Distributions

Discuss the security implications of the various flavors of linux and unix

Distributions

Post by terminus on Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:51 am
([msg=429]see Distributions[/msg])

What is your favorite linux distribution and why?
terminus
New User
New User
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:10 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by Jesus_of_Suburbia on Wed Apr 16, 2008 12:38 pm
([msg=443]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

Fedora

Because Shut up

But really because Red Hat actually sells, and Fedora is basically just Red Hat but awesome. I in fact do judge linux on commercial success and not uber leetness and other stupid shit like that. I want a distro that has a real following, not three dorks with nothing better to do.

:geek:
Jesus_of_Suburbia
New User
New User
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by Wyrmkill on Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:58 pm
([msg=460]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

Jesus_of_Suburbia wrote:Fedora

Because Shut up

But really because Red Hat actually sells, and Fedora is basically just Red Hat but awesome. I in fact do judge linux on commercial success and not uber leetness and other stupid shit like that. I want a distro that has a real following, not three dorks with nothing better to do.

:geek:



You judge Linux on commercial success, despite some of its best distro's are open source and you don't have to pay for them. Thats intelligent

Not only are you being ignorant in the decision of why to use an operating system "Well everyone else likes it, cause its showing commercial success, so that MUST mean its good." I mean we can obviously see that from Microsoft, the most widely used operating system on the planet. And its obviously the best.
</sarcasm>

So you want a distro with a real following, not three dorks with nothing better to do?

Unix was created by a group of AT&T employees at Bell Labs including Ken Thompson, Dennis Ritchie and Douglas McIlroy.

WOW, three guys with nothing better to do. And they came up with one of most powerful and versatile operating systems ever.

So, please, when your posting, have a bit of intelligence.
</rant>

As for the best distro.
Slackware

Reasons Why:
1. There's no package management system.
2. Slackware demands perfection.
4. Slackware is easy to mold and shape from the ground up. Slackware is built with the idea that you want to customize things your way, and it knows that, and lets you do it.
6. Slackware is hardcore Linux with a sharp flavor of classic Unix and some BSD packages thrown in for good measure.

As for servers, obviously FreeBSD is best. But for personal use, Slackware all the way.
Wyrmkill
New User
New User
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by Jesus_of_Suburbia on Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:26 am
([msg=502]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

Wyrmkill wrote:You judge Linux on commercial success, despite some of its best distro's are open source and you don't have to pay for them. Thats intelligent

Not only are you being ignorant in the decision of why to use an operating system "Well everyone else likes it, cause its showing commercial success, so that MUST mean its good." I mean we can obviously see that from Microsoft, the most widely used operating system on the planet. And its obviously the best.
</sarcasm>

So you want a distro with a real following, not three dorks with nothing better to do?

Unix was created by a group of AT&T employees at Bell Labs including Ken Thompson, Dennis Ritchie and Douglas McIlroy.

WOW, three guys with nothing better to do. And they came up with one of most powerful and versatile operating systems ever.

So, please, when your posting, have a bit of intelligence.
</rant>


*glare*

1. The Fedora Project is Open source...
2. It's not because everyone LIKES it, it's because it's proven. You can only sell snake oil for a while before people realize they are getting the wool pulled over their eyes. It's called maturity, i like a distro that has the big bugs fixed. You don't get that with version 0.38.399 RC14. Distros backed by money and built off of commercial distros are not necessarily better because they have the best and most features, but because the features are proven. Also, in my experience at least, there is a bigger and more helpful community backing these projects.
3. Microsoft was (stolen) by a small group of people, does that make it better than everything else? Fuck no. it all relates back to my previous reasoning. When something is just beginning it's untested, unproven, and 9 times out of 10 buggy. That goes without saying for all things from all kinds of people. However, a larger dev team can get more done faster than a smaller one. Maturity comes, but it takes time, and i'd rather stick with something that works fine NOW not EVENTUALLY.

This debate always causes shitstorms, and no one person is right, you might like slackware, but other people might think it's a total piece of shit because FreeBSD is CLEARLY better becuase it isn't a steaming pile of suck.

Call me old fashioned, but i like to use an operating enviroment i can trust, not something that with enough tinkering can look the best, or do a certain function.

I may be alone on this, but i think better things come from the hands of the many than the few, i'd rather see a single distro that does everything "Pretty good I guess" than one that does one (or a few) thing "really freaking awesome". Because for most people there is only a fine line between the two. I've grown used to getting coddled by my operating system, and no amount of talk will tell me that i need to get used to otherwise because it's better.

-_-

If you want to use slackware be my guest, i really could care less what you use, in the end i'll be the guy using whatever WiFi/EVDO/Etc. card he wants, because the world is built around windows... yes, i like windows, so what, wanna fi'daboutit?
Jesus_of_Suburbia
New User
New User
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by hackuin60s on Thu Apr 17, 2008 12:42 am
([msg=506]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

You judge Linux on commercial success, despite some of its best distro's are open source and you don't have to pay for them. Thats intelligent

Fedora is as well free distro, we don't need to pay for. :)
Not only are you being ignorant in the decision of why to use an operating system "Well everyone else likes it, cause its showing commercial success, so that MUST mean its good." I mean we can obviously see that from Microsoft, the most widely used operating system on the planet. And its obviously the best.
</sarcasm>

Agreed, here. We cannot decide any Operating System with its commercial success.
If any operating system works fine for your personal and official use, then it best for you. Also, almost all the OS have capabilities to handle and work fine for almost all the common task we handle daily.

As far as distro is concern, I have worked with RED-Hat Ent. Linux 4 ( both server and desktop ), Its pretty easy to use. And was very comfortable with it. Recently, I have installed fedora 8 which looks excellent until now, haven't worked much with it. However, there are allot of talks about Ubuntu being the very good distro.

New version of both Fedora and Ubuntu are going to release in next couple of day's may be with in 10-15 day's.
Certified: RHCSA, RHCE, CCNA.
Free software" is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of "free" as in "free speech," not as in "free beer."
User avatar
hackuin60s
New User
New User
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by sgtscream2 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 1:22 pm
([msg=567]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

I think that linux is a decent OS, we have firefox at school and that works pretty good, really slow, but thats because we got like 6 servers that are almost full. the system is easy to operate and runs fairly smooth.[code][/code]
sgtscream2
New User
New User
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 8:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by terminus on Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:13 pm
([msg=590]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

Although it's bound to do so this thread isn't meant to be a flame war over distros...

On that side note-> I started with Redhat 3.0 back in the day as my first distro, following which I installed Slackware then Debian. I went back to Slackware and stayed with it for quite a while. When gentoo came out I started using it for about a year and got tired of constantly emerging stuff. I changed to Debian as my primary distro which was probably 2-3 years ago.

I like Debian because it has a decent package management application (as long as you just use command line and not the GUI). Ubuntu/Kubuntu are based off Debian so they knew a good thing when they saw it. One thing I do not like about Debian is Iceweasel. Iceweasel is a POS copy of Firefox. Also, Oracle does not run on Debian which is a negative (for Oracle). I no longer use Slackware because of the lack of a decent package management system. The one slackware has is broken and does not have a good amount of packages and compiling everything from source is not on my checklist of fun things to do for half of my day each day.

I used to be a fan of Redhat but now that Fedora is no longer developed nearly as much by Redhat developers as it used to be it has diverged from the original distro and I am no longer a fan. SuSE is alright - it excels at running Novell applications. This is a plus if you work in an environment that uses Novell.
terminus
New User
New User
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:10 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by rki on Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:16 pm
([msg=591]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

Wyrmkill wrote:
As for the best distro.
Slackware

Reasons Why:
1. There's no package management system.
2. Slackware demands perfection.
4. Slackware is easy to mold and shape from the ground up. Slackware is built with the idea that you want to customize things your way, and it knows that, and lets you do it.
6. Slackware is hardcore Linux with a sharp flavor of classic Unix and some BSD packages thrown in for good measure.

As for servers, obviously FreeBSD is best. But for personal use, Slackware all the way.


word
Image
rki
New User
New User
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:29 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by terminus on Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:26 pm
([msg=593]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

rki wrote:
Wyrmkill wrote:
As for the best distro.
Slackware

Reasons Why:
1. There's no package management system.
2. Slackware demands perfection.
4. Slackware is easy to mold and shape from the ground up. Slackware is built with the idea that you want to customize things your way, and it knows that, and lets you do it.
6. Slackware is hardcore Linux with a sharp flavor of classic Unix and some BSD packages thrown in for good measure.

As for servers, obviously FreeBSD is best. But for personal use, Slackware all the way.


word


copy cat - don't you have an opinion of your own?
terminus
New User
New User
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:10 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


Re: Distributions

Post by Wyrmkill on Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:37 pm
([msg=605]see Re: Distributions[/msg])

terminus wrote:
rki wrote:
Wyrmkill wrote:
As for the best distro.
Slackware

Reasons Why:
1. There's no package management system.
2. Slackware demands perfection.
4. Slackware is easy to mold and shape from the ground up. Slackware is built with the idea that you want to customize things your way, and it knows that, and lets you do it.
6. Slackware is hardcore Linux with a sharp flavor of classic Unix and some BSD packages thrown in for good measure.

As for servers, obviously FreeBSD is best. But for personal use, Slackware all the way.


word


copy cat - don't you have an opinion of your own?


Why do you need an opinion of your own, when I'm always right and you can just agree with me :D
Wyrmkill
New User
New User
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


Next

Return to *nix

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests