Which flavor linux would you recommend? Redhat 7.3 or Mandrake 8.2?

[LastStop]

I don't know anything about Linux (tsk tsk) and I just thought it would be a great time to start since I have so much free time. Can somebody tell me what exactly are the differences between the two and which would you recommend for a n00b?

 

[yakko]

Build your own distro. The June issue of Linux Format magazine has information on this.

 

[NeoMadHatter]

might want to try the OS forum. must more responses there. i'd say mandrake, was a cake to install found everything i had. getting KDE 3 i didn't figure out and eventually had to get rid of it because i don't have time to learn it right now. maybe some other time.

 

[Alex]

windowsXP

 

[silverpig]

I'd go with Mandrake if I were you. 8.2 is newer than RH 7.3, and it's a bit easier to use as well. The install could be done by a friggin monkey. To get a full list of everything that's the same/different, just go to the homepages of each distro to find out.

 

[notfred]

Redhat. Mandrake tends to release things too soon, with too much buggy beta software.

 

[Gooberlx2]

I'm a fan of RedHat. It's what I use and seems to be considered the standard. The install is easy enough....in text mode. (The GUI mode hasn't worked for me yet for some reaon) Besides, setting up X aferwards and updating packages with up2date is also easy.

OT: If you have an Nvidia card head on over to the Nvidia website and get the linux drivers. If the RPMs don't work then you can compile from source....but I think you'll have to have the kernel source installed before you can do that. Read the README on their webpage, it's all very easy to get working.

 

[FoBoT]

they are very similar

its a little bit easier to load less stuff with the mandrake installer than red hat, RH installer tends to load more/fill more hd space

if you want the whole enchilada pick either one, if you want to limit the stuff that is loaded/hd space that is used, go with mandrake



Linuxnewbie.org

 

[ScottyB]

This is probably in the FAQ's, but while on the Linux subject. Can you install a dual boot of Linux and XP, if you already have on XP with NTFS. When you put your drives to NTFS, it says for one OS, but this is probably MS BS. Also will LILO take care of the boot sector, cause I already have XP installed and just want to shrink down my C drive and install Linux on it, and I don't want to fool around with the boot sector trying to get it to work right. I also might just put it on the first part of my second 60 HD, would this be alright.

 

[Chaotic42]

Having never used Mandrake... I say Mandrake.

I'd rather use Xenix than Red Hat. That's just me though.

 

[DaHitman]

Originally posted by: sbastedo
just want to shrink down my C drive and install Linux on it, and I don't want to fool around with the boot sector trying to get it to work right.

You will need to do this ahead of time and make an empty partition for Linux... use Parition Magic (my tool of choice) or something similar.

I also might just put it on the first part of my second 60 HD, would this be alright.

Linux can boot from anydrive, and anywhere on those drives...

 

[LastStop]

Thankyou everyone for all the great information. I just found a RedHat 7 book on my bookshelf and so I'll probably go ahead and get RedHat 7.3 instead of Mandrake. This won't be my primary OS though, it's just going to be a tool to learn linux/unix. I've scanned through the table of contents, and there's a friggen chapter on how to install Linux :Q. Anyways, I'm off to the store.

 

[ScottyB]

Originally posted by: DaHitman

Originally posted by: sbastedo
just want to shrink down my C drive and install Linux on it, and I don't want to fool around with the boot sector trying to get it to work right.

You will need to do this ahead of time and make an empty partition for Linux... use Parition Magic (my tool of choice) or something similar.

I also might just put it on the first part of my second 60 HD, would this be alright.

Linux can boot from anydrive, and anywhere on those drives...

Thanks. I have PM, that's how I am going to shrink the drives down.

 

[Rainsford]

Build your own distro. The June issue of Linux Format magazine has information on this.

I don't know anything about Linux...

Hmm, doesn't sound like a good combination now does it?

 

[starwarsdad]

I am a Linux newbie and have both running on different machines. I like Mandrake a little better because it has been easier to transition from 2000. Red Hat is faster though. I run KDE on both and on an XP1600+ RH definitely performs better.

Performance has caused me to switch to the RH box more and more.

 

[StuckMojo]

debian

 

[manly]

If you *need* GUIs for sysadmin, go with Mandrake. Historically (and in my brief look at RH 7.3) Red Hat Linux is very thin on GUI tools. That's fine for most UNIX geeks, but newbies can find Red Hat to be unfriendly.

Red Hat *is* the de facto standard, so if you need 3rd party (primarily commercial) applications official support, Red Hat is the best way to go.

Personally I like SuSE; it seems that the latest version 8.0 of SuSE comes with a FUGLY GNOME desktop (KDE is their preferred desktop and SuSE's tweaks look okay). If you're a GNOME user, then the default UI in SuSE 8.0 will probably scare you off.

 

[drag]

-sbastedo

Linux can be used for a dual boot for XP, however I don't have much experiance with Xp/Linux dual boot so you might not want to take my advice....

Linux's support of the NTFS filing system ain't to hot and I think it is mostly beta so you might have a bit of trouble mounting the XP's partitions into the directory structure if you want to be able move files from linux into xp and visa-versa.

Linux won't install into NTFS partition nativly, however you can install it into a FAT32 partition by using something called UMSDOS.... Altough you would be better off installing Linux in it's native EXT2 filing system to avoid complications....

NTFS only for one operating system is BS although only Microsofts stuff uses it.

If you guys want a Linux disto to play with and are not serious about setting up a full-fledged OS or cannot move reformat your HD you can try something called ZipSlack -- its a stripped down Slackware distro that you can install into a MSDOS filing system. It was designed to fit on a 100meg zip drive as a way to create a server thingy. It's a cool thing to play with and it'll do most anything that a regular Linux OS can do and you can boot into from Window's dos mode or a floppy disk. It doesn't have a X windows system on it though, so you are stuck in Command-line only enviroment. However they have a package you can install that will add the X windows system to the distro, but it will be considurably larger than a 100 megs.... Remember that it's a stripped down no frills version of linux and no bells or wistles to make your life easier so it's a difficult way of doing things, but it makes it possible.

you can find out how to download it for free off of this website. It comes in a single large .zip file. (btw you need a 32 bit unzip prog. to unzip it like winzip, don't use pkunzip)

 

[Tiger]

Debian is not a newbie friendly distro. Neither are a few of the others like LFS, Gentoo, Slackware etc....
The dual boot FAQ on this site should also work with XP.

 

[Dreadogg]

Build your own distro. The June issue of Linux Format magazine has information on this

LOL I did this once I call it dreadoggIX, acually just install mandrake but first set a partition with parttion magic and read up on how to set the rest of the partitions like swap boot Etc.. and good luck!

 

[Flatline]

I've tried Mandrake 8.2 and RedHat 7.3...they each have problems. Mandrake 8.2 seems to be a bit buggy and it is definitely slow (even for Mandrake), as it ran in an extremely lethargic manner on my Athlon 1.4; RedHat 7.3's installer is a bit buggy (not excusable), so if you're looking for the full install, it may not be your best option. As a matter of fact, 7.3 is buggy enough in places that RedHat has already release the 7.4 beta for testing.
I've just done an FTP install of SuSe 8.0 (mostly because I don't have to recompile my kernel to get my Audigy to work) and I actually do like it; I'm not as familiar with it as RedHat, so I'm having to find things all over again, but no distro is perfect (or exactly like another). However, if you're not at all familiar with 'nix, I wouldn't recommend an FTP install.
Overall, as a noob, I would say that you should probably go with Mandrake, but I hope that you have a really fast machine so that it doesn't act like XP on a 486...
By the way, guys, the default desktops for KDE and Gnome on the new SuSe are extremely pug-fugly...I have no idea what they're thinking.