Like the server rooms - it keeps slipping in under the radar
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| BernardSwiss Aug 03, 2011 7:30 PM EDT |
I like to talk about pre-teens who managed to install Linux back in 2002, and accountant types who converted their office and servers back in 2004, without a techie to help them. And these days, the Public Library staff know a fair bit about Linux, Open Source, and open formats. But a couple of weekends ago at the local Starbuck's, I met I mill worker, who prefers Slackware on his netbook, and installed it himself, though he does have a techie brother-in-law who admins Linux. |
| lcafiero Aug 03, 2011 10:00 PM EDT |
I agree, and interesting story about the Slackware-using mill worker. All of which is to say that the myth that there's some "voodoo" to using Linux has been systematically being dispelled. |
| jdixon Aug 03, 2011 10:48 PM EDT |
> I met I mill worker, who prefers Slackware on his netbook, and installed it himself, One of the oldest and least founded myths is that Slackware is hard to install. |
| gus3 Aug 03, 2011 11:35 PM EDT |
@jdixon, there was a time when the myth was well-founded. The modern Slackware install is vastly improved over the way it used to be. |
| jdixon Aug 04, 2011 8:45 AM EDT |
> ...there was a time when the myth was well-founded. In comparison to what? When you had to download Slackware onto floppies and install from them it was hard to install. But at that point the only comparable distro was Debian, which had it's own installation issues. Slackware has never been significantly harder to install than other distros. |
| BernardSwiss Aug 04, 2011 5:56 PM EDT |
Don't you know? Anything (especially installing an operating system) that requires one to read -- let alone follow -- directions is just "too hard" for mere mortals. |
| patrokov Aug 04, 2011 9:30 PM EDT |
The Slackware install has been fairly easy since 2003, when I started using it. I thought the whole system was much simpler than Debian, where Stable was so ancient as not to have any software you actually wanted to use and Unstable broke quite often. I still have nightmares over trying to use dselect to do anything worthwhile. And if you needed to compile support for, oh say a network card, the Debian netinstall disks didn't have the necessary kernel headers. The package system in Slackware is so much easier to understand. Optional things (like KDE) go in /opt where they belong instead of threaded all throughout /usr/bin /usr/share and /usr/lib. Easier to back up; easier to erase. Easier to maintain side by side installations. It's also easier in that when you install a package, you're installing the whole thing, not one seven hundredth of the program. And the BSD style startup scripts are SOOOOOO much easier to figure out. If you want to actually learn how to use Linux, Slackware is a much better choice than Debian, Redhat, or Suse. Slackware (for me) was easier to install and the only one of the four that was actually faster than Windows. |
| Bob_Robertson Aug 04, 2011 9:50 PM EDT |
I've never seen a "problem" instaling "debian", just a lack of flash and panache. |
| BernardSwiss Aug 04, 2011 11:00 PM EDT |
Well, Debian was my first distro -- back in 2000. But despite my experience maintaining and occasionally installing Windows, I had no illusions that I had a great deal of expertise -- so I most definitely did read the directions (more than once), first. And I never had to compile anything. And even "Unstable" proved to be reliable. Of course, I was coming from Windows 98 -- so my definition of "reliable" may ;-) have been rather lax... |
| jdixon Aug 04, 2011 11:01 PM EDT |
> I've never seen a "problem" instaling "debian", just a lack of flash and panache. How far back are we talking, Bob? Around 95 or so, the Debian install was rather difficult, if I remember correctly (not significantly harder than Slackware though). I haven't seen any problems for a number of years though. |
| gus3 Aug 05, 2011 7:18 AM EDT |
KDE in /opt on Slackware? News to me. |
| Bob_Robertson Aug 05, 2011 7:50 AM EDT |
JD, 95 is when I installed Debian the first time. 14 floppy disks. Or was it 16? On a 386-33, where I could read the boot messages in real time. The only problem I had was identifying my monitor so I could find a modline for it. Oh, and that I didn't know about ctl-alt-f1 to get OUT of X once it was working. All I knew was alt-f1 and etc. to swap between consoles outside of X. |
| jdixon Aug 05, 2011 12:01 PM EDT |
> KDE in /opt on Slackware? News to me. I believe it used to be gus. Been a while though. Bob: The main problem I had installing Debian in 95 was trying to update it over dialup. Ouch. That's what made me decide to stick with Slackware. Updating Slackware over dialup was much easier. But the installation's process for choosing what to install and what not to was also a major pain, IIRC. |
| number6x Aug 05, 2011 1:57 PM EDT |
wasn't kde in /opt back in the late 90's.
Qt was not completely free, and the S.u.S.E.(pre-Novell) team were fond of /opt for commercial and non-free software (in the unix tradition) and they were big contributors to KDE. I also remeber when S.u.S.E. still had the slackware multi-disk layout, so get off my lawn! |
| cr Aug 05, 2011 5:30 PM EDT |
KDE 1.0 installed into /opt when I downloaded it for Red Hat 5.2. |
| gus3 Aug 05, 2011 5:35 PM EDT |
I guess I missed the boat on early Slackware KDE. My first Slackware install was from The Linux Bible, which ran a 1.2.13 kernel and had neither KDE nor GNOME. I made boot and root floppies, but the installer managed to get the disksets from the CD-ROM. And it took only 3 attempts for this total newbie to get it to boot properly! :-) |
| cr Aug 05, 2011 5:58 PM EDT |
@gus3: Your 1.2.13 kernel predated KDE's arrival by quite a bit. Red Hat 5.0, 5.1 and 5.2 used the 2.0 kernel; I bought all three boxes as they came out, so my installs were contemporary, and IIRC KDE was just attracting notice when RHL 5.2 was released ((C) 1998 on the box -- yeesh, you got me blowing dust off boxes here) with fvwm2 as a desktop. [fix fvwm] |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!