Which is your Favourite Linux?

[Weinter]

OK OK I know ALL of us LOVE BSD
But I am sure you all played with Linux before conversion?
So which is your favourite?

[dima]

I love FreeBSD but on 30 Oct 2008 was released Ubuntu-8.10 (http://www.ubuntu.com) (server edition based on Debian) and I have tried to install and use it. I'm very glad as big african elephant :)

[ninjaslim]

Fedora, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and Debian are my favorites. They follow Unix principles relatively well, are quite stable, and have good quality. However, nothing beats BSD.

[SPlissken]

Debian Sid, but i tried also ArchLinux and it seem quite good

[ninjaslim]

Arch is similar to BSD, but it isn't polished enough. It's not mature enough, and nor does it have the quality.

[LaR3]

FreeBSD 7.0 -> AIX -> Red Hat

[SirDice]

They all suck compared to FBSD :e

[darkstar]

I love Slackware Linux, Because it almost similiar with FreeBSD, and sometimes i still use it.

[keramida@]

When I have to use Linux, Debian is the one I can tolerate.

I still have to install my own .bashrc and other HOME configuration files; some of the default shell startup scripts in /etc drive me mad; clearing the screen on logout in the default .bash_logout script triggers several obscene curses in Greek or English to exit my mouth; and I sorely miss ^T whenever I work through Linux terminals.

But Debian's "apt" package installer is really nice. A bit nicer than portupgrade some times.

[susanth]

Hi,

These are my choice :
For Server : "Debian" http://www.debian.org/
FOr Desk Top : "Ubuntu Desk Top Edition" http://www.ubuntu.com/

[Ico]

I started out with Slackware and that was the one I used for the longest time so I suppose that would be my favorite...

[Weinter]

I tried Ubuntu then move on to Debian then move on to FreeBSD (got stucked here :e) I really like the ports system
FreeBSD is very well documented and the layout is neat and standardized
I also trial installed Fedora, OpenSUSE, Slackware
My votes goes to Debian and Slackware

[braveduck]

Gentoo rocks - portage is very much like FreeBSD's ports
And yet there is ArchLinux, with its ABC and prebuilt packages if you want them.

[ninjaslim]

Gentoo is everything that FreeBSD isn't. ArchLinux's ABS system is quite complicated to use. Ports is very automated and simple, which makes it a treat to use.

[rocky]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2092/2507997575_bc58536039.jpg?v=0

[kamikaze]

I never tried Linux before starting with FreeBSD. And I haven't tried it, yet. Whenever I have to work with a linux system I'm annoyed by all the subtle differences and by package management systems that exchange the kernel during an update.

[DutchDaemon]

I work in an office with three BSD guys (including me) and three Linux guys. The Linux guys usually spend loads of time rolling back patches that screw up their systems, can stare for hours at Yast screens (it's apparently hypnotizing), and I haven't seen a single upgrade gone right without at least walking over with a USB stick to fix something. The BSD guys have working servers and drink coffee. No Linux for me, ever.

[braveduck]

ArchLinux's ABS system is quite complicated to use.
Ports is very automated and simple, which makes it a treat to use.

I haven't said that Arch or Gentoo is better than FreeBSD, neither that ABS or portage is better than ports. They are just similar to FreeBSD ports, which makes me choose Arch and Gentoo amongst all the linuxes out there.

[doena]

At work I have to deal with Linux on our severs.
Unfortunatelly we use SuSe and Yast, but I'm not responsible
for them, only for the FreeBSD systems ;)

When studying I started with Linux at home and especially SuSe, Debian and Ubuntu. But after having first experiences with
FreeBSD, I now have FreeBSD instead of Linux systems at home.

[gilinko]

For desktop I haven't found anything that beats Ubuntu, and if I had to run a linux server it would be a Slackware Linux as it resembles FreeBSD.

Have tried ubuntu and debian on server which I just didn't get along with. RHEL4 and gentoo on desktop. RHEL4 is quite nice, but this is usually a forced alternative from a software vendor. Gentoo is like a shopping trolley at the supermarket: it starts in a straight line, but then one wheel wobbles and were of to the ditch.

The big question for me on a desktop system is: Do I need a special version of something or optimized software? the answer is usually: No, how much opimization do you need to run firefox ;)

[Almindor]

I work in an office with three BSD guys (including me) and three Linux guys. The Linux guys usually spend loads of time rolling back patches that screw up their systems, can stare for hours at Yast screens (it's apparently hypnotizing), and I haven't seen a single upgrade gone right without at least walking over with a USB stick to fix something. The BSD guys have working servers and drink coffee. No Linux for me, ever.

Interresting.. me and my friend have exactly the opposite experiences with FreeBSD and Gentoo compared to Debian and Red Hat.

But then again ours are based on desktop. Now don't get me wrong I like FreeBSD, but on the desktop it doesn't have the proper install method and "sane defaults" + integration. Not to mention that source-based desktop is going to hit you when you need it least.

Our case was a Gentoo guy who reinstalled for some reason once. My friend also reinstalled but he went with Debian. Needless to say his desktop was ready and configured in 1 hour. The Gentoo guy spent 3 days "tweaking" the damn thing.

Likewise for me to get this laptop running FreeBSD as a workstation. I spent 2 days "tweaking" and port installing.

As for the original question, Debian and Ubuntu. Nothing beats their package management (in speed, stability or availability)

[vivek]

We have mix of *nix in our data center:

FreeBSD web, smtp, pop3, squid server
Redhat used as Mysql cluster
Debian used as Load balancer using LVS to send traffic to all freebsd nodes.


My laptop has both FreeBSD and Ubuntu Linux. All desktop at works run on either Windows XP or Fedora.

[oliverh]

I started in the early 90s with NetBSD - of course no Linux ;-) - and some time later with Slackware. If I need some Linux today I'm using Slack or sometimes Arch. The latter for some multimedia machine only. I do know Debian from servers, but I try to avoid it if possible the decrease of quality during the years is obvious. I'm prefering *BSD, especially FreeBSD and I can live with Linux too - I'm fine with everything FOSS, as long as noone tries to sell some proprietary crap to me :D

[DutchDaemon]

@Almindor

Using ports on a desktop/laptop sounds like overkill to me. I will only use ports on heavy servers where I need the extra edge of compiling in a certain way. On the desktop, I use packages 95% of the time (I will use a port if I need a quick security upgrade, or if I just don't want to wait for new functionality).

My latest laptop was up and running in 1.5 hours (STABLE compiled + 478 installed packages, X11/windowmaker). If it takes more time, you're doing it the wrong way.

By the way: GenToo and FreeBSD, while 'alike in spirit', are still very different beasts. I don't think a less-than-optimal experience with GT has any reflection on BSD (one of my colleagues ditched GT for BSD, and he couldn't be happier).

[lumiwa]

In 90ies, after OS/2 I started with Debian, Slackware, try SuSE and back to Debian for long time than try Arch and back to Debian, first try to FreeBSD 7 beta ad now is on the computer just FreeBSD 7.0 about one year. I am sorry that I didn't try it ten years earlier :)

[oliverh]

@DutchDaemon I'm compiling once in a while with the help of ccache on one machine and distribute it to the laptop etc.

[lazyBSD]

emulators/linux_base-fc4 is most useful linux. :e

[SeanC]

SuSE 9.2 was the last linux I can say was my favorite.

[hitest]

I run several Debian 4.0 boxes at work. Apt-get is a good package management system. At home I run Slackware 12.1 and FreeBSD 7.0.

[graudeejs]

Gentoo rocks - portage is very much like FreeBSD's ports


Oh, no gentoo doesn't rock. I have used gentoo for about 1 year. At time i did like it. mostly because i learned many nix things using it. But otherwise it's a nightmare.

Compiling ports(ebuild or whatever, don't remember gentoo's name), sux bigtime. Upgrading ports mostly will fail ever few days.

If you build from sources. it's like russian roulette. you can never be sure that you will be able to successfully compile system.

From point of view of documentation gentoo rocks, but from usability it greatly sux.


I like arch, even if it's not ready yet.

also for new ppl, i recommend Mandriva (well, when i used it it was good, for newcomers)

[hugo]

OK OK I know ALL of us LOVE BSD
But I am sure you all played with Linux before conversion?
So which is your favourite?

Not necessarily, I know at least one person that got started with FreeBSD ;)

That said, I've been giving kubuntu 8.10 (desktop) a chance lately. All I'm going to say about it is that it's not ready for the masses (my opinion, of course), as some claim.

I managed to fix most of the problems, and some others I'm sure are KDE4's fault and not ubuntu or linux, so I'm willing to live with them for now. Wouldn't say it has been a negative experience, but I was expecting more.

[anomie]

My favorite is RHEL / CentOS. They're stable. They have a long support life cycle. And the updates that are put out (which vary based on life cycle phase) are generally non-disruptive.

Where possible, I run RHEL like it's a FreeBSD system - I choose the minimum package installation, and configure everything in files, rather than using their system-config-* programs.

One of the big downsides of RHEL vs. FreeBSD is the package selection. (I am not in the business of adding non-vendor supported repos to RHEL, and I prefer to not compile from source unless totally necessary.) Ports provides an astounding number of useful apps to choose from.

[fonz]

I love Slackware Linux, Because it almost similiar with FreeBSD, and sometimes i still use it.

Second that, on both accounts.

In my opinion most Linux distros are usable from an end user's point of view (it's all Linux and it all looks pretty much the same), but when I have to admin the box as well, Slackware causes me to utter the least amount of profanity hands down.

Fonz

[yks]

Sometimes Linux crosses my way. For instance, recently tried OpenSUSE 11. Well, it looks quite nice, much nicer than (some very widespread proprietary OS). But as I used it further, I once again came to a conclusion that there's nothing as logical and well-documented as FreeBSD. It always takes so much expensive time to tune something in Linux, and its graphical tools are just a small top of a huge iceberg, that I always give up and return to my favorite OS. But I think one can expect that Linux and (Free)BSD will gradually become closer to each other, and despite all license issues help each other to develop, rather than compete.
BTW FreeBSD license is of course my favorite one, the GPL's "do what we say" can some time turn its dark side to the Linux community.

[ninjaslim]

On the subject of GNU, they introduced their own brand of proprietary software that hinders development and quality. That's why Linux is so far behind. The BSD license gives more absolute freedom.

[kantor]

Debian and sometimes Ubuntu

[estrabd]

xubuntu

[Jay7]

/me is using ALT Linux on desktop

[james89]

Slackware and Archlinux.

[smooth]

linux sucks FreeBSD rules thats it
in my world there is only
*BSD, windows, MAC OS X
no linux hell no

[mdma]

freebsd, windows, osx. same here

[tomh009]

Not necessarily, I know at least one person that got started with FreeBSD ;)

:) First started with 4BSD, then bought BSD/386 (sources! I could buy UNIX with sources!). That turned into BSD/OS, but I moved to NetBSD to run on Alphas. Now FreeBSD for the last five years or so.

I never did fully get a hang of the System V admin tools, that's why Linux system administration feels so odd. :\

[cmc4bsd]

I support AIX at IBM and first installed FreeBSD at
home (in the 90's) because it seemed closest to AIX.
I found it easy to install and maintain.

Later I went through a period of running Slackware
and liked it but eventually came back to FreeBSD.

My wife runs Ubuntu because that's what her brother
installed on her computer and she finds it a very
easy to use desktop. I am staying with FreeBSD, only
change is I would like to buy a bigger disk drive
for my PIII (have 17GB now, getting a little tight).

[Ranguvar]

Arch, by far. The only feature I miss is Use flag / ports-like functionality. The entire distro is focused on simplicity (NOT ease of use!), vanilla-ness, minimalism, and tweakability. ABS is similar to ports except, sadly, no config flags. To the person that said ABS was hard, it only takes two commands? One to build the package from the PKGBUILD (another feature, Arch packages are built simply through a bash script called a PKGBUILD, which is very easy to write), and one to add through pacman. Pacbuilder makes this even easier. There's also the AUR for user-made packages.

Right now, the only two things I can see FreeBSD has over Arch are stability and the ports configs. I've never had stability problems under Arch, I can just see from a technical perspective why FreeBSD would be more stable. The rolling release is actually more stable, for me, than most scheduled-release distros. *BSD does a very good job of having rock-solid stable releases, as does Slackware (never tried Debian), but I've had too much misery where I'll upgrade the system and three things are broken, with no clue what caused them... with rolling, I can tell what upgrade broke what, and I can downgrade or at least have a starting point towards fixing the problem. Note, this has never happened with Arch so far :)

If there was no Arch, I'd likely use Slackware (not as cutting edge, less dependency management means less minimalism since it's more likely that unused packages will be left on the machine, 64-bit version not supported much) or Gentoo (needs more KISS and focus).

[kantor]

linux sucks FreeBSD rules thats it
in my world there is only
*BSD, windows, MAC OS X
no linux hell no

windows ??? wtf ? so linux sucks but windows is ok ? you are payed by bill gates to write things like this ?

[mfaridi]

I use Debian and like it.

[lyuts]

My Unix experience started with FreeBSD. After that i worked with different linuxes: Red Hat, Ubuntu, ASP. But again and again i realized that FreeBSD is the best.

[Almindor]

@Almindor

Using ports on a desktop/laptop sounds like overkill to me. I will only use ports on heavy servers where I need the extra edge of compiling in a certain way. On the desktop, I use packages 95% of the time (I will use a port if I need a quick security upgrade, or if I just don't want to wait for new functionality).

My latest laptop was up and running in 1.5 hours (STABLE compiled + 478 installed packages, X11/windowmaker). If it takes more time, you're doing it the wrong way.

By the way: GenToo and FreeBSD, while 'alike in spirit', are still very different beasts. I don't think a less-than-optimal experience with GT has any reflection on BSD (one of my colleagues ditched GT for BSD, and he couldn't be happier).

Not if you want to have latest (and in case of freeBSD is usually latest-1.. see e.g: gnome) desktop software.

Also since 7.1 is so close I went with beta and using 7.0 packages would be like having Ubuntu Edgy.

You didn't get me tho. The port installation. while taking time, isn't something that bad (I don't compile suicide ports like OO.o obviously). The problem is the amount of configuration it takes for the system to behave integrated-like (mime-types, defaults etc.)

But it's not a FreeBSD fault, after all it's a server OS.

[Black]

Trying a lot of different distros (starting from RH4), I found Arch to be most suited for my needs, but of course after FreeBSD :)

[Reza-Khoshbakht]

My favorite is CentOS.but I use FreeBSD
just BSD family.

[none]

I used to be a brave slackware user and apps compiler. that time I did compile almost all software to use.

then when I had another pc to test and take the first steps to make freebsd home. then I got used to ports system and now I'm a lazy apps compiler :) kernel and base I do compile every now and then, from stable.

when I got to know pf, I never ever want to use iptables again ...

none

[developer]

ubuntu ...easy....

[empty]

Started with Redhat then FreeBSD. Never changed back, and never will! :)

[Jeff]

Started off with Slackware in 1994. Used it for about 8 years then got tired of compiling all the time so switched off and on between: Fedora, OpenSuse, Ubuntu, Debian, Mint, FreeBSD.

My server has been running Debian for 2 years but I'm just about to switch back to FBSD.

I distro hop so much on my laptop its crazy. I was running Mint for the longest time but currently I'm on Kubuntu.

Hated KDE 4.0 so much I switched back to gnome but I find myself currently using KDE 4.1.3 and getting use to it. Still has a lot of bugs to iron out though.

[Nicholas]

I started with Knoppix and Ubuntu LiveCD, cause it wasn't allowed me to install anything to hard drive. :) Then was freebsd.

[Speedy]

linux sucks FreeBSD rules thats it
in my world there is only
*BSD, windows, MAC OS X
no linux hell no

I did not intend to reply here. Hell no. Threads like this simply "suck in" most incompetent opinions. But putting Windows over Linux ...
Windows is an operating system that should not be connected to the internet. It's so damn broken, and the anti-virus s/w they have to use is the most pathetic measure. For instance, anybody at their right senses could secure a building by blacklisting known bad guys?
Linux is versatile. Red Hat for point'n'click guys, bloated. Ubuntu for "Linux users", bloated. Debian has certainly it's niche. Slackware gives you really nice feeling. And who said installing Gentoo takes 3 days? Yes, it may take 3 days. And you have a fully customized OS after that, if this is what gives you satisfaction, why not? I install FBSD the same way, after installing the base system I tweak my make.conf and rebuild the world. With customizing all the s/w may take three days, too.

[ninjaslim]

Gentoo gives no one satisfaction. Gentoo installations barely lasted three or four months for me, and I was fairly conservative with upgrades and such. Gentoo is a broken system.

[Speedy]

Gentoo gives no one satisfaction. Gentoo installations barely lasted three or four months for me, and I was fairly conservative with upgrades and such. Gentoo is a broken system.

Speak for yourself. I'm posting from a Gentoo box, installation is three years old, updated weekly. Gives satisfaction to me. So your statement "Gentoo gives no one satisfaction" is clearly not true. Unless you consider me "no one"?

Edit: Gentoo is not a distribution, it's a framework to build your own Linux. So you cannot say "Gentoo is broken", you can say "My Gentoo is broken" though. :P

[ninjaslim]

You seem to be the exception. If you look at Gentoo forums, you'll see how many people have left for other distributions, or better yet, a Unix.

[nske]

Gentoo gives no one satisfaction.
[...]
You seem to be the exception. If you look at Gentoo forums, you'll see how many people have left for other distributions, or better yet, a Unix.

He is not the exception. Gentoo has it's issues, which are indeed more than other projects', imo due to it's more demanding software management system, somewhat loose organization, serious lack of manpower, and political disagreements among the developers.

I don't argue against the fact that FreeBSD has some important advantages, I wouldn't be using it otherwise. It is obvious that it is a more mature project, with higher quality standards and more solid foundations that is standing much better on it's feet. No one said otherwise.

The point is that for me and for many others, regardless of some occasional very specific hic-ups -none of which had devastating consequences, so far-, gentoo works great (in my case has been for over 5 years in multiple boxes) and provides flexibility which does not exist in other operating systems or distributions.

Other people might not be willing to sacrifice quality for that flexibility, or may not even consider the system flexible. That's perfectly reasonable. I would also be hesitant to choose Gentoo for a role in which even the smallest downtime would be castastrophic, even though it hasn't failed me in the past.

It is, non the less, a system that works reasonably well for some of us and provides some unique features that some of us appreciate.

So please don't be so absolute in your judgement.

[UNIXgod]

Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo Gentoo

Is a great toy if set up correctly!

[dtknowles]

I started on Debian and then switched to Slackware before adopting FreeBSD. You can see a definite progression there. While I have heard the accusation that BSD-derived operating systems are harder to use, I have found that not to be the case at all. The ports collection, complete system source tree, and complete documentation are definite advantages in FreeBSD's favor. Everything is just designed to work together. The only thing I really miss is the native flash player.

[ninjaslim]

BSD-derived systems seem harder to use because they give you a barebones system upon install. That has never bothered me. I setup my system the exact same way each and every time. When I had to setup a second desktop, I just wrote a post-install script that automates system configuration and application installation and configuration, while spitting enough information so that I know what's going on. Within an hour or so, I have my familiar system setup.

[brd@]

Where possible, I run RHEL like it's a FreeBSD system - I choose the minimum package installation, and configure everything in files, rather than using their system-config-* programs.

One of the big downsides of RHEL vs. FreeBSD is the package selection. (I am not in the business of adding non-vendor supported repos to RHEL, and I prefer to not compile from source unless totally necessary.) Ports provides an astounding number of useful apps to choose from.

I'm stuck with RHEL at work for MySQL and Java Tomcat boxes, everything else is FreeBSD. I do similar things trying to keep RHEL thin, but it is a pain when the installer works against you. I sorely miss the ports collection, cause I hate going outside the RHEL supported repo for things I need.

I started with RH, then when RH7 came out, it was too bloated so I tried FreeBSD and never looked back. That was in early 2003.

[ninjaslim]

I actually like RHEL/Fedora. Those two (not any other offshoots or re-brands) and Debian are the only Linux systems that seem close to Unix ideology that I'd use. The rest are just too foregone. Also, to me RHEL/Fedora are comparable to Solaris/OpenSolaris, not really to BSD as BSD vision is so different from SysV vision.

[hitest]

I actually like RHEL/Fedora. Those two (not any other offshoots or re-brands) and Debian are the only Linux systems that seem close to Unix ideology that I'd use. The rest are just too foregone.

The two versions of Linux that I primarily use are Debian 4.0 at work and Slackware at home. I've found Slackware 12.1 to be stable, secure, and highly reliable, just like FreeBSD 7.0. Also, in Slackware you are free to compile programs, install binary pre-built packages, or you can install source code using build scripts (you are not locked into only compiling software).
At the risk of being branded a heretic I am very happy to be a member of both communities (Slackware, FreeBSD). :e

[Barnon]

Currently my favorite OS with a Linux kernel , is Ubuntu, but
I would like to briefly share my history with FBSD and Linux
kernel OS's.

The year was 1996, MS did not have a secure stable OS out yet so
I went to a amateur radio swap meet and picked up copies of
Slackware, and a couple of other Linuxes. The seller suggested
that I try FreeBSD, which at that time I had never heard of.

I spent 2 days trying to install Slackware , 2 days trying the
other Linuxes (I think RH and/or Suse) without much success.
The partioning, compiling and dependencies that did not get
automatically installed drove me to reconsider using MS NT 3.5.

As I was cleaning up, I found the FreeBSD 2.2 install disks. I
decided to try it, what the heck , there was one more day left
this week. In about 2 hours, I had FreeBSD installed, networked
and X running. I have gone back to trying RH, Suse, and lately
Ubuntu, but I find that I am most comfortable with FreeBSD.

The thing I love most about FreeBSD is its stability. After 14
years running it, I have never had a crash that wasn't caused
by hardware , and wasn't easily recoverable. I have introduced
many many friends to FreeBSD, most of with dual boot to it.

Thanks, FreeBSD.

[businessgeeks]

been using ubuntu for the desktop and freebsd for servers. but now, im starting to move my laptop to freebsd...

[BuSerD]

I have access to two virtual servers provided by my employer personal use & testing. I am to lazy to test anything so I manage to ignore them for the most part. One of the virts is of course FreeBSD 7.1 Beta(for bug reporting) while the other is RHEL 5 to allow me to screw up things in a controlled environment prior to giving a customer an even bigger headache. On to the point of the thread. My personal desktop runs FreeBSD 7 exclusively. My work desktop/station runs Gentoo by choice which has not failed me in the 2+ years it has been running. The only reason my work station does not running FreeBSD is that our stations are not allowed to run virtualization software and I need things like flash available to fix websites for less(shall we say) astute customers. With the flash support in FreeBSD 7.1 i may be able to correct in the near future. I have tried many linux distros but Gentoo, ELive and Debian top the list in that order.

[vermaden]

Favorite Linux you say ... if it had to be Linux let it be Draco Linux, it uses OSS4 by default instead of ALSA and PulseShit and pkgsrc.org for package management, also all configuration is based on /etc/rc.conf file.

The second one is Arch Linux, which comes with ALSA by default but OSS is in their repository and configuration is again in /etc/rc.conf

I stay away from Debian as far as possible, their package management (APT) is rubbish, every package split into these small thingies for every occasion: -dev -bin -common -not-very-common -full -extra -asd -wtf ... I am not surprised that they like to mention how MANY packages they have.

Also I hate thirs configuration files schemma, like for apache or nginx for example. sites-enabled sites-disabled modules-enabled modules-disabled asd-disabled asd.conf asd.d asd.modules-not-sure and so on.

[drhowarddrfine]

I have no use for Linux. FreeBSD does everything I need, and better, except play flash properly.

[anomie]

I sorely miss the ports collection, cause I hate going outside the RHEL supported repo for things I need.

Exactly. Ports contain a great variety. One small example: when I moved a web server to RHEL recently, I had to switch to a new log analyzer (because I make a practice to stay within the repos, unless it is simply not possible). :\

[vermaden]

Exactly. Ports contain a great variety. One small example: when I moved a web server to RHEL recently, I had to switch to a new log analyzer (because I make a practice to stay within the repos, unless it is simply not possible). :\

Have you tried to run pkgsrc.org on Linux? Its one of the supported platforms.

[Eponasoft]

CentOS and Arch. By the way, this thread is in the wrong subforum. :D

[anomie]

Have you tried to run pkgsrc.org on Linux? Its one of the supported platforms.

No, I haven't - but that is an intriguing idea for experimentation. (I ran NetBSD for a short time on one of my laptops, FWIW.)

For production RHEL servers my philosophy could probably be summarized as: keep it simple, secure, "standardized", and easy to maintain. ;) That is why I'm staying with officially supported repos wherever possible. (Even if it is limiting at times.)

[dodo1122]

I have used gentoo for quite some time, but it went hownhill quite drastically. Right now I use freebsd and exherbo, which is basically Gentoo done right. Unfortunately it's still pre-alpha, and doesn't have some essential packages, but with some bash scripting skills you can write exhereses (like ebuilds in gentoo) in no time.

[vermaden]

For production RHEL servers my philosophy could probably be summarized as: keep it simple, secure, "standardized", and easy to maintain. ;) That is why I'm staying with officially supported repos wherever possible. (Even if it is limiting at times.)

pkgsrc.org would be kept only at one dir /usr/pkgsrc + /usr/pkg so I do not see any "bad" things here, only matter of of adding additional PATH.

Also openpkg.org is kept in similar way, only /openpkg and nothing more, even all scripts are kept there.

[Nulani]

Gentoo, Draco and Arch.

[hydra]

I also work with Gentoo, it works very well as a server. I use FreeBSD for desktop and also works great.

[tangram]

I like Gentoo though I have nice memories of Debian. Gentoo is used on a desktop machine to run mainly VirtualBox and flash. My laptop does run OpenSUSE as my wife likes it.

Gentoo has very good documentation, loads of packages and I can customize it as I see fit. From it I'd say the logical step is to move to FreeBSD due to some similarities such as the organization of ports/portage, documentation and customization.

I guess that the killer feature that I look for in a system is documentation and in the Linux land I'd point to Gentoo as its best example.

[tenq]

Started from ASPLinux, not so clear. A bit later I'm took FreeBSD 5.2.1 install CD from friend, who worked at this time in local ISP. And from this time actively using FreeBSD, as server\router and as desktop.

Answering a theme question I will tell that the favourite distribution kit linux - slackware because it really GNU :-)
PS:Has tried many distribution kits linux & other systems, but really cosy I feel only in FreeBSD.

[sT4k3]

The best linux - FreeBSD!!! ))

[ikehack]

I like Slackware. My biggest thing with Slackware is how 99.9% of anything I've had to compile on it, compiled with no problems. That is, didn't ask me to get this library or this dependency; you know, the usual. :)

[Coplen]

I really dug Debian for a long time so I'll go with that.

[gullit]

I use Slackware and Gentoo Linux, like FBSD they are very stable and simple to use.

[r-c-e]

For servers I always use CentOS, with the EPEL and RPMFORGE repositories added to yum. For desktops Ubuntu all the way.

[z0ran]

i don't even think about linux...how can i, i have most powerful OS in the world, why would i downgrade it to like..ubuntu..or something.

[r-c-e]

i don't even think about linux...how can i, i have most powerful OS in the world, why would i downgrade it to like..ubuntu..or something.

never underestimate linux as a decent mysql server!

[DutchDaemon]

I find it very difficult to underestimate linux.

[cmanns]

never underestimate linux as a decent mysql server!

You should try MySQL on FreeBSD and then edit your post, or learn how to tune MySQL while you're at it and then edit it. I've had nothing but performance gains with FreeBSD & MySQL, and I'm not really biased.

I use Debian sometimes, it's half decent. Also someone said Windows should never be connected to the internet, I've ran windows without anti-virus and such and I've never gotten virus's, when I used to fix computers the ones filled with virus's were filled with pornographic material... soo yeah. If you browse safely with windows you shouldn't have a issue, it's very insecure though regardless.

[r-c-e]

You should try MySQL on FreeBSD and then edit your post, or learn how to tune MySQL while you're at it and then edit it. I've had nothing but performance gains with FreeBSD & MySQL, and I'm not really biased.

Having "tried" MySQL on thousands of FreeBSD and Linux systems I think I might leave my post as is, but thanks for the invitation. I have found Linux w/ SMP gives me more performance even after tuning so I use it on dedicated systems. On systems with both web servers and MySQL, FreeBSD is my choice.

What I have found to be true, more than performance between the two; performance is dictated by the least competent query creator on the system.

[alik]

I used or tried Corel Linux, some old RedHat, Mandrake, SUSE, Arch, Debian, (Woody and Sarge), Zenwalk and Ubuntu (all since 5.10). I have Xubuntu 7.10 on my computer in work, so it is good time to reinstall (waiting for FreeBSD7.1)

[meeb]

I am using debians PowerPC-Port (http://www.debian.org/ports/powerpc/index.html) on my iBook but mostly used Slackware (http://slackware.com/) before switching to FreeBSD.

[Pushrod]

My favourite Linux is that "FreeBSD version of Linux" that Microsoft made. :)

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2002/02/28/185399/on-the-campaign-with-big-bill.htm

[cloud]

Debian is the only distrib I can support.
I have run Gentoo for many years but finally it's so useless. The same spirit than FreeBSD but with all the inconvenients of Linux ... Using it in production is boring.

And finally FreeBSD > * :f

[rliegh]

I've got OpenSUSE 11.1 on my desktop and laptop -so far it seems to be stable, fast and easy to use. At this point I definately prefer it to Ubuntu (and I'm no longer all that fond of wasting my time on minimalist distros like Slackware).

[jb]

+1 Arch

[oliverh]

If I'm looking for quality and reliability, nothing compares to Slackware. It may drive some people nuts because of the missing dependencies but that's a feature of this distro :-)

Slack I say - within the plethora of Linux distros it actually sucks less :D

[vermaden]

If I'm looking for quality and reliability, nothing compares to Slackware. It may drive some people nuts because of the missing dependencies but that's a feature of this distro :-)

Slack I say - within the plethora of Linux distros it actually sucks less :D

You can use pkgsrc.org / apt-get (slapt) / openpkg.org with Slackware to provide package management with dependency handling.

[oliverh]

You can use pkgsrc.org / apt-get (slapt) / openpkg.org with Slackware to provide package management with dependency handling.


Yes I know, but I don't see this as disadvantage. As much as I like the ports in FBSD, I do like writing my scripts in Slack ;-)

[rliegh]

You can use pkgsrc.org / apt-get (slapt) / openpkg.org with Slackware to provide package management with dependency handling.
I've tried using pkgsrc with openbsd, slackware and opensolaris -and I've never been able to reliably get any of the more complex items (gnome, or even firefox) to build. That may be due to my lack of programming skills; but it makes me wonder if it's really possible to use pkgsrc as a full-out application/package manager outside of netbsd.

[vermaden]

I've tried using pkgsrc with openbsd, slackware and opensolaris -and I've never been able to reliably get any of the more complex items (gnome, or even firefox) to build. That may be due to my lack of programming skills; but it makes me wonder if it's really possible to use pkgsrc as a full-out application/package manager outside of netbsd.

OpenSolaris is not one of the supported platforms unfotunelly (Solaris 8/9 is if I recall corectlry), althout I saw multiple howtos on blogs about making pkgsrc work @ OpenSolaris.

Also why use pkgsrc @ OpenBSD when OpenBSD has its own ports?

[rliegh]

OpenSolaris is not one of the supported platforms unfotunelly (Solaris 8/9 is if I recall corectlry), althout I saw multiple howtos on blogs about making pkgsrc work @ OpenSolaris.

Also why use pkgsrc @ OpenBSD when OpenBSD has its own ports?

The same reason I tried to use it on FreeBSD; if you can use one framwork on multiple operating systems, then you only have to download one set of distfiles. It's more convient to build what you need in pkgsrc, archive the distfiles and then have them available when you feel like using another BSD -as opposed to having to re-download them seperately for Free and Open BSD.

[ninjaslim]

I don't know, I haven't touched Linux in ages. These days, my proven combo is FreeBSD and Mac OS X. Total Unix and total productivity!

[Oko]

I've tried using pkgsrc with openbsd, slackware and opensolaris -and I've never been able to reliably get any of the more complex items (gnome, or even firefox) to build. That may be due to my lack of programming skills; but it makes me wonder if it's really possible to use pkgsrc as a full-out application/package manager outside of netbsd.
It is of course possible on DragonFly which is tier one platform for pkgsrc but you have a good point about other platforms. That was my personal experience as well on OpenBSD. I wonder if it had anything to do with the fact that I always install native XOrg.
Maybe pkgsrc will work better when NetBSD switches completely to Xorg after 5.0 release.

To people how are wondering why would somebody use pkgsrc on OpenBSD I will give couple reasons.

OpenBSD is mostly binary source OS and packages are updated once in 6 months. Using pkgsrc will enable you to use OpenBSD in the same fashion like FreeBSD (moving target packages).
Obviously there are 3000 more pkgsrc then OpenBSD ports and almost 5000 more counting vip pkgsrc.
Finally OpenBSD has no stable packages anymore while pkgsrc has constant security updates.

[amorosso]

Hi, after reading all these post, but witch linux would be good for a web site server.. I'm very very new to this.. Thank you..

[hitest]

Hi, after reading all these post, but witch linux would be good for a web site server.. I'm very very new to this.. Thank you..

Any version of Linux should ship with the Apache web server.

[oliverh]

Hi, after reading all these post, but witch linux would be good for a web site server.. I'm very very new to this.. Thank you..

E.g. Debian and Centos - both with stability and reliability in mind.

[Oko]

E.g. Debian and Centos - both with stability and reliability in mind.
Hi OliverH,

I know you have been using Linux since 1992 or so. Could you give some objective comparasion of four major Linux distros
CentOS, OpenSuSE, Debian, and Slack firstly for the server then for the Desktop.

I have been living most of my adult life in U.S. and seems to me that nothing compares to RedHat (CentOS) when it comes to enterprise level server and even a desktop. On the another hand for a hobbiest or non-proprietary applications Slack seems the best thing. In my personal experiance Slack people are also most competent Unix users closely followed by RedHat.I have really bad experiences with Debian people and pretend to be Debian (Ubuntu) people. I must confess though that Ubuntu is closest to Windows and OS X among non-proprietary systems but RedHat is
really good IMHO for a enterprise desktop.OpenSuSE user base in U.S. is non existing in my experience.

Thanks for any input.

[oliverh]

Hi Oko

apart from *BSD I am long-time Slacker. Centos is in my opinion the 'new shooting star' at the os heaven. Debian is yet a good system, easy to administer but it has got some massive problems lately because of 'politics'. Compared to 'rpm hell' Debian _can_work like a charm, but in the end I would chose Centos because of the overall quality. So 'Gods own distro - Debian - is a very difficult case, it _can_ fulfill certain tasks but it has got - in my very own opinion - a tendency for failure.

Centos for servers, Slack for the Desktop of the somewhat experienced user.

[ChickenWing88]

Here is my operating system preference in order of most recently used

1.FreeBSD
2.PCBSD
3.Ubuntu
4.Mandriva
5.Fedora

[PetrusValidus]

I don't have one favorite Linux distro, I use a few for different reasons. I think a lot of people on here do the same.

Mandriva: Windows *desktop* replacement (websurfing, watching DVDs, games, fun stuff, etc)

Novell's SLED: Windows *workstation* replacement (All work, no play!)

Debian: Linux workstation

I haven't done too much with Linux servers so no opinion there. But I would probably choose Debian. When I do use FreeBSD it's for a workstation. To me, Debian and FreeBSD are analogous to each other. Both very reliable OSes. Still not too familiar with FreeBSD but I hope to be soon.

[Mad_Dud]

I'm still in love with Slackware :-)

[rghq]

Slackware would be the only "acceptable" Linux distro for me.

Personally I don't like Debian's "symlinking" - placing configuration files under /etc, then symlinking them across the system, also for some Webapps. Some people may get used to it, for me it's just confusing.

[alie]

1) FreeBSD
2) Debian

[gpan]

Arch Linux (another relatively unknown giant) with a great package manager (pacman). What I would like to ask is if there's a graphical package manager equivalent to Shaman (a graphical package manager for Pacman).

[fronclynne]

When DOS was eaten by windows95, I went looking for a CLI, and eventually found slackware. Whilst scrolling through the interminable comments of some forgotten /. article, I saw a reference to FreeBSD and decided to try it. I still have a soft spot in my heart for slackware (hail Bob), but gentoo is fine for linux and I'm playing with arch (and it seemeth okay). Ubuntu is what I installed for the GF.

Linux's /etc gives me the heebie jeebies, though.

[Daisuke_Aramaki]

New user here, and relatively new to FreeBSD as well. But a longtime Linux user. My favorite Linux distributions are Lunar and Sorcerer. Two of my production machines are powered by them and will remain so as well. My first experience with FreeBSD was loading it on a Lenovo laptop, and everything works great. Eyeing my other laptops for the migration as well.

[ligregni]

Hi!, This is my first post here!!!, I noticed that FreeBSD has it own forums... TODAY!!!

About the linux I like (and, as the Thread creator said, I love FreeBSD), it will be Slackware.

Why?, because it is not too easy, just like FreeBSD, I love that when you install FreeBSD, you must do everything, the OS will not do that for you, and, after a minutes installing, all you get is a simple CLI, and, WOW!!!, you can control the world with that..., about Slackware, I liked that, when installig, it says:

"You must partition your disk, use fdisk...", I toke it like: "I will not do that for you, so!, let's move!"... And thats why in the other side, I hate *buntus and the other linux distros.

The other linux I like is named Austrumi, it is a really interesting proyect, you burn your CD, boot from it, it loads the OS on RAM, the CD is ejected, and you have a very minimalist linux working on your RAM... like Live-CD but pretty much faster...

But, really I am a PC-BSD user (I know it is quite simple as Ubuntu, but it has FreeBSD behind...), and a FreeBSD newbie (I wanna use it all in CLI)

Greetings from MEXICO!!!

[jemate18]

My favorite GNU/Linux:
1. Ubuntu - easy to use and work with
2. openSUSE - Best KDE implementation ever

[pradtf]

Hi, after reading all these post, but witch linux would be good for a web site server.. I'm very very new to this.. Thank you..

we've run our home servers with slackware, ubuntu, openbsd, debian and finally freebsd7. we have had no problems with any of them other than ubuntu when i followed an upgrade that crashed the server and didn't get fixed for a day or so as well as with openbsd where i did the regular upgrades which led to a deterioration of a system that had been running quite well for more than half-a-year.

on the freebsd-questions maillist i asked about upgrading and got some very sound advice from more than one person. if everything is working as you want it to, why would you want to upgrade?

we've been running freebsd7 for more than a year now and we're sticking with it!

[pradtf]

Personally I don't like Debian's "symlinking" - placing configuration files under /etc, then symlinking them across the system, also for some Webapps.

i agree! initially, i had thought this was a clever and flexible idea, but things felt a lot more unnecessarily complex afterwards.

[pradtf]

My favorite GNU/Linux:
1. Ubuntu - easy to use and work with
2. openSUSE - Best KDE implementation ever

1. ubuntu is nice, but typing sudo all the time drove me nuts :(

2. it does seem to be very smooth so far and it is the 'recommended' linux of the kdedevelopers from what i understand:
http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/3528

[tankist02]

Type

sudo su -

and get a permanent root terminal.

[ChickenWing88]

The fallowing is a list of my three favorite Linux Distributions


Ubuntu ( Best For Laptops)
2. OpenSuse ( Mostt hardware support for Pavillion a6230n)
Debian (Best for Cli based systems (I.E. Servers and power user Desktops))

[crsd]

My favorite Linux is no Linux at all :)

[alie]

@crsd: hahahaha. good answer! +1 for u

[s3cur1ty]

Gentoo and slackware, I use them quite a bit

[s3cur1ty]

Oh, no gentoo doesn't rock. I have used gentoo for about 1 year. At time i did like it. mostly because i learned many nix things using it. But otherwise it's a nightmare.

Compiling ports(ebuild or whatever, don't remember gentoo's name), sux bigtime. Upgrading ports mostly will fail ever few days.

If you build from sources. it's like russian roulette. you can never be sure that you will be able to successfully compile system.

From point of view of documentation gentoo rocks, but from usability it greatly sux.


I like arch, even if it's not ready yet.

also for new ppl, i recommend Mandriva (well, when i used it it was good, for newcomers)Hey, but isn't that the fun of gentoo? Finding out what went wrong and fixing it, building a system to your liking.

[ArtemD]

I use Debian when I have to use Linux. At work I am forced to use RedHat Enterprise thou :(

[lissyara]

I start with FreeBSD.
I use many Linux, AIX, Solaris...
But, my desktop (home & works) - FreeBSD.
Many servers - FreeBSD (mail, db, www, filesharing & other)
But... Many servers with linux & AIX - for Oracle =(((
I love FreeBSD, and hate Linux =)
It stupid and non-logic system.

[irkkaaja]

@Almindor

Using ports on a desktop/laptop sounds like overkill to me. I will only use ports on heavy servers where I need the extra edge of compiling in a certain way. On the desktop, I use packages 95% of the time (I will use a port if I need a quick security upgrade, or if I just don't want to wait for new functionality).

My latest laptop was up and running in 1.5 hours (STABLE compiled + 478 installed packages, X11/windowmaker). If it takes more time, you're doing it the wrong way.

By the way: GenToo and FreeBSD, while 'alike in spirit', are still very different beasts. I don't think a less-than-optimal experience with GT has any reflection on BSD (one of my colleagues ditched GT for BSD, and he couldn't be happier).
As I recall, the closest linux distro to FreeBSD is really CRUX (http://crux.nu), not Gentoo. I don't have any experience with it, though.

[vermaden]

As I recall, the closest linux distro to FreeBSD is really CRUX (http://crux.nu), not Gentoo. I don't have any experience with it, though.
You should check Draco Linux, that I mentioned here:
http://forums.freebsd.org/showpost.php?p=3172&postcount=70

[irkkaaja]

You should check Draco Linux, that I mentioned here:
http://forums.freebsd.org/showpost.php?p=3172&postcount=70

I would have mentioned Draco, but it's still on a horribly outdated set of core components; kernel 2.6.23 and gcc 4.1. The whole "linux with pkgsrc" isn't a new idea, though: it's been done before, too (http://voltalinux.sicurezzarete.com/), but voltalinux is dead.

[oliverh]

>kernel 2.6.23 and gcc 4.1

Bleeding edge is the decease of the Linux-world.

[fbsduser]

The one linux I like is Ubuntu Ultimate x64 ;)
Next to it I got FreeBSD 7.0 x86.
(I like both OS's, but tend to use linux more since I'm on a laptop, and linux supports it better than BSD).
BTW: Dunno if it's just me, but, There are quite a lot of hate here towards linux (both in sig's and posts). I expected hate toward windoze, but didn't really expect such hate toward linux.

[DutchDaemon]

Please let's not start a Linux/BSD thread again ;) It's all been said before. For example: you'll hardly ever find things like 'M$', 'Winblows' and 'Windoze' on a BSD forum. It's a different outlook, and it's geared toward Unix in general (the Big Friend), not Microsoft (the Big Enemy). I don't hate Microsoft, it hardly even exists for me; and I don't think any BSD is trying to overthrow and annihilate Microsoft; they just want to build a robust and secure operating system in its own right. Focus on their own work. Then there's the historic 'pain' of BSD getting caught up in and slowed down by a lengthy lawsuit because of licensing issues (UNIX), which paved the way for Linux steaming ahead, which still bothers some people who feel Linux only has quantity, whereas BSD has quality. There's the (perceived) "chaotic/unorganised/sloppy Linux" vs. "elite/tightly organised/smooth BSD" development process. Etc. etc. etc. etc. Really, Google has all the threads and history of Linux/BSD.. The twain shall probably never meet again.

[FBSDin20Steps]

Right now. I use FreeBSD and Ubuntu as a desktop. Once virtualbox is ported to FreeBSD...(I hope it will). Then it's FreeBSD all the way

Greetz

[alie]

yup... i am waiting for it also... now i am using OpenSolaris for my office desktop and FreeBSD for my home dekstop.

[rliegh]

The whole "linux with pkgsrc" isn't a new idea, though: it's been done before, too (http://voltalinux.sicurezzarete.com/), but voltalinux is dead.
It's my understanding they say the same thing about BSD too.

Wrong in both cases. (http://voltalinux.sicurezzarete.com/?p=40) ;)

[oliverh]

>It's my understanding they say the same thing about BSD too.

Yes BSD is dying for some decades now. That's humor, but comparing a mature and well-known operating system that drives huge parts of the internet to some distro is somewhat bewildering.

[christian]

My favourite Linux is Slackware, it's the OS I use the most time. Linux and *BSD are great operating systems, both of them have got their advantages and disadvantages.

BTW: I don't like BSD vs. Linux flamewars as well as I don't like Linux/BSD/Unix vs. Windows flamewars. Everybody can use the OS he want to use. For example for a user, who only wants to write letters, the OS is not really interesting, the most operating systems will provide capabilities to do that. FreeBSD and Linux are the operating systems, which fulfill my expectations, so I use both.

Best Regards
christian

[Graaf_van_Vlaanderen]

For my desktop I use OpenSolaris.

My two compute servers run FreeBSD. (GNU Octave)

My file server runs OpenSolaris: ZFS

My laptop runs on Ubuntu.

[fbsduser]

My favourite Linux is Slackware, it's the OS I use the most time. Linux and *BSD are great operating systems, both of them have got their advantages and disadvantages.

BTW: I don't like BSD vs. Linux flamewars as well as I don't like Linux/BSD/Unix vs. Windows flamewars. Everybody can use the OS he want to use. For example for a user, who only wants to write letters, the OS is not really interesting, the most operating systems will provide capabilities to do that. FreeBSD and Linux are the operating systems, which fulfill my expectations, so I use both.

Best Regards
christian

Funny thing is I tend to find the Linux+BSD vs Windows flamefests funny. But I guess that's because I tend to put Linux & BSD (since they both are opensource) in the same "team" and windows in the other one.

Also my Favorite Linux changed from ubuntu ultimate to M$Linux 11.1 x64.

[DutchDaemon]

I see Linux vs Windows flamefests. I fail to see BSD vs Windows flamefests, really. We're not that bothered. We don't write M$ either..

[ChickenWing88]

My personal preference is Refhat based distributions such as Fedora or CenTOS. I haver also dabbled with slackware, Ubuntu, Pre novel Suse Linx 9.0,OpenSuse and Debian.

[ericturgeon]

I prefer Ubuntu because the synaptic have all application like FreeBSD package and use gnome2 for desktop manager.

[tangram]

I prefer Ubuntu because the synaptic have all application like FreeBSD package and use gnome2 for desktop manager.

And you like brown? (j/k)

[hitest]

At the moment I'm running at home:

FreeBSD 7.2-amd64, Slackware 12.2, and Debian 5.0.

[PetrusValidus]

I am running as of right now:

Primary workstation: Mandriva 2008.1
Laptop: openSUSE 11.1
Server: Debian Lenny

[LateNiteTV]

debian.
i kind of want to try arch someday too.

[gnemmi]

Mandriva 2009.1 running on my Dell 1318.
FreeBSD 7.0 running on my desktop.

[drhowarddrfine]

Ok. This pathetic thread has been going on for 7 months now and is a duplicate of hundreds of other forums all over the 'net.

[Bobarino]

Ok. This pathetic thread has been going on for 7 months now and is a duplicate of hundreds of other forums all over the 'net.

You're absolutely right.

But, since the thread is still open.....Debian

[ckt1g3r]

Slackware Linux > FreeBSD > Arch Linux , is my favorite OS.

[dburkland]

FreeBSD and if I can't get it to run on my hardware then ArchLinux gets installed.

[copypaiste]

If only major vendors paid more attention to freebsd we could forget about all these linuces ^_^ Though openSUSE is ok for a desktop.

[hitest]

When I run Linux it is either Slackware or Debian.

[Allamgir]

I love Arch Linux, but it's so... Linux. Idk, I like the controlled nature of FreeBSD while still being completely free. I like ubuntu for the handholding kind, but I'm more of a DIY fan. That's why I'm so interested in FreeBSD after using Arch for a little while.

[MG]

For a Linux distro I'd have a clean LFS system. Just a kernel, binutils, common base binaries and all the sources. No files relating to any specific distro.

Anyone ever heard of Linpus Linux? It was once on my Acer netbook. Never seen a distro suck that much. It was completely infected by Acer to be sure nothing will work from shell.
I think it's important for the Linux community to keep the knowledge and not to become owned by companies. They are running a silent war against O.S.S, but will never admit that.

[CodeBlock]

Well, I've only first tried FreeBSD about 2 or 3 weeks ago, and instantly fell in love with it. Most stuff seemed to *work* and when it doesn't there were many, *many* ways to get help.. Google, IRC, Forums, PR's, Mailing Lists, etc, etc..

I first started in the *nix world with FreeSpire, which I ended up hating, when xorg wouldn't work right, and moved to Ubuntu. After a few months, I grew out of that, and moved on to Debian. After sticking with Debian for a few _years_, people kept telling me to try ArchLinux. Right off the bat there were a few things I didn't like about it, namely how protective the Arch community is... I gave it a shot anyway, and stuck with it for a few months, and still to this day, dual boot it, with fBSD on my laptop. After Arch I decided it was time to try something new, and was pointed in the world of the BSDs. So I gave Free a try and instantly fell in love with it. Ports are amazing, the documentation is great, the community is very nice. Overall it was-- *IS* great.

Recently my friend told me to try Gentoo Linux, which I have now, on my secondary desktop. I think if I was going to back fully back to Linux, it would be Gentoo. However I really have no plans on going back.

So, to cap it up:
I run BSD when I can:
- Desktop
- Laptop (dual boot)
- Test Server
I run Debian on my VPS
I run Easy Peasy (an ubuntu variant) on my netbook (considering throwing BSD on it though)
I run Arch on my laptop (dual boot) (thinking about replacing with Gentoo)
I run CentOS on my other home server. (once again, considering moving it to BSD).
I have a third desktop with a windows install on it, and XP on the second drive of my Desktop, but never used.

Phew- lots of typing xD.

[kano]

I used to run Debian on my servers and ArchLinux on my desktops/laptops. Debian was nice and stable for the servers, but trying to use it on the desktop usually just frustrated me as stable is too old and the unstable I had things break too often.

Arch was nice on the desktop as things were very simple to configure (kinda like BSD, but not quite) and had the latest packages. The rolling-release system was not very good for server use though.

I've used tons of Linux distros over the years (Redhat, Mandrake, SuSE, Gentoo, Slackware, Ubuntu, Fedora, and probably more) and those were the two I liked the best.

Everything is FreeBSD (except one) now though. :) I have the best of both plus more!

[Bunyan]

My favourite Linux distribution is SLACKWARE. It is simple, BSD-like.

[segfault]

Agreed, it's all about Slackware for me too. Gentoo was alright too.

[gripek]

Hmm...
On the start with my travel I use "PLD 1.0" http://www.pld-linux.org/
After, I install Slackware and I love this distrubution.
Next, Debian. Nice, Simple, Many howto's, forums, docs. Apt-get is realy good...
SUSE Linux - no comment... This "yast" is a "M$ Win" Control Panel! Is not a linux for me ;)
RedHat/CentOS is very nice. Clean-up, order, simple system.
But... Fedora not like user instructions and preferences. I make have "Xfce4" - ok, but fedora autoinstall in my system 10000 dependence.
I don't like this! Wrr..! :)

My like Linux is Slackware but I don't use him.
RedHat/Centos and Debian is so good for me :)

[pripiat]

Another vote for Debian. :-)

[bsdhosting]

debian is great :D slackware is good but not very popular these days.

[ninjaslim]

Sigh, seems as though I'm completely Linux-ed out. I'm happier with running Matlab on FreeBSD than I am natively on Linux. Just so many things about Linux that turn me off. Oh well, it'll get there some day.

[Saint0fCloud]

Gentoo, although right now Arch is the only linux I have installed and I rarely if ever use it since I definitely prefer Free/NetBSD

[rokpa92]

Wolvix http://wolvix.org/
or Tuquito http://www.tuquito.org.ar/ (argentina distro´s) and is very easy.
but i like FreeBSD all my live

[tcoffeep]

I used Funtoo up until I discovered FreeBSD, and before that it was Arch.

[Mormegil]

The only Linux that exists for me in my personal life is Slackware, and it's only installed on my laptop because of poor FreeBSD support for my wifi card. My first introduction to Linux was two years or so of RedHat, but I didn't learn anything until I switched to Slack, and I never felt like I was on top of the game until I moved to FreeBSD.

I do have to dabble with various other Linux distros for work, the most tolerable has been CentOS.

[fonz]

The only Linux that exists for me in my personal life is Slackware, and it's only installed on my laptop because of poor FreeBSD support for my wifi card. My first introduction to Linux was two years or so of RedHat, but I didn't learn anything until I switched to Slack, and I never felt like I was on top of the game until I moved to FreeBSD.
Mental note: when time travelling into the future, try not to run into one's future self ;)

I could have written your post, except that I found a USB WiFi adapter that works with FreeBSD - wheee :) But getting back on topic, I do agree about Slackware. I've seen several Linux distros old and new (and yes, I too started with RedHat), but Slackware has always been the one that gave the least reason for swearing and cursing.

Alphons

[Eponasoft]

I tried the LFS route over the last couple of days. I have a project going on right now where I need a good-but-small distro of Linux, so I've tried out a few. None have fit the bill thus far. It HAS to be one iso only, and many distros are many isos and have essentials spread out amongst them. So now I'm downloading the latest archlinux, as that always did well for me. If this doesn't work, then perhaps I'll go the Debian route, as that has worked for me in the past as well. And for the record...I'm installing them into QEMU, not running them on a normal system. One might argue that this is a terrible idea...but I already have Windows 2000 running through QEMU with no problems and if that works just fine, then a Linux of some kind should too...and thus far, all I've tried have failed.

[noobster]

And for the record...I'm installing them into QEMU, not running them on a normal system. One might argue that this is a terrible idea...but I already have Windows 2000 running through QEMU with no problems and if that works just fine, then a Linux of some kind should too...and thus far, all I've tried have failed.

You might want to try VirtualBox instead of QEMU, because in my experience it runs much faster and installing a Linux should work without problems.

[CodeBlock]

I see a lot of you mentioning Slack, which is the one distro I haven't tried yet. I'm now tempted to throw it in a VM and mess around with it :P.

[Eponasoft]

You might want to try VirtualBox instead of QEMU, because in my experience it runs much faster and installing a Linux should work without problems.
If I could I would but virtualbox fails to build (after I spent over 2 days compiling a legion of dependencies for it), and there appears to be no prebuilt binary for it...unless there's one ready in ports now.

[noobster]

If I could I would but virtualbox fails to build (after I spent over 2 days compiling a legion of dependencies for it), and there appears to be no prebuilt binary for it...unless there's one ready in ports now.

It is available now: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-7-stable/Latest/virtualbox.tbz

[Eponasoft]

Awesome, thanks. :)

[krynn]

I must say that I agree with most in this thread, Slackware is the linux distro that I came to FreeBSD from and it will as such always be my favorite.

[Eponasoft]

Hrm...even with the binary of virtualbox available, I still can't get it to work. I honestly don't have the patience to make it work either...it requires WAY too many dependencies and there are too many conflicts.

[sasha-fbsd]

Back in university years (early 1980, 81/82) I fell in love with the unix systems on campus. Have been using Apple plus/2c/gs, then mac classic etc. Always, though, have been missing unix. In 2004 (?), to my surprise, I found online and installed FreebSD 5.3. My love rekindled!!

As learning experience, I have also tried Mandrake, Yellow Dog, Oopen Suse, Ubuntu, Slackware, Xandros. I particularly liked the now gone Libranet.

I ALWAYS came back to my now 7.2 release FreeBSD. It always works, never fails. I run 7.2 Fbsd on my workstation, and PC-BSD on a Compaq laptop (to watch Flash videos).

I love my FreeBSD, and there is still so much to learn, to make it so much better.

Sasha

[trash]

sabayon linux is based on gentoo with a binary package manager for the lazy working alongside portage. pretty good.

[allbanddxer]

I jumped around for a long time, since the later 90's using Red Hat, Mandrake, Suse etc. I eventually came to the conclusion that less is more, and have avoided the big distributions ever since. I also found that Gentoo was more trouble than it was worth so ArchLinux was the best of both worlds. Minimalistic, fast, and stable enough...

[Nylex]

Slackware.

[system_serenity]

@Almindor

Using ports on a desktop/laptop sounds like overkill to me. I will only use ports on heavy servers where I need the extra edge of compiling in a certain way. On the desktop, I use packages 95% of the time (I will use a port if I need a quick security upgrade, or if I just don't want to wait for new functionality).

My latest laptop was up and running in 1.5 hours (STABLE compiled + 478 installed packages, X11/windowmaker). If it takes more time, you're doing it the wrong way.

By the way: GenToo and FreeBSD, while 'alike in spirit', are still very different beasts. I don't think a less-than-optimal experience with GT has any reflection on BSD (one of my colleagues ditched GT for BSD, and he couldn't be happier).

I pretty much have done the same thing.

[gentoobob]

I use Ubuntu or Fedora for my desktop and laptop. Ubuntu is nice for laptops, as I always say, "It just works". I switched to FreeBSD awhile back, love it for server operations, built to stay running and fast.

[Philippe-Pierre]

Binary distributions: Debian, Slackware.
Source based: Source Mage, LFS.

As for FreeBSD: it just has it all. Period.
;)

[foldingstock]

Not necessarily, I know at least one person that got started with FreeBSD ;)

My first experience with a non-Windows system was NetBSD 1.x in the mid 90's. After using it for a while a friend introduced me to Red Hat Linux. It seemed very backwards compared to what I had learned from NetBSD.

I use Ubuntu Linux from time to time on the desktop and it is nice until I have to do anything other than routine desktop tasks. The underlying system supporting Ubuntu is very strange and feels hacked together.

I am much prefer FreeBSD/OpenBSD when possible.

[respite]

I find it very difficult to underestimate linux.

Hah. :beer

After 10+ years fighting with various linux distros, i feel arch gave me the least of headaches. Default install is small and somewhat clean. Using pacman makes it easy to quickly build the desired machine.

[MannyNix]

Which is your Favourite Linux?
Slackware, hands down. Gentoo a close 2nd, then Arch.
Btw, If you ever need to recommend a 'Linux' to a friend or newbie, try linuxmint (http://linuxmint.com/) easier than *buntus and you won't get bugged as much.

[homemade]

Debian for servers and Ubuntu for Desktops.

Ever since FreeBSD 8.0, I might be forced to leave FBSD for a more secure future; but I love FBSD.

[conta]

i use sidux (debian sid) for everyday use...

with bsd I have too much troubles ;]

[head777]

Debian Lenny :e

[oliverh]

Debian for servers and Ubuntu for Desktops.

Ever since FreeBSD 8.0, I might be forced to leave FBSD for a more secure future; but I love FBSD.

Microsoft or Apple? I don't think of Linux while talking of a secure future on the very desktop? Linux as *BSD is just not relevant on the desktop.

[topher]

Its based on Slack and uses a ports tree.

[CodeBlock]

Its based on Slack and uses a ports tree.

No, but according to http://kongoni.co.za/news/the-end, it is now unmaintained and looking for a new lead developer.

[Ruler2112]

I'm going to throw my preferences out there, but I know it'll probably provoke discussion. The only nix OS I install anymore are FreeBSD. I used to prefer Slackware, and before that RedHat, Mandrake, Arch, and Gentoo. None are as stable as FreeBSD and all are more difficult to maintain due to the fact that all (except Gentoo) use binary packages, so you have to find a package built for your specific version or create one yourself. The ports tree gets away from all that. I may need to revise this if I ever have to reinstall my DVR; I've heard that the multimedia device support under Linux is much better than BSD.

The Linux I use most often is the System Rescue CD (http://www.sysresccd.org) for troubleshooting, cleaning, and recovering data from systems. I feel that this is the 'best' Linux out there - not to run your machine with on a regular basis, but rather as a rescue/troubleshooting tool. I cannot count the number of times I've used it to save a system and have the CD laying on my desks, both at home and at work. I regularly use ClamAV (antivirus), gParted (non-destructive partition table editor, ala Partition Magic), partimage (partition imaging tool, ala Ghost), and of course the regular system tools included in the OS (fdisk, dd, badblocks, ntfs-3g, ping, nmap, traceroute, etc) and find the CD as a whole to be invaluable.

[jamesroy]

Hi
I've been installing PCBSD in Virtual box as guests under host Win XP, just tinkering really. I definitely hate Damn Small Linux, I thought it could be a cool lightweight OS but didn't suit my machine ?
VirtualBox has performed alot better than I expected, once I find a PCBSD I like heaps I'll setup a dual boot system but the idea of running a safe OS in a Virtual environment is a really interesting security environment, as long as I don't share folders with XP.

[topher]

Its not linux, but I like it. Its simple and minimalist. Nice community too, without the elitist 'tude I'm noticing in this thread.

[fronclynne]

The Linux I use most often is the System Rescue CD (http://www.sysresccd.org) for troubleshooting, cleaning, and recovering data from systems. I feel that this is the 'best' Linux out there - not to run your machine with on a regular basis, but rather as a rescue/troubleshooting tool.

I just fiddled with it a bit in qemu, an it's definitely plusgood. What linux should be: A fixit tool for real operating systems.

[topher]

No, but according to http://kongoni.co.za/news/the-end, it is now unmaintained and looking for a new lead developer.

How sad. That was just yesterday that he posted it. I understood that it was on a short list of distributions approved by the FSF. Maybe someone there can keep it going. I will send the link to their mailing list.

[ChickenWing88]

I Have tried every Linux distribution and decided on Debian for several reasons. The lease of which the minimal footprint of 80MB with a full gnome desktop.

[darkshadow]

freebsd is enoth for me , so none

[topher]

Since the majority of apps that I run were developed for linux before they were ported to FreeBSD. I'd have to say that running them on the FreeBSD kernel provides the best experience for me.
I have also installed /usr/ports/www/linux-f10-flashplugin10 and /usr/ports/www/nspluginwrapper. Most new versions of linux distros no longer provide nspluginwrapper in their repos. Instead they suggest using the Adobe 64bit flash plugin beta or gnash while we wait for html5 to change the way media is streamed in a browser.
By using the Fedora 10 port however I am able to get the performance that I remember having with nspluginwrapper in linux way back when.
In fact the older versions of almost all ported linux applications without the constant system updating to be in sync with a repository is what I like most about FreeBSD. Its so much more stable when not that much changes.

[Orige]

Debian!

[sossego]

It depends now on the equipment.
Fedora for the laptops, debian and freebsd for the desktops.
Openbsd for qemu, netbsd for stubborn machines.
I'd say that knoppix is a good one to keep, version 5.x. Also a customized debiab live cd is another backup.
Hmm.
I've used Netbsd live to fix.

[blackrain]

I've tried many of linux distros: Debian, Arch, *ubuntu, redhat, fedora, gentoo. FreeBSD is like a magnet and has always been attracting me with its simplicity and robustness, so I've decided to leave the linux world for a while ;)

[Bapabooiee]

I'd definitely have to say Gentoo, because of its Portage system. And while Portage can sometimes have its problems, it's largely been very good to me, and has allowed me to keep very fine-grained control over my system with minimal issues. It's also really damn easy to tinker with your entire system (all forms of upgrades or rollbacks are usually painless), but very difficult to get your system into a bad state, where extensive troubleshooting would be required (as the more control you have, the easier it is to mess things up).

But other than Gentoo, no other Linux distros really tickle my fancy except for Arch Linux (and possibly Slackware), as the only types of distros I use anymore are "meta distros", which are essentially distros that let you build your software from the ground-up.

It shall also be noted that, for the record, I'm new to FreeBSD, and have only been using it for a couple of days. Admittedly, the main reason for doing so is because I heard that Portage had a lot in common with Ports - but also because a *BSD operating system has been something I've wanted to try for a while now.

So far, I like it, but I'm going to withhold my final judgment until I get some more experience with it.

[sk8harddiefast]

I was using gentoo.Is "copy" of bsd.But i really prefer bsd from any other os :D

[nekoexmachina]

I've used arch and debian. mostly.
After some sw&hw-update there came a problem called iowait, and some minor issueses. I've found zen-kernel that has no-such-problem as iowait by words of some of my friends. Than the other problem appeared - i totally hate configuring linux-kernel, because all of that make *config crap just sucks (e.g. - is not usable for me, i just get stuck with such many options there), and because .config does not has any comments in it. Ok, so i've tried the pkgbuild from arch's aur, but it did not work - with the root hdd disappeared from /dev (with the other two on the same controller still present). So, i gave up on arch and tried to look around for a good alternative with zen-kernel out-of-box or something. It's better to change my way to install software than to use unusable make configs or learn what is every last option in .config-file.
Then i've found that one of my local foss-community website members also has had such a problem back in 2006, so i've just reused his experience and installed freebsd (that was 7.2 at that moment). And i've liked the whole thing about it, except some things in the ports system (some of ports are just kind of strange if to talk about dependencies: why does minimalistic browser called uzbl want some gnome-monster things (gconf)? It is not the problem of the whole ports, but the local problem of one of the ports. It even could be considered as not-a-problem, yes. But still, i just do not want to have something that i do not use in my system. It is not hdd-free-space issue, or performance-issue - it's just emotions, yup). I've retried to stick back to linux with new ubuntu 10.04 release (no real reason - just wanted to see any improvements with bugs i've steped in earlier) - just to see that my hardware bugs are fixed, as i could know with ~3hrs of testing livecd. But i just do not feel like installing linux will give me anything good. And alsa sounds worse than oss.

[richardpl]

tinycore linux

[ah7013]

I like arch and ubuntu. Its hard to decide what one comes first. They are both good for different things

[carlton_draught]

I tried Linux for many years without success until it finally clicked. Redhat a couple times, Debian, Corel, Mandrake, DSL, PCLinuxOS, OpenSUSE, and finally Ubuntu, where I could finally ditch MS.

Now my intention is to ditch Ubuntu and migrate everything to FreeBSD to get ZFS features. For desktop systems, I still like Ubuntu, not too much hassle. FreeBSD is more elegant in its design.

I've also dabbled with OpenBSD.

For firewall/URL filter/QOS/WAP type applications I've used pfsense for a while, but found ZeroShell to be more versatile. It's really nice, I recommend it highly.

[nekoexmachina]

Just updated Ubuntu for my fathers desktop.
He loves it, but he takes a look for fbsd on the virtualbox, and well, he says that it's kind of easier to maintain, update & reconfigure(for the base system), and he loves that easy rc.d scripts and rc.conf syntax, and he says it's kind of faster than new ubuntu on that virtualbox was, but he hates the idea of compiling some software like openoffice that is not present in the package-repos.
Also he needs stable virtualbox or any other fast (e.g. qemu+kqemu is not fast enough, but kvm is) to get virtual windows environment for his work. Any suggestions?

Also, i've tried out openbsd as a desktop on qemu, and well, i've liked it - but i'll miss all that portupgrade stuff & framebuffer & mplayer-mt (has anyone compiled&tried it? As i understand what giant lock is, mplayer-mt won't work with obsd). And gpart hdd migration will be tricky, i think, as obsd doesn't support it :)
Now I use 4.7 as my pretty-old-hardware-home-router thing.

[mtspbr]

I've installed and used suse, slackware, redhat, ubuntu, debian, mandriva (conectiva/mandrake), etc in desktop a long time ago. Today I have two VPS debian, because I don't found a freeBSD VPS with best cost/benefit. In my work I use Windows :( to develop Java apps. In my home I'm setting one development server with svn, trac, https, tomcat, postgreSQL, nexus (maven repository mirror), etc. on freeBSD 8 in a Dell server quadcore xeon and for develop my Java and Objective C apps, I use Mac OS X.

[klanger]

Also he needs stable virtualbox or any other fast (e.g. qemu+kqemu is not fast enough, but kvm is) to get virtual windows environment for his work. Any suggestions?



WINE + FreeBSD ?

[sk8harddiefast]

I really don't like wine.If i wanted to run some windows apps i was using virtualbox or vmware

[nekoexmachina]

WINE
nope, applications he needs don't run on wine.

[sk8harddiefast]

Then there are 2 things. Or dual boot with 2 os. Freebsd and the other one he needs but is something that always avoid and don't like it and the other is a virtual machine. I recommend vmware-server. Is free,more complicated than virtualbox but better and i have read somewhere that on vmware, windows run faster than if you install them on a desktop pc with the same system requirements!
I have played with vmware-server and is really veeeery good!!!

[nekoexmachina]

There is no native version of vmware for fbsd, as i know, and linux-emulation-layer is, well, the thing i will not use if there is no need like 'die-or-use'. Now he's using virtualbox (on linux), and as i used virtualbox on bsd last time (a day after importing it into ports :) ) it was buggy (e.g. segfaulted while installing some linux distro). May be it was not vbox problem - i didn't even bother to look - so i'll give it one more try some time like nearest weekend.
Also i've played around with some obsd things with qemu-kqemu on my fbsd-desktop; well, it was actually fast. Much faster than i expected it to be, something like the time i've used qemu-kvm on linux half-a-year ago.
So, when i'll visit dad next time, i'll try to do an installation of windows under freebsd host with qemu, probably it will be fast enough :)

Also he really liked the whole openbsd lyrics thing except for the first song :)

[sk8harddiefast]

I have played with vmware-server and is really veeeery good!!!
When i was using gentoo.
Now on my computer,i run virtualbox. Simple just to do the job. It runs fine and i haven't problems.
I didn't see if there is vmware on ports.
I have read about qemu-kqemu but i have never tried it so i have no idea if it worths.

[SPlissken]

I discovered SalixOS some months ago , a slack based distro
It's slack for newbye, easy to install and to use.

[klanger]

I discovered SalixOS some months ago , a slack based distro
It's slack for newbye, easy to install and to use.

Yeah, salixOS is nice & has a very good package manager, extremely fast.

[pamdirac]

slack || t2sde

[gore]

SuSE / OpenSUSE
Debian
Slackware

I've been using those for some time and I've not once had any major issues with them.

I hate Gentoo, RedHat, and Fedora.

[zspider]

Arch Linux. However as soon as the day comes that the intel drivers run smoothly then it will be replaced with FreeBSD. As some other people said its just more elegant in its design. BSD is a bit like Windows Server in terms of how well things work together and that is a major draw for me.:)

[Dereckson]

- back to 2004, knoppix for hardware support and the huge catalog of software available to test
- I also like archlinux because it's lightweighted and the colored output is very nice.
- I could have liked Gentoo, because the name were cool and the doc nice. It were before using it on a dedicated server x64: whois command not found (okay, a lot of small utilities to emerge...) and a lot of software marked unstable requiring a lot of config to install (by the way, the install process with all those flags is annoying).

OK OK I know ALL of us LOVE BSD
But I am sure you all played with Linux before conversion?
So which is your favourite?

Well... not really, I've tried to install but never used Linux before FreeBSD.

1995 - tested Slackware. No mouse support (I had a mouse with a wheel).
1998 - wanted to test MkLinux on my PowerMac 7200. Model not supporhttp://forums.freebsd.org/images/icons/icon10.gifted.
1999 - got a Corel Linux cd in a computer magazine. Can't install, no AGP support.
2001 - we've a project to get a dedicated server on an IRC channel, the sysadmin picks FreeBSD. I got familiar with this OS. It were good
2002 - in // we got a second server under Debian. Where is sockstat? What's the bash syntax for setenv? #@! I must apt-get install libfoobar-dev after libfoobar
2002-2004 - "Linux sux. FreeBSD rulez." phase.
2005 - Got Knoppix. Some months later, a crash on my laptop hard disk occurs. The time to get a new hard disk, I spend some days under Knoppix. Were a rather nice experience, especially a night with Stellarium.
2006 - Pragmatism and idealism lead me to prefer BSD licence to GPL licence.
2008 - After days to compile KDE and Gnome to use FreeBSD as desktop environment, I start to recommand Ubuntu to newbies instead to say than KDE or Gnome are still KDE and Gnome under Linux, FreeBSD or WhatEverOs and so they should use FreeBSD to learn something different.
2010 - I'm okay with Linux but don't really want to use it. I offer to some LUGs to present BSD systems at their install party and experiment to recommend PC-BSD to new users.

[juniorsatanas]

windows xp dead
linux debian dead
now freebsd = free live

[cracauer@]

Debian.

For my Linux use I ditched Fedora after F4, because I felt cheated about the time period for future updates and I had both F5 and F6 destroy partitions in situations where the old classic fdisk worked right. At the time I didn't have my test farm diskless and had harddrive with multiboot installations. I ran Debian on 64 bit boxes for Ubuntu on 32 bit for a while but Ubuntu has decided to turn itself into a toy that isn't suitable for my uses, so it's all Debian now. Debian also gives me a very wild ride now, in particular with bad udev updates, various other fiddling with device entry handling, stupid warnings about "you won't be able to boot" and botched /etc/rc updates.

One main reason why I use Linux in more than testing is that FreeBSD ports update me forcefully to newer Xorgs, and Xorg breaks things for me left and right. But alas all Linuxes also use broken Xorgs and I now run my Xorg server in a chroot (session in there not in chroot) and use an Xorg version of my choice. At this point I expect that Debian-stable can't satisfy the need for a working desktop much longer either and then I am back to square one and probably have to do pretty massive mixing of chroots to be secure where I have to, have old working versions of things where I need them and can have current versions where I want them.

I expect to re-evaluate Fedora, to maybe try REL/CentOS on the "outside" box if my desktop is chrooted anyway, or convert some Linux boxes back to FreeBSD. Some FreeBSD problems have disappeared.

I can't say that I am overly happy with the way that things are going with any of the above OSes. But hey I can post complaints on the Internet so it can't be all broken :)

[martins]

Slackware, of course. What else is there?:)

[zspider]

I tried Slackware a few times, but its too time consuming to hunt down dependencies and the automated package management systems that were available seemed to be rather out of date. That was probably about a year ago then I went back to Ubuntu got sick of it immediately and went on to conquer Arch Linux. Feels like it was an eternity ago now.

[martins]

I don't really like package managers that track down dependencies for you. I used Ubuntu for a few weeks in the past, but gave up on it when I was trying to remove one package and apt-get wanted to remove the whole gnome desktop with it.

[kpedersen]

Whilst I find no dependency checking (slackware) to be flawed, I do hate the way ubuntu and debian work with this overly complex repository and indexing (complete with many different names for the same packages)

I just wish unix developers would stop using so many damn packages for their applications. Or at least the linux package makers to stop splitting packages into such small parts.

Just to compile OpenMotif, I have had to install the following Debian (non-base) packages

xorg
xorg-dev
x11proto-print-dev <-- Includes print.h
libxp-dev <-- Includes libXp (this should be in the same package as print.h)

I much prefer the fact that with FreeBSD, I only had to install xorg.

One thing I have never quite worked out is that FreeBSD packages are made via the ports system. How are Debian packages made? By hand?

[zspider]

I do agree that alot of programs pull in too many dependencies. On FreeBSD you have a certain degree of control over that with the compile time options. I know what you mean about Ubuntu/Debian/others. You try to dump something like pidgin or some gnome gui app and it wants to take the whole desktop off with it.

[Chuchubi]

I have an old Fedora core 3 machine for doing multimedia. But I have upgrade the kernel from source and it runs the latest versions of most programs. So this machine is not realy FC3 but it is my own fedora core whatever. I also run Fedora 6 and 7. In the past I have tried Suse, Mandrake, Debian, slackware and Ubuntu. But I like the Fedora stuff more than all.

[mharvey87]

Screw fedora - Installed apache but couldn't view any of the index.html by default, had to go in and change directives when there was no reason to. Where are the codecs? Apparently in gstreamer-ugly but was never able to get that working after hours of searching the web and forums. Basically it sucks as a desktop and sucks as a server because it doesn't know which one it wants to be.

Screw ubuntu - The philosophy of ubuntu is "if you have to google a tutorial on how to enable su then the os is more secure, but don't ask about it on our forums because we'll just delete your post and then lecture you because we don't know shit about linux but we wrote a gui for it so that makes us experts" ha, what a joke.

Linux Mint is perfect for a desktop - Flash + codecs preinstalled, easy to use guis and software installation. All the good from ubuntu without the bad.

BSD is perfect for servers and network devices - comes installed with just the needed software and works perfectly + BSD license.

Oh and when it comes to forensics SCREW helix. "mount -o rw" should mount something as read/write, end of story. Use backtrack for that stuff. Even though I'm still confused as to why backtrack can auto-detect a single network card but won't auto-detect multiple ones.

[Fleet]

My favorites are Debian, Fedora (+ RHEL) and Arch Linux. Arch Linux was the last Linux distro I used before started to use BSD. Arch Linux served as a good learning platform for me and I definitely liked its adherence of the KISS-principle. Its config files and ABS is very similar to config and ports in FreeBSD.

[kpa]

Debian, I won't even consider anything else. Now that I have become more familiar with FreeBSD I wish Linux would adopt the same clear distinction between the core operating system (base in FreeBSD) and 3rd party software (ports).

[gore]

Debian, I won't even consider anything else. Now that I have become more familiar with FreeBSD I wish Linux would adopt the same clear distinction between the core operating system (base in FreeBSD) and 3rd party software (ports).

For me personally I've always hated having multiple update ways in BSD. I use FreeBSD and PC-BSD and I like it, but when it comes to updates and patches... Wellllll... freebsd-update is a step in the right direction, but when a Port needs to get patched because there is a security flaw in one, I can't stand it.

I have a lot of old machines because I simply can't afford to buy everything new, and all but one of my boxes, are single core Processor machines with ... Other than my new machine, and one that has 768 MBs of RAM, they all have 512 MBs or less of RAM, and only 3 are above 733 MHz Processors.

Patching security in Ports for me is generally going to take long enough that I can't most of the time. I run Debian on one machine that I use as a secondary Desktop / Workstation, which means I use it to check email with about 4 different clients (I'm picky and have a lot of stuff to check, and multiple accounts for whatever I use it for, such as personal accounts for family and friends, a few for mailing lists, and other stuff) and then some web browsing, and then I use it also to make most of my music with LMMS, and then LAME to turn that into an MP3 to upload on Myspace so people can hear it since I don't own a radio station, and then I use it for other stuff too. It has two hard drives; The 80 GB one it came with that has XP Home on it, and then the 160 GB drive I installed with Debian. Rarely boot into Windows.

My Laptop runs currently a version of Slackware that's modified, and I use it for basically whatever.

My FTP server runs Slackware 12.2, and I like that because, well, it doesn't need much, I don't use X on it, and log in mostly over SSH.

These things may not be the bottom of the line in terms of speed, but they're for sure dated. And for me to upgrade Ports, on stuff like that.... A cell phone would probably be faster most of the time, and the way Ports work, and how they are "separate" from the base system I can update with "freebsd-update" means I have to sit there for a LONG time. The last time I did a Port upgrade, it took like a week, and since I was fairly knew to it, I ended up having to reinstall because it didn't all work right.

I'd LOVE to have a tool that updated everything. In Debian, it's this:

apt-get update && apt-get upgrade

Done.

In Slackware, I can do a couple of things. I've used slapt-get before, and swaret a lot, and slackpkg works fine too, and I've also just downloaded each patch by hand with wget and upgraded them by hand, which was really easy too:
upgradepkg *.tgz
Done.

The FreeBSD system, would take a LONG time. I don't set compile time options because I'm not a programmer, don't really care about that stuff, and usually leave things as is when they get installed other than Window Managers that I may configure a certain way or something. But as for compiling, well, like I said, I'm no coder by any means, and I don't really WANT to sit there telling it how I want it compiled.

When I first started using FreeBSD, I was totally confused why the Security Mailing List was telling me to compile patches and reboot, and why freebsd-update didn't update ports, and when I learned how it did, I was like WTF, why is this so time consuming? I couldn't understand why anyone would want to do that, and as I got older, I started realizing why it has a benefit to it, but at the same time, for someone like me, or the average user, there really isn't many things that would make anyone who is just using their computer for web surfing want to actually spend that long to do that.

I think once someone does a system that upgrades / patches the whole system with one tool, it will be a LOT easier getting people to use FreeBSD instead of Linux. It's hard enough getting someone using Windows to try Linux where updates can be shown in the tray, or you have a tool like Yast, Yast2, or MCC from Mandriva, and the others, like APT, that grab all your updates for you and install them while you get Coffee or something, and then maybe a reboot if you updated the Kernel, and then you're done, to want to do what it takes to upgrade Opera, or Pidgin. I would LOVE for that to happen in BSD.

I'm not aware of anything that does this, and I'm actually reading through some of the docs right now because, well, it's been a while, but as far as I know, other than the Base system, the Ports still need to be upgraded all at once, and it takes a LONG time.

[lumiwa]

I have on wife computer with Windows installed Arch Linux. It is fast, updated, everything works and as a desktop IMO is the same secure as FreeBSD.

[gore]

My Wife's Computers run a mix of Windows, Slackware, and Solaris. She's actually better with Unix than I am I think lol. Arch Linux seems popular around here. That's good though, years ago when I first saw Arch, it was like, a really unknown project at the time, and I saw it, and thought it looked interesting, so I decided to download it. It was YEARS ago, and they only had one or two releases at the time, and when I got it installed I actually thought it was really nice. I was shocked a few months ago to see how it's grown so much. I haven't used it in a while, but all of this talk makes me wonder if I should install it on my laptop since I've been using that to test stuff lately anyway heh.

I've also started to really like Linux Console. It's basically a version of Linux that is made to work on older hardware, and it has a really nice look and "feel" to it. I like it, and I also thought the same of Mamba, and, of course, MoonOS, which looks beautiful.

[jb_fvwm2]

"the ports still need to be upgraded all at once..."
...
you can use csup with certain parameters to only fetch only
port updated ports tree, thus updating only one port.
...
Something I found out about...
hopefully I explained it better in another post (search on 'uniq")
Say you want to postpone the gnome upgrade.
And you presently have a lot of gnome ports to upgrade
You make a list of ports , tee it to a file, that need upgrading.
(pkg_version...
Wait a week or so.
cvsup the entire ports tree.
make the 2nd tee'd output file from pkg_version.
....
Run the cli, the output should be ONLY those needing upgrading
per below::
SINCE the first pkg_version a week ago.
...

sort file.1 file.1 file.7 | uniq -u | lookat

(lookat, or less, or more, or just to a terminal)
...
Without that command line, you would not know how to
skip updating just a lot, and glance at the result
to update only the ports needing newly updating within
the last week (in this case, you would ignore results
from the uniq pipe, that are gnome - based).
...
Hope that is clear enough to serve as a mini-guide...

[gore]

I know you CAN do that, but from the docs I'm reading, it can make the system unstable. I think the wording was "Although the BSD core team does what it can to make sure these work backward compatible, there is a chance" or something like that.

I still haven't updated my ports yet because quite frankly, the machine it's on right now, is a 433 MHz Celeron, with 192 MBs of RAM. That's going to take a LONG time.

[henker]

I still haven't updated my ports yet because quite frankly, the machine it's on right now, is a 433 MHz Celeron, with 192 MBs of RAM. That's going to take a LONG time.

Why dont you update using packages instead? It`s not as up-to-date but it works and its so much faster

[gore]

I'm using RELEASE, and it says on the docs you can only do that with... I think STABLE and something else.

[DutchDaemon]

No, you got that slightly wrong ;) To use up-to-date packages on a -RELEASE, you must set PACKAGESITE to the -STABLE package repository. Search PACKAGESITE on these forums, there are a few examples around.

[gore]

No, you got that slightly wrong ;) To use up-to-date packages on a -RELEASE, you must set PACKAGESITE to the -STABLE package repository. Search PACKAGESITE on these forums, there are a few examples around.

So basically I could have set that to -STABLE whatever version, and then done all this WAY easier?....MAN!

I'm actually right now checking what to do with portupgrade and seeing if I can use my test machine to see how long it would take, because it's been a LONG time since I've done this. I'm so used to other OSs and how they work that I literally haven't in over a year or so.

Someone told me once it was easier to just run:

portupgrade -af

And let it roll, but that ended up breaking a lot of stuff for some reason and it took forever. Basically I spent almost a week having to come in and hit a button here and there for it to run, only to have a broken box once it finished heh.

Didn't bother me SO much, because I have back ups of everything important on like 7 disks and a bunch of other stuff, but the time...lol.

EDIT:

I just noticed something I hadn't seen before; "Portmaster"... This thing seems a little easier to work with than Portupgrade, and I'm actually using it right now on my test machine to do an upgrade of my Ports. Right now I'm in the UPDATING file reading there, and basically following along to see how it goes. I do kind of like this new one though, which probably isn't new at all, but I'm used to stuff from the books I have, which usually only talk about one or two ways.

So right now, I've done "portmaster p5-" and letting that run.

Originally I was just going to go "portmaster -a" but, the UPDATING file seem to have a method, so why not right?

[raul_comodoro]

I have usued almost 20 different flavors of linux...so it;s a lot......among them Ubuntu desktop works fine.....but I don;t like Gnome so I've installed KDE, and works fine......Suse is very slow.....Slackware is almost a BSD system, but it has an issue......difficult to get applications.

I used Mint linux too as a desktop.....I changed Gnome for KDE again....

PC Linux 2009 y PC OS Linux are good too....

But after all almost I use FreeBSD 7.3 or 8.0.....I think the best in many situations at all.....good performance......an oustanding docs system on line.....and ports/paxkages go well once you have a good undestanding about them.

There is a program I would like ported to BSD, it is Xdosemu.....great to run DOS applications using X interface (I apologize all the UNIX fans that hate DOS....but some programs are still useful).....does anybody how can I get it to BSD........oe maybe wich rpm or wathever kind should I install using linux emulation.

[gore]

I have usued almost 20 different flavors of linux...so it;s a lot......among them Ubuntu desktop works fine.....but I don;t like Gnome so I've installed KDE, and works fine......Suse is very slow.....Slackware is almost a BSD system, but it has an issue......difficult to get applications.

http://www.linuxpackages.net

There you go.



But after all almost I use FreeBSD 7.3 or 8.0.....I think the best in many situations at all.....good performance......an oustanding docs system on line.....and ports/paxkages go well once you have a good undestanding about them.

There is a program I would like ported to BSD, it is Xdosemu.....great to run DOS applications using X interface (I apologize all the UNIX fans that hate DOS....but some programs are still useful).....does anybody how can I get it to BSD........oe maybe wich rpm or wathever kind should I install using linux emulation.

BSD runs Linux apps just fine. Shouldn't be that much of an issue. To bad YAST doesn't work on BSD. I wouldn't be on my 5th try to get Ports updated.....My tree is up to date, the ports are now basically broken.