Redhat vs. the world 1

[JeffPr]

I just installed a copy of redhat linux 9 on my computer and I am getting worried reading through these pages. A lot of people seem to favour other distributors and I would like to open up the floor to give people a chance to say what version of linux they would use and why. I hope there are some people that still like redhat so I didn't waste 80 bones buying redhat linux 9: unleashed.

Do you think your friend could feed my cat? Heisenberg wasn't sure. ~ Erwin Schrodinger talking of his revolutionary paradox

 

[danielhozac]

I use RedHat for just about everything. I've tried a lot of distros but I think that RedHat is the best.

//Daniel

 

[ImpetusEra]

I installed Red Hat 5.2 on an older computer to mess around with a few weeks ago. Being old it needs lots of updates to be able to do anything. I've deemed it too much work seeing is it needs tons of dependencies for every update I try to do, a real PITA. Gentoo Linux is looking preety good right now as it apparently automatically downloads the dependencies needed and implements them. Check it out at

http://www.gentoo.org.

Only $15 too.

 

[danielhozac]

Dependencies are easily solved if you use

apt-get

, which is really a Debian tool but that has been ported to work with RPMs too:

http://ayo.freshrpms.net/.

//Daniel

 

[mattjurado]

SuSE is our preference... My 2 cents.

Matt J.

 

[AP81]

I liked RedHat up to version 7.3. I don't like it particularly for desktop use. One good thing about RedHat is that you can always find a package that will work.

Debian is by far the most robust and stable distro. I also like Slackware (as I learnt on it). SuSE is my other favourite with comes with a heap of packages and I think is the best Windows alternative.

 

[pdrap]

Don't overlook a distribution like Knoppix. The new 3.3 version is out, and it can be installed to the hard disk.

You didn't waste your money though. RedHat has a lot of mindshare, and it is a quality product. If you install it and learn it, you'll find that it's a very solid OS.

That said, I run Debian myself.

 

[JeffPr]

Thanks for the feedback. It seems like the vast majority of people use debian (which I've used a bit before and thought it wasn't too bad), SuSe, and of course redhat. I haven't encountered any of the package problems yet with their RPM but I'm sure there will be some posts up here soon enough.

Do you think your friend could feed my cat? Heisenberg wasn't sure. ~ Erwin Schrodinger talking of his revolutionary paradox

 

[enorbet]

Hello
Having tried nearly a dozen distros, including RedHat, I suppose I should first say "stop worrying...RH is OK". Linux is a kernel so all distros share in the basic power and configurability that is Linux. The "raison d'etre" for different distros is basically the existence of different kinds of users.

Probably the first consideration is to answer the question "Why am I using Linux in the first place?" If the answer is simply "to get a more stable desktop" or "lot's of free software" then any number of distros designed to be a quick migration from Windows will do, with RedHat being one of them. Mandrake, SuSe, and Xandros are some others. Basically distros can be divided into three categories RedHat, Debian, and other as regards how they handle packages or installing/upgrading new software. RedHat designed RPMs which has since been utilized by almost every distro at least to some extent. IMHO, Debian's apt-get/dpkg method is consderably superior, especially at handling dependencies, but the trade-off is that Debian is a little slower to use new linux kernels as their design goals are more conservative ( a good thing for stability and compatibility ) and more like the original HURD project and Gnu micro kernel methods. It is very easy to install another distro with a menued Lilo or Grub bootloader so you can try lot's of them free of charge, however this implies you are not merely superficially interested in simply "a better windows" which will momentarily bring us to the 2nd type of user, the "nuts 'n bolts DIY guy". In summary to the first part, having tried many distros, I recommend Xandros to casual migrators from Windoze. It has evolved from Corel Linux which M$ considered such a threat they bought controlling stock. Fortunately the majors at Corel hated M$ and loved Linux enough to sell it off so it wouldn't be buried. It became Xandros and is based on the Debian system and has the best and easiest Samba ( Windows networking shares ) setup I have ever seen. Upon install my windows shares were simply *there* even in the file manager just like in Windows Explorer. Debian is also reputed to be the absolute fastest to export/clone/deploy new workstations if intranet-working is important to you. If that weren't enough there is a more expensive ( still under $100 US ) version available that comes with all of CodeWeavers best windows emulation stuff. WineX, Crossover Plugins ( for most Office, Excel, Word, MediaPlayer, Quicktime, RealPlayer, Fonts, etc etc ) compatibility. Not only that but in just a few months, around the first of 2004 their new version is coming out having massive improvements and additions. BTW I am in no way affiliated w/ Xandros. It's just impressive for the casual or application oriented user.

Actually I am a nuts n bolts guy who now uses and prefers Slackware which is the main "other" ( although Gentoo is gaining some steam too ) since it is one of the oldest distros still in existence and adheres closely to a BSD/Unix model and is higly conservative about making changes just for change sake. All of the above distros run the risk of becoming proprietary sometimes even by desire and design of the owners. Slackware, by sticking to a fundamental model of structure and filenames ( as well as conventions regarding what loads when and from where ) is extremely stable and is perhaps the best distro for those who wish to compile their own software from source, rather than relying on some generic rpm or deb binary "one-size-fits-all" installer. Rolling your own gives the owner/user much more control over every facet of the system. An automobile analogy might go like this. Binary package distros, like RedHat, are something like a '55 Nomad, cool, but still a station wagon, where Slackware is more like a Hot Rod Harley Davidson built by Jesse James or OC Choppers.

In short there is no one answer which is why there are so many flame wars over distro preference but nothing says you can't try a few. The free ones take some work on your part but have a lot to offer. The easy ones cost a few bux. They all beat doze silly.

Jimmy

 

[JeffPr]

Interesting post, sounds like you have a lot of experience with linux and know about alot of different aspects of the operating system. The reason I am using linux is to learn how the operating system works and to learn what I can do with it, I have no solid reason for using linux so I think that redhat will more than suffice for my purposes. Because you seem to know so much about linux, you should look at my posts under this thread and answer my question about what I did to my bootloader.

thread619-660340

regards

Do you think your friend could feed my cat? Heisenberg wasn't sure. ~ Erwin Schrodinger talking of his revolutionary paradox