Thanks for that URL - I've already ordered the Mandrake 8.2 set from LinuxEmporium.co.uk tho - �13 I think it came to, for 6 CDs, including postage/packing.
I've already partitioned my hard drive into a root partition, a /var partition and a linux swap partition (plus Windows C:). Will Mandrake recognise these - it should do, right? Thanks for all your help - maybe I'll try Slackware after I have some experience Gregory Kane wrote: >Thomas > >The 56K has got to be painful. Check out www.cheapbytes.com. The distros are >cheap and the mail might get there before your download finishes. I run >Mandrake and the only complaint is that they try to be leading edge which >can cause some dependency problems with some software - more rpm's to >download. I guess that is my basic complaint about Linux. Mandrake is solid >and in one instance was the only distro to run - out of the box - on one of >my laptops. I feel it's a good choice but we all have our druthers. > >Greg Kane > >-----Original Message----- >From: Thomas Madhavan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 2:52 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Slackware or Redhat? > > >Thanks very much for your replies - luckily there hasn't been the >10,000-post war that someone commented on :) > >Well it seems Slackware is the more 'unix-like' of the two - I've read >several reviews (how accurate they were I'm not sure) and they seems >pretty consistent in the view that Slackware does not provide regular >updates? Also, much time needs to be spent actually looking for existing >updates because there is no 'automatic' updater. Lazy, I know, but >useful nevertheless. > >One final distribution I'd like to try is Mandrake. I've heard good >things about it - I gather it's more similar to Redhat than Slackware? >What main differences are there? At the moment I'm downloading a 680MB >Mandrake 8.2 .iso on my 56k connection :( 35 hours to go :D > >Thanks again. > >Thomas Madhavan > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>>I've read differing opinions about the ease of use of Slackware - what >>>are your personal opinions? Is Slackware more secure 'out of the box'? >>> >>Yes. A better configuration by default, and only tested and approved >>version of all packages instead of the very last version of each. >> >>>From what I gather Slackware is a little harder to learn than Redhat, >>>but a little more... configurable? >>> >>But a very more instructive ! Once you will know Slackware, you will >>be able to manage any Unix system. You will learn the filesystem, >>what is set up where, the syntax of each config files and so on. >>In Red Hat, Linuxconf or some others tools do it for you, so you do >>not learn so much. >> >>One time, I received a Unixware computer. I even did not know about >>the OS before this moment. But re-using my knowledge of Slackware was >>enough to operate and re-configure this exotic Unix. >> >>Some other time, I debug Solaris with my books and man pages from >>Salckware : the most Unix-like Linux distribution. >> >>>Am I right? >>> >>Half right : more configurable ? No : all you can do in Salckware, >>you can do it in Red Hat. But Red Hat hides you so much with its >>automated tools, doing his own configuration by hand, like in >>Slackware is much more powerful. >> >>>I have no problems with >>>using the console and learning anything the hard way :D >>> >>So do it : once done, you will masterize all Unixes and understand >>much more about computer in general. >> >>>What advantages/disadvanages does Slackware 8.0 have over Redhat 7.0? >>> >>the possibility to lets you learn about Unix. Did you re-compile a >>kernel in red hat ? A good chance you will have to do it in Slackware. >>Do you know which information are used in the X main configuration >>file ? You will learn about that and much more with Slackware. >> >>Jacques Bourdeau >> > > > > > >
