Hi,
I've been browsing this forum for a while, posting to it for a shorter
while, and I've noticed that there are a large number of people who seem
to believe that one of the FIRST solutions to a problem with Linux is to
reinstall. I don't know how many of these users are coming over from
windows, where it is not only one of the first solutions, it's quite often
necessary to reinstall, but I believe that they are in the majority. While
this is a common practice in the windows world (a programmer friend
who used to work at MS says they all wipe their hard drives and do a
fresh install on a regular basis), it is, I believe, most uncommon in the
Linux ("guru"?) world.

I believe that reinstalling your operating system should always be
considered a major task that is not taken lightly. Not only do you have
to start over completely with configuring all your devices, if you fixed a
problem on your old system, you now get to fix it again, and if you have
any important data on the system, you really should back it up. Usually
every problem you had will need to be dealt with again, and you probably
didn't keep all the configuration information that got the problem(s) fixed
in the first place. While there are sometimes legitimate reasons to
reinstall (a mistake with fdisk, corrupt filesystems due to a variety of
errors (usually operator errors), etc.), there are an inordinate number of
people who seem to think not getting sound to work implies they need to
reinstall. I understand that it can be very frustrating working for days on
a problem that just won't be solved, reinstalling the entire OS is rarely
the correct answer, since you'll likely get back to the same point you
were before you reinstalled. What has usually worked for me is to just
stop worrying about the problem (when that's possible), and just use the
system as it is for a few days to a week or two, and then slowly get back
to thinking about how to go about fixing the problem from a different
direction.
Many times I find myself writing down (typing in, over the course of a
week or so) what I believe are the exact issues related to the problem,
enumerating exactly what I did to fix it, and what the effects of each
attempt were. Quite often, after ignoring this list for a couple of days,
when I get back to it I notice some glaring holes in my attempts. I will
then go and work on fixing those, which usually involves many web
searches and looking through the documentation over and over because
I know I missed that one essential sentence. Usually one of those holes
turns out to be the solution and I have learned a lot more than a simple
reinstall would have taught me.

I don't want to imply that I think there aren't any problems that can be
fixed by reinstalling, but I have noticed that, for me, the time between
reinstalls has slowly lengthened to the point that now the only time I
reinstall is when there is a demand for a new feature that would
basically require a lot of updating of programs, many of which are
essential to the core OS. Even doing kernel recompiles is more time
consuming than usually warrants, so now I build almost everything as a
module and just load the necessary module instead of recompiling my
kernel.

The main reason reinstallation unnerves me is that the user who resorts
to that so quickly isn't really learning how their OS works, but is instead
just getting frustrated with how it doesn't work. This means that there
are probably a lot of people who don't bother to reinstall linux, but instead
go back to their old, comfortable OS that is easy to reinstall every week,
which fixes (for a time) the problem they were having. That means that
we, the Linux community, are losing out because of the loss of
consumers of Linux products (free or not). If the linux gamers (for
example) is ever going to really get its foot in the door, they need the
numbers JUST USING the OS, regardless of the numbers using it for
games.

My questions are:

Am I missing something in many of these posts, or do others think
reinstallation happens a lot?

Are we, the communtiy, just not helping in the right way?

Are many people just too impatient to work all the way through their
problem (maybe due to the easy fix MS has provided (and they've grown
used to) with reinstalling)?

Am I right in believing that the linux gurus out there don't reinstall (on
their main system, when they have a problem; their tinker systems are
different) very often?

Linux in itself takes a LOT more to configure it than a Windows system (just simply more to configure). So I then out of desparation, they try to fix Linux machine than reformat them. In the occuring trend today is (I think) because the Linux users haven't dug into configuring Linux all that deep. However, take the very same person, and let them invest over 40 hours of grooling configuration, and they'll think twice about "reformatting".

Just my 2 cents worth.

Except for a corrupt filesystem, unfixible with fsck, I can't really think of any other reason to do a re-install. And even with that said, depending on which filesystem is broken, you may still not need to re-install. -mk

Hi,
I now people doing reinstalls for version numbers... something I dont understand. On the other Hand, I met people buying a brandnew windoze-pc, telling me its so fast, the dont have to WAIT for a word-document to open.
So If a lot of people are really sick, why shoudnt linux users be a little sick?

I don't think it's a mistake to reinstall if you are new to Linux and just experiementing while learning about the tools. On the other hand it's nice to recieve advise from the experts, and if they say that they don't reinstall than maybe that's what beginners should eventually strive for. As a personal idea, I keep a small container of blank notes/cards beside my PC and I write down all kinds of information about command line tools, and installation steps that I have performed sucessufully. That way I have a reference that lasts longer than my memory.

Dunno if I'm considered a linux guru, but i don't reinstall very often (more like never if I can help it.).
But I know that many users new to linux do not understand the concept of multi-user and root. Thus they use root as they everyday account, and sooner or later manage to screw up the system thoroughly. The usual option the is to reinstall. After a cuple of times they get the message and create a useraccount for their everyday work.
OTOH I know some guys who like to try out different linux versions, and instead of using them parallel, they "reinstall Linux"...

My two cents worth. A post on one of these bb's said the best way to learn Linux is to just get in there and screw it up. Most of the reinstalls involve just that. We are learning about setting it up and really screw something up. Since we have nothing more than the operating system and, maybe, some test files where we tried emacs or AbiWord, there isn't much stopping us. We have nothing needing saving. We also do not want to live with the repercussions of our ignorance. At this stage of our learning reinstalling the OS is the quickest way to reset everything to factory defaults. We get to start back at a known starting point. As we're learning, this is very important.

When I first installed Linux, I found three different ways to configure the hard drive. Everyone of them was kind enough to point out that if you asked ten Linux experts how it should be done, you would get ten different answers. Isn't that informative? Yes, from the standpoint that there are a number of very valid opinions. No, because it means it comes down to personal preference.

My only option, therefore, was to try different configurations. After each, I'd have to stick the CD back in and start from the beginning with the next one. When I finished with that, I started configuring Linux. I've tried both Mandrake and Red Hat, in many different configurations. I would work with them to get all of the part working. For example, Mandrake considered my modem a Winmodem (it's not). Red Hat loved my modem but wouldn't acknowledge my CD-ROM. These were both opportunities for me to now play some more with Linux and I took them. When I had tinkered enough that my desktop had become unstable, I put everything back to factory defaults (I reinstalled the OS).

As I get everything set the way I like it, my willingness to reinstall the OS drops dramatically. My personal computer is running Red Hat 8.0 and is set the way I want it. It will have to be a very bad problem for me to mess with that.

On the other hand, I have an older office laptop that I have installed Red Hat 7.2 on. This computer has limited resources and 7.2 is a little crowded--not exactly the most stable platform you could work on. Prior to reading your post, it locked up on me. I tried to change to another virtual console (Crtl-Alt-F1) so I could reboot it. It was having none of that--this laptop locks up enough that my only option is to just turn it off. This is not how I want to exit from Linux, so I will be tinkering with it to see if I can coax more stability out of it. I have little doubt that will involve starting over again. Since I know that, I keep all of my files in one place and will move them before reinstalling. My cost? Thirty minutes.

I still use Windows, both 98SE and 2000 and can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I've reinstalled those operating systems. In my office, our network administrator works for me and none of us have seen the constant reinstallation of Windows you believe we converts bring to Linux.

As I said, I think it is just learning Linux and nothing to be worried about. Knowing that I can just start over reassures me that I cannot possibly screw it up beyond repair. That's a nice, warm fuzzy to have!

Greetings all:

I was actually looking here to get advice on whether or not I should rebuild my kernel after experiencing a series of problem with Samba and hostnames. I am kindof new to Linux and have decided to migrate my systems over from Win2K. I was trying to do the configuration in order to migrate my web folders initially and then I was going to gradually migrate.

I think what happens for those of us coming from windows is that we get so use to having the visual interface to solve our problems for us that we forget about all the necessary instruction that takes place behind the scenes. This, of course, puts us at the mercy of MS and usually puts dents into our bank accounts once a year.

I have to decided to try and push through now and will only reinstall if I just can't avoid it. I will look through the post to see why is it that I just can't seem to get Samba configured right. The box shows up in Network Neighborhood but when I try to open it I get a "Server is not accessible. You do not have permission..." error.

disays:
You are tackling a very difficult problem (SAMBA) that many
seasoned linux users still have trouble with. Don't back down, but do
realize that SAMBA is not typical of linux problems, it is much more
difficult.
When I say reinstalling, I really mean wiping the disk (maybe) and going
back to the very beginning. Rebuilding your kernel is something else
entirely. If you really need something that's available in the kernel,
rebuild it so it works for you. . .
Of course, I'm not sure why you would need to rebuild your kernel to get
SAMBA to work, but that's another thread. . .

Definitely. I think that a lot of users confuse that. A kernel rebuild is *sometimes* (if I am really tired when I do it ) A weekly thing for me. Either I missed something, or want to try it a different way, or whatever.

The ONLY time I re-install now is if I decide to redo my winbloze partition differently, making it smaller, or moving it around or whatever. I hardly ever re-install linux due to a problem, but rather from boredom It's been a good long time since a re-install due to a linux problem, so I guess either I am getting less bored, or I figured out how to manipulate a lot things.

Cool

Hi Moses:

I figured that you were drawing the distinction as it seems logical. I will do my best to hang in there. The nice thing is that the GUIs are aroung to help me with the transition. I work alot with multimedia and like to do things on the fly.

In the two weeks since installing RH8 I've learned alot about the power of Linux and have begun looking at various advantages eg, using it to run web and mail all for essential no cost.

Hopefully, I'll be able to troubleshoot the Samba configuration.

thanx...
dawit..

I agree, it's part of the learning experience especially since each time the user gets to rethink (one would hope so anyways) how he has his partitions, and what might make for a better installation. So, it's practice, no harm in that.

Of course you don't want them doing it for the least little problems...

And a dichotomy arises when we discourage the "newbie" from experimenting, and then expect them to be an expert later on.


Same here, my work box (Win95) finally had to have a reinstall after five years of use .


Amen.


John

There's a big difference between "have to" and "want to".

When I was new to Linux, I did re-install several times, because I wasn't sure what I had done and wanted to trace my steps better to figure out where and how I screwed things up. Beyond that, I have found only one other reason to "have to" (at least for me). When I got a new drive for my laptop, it was just easier.

As time goes on, and as knowledge (hopefully) deepens, problem-solving can be more specific and less the shotgun/Windows approach of re-load. It becomes more a matter of identifying problems to a package, or even a specific piece of software and perhaps re-installing/refreshing/upgrading the bad piece.

If you want to reload, go for it, but it's seldom really needed.

When I first started, it was such a pain to reinstall (~30 diskettes (any
number of which were bad at any one time), 486, took at least a day), that I
really struggled not to have to reinstall. Kids these days, they have it so
easy, just pop in a CD, and in 30 minutes they've got a new install.