Post by: Grey Wolf on October 07, 2003, 03:30:20 pm
Post by: Kamikaze on October 07, 2003, 05:57:04 pm
http://lwn.net/Distributions/index.php3#smalldisk
http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Software/Operating_Systems/Linux/Distributions/Tiny/
Post by: mikhael on October 07, 2003, 06:50:45 pm
Post by: demon442 on October 07, 2003, 10:08:39 pm
Post by: Setekh on October 08, 2003, 03:54:37 am
Post by: Petrarch of the VBB on October 08, 2003, 04:14:05 am
Sorry
Post by: Admiral LSD on October 08, 2003, 04:44:42 am
And mikhael, NTFS write support has been in the kernel for at least the last 5 years but it's been *extremely* experimental that whole time and still isn't supposed to be 100% reliable. I don't know how SuSE gets away with it but I wouldn't trust it as far as I could throw it.
Post by: kasperl on October 08, 2003, 09:36:14 am
Quote
Originally posted by Setekh
I typically use Debian. :)
i keep hearing good and bad things about this one, it is rumored to be a ***** to install, but it is also rumored to work really well.
i never used linux in my life, aside from Knoppix. i am installing linux in 2 weeks, tell me more about Debian.
Post by: Razor on October 08, 2003, 12:04:57 pm
Post by: mikhael on October 08, 2003, 12:38:16 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Admiral LSD
And mikhael, NTFS write support has been in the kernel for at least the last 5 years but it's been *extremely* experimental that whole time and still isn't supposed to be 100% reliable. I don't know how SuSE gets away with it but I wouldn't trust it as far as I could throw it.
NTFS write support was NOT in the kernel when I was adminning Red Hat boxen in 98-99. Heck, reads caused a kernel panic regularly. As of the last time I tried NTFS on a linux box, it still panicked. I don't touch Linux anymore, so I don't really know what's going on with it.
Post by: Kamikaze on October 08, 2003, 06:04:30 pm
Quote
Originally posted by kasperl
i keep hearing good and bad things about this one, it is rumored to be a ***** to install, but it is also rumored to work really well.
I can't give an objective analysis on this one (debian was the first distro I installed, but I wasn't exactly a n00b), but I never had any problems with installing it. I'm pretty sure you'll have a hard time figuring out how to run the X window system though. With using debian, it's love or hate. Some people swear by "the Debian way", others hate it.
By the way, I use Gentoo (dual-booting with win2k on my main PC, the laptop is on debian), it's a rather popular source-based distribution. Not for the impatient (It took me 20+ hours to compile everything I wanted on a 450mhz system).
I suggest you install a more n00b friendly linux like ark linux, libranet, redhat or mandrake.
Razor: A question like that isn't answered easily. It depends on what you want to do with your PC and what aspects you care about in an OS.
Post by: mikhael on October 08, 2003, 08:57:21 pm
Debian is user-hostile. N00bs need not apply. It will eat your brain. You have been warned.
Post by: demon442 on October 08, 2003, 09:45:52 pm
Haven't tried any of the BSDs, hope to soon, though. What's it like?
Post by: Admiral LSD on October 08, 2003, 10:08:09 pm
Quote
Originally posted by mikhael
NTFS write support was NOT in the kernel when I was adminning Red Hat boxen in 98-99. Heck, reads caused a kernel panic regularly. As of the last time I tried NTFS on a linux box, it still panicked. I don't touch Linux anymore, so I don't really know what's going on with it.
It was there, it just probably wasn't compiled in to stock distribution kernels. I just dug up my old copies of kernel 2.0.36 and the development kernel 2.1.131 and while I was positive I saw it in 2.0.36 it more likely I remember it from 2.1.131:
Post by: mikhael on October 08, 2003, 10:19:16 pm
Post by: Setekh on October 09, 2003, 05:06:56 am
Quote
Originally posted by mikhael
Debian is user-hostile. N00bs need not apply. It will eat your brain. You have been warned.
Just think of the power... :nod:
Post by: mikhael on October 09, 2003, 10:28:00 am
It is not n00b friendly, to say the least. Definately, distinctly, deservedly: the worst distro (except maybe Slackware!) wtih which to start out learning about Linux. I mean come on: FreeBSD has a user-hostile installer. I know this and I love FreeBSD. But Debian's installer (if you can call it that) is actively user-homicidal. Its easily the worst I've ever seen and certainly the worst you could possibly inflict upon a n00b.
Post by: Martinus on October 09, 2003, 10:35:04 am
[/color]
Post by: Setekh on October 09, 2003, 10:44:43 am
Quote
Originally posted by mikhael
The power of Debian is questionable, Steak. Once its running, its just like every other distro of the PenguinOS. Its "power" is in its package system.
Yeah, I'll give you that. I was half-joking, I wouldn't be able to admin this box with my current knowledge - but I do enjoy using it, having become accustomed to the unfriendliness. ;)
Post by: Admiral LSD on October 09, 2003, 11:26:38 am
Quote
Originally posted by Maeglamor
[color=66ff00]On the same line of thought; why use a BSD over a linux distro?
[/color]
tbph I wouldn't, at least not on an nForce motherboard. You'll most likely have no LAN (proprietary driver modules), no sound (unless nvaudo, i810_audio or ALSA are available in BSD versions), piss-poor IDE performance (due to the kernel knowing you have an ATA controller but not being able to set DMA on it) and no hardware 3D acceleration on non-nVidia cards (due to a lack of AGPGART support). I spent over a week trying to make Debian work with all the stuff on my 8RDA+ (whereas Gentoo supported it all "out of the box" and Slackware provided a reasonable base to start with) and only partially succeeded (all the hardware worked eventually but due to the need to "sideload" it onto my HDD due to lack of support for my HDD controller (not the onboard nForce ports, an off-board Silicon Image controller) I was left having to install stuff like XFree86, GNOME and KDE by hand and apt refused to play ball), FreeBSD can only be worse than that. If you have another, preferably older, machine you can use as a guinea pig by all means go for it.
Post by: mikhael on October 09, 2003, 08:47:42 pm
Quote
Gentoo. Because everything else is just ****. :D
Dude. Gentoo: Its like FreeBSD, but without all the standardisation and stability. ;)
I wouldn't use an NForce motherboard. They're garbage--but that's just a techie opinion. They're perfectly useable for joe user.
I use BSD instead of Linux because its a slower target. Development is slower, more careful and generall (in my opinion) of higher quality. They are more stable because of the slower, more careful development process.
The various BSD platforms are standard. You can move from OpenBSD to FreeBSD to NetBSD and feel reasonably at home. The file system is standardised, and the package and ports systems adhere to that standardization (Debian is strong here too).
Next thing: BSD is BSD derived. It seems like a rather self evident thing to say, but it true. Linux and Solaris share a serious flaw, in my opinion: they both try to mash together the "best" of BSD and the "best" of System-V. In the end, they both end up inconsistent and ill suited for (again, my opinion) serious every day work.
Finally, and most importantly, there are fewer BSD Zealots to deal with than there are Linux Zealots. You won't here your average BSD user cursing your family to its third generation for using a different BSD distribution than he does, or worse a different OS. You will catch this from lots of Linux users though. The BSD user culture is much more laid back, less defensive, less confrontational and more generally helpful.
Keep in mind I don't try to make my boxen into a flashy wunderkind super techie workstation out of Star Trek XXXIV. In fact, it looks and acts a lot like Microsoft Windows on the surface. Underneath the surface, its your average Unix powerhouse.
Other than that stuff, there's really no difference between FreeBSD and Linux.
Post by: Kamikaze on October 09, 2003, 09:04:02 pm
Quote
Originally posted by mikhael
I wouldn't use an NForce motherboard. They're garbage--but that's just a techie opinion.
I'm curious on the matter, can you elaborate? I'm considering mobos for a new system and nforce2s were one of my options.
Post by: mikhael on October 09, 2003, 10:21:14 pm
On the professional side, the NForce chipset is inappropriate for server machines (which is the realm in which I work).
Post by: Kazan on October 10, 2003, 12:11:15 am
Red Hat is ok
FYI: NTFS 5.X support (Win2K/XP NTFS) is still tagged expirimental - it's ready only and if you load the ntfs5 module [ie mount an ntfs5 drive] your drive performance will go directly through the freaking floor [as of last time i used it which was 6 months ago]
Post by: Admiral LSD on October 10, 2003, 01:40:19 am
Post by: Grey Wolf on October 10, 2003, 11:58:55 am
Quote
Originally posted by mikhaelCould that be because they're intended for hardware enthusiasts, not servers?
They're reasonably okay, if you like chipsets with a bunch of crap added in. I personally do not. Its useless cruft.
On the professional side, the NForce chipset is inappropriate for server machines (which is the realm in which I work).
And a dirt-cheap nForce 2 doesn't really have that many extra features added in. Soundstorm (the good audio subsystem) is part of the MCP-T, the optional upgrade to the standard MCP southbridge. SATA and RAID? Those are both on discrete chips that the motherboard designers add in, just as it is in most VIA chipset-based motherboards. Dual-channel DDR? Sure, it doesn't help much do the inherent limitations of the processor (a dual-pumped 133/166/200 which comes out to 266/333/400, as opposed to the quad-pumped bus 133/200 of the P4, which come out to 533/800, requiring dual-channel ram for maximum performance). But they released a version of the northbridge without it (the nForce 2 400, as opposed to the normal nForce 2 Ultra 400). Integrated LAN? Sure, many people may not use it, but it's becoming standard equipment on all motherboards. Is there some feature I didn't list which you really hate or something?
Post by: mikhael on October 10, 2003, 08:04:12 pm
Put an NForce chip into a high-reliability (five nines or better) environment. They are not stable enough for use in anything but a gaming/home machine. Like I said: I don't deal in those environments. My gear is strictly in the server space. Gaming/enthusiast machines and professional machines are two entirely different worlds. Most gamers/enthusiasts forget that.
Post by: Grey Wolf on October 11, 2003, 02:04:12 pm