[Wylug-help] Networking Linux PCs

[John Hodrien]

On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Frank Shute wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 12:09:24PM +0000, John Hodrien wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Frank Shute wrote:
> >
> > > This has always been the perceived wisdom but I often wonder how true
> > > it is. I can't comment on Debian but having installed FreeBSD which I
> > > was assured was terrifying and strictly for wizards, I found it to be
> > > the easiest OS I had ever installed. It was really just a case of
> > > being able to read the instructions with the partitioning being the
> > > hardest bit (isn't it always when you dual boot?) although the
> > > installer offers a sensible default.
> >
> > Ah but there's different groups of people.  I started with slackware, and
> > coped but that certainly doesn't mean it was good.  Some people would start
> > there and throw it in the bin and never bother looking again.
>
> But Slack has always been considered a bit of a hackers system.

But doesn't BSD + Debian have the same kind of reputation?

> > The RedHat installer is hardly complex if you pick the newbie install, and I'd
> > suspect less complex than the BSD installer.
>
> The RedHat installer is more complicated than the FreeBSD installer &
> because it's got whizzy graphics and the like, it doesn't really make
> it any easier to use - newbie or otherwise.

I disagree.  Newbie perceived easiness rates a mouse click as easier than
right-right-return.

> Installing on my laptop which only had a PCMCIA CDROM was the same
> procedure with RedHat and FreeBSD - copy the CDROM to my Windows
> partition and go from there. Numerous (complicated) kernel recompiles
> with RedHat to get sound, PCMCIA and USB working, none required with
> default FreeBSD kernel although APM doesn't work so I require an
> (easy) recompile. Hideous amount of hacked options in linux kernel to
> get APM working on a Thinkpad.

Then you're damned unlucky with the pcmcia setup of RedHat.  I'm amazed that
you required all these changes.  What hardware have you got?

> Not the workstation but RH failed to configure the ATAPI CDROM correctly
> and FreeBSD did.

Explain.  How can RedHat fail to configure a boring ATAPI CDROM?  It manages
Firewire but not ATAPI?  What was strange about it?  What did it do wrong?

> What I'm really getting at is that a more thoroughly tested system
> than RH is easier but RH insist on putting out systems that contain a
> kernel which is hacked and hasn't had widespread use. Ditto their
> system tools. Ditto their hacked versions of Gnome and KDE....

What faults are you pointing at with their kernel?
What faults are you pointing at with versions of KDE and Gnome?

> Compare and contrast the development process of a RedHat system and
> FreeBSD or Debian: A few people at RH hack around with kernel and the
> system and it receives a not very widespread release as beta then it's
> released. But FreeBSD is released as CURRENT (for the keen &
> developers), then STABLE (some bugs) and finally RELEASE (rock solid)
> and all along that process anybody can track whichever release they
> want or even track more than one. Debian does something similar.

Then RedHat receives far more users out in the field.  No?

> Then compare and contrast apt or ports to RPM and they're in a
> different league. The administrative overhead is huge in comparison,
> something anybody, let alone a newbie, could well do without. RPM
> should be dumped - it's grossly antiquated, inadequate and generally
> hellish.

I don't entirely understand why the administrative overhead is huge.  If I use
what RedHat supply, what problems do I have?

> > > I suppose newbies might be put off by Debian as stable (or release?
> > > Can't remember) is always someway behind the latest kernel and
> > > utilities.
> >
> > Until recently, somewhat was putting it mildly.
>
> But it's stable and well tested which is preferable to something that
> is not IMO. BTW, is Debian release on 2.4 now or still 2.2?

See I don't think it is to the current market, because they've been sold
computers as something that doesn't always work.  I've got a RedHat 8.0
machine in front of me, with all these unstable things you're talking about.
It's not crashed once since I installed it on new untested hardware.  It's
fast, it's pretty, it's got almost all of the packages that I want.  If it
crashes once a month but is slick, and yours never crashes, I still think
RedHat wins newbie points.

jh

--
"Computer science is as much about computers as astronomy is about
 telescopes."
                                                      -- Edsgar Wybe Dijkstra