Which Linux should I use?

[SeeMoreDigital]

I have a PC which I use as an internet/media files server. It currently has 3No boot partitions (at 6GB each). Two of them are running WinXP, leaving one spare.

It's always been my intension to run the third boot with a different operating system. And now I've got some time on my hands (due to illness) I would like to have a go at delving into Linux land!

But the question is which one? In fact I'm not sure how many versions of Linux there are!

So I thought I would start by asking you guys, which versions you use?

And once the decision is made. Will it be a straight forward task to install on my PC as a third boot?

I'm not sure what other questions I should be asking at this point!

Many Thanks

[Tuning]

@SMD
Well I'm not expert in linux world,I can say there are many distributions you have.Prominent names are Debian,Redhat,Suse,Mandrake,knoppix..and the list goes on.I haven't tried the suse version,but have done with others in this list.To me most difficult to install was Debian.The easy one was mandrake.Oh! forgot to mention Knopix,with this distribution(Actually a lite version of debian)you can boot directly to linux from CD.No need to install as third boot.But you cannot save the config while using this type,as files are using a RAM disk.

If you are completely newbie to world of linux,you will be happy to use Mandrake installation package.I think suse is also similar to that kind.If you want little more advanced version then go for Redhat.Toughest of all is Debian distribution,which need expert assistance to install.(Many manual configurations need to managed....).
If you want only flavour of linux then use knoppix.
BTW,I like redhat very much.

[Doobie]

Dumbest answer: "The best distribution is whichever one that You think is best. I suggest that you install and try as many different distributions as you can." -- from a moronic newbie Linux site.

If you don't know which, just run to mandrake.com and download their free distribution.

[r6d2]

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
And once the decision is made. Will it be a straight forward task to install on my PC as a third boot?
I downloaded the 3 CD set from RedHat a while ago planning to do the same.

Unfortunately, it might be not straightforward since it seems that the root partition has to be FAT. If it is NTFS, you'll have to do a reinstall of XP.

I'm not sure about other distributions, but Mandrake and RedHat are probably the way to go.

You can get more info in a Linux devoted site. Those guys have guides for everything.

[Neo Neko]

It was said that debian was the hardest. Well it's not really. Slackware is actually a bit harder. Harder yet is Gentoo. And hardest is LFS. If you are just starting out Mandrake or maybe SuSe is best. The SuSe live CD even detected my Hauppage capture card.

[BloodyRipper]

well, i think that the softest distributions to do everything & dvd-ripping also are mandrake and Polish Linux Distribution

[netterpaladin]

I have been using Suse in the university for 2 months now. And I must say it works great. I especially like their YAST (there you can install and deinstall everything.) Very much like windows :).

The latest version 9.0 works well BUT i dont know about your dual boot settings. The linux boot loader is called LILO but havent used it yet. (As you can see I am also new)

So my vote goes to Suse (and it is also from a german company!)

netterpaladin


PS get a DVD (of any distro) somewhere so you dont have to do the disc juggling

[Tuning]

Originally posted by Neo Neko
It was said that debian was the hardest. Well it's not really. Slackware is actually a bit harder. Harder yet is Gentoo. And hardest is LFS.
Thanks for info NeoNeko,I had never heard of these distributions.May be it is the right time to check these ones.
Thanks again.
BTW,Is these versions downloadable?

[Fantasma]

Hi

I have been playing with Linux for some time, but only using
Red Hat 9 or Mandrake 9.1.

I really like Red Hat 9, but due to the changes they are implementing
(dropping the desktop market) maybe is not good idea to use it, Mandrake is able to play my Divx files :)

I prepared my hard disk using Partition Magic, I run Windows XP Pro. If you are going to use Linux for Internet related tasks, I recommend that you learn to configure the firewall that comes with it called IPTABLES, there is a very nice configuration tool called Guard Dog for setting it like a real pro.

You can get very cheap Linux cds from here: http://almostfreelinux.com/

and for the firewall:
http://www.simonzone.com/software/guarddog/

[omol]

Originally posted by Tuning
Thanks for info NeoNeko,I had never heard of these distributions.May be it is the right time to check these ones.
Thanks again.
BTW,Is these versions downloadable?

LFS is Linux From Scratch (http://lfs.sourceforge.net/). It's very much like Gentoo stage 1 installation. You have to compile everything and hand edit fstab and/or raidtab. Even worse, if you have some exoctic hardware that could only boot from a initrd, you have to hand contruct a initrd image. Are you sure you want to try this? I won't recommend it if you do not have a fast box. Even doing kde3 ebuild with distcc with 2 nodes consisting of 2G P4 and 2.4G P4 took me around 8 hours.

regards,
omol - Debian sid user

[juicemansam]

Personally I'd use Debian or Slackware. I recommend them if you're really willing to learn GNU/Linux the long/hard way. If you want to just jump into something more familiar to Windows, then I'd have to recommend RedHat/Mandrake or SuSE.

I once had a Debian base system running on an Alpha-LX and then converted it to Slackware, way before Slackware was experimenting with the Alpha. That kept me happy, too bad I probably threw away my Alpha by mistake during a move :( . I wonder how it would have done with today :( .

[ultimatebilly]

I installed Debian Sarge recently, after I destroyed my Woody-installation, and have to say it's not hard at all anymore...
All my hardware has correctly been recognized and configured, the only thing I had to add manually was my usb-mouse and apm-support.
I used a netinstall-version I downloaded here:
http://gluck.debian.org/cdimage/testing/netinst/i386/
I would recommend using a netinstall-version, regardless of the distribution you use, because this way you will have the most up-to-date packages...
You will of course need a router or another PC with ICS for installation.

[zerocoolnl]

Hey guys,
Nice distributions I see here, but which program (like Gordian KNot in Windows) should I use to rip a DVD to DivX/XviD??

Thnx,
zerocoolnl

ps:BTW: I use Mandrake 9.0 and have running a Clarkconnect server

[ultimatebilly]

If you are looking for something with a GUI, then I would recommend using transcode with DVD::Rip as frontend.
I didn't use these programs yet, only mencoder on the command-line, but as far as I know DVD::Rip is as close as GKnot as you will get at the moment.
If you can use Debian-packages, you can get all you need from here:
http://marillat.free.fr/

Have fun! :D

[DAvenger]

SuSE is very user friendly, I'd recommend it for Desktop use ;) Debian for servers ...

[ultimatebilly]

Well, I found it to be too user-friendly, almost feels like windows...:D
But you are right...
If I would have to set up a "mission-critical" Linux-Desktop-system for work, I would also use Suse, I just prefer Debian because it "feels more like Linux" to me, and I have an ambivalent relationship to Yast...
On the other hand, if you use Sarge, then you don't have the problem that the Desktop-packages are outdated - which is the reason most people use Debian for servers only (for anyone who isn't familiar with the system: Debian packages and distributions always have 3 stages: 1. Unstable(Sid), 2. Testing(Sarge), 3. Stable(Woody) - therefor it takes a while until packages are considered to be stable, but if they are, you can be absolutely sure that they really are...).
But in the end it's all coming down to personal preferences, and what you do want to do with your Linux, if you just want to use it, or if you want to learn how it all works together (which is better accomplished with Debian or Slackware than with Suse, I believe).

[SeeMoreDigital]

Well thanks very much everybody so far.

I did not realize there were so many variants offering different functionality!

Anyway, it looks like Suse is coming in as favourite.

Now all I need confirming is how straight forward it will be to install Suse along side WinXP, on a separate Fat32 partition?

I guess I could have started a 'What Linux do you use?' poll. But in order to do that. I would have had to have known how many different versions there were to begin with!

Thanks again

[Tuning]

Now all I need confirming is how straight forward it will be to install Suse along side WinXP, on a separate Fat32 partition?

SMD, Linux uses its own file system called ext2, ext3 filesystems.
So you have to convert FAT32 to that. You can do it with in the package installation, or using third party tools like Partition Magic Pro .
It also requires a swap partion to be made. All these options will be available in the installer package.

[zerocoolnl]

Maybe this give you an id how many distributions there are: www.linuxiso.org

Greetz,
Zerocoolnl

[jggimi]

SuSE uses Reiserfs for a file system.

Current downloadable version (and network installable version) is SuSE 8.2. SuSE 9.0 has been announced and purchasable versions may be available for retail already, as I recall a November release was planned. A "Live!" CD for testing 9.0 on i586 compatible hardware is available for download, though.

As I recall, one of the biggest changes announced in 9.0 is the availability to mount NTFS partitions R/W, and improved installation with actual partition resizing for those who can't repartition Windows platforms on their own. (SuSE 8 could clip a partition table and reduce a FAT32 partition in the table, but it would leave the FAT32 filesystem untouched and Windows would be unaware of the resizing. Not the most helpful way to manage a partition, is it?.)

[SeeMoreDigital]

Thanks for that info jggimi.

I guess I'd better wait for the official disc launch of SuSE 9.0 then.

I've waited this long, so I might as well wait a while longer!

However, from what I've seen of SuSE 9 professional it comes on 5No CD's, each one containing more than 660MB of data. That's more than 3.2GB for the O/S alone!

Do I really need all of this. Even both my WinXP boot drives only occupy 2.8GB?


Cheers from a Linux newbie

[Tuning]

However, from what I've seen of SuSE 9 professional it comes on 5No CD's, each one containing more than 660MB of data. That's more than 3.2GB for the O/S alone!
Do I really need all of this.
No, for general use altogether 2 GB will be only required including swap.
These CDs often contains packages not only for simple desktops, but includes packages for servers, software developement, games, ecectra...
So it is up to you to install which ever packages you need, and accordingly size increases.

[jggimi]

It's not the OS alone, it's the OS and many many Linux applications.

If you have a broadband connection, a CD burner, and can boot from CD, then test SuSE 9.0 by downloading an .iso of their "Live!" test. It will place at most, 3 files in a root directory of a FAT32 file system, and let you test out one configuration of the OS and appliction suite on your hardware.

I went back through their English website, and looked at both press releases and product pages. 9.0 for the desktop was announced September 30, for an October 24 release, and it is available for purchase now.

I would expect it to be available for download within a month or two. I don't mind lagging behind retail packaging, as I prefer to install patches than to experience bugs, plus I do not need their installation support. Plus, I'm cheap.