Perpetual Linux Distro Thread - Page 5

Adelante · 23rd December 2002, 1:34 AM

Started with Mandrake 8.2 was on it for about 2months until i realised its great for beginners, but holds back on really learning about linux, and i found that its a bit bloated.

Moved to Freebsd (decided to jump into the deep end, and swim for myself) I loved freebsd, and the portage system, but i missed the Linux flexability. stay on freebsd for 6 months

Moved to Slackware, its a great distro once you know your stuff, but to me it seemed to precompiled for me, So i took myself and my dialup and Installed Gentoo Linux, (yes i installed it over a dialup, which is very easy infact) and i havent looked back since. this has to be the best linux distro, and as a bonus it includes its own portage system.

leperMessiah · 12th January 2003, 3:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mirror

I'm giving this one a download the moment, have you tested this on a machine with a geforce 4? Both redhat and mandrake have both had problems running X until the Nvidia drivers were installed. Does lycoris come with the nvidia drivers? I ask this because there's no official packages on the nvidia site, so if I have to build them myself then i'll have to download a whole extra cd to get the development stuff required :\

Sorry for late reply, yes Lycoris supports Geforce out of the box, though you need to install the drivers from nVidia website if you want GL to work though.

You'll need to get the devtools CD too, otherwise you can't do much.

Once you download it once you can just update the .iso with cvs.

mazzanet · 15th March 2003, 12:50 PM

me puts vote for redhat and lrp (linux router project)
me sends string "VC" to \\vend0
\\vend0 is my dodgy (vanilla/normal) coke vending machine running lrp

NeXuS · 30th March 2003, 9:05 PM

Well first linux distro for me, was RedHat 5.2. Then SuSe 4 or 5, then after corrupting too much with rpmfind and trying to upgrade everything, got told to have a look at debian. Fell in love with debian, and its packaging system (esp good with broadband). Just this weekend I had decided ill try out slackware. Downloaded v9.0 for a friend, so i thought what the hell, ill give it a shot. Going from debians KDE2.2 to Slackwares KDE3.1 has made it seem sooo much more user friendly. I think now i prefer Slackware atm, mainly because debian are always behind in what they have binary packages for, and slackware 9 has all the tools i like, and use.

So I would have to say Debian for long term server, etc. and Slackware kicks ass for the desktop use. Biggest problem i can forsee is upgrade time, its probably going to be easier to format and reinstall slackware, whereas debian its just an apt-get upgrade and it does it all for ya.

linuxvirg · 2nd April 2003, 6:09 PM

Another vote for debian here.

I started out with redhat 5.0 i think... dam that was ages ago. The thing that bugged me with redhat was the package management. If you wanted to install something, you would have to find and download its dependencies first. Which became a huge pain in the arse.

I tried a few other distros over the years suse, turbolinux, mandrake, slackware, then debian. And debian is where I've stayed. Once you get past the fact that you just ignore dselect , because its so bloody unintuitive, the install isnt that bad. Apt-get becomes your best friend and life is good.

One thing with debian is that the stable tree is a fair way behind as far as versions of software are concerned, the testing and unstable branches do make up for this in some way but its still behind most other distributions. Not all programs cater to debian, so finding a .deb for a particular program may not be too easy, or you might have to make your own.

Libranet might address most of these issues.

I've heard alot of good things about Gentoo and Slackware recently, so I might have to give them a try.

Cheers,
Virg.

Deanodriver · 5th April 2003, 4:41 AM

I'll recommend Mandrake...

Sure, it's the n00b's distro, but sometimes, some of us just like not having to screw around when doing something simple.

I started on Redhat 6.x (didn't get a proper install working), and my first usable install (that had X, etc), was Mandrake 7.2. Now, I have tried a bit of Slackware and Debian, and I don't mind them, but for everyday desktop use, I prefer the simplicity of Mandrake.

I'll put it this way, Mandrake 9.1 was the distro that I deleted my Windows partition for.

Eman · 4th May 2003, 10:36 PM

A vote here for Gentoo.

Why? Well,
Of course, it doesn't have much of an install (you have an installation guide and a tarball) and you have to do a lot of dirty work yourself, like writing /etc files and configs for init scripts, although Gentoo trys to make it as easy as possible for you without doing it itself.

And you have to compile nearly everything. KDE can take days. And I've never managed to compile a working kernel on the first try. Why oh why does my kernel try to kill init? It knows it's bad.

And then Gnome stole my KDE desktop and I had to re-install,
and then Mozilla would freeze for minutes on any webpage, and I had to re-install,
and then Konqurer forgot it could read HTML and KDE would crash if I tried to change file associations, and I had to re-install (by this time, I had wised up and was using stage 3 tarballs & binary packages from previous builds),
and then my ISP's mail server stopped liking my hostname no matter what, and I had to re-install, and then Kate would hard-lock X but I only had to re-install KDE,
and now only root can run KDE even though adding a new user works fine on another Gentoo box I have (I had learned well by the time I installed it on my girfriend's PC, but somehow it did a silent strike on her WinME system, even though both systems were working fine with each other), but I'm working on it.

So, you may be wondering, why in $DIETY's name am I still using Gentoo?
Well, the thrill of learning for one (I'd never used Linux before I installed Gentoo), and it still works better, feels better and seems more reliable than Windows (any version from 3.11 to XP Pro & 2K Server) and I'm happy with that.

And it's like, cool, or something.

deepspring · 12th May 2003, 3:17 PM

I originally started out using Slackware 3.1, but since I have used or tried these Linux/*nix varients:

RedHat 4.2, 6.1, 6.2, 7.1
FreeBSD (can't remember what version)
StormLinux (can't remember what version)
TurboLinux (can't remember what version)
Debian 2.2r3
Mandrake 9.0
Solaris 7.0
Caldera Linux 2.3
Corel Linux 1.2
BeOS 5.0
Lycoris Desktop/LX 1.5
SuSE 6.4
Slackware 3.1, 7.x, 8.0, 9.0

Possibly the worst distros out of the above were: TurboLinux, StormLinux, Solaris, Corel, Lycoris, BeOS, SuSE, RedHat (except 7.1), FreeBSD.

The best ones out of the above: Slackware, Debian, Mandrake 9.0, Redhat 7.1.

Señor Codeman · 11th June 2003, 3:40 AM

doesn't look like anyones mentioned this one yet, but i've had loads of fun using knoppix 3.2

it's a live-cd distro based on Debian but with laods of extras installed

probly not useful for a linux boxen to run full-time but it's fun to play with when you're like me and have no hard disk space to spare or you do a lot of work fixing computers (which my dad does) - looks like it'd be useful for doing system recoveries (or demonstrations to customers to convert them from windows

) as you don't have to install anything - just boot off cd or make a boot disk to load from cd

-- Señor Codeman

TEO · 21st June 2003, 11:41 PM

Debian

I used RedHat on my servers and desktop for three years. I switched to Debian because package management and security updates using up2date and the RedHat network was, for lack of a better word, dismal.

I've been running Debian for almost 6 months(?) now, and haven't looked back yet.

That said, it's better suited to experienced users who know roughly what packages they need.

tenty · 15th August 2003, 12:05 AM

I had a quick skim down the list of Linux Distros... and everyone seemed to be ranting and raving about their prefered distrobution......

but no one's considered a newbie linux user so here I try to go...
(Please keep in mind that versions are correct to the time of writing this post)

Order of Easiest to Hardest Linux Distros to Install/USE [list=1][*]Knoppix - Version 3.2 (Boots off CD)[*]Red Hat - Version 9.0 (usually easy install, Simple GUI)[*]Mandrake - Version 9.1 (Easy install, Simple GUI)[*]-[*]Debian 3.0 [i](Advanced: Can accept default settings, but advised to change them - Based on your knowledge of software you install, some packages on installation have Letter prompts or graphical text boxes to enter in info - Broadband connection required if you want to update from security.debian.org)[*]Slackware - Version 9.1 (Advanced: for people who like to dapple in source packages - For people who like to 'make' their programs more custom built to the machine)[*]-[*]BSD set (which is more UNIX than Linux) distros include: FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc.[/list=1]

I cant say I have played with SuSE so I dont know where I would put it in the list of Use Vs. Install. Fundamentally all linux distrobutions are the same in the down-to-earth text sense. If you learn how to use the CLI (Command Line Interface), You can't go wrong on any distro you touch.

Final Thought: I have been using Slackware/Debian for a while. I prefer Debian as you can get packages and install them at will and do various ammounts of automatic and/or manual configuration as well. But if you want something that's very nice visually, and you dont like the idea of going "Behind the Scenes" of using a CLI, I would then suggest Red Hat, and then Mandrake.

Feel free to correct any of my thoughts if need be, and I hope this has been slightly more informative for newer users of the Linux Operating system.

Iroquois · 23rd August 2003, 6:02 PM

Thought I'd add my thoughts/experiences.

I installed a version of Red Hat back in 1997 (no idea which release) and didn't touch Linux for some time after that.

I got into Linux with Red Hat 7.2. I switched about a fair bit, trying Mandrake 8.2 and tried installing Debian/Slackware a few times, with little to no success.

I poked about with Lycoris/BSD, and eventually settled for a while with Red Hat 8/8.094

But then, I found Slackware 9.0, and I haven't looked back. I just find it totally simple and efficient. Compiling stuff works an absolute treat, and everything on Slackware just seems to be in the right places and done properly. I've found it a great learning platform, and I learned a lot more about Linux with Slackware in a matter of days than I did with Red Hat in months. I haven't found the package management bad at all, I hear of a lot of people having problems with it and people who don't like it as much as apt-get.

While apt-get is nothing short of fantastic, I've had very few problems with Slackware's .tgz format.

I'm running slackware-current at the moment.

looktall · 27th August 2003, 9:07 PM

we're learning unix at tafe using solaris 7 IIRC (on sun terminals).

i want to set up a machine at home to practice on.
going by what i've read in this thread, some flavour of BSD would be the most unix like, yes?

IgniZtion · 4th September 2003, 1:55 PM

Another vote to Slackware here...

I've used various distros since my first linux install back in '96 including RedHat, Mandrake, Debian and Corel Linux. Back then my first install was Slackware, and I hated it. mainly because I was just getting used to the nice guis of Win95 and was finally getting rid of the horrible DOS command line terrorising my computers the previous 4 years.

Slackware didn't do it for me then, mainly because I wasn't into learning by reading howto's... Redhat back then wasn't the easiest either, but after some hassels I got it working ok for a month then it died on me and I gave up...

In between then and now I tried both debian and corel linux, but stuck to win98 and later win2k for my main desktop use.

Since Slackware 8.0 was released, only one distro is allowed on my machinepark both for server and desktop use..

Esy to set up, easy to upgrade especially if you are interested in having stuff optimized for your system by compiling your own apps, and stable as hell...

The one thing for newbies is to have the courage to edit text files manually and learn to use a powerful console based text editor ( vi(m) )

Slackware also has a package tool called swaret which works a lot like apt-get in debian. It does not however have anyway near the same amount of packages to choose from.. Remember though that downloaded binaries are not optimized for your system...

KeLA · 18th September 2003, 1:26 PM

/me points to uptime.netcraft.com

15th March 2003, 12:50 PM	#63
mazzanet Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: /dev/null Posts: 529	me puts vote for redhat and lrp (linux router project) me sends string "VC" to \\vend0 \\vend0 is my dodgy (vanilla/normal) coke vending machine running lrp __________________ BlackBox :: Have you had brain surgery yet? :: OCAU Night Owl #-13 :: OCAU Camera Club #222 OCAU Emergency Service's club member #015 Last edited by mazzanet; 15th March 2003 at 12:51 PM.

30th March 2003, 9:05 PM	#64
NeXuS Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Southern Suburbs, Melb Posts: 543	Well first linux distro for me, was RedHat 5.2. Then SuSe 4 or 5, then after corrupting too much with rpmfind and trying to upgrade everything, got told to have a look at debian. Fell in love with debian, and its packaging system (esp good with broadband). Just this weekend I had decided ill try out slackware. Downloaded v9.0 for a friend, so i thought what the hell, ill give it a shot. Going from debians KDE2.2 to Slackwares KDE3.1 has made it seem sooo much more user friendly. I think now i prefer Slackware atm, mainly because debian are always behind in what they have binary packages for, and slackware 9 has all the tools i like, and use. So I would have to say Debian for long term server, etc. and Slackware kicks ass for the desktop use. Biggest problem i can forsee is upgrade time, its probably going to be easier to format and reinstall slackware, whereas debian its just an apt-get upgrade and it does it all for ya. __________________ Gaming: C2D E8500 @ 4.0G\|DFI P45-T2RS-JR\|8G Dominator PC8500\|HD4890 1GB\|3x SP F1 1Tb TV: 2x XBOX 360 as Media Center Extenders Server: Xeon 3440\|16G DDR3 ECC\|Supermicro X8SIA-F\|LSI-9211i\|18x 2Tb F4EG\|LSI-9260\|4x V-Raptor\|2x HVR-2250\|Intel QuadGig\|Chenbro CK-13601 SAS Exp\|ESXi 4.1\|W7MC\|Nexenta\|W2K8R2\|Ubuntu\|Squeezebox Laptop: Lenovo T400\|8GB\|P9700\|250Gb Vertex\|500Gb\|3G\|14" LED

5th April 2003, 4:41 AM	#66
Deanodriver Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Melbourne Posts: 7,440	I'll recommend Mandrake... Sure, it's the n00b's distro, but sometimes, some of us just like not having to screw around when doing something simple. I started on Redhat 6.x (didn't get a proper install working), and my first usable install (that had X, etc), was Mandrake 7.2. Now, I have tried a bit of Slackware and Debian, and I don't mind them, but for everyday desktop use, I prefer the simplicity of Mandrake. I'll put it this way, Mandrake 9.1 was the distro that I deleted my Windows partition for. __________________ sifnt.net.au \| I brew, therefore I am.

4th May 2003, 10:36 PM	#67
Eman Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canberra, well of souls Posts: 1,108	A vote here for Gentoo. Why? Well, Of course, it doesn't have much of an install (you have an installation guide and a tarball) and you have to do a lot of dirty work yourself, like writing /etc files and configs for init scripts, although Gentoo trys to make it as easy as possible for you without doing it itself. And you have to compile nearly everything. KDE can take days. And I've never managed to compile a working kernel on the first try. Why oh why does my kernel try to kill init? It knows it's bad. And then Gnome stole my KDE desktop and I had to re-install, and then Mozilla would freeze for minutes on any webpage, and I had to re-install, and then Konqurer forgot it could read HTML and KDE would crash if I tried to change file associations, and I had to re-install (by this time, I had wised up and was using stage 3 tarballs & binary packages from previous builds), and then my ISP's mail server stopped liking my hostname no matter what, and I had to re-install, and then Kate would hard-lock X but I only had to re-install KDE, and now only root can run KDE even though adding a new user works fine on another Gentoo box I have (I had learned well by the time I installed it on my girfriend's PC, but somehow it did a silent strike on her WinME system, even though both systems were working fine with each other), but I'm working on it. So, you may be wondering, why in $DIETY's name am I still using Gentoo? Well, the thrill of learning for one (I'd never used Linux before I installed Gentoo), and it still works better, feels better and seems more reliable than Windows (any version from 3.11 to XP Pro & 2K Server) and I'm happy with that. And it's like, cool, or something. __________________ \| + \|

12th May 2003, 3:17 PM	#68
deepspring Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: No Where Posts: 3,244	I originally started out using Slackware 3.1, but since I have used or tried these Linux/nix varients: RedHat 4.2, 6.1, 6.2, 7.1 FreeBSD (can't remember what version) StormLinux (can't remember what version) TurboLinux (can't remember what version) Debian 2.2r3 Mandrake 9.0 Solaris 7.0 Caldera Linux 2.3 Corel Linux 1.2 BeOS 5.0 Lycoris Desktop/LX 1.5 SuSE 6.4 Slackware 3.1, 7.x, 8.0, 9.0 Possibly the worst distros out of the above were: TurboLinux, StormLinux, Solaris, Corel, Lycoris, BeOS, SuSE, RedHat (except 7.1), FreeBSD. The best ones out of the above: Slackware, Debian, Mandrake 9.0, Redhat 7.1. Last edited by deepspring; 12th May 2003 at 3:19 PM.*

23rd December 2002, 1:34 AM	#61
Adelante Awaiting Email Confirmation Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Johannesburg South Africa Posts: 33	Started with Mandrake 8.2 was on it for about 2months until i realised its great for beginners, but holds back on really learning about linux, and i found that its a bit bloated. Moved to Freebsd (decided to jump into the deep end, and swim for myself) I loved freebsd, and the portage system, but i missed the Linux flexability. stay on freebsd for 6 months Moved to Slackware, its a great distro once you know your stuff, but to me it seemed to precompiled for me, So i took myself and my dialup and Installed Gentoo Linux, (yes i installed it over a dialup, which is very easy infact) and i havent looked back since. this has to be the best linux distro, and as a bonus it includes its own portage system.

2nd April 2003, 6:09 PM	#65
linuxvirg Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: sydney Posts: 86	Another vote for debian here. I started out with redhat 5.0 i think... dam that was ages ago. The thing that bugged me with redhat was the package management. If you wanted to install something, you would have to find and download its dependencies first. Which became a huge pain in the arse. I tried a few other distros over the years suse, turbolinux, mandrake, slackware, then debian. And debian is where I've stayed. Once you get past the fact that you just ignore dselect , because its so bloody unintuitive, the install isnt that bad. Apt-get becomes your best friend and life is good. One thing with debian is that the stable tree is a fair way behind as far as versions of software are concerned, the testing and unstable branches do make up for this in some way but its still behind most other distributions. Not all programs cater to debian, so finding a .deb for a particular program may not be too easy, or you might have to make your own. Libranet might address most of these issues. I've heard alot of good things about Gentoo and Slackware recently, so I might have to give them a try. Cheers, Virg.

11th June 2003, 3:40 AM	#69
Señor Codeman Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: all kinds of places Posts: 407	doesn't look like anyones mentioned this one yet, but i've had loads of fun using knoppix 3.2 it's a live-cd distro based on Debian but with laods of extras installed probly not useful for a linux boxen to run full-time but it's fun to play with when you're like me and have no hard disk space to spare or you do a lot of work fixing computers (which my dad does) - looks like it'd be useful for doing system recoveries (or demonstrations to customers to convert them from windows ) as you don't have to install anything - just boot off cd or make a boot disk to load from cd -- Señor Codeman __________________ home: MacBook Pro 2.4ghz, 4gb ram, 320gb hdd, 8600M GT 256mb work: Alienware m15x 2.5ghz, 4gb ram, 200gb hdd, 8800M GTX 512mb Trades: onoff, paThetic, XTRO, waratt

21st June 2003, 11:41 PM	#70
TEO Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 7	Debian I used RedHat on my servers and desktop for three years. I switched to Debian because package management and security updates using up2date and the RedHat network was, for lack of a better word, dismal. I've been running Debian for almost 6 months(?) now, and haven't looked back yet. That said, it's better suited to experienced users who know roughly what packages they need. __________________ Claiming that your operating system is the best in the world because more people use it is like saying McDonalds makes the best food in the world.

15th August 2003, 12:05 AM	#71
tenty Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 5	Chalk one up to the Newbies (Information Post) I had a quick skim down the list of Linux Distros... and everyone seemed to be ranting and raving about their prefered distrobution...... but no one's considered a newbie linux user so here I try to go... (Please keep in mind that versions are correct to the time of writing this post) Order of Easiest to Hardest Linux Distros to Install/USE [list=1][]Knoppix - Version 3.2 (Boots off CD)[]Red Hat - Version 9.0 (usually easy install, Simple GUI)[]Mandrake - Version 9.1 (Easy install, Simple GUI)[]-[]Debian 3.0 [i](Advanced: Can accept default settings, but advised to change them - Based on your knowledge of software you install, some packages on installation have Letter prompts or graphical text boxes to enter in info - Broadband connection required if you want to update from security.debian.org)[]Slackware - Version 9.1 (Advanced: for people who like to dapple in source packages - For people who like to 'make' their programs more custom built to the machine)[]-[]BSD set (which is more UNIX than Linux) distros include: FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc.[/list=1] I cant say I have played with SuSE so I dont know where I would put it in the list of Use Vs. Install. Fundamentally all linux distrobutions are the same in the down-to-earth text sense. If you learn how to use the CLI (Command Line Interface), You can't go wrong on any distro you touch. Final Thought: I have been using Slackware/Debian for a while. I prefer Debian as you can get packages and install them at will and do various ammounts of automatic and/or manual configuration as well. But if you want something that's very nice visually, and you dont like the idea of going "Behind the Scenes" of using a CLI, I would then suggest Red Hat, and then Mandrake. Feel free to correct any of my thoughts if need be, and I hope this has been slightly more informative for newer users of the Linux Operating system. __________________ http://www.danasoft.com/vipersig.jpg

23rd August 2003, 6:02 PM	#72
Iroquois Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Brisbane Posts: 1,960	Thought I'd add my thoughts/experiences. I installed a version of Red Hat back in 1997 (no idea which release) and didn't touch Linux for some time after that. I got into Linux with Red Hat 7.2. I switched about a fair bit, trying Mandrake 8.2 and tried installing Debian/Slackware a few times, with little to no success. I poked about with Lycoris/BSD, and eventually settled for a while with Red Hat 8/8.094 But then, I found Slackware 9.0, and I haven't looked back. I just find it totally simple and efficient. Compiling stuff works an absolute treat, and everything on Slackware just seems to be in the right places and done properly. I've found it a great learning platform, and I learned a lot more about Linux with Slackware in a matter of days than I did with Red Hat in months. I haven't found the package management bad at all, I hear of a lot of people having problems with it and people who don't like it as much as apt-get. While apt-get is nothing short of fantastic, I've had very few problems with Slackware's .tgz format. I'm running slackware-current at the moment.

27th August 2003, 9:07 PM	#73
looktall Working Class Hero Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: morley.wa.au Posts: 17,916	we're learning unix at tafe using solaris 7 IIRC (on sun terminals). i want to set up a machine at home to practice on. going by what i've read in this thread, some flavour of BSD would be the most unix like, yes? __________________ JoJoker endorses this product and/or comment.

4th September 2003, 1:55 PM	#74
IgniZtion Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Brisbane Posts: 45	Slackware Another vote to Slackware here... I've used various distros since my first linux install back in '96 including RedHat, Mandrake, Debian and Corel Linux. Back then my first install was Slackware, and I hated it. mainly because I was just getting used to the nice guis of Win95 and was finally getting rid of the horrible DOS command line terrorising my computers the previous 4 years. Slackware didn't do it for me then, mainly because I wasn't into learning by reading howto's... Redhat back then wasn't the easiest either, but after some hassels I got it working ok for a month then it died on me and I gave up... In between then and now I tried both debian and corel linux, but stuck to win98 and later win2k for my main desktop use. Since Slackware 8.0 was released, only one distro is allowed on my machinepark both for server and desktop use.. Esy to set up, easy to upgrade especially if you are interested in having stuff optimized for your system by compiling your own apps, and stable as hell... The one thing for newbies is to have the courage to edit text files manually and learn to use a powerful console based text editor ( vi(m) ) Slackware also has a package tool called swaret which works a lot like apt-get in debian. It does not however have anyway near the same amount of packages to choose from.. Remember though that downloaded binaries are not optimized for your system... __________________ - IgniZtion-

18th September 2003, 1:26 PM	#75
KeLA Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Brisbane Posts: 5	/me points to uptime.netcraft.com __________________ Trance is not a type of music or a scene. It's a way of life.