Which Distro?

[linuxNohow]

I think Slackware 8.0 is sweet. It's much lighter than redhat and will do everything you need. Plus there is no need to worry about abandoning RPM's because Slack has rpm2tgz which will convert an RPM into something that you can install on Slack with one command. One other good thing about Slack is that it installs a slew of desktop managers that you can choose from simply by copying the corresponding xinitrc.gnome or xinitrc.kde file to ~/.xinitrc and run startx. it's as simple as that. No reconfiguration of X needed so you can switch from enlightenment to kde then to gnome all in the space of a couple of minutes and very easily too.

[Joshie the CK]

One thing that looks really cool about SUSE, is the configuration tools.. software installation, and configuration of stuff like the X server..

That just looks cool.. :-)

Geez, for someone who's convinced himself to re-install redhat tonight, I'm sure drooling over SUSE.. lol..

You know, sometimes choices are overrated.. :D

[sarah31]

I agree with frith and TC (of course). I have installed both LibraNet (on my PC) and Debian (on my Mac) and they were pretty damn straight forward. I like text installs and i like the fact that you install the base system first and then X. If you have problems with X then it won't botch your install. The upgrading/installing tools rock. Old apps, sure but you can upgrade the ones you want to easily enough. Bleeding edge isn't always the best for everyone.

In LibraNet,if you use the ICE default desktop you can easily switch between desktop environments. With LibraNet as well you can join their wonderful email help list. The people are quick to answer, friendly, and can usually get your problem solved.

Based on my experience, as limited as it is, GO DEBIAN or DEBIAN BASED!

My shameless two cents (Canadian).

[Hitokiri_X]

Just try them all out.I originally started with those graphical install distros,but they always installed junk I even when I selected it not to.After a couple days of using them,I threw away my mandrake,redhat and caldera cds,made some debian and slackware floppies and ended up loving the text based,ftp installs.So just try them out and eventually you'll end up with one distro that you love more than the others.

[Joshie the CK]

Well this is fun.. Apparently the RH7.2 boot disk, falls to the same bug as RH7.2 itself..

Just after I inserted the second disk, whammo, freezes up.. THAT was fun...

Okay then, back to square one..

RH 7.1, SUSE7.3,(get CD's from someone, or do FTP install) Libranet, seem to be the top three choices.. I have disks for Debian 2.2r3, and SUSE7.0.. Those are the only non redhat disks I own though..

Darnitall.. I wanted my computer up and running, TONIGHT... grr..

[sarah31]

***subliminal message**** www.libranet.com (http://www.libranet.com)

***end of message*****

:)

[Joshie the CK]

Okay.. Let's assume I download the Libranet ISO tomorrow, at school... (T3's are wonderful..)

Some of this software is outdated.. KDE, and such..
I've never used a Debian distro.. Just heard about them.. Is it really as easy as everyone claims?
Obviously, I'm going to want the latest versions of KDE, and GNOME.. Throw in windowmaker, and a bunch of other misc. software...

Is this distro going to be something I can live with, that's just going to *work*, without needing a ton of tweaking?
Starting now, my system is going to be linux only. No more dual-boot to 2K.. So I can't afford to be tweaking it all the time, just to keep it running anymore...

Anyway, I'll grab the ISO and burn it tomorrow.. I suppose I'll at least try and install it.. :)

Also:
Any problems with ReiserFS in Libranet? My systems here get hit with power outages and such fairly often, so they tend to go down. I've never used a ReiserFS system. ext2 and ext3 are the only ones..
How does ReiserFS measure up, in comparison?

[ 24 January 2002: Message edited by: Joshie the CK ]

[Speedy]

First off this is coming from a diehard Debian fan, so take this post with a grain or three of salt.
I could never imagine using anything other than Debian for my main desktop. I've played with RedHat (back in the 5.1-6.1 days), TurboLinux, corellinux, and freebsd (which granted is not linux) and I've found that the easiest to deal with over a _long_ period of time is Debian. I won't lie, for someone new to Debian even if they're fairly experienced with Linux the Debian install can be a b$%*h and a half and the thought of having to face off against dselect can be daunting. After the initial learning curve is passed dselect and apt become your new best friends (maybe thats just be, they become damn indispensible though). Maybe RedHat has changed since the last time I've used it but, it just never gave me the impression that it was ever intended to be a system that could be upgraded constantly to keep up with newly released software. It felt a lot more like there were specific versions that were kind of a hassle even to upgrade between. Debian while it requires some initial tweaking will practically run itself afterwords. When you hear the Debian freaks (*ahem*cough*) talk about apt like some kind of god thats what they are talking about. apt means never having to check for updated rpms or deal with dependcy issues by hand ever again. You go 'apt-get update' it gets list of the latest software, you go 'apt-get upgrade' and it downloads all the new versions of software it can get its hands on. Tada. Now f($%ing around with rpms trying to hunt down the magic last dependcy or trying to find the devel files so you can compile from source.
Dispelling another Debian mith while I'm at it is that Debian is out of date and only has ancient software. Its 'stable' tres tends to be ancient (but more stable than any release you'll _ever_ see from redhat), the unstable tree usually leads RedHats betas by at least a month and is IMHO quite stable enough for eveyday desktop use. The only crashes I've had I've been asking for (tip: don't run a kernel with a semi-rejected patch).
So anyways...I've rambled for quite longer than I meant to...but if you're actually still reading this Joshie I'd say: stick with RedHat, Mandrake or Suse (never tried Suse, I really should) if you want something that will come up ready to go with about a days learning curve. Go with Debian if you can deal with a week or two (mebbie more) learning curve to be fully comfortable, and you'll never have to worry about upgrades, reconfiguring, etc. Actually the best solution is probably the one you came up with: Go with an rpm based distro like Suse or RedHat and put Debian unstable on another partition to play with. Debian isn't for everyone but if you give it a chance I think you'll be pleasently surprised.

-Speedy

(wow that was a lot of typing, more than I've done for school in the last 2 odd months)

[mrBen]

I agree with all of you ;)

I've used Debian - it was the first distro that I bought rather than got from a magazine. And it _is_ sweet, especially apt-get. However, apt-get is a bit useless if you don't have a Linux net connection, which I don't at the moment. Plus AFAIK it doesn't do a lot of hardware detection, so expect to spend a little time fiddling with your soundcard.

Enter Libranet, which I've not tried yet, but will download and burn when they release v.2 which I heard was due out in a few weeks. It's basically Debian with a few new things, and more hardware detection, which sounds like heaven to me.

I'm currently running a SuSE 7.1 box, as I was given the box set for free :D. It's very nice, although with all those CDs it can feel a little bloated at times. The YaST2 configuration is really good too, although I'm told it has a tendency to override any configurations you make outside of it.

Most reviews I've seen on-line say that RedHat 7.2 is very good, but SuSE 7.3 is best of the two. But if you are looking to combine ease of use with Debian, then Libranet is the way to go (given that Corel, Storm and Progeny have all died out :( )

Just my ramblings......

[Joshie the CK]

Speedy: I read the whole thing. :)

Anyway.. I've got my libranet CD..
I *HOPE* it installs.. Is it the 2.4 kernel that the Athalon doesn't get along with? If the athalon has problems with 2.4.3, then Libranet may not install either..

[crosses fingers] I hope, I hope..

[Taizong]

All this talk and discussion, and a quick install of Mandrake 8.1 would have had ya going in 45 minutes. You don't even have to install KDE or all the tools if you don't want to (if you like having to configure core components everytime you install a new system, then be my guest). Install KDE and use GNOME, you will still be up and running in no time. Plus, Mandrake is very flexible when it comes to upgrading software and such.

On the other side of the coin, I have tried Debiann since it was suggested to me a few weeks back, and it is definately easy to use as well. The install is still a bit tougher to deal with though.

[danrees]

While apt is probably the best system for keeping a system up to date, you have to understand that not everyone has cable connections yet :rolleyes:

Dial-up users like myself tend to hop from new releases of a distribution to the next, simply because it is the easiest way to keep up to date.

For example, my SuSE 7.2 system works fine. I don't have a net connection most of the time on it because there is no connection point in my room at school (roll on October with a uni backbone connection in my room :p). This means security fixes aren't really relevant. So the only software I need to install is major new releases, such as Mozilla, GNOME, KDE etc. Often the easiest way to achieve this is to just get hold of the latest distro release.

This is just not practical with Debian.

[Frith]

I think there are people out there who will, for a slight fee, burn the latest Debian Sid onto cds for you every week.

This could get kinda expensive, though (and there's always the risk of having the guy burn a set of debs that have a broken program).

[scanez]

Originally posted by danrees:
<STRONG>While apt is probably the best system for keeping a system up to date, you have to understand that not everyone has cable connections yet :rolleyes:
</STRONG>
Actually I see apt as benefitting dial-up users more for those reasons you mentioned.
The initial installtion would be a big hassel so it'd probably be better to install by CD or something, but updating after that (only those packages you want if you wish) is a breeze. I was doing that this summer from home, apt-get upgraded every night and all it took was half an hour at most, and that was me updating every package. Upgrading only those I wanted would have taken much less time...

[sarah31]

Originally posted by Joshie the CK:
<STRONG>Speedy: I read the whole thing. :)

Anyway.. I've got my libranet CD..
I *HOPE* it installs.. Is it the 2.4 kernel that the Athalon doesn't get along with? If the athalon has problems with 2.4.3, then Libranet may not install either..

[crosses fingers] I hope, I hope..</STRONG>

Well if the Atholon doesn't like the 2.4 kernel then you are pretty well screwed as most distros use some version of it now.

From my experience so far with LibraNet I can live with most of the ancientness of the apps. After all it is rock solid stable. I am going to upgrade to woody though in the next few nights. Luckily for me I have high speed and it won't take that long. Of course I will walk away while it is doing this because I know it will take time. Changing your sources.list to woody or SID and doing an apt-get dist-upgrade is all that needs to be done.

Be sure to join the LibraNet email help list too. They are really friendly and usually quite quick to respond.

(Taizong Mandrake works for some and they have a nice installer. Their concept of newbieizing linux is smart too. For me though I will never recommend it. I had lots of trouble with it and the problems there never seem to get fixed. But like I say ALL THE TIME, use what works and makes you happy.)

[scanez]

Originally posted by Joshie the CK:
<STRONG>Speedy: I read the whole thing. :)

Anyway.. I've got my libranet CD..
I *HOPE* it installs.. Is it the 2.4 kernel that the Athalon doesn't get along with? If the athalon has problems with 2.4.3, then Libranet may not install either..

[crosses fingers] I hope, I hope..</STRONG>
Just for the record, I have had NO problems with my Athlon XP and 2.4.17. The bug that was discovered affects agp, but even that hasn't given me any problems at all. Of course your experiences may differ, but I just wanted to give another perspective :)

[Joshie the CK]

Well that was fun... Libranet won't install either...

It starts to get to the 'installing base system' part, and then blows up with a "Unable to handle paging request" message or something.. Something to do with paging..

Whoop-de-do... I'd install win2k, but it probably won't work either.. It wouldn't, when RH7.2 was on the system..

argh... This SUCKS.. All I want is a computer that *WORKS*!!! I'm tempted to go with RH7.1, just to see if it'll actually install.. 'cause perhaps my hardware is just whacked.. yeesh.. I certainly HOPE not.. It's only about 6 months old..

I swear, if I have to buy new hardware, I'm gonna buy an apple.. The one at school, just runs and runs and runs and runs with NO hardware or software problems.. LoL.. Maaan.. And I HATE macs too.. :D

Update:
First, I tried Debian 2.2r3.. Wheee.. Crash, with the same problem as Libranet..
Then I figured, heck, RH7.1 worked before, it ought to work again, right?
No such luck. Crashed right after the second CD started going... Just like 7.2.. I think it has to be hardware.. grr..

[ 25 January 2002: Message edited by: Joshie the CK ]

[mrBen]

There's various fixes for the Athlon problem on most Linux news sites now. Give them a try - I think you're supposed to disable some sort of paging thing in the BIOS. Then try the Libranet again ;)

[Joshie the CK]

Heh! Okay, back at school, so I had some time to research this thing..

Turns out the 'athalon bug' really only happens if you're using AGP video?

I don't even have an AGP video card.. :-D

Besides, stuff with older kernels, like Debian 2.2r3, or RH7.1, had problems installing, so it can't be this particular athalon 'bug'..

This is just ducky.. heh heh.. More and more fun all the time, eh? :D

[sarah31]

How new is your box? Perhaps if you are having trouble with everything the CPU is just a lemon. You should be able to return it or take to the store you got it at get them to test it. There are plenty of Atholon users out there that are not having as many troubles as you seem to be having. If setting Paging off in the BIOS doesn't work then I would tend to think that the CPU is wonky.

[Taizong]

If a distribution installs with little or no problems, has an outstanding number of services, clients and applications that can be preinstalled and configured, and has useful utilities for updating security patches, libraries, and applications, then the distribution is good. This is what you would expect out of a desktop operating system.

Hacking and experimentation to get a Linux system working should be secondary to an experienced Linux user, not a pre-requisite. This should not be required by those merely wishing to get their work done either.

Point is, you won't be any cooler by spending 3 hours getting your X windows to run so that you get ogle going to watch DVD's in Slackware or Libranet. You won't be any cooler by not using a distribution that works soundly out of the box.

Stop fighting the collective. Install Mandrake 8.1. You will be assimilated.

[sarah31]

Originally posted by Taizong:
<STRONG>If a distribution installs with little or no problems, has an outstanding number of services, clients and applications that can be preinstalled and configured, and has useful utilities for updating security patches, libraries, and applications, then the distribution is good. This is what you would expect out of a desktop operating system.

Hacking and experimentation to get a Linux system working should be secondary to an experienced Linux user, not a pre-requisite. This should not be required by those merely wishing to get their work done either.

Point is, you won't be any cooler by spending 3 hours getting your X windows to run so that you get ogle going to watch DVD's in Slackware or Libranet. You won't be any cooler by not using a distribution that works soundly out of the box.

Stop fighting the collective. Install Mandrake 8.1. You will be assimilated.</STRONG>

WTF? Have you ever visited the Mandrakeruser site? Installation is plagued with all sorts of troubles. Your rescue floppy won't get made properly usless you use one of the most ancient apps that exists. S3 onboard video users won't get X configured without downloading new drivers, installing them and then reconfiguring X, all from the console. Oh yeah, I forgot about that lovely Software Manager or RPMs. Bah installation may be pretty but if you have any experience installing ANY OSes LibraNet or Slackware are not that much more difficult.

Installing LibraNet took me a total of twenty minutes. I only had difficulty with PPPoE and my printer. While with Mandrake...well I would bore you to sleep with it. Mandrake is great for some and those who really want to experience the bleeding edge, whether it is working or not, and that is great but don't equate an easy installation for a great distro. BTW have you even tried to get any answers from Mandrake support...good luck!

[Joshie the CK]

Well the motherboard/proc, are only about 6-8 months old..
Thing is, they ran 2K, and redHat 7.1 just fine, for that whole time, up until about a week and a half ago.. Linux started crashing regularly, with core dumps left and right..
2K was FUBARing, and random weirdness was happening, like the control panel being put into the little sidebar rather then the main window where it was supposed to be...
(Ever seen windows control panel screen throw a javascript error when you try to open it.. Makes you wonder.. :D)

So I decided, screw this. I backed up 7 gigs of stuff, by puttng the hard disk into my brother's computer, and copying to another computer across the network.. (took me three tries (read, core dump-reboot) to get my /home directory onto the fat32 partition.)

So now, trying to reinstall just fails repeatedly.. On any distro. The only distro (that I have disks for) that I HAVEN'T tried, is RedHat 6.2.. And that's just NOT going to happen.. heh..

[sarah31]

Well something really sounds whacked here. Do your drives work? Have you check all cables? The power source? Any unusual occurances preceed the problems?

I seriouly think that there is something faulty with your hardware. On a machine that "old" you shouldn't have such problems. The AGP bug should not have affected you at all as 2K has a fix and you would only notice it in games, mostly. I recommend checking all that you can on hardware wise or taking it for assessment to the store where you bought it (or the components) dig up you receipts and any warrantee cards/papers while you are at it. This goes well beyond problems with the OSes you use, IMO.

BTW, is there an option to turn Paging off in your BIOS? You could try that but I am skeptical that that would even work :( Or vist the Mobo manufacturer's home page perhaps you can upgrade the BIOS or your problem may be *urp* common and they may have a fix.

Best of luck and I hope the solution ends out being cheap and simple!

[Joshie the CK]

Well.. Here I am.. In Libranet.. :-D

After a couple tries, the bugger finally installed.. Now I guess the big trick is, will it KEEP running.. heh heh..

Thanks for your help everyone... I'm sure I'll be around here for a bit, asking about stuff that might not quite work..

I'll tell ya, libranet needs some auto-detection of network, video, and sound cards.. RedHat did it easily.. I'd say, add that auto-detection in there, and that install actually goes pretty easy.. But without it, getting X up and going can be a real pain in the rear..

[sarah31]

Originally posted by Joshie the CK:
<STRONG>Well.. Here I am.. In Libranet.. :-D

After a couple tries, the bugger finally installed.. Now I guess the big trick is, will it KEEP running.. heh heh..

Thanks for your help everyone... I'm sure I'll be around here for a bit, asking about stuff that might not quite work..

I'll tell ya, libranet needs some auto-detection of network, video, and sound cards.. RedHat did it easily.. I'd say, add that auto-detection in there, and that install actually goes pretty easy.. But without it, getting X up and going can be a real pain in the rear..</STRONG>

You are right in that observation. I actually think that 2.0 will be much improved in this capacity. If they don't have autodetection I would hope that they have a larger list of drivers and explanation of what the drivers are. right now if you have never visited XFree86 or looked at your XF86Config(-4) then you may not know the symbol/acronym for your driver!

I like the idea of setting X up after the base is installed though. In mandrake if X configuring FUBARs it often FUBARs the install

:(

Don't forget to join the email help list! We are fairly fast at answering your questions. Note though that we may not have all the answers you need.

I hope you like LibraNet. Take the time to read up on the upgrading tools such as apt-get, deselect, console-apt (capt), dpkg and so forth. Most of all lets hope your computer stays up and running (I would still be tempted to get it check out though!).

[Saptech]

In your opinion, what would be the worst distro you've tried? I here that Corel was terrible.

[scanez]

LOL! This thread is bound to start a big flamewar...I choose not to post :)

[Saptech]

Originally posted by scanez:
<STRONG>LOL! This thread is bound to start a big flamewar...I choose not to post :)</STRONG>

You still have your opinion... :rolleyes:

[cage47]

Definitely Corel. The only Distro I've thrown away. Stormix just didn't like some of my hardware but I still have the cd and might try it on another machine soon.

[mcmanus69]

Let the flames begin! (doesn't this belong in rants??)

Well, you didn't say "Linux" distro, so I say Windows 95. =)

hehe, j/k... that's the worst OS, but I'd say the worst distro would have to be.... well, based on personal experience, I just could never get Debian to work properly, and even on the school's computers, X ALWAYZ crashes (altho it gets points for having like 20 ppl telnet'd in at once and at least that never crashes). I don't think it's that bad, I just haven't had good personal experience with it, is all.... :rolleyes:

Oh, and WAY TOO complicated!!! (or am I just not '1337' enuf??? :D )

[ 04 February 2002: Message edited by: mcmanus69 ]

[ 04 February 2002: Message edited by: mcmanus69 ]

[PimpHolic]

ive heard great things about debian, but for me, debian - simply because i couldn't get X to work. well after a week i did, but as soon as i got in my keyboard and mouse would freeze

[Siskmarek]

I miss OS/2... does anyone here remember OS/2? I remember having 16 megs of RAM on a 486 and multitasking like crazy...

Compare that to Windows 95... :rolleyes: Couldn't do 5h1+ in that.

Oh well... I have Linux now. *snuggles Tux!*

Crappy distro?

There's such a thing as a crappy distro?? :eek: :D

~ Siskie

[X_console]

I don't know about worst, but Corel was the only one that would never work on any system I installed. It'd install fine, but when you rebooted, it'd refuse to boot up. Every other distro I've tried, RedHat, Slackware, Debian and Mandrake have worked fine.

[MkIII_Supra]

Debian, couldn't get my 3COM NIC to work, my Ati Xpert@Play 98 8MB video to work in X and of course my HP DJ600, or HP DJ420 printers wouldn't work either.

All the hardware worked in every other distro I tried including Slackware (although I had to spend a week getting them to work for the most part...) so based on that Debian is by far the worst distro I have ever tried.

[Strike]

Mandrake. Sure, it "worked", but all the distros I've tried (haven't tried Corel) worked. Mandrake assumed I was a moron, even in expert mode. Sure I could pick what packages I want, but when it came to things like setting the "security level", it decided to do it its own way instead of the way the separate application authors' intended way. Too intrusive for me. That and it uses RPMs which just have too much of a history of simply not working, even when I ask people who know all about RPMs.

[inkedmn]

i'd have to go with mandrake as well.

[nerrollus]

Originally posted by Strike:
<STRONG>Mandrake. Sure, it "worked", but all the distros I've tried (haven't tried Corel) worked. Mandrake assumed I was a moron, even in expert mode. Sure I could pick what packages I want, but when it came to things like setting the "security level", it decided to do it its own way instead of the way the separate application authors' intended way. Too intrusive for me. That and it uses RPMs which just have too much of a history of simply not working, even when I ask people who know all about RPMs.</STRONG>

When I first got RedHat I was really drawn to the RPM's. Thought it was make life a lot easier since I didn't know jack about Linux. Funny thing is, now I can't stand using them.. hehe. I install everything from source now.

Keep thinking I should have just gone with Slack, but I still like the GUI install that RedHat has. Easier on us newbies.. ;)

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

Turbo Linux... Ughhhhh.

I dunno... maybe I didn't give it enough of a chance. The install was so crappy, I no longer had the urge to install it. Maybe someone can give me a compelling reason to try it again, though....

[mrBen]

The fact is that in the open source bazaar community (bizarre ;) ) the ones that _are_ crap are the ones that no-one remembers. Even Corel had some people who really liked it, and thought it was fantastic. Like I say, the ones that are crap are the ones that no-one uses and fall away. Open source=survival of the fittest. The best thing is that we all get to have a choice. Tonnes of people 'break their teeth' on Mandrake, and yet it's been mentioned as the worst too. Lots of people say :cool: Debian :cool: and yet some say _its_ the worst.

The worst distro is one that everyone is forced to use, which eliminates choice.

(Same goes for Desktop Environment - imagine a DE where all the libraries are wrapped up in the DE so that you can't run the associated applications outside of that DE :( )

[Okie]

opinions - opinions, you know what they say about opinions, ...and they all stink (including this one)...

i believe the major distros are all good distros, some prefer the .rpm type distros like Redhat, Mandrake, while others prefer the .tgz type distros like Slackware, or the .deb. Debian distro, don't forget computers are built different with different hardware and depending on your computer will depend on your experience with any particular distro, (build it yourself with up quality compliant parts and your better off, when you take a OEM built computer that was made with a specific OS (Windoze) and make partitions & put Linux on that can be a mixed bag of tricks, two & half years ago i bought my first computer, a Gateway with Win98se and about 3 or 4 months ago i bought my first copy of Linux (Mandrake8.0) and it was buggy as hell, but i did not want to give up on LInux and got Redhat7.1 and seen much better performance from Redhat, Slackware8 is exellent but i know i need to learn the finer points of tweaking & tuneing the OS...

after seeing custom buily computers and comapring them to this crappy OEM i will NEVER NEVER NEVER buy another OEM computer, dell, gateway, HP, compaq can all go to hell as far as i am concerned, the hardware you are installing the OS either makes it or breaks it...

HappyTrails ;)

[kuber]

Well, I have only used 4 - slack, debian, redhat, mandrake.

I really dislike mandrake, simply because I don't like being treated like an idiot, but for me the worst is redhat 7.0, simply because it had a broken gcc. WTF? Where was the quality control there?

[mdwatts]

Worst Linux Distro?

That would have to be a toss up between Debian and Slackware.

:cool: Caldera OpenLinux Workstation 3.1.1 :cool:

[thpook]

Gentus.

Anyone remember that one?

Horrible.

[mcmanus69]

Originally posted by WattsMD:
<STRONG>Worst Linux Distro?

That would have to be a toss up between Debian and Slackware.

:cool: Caldera OpenLinux Workstation 3.1.1 :cool:</STRONG>

LoL, killing two troll-groups with one stone ;-)

[Strike]

I propose that you justify your decision as well instead of just throwing out a name.

[Shadoglare]

I've never been able to get Debian to work worth a crap, plus they took away small memory support on their latest versions so it will no longer work on my laptop, so they get my vote :)

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by Strike:
<STRONG>I propose that you justify your decision as well instead of just throwing out a name.</STRONG>

I've used Caldera since 1.3 and on the weekend, I redid one of my home pc's with OL Workstation 3.1 (ReiserFS) on it and installed their latest (gift from the God's) Workstatin 3.1.1 with ext3.

Ever see me post questions in the 26 months I've been here at LNO? No need to with Caldera. Everything works.

I've never had to manually setup the network either while using dynamic or static ip. X always works. All my home pc's (Intel/AMD) and work pc's (All Compaq's) Install, boot, use.

Just kidding about Slack and Debian. I know they are good as are most linux distros. I just prefer Caldera.

Originally posted by mcmanus69:
<STRONG>Killing two troll-groups with one stone</STRONG>

Actually a large boulder (apparently they're hardheaded).

[mdwatts]

Isn't Debian the 3.0 of Windows?

[Strike]

Originally posted by WattsMD:
<STRONG>Ever see me post questions in the 26 months I've been here at LNO? No need to with Caldera. Everything works.</STRONG>

Ever see me post questions in the 12+ months that I've been using Debian? Only in the programming forum, and they certainly aren't distro questions.

[JG]

WattsMD (aka MDWatts??)

sorry to hijack this thread but could I ask a question re OL 3.1.1

I've found a site that I can DL OL3.1.1

But there are 3 iso's listed, as follows:

CD1, CD1a, CD2

I've dl's CD1 so far and was wondering whether the other 2 are totally necessary?

Thanks in advance

JG

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by Strike:
<STRONG>Ever see me post questions in the 12+ months that I've been using Debian? Only in the programming forum, and they certainly aren't distro questions.</STRONG>

I never said you did.

I'm just saying that I've rarely had any major problems with any of the Caldera products I have used. Any problems I have I either read the documentation or search the web.

JG... no problem. Good to see you around.

Yes original member mdwatts. Been through a few accounts since.

CD1 is all you really need for the basic install. CD1a is extra goodies and the autorun will run a script that installs the extra packages.

CD2 is the source code and not necessary.

Let me know if you need any help. PM will not work as this account is borrowed from FoBoT.

[Taizong]

Red Hat.

I have not tried many distros, and now actually use FreeBSD more the Linux, but of the distros I tried Red Hat is the worst - hands down. It's RPM system is just terrible, forcing me to abandon it almost immediately. Red Hat lacks many intuitive tools found in other distributions (which is a moot point considering that I can just install them, but still, that's time). It had little to no add-ons for supplied software (like skins for xmms or backgrounds for eterm) which made what little glorius open source software it comes with seem very amatuer and non-robust - which to me just shows laziness. It's firewall configuration tool is counter productive. It had alot of dependency issues out of the box (7.2 no less).

Overall Red Hat licks harder then Justin Timberlake in a middle school male gym shower.

[JG]

WattsMD - thanks for the speedy reply and the info.

Yep, I'm still lurking around here.........

I started a long time ago with OL1.3, then onto 2.4, didn't like 3.1 that much, so thought what the hell... I'd give 3.1.1 a go.

Contrary to others opinions I always had a soft spot for Caldera OL .... it always "worked" pretty well and configuration was relatively easy... I just found that it was usually a bit out of date compared to the other distros at the time...but then again the other "current" distros usually suffered from some form of instability or bug problem.

Oh well...lets see what the Lizard install of 3.1.1 has in store for me...........

JG

[sarah31]

Personally I have tried too few distros to say that there is a "worst" distro. I wasn't able to install MDK 8.1 Final version, the beta worked though. Many would say that it was/is my crappy hardware but if I can install the beta and not the final? Something wrong there folks. Mandrake likes to have all the latest and greatest widgets whether they work or not. Mandrake and I were just not comapatable. Nice installer though (even though the problems with X can screw your entire install).

[ 05 February 2002: Message edited by: sarah31 ]

[Jomboni]

Originally posted by Taizong:
<STRONG>what little glorius open source software it comes with</STRONG>Red Hat 7.2 is 2 cds, entirely open source, if you download it. I fail to see how 2 cds is not a lot. All of the tools that they develop are made open. They have made significant contributions to Gnome (whether you like Gnome or not - they are giving back to the Linux community). And RPMS are not nearly as bad as people make it seem.

And if you hate RPMs so much, why are you using Mandrake?

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by JG:
<STRONG>WattsMD - thanks for the speedy reply and the info.

Yep, I'm still lurking around here.........

I started a long time ago with OL1.3, then onto 2.4, didn't like 3.1 that much, so thought what the hell... I'd give 3.1.1 a go.

Contrary to others opinions I always had a soft spot for Caldera OL .... it always "worked" pretty well and configuration was relatively easy... I just found that it was usually a bit out of date compared to the other distros at the time...but then again the other "current" distros usually suffered from some form of instability or bug problem.

Oh well...lets see what the Lizard install of 3.1.1 has in store for me...........

JG</STRONG>

Glad to help...

Much the same as me. 1.3 to start though I only installed it on a old 486 to get a taste of Linux and never really used it.

Since then I've used 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and then the 3.1 series.

I would agree that some of the included packages are not cutting edge, but there's a reason for that. Stability. All the packages are compiled and tested to work with each other.

I just checked and found I had saved this...

On the main page for Open Linux 3.1 Workstation on the Caldera Web site is a hyperlink to an interesting document entitled
the_difference_between_caldera_and_redhat_linux.pd f.

One paragraph in particular caught my attention:

[quote begins]
Caldera uses professional release procedures that assure that when any of the programs are recompiled that the source code (the
``binaries") are compatible with the libraries and the compiler that are supplied. This process is known as ``self-hosting". It is the extra care used by professional software developers that means so much to developers using Linux. Red Hat ``self-hosts" about 30 packages -- of the hundreds that they include in their ``distribution".

Selfhosting is a feature to be of interest to more than developers, however. Smart Reseller (now Smart Partner) magazine ran benchmarks of Red Hat, Caldera, SuSE, and Windows NT (See Jan 25, 1999 issue). Those benchmarks found that Caldera ran 250% faster than NT in the file I/O tests. When measuring these
operating systems as Web servers, it found that Caldera ran 50% faster than any other system, including Red Hat. Here is how they
explained the performance differences between Linuxes:

``Those results also point out the vast differences that compilation can have in performance. The source code may be the same, but the quality of the binary code, the executable, varies significantly,
depending upon how well the source code was compiled." That points directly to Caldera's ``self-hosting" as the reason for its
performance.
[quote ends]

I wish you luck with the install and hope all goes well. I'm very pleased with their latest release.

Regards
Mike

[sarah31]

Originally posted by Jomboni:
<STRONG>Originally posted by Taizong:
what little glorius open source software it comes with</STRONG>Red Hat 7.2 is 2 cds, entirely open source, if you download it. I fail to see how 2 cds is not a lot. All of the tools that they develop are made open. They have made significant contributions to Gnome (whether you like Gnome or not - they are giving back to the Linux community). And RPMS are not nearly as bad as people make it seem.

And if you hate RPMs so much, why are you using Mandrake?

Good points. Just to add to your RPM point, I don't think so much it is the rpm package as it is the tools that are used to install, etc them that are the biggest pain.

[TC]

No such thing, they are all good in certain ways. Some are tailored to different aspects. That is why some people have success with a distro that others don't have. It's all up to personal choice. Aren't you glad at least you have a choice!!!

:D

TC

Have fun computing

[Shadoglare]

So umm more than anything you're saying that RH is the worst distro out there becuase it didn't come pre-loaded with enough toys and eye-candy?
:rolleyes:


Originally posted by Taizong:
<STRONG>Red Hat.

I have not tried many distros, and now actually use FreeBSD more the Linux, but of the distros I tried Red Hat is the worst - hands down. It's RPM system is just terrible, forcing me to abandon it almost immediately. Red Hat lacks many intuitive tools found in other distributions (which is a moot point considering that I can just install them, but still, that's time). It had little to no add-ons for supplied software (like skins for xmms or backgrounds for eterm) which made what little glorius open source software it comes with seem very amatuer and non-robust - which to me just shows laziness. It's firewall configuration tool is counter productive. It had alot of dependency issues out of the box (7.2 no less).

Overall Red Hat licks harder then Justin Timberlake in a middle school male gym shower.</STRONG>

[Shadoglare]

Speaking of RPMs, I'd like to mention that Ximian's Red Carpet is a very, very nice too when it comes to RPMs and dependancies.
Only thing that yakks me off about it is they seem to assume everybody has broadband internet - it's very, very, very, very, very slow over dialup, and it doesn't even give you the option to check for lib files, etc that it needs to download on a local source like a CD - it's gonna download it even if you have it somewhere else.

Originally posted by sarah31:
<STRONG>Good points. Just to add to your RPM point, I don't think so much it is the rpm package as it is the tools that are used to install, etc them that are the biggest pain.</STRONG>

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: Shadoglare ]

[MaGneTTo]

why is everybody saying Debian is the worst distro... I only tried Red Hat 6.2, MDK 7.1, 7.2 and 8.0(for about 3 hours :) ), and for about 4 months now i'm using debian potato, just a little transition problem, but, i just love it, it works great for me, and i'm thinking of upgrading the RH 6.2 that we have running on our server, to Debian potato, which was proved to me to way more stable than RH 6.2, so, that's it... My vote goes to Red Hat 7.2, horrible...

[Taizong]

Originally posted by Jomboni:
<STRONG>[QUOTE]
And if you hate RPMs so much, why are you using Mandrake?</STRONG>


Like I said, I use a few distros, including Mandrake. In fact, I use Mandrake only at home on one system - but this is all pointless.

Red Hat is not Mandrake. Red Hat is developed by a diffrent company then Mandrake. Keep that in mind. Now, since both distributions use the RPM does not mean that the mess that is Red Hat's RPM system bleeds over to Mandrake.

[Taizong]

Originally posted by Shadoglare:
<STRONG>So umm more than anything you're saying that RH is the worst distro out there becuase it didn't come pre-loaded with enough toys and eye-candy?
:rolleyes: </STRONG>

Yes and no. Like I said, I can download them, but that is a waste of my time. I use GNU/Linux and BSD for production and pleasure. Why waste time with Red Hat when every other distros are more complete and useful out of the box or right after install?

Furthermore, I don't intend to get into a super-loser-geek battle with you because I like KDE and prefer to use point and click utilities whenever I get the chance. I'll leave that to fat people with little experience in social circles.

[mdwatts]

My wasn't this fun?

We should have one of these at least once a week.

The point being, someone could install Redhat 7.2 on their system and have no problems at all, while someone else may install RH7.2 on THEIR system and have nothing but problems.

The BEST DISTRO or the WORST DISTRO???

Depends on your hardware and your knowledge.

[BK1]

Well they've all worked pretty well for me.
As long as you don't mind reading what you find and asking questions when you don't find the answers on your own. XChat is very nice for connecting with folks that can help you. This site has been a blessing too. My biggest issue in selecting the current distro I'm using is how much time I have to work on things like getting my nic working, sound and etc.

[indelusion]

I'll make it easy for you. Here's the best distro: http://telia.dl.sourceforge.net/mirrors/slackware/slackware-8.0/isos/install.iso

[Saptech]

Well I've just received my Libranet cd disk and will be installing it on my TP 380XD. From what I seen libranet looks pretty good for a desktop system.

[z0mbix]

I think it also depends on the person using the distro. For example, my fiancee wanted to try linux but wanted something she could use out of the box and not have to configure much so she bought Mandrake. On the other hand I started on RedHat then switched to Mandrake but couldn't play around enough!

I've been running Debian for a while and Slack for about a month and cannot see when I'll be done configuring things. Compiling kernels, IPtables, Firewall, sendmail, fetchmail, Samba, NFS, CS server etc. I'm a bit sick in the head like that!

[2damncommon]

Considering that a lot of it is the same?
I have Mandrake, SuSE, Progeny(Debian), and Peanut running fine.
Slackware I can't get configuered completely.
Red Hat still didn't like my hardware as of 7.0
Have had trouble getting oddball distros that can be found on large distro lists going; probably due to both hardware and software (or config) problems.
Bad distro? If you know Linux you look for what you want.
If you don't the one that installs on your hardware is good.

[BoB.gov]

we all have one. it may be propping up a desk somewhere in the basement, taking up shelf space in a closet or garage, or ripping off satellite TV with only a simple program running in RAM. the 486, it has so many uses. those machines represent some of the first attempts to standardize components in a computer just enough so that you COULD conceivably take two that didnt work and make one that did, as opposed to all of the (N)86's that came before it.

alright, its overly centimental. since machines just keep getting faster and faster, what is to be done with the old machines? it seems a real shame to toss them, especially after all the learning-through-electrical-fires-wisdom they were able to impart.

windows, obivously, is illequipped to save these poor, forgotten machines. so it's linux to the rescue!

there HAS to be a distro besides Slack that will run on one. so if anyone knows of a piticular distro which doesnt fall short in the GUI or hardware tolerance/detection department, and is NOT Slackware, i'd very much appericiate it.

the machine isnt very impressive:
-Intel 486SX2 processor
-52 Megs 72-pin ram
-2 Gig HD
-8X CD-ROM
-1.44" Floppy Drive
-PnP ISA NIC
-Onboard sound and 1(or 2) meg vid card

i want to even try running ADSL on it, if i can get the distro to work. i have tried Slack and... im too new to handle it. i got everything but the GUI to work, which i need.

so any opinions/sudgestions would be great!
thanks!

[mdwatts]

Let's see... What did last weeks 'Distro for a 486' question suggest. ;)

Probably Debian, Peanut Linux and Slack.

A Google search for 486 distros?

[BoB.gov]

right, a google search for 486 distros was the first thing i tried. thats why im here.

also, last weeks posts dont always find a way to stay available.

[FoBoT]

debian for sure , loaded via floopy disk :)

[Saptech]

You may also want to look into VectorLinux, its nice and small!
http://www.vectorlinux.com

[BoB.gov]

fits the description, its NOT slack! thanks a million!

[jrcow97]

I'm going through the same problem. So many flavors of linux. I'm going to try slackware because I found someone that's will to help me if I have problems. :) I had problems setting up X when I tried Debian. I just gave up on it. My box isn't that great compared to today's standards:

120Mhz pentium
32Megs ram
24X cdrom
3com network card

I also want to setup dsl on the box ;)

[mdwatts]

I did a search in this forum (General) for '486 distro' and received a page full of hits.


One of them (http://www.linuxnewbie.org/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=009129)

And another (http://www.linuxnewbie.org/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=018184)

Google search results (http://www.google.com/linux?q=distro+for+a+486&hl=en&start=10&sa=N)

[alkalinelito]

...and Use Blackbox :D

[portablevcb]

I just recently set up a P75 laptop to run from a floppy and CD-ROM (disless workstation) using SuSE 7.2 (2.4.4 kernel). Since there was no HD on the laptop, I compiled the kernel on my other machine and then made a boot floppy and companion CD (not a simple enough task to describe here, look in the NHF stuff).

I have used a lot of flavors of linux, starting on my old 486 and RH 4. I liked Slack because I had to learn a lot (v7 and 8), RH and SuSE because they are easy to use and very compatible with most distributed binaries, did not like Drake because it changed too many things I had come to expect (where files were stored and not very compatible with RPM binaries).

Once you get the kernel compiled how you like it, just boot and go. Remember on a 486 it may take an hour (or more) to do a full kernel compile. I had heard somewhere that some distros do not put a 486 compatible kernel on their commercial CDs. If you compile your own and make the floppy this should not affect your choice.

If you want X, then be prepared for much slower activity. I would work with ICEWM since that is my favorite WM for streamlined operations (yes, BlackBox is probably smaller and faster, I just like the ICEWM UI better).

Good Luck

[Dun'kalis]

I'm trying to find a small distro that can run on a K6-2 300 with 64MB RAM. All I need it to do is run XMMS. I don't need(or want) large distros like Red Hat or Debian. This is for a very specific project, and I have Win95 installed on the drive(reformatted it today). It only has the Aptiva software(Its an Aptiva) and WinAmp. Any suggestions?

[EDIT]And, I don't have a mouse for it. I don't need one for this project.

[ 02 March 2002: Message edited by: Dun'kalis ]

[sarah31]

Peanut linux maybe? Tiny Linux?

[Dun'kalis]

Hey, thanks. Any way I can put TINY Linux on a CD? I don't have that many floppies sitting around...?

[sarah31]

No sorry I don't. Does peanut Linux require the same thing (ie huge pile of floppies?). That one you may be able to stuff on a disc.

(As for not wanting Debian for size you could just install the base, the development packages and x and then just apt get xmms. Mind you that would consume more space than is necessary for just xmms. I just thought I would point out that you can do a very stripped down version of it.)

[z0mbix]

slackware or debian. I take it you only want to run mp3's/CD's. Can you not install a console player instead of xmms and not bothing installing X. MP3Blaster is very good for console. There are also many console CD players.

[ScRapZ_1]

Thats highly unusual of you to say either Slackware or Debian cheeky :rolleyes: :D

Theres always the 'command prompt' way of playing it. play foobar_liveinconcert.mp3 is the easiest cleanest, and most non GUI way of doing it. I'm not sure of the names of others, but I'm sure if you do a search on Freshmeat (http://freshmeat.net) you'll find exactly what you're looking for (well, for the Mp3 player anyway.)

I remember a distro that I had once, called Basic Linux, or baslinux as the file name went by. Small enough to fit on two floppys, and was pretty much a full functioning linux distro, with no GUI obviously. Combine that with a prettied up console Mp3 player, and you got yourself a damn jukebox! www.ibiblio.org (http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/linux) has an extended linux section, including every distro concievable.

TTFN,
ScRapZ_1 :p

[ 02 March 2002: Message edited by: ScRapZ_1 ]

[evilcartman]

ZipSlack maybe? :eek:

[Jomboni]

I have this sneaking suspicion he's using this computer almost as an mp3 jukebox, and running over to type play mysong.mp3 every 5 minutes probably isn't the best way to do that!

[jscott]

Originally posted by Jomboni:
<STRONG>I have this sneaking suspicion he's using this computer almost as an mp3 jukebox, and running over to type play mysong.mp3 every 5 minutes probably isn't the best way to do that!</STRONG>

Just get Gronk! (http://www.jwz.org/gronk/) You don't need X and you can control the playlist through your browser.

[keating305]

Originally posted by jscott:
<STRONG>Just get Gronk! (http://www.jwz.org/gronk/) You don't need X and you can control the playlist through your browser.</STRONG>GREAT APP!!! Thanks for the info; I've been looking for something like this for a while, and this i exactly what I need!

:D :D :D

[vee-eye]

Why don't you just run a linux boot disk and install play on it if necessary? The program seems to be 4771 bytes large.

I'm not sure where you would find this floppy though.

[PimpHolic]

Originally posted by [_CaRtMaN_]:
<STRONG>ZipSlack maybe? :eek:</STRONG>

yeah, use zipslack
OR..try bigslack and X is included
both of these can run from a DOS partition http://www.slackware.com/zipslack/
has info on bigslack and zipslack

[jbstew32]

peanut is a shrunken slack i think.

Definitely go with some form of Slack or Debian...no doubt that will be the best for this application. The installs get as small as you want almost.

[jscott]

Originally posted by keating305:
<STRONG>GREAT APP!!! Thanks for the info; I've been looking for something like this for a while, and this i exactly what I need!</STRONG>

I wasn't even really looking for something like this, I just "found" it while read some of jwz's site (http://www.jwz.org)

[McBoon]

I read the NHF for the distros... they seem a bit outdated. Not by much though.

What's the scoop on Redhat 7.2? (currently what's running now on my CPU)

What about SuSE? I can't find an ISO for it.

Do most professional Editions cost $$$?

[sans-hubris]

http://www.linuxiso.org

[slacker_x]

I don't really know the details, but I'm pretty sure you can't download a full suse iso. I believe you can still get a fully functional system with an ftp install.

It has been so long since I have used anything but debian that I can't really comment.

:cool: debian :cool:


I would suggest searching the forums for distro suggestion or best distro. You will turn up a ton of info. Most of it isn't very useful. The best info I have heard is try them out yourself :D

[McBoon]

thanks for the link. Does anyone know how stable RH7.2 is? I've got that running now and I know people said 7.0 is very bad. Just wondering if 7.2 is much better, like 6-&gt;6.2 better.

[mcmanus69]

You actually can download all 6ish gigs of SuSE 7.3 Pro... Or at least it seems like it's all of it. It's a TON of data. I didn't think you can either but someone on this forum proved me wrong. :D

BTW, I think RH7.1 and 7.2 are pretty stable and good releases, IMO.

Edit: To clarify, I downloaded everything I could onto my HD and did an install via the "Hard Drive" option. Works great, tho I think I got a few corrupted source packages (oh well, I don't need them anywayz).

[ 05 March 2002: Message edited by: mcmanus69 ]

[tenshinshoden]

Hi,

For you guys, what linux distro to you think is the best, when I say the best I mean the most reliable and stable distro. I'm new to Linux and I really want to learn it. I've installed slackware on my gateway celeron 400 desktop and openlinux on my notebook.

Thanks

[z0mbix]

This really depends on what you're going to use it for...and also personal opinions :)

[yard21]

Originally posted by cheeky_zombie:
<STRONG>This really depends on what you're going to use it for...and also personal opinions :)</STRONG>

Hm, I really didn't want to do this, but I can't resist:

:cool: Debian :cool:

(No really, cheeky_zombie is right, it's a matter of personal needs)

[FyberOptyx]

Debian is regarded as one of the most stable but is not as easy as others and not as cutting edge.
Redhat is very cutting edge and as such can have a lot of bugs.
Mandrake is in the middle of the two and easy to use.
Only have experience with above, sorry.

[ 05 March 2002: Message edited by: FyberOptyx ]

[Icarus]

:rolleyes: Not again :rolleyes:

I use Red Hat 7.2 and after updating all the files with up2date it is nice and stable.
Without the updates it is very unstable...

[mdwatts]

:cool: Caldera OpenLinux Workstation 3.1.1 :cool:

or

:cool: Caldera OpenLinux Server 3.1.1 :cool:

or those other so-called distros.

At least you have half of it correct. Just get rid of Slackware and you'll be fine. ;)

Seriously just do your own research and find a distro that has what you want and supports your hardware.

[Usulsuspct]

I have a fair amount of experience with linux, mostly red hat and mdk. I currently run a samba file/print server from my main linux box and would like to move this to a box dedicated to just that file/print serving.

That will let me do my testing and playing on my main linux box so I dont have to worry about breaking it.

Now what distro would you reccomend for a fileserver? I was hoping to try somehting other than MDK or RH. It doesnt need to have allot of GUI stuff as it will run CLI for the most part and fluxbox when it is ever in X.

What distro do you guys reccomend? Slackware, Debian?

[Frith]

:cool: FreeBSD :cool:

[PimpHolic]

:cool:slackware :cool:
you can install as much as you like (or little) and since your already familiar with linux its better than freebsd :)

[PimpHolic]

:cool:slackware :cool:
you can install as much as you like (or little) and since your already familiar with linux its better than freebsd :)

[z0mbix]

or debian...

[EvilFly]

or both slackware and debian... :)

[--C4--]

Another vote for
:cool: Slackware :cool:

You want a distro that's not full of garbage, won't take up that much disk space with needless buggery, and runs with minimal overhead. My vote is for Slack, but I'm a Slack whore so... take it for what you will.

[Usulsuspct]

I was afraid of this...so many distro's so many followers.

I am thinking that I might try debian, but who knows slackware might get tried as well?

Thanks for the input...freeBSD might be over my head?

[FyberOptyx]

I have been given a 486dx2-66 which has 24M ram and 120M hd. I want to use this as a firewall/router. I have only experience with Red Hat and Mandrake and hace tried to install a basic system. Red Hat needs at least 250M hd and Mandrake (according to the docs) needs at least 32M of ram.
I have had a little scout round but not found the info I need.
I have had a look at Slack, which can be installed on much less spec than mine but I have always thought of slack as being a couple of years behind the rest. Am I wrong?
I would preferably like at least 2.4 kernel so as to use the iptables rather than the chains.
I know there are some people here who are probably using a 486 for similar and would like to gain from their experience.
I do have a spare(ish) 6 gig drive but it would be a waste just for what I need.
Many thanks for suggestions.

ps.
Is it me, but when I try a search on here, it takes forever and then returns no results. Even for simple things that should be found?

[lm72]

Peanut Linux is an nice distro.
http://www.ibiblio.org/peanut/

Debian is an other option
http://www.debian.org

Search wise get same thing it take ages for search.


Regards,

Alex :)

[ 17 March 2002: Message edited by: lm72 ]

[Dagda]

If you are planning on using it just as a firewall/router then you can use floppyfw (http://www.zelow.no/floppyfw/), lrp (http://linuxrouter.org/), Smoothwall (http://www.smoothwall.org/community/home/), MandrakeSecurity (http://www.mandrakesoft.com/products/snf) there are lots more just do a search at Google Linux (http://www.google.com/linux)

[FyberOptyx]

Thanks for quick reply.
I used to use Debian a couple of years back and thought it needed a higher spec machine.
Just checked and it will do just nicely, thanks.

[FyberOptyx]

Just checked a few of above mentioned:

Mandrake:
Required configuration:
Pentium Processor or compatible.
CD ROM drive.
250 MB disk space (minimum).
At least 32 MB of RAM (64 MB recommended).
VESA 2.0 compliant graphics card.
Ethernet Network Card.
Internet connection (Modem, Cable, ISDN, ADSL,...)
A Web Browser.

Looks nice but out of the question.

I forgot about smoothwall, thanks.
I think I may look at it even though it still uses the old 2.2 kernel

:)

[worldtouch]

distrowatch.com

[ph34r]

Slack or Debian can do it... heck, I have Slack 8 running on a 486sx33 laptop with 12mb of ram... and several P75s at work with 8mb each...installing can be a bit of a *****, but they run and work.

[FoBoT]

that box is begging for www.freesco.org (http://www.freesco.org)

[X4v13r]

do linux from scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org

[Alex Cavnar, aka alc6379]

I dunno... Linux from scratch would take forever to compile on that spec machine, and besides, you already have to have a distro on that machine to get Linux from scratch to install.

Sorcerer Linux, on the other hand, is like LFS, but there is an installer for it...

[joelmon]

In the future, when I am ready, and that's quite a while from now, I would like to turn my linux box into a web server. (or I can buy another box)

Anyway, I am curious which distro you feel is best in terms of stability, power, or any other benefit you might know of/want to share.

My choices I am considering are:

Red Hat
Debian
Suse (installed now)
Caldera

I want to learn linux badly and I am studying it (just starting seriously) and I realize knowing one will help with the other, however, over the next year I want to really become a pro and eventually certified as system admin so I can host clients without fear of f'ing up. Is there a flavor I should favor in my time of study and one day, depend/rely on to host customers without fail?

Thanks for your time, I hope I wasn't too vague :/

[jcrowe]

I would stick with debian. It has the easiest software updating available (apt-get). Also, it won't install a lot of cruft that you don't really need. If you can install debian (it's really pretty easy) you won't have any problems with the other distros.

You might also concider some of the other *nix systems. I haven't ever tried them, but I hear they are stable and secure.

jcrowe

[joelmon]

Debian. I have a cd with it
2.1 Might be outdated
I can consider getting a newer version

Thanks for the tip, Yeah, I just want to compile php/apache/mysql and all that jazz

No mp3's or home use.

[Ryeker]

Time and time again...

Use the distro YOU know how to use the best. Linux is Linux. No matter which distro you use. Each has their own little way of doing things. An experienced RH administrator can secure a RH box tighter than some casual Debian/Slack'er. It's not the distribution that's the problem. It's the administration of it. YOU are the most important part of security, NOT the distro.

If you've been using RH the longest, use it.

[Legg83]

I'm trying to get slackware installed onto an old laptop with 4MBs of memory.

Slackwares default install won't work, i know, so I've tried smalllinux, mulinux, toms something, none seem to work.

any suggestions?

[ph34r]

You need to read the 4mb laptop howto.

Basically, you need to use tomsrbt and create a small (15-20mb) ext2 partition to put the contents of the boot, color.gz, network, and pcmcia images in. Make a small (16mb) swap partition while you are at it. Then boot with the boot disk, and at the lilo prompt, specify "ramdisk root=/dev/hda1" or whatever partition you made that contains the contents of the floppy images.

See my post in "How I did it" re: 486 torture.

BTW - I have Slack 8 on my 486/4mb laptop now (and a nice 8mb ram upgrade, but the install process is the same with 12mb anyway...)

[jcrowe]

Originally posted by Ryeker:
<STRONG>Time and time again...

Use the distro YOU know how to use the best. Linux is Linux. No matter which distro you use. Each has their own little way of doing things. An experienced RH administrator can secure a RH box tighter than some casual Debian/Slack'er. It's not the distribution that's the problem. It's the administration of it. YOU are the most important part of security, NOT the distro.

If you've been using RH the longest, use it.</STRONG>

This is 100% percent correct. joelmon said that he is trying to learn linux, not that he he been a linux admin for the last five years. :D You said that:
Each has their own little way of doing things.
This is exactly why I suggested Debian. It is the only distro (of the ones I have tried) that makes software updates/additions simple, but rock-solid in stability. Redhat is a perfectly valid linux distro for a server. It can get pretty nasty when changing packages around, or updateing them. If I was going to use Redhat on a server I would compile all my major apps from source. And if I wantes to compile all my apps from source I would use Slackware. ;)

Thanks,
jcrowe

[mdwatts]

http://www.tzi.de/~pharao90/ttylinux/ was listed on the freshmeat.net homepage today.

[joelmon]

I am just getting started learning Suse. I know it's more popular in europe than the Us so I am not sure how many here would support using that.

Debian I can consider installing and giving that a shot as well.

SO basically, the idea is if I am (one day) able to pass the lpi certification test and become a competant admin, one distro or another, I would feel comfortable working my way around it if in case I ever had to switch distros or what not. I just want to cover my bases. Ask as many dumb q's as possible. Thanks

[Goofy[HSK]]

i have an old 486dx4/100 with 1meg video and 16meg ram.

i want to experiment with linux on it

i have 170 + 210 hard drives

which distribution would run

[z0mbix]

Slackware or Debian

[Spoticus]

Redhat 6.2 with the latest 2.2.x kernel would run pretty well on that. I have a simliar machine that I run it on. Don't expect much, if anything out of a gui though.

[jcrowe]

Originally posted by joelmon:
<STRONG>SO basically, the idea is if I am (one day) able to pass the lpi certification test and become a competant admin, one distro or another, I would feel comfortable working my way around it if in case I ever had to switch distros or what not. </STRONG>

Yep, as stated before. Linux is Linux. The main differance between the distros is the package managment(or lack of) and the installer. Other than that they're pretty much the same.

jcrowe

[NyteMask]

I have an old laptop P120/16m/1gig hd
I dont want to run X, I have a good machine running Redhat 7.1 for that. Im just looking for a distrib that will run fine on those specs. I have seen some that recommend Slackware. Is there a specific ver or will the latest work fine??

Thanks :cool:

[TC]

Debian or you could try FreeBSD also

:cool:

[z0mbix]

the latest, slackware 8.0 will run fine on it

[scanez]

Debian will also run fine on it ;)

[mcmanus69]

Heh, I have an old laptop with similar specs. 133MHz/16MB Mem/1 gig HD...

Slackware works great on it. But I needed X so I ended up putting RH6.2 on it. Works great. It's a good little terminal for doing coding away from home and telnet'ing into my main box to reboot it when my main box locks ;)

[jglen490]

Just take your RH 7.1 CDs, do a custom install, and don't put X on it. No need for another distro just because it's another machine :) !!

[jglen490]

Try Peanut Linux (http://www.ibiblio.org/peanut/).

[thescribe7]

I had a p5-75 with 500mg hdd. I used slackware. My friend loaded it via an internet connection and linux boot disk and lynx. I was very nice for a small footprint with all the power of linux. Left room to spare to load a few apps. JMHO :rolleyes:

[lilrabbit129]

I loaded Drake 8.1 on a similar laptop (Compaq Armada P120, 24MB RAM, 2GB HD), i'm currently running blackbox, IceVM and even occasionally KDE.

if you don't want X just do custom w/o X.

[jbstew32]

Debian. Its best to use the CD for the base install and use apt to install just what you need.

[NyteMask]

It's not That I dont want X on my laptop, I am just sure it would choke it do death and the performance would be aggrivating. I have tried to get 7.1 on there before and I cant get through the install in text mode. How is X running on the laptop's like mine you guy's were talking about?

[jglen490]

If you want X on this laptop, then you will need more RAM. 16MB just won't cut it. You will need at least 32MB and use a light window manager (i.e., window maker, blackbox, fluxbox). Even then it will be a chore.

I have an IBM TP365XD (P120/72MB/1.3GB) and Mandrake 8.0 loaded. The install complained that there wasn't enough memory to do the install, then I said "O.K.", and it went ahead with the install anyway. I also can run KDE, but usually end up in XFCE (a lighter weight desktop/GUI than KDE).

It takes patience and a little bit of hardware help, but these lightweight lappys can run any Linux distro and can run X. You won't win any speed races, but you can run Linux and can do all the things that a stronger lappy can do.

[forand]

Hello all I am new to linux but so far I am enjoying the learning curve. I just installed MD 8.2 on my desktop sys and have been enjoying learning how to secure and tune the system now I want to try something a little harder: I have an old Pentium Pro 190Mhz and was hoping to start using that as a firewall/webserver(very low traffic). So I was wondering what distro ppl suggest for this purpose. Thanks!

[ntt.]

For a firewall / router you could try Smoothwall, but I think Slackware would be a good choice. Just be prepared for that learning curve to get steeper!

[forand]

how steep of a learning curve are we talking about with a newbie to linux using Mandrake 8.2 on desktop and learning how to setup Slackware for a firewall/router/webserver? thanks!

[z0mbix]

depends on you IQ really ;). Slackware's not hard though, just you need to do things yourself, but it tells you what to do. Go to slackware.com for all the answers you'll ever need.

[kyou]

I started with SuSE 7.2 and after three months, I wanted something different, so I got Slackware 8.0. The difference in difficulty is immeasurable, but it was so much more fun. I've never had more fun breaking my OS. :D It's really *not* that hard, just that you need to think about what you're doing, rather than the basic RPM-based distros that just do it for you, anyway. Slackware is probably my favorite distro, even though I'm using Mandrake 8.2 right now. I also adore .tgz's. I find them to be much better than .deb's and .rpm's, even though the package management isn't as good. If there was a *good* apt-get for Slackware, I'd be sexing it up. But you don't really need one, just go to www.linuxpackages.net. (http://www.linuxpackages.net.) And I hate urpmi. It's a ***** to get things to work with it, plus it has the Mandrake rpms, which seem to be fatally flawed, like every other distro's rpms, for me, at least.

Basically, Slackware is what Linux should be. :) If you're not afraid to play around or actually read manuals, you'll have no problems at all.

[forand]

Cool Thanks! now all I need is a case to put this damn mb in and I am good to go!
Brian

[ascii]

I have found a VERY old computer, I think it must be a 286 - it has an 8hz CPU. I was looking to try and find a linux or other free unix distro to install on it. Seeing as it doesn't have a CD drive I need one that will fit on several floppies. Can anyone suggest a distrobution that will fit on a few floppies and doesn't run on a DOS partition?

Thanks.

[raab]

Try Basic Linux (http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/baslinux/). You need a DOS partition to set it up to run off floppies but after that you can run it by itself, just boot from the floppy.

[Icarus]

Alan Cox has been working on a little beast of a Linux distro for such a thing. http://elks.sourceforge.net/

[ascii]

Cheers guys.

[Shadoglare]

Will Linux even run on a 286? Like even the basic shell of an OS?

[2damncommon]

For a really old machine you may want Minix. http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/minix.html

[joeyftesmer]

Alright folks....*puts on riot gear*

I don't want some a flame war, I want straight honest and POLITE answers.

I want a distro that will teach me alot about Linux, I want something challenging that uses alot of command line interfacing. I wanna be fustrated about trying to get something to work. Something that will be stable, and fast.

[sarah31]

Debian, Libranet, and Slackware are good choices if you want to learn but not from scratch. LFS and Gentoo may teach you more though.

Newbie distros: Mandrake, Suse, Libranet (to some extent) will be relatively good transition distros. Apparently Suse being the best of the lot(from what i have read here).

My personal choices are Debian and Libranet. Someday I may do the Gentoo and LFS thing though.

[mcmanus69]

Gentoo, baby! :D

Seriously, tho, it's great, it's fun, I've learned a lot (still learning...), and it simply rocks! I like it even more than Slackware! Slackware is good too, if Gentoo doesn't float your boat, altho I think most ppl think Debian is better. I personally don't like it much because I can't seem to get it to work on this box (but then again it has major hardware issues, so I can't really blame Debian)

Sarah, you've GOT to try Gentoo... you'll love it :)

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by joeyftesmer:
<STRONG>Alright folks....*puts on riot gear*

I don't want some a flame war, I want straight honest and POLITE answers.

I want a distro that will teach me alot about Linux, I want something challenging that uses alot of command line interfacing. I wanna be fustrated about trying to get something to work. Something that will be stable, and fast.</STRONG>

Nah. We love this question. It doesn't get asked often enough in my opinion. Should be one an hour instead of once a day. ;)

If you really want to get the scoop, then just try searching and reading of some of the many other threads in the General forum on the same subject.

All members will USUALLY do is tell you that their distro is the best. Why not just do the research yourself for whatever hardware and requirements you may have and then decide for yourself?

Do you have a favorite color I should get for my new car or any options that would meet my requirements? ;)

[zhiyung]

i'll install linux next month
any new linux(i mean new version) will be out in btween april and may?

[z0mbix]

Originally posted by zhiyung:
<STRONG>i'll install linux next month
any new linux(i mean new version) will be out in btween april and may?</STRONG>

Go to distrowatch.com for up to date details of distros, new distros's and what packages they come with :)

[danrees]

WattsMD: Of course people will say their distro is the best - they wouldn't use it otherwise ;)

If you want to learn a lot about Linux, then the only way to really go is with Linux from Scratch, Gentoo or Slackware. These will all require compiling things from source at some stage. Debian will also teach you about Linux, but to a lesser extent, because the installation process is becoming more streamlined. Also, apt-get takes care of a lot of things that you would have to worry about with other distros.

Now that I use Debian I will never ever go back to an RPM based system. They are just too cumbersome and difficult to maintain if you like to keep up to date with software. With Debian, assuming I don't feck up my system completely, I will never have to install a new version - I can just keep up to date by using apt-get.

However, if you must use RPM, SuSE is the best in my opinion, simply because its local documentation is superb, and the whole system feels integrated and tightly put together.

Just my opinion. ;)

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by danrees:
<STRONG>WattsMD: Of course people will say their distro is the best - they wouldn't use it otherwise ;)

</STRONG>

I know they will.

The point is, I may have Mandrake 8.2 working perfectly on MY hardware and it fits my needs. Others that try Mandrake might have nothing but problems installing with THEIR hardware. You have to take the time and research which is the best distro for your particular hardware and has the features/applications you require.

Everytime we have this same question, all we are really saying is

Pick mine... Pick mine...

[danrees]

WattsMD: You're right of course. Different distros have different strengths.

The definitive answer to the question "which distro should I use?" is "the one you like best".

You can download every major distro from the internet and you can also buy cheap CDs for about *2/$3 from places like linuxemporium.co.uk. The best thing to do is just try a three or four different distros (if you have the time, give each a couple of weeks), and then settle on the one you prefer.

[mdwatts]

Originally posted by danrees:
<STRONG>
You can download every major distro from the internet and you can also buy cheap CDs for about *2/$3 from places like linuxemporium.co.uk. The best thing to do is just try a three or four different distros (if you have the time, give each a couple of weeks), and then settle on the one you prefer.</STRONG>

That would be the best advise and also what I would suggest.

You certainly do have choices with Linux and as danrees suggests, give a few of them a try and settle on the distro you feel works best for you and supports all or most of your hardware.

Go to the major distros websites, read the docs and the HCL's and make a decision if that particular distro is worth trying.

[Desire]

Other places where you can get cheap cd's are www.cheapbytes.com (http://www.cheapbytes.com) and www.linuxcentral.com (http://www.linuxcentral.com)
I've found shipping with these two places extremely fast.

[Desire]

Other places where you can get cheap cd's are www.cheapbytes.com (http://www.cheapbytes.com) and www.linuxcentral.com (http://www.linuxcentral.com)
I've found shipping with these two places extremely fast.

[carlywarly]

SuSE 8.0 is out in about 2-3 weeks. Nice shiny new KDE 3.0 is included .... yummy.

[wjat]

Gentoo Linux! :D

[jbstew32]

ok if you read his post, you will notice he wants to do it w/o a crutch. Based on that i advise you to NOT try Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSE, etc...

Instead I would advise you going with Slackware. While Debian would give you a much bigger headache, Slackware is a nice system to get you to learn command line stuff. After you use slackware a bit and get used to it, then you may try Debian, but debian as a 1st distro...ouch.

[UtterNewbie]

First off, is distro short for distributer? Just curious, dont really care....anyhow to my question.
I had some troubles with Mandrake causing me to reinstall and I'm considering switching to the newest Redhat.....should I?
By the way, some background info, i'm extremely newbish and all I can do is install basically. Which is easy to learn with; Mandrake or Redhat? Thanks

[scanez]

Distro refers to distribution- like when asking "which distro" we mean "which distribution". Anyway, if you want to try RedHat, go for it. No one can say what your experience with it will be but you'll never know until you try. Which is easier? Decide for yourself ;)

[nopri]

Just treat distro like friend chicken. Distro shorts for distribution.

Linux cannot work with one kernel only. Programs are needed. Strictly say that we can eat the fresh chicken. It has to be added with spices, then has to be fried so can be eaten as fried chicken. But there are so many fried chicken there, Kentucky Fried Chicken, California Fried chicken, etc. Choose one, if you don't satisfy, create it yourself.

[bdl]

I don't know about you, but I'd never eat a chicken I considered my friend. :)

[UtterNewbie]

nopri....i've had an epiphany!
Also, any other suggestions will help..but RedHat sounds like an interesting *spice*, maybe I will give it a *bite*...whew, i crack myself i tell ya !

[UtterNewbie]

question: how much space should i leave for / and how much for swap? I'm not even sure what i need or what swap is..........but yea, when i installed mandrake last time i needed to "mount" or swap and leave space for / and i dont know, i just winged it and left a lot of space for / and some for swap. Hopefully you guys will know what i'm blabbing about

[bdl]

If you want to make just one linux partition, give it at least 3gb for a decent installation with X and most applications you'll want to run. You can create a much smaller root partition if you divide the filesystems up as I've shown below. Swap space is just like virtual memory under Windows: it uses a place on the HDD to swap out pages of memory when the physical RAM fills up. The more RAM you have, the less critical swap becomes, but you should have at least 128MB, I always use 500MB because I have plenty of room on my drives.


Everyone has their own partitioning scheme, the example below has always worked well for me. based on a 20gb HDD, the entire drive will be a linux installation.

/dev/hda1: '/' (root): 500mb
/dev/had5: swap : 500mb
/dev/hda6: /var : 1gb
/dev/hda7: /home : 10gb
/dev/hda8: /usr : remainder of drive

[Growler]

I've just got to chime in here and express my complete happiness with mandrake8.2 - not the geekiest of distros, but everything worked really great right out of the box. no screwy sound problems like I had with Redhat, and no messed up library paths.

I still use RH on my ancient server (drake kept barfing when I installed it on that) and I think it's great for that. but I'd go with drake on the desktop anyday.

[Devil]

HI. I am looking to set up a small home server.
It will only run apache and ssh in the beginnin.
I havent decided on what distro to use but I have narrowed it down to:
debian (for atp get)
slackware (stability)
red hat (heard it is a good server distro)

Any suggestions?
thanks...

[z0mbix]

I personally use debian on my servers as I like the way apt can easily keep me up to date. I also wouldn't say that it's any less stable than Slackware if you stick with the stable distro.

[Guzz]

May I suggest Gentoo, www.gentoo.org. (http://www.gentoo.org.)

[Devil]

ok thanks.. I was kinda thinking debian to.
I am currently trying gentoo on a laptop and I like it wery much.. I am probably going to make it my desktop distro soon.

still open for suggestions tough.

[Devil]

I just remeberd that I have another question..
If I choose debian, should I get the stable potato, or the testing version woody?

thanks...

[drwebpat]

Originally posted by Devil:
<STRONG>I just remeberd that I have another question..
If I choose debian, should I get the stable potato, or the testing version woody?

thanks...</STRONG>

Woody is supposed to be released soon.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2002/debian-devel-announce-200204/msg00004.html

[z0mbix]

Originally posted by Devil:
<STRONG>I just remeberd that I have another question..
If I choose debian, should I get the stable potato, or the testing version woody?

thanks...</STRONG>

as drwebpat points out Woody is supposed to become stable 01May02. I use woody on my server as it's still very very stable and my server isn't exactly mission critical! Potato is rock solid if a little out of date. I'd go with woody if it's not mission critical as it'll be stable soon. It also save upgrading from potato to woody, even though that's very simple with Debian/apt. :)

[Shadoglare]

Anybody know of any distributions that will still work on a floppy-based 486/25 with 4MB Ram?
I did have an older version of Debian that worked pretty good, but like an idiot I downloaded a newer version, and the newer version doesn't have the option to work around the low memory like the older one did.
I've tried a few of the "tiny" distros, but none have had PCMCIA support, which I need, and most don't have PPP support or anything either.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated :)

[mdwatts]

http://old.lwn.net/Distributions/ is the best resource I know of that covers just about every distro out there including floppy based etc.

[Shadoglare]

Actually an idea just struck me, and I checked Debian's FTP site - and lo and behold, they have an "archives" section.
I looked through them and apparantly Deb support ed 4MB/Floppy machines up through v2.0. I may have found my salvation after all :D

[Loki3]

I decided to go with Red Hat 7.3 because the book I bought was more Red Hat centered and it seemed more user-friendly. After reading some posts I get the feeling that not many people like it. I was hopeing it would be user-friendly and get me started but wouldn't be a dog as I learn more. You know as I kind of grow into it. Do you veterans out there think I made a good choice? I know distros are mostly personal preference, but just wondering...

_Loki

[jdctx]

I think Red Hat was a good choice because it's well supported. Linux distro for the most part can be broken into into 4 categories.

In order by most supported in way of the number of distros in each class are

Red Hat based or rpm package managed examples are SuSE and Mandrake along with of course Red Hat it's self.

Debian based or deb package managed
examples are Libranet and Xandros formally Corel Linux.

Slackware based which uses tgz packages.
examples are ZipSpeak and BasicLinux

Source based these are distro's in which you compile some or all of the program's yourself.
examples are Gentoo and Sorcerer

If you want to expand you knowledge in Linux distribution. I'd start off with Red Hat as you have done. Once you've seemed to master that move to either Debian or Slackware and then finally a Source based distro.

[ 21 June 2002: Message edited by: jdctx ]

[z0mbix]

Yeah, RedHat's a good choice to start with as it's very user friendly and many other distro's are based on RedHat. And most of what you learn with RH can be taken to any other distro if and when you decide to move to debian...*cough*...I mean any other distro ;)

[sarah31]

Well honestly I have heard good and bad about it. I don't think you have made any errors if the distro fits your information sources. I would proceed on the road you have chosen.

Time alone will determin whether your decision was a good or a bad one.

[fancypiper]

Get Red Carpet (http://www.ximian.com/products/ximian_red_carpet/) for it as it has much better dependency resolution.

However, it's not as good as Gentoo's Portage! :D

When you get a handle on Linux in RedHat, you might want to check out the Gentoo distro (a lfs system).

[njcajun]

I actually go so far as to recommend Redhat for newbies, as noted in an article on my site (http://www.linuxlaboratory.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=9).

Another thing mentioned there is that when you pick a distro, STICK TO IT. At least for as long as it takes to get some confidence with linux in general and how it sorta works and stuff.

I recommend it partially because people who write reviews and documentation on linux-related technologies will quite often preface their documents with something like 'this works on Redhat', or 'this procedure was tested on Redhat' or something like that.

Another reason is that there's so damn much documentation on Redhat stuff, and so many people use it that the problems you do have will likely be fixed faster than if you were using, say, Beehive linux or something (not that beehive is bad - it's cool, but...)

Anyway, good luck
:)

[linux wannabe]

I have not yet purchased linux, so technically I am not a newbie, however I do want to begin running linux as soon as possible. I first need to know what distrobution of linux I should use. Secondly, I am going to be building a new computer soon, and I need to know what kind of hardware to get. If anyone could just steer me in the right direction it would be greatly appreciated.

[ThantiKTiger]

I have not yet ventured that deeply into Linux...but, from my experiences for a newbie...heres what I recommend.

Mandrake Linux 8.2 (You can download it...better than having to pay for it)
It has ease of installation, ease of use, and also will help the transition from Windows to Linux...if you really get into learning the OS, read, read, read, read...

NVida GEForce 2/3/4 NVida are the only ones I've seen who actually care for linux. They have drivers of their own which you must install afterwards to enhance usability of your card, but well worth it.

Any generic SoundBlaster, etc will do for sound...

Personally, for a processor...I choose the AMD Athlons...they have a better math co-processor and outperform Pentium machines. Although I have no experience w/ compatability on this architecture, I shall have my machine built in a couple weeks (need the $$ first... ;))

Also, what kind of internet connection do you have currently? Cable?...DSL?...if so make sure to grab an ethernet card (doesn't matter what kind...generic is cheapest and linux more than likely suports it.)

Other than that, I have no idea on CD Burners, etc.

If you can't burn the 3 Mandrake 8.2 CDs, I can burn some copies for you...just make sure you'll keep 'em safe, tell all your buddies how great linux is, and use them to infect others with the greatest OS of all... :D

[linux wannabe]

thanks a lot for all the info. i feel like such a moron for keeping windows as long as i have. ive been researching linux for a while, and i couldn't decide between mandrake 8.2 or redhat 7.3. ill be sure and get mandrake now. right now i have an ati radeon 7000 gfx card that i was hoping to transfer to the new comp. (i am the cheapest person in the world) how much do you think i could get a decent geforce 3 for? ive been scoping out the new geforce 4 Ti 42-4600s, but unfortunately i don't have 400 bucks to spare right now. i have a cable connection, but i am going to keep my old comp running whenever i get the new one. i will need a cable connection for both. is there anyway to splice the cable line without negotiating the performance of it? or will i have to set up a network between the two comps? some of these questions are most likely extremely dumb, but ive got to start somewhere. thanks for the help.

[ThantiKTiger]

I'm not sure about compatability for the radeon...oh, btw...you can go to pricewatch.com

click on video cards, and look at the price of a GEForce 4 MX 440...I think you'll like.
(hehe, $65.) Good performance too =)

a good idea for the cable connection is to buy a cheap hub, 2 network cards, and some cable. 2 ethernet cards in whatever machine hosting the cable connection...1 in the one that needs the extra connection...read up on networking a little bit and you should get the idea. If you have 98/ME/XP you should be able to do a quick internet connection sharing deal and then set the linux box to use DHCP for your ethernet card...(automatically assign an IP address)

thats the solution for the cable connection...sorry if its confusing. If your ever in the process of setting it up, email TKTiger@comcast.net and I'll look up some docs that I followed to get it all working.

REMEMBER...if you can, a GEForce4 MX 440 can be $65 if you choose. With some dang good performance.

[ThantiKTiger]

I feel like being a little bit extra-helpful today...heres a URL to the list of cheap GEForce 4 vendors...

http://www.pricewatch.com/1/37/4591-1.htm

[ThantiKTiger]

lol, and if this just didn't just work out...
http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=linux_nforce_1.0-0236

They have a specific RPM built for a computer w/ an Athlon Processor, and a GEForce card. and notice how they boast compatability w/ Mandrake 8.2 =)...

Compatability is good.

Also, sorry if I'm boasting about Mandrake...I'm just looking at compatability issues and this page I just saw amazed me. I'm actually building a system very soon as well and this is all I'm putting in my system.

AMD Athlon Processor (Dunno which yet.)
Nvidia GEForce 4 MX 440
40gig Maxtor Harddrive (p.s. DONT GET WESTERN DIGITALS!)
Logitech Optical Mouse (gotta do optical w/o going microsoft.)
Generic CD Burner
Generic Soundcard
Generic Keyboard

Basically all I care about though is graphics, and processing power. Pretty much all that I need.

[linux wannabe]

i was reviewing the specs for the comp i hope to get within the next month. the motherboard has two 32bit PCI slots. I have always worked with AGP gfx cards. are these slots for PCI cards? it also includes 128bit onboard AGP accelerator, but im not completely sure if it would be upgradable. its a palomino 1.4GHz with 256DDR and a 40gig IDE UDMA hd. I have never heard of UDMA hd's, but its pretty cheap. do you think that it would work out ok? thanks again.

[Icarus]

Time for a second opinion :D

When getting new motherboards I find it is a lot less hastle if you get a board that has as little onboard things as possible. I just got a Soyo K7V Dragon Plus! with on board audio and LAN, I prefer to use my Sound Blaster Live! for the audio so I had to disable that. And the Soyo's have a problem with the IRQ's...they like to share them with all the devices, so I had to disable the LAN to fix a problem with the system locking while playing games.

In other words, get a bare motherboard, seperate components (try to leave PCI slots 1 & 2 open, these are normally shared with the AGP slot and will complain most of the time) and do a lot of research on the hardware you are getting.

Now for which Linux to use...Mandrake is good for starting to learn but most people get sick of it after a little bit and move to another one. I've been using Red Hat for the last year and have been happy with it. If you download it you still get very good minimal support from Red Hat and it is updated very often (not to mention they employ 6 of the top 10 kernel hackers ;))

Once you've dug into Linux and have a good feel for it, start trying other distros to see which one you personally like. Everyone has their own favorate.

[ 24 June 2002: Message edited by: mahdi ]

[ThantiKTiger]

I agree with the Soyo advice. My current computer has a Soyo 5ehm...compatable with almost all old and new architectures.

Has EDO/DRAM compatability
4 PCI and 2 ISA slots
Support for both AT and ATX power supplies
and an AGP 2x slot.
but thats an OLD motherboard.

I usually get a motherboard with NOTHING onboard except perhaps LAN, SOUND and thats it. I dont have much of an ear for sound quality so hey, it doesn't bother me.

And Mahdi is right...dont stay w/ just one linux distro. I'm using Mandrake right now because it has a reputation for supporting a lot of the new stuff, etc. Personally I plan to try out RedHat and Debian...after I learn what I need to know.

Mahdi, are there any performance differences between redhat + mandrake? One perhaps better at graphics processing than the other?

[dogn00dles]

Slackware has been the easiest distro, though I have only used RedHat besides. GUI's confuse the hell out of me, and manually configuring everything teaches you a lot, and really isn't that much of a trouble. Also, Slackware is supposed to be more customizable, though I haven't seen much to prove it.

[Icarus]

I don't think there is much performance differance, they are basicly the same except for the default GUI and maybe how they handle some directories. They should be using the same X11 drivers and video drivers. The only real differance is that Mandrake has a ton of nice little tools to configure everything, where in Red Hat these are not very plentyful and it is still better to edit configs by hand (which I enjoy ;))

[r1ccard0]

I use a athlon / abit kt7raid system.
Works fine. I would recommend any abit system ove the Soyo dragon's even though the soyo dragon is great. check out athlonmb.com.

Secondly, don;t bother getting the best grafix card, it isn;t really worth it! Plus xfree86 support is a little slow.

I would get WD only the 8mb buffer drives, but yes Maxtor Dx7xxx's are very good drives, make sure you get the liquid bearing drives.....

[Icarus]

Abits are raved about and I hear nothing but good things. ASUS also makes good boards that have only the usuall VIA problems :p
MSI (Micro-Star) Makes some good DDR boards that are 'certified' for use with Linux.

Look around, don't get the first thing you find and try doing a www.google.com (http://www.google.com) search on the board you decide on and read the postings people have about it.

I just got a GeForce 3 Ti 200 128MB video card for $130, check www.pricewatch.com (http://www.pricewatch.com) when looking to buy hardware online (always good to do some price shopping) and remember that add in the shipping costs! It might be cheaper to buy it locally ;)

[Estimated Prophet]

I'm looking for a distro to put on as a dual boot for a while, until I learn and of course save all my files. I've heard Lycoris mentioned but was wondering what peoples thoughts are on it, a frined has also d/l'd ELX (I think that's it) and want me to try that.

[Estimated Prophet]

OR maybe just try Debian... so many to choose from.

[kuber]

I think it looks lame. Try Debain or Libranet.

[sheek]

It's ultra newbie
even more newbie that mandrake ........
I didn't even think that was possible..

Get this if you want to have a nice "My Computer" icon and a "Start" button in linux

[X_console]

Never heard of that distro. If you're a newbie I recommend trying a major distribution. It's easier to get help that way. Pick one:

Mandrake
RedHat
Debian
Suse
Slackware
Caldera
Turbo Linux

[Acidkewl]

I was wondering what is everyone's favorite distrobution of linux and why. I am trying to deside what distro to install thanks.

[2damncommon]

See this list: http://old.lwn.net/Distributions/

Someone likes every one listed for a good reason.
Sorry.

Mandrake or SUSE for a "newbie".

Check here: http://www.cheapbytes.com/
if you don't want to spend a lot while trying.
Download editions on the cheap. Great to try.
Good Luck

[mdwatts]

Everyone has their own opinion as to which distro is the best.

What someone suggests may not even work on your hardware or will take quite a bit of time to get working.

Make a list of your hardware, start off going to the link that 2damncommon suggested and then check the HCL (hardware compatability list) of the distros you are considering.

Use Google for Linux (http://www.google.com/linux) to search for your hardware components and distro/version to see if others have reported problems so you know what to expect.

Mandrake or Redhat for beginners.

[1337_sux0r]

Ok I started with drake . Then went to FreeBsd and then to slack.
I have used slack for awhile and like it . I am feeling a need for a change and have been scoping Gentoo . Anyone have any thoughts?

[Dun'kalis]

If you go Gentoo, have a high-speed connection available. If not....

I just spent 2 weeks of my life downloading stuff!

Gentoo can be, at times, a sadistic beast. OK, most of the time, its so sadistic, it tolerates NO stupidity or mistakes. Of course, it teaches lots of Linux, but you probably know much Linux stuff already. I've heard masochists, along with power users, enjoy Gentoo.

Thats the sort of experience it is. Be warned! If you've worked with Linux for a while, you probably will breeze through install. Unless something...bad...happens...

Just a word of advice, from a true Linux Newbie! Yes, I've used Gentoo, Debian, Lycoris, and SuSE.
Consider yourself warned!

[1337_sux0r]

well I would like to think of myself as competent with linux.
I do have a kickin connection so I think I am going to go for it.Thanks for the reply

[stingray72]

Gentoo's not too hard, if you follow the installation instructions and apply them to your system. Then your install should go pretty smoothly. The good part is you can read the install instructions before you start and see if it's something you really want to do. It really isn't bad though. I've got Gentoo dual booting with RH7.3 of my Athlon 900 and it's fast!! I still can't seem to migrate away from my Red Hat installs no matter what other distro's I try.

Good Luck

[mcmanus69]

go for it! :)

Make sure you PRINT-OUT the x86 install doc and desktop configuration doc (at LEAST these two for now... the others you will eventually need to read as well, such as Portage Guide and use-vars and rc-scripts, etc). Also, make sure you understand your hardware, and filesystems and partition structure (and how to use fdisk)

One last thing: subscribe to at least the gentoo-announce mailing list, and if you ever have any problems (you will) hit up #gentoo on irc.openprojects.net

Good luck!

P.S. Add users to the group 'wheel' if you want them to be able to use 'su'

P.S. Add the "-m" (or was it -M ??) option for "adduser" when creating a new user to create their home directory properly (with permissions and ownership automagically set)

[1337_sux0r]

Thanks for the feed back guys it is appreciated. I am burning the iso as we speak.

[Dun'kalis]

Good luck with Gentoo! I only had problems since I either didn't format my drives properly, or my /etc/fstab was entered improperly. It kept telling my to fsck my ext3 drives...

[Graham Jones]

Hi All


im getting an aDSL connection shortly and want to set up my old system as a router.

I have a linux compatible PCI DSL modem and 3 network cards (for each machine I wish to share with) just wondering which distribution will be the best for me.

It needs to be as newbie friendly as possible or at least have good help files as I only used a linux machine for the first time a couple of months ago.

cheers guys (&gals)

Graham Jones

[Bokkenka]

ClarkConnect (www.clarkconnect.org)

It has a good installer, which sets nearly everything up. After that, it uses a browser-based administration. One word of caution... It will partition and format the drive the way it wants, erasing everything on it, so be sure it's a blank drive.

[FoBoT]

i also use clark connect with my cable
its great

[X_console]

I use this in case of emergencies: http://www.zelow.no/floppyfw/

Very handy, fits on a floppy and has support for pppoe if your ADSL provider uses that.

[Graham Jones]

Thanks alot people.

And OMG this download site is fast. D'ling at 8K on a 56kbps modem?! is that possible?

[Robert Simandl]

I have several Windows computers networked at home and would like to add a Linux PC to it.

I have several audio and video clips on all PC's and would like to be able to play any of them, from any of the PC's.

I've tried Mandrake 8.1 and Red Hat 7.2, and neither of them will show up in the "Network Neighborhood" or "My Network Places" screens on the Windows PC's. And the Linux box won't see any of the Windows PC's.

Is there a Linux distro that's more networkable with Windows PC's than any other?

Thanks...

[cabu1966]

You need to check into setting up samba. There is a Samba NHF (http://linuxnewbie.org/nhf/Networks/Samba.html) here.
Samba will work and is included in most, if not all, distros

[Pvt. Kernel]

I have Mandrake 8.2 installed and I can see my FAT32 partition on the same system just fine.

I know that if you want Windows to see your Linux box you'll have to have Samba installed on it. Then your Windows users will login to the Linux box as if it is a Windows domain.

I'm a n00b too, be gentle. :)

[Icarus]

Originally posted by Pvt. Kernel
I have Mandrake 8.2 installed and I can see my FAT32 partition on the same system just fine.

I know that if you want Windows to see your Linux box you'll have to have Samba installed on it. Then your Windows users will login to the Linux box as if it is a Windows domain.

I'm a n00b too, be gentle. :)
Very close...You don't need Samba to read from a drive on the same system, but for network shares you do.
read through some samba HOWTO's, I think you'll need to setup a samba server for other systems to see and access linux shares. I've done this once in the past and never understood how/why it worked (took me weeks of banging on it then suddenly it started working).

[teeitup]

http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=5297

parts 5 thru 8 should get you going.

Good Luck,

[cowanrl]

Probably the one thing that gives most new users problems using Samba is firewalls. They have a firewall set up and it blocks the ports Samba uses. If you have a firewall set up on your Linux machine, shut it off until you get Samba running unless you have a real security issue. On most home networks this doesn't present a problem. Once Samba is working, then start the firewall up and work the bugs out of it.

The NHF on this site for Samba is not very good. They used to have a pretty decent one but it must have been lost when they upgraded the site. The one that is there now has you disabling encrytpted passwords on the Windows machines. DO NOT FOLLOW THOSE INSTRUCTIONS!

Red Hat 7.2 comes with a version of Samba on the CDs. Though it's not the latest, it will get you up and running.
One of the best sources of information on using Samba is included with the SWAT utility. SWAT is a graphical tool that can be used to configure Samba. I recommend all new Samba users install SWAT when they install Samba and read through all the documentation that comes with it.

There are plenty of guys on this site that use Samba. You won't have any problems finding help here. If you do a search back through the Networking Linux forum, you'll find lots of posts on it. If you get stuck, someone here will be glad to help out.

[RadiationBoy]

hey ppl I'm just wondering if anyone knows of a fairly small distro so that it wouldn't take too long to download on 56k (I don't mind if its a couple hundered MB just not a cd or two like most distros)

Seems like most distros come with a bunch of extra software, that I hardly use anyway. So does anyone know of a distro with out so much extra stuff so that its smaller? thanks.

[fancypiper]

Check out all the small/floppy distros here (http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/) .

I have just switched to Gentoo (http://www.gentoo.org) , a build from scratch with portage for dependency resolution.:cool:

[2damncommon]

www.peanutlinux.org

[jrcow97]

I totally agree that a lot of distros come with software that one doesn't use most of the time. I haven't tried this one option yet cause I don't have enough time, but have you considered building your own linux distro from linux from scratch (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/) ? That would be a fun thing to do if you had some spare time and it would be perfectly trimmed to your needs so there wouldn't be worthless programs taking up space.

If that isn't a practical idea, then you should also think about what your going to use your distro for.

For example, if you wanted linux just for a firewall, try Devil Linux (http://www.devil-linux.org/)

I'm sure there are other distros out there that provide support for different users specific needs.

[baldguy]

don't forget zipslack! (http://www.slackware.com/zipslack/)

[beekpr]

I have been useing PeanutLinux for about a year and like it.
about 225 meg download

[RadiationBoy]

thanks for the suggestions...I might try zipslack or peanutLinux.

@ jrcow97: yeah I checked into linux from scratch...I might do that too haha. I'm a newbie so it seemed kinda hard, but I guess it would be a great way to learn!

[Saptech]

Be sure to check out VectorLinux (http://www.vectorlinux.org) , its a pretty nice & small and good for small hardware configurations.

[evulish]

Look for a distro that has FTP install. I'm pretty sure Debian and SuSE both have them. Both of them are excellent distros. They can be customized to fit just about any speed/size issues.

If you would like a full distro, I would recommend shelling out 5 bucks or so to a website that mails cds. I don't know any offhand but I know there are many other posts recommending some.

[jdctx]

Slackware base install is like 20 megs and Debian has a simliar setup that in which you can also install via diskettes.

[SUOrangeman]

www.distrowatch.com

-SUO

[Wallex]

I am new and all, but I've been reading around for a while, and I still wonder....
Just exactly what tells the distros apart from each other? The installation process? How do you install and upgrade software? They say not all programs can un under all distros, what's up with this? Is it that the distros use different Api's or something like that? There's Linux... Linux is the base, it's that console where you can go and do all kinds of stuff. I thought that the /dev/ was where all devices should go and where they all are configured (which should mean that once you change distro, there is no reason to 'redetect all hardware'), altough I might be wrong on this. Anyway.. we have a windows manager like Windows Maker, KDE, Gnome, these all provide the graphical end, that is, what the user sees, doesn't it? Then what's the distro? How the enviroment is managed? I guess it's that...
A good distro? I guess a good distro for the general user is one where you can install hardware and software pretty easily, one where you can just update your programs with a single command, one that is highly customizable (without having to go and play around in the code), now.. is this all a good distro for the average user or not?
A good distro for advanced users? I still don't grasp this idea... why would a distro be better for advanced users? What exactly it does to make it better for an advanced user? I heard it's a good distro if 'it doesn't hides things from the user', what's that supposed to mean? One where you don't just choose 'A or B', but one that has 'A or B or C or D' and an 'Options' button as well? Or a good distro is one that doesn't installs anything automatically, but you have to go and do everything yourself (installing hardware, compiling source code and so on)? I don't know people, but when I hear that a good distro is one that allows you learn Linux it sounds to me like a good distro is a distro that does less. Less is More, anyone?
To me a good distro would be:
-Easeness for hardware detection/installation
-Easeness for software installation and upgrading
-Gives you the most options for almost everything.
Of course.. there are other factors like 'speed' and 'stability', but isn't that a must for all distros?
Personally, all I really want is:
Ease of installation: For me it means avoiding dependency hells
Ease of upgrade: Not having to download all the source code again as if I never had the program
and High personalization without having to go into code.
The hardware configuration part is not really important, even if it takes me a month to configure everything, once it's done I don't have to go through it all again, right? Anyone agrees/disagrees?
EDIT: Oh I forgot, since I am a student, if anyone has any suggestions for a distro, it would be better if it's a free one, I never liked cracked/hacked software (that's why my current 'future distro' of choice is Debian)