this is probablya very overused question, but is there really any difference between linux distributions? one of my friends gave me a red hat 7.1 cd to get me started and i haven't really had a problem with it other than the general lack of knowledge thing (I still don't know the command to shut down correctly from the console.) Another friend of mine keeps telling me to get Mandrake. he says its easier to use. also, i have plans of using my linux as a server, and another person i talked to said that for servers, the *bsd's r better OS's. and i've also heard that there is no real difference between linux and the *bsd's, and to just ust the os ur friends use so that they can help u ou a little. so, i guess my question is: is there a supreme OS?
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations SkipVought on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
linux differences
- Thread starter jacksplat
- Start date
There is no *perfect* or *better* distribution...
I personally perfer Debian, but have alot of respect for Mandrake as a desktop Linux distro, RedHat had become the "defacto standard" for corporate use, and *BSDs are great...
What you should do is take one, and learn it.. you already have RH installed and running, so poke around, read the man pages, and other docs that are available on your machine. Once you are comfortable with it, then you can start exploring other distributions and have confidence that you will be able to make an informed decision on its performance FOR YOUR NEEDS
As to your question on how to shutdown from console...
here are a few things that will work
(as root/superuser)
init 0
or
shutdown -h now
Hope that helps
-John
I personally perfer Debian, but have alot of respect for Mandrake as a desktop Linux distro, RedHat had become the "defacto standard" for corporate use, and *BSDs are great...
What you should do is take one, and learn it.. you already have RH installed and running, so poke around, read the man pages, and other docs that are available on your machine. Once you are comfortable with it, then you can start exploring other distributions and have confidence that you will be able to make an informed decision on its performance FOR YOUR NEEDS
As to your question on how to shutdown from console...
here are a few things that will work
(as root/superuser)
init 0
or
shutdown -h now
Hope that helps
-John
It's not Linux that's confusing, it's the choice of Window managers. RH7.1 runs the same kernel as MDK8, it's the WAY that MDK8 runs the installer, and the (11) choices of desktop/window managers. If you can manipulate X to run Gnome, KDE, Ice, whatever, then you're doing just fine, and you won't find any diff trying to use MDK8, Caldera, RH, Debian, etc., OTHER THAN the specific (small) differences between them. Newbies like MDK8 because it's easy to install, it's easy to configure (mostly automatic), it's easy to get devices running (modems, NICs, etc.), and it's supremely easy to get to a GUI. RH7.1 runs in second place for ease of install/use, and the others fall behind rapidly after that.
If you want a second OS to play with, learn a bit about, and enjoy this sort of thing (dual/multi-booting, "tecchy" stuff), then MDK8 or RH7.1 is perfect.
If you want to completely rid yourself of the Microsoft monopoly, then they're good to start with, get your feet wet, but you'll want a more challenging and stimulating distro soon after.
Don't get me wrong, MDK8 has everything (and then some!) that all the other distros have, it's just put together in a nice (MS Windows-like) GUI package, which makes it somewhat bloated and slow. Once you've gotten into the real workings of it, a reinstall, with ONLY the specific packages YOU want (who needs 11 desktop window managers, 27 gazillion games/puzzles/toys, 3 CD burning progs, etc.) will streamline it considerably, and speed things up at the same time. (A fully bloated install of MDK8 still takes up less space than Win98!)
It's kind of like shutting off all the extraneous processes in Win2k. Who needs most of them anyhow?
As for reliability/stability/compatibility, who can complain? Where else are you going to get an OS, with this much power (can you say Apache or Bastille?) for absolutely NOTHING!, except the time to download it? Cheers,
Jim
If you want a second OS to play with, learn a bit about, and enjoy this sort of thing (dual/multi-booting, "tecchy" stuff), then MDK8 or RH7.1 is perfect.
If you want to completely rid yourself of the Microsoft monopoly, then they're good to start with, get your feet wet, but you'll want a more challenging and stimulating distro soon after.
Don't get me wrong, MDK8 has everything (and then some!) that all the other distros have, it's just put together in a nice (MS Windows-like) GUI package, which makes it somewhat bloated and slow. Once you've gotten into the real workings of it, a reinstall, with ONLY the specific packages YOU want (who needs 11 desktop window managers, 27 gazillion games/puzzles/toys, 3 CD burning progs, etc.) will streamline it considerably, and speed things up at the same time. (A fully bloated install of MDK8 still takes up less space than Win98!)
It's kind of like shutting off all the extraneous processes in Win2k. Who needs most of them anyhow?
As for reliability/stability/compatibility, who can complain? Where else are you going to get an OS, with this much power (can you say Apache or Bastille?) for absolutely NOTHING!, except the time to download it? Cheers,
Jim
From what I understand, there are two basic flavors of Linux: Sysv (System 5) and BSD style. SysV distros include RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE, and I believe Debian. A good example of a BSD Linux is Slackware. Basically, the main difference is where the startup and configuration scripts get placed. Essentially, linux is linux at it's core.
Understand, also, that there are some subtle differences between RedHat, Mandrake, and SuSE. Again, these differences are largely to do with configuration scripts.
If you really want to learn linux, forget the gui and all those fancy tools. Learn to hack the scripts yourself. There isn't a tool out there that will give you the flexibility and power of doing it yourself the good old fashion vi way.
Understand, also, that there are some subtle differences between RedHat, Mandrake, and SuSE. Again, these differences are largely to do with configuration scripts.
If you really want to learn linux, forget the gui and all those fancy tools. Learn to hack the scripts yourself. There isn't a tool out there that will give you the flexibility and power of doing it yourself the good old fashion vi way.
- Thread starter
- #5
Right now, speed is relatively irrelevant X-)
ALL Linux distros (including software) run faster than the Windows equivalent on the same machine.
A really small distro (fit's on a floppy!) will really scream, but you don't get any GUI with it.
Mandrake 8 has the edge on security, with built in "Bastille", the other distros don't come with it included, but you can download it at Cheers,
Jim
ALL Linux distros (including software) run faster than the Windows equivalent on the same machine.
A really small distro (fit's on a floppy!) will really scream, but you don't get any GUI with it.
Mandrake 8 has the edge on security, with built in "Bastille", the other distros don't come with it included, but you can download it at Cheers,
Jim
- Thread starter
- #7
The firewall (Tiny Firewall) that comes with RH7, is like using a paper bag for a door. You might keep out a mosquito, but anything bigger is going to get in.
Go get Bastille. Cheers,
Jim
Go get Bastille. Cheers,
Jim
- Thread starter
- #9
hehe...good analogy...as i was saying in another thread i'm thinking of setting up a NAT so i can have a linux server and my windows computer at school. do u think that the nat would provide enough security or would a firewall be necesary?
- Thread starter
- #10
Linux box as a firewall:
NAT is good, but a pain.
Why not just use a small windows firewall (software) on the win machine (zonealarm, Norton personal, etc.) and Bastille on the 'nix box?
Better yet, go purchase a cheap router, and plug as many machines as you like into it?
Two ways to go: If you already have a LAN on a hub, you only need a single port router, if you don't have a hub/LAN, get a cheap router (4 or 5 port selling on ebay for less than $60).
The router IS the firewall, and you haven't got any software setup headaches. Cheers,
Jim
NAT is good, but a pain.
Why not just use a small windows firewall (software) on the win machine (zonealarm, Norton personal, etc.) and Bastille on the 'nix box?
Better yet, go purchase a cheap router, and plug as many machines as you like into it?
Two ways to go: If you already have a LAN on a hub, you only need a single port router, if you don't have a hub/LAN, get a cheap router (4 or 5 port selling on ebay for less than $60).
The router IS the firewall, and you haven't got any software setup headaches. Cheers,
Jim
- Thread starter
- #12
my friend has a router and he has a heck of a time dealing with DCC transfers and direct connects on aol. he has the Linksys Etherfast with 4 ports. he has to forward ports and stuff to each computer to get stuff to work, and still has trouble with aim and dcc...i chatted a little with this kid at school who ran a server last year and he said he ran a nat..thats y i was inuiring about it. and i have norton personal firewall on this computer. but now that u mention the router, it kinda just clicked in my head that i'd be doing the exact same thing, but with software on linux.
Check out the article I mentioned. It works great for a small LAN.
I still prefer the router. The trouble most people have is not knowing which port the program wants to use (AIM, DCC stuff, etc.) and how to configure the router to allow the right kind of transfers. It's a case of RTFM. If you have any clue how to set up a router, it's BY FAR the most secure way to go, and you don't need any extraneous software running in the background sucking up resources (particularily important on any Win9x box). Cheers,
Jim
I still prefer the router. The trouble most people have is not knowing which port the program wants to use (AIM, DCC stuff, etc.) and how to configure the router to allow the right kind of transfers. It's a case of RTFM. If you have any clue how to set up a router, it's BY FAR the most secure way to go, and you don't need any extraneous software running in the background sucking up resources (particularily important on any Win9x box). Cheers,
Jim
- Thread starter
- #14
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question