dpkg is for Debian based distros. On Arch you would configure the font like described here: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Font#Console_fonts

Arch on a server wouldn't even come to my mind (Ubuntu Server wouldn't also, but that is a different story). On a server I would only use well tested stable distros, like Debian, CentOS/RHEL or Slackware. The last thing I would want on my server would be a breakage from the last update because someone hasn't tested that well enough.

I would use a BSD for a server

Good point, I'll keep that in mind. I haven't tried Debian much, I might give it a shot.

What makes you say that Ubuntu Server wouldn't be a good choice? Is it the whole Ubuntu thing, or something else? Keep in mind that I set this up before I had a very clear understanding of how Linux works, and at the time I was using Lubuntu. It has 2 HDDs, an 80GB one for the OS and a 250GB one for my actual data. I recently chopped the OS drive into 10 GB partitions, and right now (off the top of my head) I have Ubuntu Server (the one that's currently running), Arch, and Slackware. As of now, GRUB only knows of Ubuntu, [opens SSH in a terminal], wait, now it knows about Slack, I might have been wrong about installing Arch. But I digress.
Does Debian come with an option to not install a GUI? Since it's a server, it doesn't really need one, and honestly the Celeron in there seems too weak to handle any kind of excess processing, just take the mplayer example from the previous page. :) I can't believe the original owner ran XP on it...

Yes, you can do a minimal Debian install, and only install what you want/need. (One could go crazy trying to decide between Debian and Slackware- they're both great, stable distros. Me? I might opt for Debian, if I did a lot of work on the server, if only for the quick and easy package installation...come the day that you need it.)

(((Hey Maw! Lookit me! I done-did knowed the answer to the compooter question!)))

I'm sure we've all had some of that at one point or another...My moment came the first time I booted a computer without a HDD... It was a 486, and I found a DOS boot floppy... Somehow, it ended up in my Rube Goldberg project for sccience class... hitting the spacebar was the goal. I wrote a quick batch file that cleared the screen, waited for a keypress, then echo'ed out an ASCII Pop-Tart.

I really need to mess with that computer again, it's collecting dust now. But first, I need to find a better method of connecting the keyboard. It only has an AT port. After a bit of Googling, I discovered that a PS/2 keyboard is essentially an AT keyboard with a different shape connector. I used Invisible Fence wire to give my alligator clips something to connect to (it fits PERFECTLY in the holes on the AT port) and I hacked the shield of the PS/2 plug away (with wire cutters...it was an interesting project) until I could reach the pins. 4 alligator clips later, I had a keyboard. Is there something wrong with me, or is this considered normal in the area of Linux users? :rolleyes:

It is just my personal opinion, I wouldn't consider to use an OS on a critical system like a server that has to be released at a specific date, regardless in which condition the OS is at that point. It says much about an OS when the developers tell their enterprise users at release time not to upgrade to the new version before the first point release, because they need more time to fix the bugs in that version. An enterprise grade OS IMHO should only have exactly one release date: when it's done.

I can't speak for Linux users at large- but you'd make a great shade-tree mechanic! LOL! (I've got one bolt and a C-clamp holding the starter in my van; and the connectors hacked-off the stereo and the wires spliced together...)

I wouldn't consider that normal, I would have just looked if I have an adapter around and if not bought one, they are about 3$.

Hi Sumguy

Depending how mplayer was compiled, mplayer offers video output options. You can type this to see a list of video output playback:

I must say with the smaller text and stepping back from the screen further video looks good enough to watch from a CLI. :)

I just lost what little faith I had that Microsoft was going to be able to make Windows 8 usable. I know it was a long shot, but I was honestly hoping that it would work out all right.

I tried to uninstall the "updates" that caused my laptop to boot so slowly. That didn't work. I did some looking around, and Microsoft has a "Refresh" thing that's suppossed to reset the OS. I made the assumption that it would reset 8.1, which was what I wanted. Instead, it stuck me in 8, :confused: and now the "App Store" won't work, so I can't re-update to 8.1. So I did a bit more Googling (using IE, since I felt like punishing it :rolleyes:, and Firefox was gone) and found a few things that didn't work. I eventually came across a "Reset" which (if I understand this correctly) wipes the partition and reinstalls the OS. It's running now, so it should be done in the morning. Then I get to sign into it, find the 2 updates required to make Win8.1 avalible in the "Store" then download 3.1 GB that I've downloaded at least 4 times aready. Then I get to install 8.1, then try to keep it from updating itself. :banghead:

Then I'm dual-booting Win7 on it. And once I'm done with that, I'm throwing Arch on there as well. :Pengy: The only reason I have for keeping 8 is for the warranty, and I just don't like the idea of completely wiping the original OS off it. My dad probably wouldn't like it, either. I guess I could always get win8.1 freshly installed, then use Clonezilla on it. Actually, I wish I would have done that earlier, then I wouldn't have all these problems!!

So I re-installed 8, upgraded to 8.1, and it worked. Took an image and immediately shrunk the Win partition to 100GB. It's a 1TB hard drive, so it's not that big of a deal for me. (My backup server only has 250 GB, I think, so I hope I don't use the full terabyte) I then made another NTFS partition and burned a Win7 install DVD. Apparently, Win7 doesn't like GPT disks. It simply refuses to install. So I guess I'm stuck with 8.1. But once I get Arch on it, I'll barely be using Windows anyway, so it shouldn't matter. I plan on giving Arch 100GB, then making the rest a shared partition for my files.

so why not virtualize your win stuff?
i have a need for MAC OS for a CAD program, but i also need Windoze, so i have a new killer PC that i will run win8.1 w/ vmware, and then i'll have a bunch of vm's for all my other nix's and doze OS's, etc. new machine is e31270v3 xeon, asrock 9ac mobo, 32G of ECC, three 240G crucial SSD's in raid-5, evga gtx760 video, and corsair water cooler.

Well if you don't have a fast CPU and lots of RAM virtualizing isn't very fast.