LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Home Forums Tutorials Articles Register
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions
User Name
Password
Linux - Distributions This forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on... Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 01-15-2002, 12:42 PM   #1
DiBosco
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Manchester, UK
Distribution: Mageia
Posts: 813

Rep: Reputation: 40
"Real" versions of linux...


I'm having a mass debate here (<g>) about which version of Linux to run my file server and mail server on (bye bye Win 2k! ;-). I was having an e-mail conversation with one of the chaps in our IT department in Germany and said I couldn't make my mind up, but was leaning towards Slackware (I only want a command line version). He replied thus:

"donīt go for Slackware....the only official real "distributions" are Redhat and SuSE. Even Debian does not have RPM based installations as described in the official RFCs.

Redhat will be a very good choice "

Now, whereas I'm sure Redhat or SuSE would be a good choice, surely he's talking bollocks saying the only real distros are RH and SuSE?
 
Old 01-15-2002, 02:17 PM   #2
trickykid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,149

Rep: Reputation: 270Reputation: 270Reputation: 270
actually you should tell him that the first ever distro was Slackware...and its the only one to date that has basically stuck to its truest form, not manipulating too much from the original. and just because a a distro doesn't come with RPM, which stands for Redhat Package Manager, doesn't mean its not a true distro...
 
Old 01-15-2002, 02:41 PM   #3
taz.devil
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Wa. State
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,261

Rep: Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally posted by trickykid
actually you should tell him that the first ever distro was Slackware...and its the only one to date that has basically stuck to its truest form, not manipulating too much from the original. and just because a a distro doesn't come with RPM, which stands for Redhat Package Manager, doesn't mean its not a true distro...
HERE HERE!!! Couldn't have said it better...And tell your freind that once configured, Slacks uptime will beat RH's pants off.
 
Old 01-15-2002, 02:58 PM   #4
DiBosco
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Manchester, UK
Distribution: Mageia
Posts: 813

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 40
>> HERE HERE!!! Couldn't have said it better...And tell your friend that once configured, Slack's uptime will beat RH's pants off. <<

Hey, I didn't say he's my friend, he's just some guy in our IT department.

Actually, come to think of it he said that Win98SE was fairly stable. That comment is reason enough to realise he might not know what he's on about! <G>
 
Old 01-15-2002, 03:00 PM   #5
TacKat
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Distribution: LFS
Posts: 90

Rep: Reputation: 15
There aren't any "true" distros. So yes, your friend is talking bollocks.
 
Old 01-15-2002, 05:52 PM   #6
finegan
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,700

Rep: Reputation: 72
Re: "Real" versions of linux...

Quote:
Originally posted by DiBosco

"donīt go for Slackware....the only official real "distributions" are Redhat and SuSE. Even Debian does not have RPM based installations as described in the official RFCs.
Redhat will be a very good choice "
Now here here, giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, he did plug the two market leaders in business angled Linux, and might have dummied down the terms (into a level of falsehood), as IT geeks are prone to over-simplify when they believe they are dealing with a non 'technically literate' computer user.

Or,

He could be a corporate whelp condescending prat who needs to be beaten about the neck and head with the O'Reilly Sendmail book.

Its all based on context.

Yeah, go Slack. You won't regret it.

Cheers,

Finegan
 
Old 01-16-2002, 12:26 PM   #7
taz.devil
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Wa. State
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,261

Rep: Reputation: 45
Re: Re: "Real" versions of linux...

Quote:
Originally posted by finegan


Now here here, giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, he did plug the two market leaders in business angled Linux, and might have dummied down the terms (into a level of falsehood), as IT geeks are prone to over-simplify when they believe they are dealing with a non 'technically literate' computer user.

Or,

He could be a corporate whelp condescending prat who needs to be beaten about the neck and head with the O'Reilly Sendmail book.
Cheers,

Finegan
I opt for choice number two 'Bob'!
 
Old 01-16-2002, 12:28 PM   #8
taz.devil
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Wa. State
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 1,261

Rep: Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally posted by DiBosco
>> HERE HERE!!! Couldn't have said it better...And tell your friend that once configured, Slack's uptime will beat RH's pants off. <<

Hey, I didn't say he's my friend, he's just some guy in our IT department.

Actually, come to think of it he said that Win98SE was fairly stable. That comment is reason enough to realise he might not know what he's on about! <G>
My mistake on the friend thing, sorry. And Win98SE being stable? Well, perhaps it is compared to the other MS products but we all know he CAN'T be comparing it to Linux?!?! Could he? Yikes...
 
Old 01-16-2002, 12:38 PM   #9
DiBosco
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Manchester, UK
Distribution: Mageia
Posts: 813

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 40
>> My mistake on the friend thing, sorry. And Win98SE being stable? Well, perhaps it is compared to the other MS products but we all know he CAN'T be comparing it to Linux?!?! Could he? Yikes... <<

Actually he was comparing it to 95, which I have found to be better than 98 which is better than ME (are we noticing a pattern here, children? <g>).

I was arguing to get Win2k on my new laptop and he was trying to persuade me it wasn't significantly better than 98. What a load of crap!

Anyway, I'm sure we're not interested in whether one version of Windows is better than another. It's a bit like talking about which way you want to die, none of the options are actually desireable!

He's actually a big fan of Linux to be fair, so he's not all bad!
 
Old 01-16-2002, 06:27 PM   #10
theFuzzyOne
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2001
Distribution: redhat
Posts: 154

Rep: Reputation: 30
my 2 cents

it all comes down to choice.. that's the beauty of it all! redhat and suse seem to be very 'commercialized' distributions, but frankly there are dozens upon dozens of flavors of linux that are a better over-all choice than w2k - pick one based on the features you need and that's it! there are some great alternatives to the 'mainstream' linux's like trustix (http://www.trustix.net ) that may be just perfect for you.
 
Old 01-16-2002, 07:28 PM   #11
trickykid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,149

Rep: Reputation: 270Reputation: 270Reputation: 270
Quote:
Originally posted by DiBosco
He's actually a big fan of Linux to be fair, so he's not all bad!
i guess that means being a big fan about linux and knowing about linux are two separate things..
 
Old 01-17-2002, 09:21 AM   #12
Thymox
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Plymouth, England.
Distribution: Mostly Debian based systems
Posts: 4,368

Rep: Reputation: 64
Quote:
It's a bit like talking about which way you want to die, none of the options are actually desireable!
Oh, that's good! You've gotta use that as your signature.
Quote:
Now here here, giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, he did plug the two market leaders in business angled Linux, and might have dummied down the terms (into a level of falsehood), as IT geeks are prone to over-simplify when they believe they are dealing with a non 'technically literate' computer user.
Doesn't that really piss you off? It does me. Oh, and I'd also like to cast my vote for the latter method of correctional treatment.
 
Old 01-17-2002, 10:08 AM   #13
cbates55
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Dec 2001
Location: Howell, Michigan
Distribution: Peanut Linux & $LFS (Draco-Linux)
Posts: 24

Rep: Reputation: 15
You could use Linux From Scratch($LFS) and not have to worry about what all of the other distro's put in theirs. With $LFS you control what is there. Just a thought . . .

http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
 
Old 01-17-2002, 11:21 AM   #14
SlCKB0Y
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2001
Location: Sydney
Distribution: Arch
Posts: 295

Rep: Reputation: 96
Quote:
Originally posted by trickykid
actually you should tell him that the first ever distro was Slackware...and its the only one to date that has basically stuck to its truest form, not manipulating too much from the original. and just because a a distro doesn't come with RPM, which stands for Redhat Package Manager, doesn't mean its not a true distro...
Ahem ahem!

We have been over this before. I think you must realise by now im anally retentive enough to pick you up on this blunder!

Quote:
Started by Patrick Volkerding, Slackware is based on the older SoftLanding System Linux distribution and was designed to address many of the problems that people were experiencing with SLS, which at the time appeared to have been abandoned by its developers
Source: http://www.developer.ibm.com/library.../schenk2b.html

hehe.
 
Old 01-17-2002, 11:41 AM   #15
trickykid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,149

Rep: Reputation: 270Reputation: 270Reputation: 270
alright, its not the first but its the oldest still being maintained.. so in my book that is the first cause who cares about the other guys who aren't even in the game anymore..
 
  


Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Differences between the "free" and "paid" versions eraser Linux - General 4 11-18-2015 06:30 PM
real time programming on Linux-2.4 " URGENT" mendiratta Programming 1 05-26-2005 08:20 AM
Please explain "386" vs. "686" versions vinoloco Linux - Newbie 4 04-05-2005 07:03 PM
Linux puts the real "fire" to the wire caleb star Linux - Hardware 2 11-19-2003 05:07 PM
vsftpd - "real" vs. "virtual" users clau_bolson Linux - Networking 2 11-17-2003 06:22 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:31 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration