Why would you want to download 1.8 gigs?

davetshave

I am a bit puzzled by the size of distributions. I downloaded RedHat 7.3 a while back and I am considering upgrading to 8.0. However I have to say the idea of downloading so much is not very appealing.

Is there no distro which only pushes RPM's on demand. It's silly to download 1.8 gigs when you will not use even half the crap. Or better still you chose the modules you want, it checks dependancies and then creates a custom distro with only the bits in it you need.

Greetings,

DaveTshave.

ratamacue

Debian is perfect for what you're trying to do. You can do an absolute minimum install, and then use apt-get (package management program) to download and install only the packages you need. It will take some work of course (man apt-get, etc) to figure out how to do it most efficiently.

If you don't want to do this, why not just order a CD set from cheapbytes.com or a similar online store?

pipeten

It's silly to download 1.8 gigs when you will not use even half the crap.

I disagree, i often find that around 80% of that 1.8 gigs will either be entirely new rpms or updated packages. Within the time between each redhat release im sure thousands of lines of codes have been tweaked in hundreds of packages.

sglane

That's why RedHat sells CDs of thier distro. If you don't want to download it, buy it at Office Depot. You get the manuals and sometime a sticker or pin!

jerdo

You can also do a network/internet install of most all the Linux/BSD distributions.

davetshave

The reason I don't just go and buy the cd's is because I am chronically lazy and tight fisted.
Plus there is tonnes of crap on the cd's which I really am not interested in having, why waste plastic making cd's with things I don't need? It just seems clumsy to me. Internet installation sounds really good as an alternative.

One other thing which is also holding me back slightly is that I finally have my linux machine working the way I want it. PHP and mysql are doing everything I want them too, even samba seems to be working.

Having never upgraded from one version of linux to another I am very curious about how this might affect the working of all these services. The only reason I really want to upgrade is so as to get the newest releases of software in RPM form. Often RH 7.3 has the older version. Anyone have any thoughts on what happens to my config files for all the services?

DaveTshave

karoic

Check out Debian and if you don't like them try Slackware (my current flavor). Debian has close to 9000 packages and if you was to download it all, theres eight cds. But you can just download a install cd and do a very basic install (which is still larger then slackwares base install) But it comes out to like 80M's when installed. Then you can pick and choose what packages you want installed. Debians package manager in terms of functionality is second-2-none. A bit hard to use at first tho'.. I will never again use a distro that has a "miminal" install that turns into 500+ megs (redhat8). I totally agree that 80% of whats on those cds is junk. I just want the programs I use, not the 40 other versions of them.

karoic

Oh yeah! I almost forget. OpenBSD, oh my - How could I not mention those wonderful people? Ok.. With OpenBSD you can download a floppy disk. And install direct from any of their ftp mirrors. The install is tightly packet and you only get a very small amount of stuff. They have quite a good selection of packages too, and you can install all of them directly from a mirror of your choice. The ups and downs of OpenBSD are apparent from them moment you install it however. OpenBSD has a single goal in life. To be a proactivly secure BSD style OS. They are said to be the most secure "out of the box" distribution you can get. So, thats quite a grand thing. And I use OpenBSD for all router/firewall projects and often for web/ftp servers as well. The downfall is it's not the easist distro to use on a every day basic as a user. OpenBSD actually examines the code for their packages as well to make sure not only the base system is secure but also any packages you might want. You will note however it comes with fairly old versions of things by default. They have the new versions, but they are not so well tested for their security. Anyhow, just another offer. What ever you pick, I would go for getting away from the Mandrake, SuSE, RedHat type distros.

dalecosp

I'm a BSD baby, they're all cool because of the "ports" system. My fave is FreeBSD because it's ports system is larger and the most up to date. The base install is the OS; the rest of the "distro" (to use a Penguin term) is under usr/ports, a huge tree of subcategories containing makefiles for thousands and thousands of apps. Want Apache?

$cd /usr/ports/www/apache13
$make install clean

It downloads the tarballs itself, runs its own specialized makefile and does any necessary patching, and cleans up after itself.....

Way cool.

Not to mention, with the BSD's you never end up with an old version lying around unless you're just plain lazy. The oldest kernel sitting on my servers is December, and the only reason it's not newer is I need to get down there and install more HDD space 'cuz I'm flat running at 103% and can't build anything...

karoic

I have not yet downloaded FreeBSD. I am sure the day will come that I do it. Right now I am still rather happy using OpenBSD and Slackware for my various needs. I just upgraded my firewall to OpenBSD 3.2 yesterday 🙂. And I think this weekend I will build myself a transparent firewall bridge! Oh yeah.. This will be so much fun, and the stuff I can do to fool nmaps os fingerprinting!

With OpenBSD they have tarball ports of everything. So you just need to know the name of the port. And you can do like pkgadd [url]ftp://port_anti_microsoft.tgz[/url] and it will download, install, nice and clean. Having not used FreeBSD I really don't know the pros/cons from the different BSD platforms. I think I might end up going all BSD (ditching slackware!) in time. But I just still really like slackware for some reasons. It was the first Linux distro I had ever tried, back 1993? or was it 94. Not sure, I was 13 and at the time there wasn't a whole lot of stuff I could actually do with Linux!

... peers around, looking for the person who actually posted the question...

davetshave

Interesting discussion although so much of it has gone right over my head. I only started using Linux less than a year ago. At the time I installed mandrake at home and didn't really find it very pleasant to use, so I neglected it. Then about four months ago I started using redhat at work to run a development server, which I also use as my workstation.

Fell totally in love with the RPM system although by the sounds of it there are other systems out there worth looking at. It rocks to just be able to get software up and running so easily with none of the hassle associated.

The only thing I miss from windows is editplus, a really top class editor for PHP. Yet to find any editor for linux which works even half as well. Trying to get used to GVIM, not really very happy with it though.

I am really interested in the security and performance issues surrounding various distro's. I have had mixed results compiling applications for redhat. It's a learning curve I am sure I will have to traverse one day. It's just a bit irritating.

I will be setting up a dedicated server soon, at that point I am sure I'll try the options you guys mentioned and then you'll probably hear more from me.

Greetings,

DaveTshave.

karoic

Alright, lets try this approach then. You are interesting in a distro that is easily installed, yet not overly windowsish (by you distaste of mandrake!). Something that has good security and performance. Also by your demenor I would guess you want a distro that does not come with 4.5Gs of stuff (redhat8).

Really, trying to not be biased. I would have to say Slackware. Why? It's not like mandrake, it's not overly windowy-ish. It is the most BSD/UNIX style Linux I have used. Most all the other distros have strayed away from the true root of their existance. Being more in tune to it's origians means what you learn on slackware will easily promote you into BSD platforms with less of a learning curve. It's small, if you want it to be. Like I said - I have a install of 50M's and once I finished my few packages I wanted - It was around 300M total. The install program with Slackware is not as pretty and Redhats or many other distros. It is text driven with menus. I think it is very simple. So give it a try, and if you have a question ask it.

Why not BSD? Debian? Debian is small, it is compact, and the install is fairly easy. However it's package tool is just plain confusing to me. BSD is great for many reasons, however it's far from the easy lifestyle many linux users live. The install is much more complicated - the hard drive partition section most of all - And once it's running.. Once you get to the point that you want to install package X that there's no port for. Well, there is a lot more support for "linux" source versions. Most Linux code will compile on any linux box. But OpenBSD, FreeBSD and NetBSD tend to require a port that is designed for them.

So, if you try Slackware - And when your done. You say "whoa, that was pretty easy, I want to kick it up a notch" then download any version of BSD and try it. I think OpenBSD makes the best firewall/gateway and FreeBSD would be a good choice for the everyday use/desktop stuff.

These are simply my ideas, so I could be WAY wrong. But heck even if I am you get to try lots of stuff..

.. your mouse has moved. windows must be restarted for the change to take effect [OK] ..

su1d

actually, you only need first three CDs to install RH8.
others are just for source codes and documentation.

if i'm not mistaken, starting with RH8 they included a networked install to update all outdated RPMs on the box.

dalecosp

Well, if we have to discuss the Penguin (and we owe it Linus, at least, to do so, if not the O.P.) how about Gentoo? It's starting to make some serious waves, I understand...maybe someday you'll get this daemon-addict there as well....

dalecosp

Originally posted by karoic
Well, there is a lot more support for "linux" source versions. Most Linux code will compile on any linux box. But OpenBSD, FreeBSD and NetBSD tend to require a port that is designed for them.

These are simply my ideas, so I could be WAY wrong. But heck even if I am you get to try lots of stuff..

Well, you are wrong a bit, but not too far off base---Linux emulation on FreeBSD has been benchmarked by some as actually faster than Linux itself. Of course, that's another can of worms....writer/tester bias, tester experience with tuning various OS's, etc. But, a lot of BSD guys just grab source for some Linux package and compile away. ..

I wouldn't tell anyone they have to use a certain OS, given no parameters for the decision. But FreeBSD at least, runs Linux software (for the most part) like a native. The real issue would be speed to release on "ports" or "packages"...everything in BSD-land is volunteer, as is the case with most OpenSource SW, and you may get the latest stuff faster for Linux in the event that FBSD's Linux Emul needs to be updated to handle whatever it is....

Slackware...yup, s'posed to be quite BSDish. As I mentioned above, some guys in BSD are excited about Gentoo as well. I'm curious who has the time and hardware to test so many OS's, though...

.. your mouse has moved. windows must be restarted for the change to take effect [OK] ..

ggg!!

karoic

Yeah, not having used FreeBSD I fall short when it comes to knowing much about it. I really need to download it. Just not sure what PC I'd install it on! I need about 10 U1 systems that I can rack mount in the corner of my room and just play with OSs on them.. Hmmn.. Maybe I need to get a super high paying job first. My work did recently give me a Solaris box to "play" with. REally, that was their exact words!

dalecosp

That'd be cool, but mega-bucks, as you imply.

I have seen "Hard drive switches" that are touted to be just the thing...3 drives hook to a switch, you could mark them: Net, Open, Free, then push which you want to boot today.

OTOH, you'd have to have more than one switch (or more than one box) for Linux: RH, Suse, Debian, Slack, Mandrake, Gentoo,
Alphalinux, ALT, ART, ASP, Astaro, Basic, Beehive, BBC, BRD, Byzantine, CAEN, ChainSaw (vroom!), ClarkConnect, Cool, Core, etc., etc., etc.,

Gee, so many....I'd think we need an entire boxen farm...takes forever just to load a list on my 56K modem... 😉

scarabatwork

SuSE allows you to do this. You can download an iso of their boot disk from: [url]ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/current/boot/boot.iso[/url]

run it, select ftp as the install medium and you're ready to go.

you might also want to look at: [url]ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/current/README.FTP[/url] for instructions on installing.

good luck!

dalecosp

Originally posted by scarabatwork
SuSE allows you to do this. You can download an iso of their boot disk from: [url]ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/current/boot/boot.iso[/url]

run it, select ftp as the install medium and you're ready to go.

you might also want to look at: [url]ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/current/README.FTP[/url] for instructions on installing.

good luck!

"This" being multi-boot? How 'bout GRUB? Or the FreeBSD built in loader....not pretty, no bells/whistles, just looks at partitions and asks, "which"?

scarabatwork

I believe grub is optional (as is just about everything) with SuSE 8.1 and the default is lilo. I used to be a pretty devout SuSE user, but switched to RedHat as of release 8.0 (mainly for all the gui admin tools, which is alot easier to train people in than command-line tools <sigh>)

Anyways, SuSE is good, especially for network installs. RedHat is good, but the distro is only available (I believe) as 4 iso's and that defeats what you were trying to do in the first place.