Linux - GeneralThis Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.
Notices
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.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
View Poll Results: Which one would you recommend ?
From my personal point of view, every relevant thing you can put on a resume can improve the impression it has on future employers. However listing experiences with distinct distros in my opinion doesn't add any value. Companies are more looking to specific knowledge when reviewing a resume, for example high availability, reduncancy, distributed storage and things like that appeal nowadays a lot more then a list of distros you have experience with and which will hardly be used by the larger companies (most of them use RedHat, Debian, OpenSUSE, the big boys).
What would give you an advantage mentioning LFS, Arch, Slackware, is if you are referring to it to indicate troubleshooting skills in my opinion.
Without internet connection it doesn't make sense to install a "rolling release" distro like Arch IMHO. Apart from that, I'd definitely go with Arch, it's probably one of the best documented distros (wiki, forum), and the community is friendly and very helpful. Print out the beginners guide and you won't have much trouble installing Arch.
I have both on the laptop I'm posting from (also Debian Lenny and Sid). For me, Arch was a little more difficult to install, but if I was forced to choose between the two, I would choose Arch. I really like the rolling release.
Without an internet connection, however, Slackware wins hands-down, IMHO. I think you will have less difficulty keeping packages current. My
It does if you're not planning on performing full installs and would like just the "base system" (AAA or somesuch? haven't used Slackware in a while) + programs you directly use and their dependencies.
Yes. That's a fair point. As much as I like Slackware, if someone wants a minimal install, I'd be inclined to point towards Arch or debian. It can be done on Slackware with some care, but the 'full' install is really the recommended way to run Slackware.
From my personal point of view, every relevant thing you can put on a resume can improve the impression it has on future employers. However listing experiences with distinct distros in my opinion doesn't add any value. Companies are more looking to specific knowledge when reviewing a resume, for example high availability, reduncancy, distributed storage and things like that appeal nowadays a lot more then a list of distros you have experience with and which will hardly be used by the larger companies (most of them use RedHat, Debian, OpenSUSE, the big boys).
What would give you an advantage mentioning LFS, Arch, Slackware, is if you are referring to it to indicate troubleshooting skills in my opinion.
Companies are more looking to specific knowledge when reviewing a resume, for example high availability, redundancy, distributed storage and things like that appeal nowadays a lot more then a list of distros you have experience with and which will hardly be used by the larger companies (most of them use RedHat, Debian, OpenSUSE, the big boys).
Eric,
Kindly explain in more detail the terms "high availability and redundancy" In what context you are talking ?
I think i have guessed wrong that's why i am asking !
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.