Page 2 of 4 |
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
Posted: Tue, 11th Sep 2012 20:36 Post subject: |
|
 |
Yeah, I'm sure that Debian/Ubuntu and CentOS are the most popular choices for servers because they're slow.
This whole "XXX doesn't give you an idea about how Linux works" is also the biggest bullshit ever. What *exactly* makes Arch so much closer to "true" Linux? Because you have to enter a few commands in a terminal to get it installed rather than trivial shit like that being automated? You can do that with Debian/RHEL if you want to. It has a package manager just like Debian does, but obviously you don't use that because it just works out of the box, so I'm sure you recompile all your packages and their dependencies all the time?
No, didn't think so.
For a beginner CentOS or Debian is a better choice exactly because you don't have to worry about a lot of the unnecessary bullshit such as installing drivers or spending 3 days just to get G++ working. To learn how Linux works, that's the last thing you should be worrying about, what you need to learn is how the filesystem(s) work, how you mount stuff, what FHS is, how compiling works and so on. Once you know THAT (which is a relatively high level), that's when you switch down to something more basic.
Now whether you think the UI is bloated is another matter, but that's a matter of preference. Ubuntu out of the box is less bloated than OS X (OS X runs far more shit in the background by default) for example and I have no problems with it. Maybe you do, but again, that's your preference and has got nothing to do with whether it's "good" or "bad". Underneath the flashier distros are still very much Linux and if you use a terminal, nothing happens automatically.
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Nalo
nothing
Posts: 13510
|
Posted: Tue, 11th Sep 2012 20:36 Post subject: |
|
 |
Last edited by Nalo on Wed, 3rd Jul 2024 06:33; edited 2 times in total
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Tue, 11th Sep 2012 20:51 Post subject: |
|
 |
Werelds wrote: | What *exactly* makes Arch so much closer to "true" Linux? Because you have to enter a few commands in a terminal to get it installed rather than trivial shit like that being automated? You can do that with Debian/RHEL if you want to. It has a package manager just like Debian does, but obviously you don't use that because it just works out of the box, so I'm sure you recompile all your packages and their dependencies all the time?
No, didn't think so.
For a beginner CentOS or Debian is a better choice exactly because you don't have to worry about a lot of the unnecessary bullshit such as installing drivers or spending 3 days just to get G++ working. To learn how Linux works, that's the last thing you should be worrying about, what you need to learn is how the filesystem(s) work, how you mount stuff, what FHS is, how compiling works and so on. Once you know THAT (which is a relatively high level), that's when you switch down to something more basic. |
You just agreed with me.. that was exactly my point, Arch isnt close to anything, and getting a working OS is simple and basic compared to whatever linux course the op is taking. Its basic like you said. I was just pointing out that would be a good starting point rather than learning the high level stuff first and doing the basics later
ASUS TUF B550M-PLUS | RYZEN 5600x | RTX 3060TI | 16GB DDR4
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Sun, 30th Sep 2012 16:29 Post subject: |
|
 |
stability aka slackware.. v14 released yesterday !!!11
ASUS TUF B550M-PLUS | RYZEN 5600x | RTX 3060TI | 16GB DDR4
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Sun, 21st Oct 2012 12:53 Post subject: |
|
 |
Do you still need to manually edit xorg.conf in Slack to get the mouse wheel working?
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Invasor
Moderator
Posts: 7638
Location: On the road
|
Posted: Sun, 21st Oct 2012 19:43 Post subject: |
|
 |
Guy_Incognito wrote: | Do you still need to manually edit xorg.conf in Slack to get the mouse wheel working? |
I don't think so. In fact, xorg.conf isn't necessary at all anymore (in most cases).
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Mon, 22nd Oct 2012 20:00 Post subject: |
|
 |
quick and very easy qustion. Is debian very different than ubuntu?
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
Posted: Mon, 22nd Oct 2012 20:13 Post subject: |
|
 |
In structure? No.
In daily usage? Yes.
Debian is slower with updates than Ubuntu for stability and security reasons, nor does it come with a fancy GUI like Unity. At most, you can install a basic Gnome or KDE.
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 01:27 Post subject: |
|
 |
also, debian doesn't fight you as much if you actually want to configure something yourself
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
[sYn]
[Moderator] Elitist
Posts: 8374
|
Posted: Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 01:43 Post subject: |
|
 |
Ubuntu with Cinnamon = Win.
Just moved away from Unity to Cinnamon myself and frankly I'm loving it! More like the Gnome2 I knew and loved.
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 20:38 Post subject: |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
[sYn]
[Moderator] Elitist
Posts: 8374
|
Posted: Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 22:12 Post subject: |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 22:40 Post subject: |
|
 |
Debian 6.0 was ridiculously unstable when it came out, even the installation procedure had troubles. They fixed that in the meantime of course, but still, left a bad taste (first Debian I tried was 3.0 ten years ago, also had troubles while installing the system, oh the irony).
Non-LTS Ubuntu does feel a bit beta-ish, but LTS versions are great. I still consider Ubuntu 10.04(.4) the best all-around Linux distribution that ever existed. Still using it at work for Linux development, it's rock stable and still running like it was installed yesterday.
Last edited by Guy_Incognito on Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 22:42; edited 1 time in total
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
[sYn]
[Moderator] Elitist
Posts: 8374
|
Posted: Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 22:41 Post subject: |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
Posted: Tue, 23rd Oct 2012 23:13 Post subject: |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Thu, 25th Oct 2012 20:39 Post subject: |
|
 |
If I don't know anything about Linux and want to use a live disc to save some files from a corrupted (unbootable even in safe mode) Windows installation to an USB drive, should I go for a specific distribution?
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
Posted: Thu, 25th Oct 2012 21:15 Post subject: |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Mon, 29th Oct 2012 13:16 Post subject: |
|
 |
I was running Ubuntu 10.04 as a secondary OS for quite a while now, stable, fast, with compiz fusion effects running smoothly, etc.
After reading this thread I decided to make a clean install of Ubuntu 12.10, and I found it absolutely atrocious, slow, buggy, apps crashing constantly, when I install the Nvidia drivers the desktop disappears completely, I'm even unable to install something as trivial as Grub Customizer without it playing tricks on me.
In a nutshell, in my experience, Ubuntu 12.10 is a major let down, I'm currently looking for an alternative, after searching the web Linux Mint 13 and Fedora 17 seem like the most viable alternatives.
Yet, I'm still undecided, which one should I choose any of those 2, other distro, and why?
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Mon, 5th Nov 2012 17:51 Post subject: |
|
 |
I'd say Mint - Cinnamon. I tried it ~a month ago for a few days just to see how Cinnamon is and it run great, no crashes, fairly fast and overall good first impressions. Uninstalled it quickly after though so i cant say more but i'd imagine you need to be more on the brave side to install Fedora as that distribution always had its own set of problems.
ASUS TUF B550M-PLUS | RYZEN 5600x | RTX 3060TI | 16GB DDR4
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Mon, 5th Nov 2012 18:14 Post subject: |
|
 |
Nhiumewyn wrote: | Yet, I'm still undecided, which one should I choose any of those 2, other distro, and why? |
Well, if you are migrating from a LTS, go for LTS again. 12.04 works great, the installer is updated with new drivers (12.04.1) and overal it's an excellent distro.
Also, Ubuntu Software Center -> search for Gnome Session Fallback, and you will have classic Gnome interface (using GTK3 ofc) to choose on login screen.
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Mon, 5th Nov 2012 18:21 Post subject: |
|
 |
yeah, i had to use the classic session myself. I have no fucking clue what went through their head when they released 12.04.
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
[sYn]
[Moderator] Elitist
Posts: 8374
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73194
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
Posted: Sat, 12th Jan 2013 00:04 Post subject: |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Sun, 5th May 2013 19:19 Post subject: |
|
 |
At last
But seems like they didn't fix all rc errors, so I'm waiting for point release 1 just in case.
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Page 2 of 4 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |