Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>>> Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. >>> Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They >>> seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. >>> Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. >> >> Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. >> Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that >> and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, >> slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in >> an endearing sense of course). >> >> HTH. > Hi Sorin > > You can "sudo bash" and you will have a root terminal. In it, you can > set the root password for root. How does freeBSD compare to CentOS for stabillity etc? Seems as though CentOS has the largest market capture but I have yet to try freeBSD. Heard that freeBSD is more unix like then linux. Matt ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Florin Andrei a écrit : > > I keep an eye on a Kawasaki forum, and they have a knack for doing a lot > of Suzuki bashing. I'm, like, "WTF, they're all awesome sportbikes!" :-) > > Same here. In the end, Linux is the same Right. Got fifteen Hondas and one Yamaha before finally settling for an old 1000cc BMW which curiously reminds me of my CentOS desktop. Rock-solid, quite heavy, but oh boy is it comfortable, and it always takes me from A to B without any nasty surprises. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Les Mikesell a écrit : > But that means you have to wait many years for new features - that you > probably > want in rapidly developing desktop apps. > One new set of desktop applications about every two years suits me perfectly[1]. Lately I only needed a more recent version of Open Office than the one shipped with CentOS, so I just installed the RPMS from openoffice.org. Apart from that, I got everything I need to get my daily work done, so I'll stick with CentOS, my favourite workhorse distro. Niki [1]Although this will look more like 3 years this time. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> m.r...@5-cent.us a écrit : > >> I also have CentOS at home. There are quirks, though: for example, I >> tried to run kaffeine last night, and it couldn't find libkaffeinepart.so. I >> tried adding /opt/kde3/lib to LD_LIBRARY_PATH, to LOAD_LIB, >> and even did an ldconfig, and it *still* can't find it (I run icewm, btw, >> not KDE). > > Kaffeine is basically Xine for KDE. Since you're running IceWM, you > might as well give Xine or Gxine (no Gnome deps) a spin. As a followup - I spent the rest of last week and the weekend relocating (ARRGHGHHGHGH!!!) - I played around with this, and discovered xine was a) not installed, and b) wasn't on the CentOS 5.3 DVD I'd burned a month or so ago. Sound juicer was installed, and worked. *sigh* "Let's add this, this time, and take that out" mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> > On 09/29/2009 09:21 AM, Geoff Galitz wrote: > > Ubuntu has the LTS releases, which are long term stable releases. They > are > > supported for five years after release. > > you might want to look into exactly what is ubuntu-support and how that > compares with what you get with CentOS. Its not nearly the same thing. > To an extent that LTS is mostly considered a nonstarter in most > very > small business. Specially where the client is in a position to evaluate > their options and work out the implications of what they are getting. It > always surprises me how many are not. Would you mind elaborating on your views on that? I did some basic research on the LTS offerings and I don't see any significant differences with the exception of porting elements from Debian testing. What constitutes real LTS in your view? -geoff - Geoff Galitz Blankenheim NRW, Germany http://www.galitz.org/ http://german-way.com/blog/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Marcelo M. Garcia > The reason for Ubuntu in the laptop is simply because CentOS didn't work > very well. I followed the wiki about XPS M1530[1] and everything > almost work. At the office one of the developers uses a Dell Precision > laptop with RHEL 5.3 (it came from Dell with RHEL) and works really > fine. So, I image that some laptops are more CentOS/RHEL-friendly than > others. I'm lucky that my Dell Latitude D400 works 100% with CentOS -- I imagine being "behind the curve" in hardware is a definite advantage here. -- RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
At Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:41:48 +0100 CentOS mailing list wrote: > > Sorin Srbu wrote: > >>> HTH. > >> Hi Sorin > >> > >> You can "sudo bash" and you will have a root terminal. In it, you can > >> set the root password for root. > > > > Yupp, as I said, at the time I was testing Ubuntu, I was rather green and > > didn't know about those little tricks. Now is a another matter, but I still > > prefer CentOS. Besides, opening a terminal and typing in "su -" is way > > faster. Saves keystrokes. > Hi > > The reason for Ubuntu in the laptop is simply because CentOS didn't work > very well. I followed the wiki about XPS M1530[1] and everything > almost work. At the office one of the developers uses a Dell Precision > laptop with RHEL 5.3 (it came from Dell with RHEL) and works really > fine. So, I image that some laptops are more CentOS/RHEL-friendly than > others. Probably older ones or ones with less 'bleeding edge' hardware. > > Now I'm used to use sudo. It is a great tool. I use it everywhere. And > everything I do appears in the logwatch. > > Regards > > mg. > > [1] http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Laptops/Dell/XPS_M1530 > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 Deepwoods Software-- Download the Model Railroad System http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows hel...@deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Sorin Srbu wrote: >>> HTH. >> Hi Sorin >> >> You can "sudo bash" and you will have a root terminal. In it, you can >> set the root password for root. > > Yupp, as I said, at the time I was testing Ubuntu, I was rather green and > didn't know about those little tricks. Now is a another matter, but I still > prefer CentOS. Besides, opening a terminal and typing in "su -" is way > faster. Saves keystrokes. Hi The reason for Ubuntu in the laptop is simply because CentOS didn't work very well. I followed the wiki about XPS M1530[1] and everything almost work. At the office one of the developers uses a Dell Precision laptop with RHEL 5.3 (it came from Dell with RHEL) and works really fine. So, I image that some laptops are more CentOS/RHEL-friendly than others. Now I'm used to use sudo. It is a great tool. I use it everywhere. And everything I do appears in the logwatch. Regards mg. [1] http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Laptops/Dell/XPS_M1530 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Christopher Chan wrote: >> And I can't believe I just write that...! I sound like a linux >> die-hard... >> > Just try Solaris or FreeBSD then. That should make you a Linux die-hard. :-D Oh yes. I tried Opensolaris for a while and now I'm more convinced of Linux than ever. mg. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 09/30/2009 02:11 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: >>> Solution: stick with CentOS, rock-solid and *real* LTS. >> But that means you have to wait many years for new features - that you >> probably >> want in rapidly developing desktop apps. > > thats not always true - it is to some extent though. And the 'long term' > usually translates into 18 months. Most people, in real life - specially > those that are not involved with technology on a daily basis can easily > live with that. I'd say 3 or 4 years would be more realistic if you look at time from the feature freeze on one enterprise release until the next one ships - which amounts to a lot of changes that other distos will include. Even on the server side, 5.x is starting to show its age. For example, I'd like to be able to rewrite absolute URL's embedded in the content in sites handled through apache's ProxyPass but mod_substitute was added in apache 2.2.7 and we still only have 2.2.3. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On 09/30/2009 02:11 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: >> Solution: stick with CentOS, rock-solid and *real* LTS. > > But that means you have to wait many years for new features - that you > probably > want in rapidly developing desktop apps. thats not always true - it is to some extent though. And the 'long term' usually translates into 18 months. Most people, in real life - specially those that are not involved with technology on a daily basis can easily live with that. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Niki Kovacs wrote: > Geoff Galitz a écrit : > >> Ubuntu has the LTS releases, which are long term stable releases. They are >> supported for five years after release. >> > Ubuntu Long Term Support is three years for desktops and five for servers. > > In the last LTS version (8.04), half of the audio apps had no sound for > a month or so, until Ubuntu fixed the problems with Pulseaudio. At the > time, I had given Ubuntu 8.04 a shot in our public libraries and had > some very embarrassing moments. > > Solution: stick with CentOS, rock-solid and *real* LTS. But that means you have to wait many years for new features - that you probably want in rapidly developing desktop apps. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On 09/29/2009 06:38 PM, Florin Andrei wrote: > I agree with your assessment that Red Hat& Co are still The > Distribution for enterprise stuff. Where Enterprise Stuff == 'Stable computing where you can focus on doing things with your computer and know that when you want to, it will be there - hardware permitting - in the same state you left it, even after security updates are applied'[1] - KB [1]: Ok, so there have been some exceptions. But they are rare and far in between. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On 09/29/2009 06:21 PM, Drew wrote: > Websites for example > have moved from static html on the arpanet& university sites to the > rich multimedia content we see today. Back then the idea of a website > infecting a computer was unheard of. For completelness sake - website content hasent changed an inch in the last 15 years. What is served is still static content - it gets richer on the client side, nothing has changed on the server end at all. All your flash and css and js and whatnot are just static files served out. w.r.t dynamic served content, SSI and cgi content has been around since the early days that lets you do most of what is being done these days ( remember, its not the client we are talking about here ). - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>-Original Message- >From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf >Of Christopher Chan >Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 9:42 AM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user > >> Yupp, as I said, at the time I was testing Ubuntu, I was rather green and >> didn't know about those little tricks. Now is a another matter, but I still >> prefer CentOS. Besides, opening a terminal and typing in "su -" is way >> faster. Saves keystrokes. >> And I can't believe I just write that...! I sound like a linux >> die-hard... >> >Just try Solaris or FreeBSD then. That should make you a Linux die-hard. :-D Solaris; check. Didn't like, it was just weird. So there. ;-) -- /Sorin smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Sorin Srbu wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On >> > Behalf > >> Of Marcelo M. Garcia >> Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:36 PM >> To: CentOS mailing list >> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user >> >> >>> Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. >>> Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo >>> > that > >>> and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, >>> slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with >>> > (in > >>> an endearing sense of course). >>> >>> HTH. >>> >> Hi Sorin >> >> You can "sudo bash" and you will have a root terminal. In it, you can >> set the root password for root. >> > > Yupp, as I said, at the time I was testing Ubuntu, I was rather green and > didn't know about those little tricks. Now is a another matter, but I still > prefer CentOS. Besides, opening a terminal and typing in "su -" is way > faster. Saves keystrokes. > And I can't believe I just write that...! I sound like a linux > die-hard... > Just try Solaris or FreeBSD then. That should make you a Linux die-hard. :-D ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>-Original Message- >From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf >Of Marcelo M. Garcia >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:36 PM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user > >> Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. >> Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that >> and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, >> slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in >> an endearing sense of course). >> >> HTH. >Hi Sorin > >You can "sudo bash" and you will have a root terminal. In it, you can >set the root password for root. Yupp, as I said, at the time I was testing Ubuntu, I was rather green and didn't know about those little tricks. Now is a another matter, but I still prefer CentOS. Besides, opening a terminal and typing in "su -" is way faster. Saves keystrokes. And I can't believe I just write that...! I sound like a linux die-hard... -- /Sorin smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On 9/25/09, Anne Wilson wrote: > On Friday 25 September 2009 17:02:24 Lanny Marcus wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Anne Wilson > wrote: >> > I'm thinking of giving CentOS to a non-tech user for her new desktop. >> > He >> > needs are small. She has been used to Mozilla for both mail and >> > browsing, so >> I >> have installed one package from the FC6 DVD (KDEEDU) on CentOS 5 (32 >> bit) to get KStars and that worked fine. But, as Phil pointed out, >> maybe better to rebuild from the srpm. > > Sounds encouraging, thanks. Anne: Forget the part about using binary RPMs from FC6 or any other distro. I have been reading the list, catching up on reading tonight, and Johnny made it very clear, 1 or 2 days ago, in another thread, this is *not* something to be done. Best to rebuild the SRPM. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Tait Clarridge wrote: > CentOS is great for server use and if you want to learn CentOS for use > as a server, Fedora is a great place to start because they are both > redhat based. Chances are that if you got something to work in Fedora, > you can get it to work in CentOS (maybe with a few extra tweaks). I don't have any servers. I like CentOS on my desktop and my laptop just because it's solid. It's also the Linux distribution of choice for most Asterisk platforms -- which I intend to (eventually) learn. (I'm a telephone tech, who is eventually going to have to go VOIP.) -- RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > Fedora has the advantage to a RHEL/CentOS user of having the same > install/admin tools. But if you are turning the box over to someone > else, Ubuntu makes much more of an effort to be user friendly. And they > haven't been quite so bad as Fedora about refusing to admit that > proprietary code exists. I set my brother up with CentOS 5.3 because, since I'm the one who is going to maintain it, it might as well be something I understand and like. He and his family seem to get along fine with it. When I go over, I usually just run a quick update and make sure everything is working up to snuff. Since he has VirtualBox on it, I also maintain that -- mostly by rebuilding its kernel when the CentOS kernel is updated. (Not that I don't think that there are a lot of good Linux distributions out there.) -- RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Alan McKay wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Ron Blizzard wrote: >> I like stability over "cutting edge," so CentOS (with multimedia from >> RPMForge) > > What are the details on MM from RPMForge? > > If I could get my MM working I'd be happy. I like stability too, > which is why I use it on my servers. But for desktop use, MM is > pretty much a must-have. And I've used Fedora for years with no real > issues. Switched to CentOS for desktop because it is recommended at > my new job. So I switched at home too. I think these are the instructions I used the first couple times I installed CentOS 5.x. It might be overkill, but it worked for me. http://www.sklav.com/?q=node/2 -- RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: > Sorin Srbu wrote: > >>> -Original Message- >>> From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On >>> >> Behalf >> >>> Of Matt >>> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 11:29 PM >>> To: CentOS mailing list >>> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user >>> >>> Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. >>> Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They >>> seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. >>> Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. >>> >> Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. >> Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that >> and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, >> slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in >> an endearing sense of course). >> >> HTH. >> > Hi Sorin > > You can "sudo bash" and you will have a root terminal. In it, you can > set the root password for root. > > And break a couple of things IIRC. There are whole arguments about doing that. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Drew wrote: >> Not quite. It is more a matter of a standard only being useful if >> everyone does what it says. Picking a new location that no one >> currently uses is always the worst possible choice. > > So are revolutions but those seem to work well on occasion. :-) Only for the survivors. >>> My argument is that those same Unix admins no doubt placed it there >>> because it made functional sense at the time. >> It is not a functional thing. It's a name. > > A name is a way to for a person to remember an object or a concept. Yes, and once they have been established it is simply confusing to invent a bunch of new terms for the same things. > Names can then be arranged and organized. How names are organized is > important in the context of how and where the users and admins > interact with them. Yes, but keep in mind that these same users and admins are very likely to interact with systems that are not Linux and LSB compliant also. > It may not make a functional difference to apache > that the website resides in /srv/www instead of /var/www but it may > matter to the admin that client facing data stays away from machine > files. The name of the place they stay is irrelevant. And it's still not clear what you mean by a client, or how one piece of data is different from another. >> Aren't all files 'client facing' if the machine has a purpose? What >> other reason would you have for any files? > > How about performance logs, access logs, and audit logs? How about them? If I want to access them through a web interface, does that make me a client? How is it different than using ssh and cat? > All of which > are stuff you would put in /var and I'm sure we can agree you wouldn't > want the client to see those until they've been processed. So not > everything faces the client. What kind of server these days doesn't process everything before displaying it? Besides, am I not a client? Does a web service have to serve different people than other kinds of services? How does the type of service relate to the type of data involved? Yes, I want ways to isolate different users and groups of users, but it is very likely that I'll want the same service protocols serving different sets and the categories won't fit neatly under something a committee makes up. >>> I agree with you on standardizing libraries but I fail to see how that >>> has any relevance to where an admin should place their client facing >>> files. >> Standardizing libraries would be a functional reason to embrace the LSB. >> Otherwise it makes about as much sense as having a committee make up >> new names for your kids. If mount points and volume sizes were also >> standardized, it might be reasonable to standardize what goes where, but >> they aren't and shouldn't be because the machines will differ in size >> and purpose. > > I don't think you're understanding my argument here. I'm not arguing > against library standardization, in fact I'm for it, nor am I arguing > about the purpose of the LSB. What I am trying to ask is what > relevance does the LSB's existence and/or library standardization have > to do with the FHS, and specifically the /srv folder? OK, so what relevance does /srv have? What works after you go to the trouble of moving things to this new location that didn't work exactly the same way wherever you had it before? > As far as I'm > concerned the FHS could have been written by RedHat, IBM, or Oracle > and would in no way impact discussing the relevance of the /srv > folder. It doesn't have any relevance by itself. Things will work if you put them under /srv. They will work if you don't put them there. What's to discuss about it? What we do need in package-oriented distributions are places that are clearly out of scope for package installations, and it would be sort-of nice if 3rd party repos had non-conflicting locations for each to drop potentially conflicting items. But the committee didn't address the stuff we actually need. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> Not quite. It is more a matter of a standard only being useful if > everyone does what it says. Picking a new location that no one > currently uses is always the worst possible choice. So are revolutions but those seem to work well on occasion. :-) >> My argument is that those same Unix admins no doubt placed it there >> because it made functional sense at the time. > > It is not a functional thing. It's a name. A name is a way to for a person to remember an object or a concept. Names can then be arranged and organized. How names are organized is important in the context of how and where the users and admins interact with them. It may not make a functional difference to apache that the website resides in /srv/www instead of /var/www but it may matter to the admin that client facing data stays away from machine files. > Linus started out with the idea of emulating Solaris/SysVr4. If that's > not what happened, it is a failing of Linux. It didn't and I wouldn't call that a failing. Linux has outgrown it's original roots and is now a full fledged operating system competing with Unix. > Aren't all files 'client facing' if the machine has a purpose? What > other reason would you have for any files? How about performance logs, access logs, and audit logs? All of which are stuff you would put in /var and I'm sure we can agree you wouldn't want the client to see those until they've been processed. So not everything faces the client. >> I agree with you on standardizing libraries but I fail to see how that >> has any relevance to where an admin should place their client facing >> files. > > Standardizing libraries would be a functional reason to embrace the LSB. > Otherwise it makes about as much sense as having a committee make up > new names for your kids. If mount points and volume sizes were also > standardized, it might be reasonable to standardize what goes where, but > they aren't and shouldn't be because the machines will differ in size > and purpose. I don't think you're understanding my argument here. I'm not arguing against library standardization, in fact I'm for it, nor am I arguing about the purpose of the LSB. What I am trying to ask is what relevance does the LSB's existence and/or library standardization have to do with the FHS, and specifically the /srv folder? As far as I'm concerned the FHS could have been written by RedHat, IBM, or Oracle and would in no way impact discussing the relevance of the /srv folder. -- Drew "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." --Marie Curie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Sorin Srbu wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > Behalf >> Of Matt >> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 11:29 PM >> To: CentOS mailing list >> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user >> >> Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. >> Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They >> seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. >> Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. > > Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. > Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that > and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, > slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in > an endearing sense of course). > > HTH. Hi Sorin You can "sudo bash" and you will have a root terminal. In it, you can set the root password for root. Regards mg. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 16:14 -0400, Alan McKay wrote: > > I am not an Ubuntu basher, but I felt it was babying me a little too > > much. > > Hmmm, maybe that's what I should put on my wife's laptop :-) > > I already know Linux very well - been a UNIX geek for over 20 years, > and Linux geek for getting on 10 now. And I still get frustrated > with how difficult it can be to set up multimedia! > True. Fedora/CentOS can be less intimidating and Ubuntu more user friendly.. but where is the fun in that? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Alan McKay wrote: On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Ron Blizzard wrote: I like stability over "cutting edge," so CentOS (with multimedia from RPMForge) What are the details on MM from RPMForge? If I could get my MM working I'd be happy. I like stability too, which is why I use it on my servers. But for desktop use, MM is pretty much a must-have. And I've used Fedora for years with no real issues. Switched to CentOS for desktop because it is recommended at my new job. So I switched at home too. I have been using CentOS 5.x for MM for the last two years (DVB capture card in a small microATX box) complete with two 500GB SATA drives and two DVD rear/write drives with motherboard audio (stereo and sub). I run mythtv and store capture video local but the myth database is on my home CentOS (of course) server. Getting the initial mythTV installed was difficult but since then despite numerous updates everything just works (TM). Rob <>___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> I am not an Ubuntu basher, but I felt it was babying me a little too > much. Hmmm, maybe that's what I should put on my wife's laptop :-) I already know Linux very well - been a UNIX geek for over 20 years, and Linux geek for getting on 10 now. And I still get frustrated with how difficult it can be to set up multimedia! -- “Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV” - Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food" ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Tue, 2009-09-29 at 15:38 -0400, Alan McKay wrote: > I've been generally unhappy with my CentOS desktop both at home and at > work, when it comes to thinks like sound and video. > > I'd recommend going with Fedora Core, to be honest. Much as I love > CentOS on my servers. > > This is more a reply to the general thread, not Alan's answer above. When I first picked up Linux for personal use I had tried CentOS and found that it was not properly or easily configured for any multimedia use. This was when I was starting to use Linux and didn't have the patience to configure everything. This is when I switched to Fedora for personal use, I have used Fedora Core 8 through 11 and haven't found any major issues configuring it for what I need. There can be issues with any distribution regarding HD sound, but if you google them the answers are almost always there. That is all I've had major problems with in running it on my laptops. I use a Toshiba laptop and it has worked flawlessly through each of the versions (except for the sound problems noted above). CentOS is great for server use and if you want to learn CentOS for use as a server, Fedora is a great place to start because they are both redhat based. Chances are that if you got something to work in Fedora, you can get it to work in CentOS (maybe with a few extra tweaks). I am not an Ubuntu basher, but I felt it was babying me a little too much. More than I would want to when learning a new system. Nothing like trial by fire to grow your linux knowledge. With most Linux installations you will end up tweaking something that isn't working as advertised. I am not trying to scare you away from linux, but in my experience it has been the case that I had to "get my hands dirty" on more than one occasion. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Ron Blizzard wrote: > I like stability over "cutting edge," so CentOS (with multimedia from > RPMForge) What are the details on MM from RPMForge? If I could get my MM working I'd be happy. I like stability too, which is why I use it on my servers. But for desktop use, MM is pretty much a must-have. And I've used Fedora for years with no real issues. Switched to CentOS for desktop because it is recommended at my new job. So I switched at home too. -- “Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV” - Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food" ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Ron Blizzard wrote: > >> I've been generally unhappy with my CentOS desktop both at home and at >> work, when it comes to thinks like sound and video. >> >> I'd recommend going with Fedora Core, to be honest. Much as I love >> CentOS on my servers. > > I like stability over "cutting edge," so CentOS (with multimedia from > RPMForge) is working fine for me on my desktop and laptop computers. I > don't hate Fedora, but I don't like the constant updates. But, if I > didn't have the CentOS option, I'm pretty sure Fedora would be my next > choice. Fedora has the advantage to a RHEL/CentOS user of having the same install/admin tools. But if you are turning the box over to someone else, Ubuntu makes much more of an effort to be user friendly. And they haven't been quite so bad as Fedora about refusing to admit that proprietary code exists. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Alan McKay wrote: > I've been generally unhappy with my CentOS desktop both at home and at > work, when it comes to thinks like sound and video. > > I'd recommend going with Fedora Core, to be honest. Much as I love > CentOS on my servers. I like stability over "cutting edge," so CentOS (with multimedia from RPMForge) is working fine for me on my desktop and laptop computers. I don't hate Fedora, but I don't like the constant updates. But, if I didn't have the CentOS option, I'm pretty sure Fedora would be my next choice. -- RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
I've been generally unhappy with my CentOS desktop both at home and at work, when it comes to thinks like sound and video. I'd recommend going with Fedora Core, to be honest. Much as I love CentOS on my servers. -- “Don't eat anything you've ever seen advertised on TV” - Michael Pollan, author of "In Defense of Food" ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Drew wrote: > The argument you're expressing, as I see it, is that there is really > no difference whether or not the files are stored in /var or /srv > because in the end they're bits on a disk so where in the file system > they end up doesn't matter. /var was chosen years ago by Unix admins > so why change it to /srv? Not quite. It is more a matter of a standard only being useful if everyone does what it says. Picking a new location that no one currently uses is always the worst possible choice. > My argument is that those same Unix admins no doubt placed it there > because it made functional sense at the time. It is not a functional thing. It's a name. > Over the years that > location became a convention and therefore became an arbitrary > location. The LSB is reviewing that same functional choice in light of > what changes have occurred in how we use servers and they feel that it > makes more functional sense to break those files out into their own > tree. Names are arbitrary. If you make up a new one, you ensure that you break everything that already had one - and that's mostly what the LSB has done so far. > As far as breaking tradition from Unix, last time I checked porting an > app of reasonable size over from Linux to Unix is not a simple > process. Linus started out with the idea of emulating Solaris/SysVr4. If that's not what happened, it is a failing of Linux. And Posix imposed additional standards along the way. And of course java came along and made it possible to run things portably in spite of the OS attempts to prevent that. > The choice to put client facing files in one directory or > another is a minor part, at best, of that process. Aren't all files 'client facing' if the machine has a purpose? What other reason would you have for any files? > I agree with you on standardizing libraries but I fail to see how that > has any relevance to where an admin should place their client facing > files. Standardizing libraries would be a functional reason to embrace the LSB. Otherwise it makes about as much sense as having a committee make up new names for your kids. If mount points and volume sizes were also standardized, it might be reasonable to standardize what goes where, but they aren't and shouldn't be because the machines will differ in size and purpose. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Les Mikesell wrote: > Yes, keep in mind that it took many years for Red Hat to get it right > (or what they think is right) and when they did, they stopped > distributing the binaries for free. Ubuntu should be getting pretty > close to having the support experience they need to be a match - and so > far they have promised that their version will continue to be available > for free. I don't know what Ubuntu wants eventually, but for now they seem to have a totally different mindset than Red Hat. They've positioned themselves to be the "move from Windows" Linux and, in doing that, they're basically pushing "cutting edge." Red Hat, on the other hand, made the decision to go for the corporate server (and Desktop) market. Everything they do is geared for that purpose. Their only real competition here is SuSE. My experience with Ubuntu is mixed. It's easy to install but there always seems to be something that doesn't quite work right -- usually issues with my Intel graphics chip. I've also had problems with updates breaking what already worked. I'm using "trailing edge" hardware, so that could be the problem. If I used a Debian-based distribution it would probably just be Debian. -- RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
The argument you're expressing, as I see it, is that there is really no difference whether or not the files are stored in /var or /srv because in the end they're bits on a disk so where in the file system they end up doesn't matter. /var was chosen years ago by Unix admins so why change it to /srv? My argument is that those same Unix admins no doubt placed it there because it made functional sense at the time. Over the years that location became a convention and therefore became an arbitrary location. The LSB is reviewing that same functional choice in light of what changes have occurred in how we use servers and they feel that it makes more functional sense to break those files out into their own tree. As far as breaking tradition from Unix, last time I checked porting an app of reasonable size over from Linux to Unix is not a simple process. The choice to put client facing files in one directory or another is a minor part, at best, of that process. I agree with you on standardizing libraries but I fail to see how that has any relevance to where an admin should place their client facing files. -- Drew "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." --Marie Curie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Max Hetrick wrote: > > the zealots Nah, it's just the way the human mind works, according to its current blueprint. It can be pretty awesome in what it can do sometimes, but it does have obvious fundamental flaws too. You and I have biases too, but nobody is aware of their own. :) -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Florin Andrei wrote: > Karanbir Singh wrote: >> you might want to look into exactly what is ubuntu-support and how that >> compares with what you get with CentOS. Its not nearly the same thing. >> To an extent that LTS is mostly considered a nonstarter in most > very >> small business. Specially where the client is in a position to evaluate >> their options and work out the implications of what they are getting. It >> always surprises me how many are not. > > I agree with your assessment that Red Hat & Co are still The > Distribution for enterprise stuff. > > They should keep an eye on Ubuntu though, it's gaining ground real fast > and it's using the best strategy (that worked before for the likes of > Intel, Microsoft and, yes, Linux in general): they're co-opting the > low-end first. Things are going to get pretty interesting a few years > down the road. Yes, keep in mind that it took many years for Red Hat to get it right (or what they think is right) and when they did, they stopped distributing the binaries for free. Ubuntu should be getting pretty close to having the support experience they need to be a match - and so far they have promised that their version will continue to be available for free. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Florin Andrei wrote: > Well, it's the group bias. > > I keep an eye on a Kawasaki forum, and they have a knack for doing a lot > of Suzuki bashing. I'm, like, "WTF, they're all awesome sportbikes!" :-) > > Same here. In the end, Linux is the same, just different flavors for > different tastes. > Agreed. Unfortunately, open source communities never seem to think that way. The point being, open source/Linux serves to all get to the same goal, but unfortunately, projects get a bad name for bashing other projects. The vi vs. emacs, Gnome vs. KDE, etc. rants. I was at Ohio Linux Fest this past weekend where Shawn Powers, a Linux Journal editor, opened with a keynote speech. Basically, his speech hit on that topic somewhat. I understand and appreciate passion, but I think it gets in the way sometimes when you start bashing other open source projects that are trying to reach the same goal. The point of Linux and open source is choice, and I truly don't respect the zealots that do a lot of bashing. I think it's counter-productive and exactly why Linux communities get a bad name sometimes. I understand lists are specific, but questions like this should be about what people have had good and bad experiences with things. CentOS works good here for one persons needs, but may not fit another. Regards, Max ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Drew wrote: >> Not likely... Storage paths are all arbitrary and if a standard has to >> make up a new location that breaks existing concepts they've already >> done something wrong. > > Times change. What worked well on Unix 20-30 years ago isn't > necessarily the best way of doing things today. Storage paths are arbitrary. There's nothing more functional about one path than any other. This isn't about 'working well'. It's about forcing everyone to change for no reason. It's about making Linux different from other unix flavors for no reason. All while avoiding the thing that Linux actually needs which is to define a standard set of libraries and their locations that must be present so people can deliver programs that run across distributions. > Websites for example > have moved from static html on the arpanet & university sites to the > rich multimedia content we see today. Back then the idea of a website > infecting a computer was unheard of. Now an entire industry has > cropped up around protecting systems from malicious content. Those are functional issues, not arbitrary choices. >> So far the LSB has been good at making up things >> that nobody used before - not so good at getting everyone to agree to >> change (and change again every time they change their minds). > > I've never seen an entire industry move rapidly to adopt change unless > there are significant incentives to do so. And as the incentives for > Linux to do so are primarily "best practices" I don't expect to see a > wholesale move anytime soon. Exactly. There is no reason to change from one arbitrary location to another, and without standardizing library functionality and locations the LSB provides no functional benefit. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Karanbir Singh wrote: > > you might want to look into exactly what is ubuntu-support and how that > compares with what you get with CentOS. Its not nearly the same thing. > To an extent that LTS is mostly considered a nonstarter in most > very > small business. Specially where the client is in a position to evaluate > their options and work out the implications of what they are getting. It > always surprises me how many are not. I agree with your assessment that Red Hat & Co are still The Distribution for enterprise stuff. They should keep an eye on Ubuntu though, it's gaining ground real fast and it's using the best strategy (that worked before for the likes of Intel, Microsoft and, yes, Linux in general): they're co-opting the low-end first. Things are going to get pretty interesting a few years down the road. -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Geoff Galitz wrote: > > Perhaps it is getting trendy to beat up on non-Centos distros here on the > Centos list? Well, it's the group bias. I keep an eye on a Kawasaki forum, and they have a knack for doing a lot of Suzuki bashing. I'm, like, "WTF, they're all awesome sportbikes!" :-) Same here. In the end, Linux is the same, just different flavors for different tastes. -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Matt wrote: > > Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? On a whim, I installed it on my home mail/web/* server. It was due for an upgrade anyway. So far, so good. Running a boatload of services (low load though), no crashes, solid. The "Ubuntu experience" is the same. When I had to install stuff like the MythTV backend, or the MediaTomb UPnP server (*) or things like that (including multimedia things like libavcodec or libdvdread), there was no need to add all sorts of repos to the system, which may or may not conflict each other or replace the base packages. I just did "sudo apt-get install somepackage" and, voila!, I was done. So I think I prefer it even on the server, if it's a small home server like this. At work though, what with Oracle RAC, high-end storage and things like that, Red Hat and its derivatives are still the choice. (*) - It's great to have a system up-n-running 24/7 anyway (for email, web, DHCP, printing and whatnot). In that case, you can put a UPnP server on it, and dump all your multimedia files (MP3, JPEG, movies) on the hard-drive, then comfortably browse them on your TV with some sort of UPnP client (a game console like the PS3, or one of those tiny UPnP boxes they sell on the Internet). Then put a MythTV backend on the server, and install the frontend on the gaming PC connected to your TV - you do have one, right? :-) The gaming PC can dual-boot, Mythbuntu for MythTV, Windows for games. It's a great setup, and yes, it can be done on CentOS or just about any Linux distro. But with Ubuntu everything is just there, so the install/admin effort is greatly reduced. -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> Not likely... Storage paths are all arbitrary and if a standard has to > make up a new location that breaks existing concepts they've already > done something wrong. Times change. What worked well on Unix 20-30 years ago isn't necessarily the best way of doing things today. Websites for example have moved from static html on the arpanet & university sites to the rich multimedia content we see today. Back then the idea of a website infecting a computer was unheard of. Now an entire industry has cropped up around protecting systems from malicious content. > So far the LSB has been good at making up things > that nobody used before - not so good at getting everyone to agree to > change (and change again every time they change their minds). I've never seen an entire industry move rapidly to adopt change unless there are significant incentives to do so. And as the incentives for Linux to do so are primarily "best practices" I don't expect to see a wholesale move anytime soon. -- Drew "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." --Marie Curie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Niki Kovacs wrote: > Geoff Galitz a écrit : > > >> Ubuntu has the LTS releases, which are long term stable releases. They are >> supported for five years after release. >> >> > Ubuntu Long Term Support is three years for desktops and five for servers. > > In the last LTS version (8.04), half of the audio apps had no sound for > a month or so, until Ubuntu fixed the problems with Pulseaudio. At the > time, I had given Ubuntu 8.04 a shot in our public libraries and had > some very embarrassing moments. > +1. All my Ubuntu 8.04 trial boxes are now XP due to that. > Solution: stick with CentOS, rock-solid and *real* LTS. > > Yeah, if only I did not have to put Windows in a vm... Centos would have done the trick if it was just pure Linux. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> m.r...@5-cent.us a écrit : > >> I also have CentOS at home. There are quirks, though: for example, I >> tried to run kaffeine last night, and it couldn't find libkaffeinepart.so. >> I tried adding /opt/kde3/lib to LD_LIBRARY_PATH, to LOAD_LIB, >> and even did an ldconfig, and it *still* can't find it (I run icewm, btw, >> not KDE). > > Kaffeine is basically Xine for KDE. Since you're running IceWM, you > might as well give Xine or Gxine (no Gnome deps) a spin. I might... but I *really* want to know *why* it can't find the library, that's right there. That's problems waiting to happen. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Karanbir Singh wrote: > On 09/27/2009 02:57 PM, Drew wrote: >> That's the rule of thumb I see applied to what goes in /srv. In a LAMP >> box for example I'd expect to see the website(and site logs), database >> files, and POP3/IMAP spools stored in srv directories. Machine >> specific data like system logs and email processing spools get stored >> in /var. > > > well, /srv to me is served and shared storage. So anything on the > network that isnt consumed directly by off-immediate-network clients > using any service would end up there. > > To me, thats the best match for usage - most other things, maybe > everything else, has a fairly clear guideline from the LSB. although the > lsb specs are themselves a bit in the air. Lets see if the 3rd or 4th > time they get something done a bit more formally. Not likely... Storage paths are all arbitrary and if a standard has to make up a new location that breaks existing concepts they've already done something wrong. So far the LSB has been good at making up things that nobody used before - not so good at getting everyone to agree to change (and change again every time they change their minds). -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
m.r...@5-cent.us a écrit : > I also have CentOS at home. There are quirks, though: for example, I tried > to run kaffeine last night, and it couldn't find libkaffeinepart.so. I > tried adding /opt/kde3/lib to LD_LIBRARY_PATH, to LOAD_LIB, and > even did an ldconfig, and it *still* can't find it (I run icewm, btw, not > KDE). Kaffeine is basically Xine for KDE. Since you're running IceWM, you might as well give Xine or Gxine (no Gnome deps) a spin. Cheers, Niki ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> At Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:29:12 -0500 CentOS mailing list > wrote: > >> > CentOS as a desktop system (or laptop) is perfectly fine, *even for > non-techies*, which would most of the users at the local library. I > guess the only issue would be in terms of support for really new > hardware (which is not an issue at the local library, since the > hardware not this years model). One can get the 'missing' multimedia > goodies from RPMForge or EPel (or even from Adobe's repo [flash and > acroread]). I also have CentOS at home. There are quirks, though: for example, I tried to run kaffeine last night, and it couldn't find libkaffeinepart.so. I tried adding /opt/kde3/lib to LD_LIBRARY_PATH, to LOAD_LIB, and even did an ldconfig, and it *still* can't find it (I run icewm, btw, not KDE). mark, *hoping* they'll fix my phone line, so I'll have DLS tonight ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On 09/29/2009 09:21 AM, Geoff Galitz wrote: > Ubuntu has the LTS releases, which are long term stable releases. They are > supported for five years after release. you might want to look into exactly what is ubuntu-support and how that compares with what you get with CentOS. Its not nearly the same thing. To an extent that LTS is mostly considered a nonstarter in most > very small business. Specially where the client is in a position to evaluate their options and work out the implications of what they are getting. It always surprises me how many are not. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On 09/27/2009 02:57 PM, Drew wrote: > That's the rule of thumb I see applied to what goes in /srv. In a LAMP > box for example I'd expect to see the website(and site logs), database > files, and POP3/IMAP spools stored in srv directories. Machine > specific data like system logs and email processing spools get stored > in /var. well, /srv to me is served and shared storage. So anything on the network that isnt consumed directly by off-immediate-network clients using any service would end up there. To me, thats the best match for usage - most other things, maybe everything else, has a fairly clear guideline from the LSB. although the lsb specs are themselves a bit in the air. Lets see if the 3rd or 4th time they get something done a bit more formally. - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Sorin Srbu wrote: > >> I there are too many updates, and sometimes they crash something. I >> remember while using Fedora 10, after disappointment with F9, after an >> update, the sound stopped to work. I didn't like the idea of Thunderbird >> beta in F 12. Also, the external drives are mounted using the uuid(?) >> name, so instead of /media/disk, appears something like >> /media/88299233ddd22, which breaks my backup/recover script. And a few >> other thinks. My general option was that the experience wasn't good, or >> put in another way, Ubuntu works better. > > Uuid doesn't look like something I'd like to see anywhere soon on my > systems... I'll look into that though. I'd like to know the point with it. What happens when you mount 2 otherwise identical disks/filesystems? As might happen if you take a disk from a default install and mount it into another similar system? I haven't tried with a recent fedora version, but I'd guess it still won't work if you have the default LVM volume id from an install - they've gotten this wrong with every label/id approach so far. Even people who are 'no-tech' types as far as Linux goes may want to swap drives around and copy some old data or at least look at the contents before reusing a drive. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Sorin Srbu wrote: >> >> Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. >> Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They >> seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. >> Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. > > Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. > Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that > and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, > slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in > an endearing sense of course). Server software has been fairly 'feature-complete' for a decade or so and there's not a lot of point in using a rapidly changing distribution to run it. If you did use Ubuntu, you'd want the LTS (long term support) version. On the other hand, Linux desktop software still has a ways to go and there are more reasons to accept the new bugs that come along with new features and the need to upgrade more often. RHEL's decision to update the versions of Firefox and OpenOffice in a minor release helped, but it still feels very old as a desktop. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Christopher Chan wrote: > >>> >>> Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. >>> Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They >>> seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. >>> Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. >>> >> Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. >> Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that >> and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, >> slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in >> an endearing sense of course). >> > Bah, sudo -i for the equivalent of su -. Or more straightforwardly, "sudo su -". Works on Macs too. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
At Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:21:08 +0200 CentOS mailing list wrote: > > > > > > 1) Ubuntu really needs more frequent total updates (it is not a > > long-term stable release). The Ubuntu system that was on the local > > library's server was unable to get updates (apt-get would fail -- I > > ended up manually downloading packages and installing by hand (using raw > > dpkg commands -- ala using raw rpm instead of yum). > > Ubuntu has the LTS releases, which are long term stable releases. They are > supported for five years after release. > > I run Ubuntu along with other Linux distros for various purposes and I've > never had an update problem with it. Perhaps that system was pointing to a > flaky mirror? I don't really know. The guy who set it up originally was somewhat unhelpfull. I'm guessing he didn't use a LTS release and did not really set things up well. I took over management of the system without really any experience with Ubuntu (or Debian). > > Perhaps it is getting trendy to beat up on non-Centos distros here on the > Centos list? No, I don't think so, *I* just had a bad experience dealing with a Ubuntu setup and had problems dealing with it. And generally found a marked *lack* of support from the Ubuntu forums or from the guy who originally set the system up. For *me* it was just easier to install CentOS, and having done so, things just worked better. I have set up CentOS for other 'non techies' and things have worked well. > > > > - > Geoff Galitz > Blankenheim NRW, Germany > http://www.galitz.org/ > http://german-way.com/blog/ > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 Deepwoods Software-- Download the Model Railroad System http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows hel...@deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Christopher Chan a écrit : >> > Bah, sudo -i for the equivalent of su -. Or try this: $ sudo -s ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Geoff Galitz a écrit : > > Ubuntu has the LTS releases, which are long term stable releases. They are > supported for five years after release. > Ubuntu Long Term Support is three years for desktops and five for servers. In the last LTS version (8.04), half of the audio apps had no sound for a month or so, until Ubuntu fixed the problems with Pulseaudio. At the time, I had given Ubuntu 8.04 a shot in our public libraries and had some very embarrassing moments. Solution: stick with CentOS, rock-solid and *real* LTS. Niki ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>-Original Message- >From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf >Of Christopher Chan >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 9:40 AM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user > >> Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. >> Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that >> and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, >> slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in >> an endearing sense of course). >> >Bah, sudo -i for the equivalent of su -. Well, to my defense, I was rather green with linux at the time... 8-} -- /Sorin smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> > 1) Ubuntu really needs more frequent total updates (it is not a > long-term stable release). The Ubuntu system that was on the local > library's server was unable to get updates (apt-get would fail -- I > ended up manually downloading packages and installing by hand (using raw > dpkg commands -- ala using raw rpm instead of yum). Ubuntu has the LTS releases, which are long term stable releases. They are supported for five years after release. I run Ubuntu along with other Linux distros for various purposes and I've never had an update problem with it. Perhaps that system was pointing to a flaky mirror? Perhaps it is getting trendy to beat up on non-Centos distros here on the Centos list? - Geoff Galitz Blankenheim NRW, Germany http://www.galitz.org/ http://german-way.com/blog/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Sorin Srbu wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On >> > Behalf > >> Of Matt >> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 11:29 PM >> To: CentOS mailing list >> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user >> >> Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. >> Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They >> seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. >> Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. >> > > Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. > Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that > and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, > slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in > an endearing sense of course). > Bah, sudo -i for the equivalent of su -. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>-Original Message- >From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf >Of Christopher Chan >Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 2:35 AM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user > >Ubuntu for desktop is really a give and take. You get some stuff >conveniently done for you like Nvidia drivers (which, I believe is also >doable on Centos with a certain repo...cannot remember which) but you >may also have to handle random crap like Network Manager not setting >things up properly. Rpmforge, dkms and the nvidia-dkms-package. Works like a charm. You can't but love it. 8-) -- /Sorin smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>-Original Message- >From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf >Of Matt >Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 11:29 PM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user > >Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. >Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They >seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. >Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. Not using, but I've tried it in a LAMP-configuration couple of years ago. Stability seems ok, but personally I don't like the sudo this and sudo that and sudo everywhere. Besides, it felt somehow clunky. CentOS seemed slim, slick and fast compared at the time, so CentOS is what I got stuck with (in an endearing sense of course). HTH. -- /Sorin smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>-Original Message- >From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf >Of Marcelo M. Garcia >Sent: Monday, September 28, 2009 11:08 PM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user > >>> Sorry, but Fedora is no longer a good desktop choice. I was a Fedora >>> user, but the distribution is pushing to far the idea of cutting edge >>> features. >> >> Would you mind elaborating your view here? > >To be honest there isn't much to elaborate. I understand the goal Fedora >project to test the latest software available. In this way, Fedora isn't >for everyone. At least is not for your main system, but if you have a >spare machine to install and play with it, it's probably a good idea. In >my case, the rpmfusion NVIDIA driver didn't like my card, a Quadro NVS280. > >I there are too many updates, and sometimes they crash something. I >remember while using Fedora 10, after disappointment with F9, after an >update, the sound stopped to work. I didn't like the idea of Thunderbird >beta in F 12. Also, the external drives are mounted using the uuid(?) >name, so instead of /media/disk, appears something like >/media/88299233ddd22, which breaks my backup/recover script. And a few >other thinks. My general option was that the experience wasn't good, or >put in another way, Ubuntu works better. Uuid doesn't look like something I'd like to see anywhere soon on my systems... I'll look into that though. I'd like to know the point with it. >None of this is critical, but it is annoying. For me, a good >distribuition would be something seating between Fedora and CentOS. In >the last months I started thinking that Ubuntu feel this gap. I still >believe that CentOS is best option for servers and technical >workstations, but not for my laptop, a Dell XPS M1530. Thanks for the reply. As I can see from above, your opinions basically mirror my own with respect to Fedora. However, my opinion is that CentOS fits almost everywhere. In fact, I'm just finishing up a CentOS install on a Compaq Evo N610c - a portable. I've done this before and it has worked fine with the exception where a wifi-card in involved. This most often gives me grief. -- /Sorin smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Matt wrote: >>> I'm thinking of giving CentOS to a non-tech user for her new desktop. He >>> needs are small. She has been used to Mozilla for both mail and browsing, >>> so >>> equivalents there are not a problem. She needs grip and lame, for her mp3s >>> - >>> again no problem. >>> >> Desktop, non-techie - use Ubuntu instead. >> >> I'm a big CentOS fan, I joined even the Facebook group (lol), but its >> > > Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. > Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They > seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. > Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. > Ubuntu for desktop is really a give and take. You get some stuff conveniently done for you like Nvidia drivers (which, I believe is also doable on Centos with a certain repo...cannot remember which) but you may also have to handle random crap like Network Manager not setting things up properly. Centos as a desktop is good enough if you do not need the latest version of Firefox or other stuff. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
I'd like to chime in on this. Being techy. nothing really bugs me as I think its all POS. However I do think the Linux desktop is not so good in general. I've been a big fan of Irix and used to maintain it when it was the golden child of the Unix desktop. I've been following the 5dwm project for a while; http://www.maxxdesktop.com/site/ Anyways, check it out, hope ppl find it use full. Eric Masson was brilliant for getting this project up and running. On Sep 28, 2009, at 4:57 PM, Robert Heller wrote: > At Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:29:12 -0500 CentOS mailing list > wrote: > >> I'm thinking of giving CentOS to a non-tech user for her new desktop. He needs are small. She has been used to Mozilla for both mail and browsing, so equivalents there are not a problem. She needs grip and lame, for her mp3s - again no problem. >>> >>> Desktop, non-techie - use Ubuntu instead. >>> >>> I'm a big CentOS fan, I joined even the Facebook group (lol), but >>> its >> >> Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. >> Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? >> They >> seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. >> Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. > > I use CentOS on my desktop and my Laptop. > > It is also the version I set up at the local library(1), which > *used* to > have Ubuntu. There where two main problems with Ubuntu: > > 1) Ubuntu really needs more frequent total updates (it is not a > long-term stable release). The Ubuntu system that was on the local > library's server was unable to get updates (apt-get would fail -- I > ended up manually downloading packages and installing by hand (using > raw > dpkg commands -- ala using raw rpm instead of yum). > > 2) Ubuntu generally sucked as a server O/S -- it was trying to be way > too clever about some things -- drove me up the wall (doing *stupid* > things like constantly automounting the USB connected backup disk > whenever someone logged in and swaping the ethernet cards around, > seemingly at random). > > CentOS as a desktop system (or laptop) is perfectly fine, *even for > non-techies*, which would most of the users at the local library. I > guess the only issue would be in terms of support for really new > hardware (which is not an issue at the local library, since the > hardware not this years model). One can get the 'missing' multimedia > goodies from RPMForge or EPel (or even from Adobe's repo [flash and > acroread]). > > (1) > http://www.deepsoft.com/2009/08/setting-up-thin-clients-at-the-wendell-free-library-part-1/ >> >> Matt >> ___ >> CentOS mailing list >> CentOS@centos.org >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> >> > > -- > Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 > Deepwoods Software-- Download the Model Railroad System > http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows > hel...@deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/ > > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
At Mon, 28 Sep 2009 16:29:12 -0500 CentOS mailing list wrote: > > >> I'm thinking of giving CentOS to a non-tech user for her new desktop. Â He > >> needs are small. Â She has been used to Mozilla for both mail and > >> browsing, so > >> equivalents there are not a problem. Â She needs grip and lame, for her > >> mp3s - > >> again no problem. > > > > Desktop, non-techie - use Ubuntu instead. > > > > I'm a big CentOS fan, I joined even the Facebook group (lol), but its > > Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. > Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They > seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. > Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. I use CentOS on my desktop and my Laptop. It is also the version I set up at the local library(1), which *used* to have Ubuntu. There where two main problems with Ubuntu: 1) Ubuntu really needs more frequent total updates (it is not a long-term stable release). The Ubuntu system that was on the local library's server was unable to get updates (apt-get would fail -- I ended up manually downloading packages and installing by hand (using raw dpkg commands -- ala using raw rpm instead of yum). 2) Ubuntu generally sucked as a server O/S -- it was trying to be way too clever about some things -- drove me up the wall (doing *stupid* things like constantly automounting the USB connected backup disk whenever someone logged in and swaping the ethernet cards around, seemingly at random). CentOS as a desktop system (or laptop) is perfectly fine, *even for non-techies*, which would most of the users at the local library. I guess the only issue would be in terms of support for really new hardware (which is not an issue at the local library, since the hardware not this years model). One can get the 'missing' multimedia goodies from RPMForge or EPel (or even from Adobe's repo [flash and acroread]). (1) http://www.deepsoft.com/2009/08/setting-up-thin-clients-at-the-wendell-free-library-part-1/ > > Matt > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > > -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 Deepwoods Software-- Download the Model Railroad System http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows hel...@deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>> I'm thinking of giving CentOS to a non-tech user for her new desktop. He >> needs are small. She has been used to Mozilla for both mail and browsing, so >> equivalents there are not a problem. She needs grip and lame, for her mp3s - >> again no problem. > > Desktop, non-techie - use Ubuntu instead. > > I'm a big CentOS fan, I joined even the Facebook group (lol), but its Thats my thought as well. Ubuntu desktop and CentOS for servers. Just wandering if anyone is using the 'Ubuntu Server Edition's'? They seem appealing but CentOS is what I am used too on servers now. Thought about loading it up on a box to just try though. Matt ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Sorin Srbu wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On > Behalf >> Of Marcelo M. Garcia >> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:57 PM >> To: CentOS mailing list >> Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user >> >> Sorry, but Fedora is no longer a good desktop choice. I was a Fedora >> user, but the distribution is pushing to far the idea of cutting edge >> features. > > Would you mind elaborating your view here? > Hi To be honest there isn't much to elaborate. I understand the goal Fedora project to test the latest software available. In this way, Fedora isn't for everyone. At least is not for your main system, but if you have a spare machine to install and play with it, it's probably a good idea. In my case, the rpmfusion NVIDIA driver didn't like my card, a Quadro NVS280. I there are too many updates, and sometimes they crash something. I remember while using Fedora 10, after disappointment with F9, after an update, the sound stopped to work. I didn't like the idea of Thunderbird beta in F 12. Also, the external drives are mounted using the uuid(?) name, so instead of /media/disk, appears something like /media/88299233ddd22, which breaks my backup/recover script. And a few other thinks. My general option was that the experience wasn't good, or put in another way, Ubuntu works better. None of this is critical, but it is annoying. For me, a good distribuition would be something seating between Fedora and CentOS. In the last months I started thinking that Ubuntu feel this gap. I still believe that CentOS is best option for servers and technical workstations, but not for my laptop, a Dell XPS M1530. Regards mg. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
>-Original Message- >From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf >Of Marcelo M. Garcia >Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 8:57 PM >To: CentOS mailing list >Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user > >Sorry, but Fedora is no longer a good desktop choice. I was a Fedora >user, but the distribution is pushing to far the idea of cutting edge >features. Would you mind elaborating your view here? -- /Sorin smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On 09/27/2009 08:09 AM, Robert Heller wrote: > At Sun, 27 Sep 2009 09:13:04 +0200 CentOS mailing list > wrote: > >> >> m.r...@5-cent.us a écrit : >> >>> I'd add in the search RHEL, at least to start. Beyond that, >>> some other distro, such as mandrake, may have compatible rpms. >> >> No! Never use Mandrake RPMS on RHEL. > > Never say never: > > I have *successfully* used RPMS from both Mandrake and SUSE on a CentOS > 4.x system. Both RPMs are somewhat specialized developemental ones > though. > Sure, it is possible, if you get very lucky, to do so. However, even if packages install because a dependent library is available (take /lib/libc.so.6 for example) it does not mean that they are similar enough to work. RHEL/CentOS glibc has dozens of patches that are different than Mandriva or SUSE. They also put things in and look for things from different places than CentOS. So, one should think long and hard before (at the very least) before installing programs not built for/using CentOS/RHEL on CentOS. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> So I don't see consensus here. What if my served data ist "variable > data"? An no distinction between man made or machine made is given here. > Also this might not be flexible enough for some scenarios. Is the data being stored customer facing or internal to the machine? That's the rule of thumb I see applied to what goes in /srv. In a LAMP box for example I'd expect to see the website(and site logs), database files, and POP3/IMAP spools stored in srv directories. Machine specific data like system logs and email processing spools get stored in /var. -- Drew "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." --Marie Curie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Am Sonntag, den 27.09.2009, 15:17 +0200 schrieb Karanbir Singh: > On 24/09/09 21:32, Paul Heinlein wrote: > > I really wish RH would hop on the /srv bus. The broad distinction is > > fairly easy to grasp: /var for variable data of general interest to > > the machine, /srv for stuff related to a specific service. In general, > > /var is machine-generated, /srv is person-generated. > > what does the lsb haveto say about this ? > > - KB LSB says: "An LSB conforming implementation shall provide the mandatory portions of the file system hierarchy specified in the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (FHS), together with any additional requirements made in this specification." And the FHS says for /srv: "The methodology used to name subdirectories of /srv is unspecified as there is currently no consensus on how this should be done. One method for structuring data under /srv is by protocol, eg. ftp, rsync, www, and cvs." and for /var "/var contains variable data files. This includes spool directories and files, administrative and logging data, and transient and temporary files." So I don't see consensus here. What if my served data ist "variable data"? An no distinction between man made or machine made is given here. Also this might not be flexible enough for some scenarios. Chris financial.com AG Munich head office/Hauptsitz München: Maria-Probst-Str. 19 | 80939 München | Germany Frankfurt branch office/Niederlassung Frankfurt: Messeturm | Friedrich-Ebert-Anlage 49 | 60327 Frankfurt | Germany Management board/Vorstand: Dr. Steffen Boehnert (CEO/Vorsitzender) | Dr. Alexis Eisenhofer | Dr. Yann Samson | Matthias Wiederwach Supervisory board/Aufsichtsrat: Dr. Dr. Ernst zur Linden (chairman/Vorsitzender) Register court/Handelsregister: Munich – HRB 128 972 | Sales tax ID number/St.Nr.: DE205 370 553 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On 24/09/09 21:32, Paul Heinlein wrote: > I really wish RH would hop on the /srv bus. The broad distinction is > fairly easy to grasp: /var for variable data of general interest to > the machine, /srv for stuff related to a specific service. In general, > /var is machine-generated, /srv is person-generated. what does the lsb haveto say about this ? - KB ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
At Sun, 27 Sep 2009 09:13:04 +0200 CentOS mailing list wrote: > > m.r...@5-cent.us a écrit : > > > I'd add in the search RHEL, at least to start. Beyond that, > > some other distro, such as mandrake, may have compatible rpms. > > No! Never use Mandrake RPMS on RHEL. Never say never: I have *successfully* used RPMS from both Mandrake and SUSE on a CentOS 4.x system. Both RPMs are somewhat specialized developemental ones though. > > My advice for third-party applications: > > 1) Use RPMS from RPMForge repo. > > 2) If your app/lib/tool/whatever is still not available, go to > http://rpm.pbone.net, and make an advanced search for SRPMS in the > following categories: > > * CentOS 5 > * RHEL 5 > * FC 6 > > Note: sometimes, SRPMS from more recent versions of Fedora will also > work, but that depends on what it is. > > Have fun, > > Niki > ___ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > > -- Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 Deepwoods Software-- Download the Model Railroad System http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Binaries for Linux and MS-Windows hel...@deepsoft.com -- http://www.deepsoft.com/ModelRailroadSystem/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
m.r...@5-cent.us a écrit : > I'd add in the search RHEL, at least to start. Beyond that, > some other distro, such as mandrake, may have compatible rpms. No! Never use Mandrake RPMS on RHEL. My advice for third-party applications: 1) Use RPMS from RPMForge repo. 2) If your app/lib/tool/whatever is still not available, go to http://rpm.pbone.net, and make an advanced search for SRPMS in the following categories: * CentOS 5 * RHEL 5 * FC 6 Note: sometimes, SRPMS from more recent versions of Fedora will also work, but that depends on what it is. Have fun, Niki ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Les Mikesell a écrit : > But that leaves you in charge of maintaining and updating every piece you > install or leaving the systems in a lurch if you don't and there are > subsequent > security/bug fixes. The whole point of having an enterprise-type long-life > distribution is that you don't have to do that. Well, 'yum update' should fix that, except for the odd extra package (Java, OpenOffice.org, codecs etc.) ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
mark wrote: > Les Mikesell wrote: >> mark wrote: >>> Niki Kovacs wrote: Les Mikesell a écrit : >>> Here's an example. I have a directory java/, with the latest java from sun.com, plus the following script: >>> >>> I've just become familiar with alternatives, and now wonder why no one >>> created >>> that a decade ago. >> It's not a real good fit for things like java where you really want to be >> able >> to run multiple versions simultaneously, depending on the user, the app, or >> the >> intended purpose (perhaps testing the next release while production apps >> continue to use the older one). >> > I gather, thought that is what JAVA_HOME is for Yes, but you also need to know where that is, and the correct path to the executable you want, which the alternatives system goes out of its way to hide. And if you want different builds/patchlevels of the same minor rev, the RPM system itself will make it difficult. -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Les Mikesell wrote: > mark wrote: >> Niki Kovacs wrote: >>> Les Mikesell a écrit : >> >>> Here's an example. I have a directory java/, with the latest java from >>> sun.com, plus the following script: >> >> I've just become familiar with alternatives, and now wonder why no one >> created >> that a decade ago. > > It's not a real good fit for things like java where you really want to be > able > to run multiple versions simultaneously, depending on the user, the app, or > the > intended purpose (perhaps testing the next release while production apps > continue to use the older one). > I gather, thought that is what JAVA_HOME is for mark -- America was *not* built by "rugged individualists". - whitroth "We must all hang together, or we shall all hang separately" - B. Franklin ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
mark wrote: > Niki Kovacs wrote: >> Les Mikesell a écrit : > >> Here's an example. I have a directory java/, with the latest java from >> sun.com, plus the following script: > > I've just become familiar with alternatives, and now wonder why no one > created > that a decade ago. It's not a real good fit for things like java where you really want to be able to run multiple versions simultaneously, depending on the user, the app, or the intended purpose (perhaps testing the next release while production apps continue to use the older one). -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Niki Kovacs wrote: > Les Mikesell a écrit : > Here's an example. I have a directory java/, with the latest java from > sun.com, plus the following script: I've just become familiar with alternatives, and now wonder why no one created that a decade ago. mark -- "The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views...which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering." - Doctor Who ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Niki Kovacs wrote:
> Les Mikesell a écrit :
>
>> Can the install script be simplified to rpm installs of the http urls to the
>> yum
>> repo release files followed by yum installs of a list of packages? And if
>> so,
>> can someone publish that script?
>>
>
> Not really. Before discovering CentOS (around 2006), I've been a
> die-hard Slackware user, so my two install CDs are a bit like a set of
> two Slackware CDs. Which means, a loose set of directories with stuff in
> them, plus scripts to install them. For example, directories like x11/,
> nvidia/, ati/ and compiz/, with stuff in them, which I install only if
> needed. As for the configuration, I do everything (X11, network, ...) by
> hand, using Vi.
>
> Here's an example. I have a directory java/, with the latest java from
> sun.com, plus the following script:
>
> #!/bin/bash
> #
> CWD=`pwd`
> cp jre-6u14-linux-i586.bin /opt
> chmod +c /opt/jre-6u14-linux-i586.bin
> {
>cd /opt
>rm -rf jre1.6.0_14
>rm -f /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libjavaplugin_oji.so
>sh jre-6u14-linux-i586.bin
>rm -f jre-6u14-linux-i586.bin
> }
> ln -s /opt/jre1.6.0_14/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin_oji.so \
>/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/
> cat > /etc/profile.d/java.sh << EOF
> export J2RE_HOME=/opt/jre1.6.0_14
> export PATH=$J2RE_HOME/bin:$PATH
> EOF
> chmod +x /etc/profile.d/java.sh
> source /etc/profile.d/java.sh
> alternatives --install /usr/bin/java java /opt/jre1.6.0_14/bin/java 2
> alternatives --config java
>
> Or, other example, the w32codecs/ directory with the following script:
>
> #!/bin/bash
> #
> # codecs-install.sh
>
> CWD=`pwd`
>
> rm -rf /usr/lib/codecs
> rm -rf /usr/lib/win32
>
> tar xjf $CWD/all-20071007.tar.bz2 -C /usr/lib
> {
>cd /usr/lib
>mv all-20071007 codecs
>ln -s codecs win32
> }
>
> This logic applies pretty much to everything. But it's not really an
> installer.
>
> Of course, it *could* be possible to publish some more user-friendly set
> of install CDs, but this would be a hell of a lot of work, and you'd end
> up with something like Yellowdog Linux (which is based on CentOS).
But that leaves you in charge of maintaining and updating every piece you
install or leaving the systems in a lurch if you don't and there are subsequent
security/bug fixes. The whole point of having an enterprise-type long-life
distribution is that you don't have to do that. If there is a well maintained
3rd party repo that has the components you need packaged for yum it would be
much better to take advantage of it. Sun java used to be something of a
special case because few sites were willing to host a copy packaged to
accommodate the RH-style wierdness (I generally used the k12ltsp distro based
on
Centos specifically for this) but now that openjdk is included in 5.3 and in
epel it is not so much of an issue.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Les Mikesell a écrit :
> Can the install script be simplified to rpm installs of the http urls to the
> yum
> repo release files followed by yum installs of a list of packages? And if
> so,
> can someone publish that script?
>
Not really. Before discovering CentOS (around 2006), I've been a
die-hard Slackware user, so my two install CDs are a bit like a set of
two Slackware CDs. Which means, a loose set of directories with stuff in
them, plus scripts to install them. For example, directories like x11/,
nvidia/, ati/ and compiz/, with stuff in them, which I install only if
needed. As for the configuration, I do everything (X11, network, ...) by
hand, using Vi.
Here's an example. I have a directory java/, with the latest java from
sun.com, plus the following script:
#!/bin/bash
#
CWD=`pwd`
cp jre-6u14-linux-i586.bin /opt
chmod +c /opt/jre-6u14-linux-i586.bin
{
cd /opt
rm -rf jre1.6.0_14
rm -f /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libjavaplugin_oji.so
sh jre-6u14-linux-i586.bin
rm -f jre-6u14-linux-i586.bin
}
ln -s /opt/jre1.6.0_14/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin_oji.so \
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/
cat > /etc/profile.d/java.sh << EOF
export J2RE_HOME=/opt/jre1.6.0_14
export PATH=$J2RE_HOME/bin:$PATH
EOF
chmod +x /etc/profile.d/java.sh
source /etc/profile.d/java.sh
alternatives --install /usr/bin/java java /opt/jre1.6.0_14/bin/java 2
alternatives --config java
Or, other example, the w32codecs/ directory with the following script:
#!/bin/bash
#
# codecs-install.sh
CWD=`pwd`
rm -rf /usr/lib/codecs
rm -rf /usr/lib/win32
tar xjf $CWD/all-20071007.tar.bz2 -C /usr/lib
{
cd /usr/lib
mv all-20071007 codecs
ln -s codecs win32
}
This logic applies pretty much to everything. But it's not really an
installer.
Of course, it *could* be possible to publish some more user-friendly set
of install CDs, but this would be a hell of a lot of work, and you'd end
up with something like Yellowdog Linux (which is based on CentOS).
Cheers,
Niki
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Niki Kovacs wrote: > Matt a écrit : >> I have always used Ubuntu for desktop linux and CentOS for servers. >> Have never tried CentOS as a desktop. Perhaps I should? >> > > One look is worth a thousand words, as they say : > > http://www.microlinux.fr/captures.html > > My Linux desktop, based on CentOS 5.3, tweaked to death with all the > extra stuff like working Flash, working Java plugin, working codecs, > extra packages from RPMForge as well as my own repository. Will play > every audio and video format under the sun, and it's just about to make > coffee also :o) > > This is the exact same desktop I usually install for my clients. Comes > on two homegrown custom CDs with install scripts, so installing it on a > fairy recent desktop takes no more than half an hour. > > Does everything that the average Ubuntu/Mint desktop is supposed to do, > that is, minus the bugs and the worries. > > Policy: I install it, the user uses it. Period. > > Works like a charm. Can the install script be simplified to rpm installs of the http urls to the yum repo release files followed by yum installs of a list of packages? And if so, can someone publish that script? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Matt a écrit : > I have always used Ubuntu for desktop linux and CentOS for servers. > Have never tried CentOS as a desktop. Perhaps I should? > One look is worth a thousand words, as they say : http://www.microlinux.fr/captures.html My Linux desktop, based on CentOS 5.3, tweaked to death with all the extra stuff like working Flash, working Java plugin, working codecs, extra packages from RPMForge as well as my own repository. Will play every audio and video format under the sun, and it's just about to make coffee also :o) This is the exact same desktop I usually install for my clients. Comes on two homegrown custom CDs with install scripts, so installing it on a fairy recent desktop takes no more than half an hour. Does everything that the average Ubuntu/Mint desktop is supposed to do, that is, minus the bugs and the worries. Policy: I install it, the user uses it. Period. Works like a charm. Cheers, Niki ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Friday 25 September 2009 17:02:24 Lanny Marcus wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Anne Wilson wrote: > > I'm thinking of giving CentOS to a non-tech user for her new desktop. He > > needs are small. She has been used to Mozilla for both mail and > > browsing, so > > I believe if you install all the multimedia stuff that's described on > the CentOS Wiki and K3b, and the other things previous responses have > mentioned, OpenOffice.org, etc., she will be fine. The one thing I > suggest you teach her is where her files are and how to backup to a CD > or DVD. In the past, under windows, I set up a one-click link to run a pre-defined job. Since I moved her to Mandriva I have shown her once how to copy files with k3b, and she wasn't unhappy about that. > I ran into an issue with K3b (which otherwise works perfectly > for me), where it couldn't automatically erase a CD-RW (which I think > it claims it can do), so I need to su - and as root "umount /dev/hdd" > before it can erase a CD-RW. Hopefully she won't need to do that, as > running as root is probably not something she should be doing. Not really a problem. When we discussed RWs she said that CD-Rs are so cheap now that it's not worth the bother of using RWs. > I > have installed one package from the FC6 DVD (KDEEDU) on CentOS 5 (32 > bit) to get KStars and that worked fine. But, as Phil pointed out, > maybe better to rebuild from the srpm. Sounds encouraging, thanks. Anne -- New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org Just found a cool new feature? Add it to UserBase signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 4:11 AM, Anne Wilson wrote: > I'm thinking of giving CentOS to a non-tech user for her new desktop. He > needs are small. She has been used to Mozilla for both mail and browsing, so I believe if you install all the multimedia stuff that's described on the CentOS Wiki and K3b, and the other things previous responses have mentioned, OpenOffice.org, etc., she will be fine. The one thing I suggest you teach her is where her files are and how to backup to a CD or DVD. I ran into an issue with K3b (which otherwise works perfectly for me), where it couldn't automatically erase a CD-RW (which I think it claims it can do), so I need to su - and as root "umount /dev/hdd" before it can erase a CD-RW. Hopefully she won't need to do that, as running as root is probably not something she should be doing. I have installed one package from the FC6 DVD (KDEEDU) on CentOS 5 (32 bit) to get KStars and that worked fine. But, as Phil pointed out, maybe better to rebuild from the srpm. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> Anne Wilson wrote: >> On Thursday 24 September 2009 20:03:04 Curt Mills wrote: >>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Anne Wilson wrote: On Thursday 24 September 2009 17:50:37 Ron Loftin wrote: > My image of the "low-tech" user is the one who surfs the Web, reads > and > writes e-mail, and does the odd letter or maybe even a spreadsheet in > some office tool, along with maybe some simple games. My experience > with this category of user is that when they stumble across something > unfamiliar or want some additional function, they pick up the phone > and call me. I recognise that description ;-D >>> It's the "Give a man a fish/Teach a man to fish" scenario. >> >> Some people would rather visit the fishmonger, and it's their right to >> make that decision. > > Or, "teach a man to fish and he'll waste the rest of his life sitting in a > boat drinking beer"? I was trying to avoid responding... sorry, but my instant reaction to fishmonger was from the Asterix comics, Unhygienic the fishmonger mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Anne Wilson wrote: > On Thursday 24 September 2009 20:03:04 Curt Mills wrote: >> On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Anne Wilson wrote: >>> On Thursday 24 September 2009 17:50:37 Ron Loftin wrote: My image of the "low-tech" user is the one who surfs the Web, reads and writes e-mail, and does the odd letter or maybe even a spreadsheet in some office tool, along with maybe some simple games. My experience with this category of user is that when they stumble across something unfamiliar or want some additional function, they pick up the phone and call me. >>> I recognise that description ;-D >> It's the "Give a man a fish/Teach a man to fish" scenario. > > Some people would rather visit the fishmonger, and it's their right to make > that decision. Or, "teach a man to fish and he'll waste the rest of his life sitting in a boat drinking beer"? -- Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Thursday 24 September 2009 20:03:04 Curt Mills wrote: > On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Anne Wilson wrote: > > On Thursday 24 September 2009 17:50:37 Ron Loftin wrote: > >> My image of the "low-tech" user is the one who surfs the Web, reads and > >> writes e-mail, and does the odd letter or maybe even a spreadsheet in > >> some office tool, along with maybe some simple games. My experience > >> with this category of user is that when they stumble across something > >> unfamiliar or want some additional function, they pick up the phone and > >> call me. > > > > I recognise that description ;-D > > It's the "Give a man a fish/Teach a man to fish" scenario. Some people would rather visit the fishmonger, and it's their right to make that decision. Anne -- New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org Just found a cool new feature? Add it to UserBase signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> I really wish RH would hop on the /srv bus. The broad distinction is > fairly easy to grasp: /var for variable data of general interest to > the machine, /srv for stuff related to a specific service. In general, > /var is machine-generated, /srv is person-generated. > > If you maintain it with $EDITOR and it's available with $DAEMON, it > goes in /srv. (How's that for a stunningly broad generalization? :-) It's not just RH/CentOS that are guilty. Last time I checked Debian does this as well. On my webserver I've just grown used to making up my own /srv/www entry and symlinking /var/www to /srv/www so the system doesn't complain when apache & related apps get updated. -- Drew "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." --Marie Curie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Drew wrote: >> The other thing is that ubuntu does some things I consider odd, and >> puts some things in odd places (say, not having your web stuff >> under /var/www, etc). > > That may be because they're aiming for compliance with the > Filesystem Hierarchy Standard ( http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ ). Web > related stuff goes under /srv/www. I really wish RH would hop on the /srv bus. The broad distinction is fairly easy to grasp: /var for variable data of general interest to the machine, /srv for stuff related to a specific service. In general, /var is machine-generated, /srv is person-generated. If you maintain it with $EDITOR and it's available with $DAEMON, it goes in /srv. (How's that for a stunningly broad generalization? :-) -- Paul Heinlein <> heinl...@madboa.com <> http://www.madboa.com/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
The other thing is that ubuntu does some things I consider odd, and puts > some things in odd places (say, not having your web stuff under /var/www, > etc). That may be because they're aiming for compliance with the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard ( http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ ). Web related stuff goes under /srv/www. -- Drew "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." --Marie Curie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
It's that same old problem. Some distros just ignores LSB, and do the way they wants leaving to some incompatibility issues. The way you configure network, for example, is different on Debian, Slackware, etc. That's bad. -- Tiago Almeida tiagov...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
> Anne Wilson wrote: >> I'm thinking of giving CentOS to a non-tech user for her new desktop. >> He >> needs are small. She has been used to Mozilla for both mail and >> browsing, so >> equivalents there are not a problem. She needs grip and lame, for her >> mp3s - >> again no problem. > > Desktop, non-techie - use Ubuntu instead. A few comments: let me note that ESR uses ubuntu. I, on the other hand, don't. A few years ago, I was on a contract in the middle of bloody nowhere in western NC, and wound up in a motel room by the month that had only wireless, so I had to go out and buy a wireless card for my tower. I was also upgrading from RH9, and wasn't going to pay for RHEL, and my opinion of fedora at the time, as well as several other folks opinion, including Eric's, was that it was bleeding edge, rather than leading edge. I also didn't know about CentOS. So I tried live CDs of ubuntu and SuSE. ubuntu couldn't figure out what to do with my wireless card, while SuSE thought about it for 30 sec, and a window popped up, telling me I had a new wireless card, and would I like to configure it. I eventually upgraded to opensuse 10.3 Just in the month, I went up to CentOS 5.3. Now, there was one major problem: it could figure wirelesss, but unlike my year+ old opensuse, it didn't know WPA, and I went through days of grief until I got that going... so beware of that (and I'm *very* unhappy that it is such a song and dance to get that working... but I don't have time, with a new job, to spend time writing something that will do it all). The other thing is that ubuntu does some things I consider odd, and puts some things in odd places (say, not having your web stuff under /var/www, etc). So, pick your poison. mark ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: > > Sorry, but Fedora is no longer a good desktop choice. I was a Fedora > user, but the distribution is pushing to far the idea of cutting edge > features. Yeah, based on some experiences I had with it, I'd be wary of installing it on systems owned by random innocents. :) It works fine for the most part, but once in a while it can do silly things. That's fine for me, cause I can fix it, but it's not fine for the non-tech user. -- Florin Andrei http://florin.myip.org/ ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009, Anne Wilson wrote: > On Thursday 24 September 2009 17:50:37 Ron Loftin wrote: >> My image of the "low-tech" user is the one who surfs the Web, reads and >> writes e-mail, and does the odd letter or maybe even a spreadsheet in >> some office tool, along with maybe some simple games. My experience >> with this category of user is that when they stumble across something >> unfamiliar or want some additional function, they pick up the phone and >> call me. >> > I recognise that description ;-D It's the "Give a man a fish/Teach a man to fish" scenario. I've long-since stopped setting up machine for anyone in that category. They _must_ figure things out for themselves (with hints from me perhaps), then they've learned something valuable and are better able to fend for themselves from that point on. Preferably hand them a set of CD's or a DVD and say "have fun". They have a sense of ownership and of accomplishment that way too. Remember how proud you were when you could finally say "I don't depend on MS anymore!"? Family is the only category where I make (rare) exceptions, but my kids are already showing me a thing or two these days about Linux so I needn't worry about them anymore. -- Curt Mills, WE7U hacker at fluke dot com Senior Methods Engineer/SysAdmin "Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown "Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U "The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!" Please be advised that this email may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy or re-transmit this email. If you have received this email in error, please notify us by email by replying to the sender and by telephone (call us collect at +1 202-828-0850) and delete this message and any attachments. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance. In addition, Danaher and its subsidiaries disclaim that the content of this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of, any contract or agreement or any amendment thereto; provided that the foregoing disclaimer does not invalidate the binding effect of any digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is included in any attachment to this email. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Tiago Almeida wrote: > IMHO, > > I think Fedora is a good choice for Desktop (Although i'm a Debian > fan), because it's RPM based distro and if you get used to it you'll > be also at CentOS. > > I totally agree that for servers CentOS or RHCE is a good choice. > Hi Sorry, but Fedora is no longer a good desktop choice. I was a Fedora user, but the distribution is pushing to far the idea of cutting edge features. Now I use Ubuntu in my laptop for the same reason presented before by others. CentOS in great for technical workstations (I use and install for the engineers in the company) and servers. Regards Marcelo ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
On Thursday 24 September 2009 17:50:37 Ron Loftin wrote: > My image of the "low-tech" user is the one who surfs the Web, reads and > writes e-mail, and does the odd letter or maybe even a spreadsheet in > some office tool, along with maybe some simple games. My experience > with this category of user is that when they stumble across something > unfamiliar or want some additional function, they pick up the phone and > call me. > I recognise that description ;-D Anne -- New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org Just found a cool new feature? Add it to UserBase signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
IMHO, I think Fedora is a good choice for Desktop (Although i'm a Debian fan), because it's RPM based distro and if you get used to it you'll be also at CentOS. I totally agree that for servers CentOS or RHCE is a good choice. -- Tiago Almeida tiagov...@gmail.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS for non-tech user
Florin Andrei wrote: > I'm a big CentOS fan, I joined even the Facebook group (lol), but its > place is on the server or, perhaps, on a workstation for a power user > (or for things like running scientific apps on the desktop). If you're a > PhD running quantum theory equations with Mathematica on your Xeon > multicore workstation, I can very well see why you would prefer CentOS, > or even Red Hat Enterprise proper. +1 I have to agree here as well. I used to recommend and help set up CentOS on user desktops, but it became more of a burden than good thing. I no longer do so, because Ubuntu is so much more user-friendly. In my experience, Ubuntu is much more out-of-box useful for a standard user desktop or laptop. There's no fussing around with hardware configurations, or extra drivers (in most cases), and things just seem to work. All the gadgets, gizmos, and eye-candy items are already there, things I enjoy, but have some setup time involved in with using CentOS. For instance, on my laptop, CentOS doesn't recognize my external display and it doesn't matter what I've tried, I can't get it to work. On Ubuntu, though, it just works. I've had other experiences like having to really try hard to get wireless working. Most of my issues were hardware issues, but I know CentOS is improving on that. I think like others have mentioned. It's a combination of what the user is going to do with it, versus, what you are most comfortable with, versus how much twiddling the user is going to want to do. Ubuntu is much much easier for the user to configure himself/herself. Although it doesn't stop me from using CentOS on my laptop and desktops, I don't recommend it to people I know now because of the following reasons. I think it's all personal experience and what the system is going to be doing. It's not a simple question. These are just my experiences. Regards, Max ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
