Re: Linux wannabe
On Monday 26 March 2001 10:01, D-Man wrote: (I have just figured out how to get the internet from my dial-up modem so I'm a bit behind on the mail) I have recently switched from RH to Debian. I don't think the install is unfriendly at all, though it doesn't have the pretty GTK graphics of RH's. apt-get is awesome. I haven't seen anyone else mention bootloaders, so I will. My recommendation is to make a LILO boot disk when the installer asks you to. Don't install it on the MBR! If it isn't configured right you may not be able to boot windows (or debian). I tried LILO myself, and on my machine with my BIOS it didn't work. When asked to add linux to a win2k box at work I tried lilo first. I couldn't get a lilo floppy to dual-boot the system. LILO would also have had trouble on the MBR since the kernal was above the 1024 cylinder mark. I had heard good things about grub on this list so I decided to try it. Piece of cake! It works like a charm as well. Not only thah, but I tried it on my PC at home that lilo couldn't handle and it worked just as beautifully. http://www.gnu.org/software/grub Debian has a package for it, but it isn't in potato (current stable release). I installed it by getting a floppy and copying the binary image provided on the web site. Just print the manual, put the disk in and reboot. One of the best things about grub is that you can configure it when you boot. It gives a nice menu and command-line interface. Also it chainloads winows without any effort at all (unlike LILO). I now have grub on my MBR and won't go back to use lilo. My annoyance with grub is precisely because it has this stage1/stage2 feature. Obviously you can't jam them into the MBR. So GRUB starts looking elsewhere in the disk. If you repartition, you could lose these files and you will wind up with an unbootable system. I don't know if LILO can fit all of itself in the MBR, but from experience I can repartition at will. STILL, I am a happy grub user. Its bash-like command line (with name completion and command history!) is something else. BTW, I compiled my grub from the debian unstable source. I saved on trees by switching from VT to VT to read the info pages.
Re: Linux wannabe
On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 09:01:40PM -0500, D-Man wrote: I tried LILO myself, and on my machine with my BIOS it didn't work. When asked to add linux to a win2k box at work I tried lilo first. I couldn't get a lilo floppy to dual-boot the system. LILO would also have had trouble on the MBR since the kernal was above the 1024 cylinder mark. I like grub too. But it's nor fair to compare an older version of lilo to a newcomer grub. FYI, recent lilo versions do NOT have the 1024 cylinder limit. One of the best things about grub is that you can configure it when you boot. It gives a nice menu and command-line interface. Also it chainloads winows without any effort at all (unlike LILO). Lilo also gives you the same menu as grub. I have Mandrake 7.2 on my laptop, and lilo installed automatically with the same menu system as grub would do... I now have grub on my MBR and won't go back to use lilo. The only real advantage of grub over lilo, is that if you modify the grub menu config file, you do not have to reinstall grub on the MBR while lilo needs to be rerun. -- Viktor
Re: Linux wannabe
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 09:46:28PM +, Viktor Lakics wrote: | On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 09:01:40PM -0500, D-Man wrote: | | I like grub too. But it's nor fair to compare an older version of | lilo to a newcomer grub. Maybe. I tried lilo first when installing linux on the company machine (RH6.2). | FYI, recent lilo versions do NOT have the 1024 cylinder limit. So I've heard. | One of the best things about grub is that you can configure it | when you boot. It gives a nice menu and command-line interface. | Also it chainloads winows without any effort at all (unlike LILO). | | Lilo also gives you the same menu as grub. I have Mandrake 7.2 on my | laptop, and lilo installed automatically with the same menu system | as grub would do... Not quite. You have to first setup all the boot sequences, then it can show you them. You can't press e and get the edit menu to fix an erroneous boot sequence. | I now have grub on my MBR and won't go back to use lilo. | | The only real advantage of grub over lilo, is that if you modify the | grub menu config file, you do not have to reinstall grub on the MBR | while lilo needs to be rerun. In other words : If you messed up with lilo, you have an unbootable machine. You need to then boot that unbootable machine inorder to modify the config and rerun lilo and fix it's unbootability. With grub you simply correct your mistake and continue to boot the machine. When it is booted you can make the correction to the config file. In addition, I think it is possible to use grub without having linux at all. It can read several different partition types to get the stage2 and menu.lst from so you could use Windows or some other system to maintain the configuration (suppose someone wanted only DOS and Windows on a system, dual booting). Lilo requires Linux inorder to run and read the config file and setup the MBR. Also -- chainloading windows from lilo is difficult. Ever read the docs on linuxdoc.org and then try it? I did. Then I tried grub. It took me no time at all, with only the little documentation on the website (and the sample menu.lst file). Just my $0.02 -D
Re: Linux wannabe
(I have just figured out how to get the internet from my dial-up modem so I'm a bit behind on the mail) I have recently switched from RH to Debian. I don't think the install is unfriendly at all, though it doesn't have the pretty GTK graphics of RH's. apt-get is awesome. I haven't seen anyone else mention bootloaders, so I will. My recommendation is to make a LILO boot disk when the installer asks you to. Don't install it on the MBR! If it isn't configured right you may not be able to boot windows (or debian). I tried LILO myself, and on my machine with my BIOS it didn't work. When asked to add linux to a win2k box at work I tried lilo first. I couldn't get a lilo floppy to dual-boot the system. LILO would also have had trouble on the MBR since the kernal was above the 1024 cylinder mark. I had heard good things about grub on this list so I decided to try it. Piece of cake! It works like a charm as well. Not only thah, but I tried it on my PC at home that lilo couldn't handle and it worked just as beautifully. http://www.gnu.org/software/grub Debian has a package for it, but it isn't in potato (current stable release). I installed it by getting a floppy and copying the binary image provided on the web site. Just print the manual, put the disk in and reboot. One of the best things about grub is that you can configure it when you boot. It gives a nice menu and command-line interface. Also it chainloads winows without any effort at all (unlike LILO). I now have grub on my MBR and won't go back to use lilo. -D
Linux wannabe
I just can't take it anymore! My $2000.00 Dell PC with 256 meg RAM running MS Windows ME crashes hourly at least. I am ready to take the plunge and give Linux a try. I am a professional but not in computers. Is it possible for a mere mortal to install Debian on his desktop PC in dual boot configuration with MS Windows? Robin Rowe called the Debian installation, sys admin hell, in March 2001 Linux Journal. I bought that issue to learn tips about the installation but found the article too superficial to be of much help. Where can I find/buy simple step by step accurate directions for installation of Debian Linux on a PC? Should I give Red Hat a try first? Thanks for your replies. __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Re: Linux wannabe
if you are a newbiw and want to try linux, then i suggest you install corel, mandrake or redhat. For a debian based distribution try storm linux... debian installation is not a sys admins hell, a good sysadmin should know what they are doing. He obviously preferred the ease of installation of redhat. Each to his own i guess.
Re: Linux wannabe
If you give RedHat a try you'll just have that inertia keeping you from moving to debian. I just came from RedHat, trust me, you want to start here if you can. Go to http://www.debian.org/doc/ and read the installation guide. If it says things you don't understand, then you might have some problems. But I think it's worth learning just to get apt (the coolest software install utility I've ever seen!). If you don't think you can do it, check out http://www.linux.org/users/index.html and find your local Linux Users Group. Many have install fests where they'll put whatever you want on your box for free. And if they don't have one coming you can go to the next meeting and get tips from them or even get one to help you one weekend or something...or if your computer is easily moved, you could take it in. On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 06:32:09PM -0800, Abner Gershon scribbled... I just can't take it anymore! My $2000.00 Dell PC with 256 meg RAM running MS Windows ME crashes hourly at least. I am ready to take the plunge and give Linux a try. I am a professional but not in computers. Is it possible for a mere mortal to install Debian on his desktop PC in dual boot configuration with MS Windows? Robin Rowe called the Debian installation, sys admin hell, in March 2001 Linux Journal. I bought that issue to learn tips about the installation but found the article too superficial to be of much help. Where can I find/buy simple step by step accurate directions for installation of Debian Linux on a PC? Should I give Red Hat a try first? Thanks for your replies. __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Linux wannabe
Abner Gershon wrote: I just can't take it anymore! My $2000.00 Dell PC with 256 meg RAM running MS Windows ME crashes hourly at least. I am ready to take the plunge and give Linux a try. I am a professional but not in computers. Is it possible for a mere mortal to install Debian on his desktop PC in dual boot configuration with MS Windows? Robin Rowe called the Debian installation, sys admin hell, in March 2001 Linux Journal. I bought that issue to learn tips about the installation but found the article too superficial to be of much help. Where can I find/buy simple step by step accurate directions for installation of Debian Linux on a PC? Should I give Red Hat a try first? well, if you want to install linux the redhat might be a better choice. However if you plan to use it as well (= update it, (un)install software) etc. there is no competition to debian. IMO. there is quite a lot of docs on www.debian.org and elsewhere on the net. If you want something relatively authoritative and printed I guess the o'reilly debian book is OK (I haven't read it, just judging by reputation of o'reilly). See: http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/debian/ the whole books seems to be online (click on Online book link on the URL above) hint: the installation process is not that bad, just don't play with dselect too much (IMO example of _extremely_ bad user interface), after installation use aptitude or apt-get or similar tools to install/uninstall software (they all use the same underlying mechanizm just provide different user interfaces) erik
Re: Linux wannabe
On Wednesday 21 March 2001 20:32, Abner Gershon wrote: I just can't take it anymore! My $2000.00 Dell PC with 256 meg RAM running MS Windows ME crashes hourly at least. I am ready to take the plunge and give Linux a try. Good for you. I am a professional but not in computers. Is it possible for a mere mortal to install Debian on his desktop PC in dual boot configuration with MS Windows? Yes. Robin Rowe called the Debian installation, sys admin hell, in March 2001 Linux Journal. I bought that issue to learn tips about the installation but found the article too superficial to be of much help. I haven't read that article and I don't know Robin Rowe, but I think he must have led a sheltered life. Debian may not be the easiest distro for the rank beginner, but it's not hard if you're willing to do a little reading before you start. Where can I find/buy simple step by step accurate directions for installation of Debian Linux on a PC? Should I give Red Hat a try first? The Debian Documentation Project is a rich source of info not just on Debian, but on Linux in general. Everything you need to know to install Debian from scratch and administer it yourself is available for free. The documentation is generally well written and very thorough. http://www.debian.org/doc/ddp Mark Stone has written an excellent step by step guide to setting up a Windows machine to dual boot Debian potato, the current stable release. http://www.debian.org/releases/potato/installguide/ The Debian GNU/Linux: Guide to Installation and Usage by John Goerzen and Ossama Othman is written as a guide to Debian, but it's a pretty good tutorial on Linux in general. http://www.newriders.com/debian/html/noframes/debian-tutorial.html And if you get stuck, the folks on this list are pretty helpful. They won't hold your hand, but they will give you a hand when you need it. -- Bud Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sirinet.net/~budr All things in moderation. And not too much moderation either.
Re: Linux wannabe
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 18:32:09 -0800 (PST), you wrote: I just can't take it anymore! My $2000.00 Dell PC with 256 meg RAM running MS Windows ME crashes hourly at least. I am ready to take the plunge and give Linux a try. Lots of good replies but I should point out that windows is not THAT bad if it crashes hourly you are either doing weird exotic stuff (or an application you always runs is at fault) or you have a hardware problem that needs to be addressed first. In any case, be prepared for a steep learning curve (yes, I will know that this will get me flamed but I am still going thru it and that is my experience) Jens
Re: Linux wannabe
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 07:18:21PM -0800, jens wrote: On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 18:32:09 -0800 (PST), you wrote: I just can't take it anymore! My $2000.00 Dell PC with 256 meg RAM running MS Windows ME crashes hourly at least. I am ready to take the plunge and give Linux a try. Lots of good replies but I should point out that windows is not THAT bad if it crashes hourly you are either doing weird exotic stuff (or an application you always runs is at fault) or you have a hardware problem that needs to be addressed first. In any case, be prepared for a steep learning curve (yes, I will know that this will get me flamed but I am still going thru it and that is my experience) You've never used Windows ME have you? kent -- From seeing and seeing the seeing has become so exhausted First line of The Panther - R. M. Rilke
Re: Linux wannabe
On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 09:55:29PM -0600, ktb wrote: On Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 07:18:21PM -0800, jens wrote: On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 18:32:09 -0800 (PST), you wrote: Lots of good replies but I should point out that windows is not THAT bad You've never used Windows ME have you? kent I once interviewed with someone who said that If you don't reboot Windows 10 times a day you aren't working hard enough. Of course, when I worked on Linux device drivers I had the same thoughts. I think that Linux boots up faster than Windows, so it's maybe an advantage. -- Lex clavatoris designati rescindenda est. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Griggs Research Institute pgplBSpradvWY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Linux wannabe
Bill White wrote: You've never used Windows ME have you? I once interviewed with someone who said that If you don't reboot Windows 10 times a day you aren't working hard enough. Of course, when I worked on Linux device drivers I had the same thoughts. That's fair enough... I mean, device drivers are part of the kernel, so when they crash (as one would when you're still debugging it) they'd take the rest of the kernel with them. I think that Linux boots up faster than Windows, so it's maybe an advantage. 2.4 boots quite a bit quicker than 2.2 did, but I have a feeling that Windows is quicker still. Of course, the golden rule of optimisation is that you optimise the most common task...
Re: Linux wannabe
On Thu, Mar 22, 2001 at 03:09:17PM +1100, Matthew Dalton wrote: Bill White wrote: You've never used Windows ME have you? I once interviewed with someone who said that If you don't reboot Windows 10 times a day you aren't working hard enough. Of course, when I worked on Linux device drivers I had the same thoughts. That's fair enough... I mean, device drivers are part of the kernel, so when they crash (as one would when you're still debugging it) they'd take the rest of the kernel with them. I think that Linux boots up faster than Windows, so it's maybe an advantage. 2.4 boots quite a bit quicker than 2.2 did, but I have a feeling that Windows is quicker still. Of course, the golden rule of optimisation is that you optimise the most common task... Can't be faster than a 3 second boot - http://www.acl.lanl.gov/linuxbios/news/index.html :) kent -- From seeing and seeing the seeing has become so exhausted First line of The Panther - R. M. Rilke
Re: Linux wannabe
%% Matthew Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think that Linux boots up faster than Windows, so it's maybe an advantage. md 2.4 boots quite a bit quicker than 2.2 did, but I have a feeling that md Windows is quicker still. Of course, the golden rule of optimisation is md that you optimise the most common task... This must depend on your system setup. There is absolutely no question that Linux (2.2.18) boots _much_ faster than Windows98 on my system (homegrown PII 450, 128M RAM); I timed it once and Linux was over twice as fast as Windows. Note by boot for Windows I mean the time it takes to get to a stable screen with all the silly little applets running in the tray, etc. (I don't have any login required on my Windows partition). For Linux I counted to the time it takes to get the XDM (really GDM) login screen up. Since I use vanilla FVWM 2.x as my WM and no desktop apps beyond FvwmButtons it takes only 2-3 seconds or so to login to Linux anyway. YM, of course, MV. -- --- Paul D. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]HASMAT--HA Software Methods Tools Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional. --Mad Scientist --- These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
RE: Linux wannabe
I once interviewed with someone who said that If you don't reboot Windows 10 times a day you aren't working hard enough. ... Hmmm, an interesting comment. I must not work at home or at work then! I have to take care of seven Win2K computers - two I use at home, three I use at work, my son's desktop, and my laptop. The one of the three office machines goes back to the first betas and release candidates of Win2K. In 18 months of operation I could count the number of BSODs or hangs from all the machines on my fingers. At any rate, back to the subject at hand. What swayed me to go with Debian was precisely the smooth maintenance and upgrades found in Debian that a few of the others have commented on. I am really just starting out, but a few hours with apt-get were a *lot* more enjoyable than the few hours I spent with RPM. I have also found this reflector to be a class act in comparison to a couple of the other Linux reflectors that I have since unsubscribed from. Perhaps a bit boring if you're into heavy vitriol and M$ bashing, but more good knowledge to be found and it seems friendlier to people just starting out. My personal advice for a newbie would be to use CDs! You *will* install it (or any distro) more than once and it's nice to start with a known quantity. And if your computer case has the room and you have the extra money, a separate disk can go a long way towards helping to avoid mishaps! Cheers, -rick
Re: Linux wannabe
On 22 Mar 2001, Paul D. Smith wrote: There is absolutely no question that Linux (2.2.18) boots _much_ faster than Windows98 on my system (homegrown PII 450, 128M RAM); I timed it once and Linux was over twice as fast as Windows. My experience mirrors yours. On my Athlon 650, 128M RAM, it takes fully 40 seconds longer to boot Windows 98 SE into a usable state (and I disabled all of the silly little applets that I could) than it does to boot Linux 2.2.18, start a plethora of services, start GDM, and log into GNOME. -- David Steinberg -o) Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]_\_v
RE: Linux wannabe
Can we please move this linux-boots-faster/windows-boots-faster debate somewhere more appropriate? Intellectually stimulating tho it is. -Original Message- From: David Steinberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 22 March 2001 16:38 To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Linux wannabe On 22 Mar 2001, Paul D. Smith wrote: There is absolutely no question that Linux (2.2.18) boots _much_ faster than Windows98 on my system (homegrown PII 450, 128M RAM); I timed it once and Linux was over twice as fast as Windows. My experience mirrors yours. On my Athlon 650, 128M RAM, it takes fully 40 seconds longer to boot Windows 98 SE into a usable state (and I disabled all of the silly little applets that I could) than it does to boot Linux 2.2.18, start a plethora of services, start GDM, and log into GNOME. -- David Steinberg -o) Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]_\_v -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] CAUTION This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressee. The confidentiality and/or privilege in this e-mail is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has been transmitted to you in error. If you have received this e-mail in error you must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it; (b) please notify Australia Post immediately by return e-mail to the sender; and (c) please delete the original e-mail.
