pros and cons of each.

TIA

[voidinit]

Slackware would most definately put at ease all of your fears except the fdisk one.

I use slack for java development, and rest assured, any software you can get for any linux distro will run on any other distro. It's all a matter of how much trouble it's going to be to get it that way.

I run J2SDK 1.4.2, eclipse IDE, JBoss, and ANT on slack. It runs like a dream.

If you need any help automating your java environment variables or anything like that, give me a PM.

Any distro you decide to use will run reliably and stably as a development platform as long the box has a good admin. :-) It's really all about personal preference. Slackware is just basic linux, a kernel, a filesystem and some applications. If you want to configure anything, edit the appropriate configuration file manually and it's configured.

I don't know a thing about Debian, but I'm sure it will serve you just as well. Linux and Java seem to go hand in hand anyway.

[bandwidth_pig]

1. Neither one offers graphical installation. At least Slack didn't when I ran 8. It may now. But both were ncurses based. Really quite simple in my opinion. And fdisk isn't too tough. It's not nearly as bad as it used to be.


2. That depends on what version of Debian you run and how much you hunt for additions to your apt sources file. You can find quite a few packages...it's just a question of knowing what place carries good up to date sources.

3. Can't go wrong with either one there.

4. Kernel is a kernel is a kernel :)
It's all the same kernel. It's just a question of what you enable in it. If your hardware was supported previously, it will be supported now.


I myself feel that from a install perspective, you are looking at a coin toss. They are about the same in my opinion. From a software management perspective, it's really hard to beat Debian. If you want more up to date packages, you can always run Sid instead of Woody (Sid is more bleeding edge and Woody is more stable). You can't loose with either one...but for stability it's damn near impossible to beat Debian. Again, I haven't used Slack for a couple of years, but back in 8 the package management really left something to be desired. I wound up compiling from source all the time.

[CrashTestDummy9]

Originally posted by bandwidth_pig
1. Neither one offers graphical installation.
Actually Debian does have a graphical install though it is 3rd(maybe 4-12th) party.Its quite easy to use not quite Mandrake'ish but close and I dont remember the url for it so go Googling.

Either way you'll get a trimmed down install with only what you need if you choose to.Otherwise it can bloat up pretty big too.

[serz]

I love Slack, but...my suggestion would be to try both.

[Drago]

Originally posted by CrashTestDummy9
Actually Debian does have a graphical install though it is 3rd(maybe 4-12th) party.Its quite easy to use not quite Mandrake'ish but close and I dont remember the url for it so go Googling.

Either way you'll get a trimmed down install with only what you need if you choose to.Otherwise it can bloat up pretty big too.
The graphical installer could be "PGI", i never tried it but maybe someone else here has. Also I've heard that the folks down at progeny were porting redhat's anaconda installer over to debian, so that could be an answer for your install needs.
http://hackers.progeny.com/pgi/
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200310/msg01880.html
EDIT: Added link to PGI