Which is your Favourite Linux?

gore said:
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.
Click to expand...

Once you fix that and you just keep using packages instead of ports they will never get broken

At least that`s true for me
 
I was upgrading them, using the docs to do it, and apparently something didn't want to work, and it went down from there. Nothing will run right now, so I'm doing a total upgrade like this:

pkg_upgrade -a and then I set a few more options for it to show me stuff so I know what's going on. It's basically, HOPEFULLY, rebuilding all my ports and reinstalling them fresh.
 
Were you mixing ports and packages? I find that sometimes that it causes conflicts and thus I stick solely to ports (on a laptop and it works fine)
 
I install my software with this:

pkg_add -r package1 package 2 and so on.

I don't really ever use anything else because it makes things easier to do that. And I can type out like 40 package names and hit enter and let it run.
 
I'd use OS X if I could afford a Mac. I've wanted a Macbook for so long, but the price.... Can't do it. I'm still running on some MAJOR old hardware here.

My Laptop - Pentium 4 M @ 3.06 GHz and 512 RAM, and a 32 MB Nvidia Ge Force FX GO5200 with 30 GB HD
MY FreeBSD test machine - Intel Celeron @ 433 MHz - 192 RAM - 8 MB ATI card, 80 GB HD
Other Deskrtop - Intel Celeron @ 2.40 GHz - 512 RAM - On board crap video - 80 GB HD it came with with Windows XP Home, 160 GB HD I installed, with Debian Linux
Other Desktop - AMD Athlon XP 2600 + - 768 MBs RAM - Crap on board video - 120 Gb HD it came with - No OS because the stupid thing keeps randomly shutting off. Took case off, think Over heating is the problem. Can't fix right now.
First Computer I ever bought - Using it as my FTP Server - Intel Pentium 3 @ 733 MHz - 128 MBs of RAM came with it, I upgraded that to 384 MBs of RAM - Came with a 43 GB Hd (Yes, 43. When I had Windows 98 SE on it, it said 42.9) and then I installed another 160 GB HD - Nvidia Card with 16 MBs Video Memory....Basically barely works now, and if I try to load a GUI, either Linux, or Windows... (I formatted the drive back about a year and a half ago, and tried installing Windows to see if the OS was the problem, and the video still looked bad. Basically one day years ago, I woke up and the video had lines all over the place. I tried to check it out but I can't really. I ended up formatting the machine, installing a new OS, and realized it wasn't the OS and that when you move the mouse in a menu, it has a line across the screen that seems to follow the Mouse. In other words, the video card is crapping out SLOWLY) If no GUI is loaded and it's just a Shell, it looks alright though. So I decided to use it as my Server, and don't use X on it really.

Main Desktop - Dell - Intel Core 2 Duo Processor...Can't remember the speed - 4 GBs RAM - 750 GB HD - 256 MB ATI card - Dual Boots Windows 7 64 Bit and Slackware.

As you can see, I've made what I have work. And the new one, I got that for Christmas this past year.
 
gore said:
...
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...
Click to expand...

You like Debian, you like Slackware...Debian has this, Slackware has this and FreeBSD is as is. If you like it keep it if not install something different. I was Linux user from...I forgot...but on my computer is just FreeBSD which I use almost all the time. Yes, I have Arch on my wifes because I like K3b which is not yet on FreeBSD and I use Krita on Arch which works muuuuuuuuch faster than on FreeBSD.
BNTW I use FreeBSD for the desktop computer.
 
lumiwa said:
You like Debian, you like Slackware...Debian has this, Slackware has this and FreeBSD is as is. If you like it keep it if not install something different. I was Linux user from...I forgot...but on my computer is just FreeBSD which I use almost all the time. Yes, I have Arch on my wifes because I like K3b which is not yet on FreeBSD and I use Krita on Arch which works muuuuuuuuch faster than on FreeBSD.
BNTW I use FreeBSD for the desktop computer.
Click to expand...

Umm, OK, here is the problem with posts like yours, and opinions like your opinion in that:

It's EXACTLY like those people who say "Well if you don't like something a lot of people use, then don't use it"... It fixes nothing.

I really don't think you realize how much Open OSs share with each other. FreeBSD uses GCC just like Linux. It's not like they don't share back and forth, as they should (When BSD and GPL / Linux people all share ideas, we end up with a better system).

I've been using FreeBSD on and off since 4.0, and I don't really care if someone is going to come on here and tell me that if I want it to update easy, I should just use something else. No. I will continue using FreeBSD, I will continue using Linux, and I will ...Sort of use Windows. (Wintendo). And I'll also continue stating my opinion, and eventually, someone will add to FreeBSD the things that make Linux more easier to update / patch / upgrade, and then, FreeBSD, will not be the "unknown" giant. Period.

I spend A LOT of my time doing IT / Tech stuff, for free, and one of the things I do, is install OSs for people, write HOWTOs on how to do it, and I even once spent literally 8 hours, with someone who had never used SUSE Linux before, basically spending all that time helping them get it installed, and then configuring it how they wanted, and so on. I didn't get paid for that, I did it because I wanted to help.

And every time someone asks me for help getting Linux installed, I almost always point out there is BSD. Why? Because I like BSD. I REALLY like it. That's why I've sent almost 5,000.00 to them. I want it to be better. I don't have a job right now and I still do the free tech stuff, because I'm not a greedy jerk. And I'm not the only person who wants things to work easier.

I doubt that if you had the CHOICE to use FreeBSD, and update it just as easy as Debian was, you'd decline. Who would seriously do that? I don't even get why anyone would be so rude they would actually post JUST to tell someone "If you don't like it use something else"...That's incredibly rude, doesn't fix anything, and, basically, wasted space.

I've been using this stuff for 10 years, and rarely do the Linux users I help out, ever want to use BSD. Well, let me rephrase that; They WANT to use BSD, and they'd LOVE to try FreeBSD out since it's the one I recommend, but at the same time, when security is brought up, they get all excited and Happy about the features FreeBSD has, until they see the section online about how you do updates. They think freebsd-update is fine, but once they see how Ports work, and how you update those... It's a deal closer.

This is the second time I've taken crap from someone who for some reason thinks it's totally perfect. I don't get that. No software is perfect, and the SECOND someone thinks it is, they stop trying to make it better. That's a problem. If you don't agree, that's fine, and that's your opinion, but being so rude as to say not only is it fine the way it is but if you don't like it hit the road... That's a bad attitude.

Eventually, some time, someone who works on BSD, will see that these updates, and how they work, IS slowing adoption of it, and they'll make a tool that updates the whole system, and then, FreeBSD will be able to compete with Linux on more than just servers.

It's not like I'm saying the way Ports work now should be taken out. I'm not like that, I don't think my opinion is so better than anyone else's that they should only do it my way (like you seem to think) I'm saying that the way it works now, could use another option.

I don't understand why someone would think that FreeBSD would work any different if another option was made. That makes no sense. The Ports could work just like they do now, it would just be nice if there was the OPTION to do it like Debian, or Slackware.

Wouldn't you love it if you could upgrade only the ones that have security patches? And not have to take the whole thing down for a week to do them ALL ?
 
Guys, get off the Linux vs FreeBSD wagon. This thread is not about that.
 
Depends on the purpose and the circumstances.
If I have a choice I'd use the following money-free OSes in this order:

For a SOHO router I'd use Slackware ot Gentoo, because like FreeBSD they both give the option to install a base OS only and I have experience with them. I believe Arch Linux follows the same BSD-like installation method - "base system + everything else", but I've never tried it.
I'd use a BSD too, but only for very simple cases. While a little slower, Linux firewall and routing provide more features.

For a server I'd prefer FreeBSD. Then Gentoo, then CentOS or Slackware. servers don't need as many packages as desktops do. Compiling from source allows removing unneeded options and packages which brings better speed and security. The other approach is "install a base system and compile by hand". Then one should update by hand also which I'd prefer not to do.
Where does CentOS come in this mix? Well, CentOS uses the RHEL sources. This means one has the security provided by Red Hat and yes, I do believe that security-wise it is a good thing to have a company behind the distro because this means legal obligation to provide security fixes ASAP.

For a desktop I'd use Fedora - balance between easy installation and use on one hand and it works relatively fast and doesn't get in my way too much on the other. Gentoo remains my favourite but I don't like wasting so much time on compiling.

The bottom line is that I should try Arch Linux and it is in my to-do list.

:)
 
Ubuntu/Kubuntu is very good for simple, quick, and has-everything. Constant updates, up-to-date versions, tons of packages in the repository. Apt-get and interfaces to it. It's the simplest, most kept-up Linux. Aside from the lack of big repositories and fast package management for everything, I liked Slackware a lot... not that it has everything up-to-date and in a repository, but what you do get is very nice. I was thinking about trying Arch, but I'm really done with Linux. FreeBSD is much better (as far as I know, and to me personally) in a lot of ways, and definitely what I want to stick with for the long-term. If I have just one operating system on my computer, it will definitely be FreeBSD... and I'm tired of Linux.
I haven't used Windows for around a year and a half, except for a few days a couple of times. I played Civilization III on it a little. I got rid of it less than a month ago, I think, and now I have nothing but FreeBSD.
OS X is nice, but Apple is too expensive to me.
 
Slackware is VERY BSD like in how it operates. I don't just mean the BSD style rc stuff, but if you buy the Slackware Essentials book, it actually has a BSD logo on the back. "BSDI" is on the back of it just like some FreeBSD books. Also, the CD sets from Slackware, are almost exactly like FreeBSD. For example, I have the FreeBSD 6.0 4 CD set, and the Slackware 10.0 and 10.2 4 CD sets, and the cases are almost identical. The only difference in the logos and what they actually say, the look and style of the case, is the same, and so is the type of info you get. I thought it was kind of weird until someone from the FreeBSD Mall told me one day that yes they were involved with it. Made me Happy to see that not every BSD or Linux distro was at each other's throat and got along :)

I need to find Pat's Cell phone number and ask him when he's going to add a SlackPort's to Slackware or something. It's a neat idea, and would be something I think he'd like. And of course, you know, SlackBSD, which would be cool, to put a BSD Kernel on Slackware. Debian has does that already, as has Gentoo.
 
I used SuSe first off when it was either that or redhat. all those years ago.
no broadband just a modem so I used to buy it! (remember?) suse came in a box with a book and 5CDs and loads of apps to play with. great fun exploring a real system compared
to DOS.
Back in the days when linux distros installed a C compiler and man pages.
sadly gone.

slackware was good too I used that for a while. got bored with
finding dependencies though.
Tried ubuntu, pclinux, debian. Solaris 10 I used for a year or so.
Now I use puppy linux in a virtualbox for youtube and suchlike.
debian to keep my hand in, because I've never worked anywhere that use BSD.
 
I like Debian and Arch. I also have Ubuntu on my laptop, but it's because almost no other distro has working GMA500 driver (only Mandriva, which I don't like and Fedora but 12 at best). As Ubuntu is Debian-based, I chose to use it. Though I'm planning to try Arch on it, there is supposedly poulsbo driver working. BTW is there any chance of porting poulsbo driver to FreeBSD? I'd like to try it on my laptop, but vesa has just too little performance.
 
I may not be an linux distro expert but Archlinux and gentoo is the way to go if you ask me. Since gentoo aint really for beginners in linux it suits sort of with BSD, while archlinux is more of a choose if i wanted to quickly get an computer with it's purpose of being an educational, programming desktop pc.
 
If I had to choose a linux distro for my desktop, I think I would choose Ubuntu. Whenever there is the possibility of flexibility in the setting up of some linux distro, e.g. Gentoo, I can't stop comparing it with FreeBSD's flexibility and get depressive. :e

So I would choose Ubuntu, which I have nearly no possibility to change something by command line, so I'd use the GUI tools and could become happy.
But of course, I would hardly miss the flexibility of everything.
 
Blackbird said:
If I had to choose a linux distro for my desktop, I think I would choose Ubuntu. Whenever there is the possibility of flexibility in the setting up of some linux distro, e.g. Gentoo, I can't stop comparing it with FreeBSD's flexibility and get depressive. :e

So I would choose Ubuntu, which I have nearly no possibility to change something by command line, so I'd use the GUI tools and could become happy.
But of course, I would hardly miss the flexibility of everything.
Click to expand...

Oh dear, no. I can confirm that aptitude, apt-get, dpkg all work perfectly on Unbunutuwutu. As does an angry "rm -rf /" whist you shriek imprecations at the accursed thing.
 
Ok, I know. I've used Ubuntu before as well.
But if I think about it, I think I would become depressive with these command line tools, and manpages, just more.
 
I still use debian on some servers, buts it's only for virtualization using xen and kvm.
I use ubuntu on my desktop at work. It works well, it's easy and really fast to install. I don't have a lot of time to waste at work and it's enough for me.
 
Fedora. yum is a superior package management system to anything else I've tried on Linux. The system itself is very flexible. Plus, RedHat gives a lot back to the community. My only beef is that SELinux is enabled by default, but it is easy to remove. Maybe not the prettiest distro out of the box, but certainly each release gives a working preview of what other distributions will soon be leeching.

Arch Linux is nice, very minimal if you stick to the packages + AUR. However, ABS is no replacement for the ports system and I wish they would stop branding it as such. I would probably be running Arch on my laptop if recent kernel changes didn't break thinkpad_acpi when using OSS for sound. KDEmod is the superior KDE4 implementation on the market.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top