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!
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.
I recently switched to Linux. Specifically SuSE 10. I have tried all sorts of distros, but the easiest for me to learn was both Mandriva and SuSE. I am going to get flamed for this: The others, expecially Debian based required lots of configuration for my hardware, not the easiest for beginners. Each distro has its merrit.
The reason I recommend SuSE is:
1. It manages the RPMs (automated package installs)
2. Online update check for updates in security, kernel upgrades, software changes, etc. (Mandriva requires a license for these if you get the free version)
3. It found all my hardware and was able to use it. I had lots of trouble getting my tv card to work in the other Distros.
4. Integrated help and documentation. Infact the guide is in pdf format on the install DVD.
If you are using RedHat, then you should know how RPMs work.
The only problem with SuSE is that it often has graphics card/monitor problems.
Ubuntu is cool, but it comes on a single CD and requires downloading all the extra software you want instead of putting in the cd/dvd.
.rpm
As stated above, RPM is a package management system. Files take this form: wine-20050524-1fc3winehq.i386.rpm .
When you obtain this file your Redhat Package Manager will be able to take this file and determine all those complicated bits in order to install it properly on your system (like, where to put it, what dependencies it has, if it's a "broken package",....). The thing that sucks about these package management systems is that if you have a distro that can't make use of the .rpm you'll have to look elsewhere for that file but in a different form. I know, I know. If you have a non-redhat based distro but want to use .rpm files just install alien (at least in cases of Debian). Then you can convert the .rpm into a .deb or whatever (?). Maybe someone with more experience could correct my statement...
.run and .sh
Some programs take a different form which can be more generic and even executable. Files that end in either .run or .sh are shell scripts. Browse filefront.com and you'll find "Enemy Territory 2.56", a free multiplayer game (sequel to RTCW but FREE). This is it's filename: et-linux-2.56-2.x86.run .
This one can be installed just by typing the filename (provided it has correct executable permissions set).
.deb
Files ending in .deb. Same difference as .rpm only it's designed for Debian distros.
KERNELs
Kernels in linux are analogous to different builds of Windows. Example -- LInux had Kernel 2.4.27 then released Kernel 2.6.8. Microsoft had Windows version 5.0 build 2195 (aka Windows 2000), a few years later released version 5.1 build 2600 (aka Windows XP).
Does that help or hinder?
ß
Last edited by beeblequix; 10-24-2005 at 03:58 PM.
(Mandriva requires a license for these if you get the free version)
Ahh no, menu->System->Configuration->Packaging and you'll see the update program there. It is, and always has been free and doesn't require any kind of 'licence'. Mandriva does have some kind of paid update service 'Mandriva Online' if you want it but its optional - you still get the same updates from the free mirrors.
.rpm
As stated above, RPM is a package management system. Files take this form:
wine-20050524-1fc3winehq.i386.rpm .
When you obtain this file your Redhat Package Manager will be able to take this file and determine all those complicated bits in order to install it properly on your system (like, where to put it, what dependencies it has, if it's a "broken package",....). The thing that sucks about these package management systems is that if you have a distro that can't make use of the .rpm you'll have to look elsewhere for that file but in a different form. I know, I know. If you have a non-redhat based distro but want to use .rpm files just install alien (at least in cases of Debian). Then you can convert the .rpm into a .deb or whatever (?). Maybe someone with more experience could correct my statement...
RPM is a basic package install/uninstall system. All modern distros have package management systems which use software repositories to automatically resolve dependencies, Suse has YAST, Mandriva has urpmi/RPMDrake, Fedora and Centos have yum. Distros which use .deb packages use apt/Synaptic and Gentoo has portage for its 'ebuild' packages. Slackware relies on the user to resolve dependencies themselves.
Distribution: Knoppix 3.9, SimplyMEPIS 3.3.2, Mandrake 10.1, SUSE 10.0, Windows 2000 Pro, Windows XP Home + Pro
Posts: 138
Rep:
If I were you, I'd use a deb distribution. Using Synaptic is much easier than faffing around with rpms. Mepis is my favourite, but Ubuntu is well worth downloading too.
Originally posted by Eerath If I were you, I'd use a deb distribution. Using Synaptic is much easier than faffing around with rpms. Mepis is my favourite, but Ubuntu is well worth downloading too.
APT and Synaptic also work on RPM based distros (even on Slack based distros using *.tgz files). Also rpm based distros have their own package managers e.g. smart, yum, urpmi so there is no need to faffe around with manual installation of rpms. Debian packages can face similar problems to rpms if installed manually, so this whole debs are better than rpms thing isn't accurate.
You can use any distro you like, but if you are a newbie, it is better for you to use a distro which has :
1. good community support
2. extensive package (or easy to make your own)
3. freedom (the GPL stuff)
Centos (or if you can afford, RHEL, but why would you want to?), SLACKWARE, Ubuntu, Debian (this is difficult) all have good community support (or you can find what you are looking for), good packages and give you the freedom to install what you like (unlike cripple-ware SuSE).
I suggest you go for Ubuntu if you have a reasonably fast machine (Athlon XP / P4) AND a broadband. Otherwise go for slackware.
As one newbee to another Ive recently tried Mandriva and I am at present trying Fedora core 4. Both installed with no problems for me and both came free with a magazine from Linux Format. I now have almost everything running under Linux that I need and am seriously considering finally ditching Windows at long last.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.