What distro are you running?

[spankers]

I've been a Linux geek for quite a while and I've found that Debian suits me quite nicely. I was using Red Hat a long time ago but it seems that distros that use RPM's irritate me to no end due to endless package dependancy problems.

What are your experiences with the different distibutions and which do you prefer?

[jer1ch0]

I've tried quite a few distros. Redhat, Fedora, Mandrake, suSE and Slackware. I've had different experences with them all mostly because of the different installation routines. However at the end of the day they are quite similar. Mandrake, Fedora, suSE are very similar. Slack is a bit different and diffinately a distro I need to come back to.
At the moment I am using Fedora Core 2. The only thing I don't like is the lack of support for mp3 and ntfs. for these reasons I would not reccommend it.
What is the installation like with Debian and why do you like it?

[spankers]

I'm not sure about mp3 support for FC2 but NTFS should be supported in the kernel and Fedora should provide any user space utilities. I am a compulsive kernel compiler and it looks like the current kernels provide Read/Write access to NTFS volumes. Maybe Fedora thinks it is still not proven?

After a long absence from Red Hat I decided to give Fedora Core 2 a try (on a spare box). Red Hat/Fedora still doesn't do it for me. Debian has a much larger selection of software available in their package repository and it still seems easier and more trouble free than Fedora.... plus Debian boot times are faster.

The Debian install is probably the weakest link in the distro... and conversely Fedora's strong suit. The installer is console/text based (to me this is actually an asset), and you should have a good feel for what hardware you have under the hood... processor, IDE controller, etc. as configuring parts of Debian is kinda hands on. If you were to convert to Debian I'd recommend running hwinfo and lspci -vv and printing it out.

The best thing I like about Debian is the way software is packaged and accessed. I use a front end called dselect to install/upgrade software and I really like it... others can't stand it. dselect uses another program called apt (stands for Advanced Package Tool) which in turn uses dpkg (Debian Package... somewhat similar to the rpm command). Using dselect one can select a package to install, review what dependancies are required or suggested, and select what you want to install.

This works across multiple package repositories that are defined in /etc/apt/sources... here's mine:
root@hermes:/home/eherr# cat /etc/apt/sources.list
# deb file:///cdrom/ sarge main
deb ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ unstable main contrib non-free
# deb-src ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main
deb ftp://ftp.nerim.net/debian-marillat/ unstable main
# deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main

I added the nerim.net repository because it contains the good multimedia stuff that Debian cannot/will not provide in the official distro.... LAME, transcode, DeCSS, dvd::rip, MPlayer, etc. dselect will update from each repository and give you a combined list of new and upgradable available packages.

If my laptop didn't get so damn hot while compiling large packages from source I'd give Gentoo Linux a shot... but as it stands I'll stick to Debian with a few odds and ends built from source.

[jer1ch0]

Thanks for that Spankers. I'll get back to you in about a year when I'm (hopefully) up to your Linux standard.

[dang]

I'm using suse9.1 here at home, but have used debian, redhat, redhat enterprise, mandrake (but not in a long time), and experimented with fedora. Debian seems pretty solid as a server based distro, but the setup can be a complete pain. Redhat does it's job well still, and rpm's can be pain in the butt, but if you like apt, then up2date on redhat does a decent job (apt is still better in that regard though.)

[spankers]

It's all in what you're comfortable with, I guess. Debian may not be the easiest to set up, but upgrades and maintenance are a piece of cake. up2date ain't half bad, like you say, but you'd have a hard time convincing me to give up apt for up2date.

I've got an older laptop I use for testing... I'll have to give SuSE a whirl. I've heard good things about it. Not a very imaginative name for a distro though. Software und System Entwicklung.

I'll have to give Slackware a try also... I'm a masochist I guess.

[spankers]

Thanks for that Spankers. I'll get back to you in about a year when I'm (hopefully) up to your Linux standard.

I don't know how long you've been using Linux but even with the easier distros, it's a bit of a steep learning curve if your background is Windows. I had the benefit of being a Unix admin when I was in the Navy. Going from Unix to Linux is a piece of cake.

Most distros have the complete set of Linux HOWTOs on the install CD(s) (I've also posted a link to the HOWTO's here in the Linux section). Read them, and the man pages... and Google is your friend. After some time perhaps you will feel like branching out to something like Debian. Or perhaps the Debian folks will make the distro a bit more friendly.

Cheers and best of luck,
Ed

[openbsd-flipp]

dettux
http://hobbingen.uni-muenster.de/dettus/dettuxx/
when i am not on an open bsd system

[spankers]

dettux?! Ohhhh... you are a sick one. Makes Gentoo look like a user friendly distro.

My experience with Open BSD is limited to server applications and unscrewing borked packet filter configs. How does it run on the desktop compared to Linux? Does the kernel support preemption?

[llbbl]

We use RH primarly. I'd lke to try some different ones at home when I get an extra monitor. I know flipp has tried and has copies of like every distro and major point releases under the sun. He is like Linux Torvalds meets Jessie James ... lol !

[dang]

TecknoGeek, just get a KVM. Saves you a lot more money then having to go buy another monitor/keyboard/mouse.

[spankers]

Or install your new Linux distro on a new box and then use the X server on your existing box (with keyboard & monitor) to run X apps remotely. One of the things that made X a little odd is the client/server separation. The server handles the hardware specific stuff and the client (application) doesn't really care about the hardware or where it is located... it either connects to the server through Unix sockets or via network connections.

I've used remote X (on my LAN) occasionally but normally use ssh for remote boxes.
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Remote-X-Apps.html

NOTE! Remote X can be horribly insecure... DO NOT use on public internet connections.

[starples]

(Jumping on this thread a little late)

I run Gentoo on my main desktop and on my work laptop that I use in the office and travel with. Dual-boot the laptop with WinXP for work-related days like today.

At home, two servers on Mandrake, and just switched my Squirrelmail server over to Gentoo.

[dang]

Or, do like I do most of the time, just ssh in and use the shell. Who needs X, it's to overweight anyways. :)

[spankers]

Or, do like I do most of the time, just ssh in and use the shell. Who needs X, it's to overweight anyways. :)
Oh, I agree! Using lynx to browse the web gets a little old after a while though. ;)

X seems to be one of those standards that is so entrenched I doubt we'll ever get away from it. DirectFB is neat but does not have the driver support to bring it into the mainstream.

[spankers]

I run Gentoo on my main desktop and on my work laptop that I use in the office and travel with. Dual-boot the laptop with WinXP for work-related days like today.

How long does it take to install on your laptop and what desktop (e.g., GNOME, KDE, Xfce, Fluxbox, etc.) are you using? My laptop runs extremely hot when compiling large packages and the largest I've built from source is Xorg 6.8.1 ... took a hour or so.

[starples]

How long does it take to install on your laptop and what desktop (e.g., GNOME, KDE, Xfce, Fluxbox, etc.) are you using? My laptop runs extremely hot when compiling large packages and the largest I've built from source is Xorg 6.8.1 ... took a hour or so.

I'm using KDE 3.3.0, Xorg 6.7.0. My laptop is fairly speedy, it's a Thinkpad T30, P4 2.0GHz, 512MB. Still, large packages can take several hours. I usually kick it off overnight, or leave it at home and ssh/screen in from the office while waiting for everything to compile. The main offenders that I upgrade with any frequency are KDE, X and OpenOffice.

For KDE 3.3.1, I may try to go the lightweight (http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Super_Light_KDE) route and see how that works out.

[spankers]

For KDE 3.3.1, I may try to go the lightweight route and see how that works out.

GNOME panel, KDE desktop, and Xfce window manager... damn!

I'm sold on Xfce4. I was using GNOME but got fed up with the unholy porkyness. Xfce4 (from cvs) has very few dependencies (gtk2 libs, libxml, libdbh) and is VERY modular. It's a piece of cake to build. If you haven't tried it you might want to give it a spin.

CVS:
cvs -d:pserver:anoncvs@cvs.xfce.org:/cvsroot/xfce co xfce4

Install instructions:
http://www.xfce.org/index.php?page=documentation&lang=en#install

Screenshots:
http://www.xfce.org/index.php?page=devel_screenshots&lang=en

I don't build the taskbar as there is a xfce4-panel taskbar plugin. The cleaner the better...

Thanks for the info on Gentoo build time... I think I'll have to wait for a hardware upgrade. If I tried Gentoo on this beast (VPR Matrix 185A5) we'd have another Chernobyl on our hands.

[llbbl]

Hey I like Gnome better than KDE, design wise it looks cleaner and the functionality seems to make more sense. Is there really a "performance" difference between the two?

[spankers]

Is there really a "performance" difference between the two?
I wouldn't think there is too much of a difference in performance once all components are loaded. It's more a matter of user interface and application preferences... KDE has some great applications built against QT and GNOME has its GTK+ apps. I just think both are resource hogs and take WAY too long to load.

Lightweight is good. If I could find a decent lightweight panel I liked I would probably switch to Openbox.
http://icculus.org/openbox/

[starples]

I'm not sure there is much of a performance diff between KDE and GNOME either, just whatever you're more comfortable with. I usually stick with KDE because I dig Konsole, the file dialogs, webdav in konqueror and that sort of thing. To each his own!

I may have to try out Xfce4, though. I like lightweight!

[openbsd-flipp]

KDE 3.x series has lessened the hit your system takes when it is running, but the diffrence is verry minimal. Gnome has also become a bit of a recource pig lately but that is a sign of the times unfortunently. What most people forget is that their first linux system (and some times many more then that) is the old computer that they replcaed so that the new Windows games will run better. This results in a desktop a few years old trying to run an application that is the latest and greatest. What people must do when they decide to install Linux for their first time is take into account the hardware that they are planning on running and the SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS for the FULL INSTALL. Yes I know that Linux will run very happily on a 386 with 4mb. of ram and a whopping 100mb hard drive, but their is no way in hell that KDE 3.3.x will run on that. All your versions will tell you what are the minimum requirements but treat it like you would treat a game. If the miminum CPU is 2.4ghz a 3.2ghz proc qill be MUCH better. This is the same with destop managers. over time they went from basic to "pretty". To get that "pretty" stage they had to screw the system requirements in the rear but it works. Now if you feal that you musty have a desktop manager that is pretty put some frikkin money into your box and give it a decent base to start with. </rant>

[ECA]

Very true OPEN..

Bells and whistles COST RAM, and speed.

windows is STILL trying to make Dynamic divers, that LOAD when needed, then drop out when not in use.
The AMIGa had that, which was great... Very little loaded at startup. When you clicked on an Item, it loaded drivers to run it, otherwise the system was CLEAN.

[spankers]

To get that "pretty" stage they had to screw the system requirements in the rear but it works. Now if you feal that you musty have a desktop manager that is pretty put some frikkin money into your box and give it a decent base to start with.

The question is... What is pretty? I happen to thing one of the best "pretty" features to come along in the last few years is antialiased fonts... and that is implemented in X, not the desktop.

With GNOME much of the fatty tissue is in things like Bonobo, gConf, and the mother of all porkmeisters, Nautilus. There is no excuse for that kind of bloat in a file manager. Unless forced I doubt I'll ever touch GNOME again.

I like Xfce4 in it's current form but I see signs of bloat on the horizon. Enlightenment or Fluxbox may be next for me.

[ECA]

truly,
CLEAN programing, is going Bye-Bye...
Bells whisles and EVERYTHING else...has to be loaded to display a text file. Its a shame..

ALL i would wish is a straight, Graphic file processor, Start/run, and thats about it.