yes, dselect isn't very nice, slack's install app is much better - but apt-get is top nice.
Posted on 2004-01-29 07:20:54 by f0dder
What I like about Slackware is it is not prebuilt and boots of a CD to install. After a pig like Redhat that could not build its own kernel, I put the bite on the guys who run my site in England and they pushed Slackware as being a clean trouble free linux distribution that was free of the kiddies stuff in redhat.

I am used to building eggdrop bots, bouncers and other stuff on the linux shells I have so building and OS of a CD does not sound like that much of a big deal apart from the build time and it probably isn't broken like the pseudo Windows installation in Redhat.

I will need to get a different network card as the ones I have did not support any version of linux but I gather they are cheap enough.

Regards,
http://www.asmcommunity.net/board/cryptmail.php?tauntspiders=in.your.face@nomail.for.you&id=2f46ed9f24413347f14439b64bdc03fd
Posted on 2004-01-29 07:51:57 by hutch--
Hm, slackware is no less prebuilt than redhat - everything is still installed from binaries. If you want to install from source and get fine-tuned stuff, go gentoo. If you couldn't build kernel on redhat, your probably forgot one of kernel-headers/kernel-source/gcc-whatever (kernel-headers should probably be included in kernel-source as well). Oh, and for "make menuconfig" you need ncurses-devel.

All distros should be able to boot off + install from CD... debian, slack, redhat, gentoo, ... (it even works in ancient redhat linux 5.1, the first linux I messed around with ages ago).

But yeah, slack is an okay choice, when you don't mind messing around with stuff yourself. It's not as friendly and cutting-edge as some of the other distros, but it works, and doesn't have the ?ber GPL naziness as Debian.

Which NICs do you have that linux doesn't support? If you need some cheap stuff that works quite fine, I'd suggest you find something with realtek rtl-8139 chips (they're present in a LOT of cheap NICs). While elitists (or people running critical stuff in big machines) may sneer at them, I have 3 physial rtl8139-based NICs and another one onboard, and they have worked well; I think the oldest one is 4-5 years old by now.
Posted on 2004-01-29 08:02:32 by f0dder
Btw, while slackwares install system is one of the better, it still has some serious flaws: you do package selection per "category", and then that category is installed... It would have been smarter if you started by doing package selection for all categories (INCLUDING A 'BACK' BUTTON!), and the installed everything... that way you could choose all packages (and click 'back' if you made an error), finally all dependencies could be calculated, and you could go drink coffee and watch TV while installing... Oh well, nothing's perfect (and especially not linux, :grin: )
Posted on 2004-01-29 08:04:25 by f0dder

How do you mean 're-entrant'?
You can run /stand/sysinstall at any time, if that is what you mean...


try going through the motions, cursing that you forgot to set your keymap to azerty :grin:, backtracking and re?ntering again :)
somehow it falters on that in a weird way. (could be me of course)
Posted on 2004-01-29 08:15:37 by Hiroshimator
It's probably you, I have a qwerty keyboard :)

Anyway, what strikes me as a FreeBSD user, is that for linux-people apparently a lot depends on the choice of the distro...
"If you want an easy installer, you need RedHat", "If you want to build from sources, you need Gentoo" etc.
There is only one FreeBSD, but it can do it all. Are all linux distros just unfinished, broken, application-specific hacks or something? :)
(I noticed that a lot of commercial/professional software only supports a few distros anyway, generally RedHat, often SuSE and/or Mandrake).
Posted on 2004-01-29 08:24:54 by Henk-Jan
well, just try it and you'll notice what I mean :p

I've been wondering wether to switch to qwerty though :/
Posted on 2004-01-29 08:35:44 by Hiroshimator

Rob,

While we may disagree with most things on the planet, when I get a spare box to play with which may happen soon, your logo is the distro I will use next time. I tried out Redhat last time and it was the most bad mannered buggy pig I have ever played with but I gather SlackWare is far better and a lot more reliable. :alright:

Regards,

http://www.asmcommunity.net/board/cryptmail.php?tauntspiders=in.your.face@nomail.for.you&id=2f46ed9f24413347f14439b64bdc03fd


Red Hat 7.0 was shiped with buggy system libarays so that the whole system suffered ( but this is olny one distro NOT all of linux)

Slack is a good distro BUT its not for newibes what distro you use is up to you there are lots of good docs around study them befor you install and if you have the space ( about 2 1/2 Gig with the riser file system and do use the riser file system you will like it ) install the whole distro (the bigest gotchya in slack is the assumtion that the whole distro will be installed or that you know what you are doing well enought that you know what you can leave out If you leave something out and find there is a libaray file missing use ldd to find out what is missing and search the contents file at the slack download site to find out what packsge it's in then install that package)

about a computer look around the junk shops linux is quite happy with a system as slow as 266 Mhz P MMX and 64Meg of ram 4 Gig HDD ( even a $50.00 junk shop computer is quite useful)
and screems along with a better computer

I have more to say bit RL is calling and I have to go
Posted on 2004-01-29 12:46:46 by rob.rice
Red Hat 7.0 was shiped with buggy system libarays so that the whole system suffered ( but this is olny one distro NOT all of linux)


Nice logic, try applying the same to Windows?

as slow as 266 Mhz P MMX and 64Meg of ram 4 Gig HDD


Might just be me, but I don't find such a machine slow at all :)
Posted on 2004-01-29 17:18:11 by Henk-Jan
pmmx-200+64meg ram... win98se+office2k ran just fine (though win98 is bugged), NT4 ran just fine on it as well (I think that was with office2k too).
Posted on 2004-01-29 17:23:06 by f0dder



Red Hat 7.0 was shiped with buggy system libarays so that the whole system suffered ( but this is olny one distro NOT all of linux)

Slack is a good distro BUT its not for newibes what distro you use is up to you there are lots of good docs around study them befor you install and if you have the space ( about 2 1/2 Gig with the riser file system and do use the riser file system you will like it ) install the whole distro (the bigest gotchya in slack is the assumtion that the whole distro will be installed or that you know what you are doing well enought that you know what you can leave out If you leave something out and find there is a libaray file missing use ldd to find out what is missing and search the contents file at the slack download site to find out what packsge it's in then install that package)

about a computer look around the junk shops linux is quite happy with a system as slow as 266 Mhz P MMX and 64Meg of ram 4 Gig HDD ( even a .00 junk shop computer is quite useful)
and screems along with a better computer

I have more to say bit RL is calling and I have to go


Some fool just paid me $100.00 to change a fuse for his furnice

I forgot to say that a missing libaray will show up as an undefined refrince error when you try to run some that needs a missing libaray
another gotchya in slack is that there almost no configuration tools in it so you will have to edit the /etc and the /etc/rc.d files by hand MAKE BACK UP COPYS FIRST so you can put them back if you end up hoseing the system
DO install the kernel source files there is info on what module you will need for your modem,NIC and sound card in there and this is the easyest place to find it
do get the e3 editor and install the uncompressed version you can find a link to it's home page at http://linuxassembly.org projects this is good for useing when you need to fix the /etc files from a rescue disk and at 12k it dosent waste much space if you never need it
DO get x working BEFOR YOU SET THE SYSTEM UP TO BOOT INTO X I don't mean to insult any body with this one but this is a mistack some people make
Posted on 2004-01-29 17:45:23 by rob.rice

DO get x working BEFOR YOU SET THE SYSTEM UP TO BOOT INTO X I don't mean to insult any body with this one but this is a mistack some people make

That's some of the most sensible I've ever heard from you ;)

But yeah, if you set the system to boot into one of the x login screens and x is misconfigured... *boom*. Can probably be fixed by booting to single-user mode though.
Posted on 2004-01-29 17:55:13 by f0dder
the truth is that the more people useing linux
and other free O/Ss the harder M$ will work to mantain its place as number one

Every windows user should want to see linux and the other free O/Ss get bigger thay would get a better and cheper windows out of this

yet another gotcha slack will not boot to single uesr mode unless it is set to in the /etc/rc.d/scripts this is why I sed get a rescue disk and an editor that dosen't need the system libarays ( the ld paths all point to the rescue disk so nothing that needs the system libarays will work e3 dosen't need them )
Posted on 2004-01-29 23:59:36 by rob.rice

What I like about Slackware is it is not prebuilt and boots of a CD to install. After a pig like Redhat that could not build its own kernel, I put the bite on the guys who run my site in England and they pushed Slackware as being a clean trouble free linux distribution that was free of the kiddies stuff in redhat.

I am used to building eggdrop bots, bouncers and other stuff on the linux shells I have so building and OS of a CD does not sound like that much of a big deal apart from the build time and it probably isn't broken like the pseudo Windows installation in Redhat.

I will need to get a different network card as the ones I have did not support any version of linux but I gather they are cheap enough.

Regards,

http://www.asmcommunity.net/board/cryptmail.php?tauntspiders=in.your.face@nomail.for.you&id=2f46ed9f24413347f14439b64bdc03fd


look in the driver docs of the kernel sources there may be a modules for your cards that the OEMs won't admit to or don't know about

If you do need to get a new NIC
D-Link DFE-530TX+
works well and the slack 9.1 kernel has a module perbuilt for it + It's cheep
Posted on 2004-01-30 00:17:34 by rob.rice

D-Link DFE-530TX+

That's a realtek RTL8139 chip, as I suggested.
Posted on 2004-01-30 02:05:03 by f0dder
Rob,

Thanks for the tip, I knew about realtek stuff but what I will end up doing is having a good look throught the compatibility list and see what I ned to get because once I get an installation that can use the network card, I can pot around and get stuff for it without having to suffer the lousy install on Redhat.

It particularly pissed me off that after repeatedly installing the full set of libraries and all of the kernel code that it would not build properly so I ended up ditching it and installing win98se on the box.

As long as the compiler and libraries work correctly with Slackware, I should be able to get it going. I would eventually like to be able to use a linux box as my internet front end as hardware that will run win98se is starting to get old and there is no way I would trust a later MS OS as an internet box.

Regards,
http://www.asmcommunity.net/board/cryptmail.php?tauntspiders=in.your.face@nomail.for.you&id=2f46ed9f24413347f14439b64bdc03fd
Posted on 2004-01-30 03:43:28 by hutch--

Thanks for the tip, I knew about realtek stuff but what I will end up doing is having a good look throught the compatibility list and see what I ned to get because once I get an installation that can use the network card, I can pot around and get stuff for it without having to suffer the lousy install on Redhat.

RTL8139 has been supported (and pretty well) for ages now... and they're damn cheap. If you want something good, go for intel or (alternatively) 3COM - they have capabilities for offloading work (IP checksum generating etc) to the NIC, instead of spending CPU time on it (and yeah, when saturating a 100mbit "dumb" card like rtl8139 based ones, you can see quite some CPU usage even on 2ghz machines).


It particularly pissed me off that after repeatedly installing the full set of libraries and all of the kernel code that it would not build properly so I ended up ditching it and installing win98se on the box.

Sounds like you have done something wrong - I've never had problems building kernel, not even on redhat :)


I would eventually like to be able to use a linux box as my internet front end

That's one of the things linux does fairly well... I have my home network running NAT'ed with a slackware box doing routing and firewalling. It's safely enough configured that I don't even need to run firewalls on the boxes inside the NAT.


there is no way I would trust a later MS OS as an internet box.

Why not? As long as you have a firewall infront of it or a personal firewall on the box, any windows would be safe.
Posted on 2004-01-30 03:58:37 by f0dder
the truth is that the more people useing linux
and other free O/Ss the harder M$ will work to mantain its place as number one


Another truth is that most people will not use linux or other free OSes unless it is better than what they are using now. Linux people often think they're already there. Usage statistics dictate otherwise.

routing and firewalling. It's safely enough configured that I don't even need to run firewalls on the boxes inside the NAT.


I use FreeBSD for that. It's faster, easier to use (iptables/chains? brrrr) and more reliable. And there are no annoying kiddie users. Personally I think FreeBSD defies the reason to exist for linux.
Posted on 2004-01-30 04:07:18 by Henk-Jan
Actually I am beginning to warm to linux a bit. I have had a chance to try it at the office and it is alot less daunting than I thought. The software does run noticably faster on the Linux box than the Windows machines but I am assuming that is mostly due to the fact that there is less "history" in that we haven't been using it for years and installed alot of personal crap, slowing things down. After all, if I do a clean install of Win2K at home my machine runs faster right up till I begin to install all of the other junk. I'll get a closer look when they change me over in the spring, for now it is only one box for training and that's all. It also appears to be more stable though again the reason is probably the same as above. All in all I like it and I am glad they decided to dump Microsoft Windows in favour of Linux but I am no longer sure I will do the same at home, it just seems too foreign for a home system for now. But I do understand now why there are so many who say they hate Linux, it is a very nice OS and threatens MS and those who have invested their career in learning Windows should be feeling very threatened right now. It is very close to critical mass and may soon capture a significant market share.
Posted on 2004-01-30 18:10:52 by donkey
The software does run noticably faster on the Linux box than the Windows


I can't help but notice the rather 'laggy' feeling of XFree86, no matter how fast the system you run it on (I use it on a daily basis on P4 1.8 GHz machines). Windows XP doesn't have that 'spongy' feeling to it. Windows also has a better scheduling policy, which actively boosts GUI applications when they receive focus, and things like that, which is impossible on a separate kernel and bolt-on GUI such as linux + XFree86. I do notice.

Also, I used to develop 3d stuff in Java, and I tried the stuff on two identical machines in the lab, with identical dual-boot configurations. Both using the Sun JVM, version 1.4.2, one with Windows XP, the other with RedHat linux 9. Not to my surprise, the Windows box clocked a few extra fps consistently in the exact same applications.
So I know for a fact that Windows runs identical software faster. Can't get more identical than Java running on the same JVM, I guess (the MS JVM was actually a tad faster still, but since it is not available on linux, it would be unfair to compare).

But I do understand now why there are so many who say they hate Linux


I personally hate it because I don't need it (I already have FreeBSD, which is a superior server OS to linux, and Windows XP, which is a superior desktop OS to linux), yet people like rob.rice find it necessary to shove linux in my face at every step, insisting that I don't know what I'm talking about, etc, and linux is what I should be using.

it is a very nice OS and threatens MS and those who have invested their career in learning Windows should be feeling very threatened right now. It is very close to critical mass and may soon capture a significant market share.


I've been hearing that same story for about as long as linux exists. These people probably think that if you say it often enough, it will come true.
I have used it in the past, at home. But it could never convince me as a desktop OS, because of the 'laggy'/'spongy' feeling, general lack of applications (try getting 3dsmax for linux?), and general amateuristic feeling around it. Like needing to edit config files manually, even for GUI apps... Or the fact that you need to install multiple windowmanagers, and get multiple looks inside the same desktop, because there's no decent standard, and some programs use KDE, others use Gnome, and then there's Qt, Motif, and what else? Very inconsistent.
As for servers... well I used to host my website on a SlackWare 7 server... Everything was fine, until one day, for no apparent reason, without anyone accessing the box, it decided to crap the filesystem. Beyond repair at that... Running fsck resulted in a segmentation fault.
Needless to say, we didn't trust linux much more after that... If even crucial tools such as fsck fail on you, there's not much hope is there? A friend suggested giving FreeBSD a try, if we were going to re-install the box anyway. So we did, and the box has been running for years now, without the filesystem (still on the very same disk) ever acting up again. Currently it has over 400 days uptime. I also run a FreeBSD system at home, serving mainly as internet gateway/firewall and general dump area. Recently upgraded to FreeBSD 5.1, it is again running for 127 days now without a problem, on a modest P150 (originally it actually ran on a 486-66 with 16 mb, and even running an Apache server, with mysql/php, and mail/ftp).

So as far as I'm concerned, I have the best of both worlds. Rock-solid, secure, efficient server, and a responsive, easy-to-use desktop system, with the software that I need.

Will I ever use linux at home? Highly unlikely. FreeBSD can also run XFree86 and virtually all the linux applications. In the unlikely and horrible event that Windows would ever cease to exist, I would sooner choose FreeBSD as my desktop OS than linux, and it's already my choice for servers anyway. I can recommend it to anyone who wants to hear it (note that last part).
So am I interested in linux? No, I'm very familiar with it, and it is not what I want.
Posted on 2004-01-30 19:18:09 by Henk-Jan