Distros in order of use
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Oct 05, 2012 7:29 AM EDT |
SuSE (not openSuSE) briefly in 1998, Red Hat, lycoris, Mandrake in 2000, another shot at SuSE in 2001, Mandrake -> Mandriva when the name changed, then Ubuntu when Mandriva started to slide badly, then various Ubuntu based distros, then Linux Mint. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 05, 2012 8:57 AM EDT |
Debian, from the first, 1995. I try other distributions, I keep Knoppix for rescuing and testing, RedHat at one work and SuSE at another. OpenSolaris finally installed in a VirtualBox, but that was that. Didn't find any reason to do more with it. |
| Fettoosh Oct 05, 2012 10:31 AM EDT |
It was in 1997 when a friend of mine (a dentist) introduced me to Suse. He was in a book store and spotted Suse package and bought it for $50 because he was having problems with his Windows PC. It didn't go so well for him and he passed it on the package to me hoping I can make use of it. I had an Apple Mac at the time but I also had access to a spare Alpha Workstation. I did manage to get it working but wasn't really that useful. No real standard applications and too much odds and ends that needed to be ironed out. But I was hooked. Then I tried Red Hat on an old PC I had access to. Same results but things kept improving rapidly and went back to Suse until Novell signed their famous agreement with MS. That is when I gave Mepis and PCLinuxOS a try and eventually settled on PCLinuxOS. Then came Kubuntu and I haven't used any other since except for occasional testing. |
| jdixon Oct 05, 2012 11:37 AM EDT |
I've always used Slackware for my primary desktop OS, pretty much since I started in 1994. I dual booted for the first few years, but went Linux full time in 1998 when I saw the way Microsoft was going with integrating IE. I've also tried Red Hat, Mandrake, Debian, and Ubuntu over the years. I've also looked at Mint recently. I decided against using Mandrake since it was optimized for newer processors, and my personal machines tend to be older ones. I gave up on Red Hat when they abandoned the personal desktop market and went solely with the enterprise market after Red Hat 9.0. Ubuntu 6.06 and 8.04 were pretty good desktop systems, though a bit top heavy for older computers. I considered it good enough that I got my Dell Mini-9 with Ubuntu 8.04 installed, and then manually upgraded it to 10.04. 10.04 has had it's issues, but has still been usable. With the abandonment of the traditional desktop for Unity in 12.04, I've given up on Ubuntu, as I'm obviously not their target customer. When 10.04 stops being supported, I'll probably put one of LMDE, Debian, or Slackware on the Mini-9. All had their good points, but none save Debian could match Slackware's combination of speed and stability. And since we were on dial up at the the time, I found Debian much harder to update or modify than Slackware (my personal experience only, others have disagreed, YMMV, etc.). Since we've gotten DSL (in 2006), they're largely equivalent, and the only real advantage Slackware has is familiarity. But then, as I've noted before, it always seems to come back to Slackware and Debian. They seem to be the two constants in the ever changing Linux world. |
| flufferbeer Oct 05, 2012 1:40 PM EDT |
@Fettooch, This artticle quoted something of the REVERSE from your list: " "Linux dude Bryan Lunduke blogged here about the top three approaches he thinks are the easiest for new users to pick up Linux," wrote blogger colinneagle. "Lunduke's, for example, went Ubuntu -> Arch -> openSUSE. " I'm wondering whether MShuttleworthless and his diehard minions of Baboontu fanbois get this yet and then try to $trongarm-reverse trends like this. 2c |
| CFWhitman Oct 05, 2012 1:53 PM EDT |
Well, I first was exposed to Linux when going back to school for a computer degree in 1997. I was given an account on the lab's Red Hat Machine (perhaps 5, but I'm not sure) for my email. I was also given an assignment to install Slackware 4 on an old computer in one of the lab classes. I was hooked after that of course. When I got my own computer to use at home, I put Linux Mandrake 6 on it (dual booting with Win 98). I stuck with Mandrake on the desktop for a while, but I also soon had a laptop that I experimented putting other distributions on, before settling on Slackware 7 (Slackware famously skipped over 5 and 6). At work I cobbled together a machine out of old parts and put Debian Potato on it. It was very useful for burning discs at a time when NT 4 was terrible for that purpose. I used it for web browsing (pre 1.0 versions of Mozilla) and testing for quite some time and upgraded it to the next Debian release during that time. Since that point I've experimented with various distributions, but my regularly used ones have been Slackware, Xubuntu (replacing Mandrake/Mandriva), Ubuntu Studio, and Debian, as well as Sidux, Linux Mint Debian Edition, and still one of my current favorites, Crunchbang. I currently have Slackware, Xubuntu, Ubuntu Studio, and Crunchbang on various machines at home or at work. |
| gus3 Oct 05, 2012 5:12 PM EDT |
Slackware, Red Hat, Mandrake, Slackware, Gentoo, Slackware, Slamd64, BlueWhite, Slackware. I now have Slackware, Slackware, Slackware, and Slackware, plus Android, Android, and Android. |
| notbob Oct 05, 2012 6:01 PM EDT |
Back in about 98, after retiring and having my last Window 98 box hacked for the 3rd time in one year --this despite extensive security measures-- I decided to try Linux. Bought a buncha discs, Debian, Caldera, RH, Turbo, Mandrake, etc. Went with RH for awhile, but got tired of them clowning around with the code for no logical reason. By this time, I'd taken a couple Unix classes and felt more confident. I tried a buncha unix flavors and the BSDs, but really liked a couple things about Linux. Finally I heard the ol' Slack adage, "If you learn RH, you know RH. If you learn Slackware, you know Linux". That plus the claim Slack was the most unix-like. So, at RH 7.2, which I'd jes paid $$$ for, only to find I only got 3 phone calls worth of support, I tossed the entire unused RH set in favor of Slack. End of distros story. I see no reason to change from Slack nor try any other distro. Slack does it all, simply, easily, and reliably. |
| Fettoosh Oct 05, 2012 6:22 PM EDT |
Quoting:This artticle[sic] quoted something of the REVERSE from your list: @Flufferbeer, To each his own and the order doesn't mean much and I use what is most fitting to my requirements and to my liking. Quoting: ... and his diehard minions of Baboontu fanbois get this yet and then try to $trongarm-reverse trends like this. I am neither and I use Kubuntu because I believe it is the best Distro overall. It is based on Debian, which I prefer for its Apt and well supported. Kubuntu is no longer under Shuttleworth control and even if it was, I would still use it. The minute Shuttleworth sells out to MS, which he might at some point in the future, I am sure I will switch to another Distro. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 05, 2012 8:12 PM EDT |
There's always Debian. |
| herzeleid Oct 05, 2012 8:35 PM EDT |
On the desktop? SLS, Slackware, Red Hat, fedora, SuSE, Ubuntu Next? maybe some form of arch. |
| djohnston Oct 05, 2012 9:35 PM EDT |
I had used AIX and HP/UX a couple of years before I "dabbled" in Linux, beginning with RedHat. Like notbob, never really got serious until my Windows box kept getting drive-by viruses. Unlike notbob, it was WindowsXP, and I was on dialup. I first had to buy a real, external hardware modem before I could use Linux on the net. Started with Suse 9.1, then upgraded to 9.2. Version 9.3 introduced new instabilities, and kinda went downhill after that. I had already been shopping for a while, and chose PCLinuxOS for its simplicity and GUIness. Upgraded the dial-up for cable and never looked back. Stuck with PCLinuxOS until just recently. But, like many others, I've tried my share of distros over the years. Although I tried Ubuntu first, before finding PCLinuxOS, I never really liked it. Just something about system-wide use of sudo. I've used Slackware, VectorLinux, Mandriva, Mageia, ROSA, Debian, MEPIS, eLive, Arch, and tried a slew of other *buntu and Debian derivatives. I had already used and set up Debian on servers at work, and feel the most comfortable with it. For me, Debian is the easiest to use, and if Debian doesn't have it in their repos, it probably doesn't exist. After many years of using primarily PCLinuxOS, I have switched to using mostly Debian, but also AntiX and Bodhi. (Yeah, I know Bodhi's a *buntu. I have a "thing" for e17 distros, and I enable the root account. Bodhi's the best e17 distro I've ever used.) |
| Koriel Oct 06, 2012 2:35 PM EDT |
I started with Slackware around 1994-95, then Redhat, Mandrake, PCLinuxOS, Kubuntu, Linux Mint Debian, and currently Linux Mint KDE. Ive left out quite a few in-between as the above represent major long term use cases. My current setup is Linux Mint KDE on my desktops and Slackware on my server. |
| kikinovak Oct 07, 2012 4:40 AM EDT |
Slackware (7.1 and 8.0 back in 2001) > Mandrake > Debian > CentOS > Ubuntu LTS > Arch > Debian > Slackware (currently 13.37 and 14.0 on servers and desktops) |
| montezuma Oct 08, 2012 12:24 PM EDT |
Red Hat (2000) > Mandrake > Fedora > Ubuntu > Mint I have now Mint, Ubuntu, Ubuntu and Red Hat Enterprise plus an Android tablet. To me distro hopping has lost its appeal. I now stick to what I know and I really believe the differences in performance between distros are not huge (I have tried gentoo and slackware btw). |
| CFWhitman Oct 08, 2012 12:48 PM EDT |
The differences in performance on varying distributions are not huge (indeed often hardly noticeable) on relatively new, reasonably powerful hardware. They become quite noticeable on old hardware and netbooks. Debian with a lightweight desktop has a distinct advantage over even a lightweight *buntu like Lubuntu (which isn't terrible). Slackware may have a slight edge over even Debian (but rather small). To use Debian on the desktop, I generally use something based on testing, unstable, or backports so that it's a little more up to date than Debian proper. For servers, Debian is great just like it is. Right now I've been using Crunchbang on older hardware and my netbook. I have Ubuntu Studio on my main laptop and desktop machines. I have Slackware on my server. I have Xubuntu on a semi-old laptop. Of course, experimentation continues to some extent on machines that aren't critical to me. |
| montezuma Oct 08, 2012 1:01 PM EDT |
@CFWhitman You are likely correct regarding old hardware. I only use relatively new stuff since prices have dropped so much in recent years. As an example my work box is a Zareason XPC small form with a 2Gig dual core processor which cost only $400. It runs "bloated" Ubuntu plenty fast. |
| jdixon Oct 08, 2012 1:26 PM EDT |
> They become quite noticeable on old hardware and netbooks. Yes. That's where Debian and Slackware start to shine. > Debian with a lightweight desktop has a distinct advantage over even a lightweight *buntu like Lubuntu (which isn't terrible). Slackware may have a slight edge over even Debian (but rather small). Truthfully, with the default install of Debian I haven't noticed any difference Now, that's purely subjective feel, no metrics involved, so take it for what's it's worth. Now, if you start installing everything including the kitchen sink, then Debian may start slowing down. I've never used it long enough to find out. But I would be surprised if that was the case. I know it's not with Slackware. |
| caitlyn Oct 08, 2012 3:02 PM EDT |
@jdixon: Over time I have yet to find anything that runs faster than Slackware and it's close derivatives (i.e.: SalixOS) on older hardware and yet has current or recent versions of everything from the kernel to application software. Over time I've found performance on the Debian based distros (and Debian itself) does degrade more so than Slackware. I can make some fairly educated guesses as to why that happens but I've never investigated it thoroughly enough. If you really like taking things to pieces it is actually possible to get similar results with Red Hat derivatives (CentOS, PUIAS Linux, Scientific Linux) but it takes some creative ripping out of bits and pieces to do it. The end result does remain very stable :) |
| caitlyn Oct 08, 2012 3:04 PM EDT |
I tried both Red Hat and then Slackware in 1995. When Linux became my primary desktop it was Red Hat at first, then Caldera, Mandrake, SUSE, back to Red Hat, Vector, Fedora, Xubuntu, back to Vector, SalixOS, and now openSUSE/SLED. |
| jdixon Oct 08, 2012 3:35 PM EDT |
> Over time I've found performance on the Debian based distros (and Debian itself) does degrade more so than Slackware. Thanks for the feedback on that, Caitlyn. If my memory allows, I'll reference you as the source for that information if anyone asks in the future. I have a faint memory of someone else saying they had experienced that, but I can't remember who it was. Like I said, I've never used Debian long enough to know from personal experience. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 09, 2012 7:21 PM EDT |
I don't think I've ever had a "performance degrades over time" problem with any Linux or BSD system. |
| BernardSwiss Oct 09, 2012 8:33 PM EDT |
> I don't think I've ever had a "performance degrades over time" problem with any Linux or BSD system. I've never noticed performance degradation in Debian -- except for actual version upgrade requiring more resources (most noticeably RAM on limited-RAM desktop machine). So... If that counts as "performance degradation", then I suppose Slackware might actually be less prone, depending on actual set-up and configuration. That's leaving aside the ups and downs subsequent to some updates -- but I've noticed that more (frequency and degree) on my Ubuntu box. Not that I actually measure or keep records, so my experience would have to be called "anecdotal". On the other hand, one of the very first things I install on any system is GKrellM (or something similar but lighter), so I can keep a casual eye on what's happening. And besides keeping top and gkrellm running, when I discovered xload takes basic colour arguments, I started running that too. (what can I say -- I've clearly been traumatized :-P by not being able to justify buying the latest/greatest hardware). |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 10, 2012 10:06 AM EDT |
Steven, me neither. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 10, 2012 4:05 PM EDT |
If things are slow, can check what services you have running and shut some down. For me, a couple of years ago that was *beam* and *couchdb* in Ubuntu 10.04. Once I nuked Gwibber and UbuntuOne, all was good again. Making sure you're not running unnecessary services is one of the best ways to speed up your system. Often it's as easy as going into the "startup services" GUI and unticking boxes. In GNOME, it's gnome-session-properties. In Xfce it's xfce4-settings-manager. I'm sure this is all in rc scripts somewhere in the Linux filesystem. In OpenBSD I can totally get with rc.conf.local http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq10.html#rc, but control of Linux services at the console is something I've never figured out. |
| jdixon Oct 10, 2012 4:32 PM EDT |
> I've never noticed performance degradation in Debian I think the person who noted the problem had installed/uninstalled/reinstalled a whole bunch of software over a period of a few years. And I really can't remember the details beyond that at this point. It was quite a while ago. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 10, 2012 6:28 PM EDT |
More than desktop environments (even GNOME 3 and KDE 4), more than running services, the one thing that kills my computer's performance more than anything else is web browsers, and specifically web pages with lots of scripts and Flash. These pages weigh your system down, the processes under the guise of the web browser just keep on eating CPU and memory. So for me it's one application that causes more trouble and saps more resources than any other: Firefox or Chrome/Chromium. |
| caitlyn Oct 10, 2012 6:29 PM EDT |
I forgot to include TurboLinux on my list, which probably fits in after Caldera. I should note that I haven't run Debian or anything Debian based, other than brief looks at new Ubuntu releases, in a few years. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 10, 2012 6:31 PM EDT |
Debian isn't insulted. Debian will wait for you. |
| caitlyn Oct 10, 2012 6:35 PM EDT |
It will be a long wait. I mainly work in a SUSE shop and my two remaining outside clients are Red Hat/CentOS. I'm pretty much sticking with the enterprise distros and their free cousins now. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 10, 2012 6:41 PM EDT |
Have you tried Stella? http://li.nux.ro/stella/ Aside from having to manually change the hostname, it installs perfectly. I'm not sure if the default apps are unusual or not for the RHEL-clone world, but ships with Thunderbird and without Evolution. It has all the extra repos hooked up, and has its own repo with things like OpenShot, Audacity 2.0 and newer LibreOffice. Caitlyn, I realize it's off-topic, but what do you think about the Suse Evergreen project? |
| caitlyn Oct 10, 2012 8:04 PM EDT |
Evergreen is about supporting older openSUSE release so... I know next to nothing about it. |
| lcafiero Oct 10, 2012 11:28 PM EDT |
For me, it's been nothing but Ubuntu. Not. Just seeing who's paying attention. Quote from the article: "Kevin O'Brien took issue with the question. 'This strikes me as a really bad question since it implies that there is a one-size-fits-all answer, and I don't think that is true,' O'Brien began. 'Before I would make any recommendation, I would want to know what kind of background someone has in using computers.' " Amen to that. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 11, 2012 7:58 PM EDT |
Ha! Larry, you had me going there. |
| patrokov Oct 11, 2012 10:31 PM EDT |
Experimented with Linux in 2003
Debian Woody but everything was SOOOO very old, Knoppix, SUSE, Gentoo, VectorLinux, Gobo, and a few other flash in the pans First real use in 2004: Slackware on the desktop and ArchLinux on the laptop, then PCLinuxOS on both Servers: Home Headless Server: ArchLinux VPS for my website: Debian Squeeze |
| bob Oct 11, 2012 11:34 PM EDT |
You might be interested in learning what distributions LXer has been using during its nearly nine year history. On Jan 1, 2004 LXer went live using Fedora Core 1 which had been released just two months prior. Through the years LXer has followed the Fedora version upgrades until this year when we took a side step over to the CentOS distribution where we are now running the current 6.3 version. |
| tracyanne Oct 12, 2012 4:01 AM EDT |
And I thought you had seen the light, Larry. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 12, 2012 11:44 AM EDT |
@bob did you upgrade/reinstall every six months? Even if you did it every 13 months, CentOS must be a bit of a relief. |
| bob Oct 12, 2012 11:58 AM EDT |
@Steven: With Fedora I was doing yum upgrades from one version to the next over an ssh connection. Risky when done remotely to a datacenter 800 miles away, but it all worked out ok. (Keep that IP KVM and a hot-standby server handy.) But yes, CentOS is nice and stable. It's a joy to use on a server if you don't need the latest versions of everything. I'm still using Fedora and Ubuntu on my desktops/notebooks/netbooks because on these systems I do like to be on the leading edge. |
| CFWhitman Oct 12, 2012 12:54 PM EDT |
That description of CentOS fits my impression of Debian as well, which is hardly surprising. It's also why I tend not to use regular Debian on the desktop; sometimes I want some of the new features that are available in recent versions of desktop software. I have to start thinking of servers because I'm about to become the administrator or two Web servers. Right now they have Ubuntu 10.04 LTS on them, along with virtual machines with Slackware installs. I'm not going to disturb the status quo initially, but I suspect that eventually I will rebuild them, and Debian is a likely candidate. |
| caitlyn Oct 12, 2012 2:54 PM EDT |
@Steven: I have looked at Stella briefly. There are a few rough edges as expected with a first release, but overall it does an excellent job at turning CentOS/Red Hat into a very decent desktop distro without all the usual hunting through repos for apps and doing the yum-priorities thing to avoid conflicts. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 12, 2012 3:53 PM EDT |
That little bit of "guessing" is endemic to rolling release systems, it seems. I treat Debian Unstable as a desktop rolling release and it works quite well, avoiding the "stale" argument. Since I've not used any other rolling release distribution, I cannot compare one set of instabilities to another. That would be interesting, but I don't have time to give two different distributions the "equal time" that such a comparison would require. |
| caitlyn Oct 12, 2012 4:43 PM EDT |
Quoting:the "stale" argument.That's an argument I've never really understood. Something is only stale if it lacks features you need or use or in some way no longer does that job. For most people a newer kernel probably doesn't mean much so long as all their hardware works. a newer version of LO/OO probably doesn't matter much either if they are going to use it exactly the same way as the older one with the same results. A media player version change doesn't excite me if my music and video are playing as they should. I know geek hobbyists want to play with all the latest and greatest. Some professionals really need to keep up on the latest technology. That's all well and good. For most people rolling releases and fast release cycles are just recipes for breakage. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 13, 2012 1:34 AM EDT |
I've never run Debian Sid, but it can't be all that difficult. But if my hardware is staying the same and everything works, why mess with a good thing? I only want a few apps to be as new as they can be, though I'm using the ESR versions of Iceweasel and Icedove that are in Wheezy. I can always tap Debian Experimental, or the Mozilla Debian APT archive if I want newer versions. I'm running Chromium instead of Chrome, but I could always use Google's version if I want more frequent updates. Haven't cared much. I do grab the .deb of the OpenShot video editor -- I always want the absolute latest of that one. That's about it. About the only thing that could turn over this particular apple cart is GNOME 3.6 and Xfce 4.10. I'll be looking at them both knowing I can't get them in Wheezy. That might be enough to get me into a rolling release (or Fedora). |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 15, 2012 10:06 AM EDT |
On the "stale" idea. Last night, because I haven't done anything interesting in a while, I decided to do a full reinstall of my primary desktop. I know, I know, sadists give masochists install disks. Anyway, my reasons were several, but small. This is my first native AMD64 install. Prior to this I have always done the i386 32bit. It suddenly dawned on me that it's been several years since I heard anyone say there were problems with "x on 64 bit", but habits are hard to break. Previously I'd needed a more recent WINE than is in Stable, so I'd gone to Unstable. Sadly, somewhere in the wonderland of libraries, Kmail-Trinity for Stable stopped working with Unstable. Well, I want my Kmail back. Anyway, "stale". Right. Well, I'm not done yet, so this morning I have a very standard XFCE install with Iceweasel/Firefox, and Gmail is complaining that "This is a very old browser. Some things won't work. Upgrade now. How about Chrome?" Funny thing is, it's displaying the old style of Gmail and works very well indeed. I'm not sure I -want- to 'upgrade'. Steven, Unstable doesn't actually have to be a "rolling" release. Once installed, leave it alone. But really, the only time I've found that Sid "breaks his toys" is just after a Stable release when there is a -lot- of churn. Best not to update for month or two, to let things settle down a bit. |
| jdixon Oct 15, 2012 10:25 AM EDT |
> Gmail is complaining that "This is a very old browser. Some things won't work. Yeah, Google does that. I never had a problem when I was running 3.6, but they complained about it all the time. Unfortunately 3.6 seems to have problems with Windows 7, so I eventually had to upgrade. :( They're just trying to push Chrome, and looking for any excuse to do so. |
| CFWhitman Oct 15, 2012 10:50 AM EDT |
Well, if you use a machine for gaming, then updates often improve things, especially if you use Wine at all. VLC didn't support Blu-Ray very well until very recently, but now it seems to work quite well (you need newer than the version in *buntu 12.04, though). It seems to me that a number of desktop apps in general get interesting and useful improvements regularly, but I'm thinking mostly of multimedia apps, not office apps or browsers. I use audio and photography apps quite a bit (I haven't done as much with video at this point). Development apps are somewhere in between. It depends on which ones you want to use and what language you're developing in (speaking of development, the new command line feature in Firefox looks pretty interesting). |
| gus3 Oct 15, 2012 11:02 AM EDT |
I just did an inventory of my home computers: Desktop: Slackware Linux. Server: Slackware Linux. Netbook: Slackware Linux. Raspberry Pi: Slackware ARM Linux. HTC Hero: CyanogenMod 7. Samsung Gem: Android 2.2. And a tablet running a third-party build of Android. In a few more years, I'll be able to upload my cerebral neural net to my home network, and just make sure the light bill stays paid. |
| caitlyn Oct 15, 2012 12:46 PM EDT |
@gus3: you only have one distro on your desktop? Pfft! Four is an absolute minimum for me right now :) |
| gus3 Oct 15, 2012 12:58 PM EDT |
Well, I have only 800 GB in the desktop, and some of that is for backup space. |
| caitlyn Oct 15, 2012 1:03 PM EDT |
Quoting:Well, I have only 800 GB in the desktop, and some of that is for backup space.That's why G-d invented external hard drives :) |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 15, 2012 4:00 PM EDT |
Installing Wine on my 64-bit Debian Wheezy system wasn't as seemless as it should have been. I had to muck about with 32-bit libraries that should have been installed automatically as part of the wine package. |
| gus3 Oct 16, 2012 1:12 PM EDT |
If G-d wanted us to use external drives, we would have been born with USB ports. |
| caitlyn Oct 16, 2012 5:37 PM EDT |
@gus3: I beg to differ. He (or she) gave us the brain power and creativity to build such things. Oh, and in case tracyanne pops in, my original comment was in jest. I am not and will not push any religion (or lack thereof) on anyone at any time, here or elsewhere. FWIW, I've dual booted my netbook at times. It has a 16GB SSD :) |
| tracyanne Oct 16, 2012 6:45 PM EDT |
THIS IS GOD, I AM SPEAKING TO YOU ALL THROUGH TRACYANNE... OH DO STOP FIGHTING ME TRACYANNE... IF I GAVE YOU USB PORTS YOU WOULD USE THEM FOR ALL THAT NAUGHTY STUFF YOU HUMANS SEEM TO LIKE, SO THERE. |
| DrGeoffrey Oct 16, 2012 7:38 PM EDT |
Uh-oh. My cats are pissed. Something about not placing any G-d before them. |
| tracyanne Oct 16, 2012 8:56 PM EDT |
I apologise for my earlier post, this short fat black lesbian woman appeared in front of me, and when she pointed her index finger at me I was compelled to write. I don't think she uses computers much, because she made me type it in all caps. By the way she said her name isn't God, that's her title, her real name is M-v-s. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 16, 2012 10:51 PM EDT |
Funny thing, I finally ran into a problem with 64bit: I had compiled the idea-plugin for gnupg for 32 bits, and didn't keep the source. And for some reason the gnupg server that used to have idea.c.gz on it is unreachable. I have several things encrypted with idea, and without that plug-in they're defunct. So, unless a miracle happens, tomorrow night I'm wiping and doing 32bit again. Who'd'a thunk it? Edit: Yes, I, too, can use Google. Found "ia32libs", let's see if that works... Edit2: No joy. Installed ia32libs and a dozen suggested others, logged out and then back in to "refresh" the path and etc, and still does not work. Edit3: After a reboot this time (sleeping will do that), still getting "wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32" so I assume there is missing a link between "ELFCLASS32" and the 32bit libraries. Oh well. Let's see what today brings. Edit4: It looks like I'm jumping the gun somewhat, trying to have the functionality of "Multiarch" one release too early. Oh well. How hard can it be, if "ELFCLASS32" can be determined, for the correct library to be called? |
| JaseP Oct 16, 2012 11:50 PM EDT |
OK,... I'm feeling left out... For me it started with SuSE (6.2, I think) circa 1998-1999,... Didn't catch the bug,... Then SuSE again around 2000-2001 (then I caught it),... Then Mandrake (no, not MandrIVA,... MandrAKE),... That until almost the mid 2000s,... Then Ubuntu,... Tried Fedora,... Tried 'buntu flavors,... Ran Debian on one machine for a while (2008?!?!),... Now, I'm running mostly Kubuntu, after warming up to 4.Xs in the latest incarnations. Oh,... and Scientific 6.3 on one machine (working up to RHCSA & RHCE),... Plus, I also dabbled with Android-X86 (OK, not really a distro), and ChromiumOS (same thing...). Oh,... And there's embedded stuff too, like Maemo (had and broke a Nokia N800,... Currently have a N900), And there's NeurosOSD (2 of them), and Android (of course)... Oh, and Archos 604WiFi (Don't really count that, as it's Tivo-ized). I almost forgot!!! I also tried Linux on the Palm Lifedrive & Palm TX (still have my TX). |
| gus3 Oct 17, 2012 12:02 PM EDT |
Uh, tracyanne, I think you swapped a couple letters there. The proper spelling is V-M-S. /me ducks and dodges |
| telanoc Oct 17, 2012 3:10 PM EDT |
Actually, it's S-M-V, as in Stanley Clarke, Marcus Miller and Victor Wooten... all Gods of bass playing. If the other discussion veering off into southern rock music wasn't good for you, check out these jazz guys. :) Oh, ok -on topic... a Slackware user at home since it was first released (not on 14 yet though, waiting on my DVD and replacement hat)... I don't have the floppies any more, but I know where my Walnut Creek CDs are. :) Work being on Redhat 6.2 through 9, our own custom spin of RH9, and Centos 5. |
| dinotrac Oct 17, 2012 8:47 PM EDT |
Oh my good gravy --- Debian 1.2 -> and up -> until -> they started screwing around with QT which screwed around with KDE which made my life hell Red Hat ever so briefly Caldera Open Linux SuSE Linux -- I think it was 6.0 that I started with. Loved YaST, used StarOffice (5?) and, mostly, KDE uncorrupted by the political nuttiness over at Debian. Eventually -- Ubuntu, but in mythbuntu form because I use MythTV assorted Linux Mints, including versions based on Ubuntu and directly on Debian. The occasional CentOS. Kinda sorta left out Corel, which I also used and liked for a little while, but don't remember where it fit in. |
| slacker_mike Oct 17, 2012 10:28 PM EDT |
Puppy Linux - ran it for a friend to save her from a totally virus-ridden PC Debian Etch - I heard about Ubuntu and booted live CDs but was attracted to Debian once I learned of the relationship between the two. I finally got the courage to install it on my G4 ibook never could get my wireless card working. Slackintosh 12.0 - I wanted to try Slackware after hearing Chess Griffin talk about it on his Linux Reality Podcast. Could never get my wireless card to work. I then went through iterations of trying anything that ran on a PPC machine, Fedora, openSUSE, Ubuntu. Around this time I bought intel Lenovo laptop, wiped Vista and set out to try Slackware 12.1 I think. Slowly I started to learn more and more. Tried out just about any distro that looked interesting, even installed FreeBSD and OpenBSD. I then spent sometime with Fedora off and on, but I always ended up back with Slackware. Slackware is what is on my Lenovo and OpenBSD is now on my rarely used ibook. |
| JaseP Oct 17, 2012 11:28 PM EDT |
Dino,... Old man,... You failed to give us dates,... You 29 yrs old for the 20th time??!?! Just to out out you,... Debian 1.2 = 1996-1997ish. Which means you've been an Open Sourcer (or Open Sorcerer?) for about 16 yrs... |
| jdixon Oct 18, 2012 9:17 AM EDT |
> Which means you've been an Open Sourcer (or Open Sorcerer?) for about 16 yrs... Dino's been using open source about as long as I have, maybe longer. And I've been using it for over 18 years now. I started with Slackware in Feb. 1994 for a project at work. From the timeline at http://www.slackdown.co.uk/history.html it was probably Slackware 1.1.2, |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 18, 2012 11:39 AM EDT |
> Dino's been using open source about as long as I have, maybe longer. Yep, lots of grey-beards on this board. Nice. Good perspectives. |
| dinotrac Oct 18, 2012 11:50 AM EDT |
@JaseP -- I will be hitting the big Six-O in January. Grey-beard, indeed. @Jdixon -- If you don't count my mainframe days (with GUIDE/SHARE) and stuff I used to pull from Byte and Dr. Dobbs, etc, I'm a year or two behind you. Started using gcc and some utilities before I started using Linux, and started using Linux as a user on a group machine at work before I dove into the Great Penguin Paradise. |
| gus3 Oct 18, 2012 5:59 PM EDT |
I typed my first program on a TRS-80 Model III in 1981. My beard's grey(-ing). |
| dinotrac Oct 18, 2012 11:49 PM EDT |
@gus3 -- Lemme see.... My first program was in WATFOR (an educational version of FORTRAN), back in 1970. BTW, I also wrote a little code on a TRS-80 Model II. That was Radio Shack's "big" pre-PC business computer, powered by the almighty 68000. Still used TRS-DOS, albeit a special version. |
| jdixon Oct 19, 2012 5:17 AM EDT |
> My first program was in WATFOR The only programming course I ever took used WATFOR also. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 19, 2012 10:16 AM EDT |
Gus, got ya beat! My first computer was a TRS-80 Mod 1. Dino, JD, agreed. Fortran in college. Tried C, Pascal, failed so badly with Turbo Prolog that I gave up entirely on programming. Yes, the Mod II was a beast. 8-inch floppy drives! But seriously, BASIC in the TRS-80 was so easy, so logical, so bloody OBVIOUS, I was able to do anything I wanted. I don't even bother trying things in any other language now, it's just not worth the hassle. |
| dinotrac Oct 19, 2012 5:48 PM EDT |
@Bob -- pssst.... Ruby. |
| Bob_Robertson Oct 19, 2012 6:58 PM EDT |
> Ruby Ok, if I feel the need to program I will certainly look at Ruby. Thanks. |
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!