LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Fedora (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/fedora-35/)
-   -   Fedora Core 5 - You mean i get all this? (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/fedora-35/fedora-core-5-you-mean-i-get-all-this-448383/)

WhatsOnYourBrain 05-25-2006 06:39 AM

Fedora Core 5 - You mean i get all this?
 
hi. i'm not yet a Linux user but i've been wanting to install it-- as soon as i get a video card for this extra box i've got here-- and more memory, unless 128 megs will run it (figure i probably want at least 256 in there, right?). if anyone thinks i can get by w/ 128-- for learning/ starting out/ basic php n mysql stuff, i might give 'er a go sooner! (sorry for the long intro there)

okay-- i found this nice little 'slideshow' which demos the fedora core 5 installation. i honestly had no idea that linux was this graphical. i mean, i assumed there was a graphical desktop & 3rd party apps-- i thought, at least at the install-- i'd probably be dealing w/ 'command line' stuff (which is fine, of course)... considering that i see so much ".. note: if you're on linux, you'll type instead usr/bin/..." when i'm working, for example, on a software walkthru which is common to both win and Linux.

it must be a common misconception?
I've been using LitesStep for windows-- the alternative shell. when i was surveying the Fedora desktop, i realized-- "litestep... it's a linux emulation!?". anyone familiar w/ that? i gotta tell ya, i'm really diggin' litestep, so perhaps i'll be more prepared for Linux than i thought?

thanks for reading! i look forward to your replies.

reddazz 05-25-2006 06:55 AM

I would urge you to get 512 megs of ram if you want to run a desktop environment. It just makes the experience a bit smoother. I managed to run GNOME (The default Fedora Core DE) on 128 megs of ram but things were a bit sluggish. For a graphics card, I suggest you get Nvidia based cards, because their linux drivers are really good.

Linux can be both very "graphical" or strictly command line based depending on the distro and how you set it up. There are many situations where using the command line would be faster than using a gui or a specific task would be impossible to perform in a gui so at some point you may have to use the CLI. From your post it doesn't seem like you will struggle since you already have some experience with the CLI.

ride153 05-25-2006 08:45 AM

this http://www.xfce.org/ could save some mem and cpu usage, its also included on the install cds

WhatsOnYourBrain 05-30-2006 01:21 PM

edit:
after much frustration trying to install mysql5.x on my XP system to work on localhost along w/ php5.1.x and apache2.0.54, i decided to wipe an extra drive in preparation for linux. i'm tired of fooling around! :)
so, now using my 'main system', i'll have 768 RAM to work with, and no need for the vid card, etc (although, i'd still like to ultimately hook up that system as a Linux box as described earlier-- but something tells me that i may not be on Windows much once i get this going...)

i'm proud to say that i downloaded the 5-CD iso i386 Fedora Core 5 this afternoon. i haven't moved forward w/ it yet, but as soon as i get home from work, baby, i'm ready to rock!

any last bits of advice before i begin the metamorphosis?

BobNutfield 05-31-2006 04:16 AM

While Fedora is one of the more intuitive distros around, it can still take some tweaking to get it where you want it. It can be a little frustrating sometimes. But, donŽt give in to frustration, and since you seem to have considerable experience, I doubt if you will.

IŽll say this: if you are not a prolific gamer, once you get linux set up, I doubt if you will ever need/want to boot into Windows again.

Bob

WhatsOnYourBrain 06-02-2006 12:44 PM

yeah, i'm definitely not a gamer. i am having a bit of trouble w/ apache though. but before i explain that, let me just say that my intent for linux was to obtain for myself a better web development environment. i'm into the php side of things (mysql, postgresql, etc), web standards (i.e. no flash) and just about anything else that's related to that-- i'm also a 'hosting provider' for my clients, but of course i'm doing that through another provider.

okay-- the apache thing. i configured httpd.conf, tweaked it to how i 'know' it to be tweaked from my previous experience and from what i know about Linux (i.e. of course i didn't use documentroot c:\apache\htdocs ... , but you know what i mean). when i pull up localhost in my browser, i get the standard non-fancy directory listing (w/ one file in there, i see one file named 'test.html' which i created in text editor- very simple just saying hello or something in an h1 element), but when i click on the file, all i get is a blank screen! i've never seen anything like it-- except maybe when php is stuck in a loop or something w/out an error shown. any ideas?

(i hope this isn't a cross-post... i've posted so many places w/ this issue... everyone just keeps sending me to the cure-all at stanton-finley.net... which isn't helping, of course)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:03 AM.