A Linux Christmas Miracle (In Progress)

[Darkbolt]

Not just now, but you have been know to.

I seen 'im!

And fwiw bbj, no that wasn't actually a slackware users perspective...I havent used slackware as my desktop in a couple years...I actually dual boot xp64 & ubuntu. XP for games, ubuntu because it does have just about everything under the sun in its repos...though, I wish they'd keep more upto date with nvidia/ati drivers, but I understand why they don't.

Anyway, linux is linux, under the hood its all the same. All those wonderful commands are still there, and work the same

[blackbelt_jones]

Not just now, but you have been know to.

I think you implied it this time, whereas you have been known to explicity say it. Anyway, I agree. We are not arguing. I merely requested that you save the Slackware tips for when I ask for them... and I will.

[blackbelt_jones]

I seen 'im!

And fwiw bbj, no that wasn't actually a slackware users perspective...I havent used slackware as my desktop in a couple years...I actually dual boot xp64 & ubuntu. XP for games, ubuntu because it does have just about everything under the sun in its repos...though, I wish they'd keep more upto date with nvidia/ati drivers, but I understand why they don't.

Anyway, linux is linux, under the hood its all the same. All those wonderful commands are still there, and work the same

My point is that "Linux is Linux" tends to be a Slackware user's perspective, for reasons that have to do with why it has the reputation for being the best distro to learn on. If you used to use Slackware, but now you're using Ubuntu from a Slackware user's perspective, that just reinforces my point. Wherever you got it, it's a good perspective to have.

[psych-major]

I actually learned a lot of advanced stuff using SuSE at a former employer. Learning Linux is a mindset that is not tied to a particular distro.

[Satanic Atheist]

Linux refers only to the kernel but the tools that immediately surround the kernel are also bundled into this.

GNU Tools are the rest of the supporting system that provide you with the commands that support and interface into that kernel so that you can actually do stuff. This is why Linux is formally (and correctly) known as GNU/Linux.

Each flavour of Linux is unique largely because of its package manager. It is certainly not unique. All distros of Linux use the Linux kernel (by definition). All of these versions, in turn, use GNU tools to achieve their basic functionality.

The only difference with Slackware is that it does not use Init-V initialisation systems but uses BSD-Style init scripts.

It IS harder to work with, but the end result is the same: a fully working Linux machine. Why bother arguing about distros when it's clear that they all achieve the same thing? Linux kernel, GNU tools - they all do the same thing.

It's just the package manager that changes. Find a distro that works for you and stick with it. I've been working with Linux for the past 8 years and I've moved from Red Hat to Mandrake to Slackware to Debian and now I'm staying with the latter - I don't need anything else. It works. For me, that is.

This thread is rapidly starting to end up in the wrong forum.

James

[blackbelt_jones]

Linux refers only to the kernel but the tools that immediately surround the kernel are also bundled into this.

GNU Tools are the rest of the supporting system that provide you with the commands that support and interface into that kernel so that you can actually do stuff. This is why Linux is formally (and correctly) known as GNU/Linux.

Each flavour of Linux is unique largely because of its package manager. It is certainly not unique. All distros of Linux use the Linux kernel (by definition). All of these versions, in turn, use GNU tools to achieve their basic functionality.

The only difference with Slackware is that it does not use Init-V initialisation systems but uses BSD-Style init scripts.

It IS harder to work with, but the end result is the same: a fully working Linux machine. Why bother arguing about distros when it's clear that they all achieve the same thing? Linux kernel, GNU tools - they all do the same thing.

It's just the package manager that changes. Find a distro that works for you and stick with it. I've been working with Linux for the past 8 years and I've moved from Red Hat to Mandrake to Slackware to Debian and now I'm staying with the latter - I don't need anything else. It works. For me, that is.

This thread is rapidly starting to end up in the wrong forum.

James

Do you think we're arguing about distros? Psych-major has been telling me that taking up Slackware is a good idea, and I agree. Now Psych-major is saying that you don't necessarily need Slackware to learn Linux, to which I also agree. And God Bless us, every one.

On the other hand, I do think there are differences beyond package management, so maybe we are arguing about distros. On this castoff that won't take IDE input, I used an older computer to install opensuse 11.1 to a 4 GB flash drive. I used a live CD which I booted at runlevel 3, so X wasn't involved until after I plugged the flashdrive into this computer, booted, and completed the setup. I then added a 120 GB storage hard drive with an external casing, and used partition tools in YAST to mount the second hard drive as /home.

Now, when I tried to do that with Kubuntu, it didn't work. The installer wouldn't install GRUB to the flash drive. Now, surely there is a way of doing this with Kubuntu, but I chose to use the opensuse disk, which I already knew would work. So hardware detection is another difference that can pop up between distros. Besides packaging, there are major differences in administration tools. After all, YAST is a lot more than a package management system. All of these differences certainly matter more to a user like me, a linux autodidact with limited abilities, than to some of you pros out there. People are people. They are allowed to have limitations, and the more limitations you have a GNU/Linux system administrator, the more the "minor" differences between distros loom large. I used to take a lot of crap for solving problems by switching distros, but as my abilities have expanded, my reptoire of favored distros has contracted. These day I usually favor debian-based distros, like to fiddle with Slackware/Vector, and find Opensuse sometimes solves problems for me. It's been a couple of years since I've checked up on what Fedora or Mandriva have been up to.

I'm not the one who came up with the slogan "... If you learn Slackware, you learn Linux." I think it means that because Slackware has few custom administration tools, it teaches you how to use a multitude of other distros by bypassing those tools in other distros. Does that make sense?

[Satanic Atheist]

Yes, Slackware does have fewer custom administration tools, but, in my opinion, it's irrelevant.

You learn Linux because you want to. The actual Distro that you use does mostly affect the type of package management that you use (RPM for Red Hat/Fedora Core/Mandriva, APT for Debian-based distros). I do all of my administration on the command line so I don't need fancy configuration tools except for setting up trivial things such as KDE which is made a lot easier with the use it its tools.

I believe that the only way to "learn Linux" is to work at the command prompt and try to set up the machine so that it "just works" whenever you want to do anything. You won't learn much (if anything) if you simply stick to the GUI - any Windows convertees will only try to use it as a Windows substitute and that's definitely what it isn't.

James

[blackbelt_jones]

Yeah, you can run Linux as if it were Windows, and the best you can hope for is Windows with more support hassles. There is one thing that Windows does better than anyone else and that's being Windows. It's not necessary to use the command line, but when you know how to use it, it becomes the main advantage. Unfortunately, there's a huge amount of misunderstanding about this. Everybody's head is stuck in the 1980s when GUIs saved us from the tyranny of the console, making computi9ng accesible to everyone. This was a fine and wonderful thing, but the command line and the GUI are not competitors anymore. They are partners. They work together, and this makes the command line a whole lot easier to use.

I feel like I'm going into my theme song now. Everybody who knows me has heard me say this a hundred times.

[blackbelt_jones]

Yes, Slackware does have fewer custom administration tools, but, in my opinion, it's irrelevant.

You learn Linux because you want to. The actual Distro that you use does mostly affect the type of package management that you use (RPM for Red Hat/Fedora Core/Mandriva, APT for Debian-based distros). I do all of my administration on the command line so I don't need fancy configuration tools except for setting up trivial things such as KDE which is made a lot easier with the use it its tools.

I believe that the only way to "learn Linux" is to work at the command prompt and try to set up the machine so that it "just works" whenever you want to do anything. You won't learn much (if anything) if you simply stick to the GUI - any Windows convertees will only try to use it as a Windows substitute and that's definitely what it isn't.

James

The relevance is that a background in Slackware is held to be Universal. Because there are less custom administration features, the conventional wisdom is that if you can master Slackware, you can master anything, that's all.

[trilarian]

The relevance is that a background in Slackware is held to be Universal. Because there are less custom administration features, the conventional wisdom is that if you can master Slackware, you can master anything, that's all.

Of course, you could always skip the custom tools provided by the distro of your choice. For example, to install a program in Debian skip APT and download the source, untar, ./configure, make, make install.

I'm not trying to discourage your learning adventure, but show that the difference in distributions really is less than some people make it out to be (which is a good thing).

[blackbelt_jones]

Of course, you could always skip the custom tools provided by the distro of your choice. For example, to install a program in Debian skip APT and download the source, untar, ./configure, make, make install.

I'm not trying to discourage your learning adventure, but show that the difference in distributions really is less than some people make it out to be (which is a good thing).

Well, I'm not talking to those people right now, am I? I'm talking to people who are saying that it's ALL about the package manager, and I just don't think that's quite true. Distros are like people. We all have 99 percent of the same DNA. We're more alike than we are different, but the differences have a way of mattering.

I learned about the differences in distros by buying an old garage sale computer and installing every distro I could get my hands on. People made fun of me, but I got to see first hand what they all have in common. I got so that installing a distro became no big deal, and then I learened hiow to create a seperate home partition so I could reinstall and keep my data, and how to save my fluxbox configuration files so I could customize a new system in less than five minutes. It gave me a lot of confidence to know that I could fix anything by reinstalling. It made me willing to explore, to experiment. I digress.

I don't agree with this agenda that we all need to be pushing the idea of how simple Linux is. For some people, it isn't. It sure wasn't for me. In the beginning, I didn't even have enough of an understanding to find stuff on Google. Search after search came back empty. When I was having problems, people telling me how simple it is just made me feel like the stupidest guy in the world. I tell people they might need some patience, and I usually suggest a cheap second box so that everything doesn't stop while they're getting their system working. I tell them not to expect for it to be easy, though they may be one of the lucky ones, but to expect for it to be rewarding.

Yes, I suppose you could learn all that basic stuff on Debian, but how many books are there on running Debian without using Debian administration tools? But no, it's not a strict requirement. We already agreed on that.

[trilarian]

Yes, I suppose you could learn all that basic stuff on Debian, but how many books are there on running Debian without using Debian administration tools? But no, it's not a strict requirement. We already agreed on that.

Doesn't have to be Debian, but I would think if the commands/procedures found in Slackware are universal then shouldn't you be able to read a Slack book and have it apply to your DOC (distro of choice)?

As I initially said, I'm not trying to discourage learning in any sense. I think it is great you still have the drive to experiment with other distros despite you having found your niche. I simply think the line you quoted - If you learn Slackware, you learn Linux - is misleading. Since what makes learning Slackware learning Linux (using non-distro customized commands/procedures), by default is true for learning any distro (if you take the time to learn the underlying processes of a high level program). Slackware simply forces you to - which albeit is a good way to learn - necessity.

[JohnT]

Slackware for years........ now FreeBSD and its derivatives. New hardware, old hardware I use 'em' all.
Happy New Year!!!

[Satanic Atheist]

If you want to take this to extreme, you could go for Linux From Scratch - that alone will teach you more about Linux that you could (probably) ever want.

Still, I use Debian on my server because I can quickly bring it up to date with two simple commands. I've LEARNT to operate the command line and I use it regularly to (re)configure the system. I don't need to depend on it. I want the system to work now and it does. Whether I use the GUI or the CLI is entirely at my discretion. My point is that I use the system to do work (and it does it very well) rather than make life difficult for myself. If you want to operate a UNIX-based system, you simply have to work at it and the command prompt is the best way of doing that. Each Distro will present the same set of features that you can expect but they may present them slightly differently. At least in Linux the command prompt is almost universal and that's where the real power of Linux becomes apparent. Package Managers simply make life easier for maintainers.

James

[blackbelt_jones]

Doesn't have to be Debian, but I would think if the commands/procedures found in Slackware are universal then shouldn't you be able to read a Slack book and have it apply to your DOC (distro of choice)?

As I initially said, I'm not trying to discourage learning in any sense. I think it is great you still have the drive to experiment with other distros despite you having found your niche. I simply think the line you quoted - If you learn Slackware, you learn Linux - is misleading. Since what makes learning Slackware learning Linux (using non-distro customized commands/procedures), by default is true for learning any distro (if you take the time to learn the underlying processes of a high level program). Slackware simply forces you to - which albeit is a good way to learn - necessity.

Well, it's not my saying, and I've only been speculating as to what it means. I don't think it's misleading unless you read more into it than is there... but damn, how did we get started on this?


I remember how people used to criticize me for all my distro hopping back in the day, but the minute I had settled on something, people were immediately trying to get me to switch. Likewise, after Psych-major and a few others trying to shove Slackware at me for what seems like a hundred years, I don't know why I'm surprised that expressing an interest in Slackware should be a controversial statement.

Here's my opinion. Learning Slackware can probably be very helpful to gaining general Linux, but it's not the only way to learn Linux. That's not exactly going out on a limb. In fact, it barely qualifies as an opinion at all. I think I made it clear that the main reason why i want to learn more about using Slackware is because I enjoy using it. I get a lot done when i use software. All that stuff about it being good for me is just in passing.

Actually, I do have my own saying: "The Slackware Guy is not your friend." It was intended as a joke at the time, but to extent that there's a grain of truth to it, it also applies to the Ubuntu Guy, the Fedora Guy, the Gentoo Guy, and whatever kind of Guy I happen to be at the time.

For learning Linux, I really do think that a period of distro hopping can be very beneficial. You can gain a lot of insight into what Linux is by seeing what four or five distros have in common, and what they don't have in common. There is insight to be gained from an overview.