Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sheddyian]

I've realised that I'm incredibly ignorant when it comes to Linux, having floundered a lot trying to set up a web server on a Raspberry Pi.  (It's getting there, very slowly).

So, I thought a good plan might be to put Linux on one of my main PCs to use and learn by osmosis.  My PCs currently have Windows XP or Windows 7 on, so I could either dual boot one of them, or replace Windows altogether.

Now, because of the preferred/default Raspberry Pi installation of Debian Wheezy, I'm minded to put that on a PC as well, and hopefully it'll be nice and similar across the platforms.

But I'd be interested in anyone else's opinion and/or preference.

What version of Linux do you prefer, and why?

Ian

(I have only just realised that Wheezy is the version release of Debian - I'd imagined that it was a special cut-down version especially for the Raspberry Pi!)

[asbokid]

I run Debian.

SFAICS it largely boils down to the method of package management.  It's pretty much a two horse race: Debian (and derivatives like Ubuntu) use apt and Redhat-based distributions use rpm.   From my limited experience of running both, Debian's package management seems more reliable, and simpler to begin with, but potentially more powerful in the long run.   Debian also port to many more architectures, including arm.

The rest of the differences between distros can be 'tweaked out' to suit - which window manager, and that sort of thing - kind of non-essential issues.

Dunno if you care much for the politics, but Debian are the most puritanical over open source software. I'm definitely with them in spirit, but sometimes you find yourself saying "I just want this hardware working, without a great political debate with the manufacturer! Just gimme the closed source binary driver!"    On the flipside, Ubuntu can sometimes seem the opposite: a bit too commercial.. A bit Windowsy, with a dictatorial figurehead like some Linux equivalent of Bill Gates (Mark Shuttleworth).   

Go with Debian.  My 2c!  Although at the end of the day, 99% of the distros are identical!

cheers, a

[burakkucat]

I run Red Hat Enterprise Linux and also its clone (CentOS).

asbokid & the b*cat have now been collaborating for a few years and the difference between their Linux-kernel based OSes is irrelevant.

Any Linux-kernel based OS that you decide to use will be an excellent choice . . . purely because it is not BGW! 

[roseway]

I largely agree with the above views. I use Debian Testing for my main main machine, and I upgrade it every day (a matter of just a few moments when it's done from the command line). There are distros which are described as more "user friendly", which hold your hands to a greater degree, but the hand holding tends to get in the way of proper understanding of the system.

[broadstairs]

I agree with Eric particularly in regard to the way some distros get in the way of understanding. For that reason alone I steer clear of any of the *buntu distros, something about them which annoys me. I have used many different distros over the years and all of them using the KDE desktop, I just dont get on with the other main desktop called Gnome. Yes KDE 'looks' quite similar to Windoze in many respects but that 'look' is as far as it goes, I find KDE a significant improvement over any flavour of Windoze I have used (all of them up to W7).

Currently I use Fedora in KDE mode.

Stuart

[tonyappuk]

The best "hand holding" distro is probably Mint which is very easy to use. They all come as live versions so you can give any of them a whirl without any hard drive changes. Or you can run in a virtual environment. Lots of options to try before you jump. But you probably know all that anyway!
Tony

[tickmike]

I use PCLinuxOS (PC Linux OS) www.pclinuxos.com join the the Forum there they are very friendly.

Use Eric's Tutorials (1 to 6) above and you will find all the details of how to install it.

I use the KDE desktop,'Minime' version,  it's simple to use a bit like windows.

I have tried many of distro's but still use this for my main computers, I can not get on with any ubuntu or there off shoots eg mint, But each to there own.

Most are user-friendly nowadays with a GUI (graphical user interface) 

Edit... Just remember Ras-Pi uses a different type of possessor (Arm) and you can not just use any distro on it, the above are all for normal computers, laptops etc.

[sheddyian]

Thanks for all your replies!

I realise that not all distros will run on the Raspberry Pi's ARM processor, and I've gone with the "standard" Debian Wheezy on that.  Which is why I may well put Debian on the PC as well, but I was interested what the differences (or not) of the different distros are.

Although I knew about them, I hadn't thought about which desktop environment I might want. 

As regards to hand holding, I do tend to favour installation or setup wizards that get things pretty much how you want so you can get going, but I'm happy to go in and adjust things manually later.

Would I be right in thinking that I'll make an installation DVD (or 3) from a download, and that when I run or boot from that, part of the setup will allow me to configure a dual boot with an existing install of Windows?

At least to start with, I'll probably go with Debian to match what I've got on the Pi.

Ian

[broadstairs]

Most distros come in at least two flavours. A bootable ready to run iso to burn to a CD or DVD which allows you to play with the system first before committing to an install but is then installable to your hard disk, these will usually give you a full working desktop system which you can then add to later or customise as you wish/need. Then they usually have a full DVD only iso which is bootable but to a standard installer which allows (if you want) customisation and package selection, plus whether you want a desktop system or a server (without a gui perhaps). All should install to a dual boot system, however I believe that W8 and in some cases W7 might have problems getting it to dual boot OK, XP in my experience works like a charm in most cases to dual boot.

Stuart

[tickmike]

Have a look at http://distrowatch.com/index.php?language=EN

[roseway]

Would I be right in thinking that I'll make an installation DVD (or 3) from a download, and that when I run or boot from that, part of the setup will allow me to configure a dual boot with an existing install of Windows?

Most if not all distros will enable you to set up a dual (or more) boot. There will be a stage during the installation when you get to choose which partitions to use, and what to use them for. Later on, it will detect any systems installed on the other partitions and set up a boot menu.

Comprehensive Debian installation instructions here: http://wiki.debian.org/QuickInstall

[sheddyian]

WEll, the install went OK, I've now got a dual boot 

BUT...

It's slower than Windows XP on the same machine, particularly the web browser (tried Ice Weasel and one other).

If I run the system monitor and nothing else, CPU1 is at 100% constantly, CPU2 bobs up and down 0 - 7%.  CPU fan seems to be running quite fast too, suggesting it's getting a bit hot.  No disk activity though.

Is this normal?

Ian

[burakkucat]

BUT...

It's slower than Windows XP on the same machine, particularly the web browser (tried Ice Weasel and one other).

If I run the system monitor and nothing else, CPU1 is at 100% constantly, CPU2 bobs up and down 0 - 7%.  CPU fan seems to be running quite fast too, suggesting it's getting a bit hot.  No disk activity though.

Is this normal?

No, nein, non, nay and thrice times nay!

You now need some help from Eric or Asbokid, the Debian specialists, to resolve your obvious configuration problem (which may be graphics related).

[broadstairs]

Ian it might help if you tell us what graphics card (Intel, ATI or Nvidia) you have and a bit about the spec of the rest of the hardware. My quad core AMD which dual boots with XP is pretty fast running Linux. Also if you are running KDE there should be a system Monitor (also known as KSysGuard) which will show what is using both memory and CPU, this may lead us somewhere.

Stuart

[asbokid]

Oh dear, I don't know what to suggest.   How are you measuring the performance of Windows and Linux?    Speed of retrieval and rendering of web pages by the browser?

cheers, a