Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
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've never used it. Does that still count? I personally think RH, Mandrake, and SuSe are all too corporate. I don't like rpms. I don't like SysV inits. I don't like too many (if any) specialized GUI tools. I don't like funky filenames or directory structures. I really don't like the idea of shipping broken compilers or excessively 'specially' patched kernels. I don't like that any one distro is essentially synonymous with 'Linux' in Joe Public's mind, if Linux is in Joe Public's mind at all. I don't like how many pages they take from the Microsoft playbook - which is why I think of it as MicroHat. In other words, everything I've heard, read, or imagined about it has made me decide to never bother with it. SuSe's way too corporate, doesn't provide proper downloads, I hear their support sucks, and they're too close to SCO. Mandrake has advertisements and corporate links and whatnot but that's the one of the three I've actually used. I didn't like it but I can see why people would and I sometimes recommend it with reservations to certain people looking for a distro.
Just what I think.
As far as whether Slack or Debian are advanced and RH is newbie, that is the general impression but if you like RH, use it, and screw what others think. On average, I find Slack users more knowledgeable than RH users but an average is a fake thing made up out of real people, almost none of whom are actually average. There are many RH wizards and many Slackware idiots (not that I'd have any personal experience with being - er, knowing about - that last).
I have a Debian install I don't use much - or like much - but the only thing particularly 'advanced' about it is actually primitive - it has the worst installation process I've ever suffered through, excepting only Core. After that, there's not much especially 'advanced' about it. People get freaked out having to use fdisk to install Slack but Slack's install is fine. Configuring Slack is probably a lot harder but mostly in an optimizing sense. Just minimally running it is not too hard. I dunno. If you like the command line and text files and don't much mind reading some docs, Slack doesn't seem so hard. Maybe if you don't, it seems impossible. It's more an attitude thing than an advanced/newbie thing. The most advanced distro is running Minix and creating a kernel. The gulf between that and Lindows puts Slack, Debian *and* RH pretty close together nearer the Lindows end.
Is that about what I said about rpms? That's true - that was just something I threw in my laundry list. I don't really even use *.tgz either, beyond the initial install and security updates and whatnot - my add-on apps are usually from source. I used a lot of funky distros early on and compiling was a real pain and part of the joy of Slackware is how smooth many compiles go. Part of what I understood (or misunderstood?) about RH was that compiling could be a headache due to RH peculiarities.
If it wasn't about what I said, then never mind. *g*
I'm with trickykid. Redhat is also my second choice after Slack. Although, lately, I'm using a lot J.A.M.D. It's pretty much like Redhat, but with a single CD and apt-get/synaptic by default. That helps a bunch to update stuff and doesn't have unnecessary stuff, as 4 browsers, 5 windows managers and all that you know Redhat is shipped with.
I also have to disagree that they (Redhat) is too close to SCO, in fact, I think they have sued SCO a few months ago. And the support is very very good, both from Redhat and the rpm's around (if there's a rpm, there's surely a Redhat rpm).
Note: J.A.M.D ain't good for compiling stuff. In fact, it does not come even with gcc, but you can apt-get for it. Personally, I think that it's a very worthy try for those used with Redhat
Last edited by Mega Man X; 10-09-2003 at 12:53 PM.
I'm not particularily fond of RedHat even though I have used it pretty extensively. RPM hell isn't my cup of tea and the eerie similarities between RedHat and Microsoft (register! register!) put me off.
I mainly use Debian because I am used to it and the package system is excellent. One can complain about the install process but it's actually not that hard. But OK, it's not a "wizard" if that's what you want.
Out of the things that annoy me most about the mentioned corporate-focused Linux distros (and Mandrake) is that they are basically trying to be the next Microsoft - they want GNU/Linux to be the next Windows. That's pure crap if you excuse my language. Linux should be Linux and even though I agree on making it more user friendly can be positive in attracting new users, pretending that Linux isn't Linux - like Lindows (who must be a bunch of complete idiots - running as root per default? Ha!) is very wrong.
I've always used Slackware, it was the first distro somebody loaned me on CD way back when.
I tried Redhat out once, and I couldn't figure it out. I in no way blame this on Redhat, but on myself. I just found it amusing that I hammered my way through one of the "advanced" distros, and got befuddled by the one that's supposed to be the easiest to use.
ok if have tested a lot of distros like red hat(5-8),mandrake(7-9),suse,debian,knoppix,freebsd... just for fun and to learn more about linux and different concepts
but in the end i love my slack its fast and custom also its not overloaded with guis or programs no one ever needs ...
but of course i can understand people using rh,mandrake,suse, because its easy to install,easy to use ...
so people who just want to use their computers without getting into and getting to know what really happens in a system its ok
if someone wants to know an easy to use distro i mostly say get rh,mandrake,suse but for myself i have tested them and learned, that i want to have a more customable distro, thats why i rested at slack and i dont think ill change in the future .