Mandrake?
 

I've heard a lot of people speaking about mandrake being better than redhat, is this true? I never tried it yet.. I've just been hearing things about it being the best distro of linux around (For me i think it's slackware but that's another story). So what is so good about Mandrake *mdk, mandy, blahhh* ?

Well, a close second to Slackware, Mandy is the best distro around. However, you are asking a very often asked question, it goes right along with KDE vs Gnome, RPM vs Tarball...

You may find some good info over here:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...threadid=34135

Cool

Does anyone else think that these distro wars are a bit silly? In my opinion this is like arguing over all the little accessories that come with your car. Mandrake has driver side airbag-Slackware has an FM-Radio-RedHat has Air Conditioning:

When you look under the hood isn't the engine almost the same for all of them?

if you are talking about Mandrake 9.0 VS Redhat 8.0?

right out of the box support for MP3, Video with mandrake, not with redhat, you have to manually add MP3 support and xine for redhat 8.0, when asked about the lack of support RedHat seemed to pawn it off on licesing with MP3, DivX and such,

I run more mandrake clients than I do any other flavor, IMHO I like mandrake better :Pengy:

Well, generally speaking, yes. Unless you move onto Mazda Rotary engines, the design concept is the same. You have a chamber (known as a cylinder) and a compression mechanism known as a piston. The fuel is fed by many different means, but nonetheless, the fuel is fed to the cylinder. The piston compresses the gasses from the fuel and the air mixture, and the spark plug ignites the gasses causes a combustion forcing the compression mechanism back outwards making 1 complete revolution.

However, you have different sizes, different types, different types of pistons, different fuel deliveries, different fuels, different air mixers, and so on. It's the same concept, but a different thing altogether when you put these things all in perspective.

The same goes for a distro. They have the same corps, the kernel. Everything is built around this, or to work with it. It's how well everything works with the kernel that makes 1 distro better than another, different than another.

;)

That's why distro wars/discussions exist.

Cool

Jeeze MasterC I didn't know you were a part time mechanic as well as a linux Master.:D Your absolutly right though. I guess I just like to make statements like that because I feel inferior running RedHat. When I get my new server I was thinking about going for Slackware. It seems that most people using Slack are die hard(for what reasons I don't know). I went to slackware's site and it looks like the iso download is only one CD. Is this right? If you buy it you get 3 or 4 CDs.

Should I be nervous to go Slack from RedHat?

On a personal note it feels very good to have a guru like MasterC visit your humble web page. The page itself is crude but I'm no web designer. All the web designers I know think the site is horrible but when I tell them that I'm running it off my laptop they are amazed.

Cheers to Linux!

;) I used to dabble with mechanics, and I'm throwing together an engine at the moment :)

Rh is not an inferior distro, regardless of how many times it's been said :D RH is in fact an excellent distro, works great for both servers and desktops, and most of the time it's the user who needs a specific distro, not a distro that needs a specific user.

Slack is 1 CD, even the purchased version is only 1 cd, the other CD's are live eval CD's (rescue), sources CD, I can't remember the other 1. Yeah, slack is everything you want, nothing you don't. However, it's a big plunge going from RH to Slack, so be sure to tie your shoes on real tight first ;)
Other than the culture shock, I think you'll do just fine with Slack, you are very knowledgable, and can learn very quickly. It might keep you on your toes for the first time 'setup' of everything, but it will teach you alot, and you will come away more learned than me since you've already got knowledge I don't.

Thanks for the personal note, I was really impressed with your site. I think it's an excellent setup, and especially for no web designer. Very nice job. Definitely impressive it's running off your laptop! :) I'm no guru though, but thanks for the compliment ;)

Cool

Silly question but where is there a good Slack Install tutorial? I can't seem to find one.

It's more like the PCs. All the PCs use the same processors, Intel or AMD. But there are,
IBM PC,
HP PC,
Compaq PC,
Dell PC,
or "no-brand PC",
or PC you build your own.

Which one is better? There must be difinitely performance-difference especially between the branded PCs and lousily built "no-brand" PCs or the PCs built by me. :D

I've used both RedHat and mandrake quite a bit, urpmi blows RPM away...out of the box, Mandrake is much easier to use, auto-configures more things for you (TV-card, dual monitors,etc.) 9.1 is killa nice. Galaxy theme is just as good as bluecurves(much better icons & fonts in 9.1) And the community is much stronger for Mandrake (mandrakeusers.org). I feel when using Redhat, i always have to go through and change and add all kinds of little things that mandrake does automatically.
If your looking at deploying something wide-scale with windows trained users...Redhat 8.0 is VERY easy to use for windows users, menus are extremely newbie proof. But other than that, it kinda sucks compared to mandrake

Hrm Crashed, bother to check www.slackware.org? :tisk:

http://www.slackware.org/book/

And yes, its just like masterC said. It won't come with anything fancy, so prepare to compile!

Just installed mandrake for the first time (was the only current cd I found) and the install was really good.Even configured the burner ok.Should be nice for somebody that wants an easy install.Of course it took me only one app to install (d4x) to find my way into rpm-hell.

Right now I'm using Mandrake 9. I have Redhat 7.3 and Redhat 8.0 images but I'm too lazy to put them on CDs. I also have slackware and freeBSD images too and again I'm lazy to put them on CDs.

I picked Mandrake because it is more combatible with my hardware than other distributions. Also I would like to learn LINUX instead of ripping out my hair trying to set it up. I love command line OS and configuration files that are in text. Missed it when I first updated to Microsoft Windows 98 from Windows 3.10.

I don't like comparing what LINUX distribution are good and bad. They are all great. Users are the ones that should know how to control them. All LINUX distributions are beast compared to MS Windows.

Just keep in mind you are not running puny Microsoft Windows.

I like mandrake vs redhat and suse anyway.
Suse had to me what seemed to me to be somewhat idiosyncratic configuration and with redhat i usually end up having to download something that would probably have come with mandrake, nmap , portsentry or whatever. Havent tried the latest redhat though, have heard good things about it.