[lug] Primer on Linux Distros
LittleViggy at alum.manhattan.edu
Fri Oct 18 08:12:30 MDT 2002
Slackware: Why? Because it's almost completely manual. Yes, I'm a
glutton for punishment! Slackware is actually a nice distribution. The
setup program is very primitive; and it doesn't do too much for you.
You can choose to install everything; select from certain packages
(which will install groups of stuff); or you can select from individual
files. What I really like is that there are not a lot of "automagic"
setup tools, you have to create, or modify, the various config files
manually. This gives the end user a very good feel for how the OS
operates. This is *not* a distribution for the beginer! I run it on my
laptop mostly for leisure, and surfing the net.
Bernard Johnston wrote:
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: bill ehlert <bill_ehlert_lists at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: RE: [lug] new distro
>> To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
>> Reply-To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
>> nate wrote:
>> [ babble, babble, babble ]
>> peter wrote:
>> [ babble, babble, babble ]
>> ** geez, enuff already!
>> it occurs to me that it would be really
>> nice if a few folks would write a bit
>> about his/her/their favoriate distro,
>> -- what distinguishes it from others
>> -- what it's particularly good for
>> -- what it's not so good for
>> THAT would be interesting and useful!
> Ok, Bill, I'll bite. Here's my exegesis of the distributions as they now
> Lindows--Win 98 Clone. It's a good idea but it hasn't been engineered
> very well. Lots of
> people report all sorts of trouble getting it to work with hardware,
> etc. Not ready for prime time
> yet but it might eventually turn out well for the mass market. One nice
> feature is that it is Debian-based and so has the wonderful apt-get
> Lycoris (alias Redmond)--WinXP Clone. Very nice for basic (i.e.,
> Windows) users. This is what
> I'm setting my mother up with. It still has an unfinished feel to it,
> but no major problems. I expect it to give XP a serious run for its
> money in a year or so.
> Mandrake--My personal favorite. This is Redhat-based with a nice KDE
> (Qt) GUI. That means that binaries are packaged in the rpm format, which
> can lead to "RPM hell" (one package depending on another depending on
> another, etc., so that you can't install anything). That's the downside.
> This is mitigated somewhat by Ximian's RedCarpet, which is similar to
> apt-get. Nice look and feel, and some real thought has been given to
> useability, but it still has a solid base for power users. I like the
> Xkill feature and the way they've set up the CDRom and Floppy right on
> the desktop. I use 8.2. 9.0 (just out) is rumored to be quite buggy and
> should be avoided.
> RedHat--most common distro, so you get the benefit of the knowledge of
> people around you. Arguably the best server distro. Until their latest
> release they were not very interested in the desktop/workstation but
> that's changing. The newest release (8.0) is quite attractive but rather
> buggy. The general rule on RedHat is wait till the *.2 (stable) release.
> Suffers from RPM hell as above.
> SUSE--seems comparable to Redhat but I have little personal knowledge.
> It's more popular in Europe.
> Debian--seems to be the top choice of command-line-oriented power
> users/hackers who want to know where every byte goes. Seems to give the
> most control to the user. Replaces the RPM-package system with apt-get
> which takes care of dependencies for you. Has some other nifty
> command-line features.
> Gentoo--very interesting distro in which you compile everything from
> scratch. This takes a long time to install (!) but in the end has the
> advantage that you know the software is completely optimized for your
> Anybody else want to throw in their .02?
> Web Page: http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> Join us on IRC: lug.boulder.co.us port=6667 channel=#colug
More information about the LUG