Problems with Linux (Yeah, AGAIN!)

Here's the story:

I got this ATI Radeon X700PRO AGP at boxing day. I know, ATI and linux isnt a good mix generally, but i just couldnt resist: 149 CAN for that card was just too low to say :noooo:. So, anyway, linux wouldnt start the X server anymore, as expected. While i had the opportunity to just fix the problem with a bit of bashing in a console, i decided it was a good time to switch to another Distro. I was really deceived by Suse linux: Sound was all messed up, or inexistant, and The RPM system wasnt as good as i expected: I had a though time finding even the most known linux programs, and Dependancies where a pain in the ass. I decided to give Mandriva 2006 DVD a go, since i had a great experience with mandrake as my first linux distro (apart of knoppix, but that doesnt count), because i could easly find programs that i wanted without any assle, and also because it was a great excuse to use my Dvd burner i received this christmas. :dance:

Downloaded it, Burned it, Installed it. Fine. After the programs, or packages if you want, where installed though, A pre-installation system screen apeared...... i waited.........and waited.........to finnally restart the whole proccess because it seemed to never end. It gived the same result Each time i tried it. Of course, i had a big headhache trying to remember Msdos command, to replace the deffective MBR and bootloader that was partially destoyed because of a quick suse uninstallation and a failed installation of Mandriva.:redface:

I was wondering if anyone else experienced this while trying Mandriva 2006 DVD. Anyone?

Cahaz_

 

Never used mandriva, i always stick to slackware...

Depending on how trashed the hard drive was, there should be a log file detailing where the install crapped out. I've had trouble with everthing from video cards to ide chanels, linux is generally a pain in the ass when it comes to newer hardware.

you probably already know this, but if the mbr (master boot record) gets screwed up again you can fix it pretty easily if you do this from a boot disk:

chkdsk /p
fixmbr
fixboot

 

i had no boot disk around. :shrug:

Anyway, any recommendation on a good and easy to use distro? im still no expert, you know. Im temptated by Gentoo, but im scared of its installation proccess.:crying: i wasnt convienced by suse at all, slick or not. i think im going to try linspire:banghead:.

Its not that i want to though.

 

Why don't you use Knoppix. I does not install anything. Runs everything from the disc.

I use it all the time (for college stuff)

 

Going off the Knoppix train, Ubuntu has a livecd, and there has yet been an Ubuntu user that was unhappy. I don't use it myself, but can a million billion people be wrong?!?! (dont answer that)

 

the thing with unbuntu is that its gnome friendly, and i dont know why, but even if gnome is simpatic and quick to use, i never really liked it. Maybe its because of its Mac Top bar, or because of its unfinished, unpolished and boring theme, i dunno. I'd like to stick with KDE and Wn. I know theres Kunbutu, but i heard bad things about it, like that it was rushed, full of problems, and uncomparable to the original Unbutu. I doubt it was made by the same people too.

But hey, that was long time ago, maybe better versions surfaced or something.:shrug:

As for knoppix, i think its great for a first contact with linux, but i quickly found that it was incomplete, and that the hardware detection was really poor. Its not very fast either (because, of course, its a live cd).

 

Well, thats the problem with "hearing" things. There is nothing wrong with Kubuntu at all. This is what my neighbor uses, and believe me, if a single menu option didn't work, Id hear about it.

But I dont have a strong arguement for Ubuntu, like I said, because I dont use it.

 

I use FreeSBIE for work. I install it locally, but they have a livecd as well. I personally agree that it is a better environment for ME than linux, but that may not be the case for everyone.

http://www.freesbie.org/

 

what BSD is anyway? i heard about it, yes, but i cant tell you what it is exactly, apart that there's some kind of rivality between linux and it. How does it work? is it based around *nix?

 

In short (and possibly slightly skewed for simplicity):<br>In the beginning there was Unix from Bell Labs. It eventually turned into what we know as BSD Unix (BSD standing for Berkeley System DIstribution). Somewhere around 1980 a company called SCO (Santa Cruz Operation) was founded. Their main service was porting Unix to obscure platforms. Shortly after, they started their own breed of unix called "SCO Unix" by some. There are many other players in the unix game (Sun being one of them with their Sun OS), but it is hard to define what a Unix is anymore. Linux is a Unix clone in that, it has some fundamental differences both in userspace and in the kernel that keep it from being "real unix".

Hope I helped a little

 

Perhaps Linux is a UNIXclone but it is based on minix, if I remember correct. Or something like that, I can´t seem to remember, but one time I read the whole Minix, Linux / Unix story. on a website long ago.

 

give me the name of a good BSD distro for beginners and i will give it a go. Im deseperated; i decided to download Kunbutu and Linspire for the night, and im trying to find a gentoo DVD, just for the heck of it. Any other recommendation while we are at it?


Somehow, somewhere, another linux distro is waiting for me. ong:

 

Like I said, try FreeSBIE:

http://www.freesbie.org/

 

yupp, and it's called slackware compiled from source, did this once on my good ol' 200mhz computer.. took me 2 weeks to get it all up the way I wanted. but after that, it worked smooth ^^

 

Try this slackware live-cd distro:

http://slax.linux-live.org/

 

Slackware all the way, baby.

 

I know slackware is always a niche "geek trend", but let me give some advise by someone who has ran slackware for over 11 years now... dont. If it is a workstation, DONT USE SLACKWARE.

There are two reasons I ended up abandoning Slackware as my desktop distro of choice. First, Patrick, the soul maintainer of Slackware (wasnt always that way) got really sick last year and seemed like he was gonna kick the bucket. This brought some realization... when this guy is gone, there is no more Slackware. There were claims of a few people picking up his slack, but they didn't. Releases were delayed. One of the main problems is, they were volunteers, and Slackware is mostly a one man vision. The project can barely be maintained by the one man deploying it, he has no one on the payroll to help/pickup where it needs, and you simply cant rely on volunteers.

Which brings me to point #2. Slackware has NOT CHANGED in the last 11 years. Thats right. Other than the kernel and a few decisions to depricate/include packages, the installer is the same, the environment is the same... and sure, you are thinking, THATS GOOD!!! Well, it can be, but in this case, it isnt. The package management on Slackware is the poorest you will ever get. Simply put, it is a tar.gz file, with a script inside to put things where they need to be. No dependancy resolution. Due to some limitations, it is always INSISTED to NEVER upgrade your slackware machine to the next version, but rather REINSTALL.

Anyway, thats my rant. Slackware can be good for install-and-forget servers (so long as you are willing to accept slackware may disappear anyday).

 

MexicanGritzTaster > didn't know that, intresting. but about the update part.. just install swaret and your good to go
I havn't really had any problems with updates yet.. but on the other hand I have only had the machine running for a month

 

If you have issues with the slack package installer, just use the redhat packages. Slack supports both.