Calling All Linux Geeks

I have a fairly nice, fairly recent HP machine I’m thinking of wiping clean and using as a Linux box. Quite a while back I used to run Slackware and then Red Hat. And I’m wondering: what’s the skinny on the the favorite distributions now? Red Hat, Debian, Ubuntu, something else? And why?

I think I’m past the point of patience with a hobbyist setup, when I used to enjoy tweaking umpteen config files by hand and mastering deep skillz to whip everything into shape. I really want an install that will mostly run right out of the box, with a nice interface, and good system tracking for my apps and customizations of choice.

Poke around at http://distrowatch.com/

I’d probably play with one of the live disks like Knoppix first and see what works and what you may have issues with. Wireless can be a problem and some other things can be quirky, so it is best to check out the live DVD stuff first.

Most of the most popular varieties are based off of Debian and the .deb files and I think Fedora (Red Hat) has the other main package manager. One issue with Debian is that they don’t add non-free stuff so there is some additional work that is needed by the uses to get a box up to speed so people go to Ubuntu and Mint.

Gnome has a newer user interface that was incorporated in Ubuntu and so some users have favored Mint’s older interface.

Slackware is still around and still functions as it always has.

Haven’t played with haiku, hurd, or BSD so I know even less about those.

If you are out to just learn about linux there is always LFS, but you’d need a working distro to compile it in the first place.

The Debian distros give me the least hassle. If I need to set up yet another virtual machine in a hurry I always grab a 32-bit or 64-bit Debian Stable net-install ISO (they’re relatively small), and the installation is always without a hassle. The net-install ISOs (CD images) are small because most of the application packages are downloaded from the net during installation. It’s always just a basic installation anyway, although you’re asked to select your main setup (file server, print server, graphics, web server..). Afterwards it’s easy to add packages as you wish.
It was mentioned in another post that Debian don’t include non-free software - but they do, to some extent at least. You just have to add Debian’s non-free repository to the list of repos.

The number of packages available to Debian exceeds any other distro by far. My desktop setup currently lists more than 39000 packages (although that’s from the “unstable” distro, where “unstable” means that packages are added and updated continuously), and these tend to be better tested (in my experience) than packages in the more closed distros like e.g. SuSE or RedHat (they rely much more on in-house testing). (We use those distros at work so I’m familiar with them too).

If not going Debian then I believe Ubuntu is a good alternative, at least according to some of my colleagues. Ubuntu is based on Debian but adds Ubuntu’s own enhancements and user interface ideas. In any case .deb-based distros (like Debian, Ubuntu and some others) will (in my opinion and experience) work better for software upgrades than the .rpm-based distros (like RedHat, SuSE, Centos and others). It’s never necessary to boot from a CD/DVD, for example, when upgrading from one major release to the next major release. There’s generally less of the ‘RPM Hell’ as can sometimes be observed with RPM-based distros (note that this is a sensitive issue and can easily result in distro flame wars - so it’s better to take the above as my opinion and leave it at that).

Starting with booting a Knoppix DVD as was suggested by I.D.10-t is a good idea. It’ll give you an indication if there are any potential hardware driver issues with your particular computer - do you get sound right away? Check. Working network? Check. Maybe wi-fi? (often tricky) Check. And so on. And Knoppix is .deb-based - it’s even possible to (in case you think “This is all I need”) to, from inside Knoppix itself, install Knoppix on the harddisk and use it as any other Linux distro.

-Tor

I am not a Linux geek nor an expert in Linux but I have been using Linux for more than ten years now and have been able to handle my own very well. I consider myself to be a fairly experienced and self-sufficient Linux user and being a Linux user is different than being a Windows or Mac user.

I say so because being a computer user, as much as a car user or a microwave oven user, means being someone who turns on the thing, uses it, turns it off.
Being a Linux user in my opinion has more to do with the philosophy that lies beneath it, rather than the mere experience of turning on, using, turning off (which of course, especially nowadays, is safe to say can be done with no hassles with many Linux distros).
Even more so when someone has used another system and all in all is fine with it, changing for the fun of it or because some Linux evangelist praised the wonders of it, might result in expecting to have a better, free-er and eye-candier version of what he/she already has.
Only to find him/herself wondering why there’s no photoshop or because something works in ways that ultimately will never satisfy them.

So what’s this “philosophy” you’re talking about mor?
Well, it a drive one needs to have, a curiosity for the way things work in Linux systems and communities. One must be willing to learn new things, re-invent the approach he/she has towards computers. Most of those who turn to Linux for the wrong reasons, end up being partly or completely disappointed about it because they tend to replicate the behavior and approach they had on their previous system.
I know it is difficult to understand what I’m talking about, especially if we consider the efforts of several distros (not just ubuntu) to bring the Linux approach closer to that of other systems, but in the end, I believe that if one has no serious issues with the system he/she uses (windows viruses do not count here) and doesn’t have a natural desire, curiosity to discover a new way of using computers, if one has no will to learn from the system and contribute (there are many ways) to the community’s development, most likely Linux is a bad choice.

That said, and of course it was not meant to be direct at the OP who has indeed experience with Linux, I think it is fair to say that pretty much any distro works “out of the box”. Yes, some still have the “config files first” stage, but it is unlikely to get one of those even just by picking one at random.
Therefor I think that choosing the right distro has much more to do with experience with it than looking at the single features.
Yes looking at how strong the community and documentation is, how many packages are available, what king of package manager is used and such and such helps a lot, but only after trying several distros and using them for production will definitely make the choice obvious.
The premise I made earlier was indeed meant to justify the last statement and especially the “for production” bit.

If we use a side-box with Linux, only to tinker with it in the spare time, maybe install a few programs just to see how and where they differ from their win/mac counterparts, we are bound to never fully understand if Linux is the right choice and if this or that distro is the right one.

If one has that drive I mentioned earlier, he/she should do nothing but commit to Linux for production use. Transfer everything, personal data, e-mails, photos, music and videos, work stuff etc., otherwise it’ll always be some toy that lies there, fun to play with, nice to look at, but ultimately useless.
If there’s the slightest doubt about committing for production, maybe it is just not necessary to go Linux, maybe one is fine with what he/she has and, regardless of what many evangelists (of whichever system) would say, there’s nothing wrong about it.

I hope not to have been harsh and believe me I had no intention to challenge the judgment of anyone here, it’s only that I see many times user turning to Linux for the wrong reasons, often pushed irresponsibly by fanatics.

By the way, I use Debian, if there was no Debian I would use Archlinux. :smiley:

Ciao

One thing nice about Debian is that makes it a bit different (I think) is that it seems a bit less attached to one desktop environment. I like Xfce, and Debian seems to keep things working with any DE you want to use.

One tool that might be useful is SystemRescueCd. I have found in the past that the partitioning tools came in handy, but it may not be something others would use. I usually like to have a windows partition that I can expand or shrink as the Linux partition changes, and deleting one is trivial.

Wow, Linux geeks are … wordy. :laughing:

Thanks, guys, for the great information. Very interesting.

@mor.whistle: Your post makes me smile a little, because I’m guessing you’re pretty young. I was programming a PDP-8 in octal machine code back in 1968 - which makes Linux seem like a toaster. I set up my first Linux box in 1993. I’ve met Linus Torvalds. I have a penguin hat.

Latecomer! Early 1992 here..

I’ve met Linus Torvalds. I have a penguin hat.

Oops, I can’t top that.. I lose! -)

(And no PDP-8 for me either.. but core memory, paper tape and octal-programming minis from the front panel, yes.)

I lose, too. I didn’t get to play with paper tape on a PDP-11 until 1976, although I had already been hacking an IBM 1130 for a few years.

At work, we’ve been using CentOS for a few years, and Red Hat before that. I haven’t been doing the installations/upgrades, but that job has landed in my lap. I’m not looking forward to “RPM hell.” The need to boot from a CD each time is a hassle, because I work remotely from all of the boxes most of the time, and some of the boxes all of the time.

It’ll be interesting to hear about what you end up doing with the box, MtGuru.

Thanks, ID, I’ll try to follow up.

I have several reasons for interest in running a Linux box. One, because it’s been a while and I have a spare machine, so why not. Another, because there are certain apps and development environments I like which are native on Linux, and which sit better on a Linux machine. Another, because the Chiffboard server runs on a Debian host, and it’s easier to hone my admin skillz on my own desktop.

I appreciate Mor’s type of Linux evangelism. But I’ve been around long enough not to pay much heed to OS religious wars. An OS is just a tool, and usefulness and usability for the intended purposes should drive the choice.

It sounds like Debian is a good baseline for comparing distributions, so that’s probably where I’ll start looking.

Yep! Pushing rocker switches on the front panel, and getting covered in paper tape confetti. :slight_smile:

I knew you would all be jealous of my penguin hat. :stuck_out_tongue:

As a long time computer geek who has professionally supported both Linux and Windows, I tend to point folks toward Mint if they want to give Linux a try. It seems to have fewer driver and general setup issues. And the interface is very friendly for those who only want to take a gradual approach to the command line. Since I know I will be providing some form of support down the road, it saves some of my time. :slight_smile:

(Mint is not entirely open source, so it may appeal to everyone’s philosophical tastes.)

For bare bones server installs, I still prefer Red Hat or Fedora, just because of my comfort level.

But with your background, I’m sure you will do fine with any choice.

Thanks, Swizz. Three mentions of Mint in the thread guarantees that I’m going to look at it. :slight_smile:

I know what you mean, although I didn’t mean to preach* at you. When I write about certain topics I don’t just think about who I’m talking too, but also to who might read in the future.
*I wouldn’t consider myself a Linux evangelist, a counter-evangelist maybe. :stuck_out_tongue:

Anyway, young, well, you mentioned you were programming in '68 so well yes, I certainly am a baby to your eyes.
When you were programming a PDP-8 I still had some ten years left to bake before I was ready. I never had the privilege to meet Linus, I only fired up my first Linux box in '97-'98 and never committed until the dawn of this millennium.
I have more than one penguin hat though, even one with flapping wings and, on top of that, I’m a great Pittsburgh Penguins fan (damn CBA!).

Ciao! :smiley:

Hi MTGuru

You might find Pendrivelinux.com of interest.


David

Debian is good choice. Although on desktop may have sometimes a bit of difficulties (especially on crippled HW).

:slight_smile:

Well that beats having your hearing messed up by too many hours in the keypunch room…

Punching holes

If you miss it, you can program that tape.