Printable View
I'm planning to build a low cost PC running a Linux OS, so the question is, what type of Linux is easy to use for a beginner so i can feel around ;) also tech specs of the OS would be handy.
EDIT: Please note, i'll be going to Uni in a year or so (hopefully studying Computer Networking) so if you know what the uni's use most would also be helpful :)
On a side note am i allowed to post want to sell threads in GC/The Lounge/General Games board.
Linux: dunno, wait for bipper to come on
Advertising: use your sig (no spamvertising)
Well, I would not suggest using linux for beginer level if you are going to be going into the computer field. I always suggest Slackware. Slackware is often considered the oldest distro in all the known universe, and often hailed as being TRUE linux. Which kind of introduces familiarizes you with multiple enviroments. It strives to be a bit more UNIX based in it's architecture as well. There is an old linux user addage that quotes: "If you want to learn red hat - learn red hat; If you want to learn linux, learn slackware."
Vector Linux is much like slackware, in that it aims to be what linux is suposed to be. It lacks a robust packaging system
Gentoo may be a good choice for you, as you can easily auto configure it to become a secure server, a gaming system, a development station, etc. Problem is, is it is automated, and this does not do much for the learning process.
Sorcerer linux is very interesting. It basically is the most automatically optomised linux out there - next to a subdistro named 'Lunar'. I have not installed it but once, and it seemed very fun to use; but it does require a bit of work.
Redhat/fedora sucks. That is more wording than the package deserves here.
Jesux. A christian based linux distribution. Repent - use linux; @$$. This was made against Devil Linux and the use of the little devil as a logo for everything BSD. Basically thus marketing is giving linux a bit of a *evil* look - well; subliminally... suposidly.
Debian/SuSe aims at packaging only TRUE open source software. This is kind of a jack of all trade linux, that aims towards bettering the OSC. This description hardly does this package justice, but I never really got past it's install and Lilo issues. You can lump SuSe in this same description - in fact, I will.
ubuntu: ease of use. a beutiful and cute lil distro for 'real people'. Thusly disqualifying 90% of the linux community :( Seriously though, one of the tightest packages that offer ease of use and oh shizz... support! This lil bugger seccedes where mandrake (sam philosophies) failed - horribly.
Now, I am sure I missed about 8.3 billion distros, but that is a brief over view of what I have personally used, looked into, or played with. As I said, I suggest SLACKWARE, and I also suggest getting to know the linux shell.
Best of luck!
[edit] On top or this quality advice: also tech specs of the OS would be handy. (What do you mean here) and I would suggest you try what is appealing to you in three month increments - or devote yourself to learn one (slackware ;) ) and set up a another box for constant testing. The main splotts in linux are fairly standard, so you should be fine diving in - the pool is plenty deep.
Bipper
There are more Linux distros out there then there are stars in the sky. No really, I do mean it.
Seriousally though, there are alot.
I don't know if Gentoo still does it, but(if they still work) I got some old Gentoo CD's where you compile the kernel up in order to get it most optimized to your system. At the time people told me it could be a multiday process(which to put it simply freaked me out(and made me think they were bulling me at the same time), but I really did enjoy playing with it back a while ago).
Whatever Linux you get I would recomend playing around with it some, they are quite fun systems. Also at least at my college, The Graphical mode of Linux is rarely to never used so get used to navigating command line. That was the hardest part for some of the people in my networking class(surprised me, I always thought command line was simple, but I did grow up with DOS based computers before any others so I guess I am biased).
To Bipper;
What is wrong with redhat/fedora? I certianlly didn't enjoy them as much as the Gentoo I played with, however, they didn't seem to deserve as harse as you gave(I reserve that for the likes of the Lindows we had to install and use for our finals.... good god(pardon my language if it is offensive) was that a pain and an annoyance to get all the stuff compiled from source to install on it). Just to make the quick note, We used many different distros and made heavy use of Vi(which is officially the coolest editor known to mankind :P); however, due to the text the teacher was teaching from alot was done on Fedora.
Err... and I lost my train of thought.
bipper, what is in your opinion overly automated about Gentoo, compared to Slackware?
[qq=kyuzo]EDIT: Please note, i'll be going to Uni in a year or so (hopefully studying Computer Networking) so if you know what the uni's use most would also be helpful [/qq]
I'm uncertain there is one distro that can be said to be ahead of the others at colleges, and it doesn't really matter anyways. Linux is Linux, and if you learn one distro your skills should give you a good level of understanding in the others. All distros can use Gnome or KDE or fluxbox/openbox. bash on one distro is the same as bash on another. All of them can run mysql or apache or whatever you want. There are sometimes minor differences if a distro patches a program to customize it for the distro, but usually not many significant differences.
There are really very few things that set one distro apart from another. The package management system (how you install programs) is the main one. And then the directory structure and init script structure, and not much else.
What are your goals in using Linux? Do you want to learn it for the sake of knowing it (knowing how the OS itself works)? If so, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ is a great learning tool. You will likely NOT end up having a system you're happy using every day. You'll have something that works but is a nightmare to maintain. But it's an outstanding learning tool.
Do you want to have a working Linux install and then learn how to USE it to do things (become familiar with the programs that exist in Linux)? If so I say use Gentoo or Ubuntu. Gentoo if you have lots of time to devote, but want to learn a good deal about the inner-workings of your OS. Ubuntu if you want something that works quickly and easily, but which is user-friendly to the point where you miss out on really knowing what the heck is going on. If you want to use your OS for programming, I'd stay away from Ubuntu. I didn't have much fun trying to get it set up as a development box.
Gentoo does take literally days to install (depending on how fast your computer is, and how skilled you are). But it's fun! And most of that time is waiting for things to compile, so it's not like you have to sit there and watch it. I can install Gentoo without using the handbook in about a day, but that's only after using it for years.
Understand that you are unlikely to get an unbiased answer to the question "Which Linux distro should I use?" The best way to know is to try a bunch until you find one that you like.
[qq=ShunNakamura]I don't know if Gentoo still does it, but(if they still work) I got some old Gentoo CD's where you compile the kernel up in order to get it most optimized to your system. At the time people told me it could be a multiday process(which to put it simply freaked me out(and made me think they were bulling me at the same time), but I really did enjoy playing with it back a while ago).[/qq]
Gentoo still forces you to compile a kernel. There's a tool called genkernel which will will automate the build process (basically compile everything as a module, and include all modules possible). I don't think a lot of Gentoo users use it.
ShunNakamura: Red Hat has left a bad taste in my mouth since day one. Littlerally - the cardboard plasticy packageing is horrable on the stomach. Anyways; notice how I did not mention Lindows at all ;) Red hat just seems to have that in between method of doing everything, and in my opinion, they lean to far toward vendor driven. In otherwords, release now, patch later deal. That is not what I, and many others look for out of linux. A secure release, and prefereably a configurable install. It is very noobie friendly, but tends to have too many issue to make a feasable enviroment anymore.
At work, I am currently fixing an array of fedora and Red hat related slip ups, as in sudden noboots and dropped partitions.
Simply put; I feel Redhat and fedora are simply bloated out of control and add too much with too little implimentation and testeing - leading to a rather unstable enviroment (a'la the Fedora board:mad: ). Using a program to start a service is very windows, and requires extra sepcialised, but simple, learning. Slack tends to have you start a program service via a command - which can be cumbersome, but it leads to the greatest learning of what a program can actually do. Also, if you find yourself runing huge lines of code to start a program to your specifications you can easily write a script :) hands on and sexy. Need I say more.
Unne: I never meant to badmouth Gentoo, as Gentoo has come aways, and thier official description seems to laminate the fact that they aim to be automated to configure to your system for specific needs. Gentoo has had that irreputable repuation in the past of being insanley unstable, though I am sure they have moved beyond that.
Gentoo has a ton to offer, and while the installs of both enviroments are (now) mainly automated off an ISO, it is the raw setup in which gentoo tailors itself to be the best *(wildcard) for your system. Using these preset methods are just peachy keen, but as I said, I am looking at it from a learning prespective. Don't be affraid to rip up the kernal (suprisingly easy) and get your hands dirty.
I honestly still do not see the gentoo vs slack debate as ever being applicatable. They both have their place, and you will never really see them compared directly (as per thier core purpose), as slack is basically a step up from nothing (while still comming with something) while gentoo is often compiled on an hour old compiler and runs software on the bleeding edge. I feel that Gentoo is a bit to edgy for me, as I prefer more of the tested and dulled out linux distro - ie slackware. Two very different things in my opinion. Point in case: Gentoo is very configurable as in (enter value) [repeat]. I feel that getting the distory up, and then editing it, is an invaluable experience as well. This is more speaking towards dealing with other boxes put together by other techs. Honestly, Slackware's install is going to be more automated -i think, but will often have the most problems with new new new new new software. IE: Slack will not play nice with most SATA controllers, as the implimentation for such is in the linux 2.6 kernal. Slack includes said kernal in a test directort, as they have not ensure the stability they want with thier distro yet, at least using 2.6 kernal. This is a PERFECT example of why I love slack, and what they exactly aim for.
As for slackware, I had a server freshly installed and a few minor security patches installed, which has been rebooted once since it's install. It took 5 hours to install (mainly due to the slow formating, and my extremley picky package management (I had 200 MB to work with :) ). The purpose of the server was to serve 5 muds on a DSL line, and it did so with out a qualm. I could kill a crashed mud, fix said bug, recompile and relaunch, and the game would go up with out a hitch. The same could be said with Apache, my PHP3 module (lol), and my email service. freakin sex.
I have done installs on many machines before, in personal, small buisness, and even coorperate enviroments. The base user was a guy with an old compaq, and hardly new how to run windows.
I set this man up with slack (8) (second customer I ever had), and showed him arround for about 45 minutes, and he was off. I have prolly given him about 45 minutes of support in the past 3 years, and he is still using the same install. That is my personal best record. Sides that, I have only reinstalled twice, on two other home users, and I think the last was about 6 months ago. (last october). I set them up with KDE usually, and they all have seemed to like it for what they use it for.
Small business wise, I have set several componi up, and hardly a hitch. Obviously slightly more than home users, but I don't feel like pulling records and looking.
Coorp: doing so right now @ my current job, set some up at target. They impliment and play very well. It takes a little know how when hitting huge prefabed network and having that shattiest doco ever (target), but it wored great, and to my knowlage - still is.
The best part about all this bantering, is I am sure any other distro can be tailored to do the same, and act as you want. I am just offering a breif - very breif- over view of my slack experiences.
oh and speaking of uptime: http://en.uptime-project.net/page.ph...f489371c556ac1
linux base wins :)
Bipper
I didn't take your post as badmouthing Gentoo, I'm just unsure what is automated in Gentoo that's not automated in Gentoo. I'm not that familiar with Slackware.
Gentoo has a stable branch, you don't have to be bleeding edge. Its stable branch is more bleeding-edge than other distros' stable branches sometimes (although for example Gentoo's stable is still using GCC-3.4.4; 4.0 and 4.1 and 4.2 alpha are available for install but not marked stable), but Gentoo's stable branch isn't as bleeding-edge as other distros' testing branches at least.
One of Gentoo's strengths is that it lets you mix and match unstable and stable packages easily. Or install them in parallel, in many cases.
Another of Gentoo's strengths is that it DOESN'T force you to make a "devlopment computer" or "desktop computer" or "server computer". There are literally no such distinctions. You install things on the package level (and its depencies are installed automatically of course, but only the bare minimum you need to run the program). I'm sure Slackware is the same. Unbuntu for example installs all kinds of garbage by default, and you have no idea what you're getting.
My uptime was 1 and a half months, but then I bought a new computer. :(
Our Fedora Core 4 really didn't have many issues with us(other then the dratted book dispite being released the same year was already behind and the concepts had changed already). RedHat though I will admit I had issues with. We had to install it from scratch and configure it for part of our final(the other part being lindows and that was just... no comment). It just didn't feel as smooth as the Fedora or other ones we used. Though obviousally better then Lindows.Quote:
Originally Posted by bipper
And in case you want to know we had to install some sort of MUD and get the service going on Lindows. We were told that it was one of the rougher ones to install. Not too bad but talk about jumping throw hoops to get it to work.
We actually did alot of that with Fedora to tell the truth. That may have been mostly due to our instructor though. So my experience of Fedora/Redhat may have been clouded through that. But alot of it was not done automatically for us(he set up the base installs for our initial Fedora learning box).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bipper
And I am glad that Gentoo is still such a long install.. that is what made it so attractive to me.
I agree, that you can do about the same with all distros - that is what makes them linux. It is basically the implied bloatedness of fedora that sucks. From what I have looked at (and am looking at today) is the two fedora 5 boxes look like they were updated improperly - and no one there admits to starting an update - I would not think that fedora auto updates cross versions?, while the fedora 4 simply has a problem unmouting /sys on boot. not a huge issue, as I am just going to back up and install slack. Stick with what ya know, eh?
And yes, I played with beta Lindows, and can confirm it sucked. :p
Unne: Sorry, I did not mean to imply that you had though I was badmouthing it, I was just unsure how my lil review was taken :) Last install on my part of Gentoo was - one year ago? It did go very smoothly and took a bit of headbutting, but overall, I do like gentoo. I actually look at it with about as much respect as slackware, thus my ranking it so high on the list. I actually see Gentoo as being a median between Slackware and more robust packages. Though, slack 10.2 has become a bit more robust in itself. :)
thanks for the input guys and gals, and keep on posting! tech specs i meant as a general term for all the different types, just the basics of what it would need for me to play around with.
also some links would be helpful, like their respected websites (so i could download them - i assume they're downloadable since some of them are freeware of some sorts??? :S )
I recommend Ubuntu for a personal machine, and CentOS (RHEL) for any sort of server.
i was thinking of installing a linux onto a AMD chip (probably something less than a AMD 3000), 1gb ram, nvidia 6600 or a FX5200 whichever's lying around atm. and the smallest HDD i could get which is probably 50GB or 180GB SATA connections, does that matter?
yeah, you with the SATA drives, you just shot slackware. That is slack's main weakness, is you should be very familiar with your hardware and the way the [2.6] Kernal interacts with it. To install such in slackware (which is in testing still) you need to use the [2.6] Kernal in the test directory. This is fairly intermediate level things to. I would then suggest you take a stronger look at Gentoo if you wish, or Ubuntu if you wish for a more windowseque ease of use.
Bipper
SATA works fine with Gentoo. Just make sure you compile SCSI drivers into your kernel.
well i am a noob with things like this (hence the thread in help :p noob in most things actually) well Munty's already got me downloaded and burnt Ubuntu, now i need a box to put it in. Also this is why i asked for tech specs as well :)
Ubuntu has very exhaustive support 'out-of-the-box' for hardware. Nearly all, if not all hardware you choose should be fine with it. You will need to note that the 64-bit install is different to the 32-bit install, and that you cannot use 64-bit on a 32-bit processor.
Gentoo is good. Ubuntu is better for newbies. Ubuntu's package manager, Synaptic, is extremely easy to use for newbies; you won't have to worry about dependencies with it. Gentoo's package manager, Portage, is also very nicely done, though much harder to read if you don't know what's going on.
Just a sidenote - Gentoo is notoriously hard to install for newbies. Having said that, the support provided is very good.
As bipper said earlier, Ubuntu (or Kubuntu, if you like KDE better) is very much based around the x window server, so you most likely won't be using a command line much. Gentoo is slightly less so, but not that much. One thing to notice is that Ubuntu uses Gnome; Kubuntu uses KDE. :p
If you want easy to use and learn on, I recommend Ubuntu.
i understand the 32bit to 64 bit, is that also backwards compatable? EG i wanted to use a 64bit processor but i install a 32bit linux OS on it...i know windows is okay(ish?) on that. not sure about linux.
Yes. You can run a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit CPU. (At least as far as windows and linux are concerned on x86 processors)
excellent.
You'll also need to make sure the software you use/download/install is made for your installation of Linux, not necessarily your architecture. If you install 32-bit Linux, don't install 64-bit packages, even if you have a 64-bit processor. :p
You can run 32-bit programs inside a mostly 64-bit system. I run 64-bit programs for almost everything (including the kernel and all system libraries). But I run a pre-compiled x86 32-bit Firefox because the Flash player for Linux is 32-bit only. Same goes for movie playing software, if you want to use win32 movie codecs, which are 32-bit only.
You also have the option of running an entirely 32-bit environment "inside" a 64-bit environment using chroot. This page is interesting: http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_AMD64#S...ot_environment
Also http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/a...?part=1&chap=2
BAH! 64 bits - it'll never catch on:p
Already has.
joke:p
Dual core is more important right now. 64-bit environments won't become mainstream until regular computer users start using more than 4GB of RAM. That's at least a couple years away.
Personally I recommend Ubuntu/Kubuntu. I've had a blast using it. I'm pretty sure Ubuntu can doing everything Gentoo can except for its robust Portage/emerge system. You'll be up and running Ubuntu in less than an hour.
All Linux distros can do the same things. Well, assuming those things are open source, which means pretty much everything. It's only how you get there that's different.
Cheers. There are a few specialized features which are key to each distro, but bottom line, the CAN be transfered - at least to my knowlage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Unne
That is what makes Linux IMO.