Reply to: Favourite Free Linux?

[ThomserveBAS]

Favourite Free Linux?

Ubuntu 12.10 as my main file server, 12.04 on my CCTV server and Debian Wheezy on a couple of repurposed Raspberry Pi's.

The whole lot is controlled by FreeBSD-based pfSense (firewall, dns, dhcp, proxy and VPN in one tiny appliance).

[bobspud]

I like damn small Linux. It's 40MB and runs a desktop system.

I hate having the kitchen sink running on a machine when it does not need to be there.

It's Debian based too so apt-get will work.

DSL information

[petergriffin]

Slackware is great, especially for learning Linux, but lack of packaging dependency management means it takes a lot of time. I prefer FreeBSD for that kind of usage these days as ports makes it a bit easier & quicker to use.

I never got on with grub, found lilo so much easier.

If you install everything you don't need package dependency resolution. If you like Freebsd-style source based dependency resolution you can install Sbopkg:
sbopkg : the slackbuilds.org package browser

Slackware is probably the only major distribution still using Lilo and Init by default, as opposite to Grub and the vile SystemD. If and when even Slackware is forced to use SystemD (and it's perfectly possible), then you can truly say that Linux has died.

[lilelvis2000]

Why upgrade the server from 10.04 though? All mine are still on 10.04 and I ain't budging until just before it runs out:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS

Got two more years yet! When closer to that time I will set up new machines and transfer sites to them and then just can the old boxes. Servers tend to be the same kind of price but RAM and proc power increases. I wouldn't upgrade from version to version on a production machine due to the kind of ball-ache you describe. If it ain't broke...

Indeed. lesson learned. The main server is still on 10.04 and I'm saving up for new hardware. Than I'll image the drive. Upgrade the new server, test and switch over. The older server will than become the new backup server. The current backup server can't manage to backup all the machines in 8 hours now. Just too much data for a Celeron 800Mhz to compress now.

[Cliphead]

Haven't recompiled a kernel for a while but happy to do that when required.

I use a CLI 100% of the time anyway so choice of distro shouldn't matter but Mint does fill in the gaps.

[doodab]

There's only one distribution that has stuck to the original Linux principles and that's Slackware, but it's not for everybody.

I started with Slackware. It came on CD through the post from some place in the states with full source for everything in tarballs. I've fond memories of recompiling the kernel, X, and GCC for best performance and spending about 3 days setting up FVWM just how I wanted. Awesome fun and I picked up a fair bit of useful knowledge that has come in handy over the years.

[administrator]

Been using Ubuntu since Breezy (2005), this server runs it and do all the others I run. I have gone right off the Desktop version since Unity, took more of an effort a few weeks ago and actually got into the way of thinking behind it and it isn't as bad as I initially thought.

CentOS for me because I've found it to be easy to get commercial software that supports RHEL to run on it. I did muck about with ubuntu for a bit but I gave up on it when they decided to move the window decorations to the wrong side.

- exactly, WTF they thought that was a good idea is beyond me.

Linux Mint is far better than Ubuntu although it's based on that, try it out and you won't go back to Ubuntu.

Mint

You have mentioned this a few times on the forum so gave it a spin over Xmas. Love it so far! Going to give it to a couple of people in the office to mess about with in VMs and see how they get on. V user friendly interface and all the apt goodness I am used to from Ubuntu.

I use Ubuntu mainly. About five years back I chose Ubuntu because it came on the front of a mag. I've also tried XUbuntu and I run CentOS 5.6 for my Oracle DB development.

I needed something cheap to run my wife's office. At that time I didn't have the Action Pack subscription. And Ubuntu could run Samba, email, LDAP, RAID all for free.

Lately though I'm not impressed with the new Ubuntu 120.04 UI..its crap. And the upgrade process almost always fails - even from LTS to LTS. It really is hell when your main server is down because the GRUB upgrade choked. And there was the time the LDAP update also croaked.

I upgraded the backup server from 10.04 to 12.04 and the backups started failing because of a major bug in Samba. So the Ubuntu QA leaves something to be desired.

Why upgrade the server from 10.04 though? All mine are still on 10.04 and I ain't budging until just before it runs out:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LTS

Got two more years yet! When closer to that time I will set up new machines and transfer sites to them and then just can the old boxes. Servers tend to be the same kind of price but RAM and proc power increases. I wouldn't upgrade from version to version on a production machine due to the kind of ball-ache you describe. If it ain't broke...

[lilelvis2000]

I am just in the process of installing Ubuntu Linux on an old PC I have lying around at home to play around with and also do some development work.

I did consider Scientific Linux as it is based on Red Hat Linux but is free.

If anyone else uses Linux at home, what version do you use and why do you prefer it?

Cheers!

I use Ubuntu mainly. About five years back I chose Ubuntu because it came on the front of a mag. I've also tried XUbuntu and I run CentOS 5.6 for my Oracle DB development.

I needed something cheap to run my wife's office. At that time I didn't have the Action Pack subscription. And Ubuntu could run Samba, email, LDAP, RAID all for free.

Lately though I'm not impressed with the new Ubuntu 120.04 UI..its crap. And the upgrade process almost always fails - even from LTS to LTS. It really is hell when your main server is down because the GRUB upgrade choked. And there was the time the LDAP update also croaked.

I upgraded the backup server from 10.04 to 12.04 and the backups started failing because of a major bug in Samba. So the Ubuntu QA leaves something to be desired.

[smatty]

I used Ubuntu for years but got fedup with the whole Unity thing and lately had some issues with mouse clicks in GTK apps so am currently running Mint KDE.

Slackware is great, especially for learning Linux, but lack of packaging dependency management means it takes a lot of time. I prefer FreeBSD for that kind of usage these days as ports makes it a bit easier & quicker to use.

I never got on with grub, found lilo so much easier.

[NickFitz]

Is Gentoo still the distro of choice for those who enjoy recompiling their kernel every day or two?

"To me, an extra 0.1% performance increase, even if I am only imagining it to be faster, is certainly worth one day a week recompiling all of the latest packages from source code."

"I would rather spend a day compiling X and KDE on my system when I know that it has been built with everything that I need, rather than installing a package that has been compiled with every option and have unnecessary dependencies cluttering up my system."

"I think 10 minutes server downtime once a couple of months (or even less frequently) due to compiling updates, is not much of an issue. "

etc., etc.: Welcome to Gentoo is Rice, the Volume goes to 11 here.

[d000hg]

Ubuntu is not Linux.

what is it then?

There's only one distribution that has stuck to the original Linux principles and that's Slackware, but it's not for everybody.

So the original linux principles are crap in other words.

[petergriffin]

Ubuntu is not Linux. All the other distributions mentioned here are crap.

There's only one distribution that has stuck to the original Linux principles and that's Slackware, but it's not for everybody.

[Addanc]

openSUSE with the default KDE desktop.

[Sysman]

Been using CentOS as my preferred server distro but gonna give Scientific Linux a whirl, I see it's basically RHEL.

I was put onto Scientific Linux by a chap who uses it at both work and home. For work purposes, at the time he made his decision SL supported more releases than CentOS and for home use he found Fedora releases dropped off the map too quickly. SL is supported by FermiLabs and CERN by paid support teams which give me a bit more confidence in its future.

Gotta just love vm's

Yes, you can test to your heart's content and only fire them up when you want to. They are easy to zap without effort too.

One of the best features is that you don't need to go near GRUB 2. When I was trying dual and triple boot systems three years ago I came to hate GRUB 2. The only GRUB 2 tutorials I could find at the time wanted to explain the philosophy and all the rest of the gubbins first, when I just wanted a quick fix to get me past the boot prompt

[Cliphead]

Been using CentOS as my preferred server distro but gonna give Scientific Linux a whirl, I see it's basically RHEL.

Gotta just love vm's