Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
I never tested it, and I will probably never test it.
In the few cases where I really needed to defrag a linux fs, I did a backup, formated, and restored the backup. For me, it's the only secure and "official" method to defragment an fs in linux. However, some people seem to live happy with this "shake" thing.
Thank you, I will try out the software "Shake" and see what it does.
-By the way, on a different note, i often get the feeling from linux users that they think that windows is bad. I always notice that long-time linux users always make windows sound like its inferior to linux. I am just saying is this the case? Both linux and windows have their pros and cons.
I often get the feeling from linux users that they think that windows is bad. I always notice that long-time linux users always make windows sound like its inferior to linux. I am just saying is this the case? Both linux and windows have their pros and cons.
They each have their pros and cons for sure, (though I personally can't think of any real pros to using Win, but that's just me) notably:
Win is better suited to game playing (generally).
Win (until Vista anyway) had a poorer default security model than Linux has had forever.
<insert 1000 more comparisons here>
We all can debate the crap out of this till the cows come home-- which has already been done a million times here, and all of which discussions have been merged into one or more gigantic "Windows vs Linux Megathread" threads.
Search LQ for "megathread" and go from there; add your own views/perspective as needed, rather than corrupting your thread here
That's where fsck will store the info that it finds to be on blocks that are allocated, but that are not referenced by any file name. In other words, info that lies on the disk but has no name. The files will be named based on their inode number, and they don't necesarily have any consistency. Anything into that directory is born from an inconsistency in the file system. Sometimes you might be able to recover something lost from there, the smaller the lost file is the easier it will be to find something that resembles it after an fs breakage.
Those files are kind of like the result of chkdsk in dos/win, when it finds lost chains.
In other words, the longer that that directory remains empty, the better you will live. If you erase it, fsck will create it in the next run anyway.
lost+found is where fsck will put files that it recovers during a check. For some errors, it can't tell where the data used to be in the filesystem, so this is the standard place to reattach them so the sysadmin can sort it out. Properly rm'd files never go there.
Edit: Read the link above. I can't read the whole 10 pages now, but it looks very good (those O'Reilly people know their shit).
Originally Posted by BumbleBee
I always notice that long-time linux users always make windows sound like its inferior to linux. I am just saying is this the case?
Do most people who do their computing with Linux think Windows is inferior? Of course. Unless your parents were freakin' sweet, you learned how to use computers on Windows or a Mac, so the reason you use Linux now is you tried it, learned about it, and judged it better.
Is Windows inferior? Well, let's just say I've never seen someone go back.
Last edited by karamarisan; 08-24-2009 at 01:28 AM.