Why Is Your Linux Distro So Much Better...

[Crushdepth]

Just curious...why do you get off on your Linux distribution? What is so good about it? Why not use a different one?

I mean, they're all the same, right?

[francois]

Just curious...why do you get off on your Linux distribution? What is so good about it? Why not use a different one?

I mean, they're all the same, right?

hi'

well, right and wrong

they are based on the Linux Kernel(Linux OS is basicaly a Kernel), then every distro use it's own tools, some very similar, but different name and functions.

a lot of them use the .rpm format for packages, but one thing for sure thay all run any .tgz.

Debian and Slackware are a bit apart, Slackware is may be the oldest distro, Debian is one of the most stable but also most difficult to master.

beside, are the famous ones ... Red-Hat, Suse, Mandriva(mandrake+connectiva) and a lot more, and so many that I can't name them all ...

I use Suse 9.3, and happy of it

I have tested a lot of them ... I mean a lot really(running Linux since 95, when I had enough to build my second pc)

soon taking a taste of freebsd 5.4

francois

[Tywais]

I've been using Slackware for, well forever it seems. It has always been my first choice for servers due to superior security (IMHO) and stability (no beta applications like in some other distros). Prior to linux I was using Minux (showing my age here).

For desktop and non mission critical systems, Mandrake (PC based) and Suse (Sun SparcStation based) due to ease of installation and configuration for my users.

[francois]

I've been using Slackware for, well forever it seems.  It has always been my first choice for servers due to superior security (IMHO) and stability (no beta applications like in some other distros).  Prior to linux I was using Minux (showing my age here).

For desktop and non mission critical systems, Mandrake (PC based) and Suse (Sun SparcStation based) due to ease of installation and configuration for my users.

hi'

minux .... houlala, remind me windows 1.0 except that minux was already rock-stable .. ( just what I read about it ) but had win 1.0 on and old 386 ... gee, what a way until now, win 1.0=2 floppies

haaa ... a Slackware user

can you tell us a bit more about the advantage to run Linux as a server ...

and even some tips about the Slackware distro

as some user see Linux as a desktop using only.

although, one can do whatever he wants now with a stable Linux distro, a lot keep windows along for a few works ...

some still have both for a matter of compatibility with job, as I do ... 99% of my customers are using windows ...so, can't do without

but, for a network, besides all facts(fake or true), Linux is by far the best OS we have.

francois

ps: come on, anyone else ...

[Tywais]

haaa ... a Slackware user

can you tell us a bit more about the advantage to run Linux as a server ...

and even some tips about the Slackware distro

as some user see Linux as a desktop using only.

Well, the obvious reasons are it's free, it's NOT Microsoft, updates are frequent (no 6 months - year like someone else hugh number of apps and support available, stability (my servers are up for months at at time without ever rebooting). For servers (network) Linux (and I feel Slackware because of all the security tools that come with it) does it all without buying add-ons. 99.99999% virus free (didn't say 100% because I heard of 1 or two virus attempts). My main server runs as a web server, time server, e-mail server, proxy server, DNS server, FTP server, Firewall, mail & spam filter, SSH web-mail server, MySQL Server and all this with just one basic PC.

although, one can do whatever he wants now with a stable Linux distro, a lot keep windows along for a few works ...

some still have both for a matter of compatibility with job, as I do ... 99% of my customers are using windows ...so, can't do without

but, for a network, besides all facts(fake or true), Linux is by far the best OS we have.

francois

With my research and engineering work I still have to use Windoze However I run X-Windows from my PC to the server so in effect have a desktop version of Linux, very convenient.

[autonomous_unit]

OK, I'll bite since the mention of Slackware brought a wave of nostalgia.

First, to make it Thailand related: Fedora handles Unicode and mixed Thai/English documents nicely in XTerms and graphical programs now. I imagine other modern distributions do as well?

The answer to the original question is, I think, that what makes a distribution best is the codependency that forms between you and it. Even more so, if you have gone from one to another like a gilted lover! Otherwise, what makes it good is that all your friends already use it and answer your questions...

My first happy use was also Slackware back when you could boot a demo off one floppy. I think I tried SLS first, but Slackware was considered user-friendly at the time. It served me well through school and I am only dissappointed w/ Linux these days when I realize that I had a full-functioning X windows and software development system (for my college CS courses) that fit into RAM and harddisk space that is smaller than some of my digital photos and music files now. I also shared a computer and dialup connection w/ college roommates using a serial terminal as the second head... that was another cheap perk.

However, I switched to RedHat when I acquired a surplus DEC Alpha computer, because they were one of the few multi-architecture distributions around. I hated the switch from Slackware, but have slowly evolved to a love-hate relationship with RedHat and now Fedora, even though I haven't tried to use anything but standard PCs lately. I know how to install it and reverse most of its brain-damage in less time than it takes Windows people to remove their viruses every week. On the other hand, I am too old school to ever try an OS "upgrade," opting for a fresh install and transplant of my personal data every time a new version comes out.

I use Linux exclusively on PCs and laptops for many years now, but will run Windows via VMWare when an employer requires me to work with Office documents for the job. OpenOffice is still not compatible enough and strange things will happen if you coauthor something and constantly throw a document back and forth from OpenOffice to MS Office...

[sting01]

Linux is basically a kernel, a distribution is what is around the kernel + the kernel itself ... including the colored carton box you can have if you order your prefered Mandrake directly in France.

Why I love Mandrake : 1) it's french

2) made by french for .....anyone else

3)In case of buggy release (who say 8 and 8.1) I can easily send insulting email to Mandrake, my vocabulary in french is far more important than in english.

4) they promoted Kdesktop in the past.

[cathyy]

Why I love Mandrake : 1) it's french

2) made by french for .....anyone else

3)In case of buggy release (who say 8 and 8.1) I can easily send insulting email to Mandrake, my vocabulary in french is far more important than in english.

4) they promoted Kdesktop in the past.

Yep on #3. I started with Slackware, got it correctly installed, and realized I was in way over my head. Tried Red Hat 6.0. It came needing a kernel recompile to allow printing. Tried Corel, and it was great for several months until I started to need the real KDE libraries they altered. Tried Mandrake (Mandriva now, is it not?) and liked it until 8.0 and 8.1 were such complete piles of feces.

Moved on to Prodigy, and was hooked on Debian-based distros. Tried Suse and needed a Debian based distro. Went to Debian-based distros again: Libranet, pure Debian, Kanotix, Ubuntu. Libranet has the best tools for a Linux newbie I have ever seen.

From there I moved on to FreeBSD. FreeBSD brought me to the best OS I have ever used: OS X. Two weeks of FreeBSD had me convinced to buy a Mac. I have never looked back, although I do still hang out on some Linux IRC channels.

[francois]

hi'

From there I moved on to FreeBSD. FreeBSD brought me to the best OS I have ever used: OS X. Two weeks of FreeBSD had me convinced to buy a Mac. I have never looked back, although I do still hang out on some Linux IRC channels.

so, can you tell us a bit about your experience on free bsd?

some of my friends jumped to mac for it's efficiency, stability and last but not least, it's unix based

still, with Suse, but a try of a free bsd is on the way ...

any hints?

Suse and freebsd have to be on the same hdd ... can't buy one more right now

francois

[cathyy]

so, can you tell us a bit about your experience on free bsd?

some of my friends jumped to mac for it's efficiency, stability and last but not least, it's unix based

still, with Suse, but a try of a free bsd is on the way ...

any hints?

Suse and freebsd have to be on the same hdd ... can't buy one more right now

francois

My memories are not perfect as to actual commands and program names...but here goes.

Installing FreeBSD will completely hose any 2.6 kernel Linux installation on the same drive, unless the new 5.4 is WAY different from the 4.x I tried. It has to do with how Linux sees the drive, versus how Windows, FreeBSD, and Linux 2.4 or earlier kernels see the drive. I'm talking actual drive geometry conflicts here.

The solution is to partition the drive using something like Knoppix, making sure it is a 2.4 kernel. Leave free space for the FreeBSD, but create all the Linux partitions you will need. You will NOT be able to change this later on during installation! The 2.6 kernel Linux will install politely into the 2.4 partitions, and FreeBSD will see the drive the same way and agree about where each partition begins and ends when you then install it after the Linux. IIRC, you have no choice other than using the FreeBSD boot manager unless you are a grub god.

It's HIGHLY confusing (or was, anyway) as the boot manager screen is the same as the installation screen. Installation is just one of the options given.

I really liked my FreeBSD. Everything Just Worked except for 802.11g wireless networking. The package management system was good. Be sure to install the Linux compatibility libraries. Be sure to install CVSup and use it.

The single best resource is the

FreeBSD User Manual.

[Crushdepth]

Ok, so they're not all the same...another question:

If Linux distros vary, is there any problem with platform fragmentation? I mean, will 'linux' programs generally run on all distributions of 'linux', or will some things work on specific distributions only? I am wondering if Linux distributions are likely to evolve into separate, non-compatible systems in future?

Last year I experimented with learning J2ME to program my mobile phone. Although it is often presented as a single platform, it isn't, so unless you write apps using the absolute lowest common denominator of functionality, they won't work on a broad range of 'J2ME' phones.

I know it's not a great comparison, but is this kind of fragmentation a problem / likely to become a problem on Linux too?

[Tywais]

Ok, so they're not all the same...another question:

I know it's not a great comparison, but is this kind of fragmentation a problem / likely to become a problem on Linux too?

Not likely because the kernel sources will be the same on each distribution except perhaps the default version numbers. The vast majority of applications that run under unix come as source code and then compiled under the distribution and as such no fragmentation except the reliance on certain libraries which may have different versions and/or default install locations which can be specified in the build switches.

Also the majority of apps now come with "./configure" build command that will search the distribution to find the required libraries/includes automatically to compile the app.

[cathyy]

Ok, so they're not all the same...another question:

If Linux distros vary, is there any problem with platform fragmentation? I mean, will 'linux' programs generally run on all distributions of 'linux', or will some things work on specific distributions only?

Actually, there IS fragmentation already, but it's not a problem. If you don't believe me, go to rpmfind and see how many different versions there are of one program, to suit the various flavors of only rpm based distros. And no, they will not necessarily run on a different distro than the one specified.

Distro developers choose a kernel which has been released by the kernel developers. There is only one group of kernel developers. So the kernel is the same in all distros using that kernel. Remember there is always more than one kernel, too.

But the kernel doesn't do everything. To the kernel you add drivers, (usually as kernel modules), utilities, and libraries. Not all distros use the same ones, but they could, because they are open source. These are what make some distros run programs, and others not. Particularly the libraries. Distro developers choose these so that they will all work well together. You can't just get everything. Some things conflict with other things.

Finally, the best distros add proprietary tools that no other distro will have. Yast for Suse, Adminmenu for Libranet, etc. These are what make a distro worth paying for. A good distro will also have solid hardware recognition so it will install the drivers you need. So be sure to have your printer, scanner, digital camera, webcam, whatever hooked up when you install Linux. Otherwise you may need to recompile your kernel to add modules (drivers). In Libranet a kernel recompile is done by Adminmenu, so you don't have to remember the six or seven command sequence to do one.

Linux is so universal because of these differences, not in spite of them. Some people want to do everything "by hand" compiling all the applications from source code. (Gentoo, Slackware) Some people want everything to Just Work (SuSe, Libranet, Mandriva, Kanotix, Ubuntu). Some people want to run Linux from a cd (Mepis, Knoppix). After that, people become accustomed one package management system and want to stick with that. For years the Debian based distros had a real advantage in that area with apt, but the Red Hat (rpm) based distros have pretty much caught up with better dependency handling. The do-it-yourself distros expect YOU to handle dependencies yourself.

[yuyi]

A good distro will also have solid hardware recognition so it will install the drivers you need. So be sure to have your printer, scanner, digital camera, webcam, whatever hooked up when you install Linux. Otherwise you may need to recompile your kernel to add modules (drivers).

...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are correct, it helps to have all stuff connected and switched on during install, to get all drivers installed right away.

But modern distributions such as SuSE do also allow the connection of new hardware later, and will catch it and install / configure the drivers, if available. And most drivers are available.

If the driver is there, then it will get installed without recompiling the kernel, at install or later, when you connect the hardware.

A Kernel recompile would only be necessary if a driver which needs to be included in the kernel is not included already in the kernel. This would usually not be the case for a printer, scanner, etc., no need to recompile here. (I'm talking about the current distributions, such as SuSE 9.3 or 10, not about the "good" old times )

[cathyy]

But modern distributions such as SuSE do also allow the connection of new hardware later, and will catch it and install / configure the drivers, if available. And most drivers are available.

If the driver is there, then it will get installed without recompiling the kernel, at install or later, when you connect the hardware.

You have apparently never installed a distro without your printer connected...and had it leave out the kernel bits that deal with printing, because it assumed you didn't need them. You have also apparently never installed Linux on a computer with a piece of hardware, say a NIC or a sound card, that was so new there were only third party drivers, and you had to compile those, and also recompile your kernel to eliminate any other driver for that piece of hardware or it would try to use the wrong one. BTDT.

You are, of course, right, IF the distro you are using includes (IIRC) kudzu or something like it for hardware detection at startup. Not all distros include that, though, as kudzu had some unfriendly conflicts. SuSe definitely does, as do most other Red Hat based distros. Debian based distros, not so much. Plug it all in before installing.

The new distros "Just Work" the same way Windows does, by including every single blasted driver in the base system installation. It's then only a matter of recognizing and loading the right driver module for whatever you plug in. Better to recompile and leave out all the excess crap you don't need.

[yuyi]

You have apparently never installed a distro without your printer connected...and had it leave out the kernel bits that deal with printing, because it assumed you didn't need them.

I do it all the time, really! Every SuSE version, since years. Many many times:

Install first.

Then, a day later, oops, I need to print, switch on the printer. Fire up YAST, configure, printing.

A week later, oops, I need to scan, switch on the scanner. Fire up YAST, configure, scanning.

No problems. No recompile.

SuSE and similar do provide a already compiled kernel. Basic features like printing (CUPS), scanning (SANE), and all the USB stuff is included, ready to get used, or not, up to you.

As said, I usually plug in the printer(s) much later. Then it is a configuring of them (at SuSE with YAST). Easy and usually automagically.

Same for scanner. I have an exotic one which needs the firmware as a file. No problem, just an entry in the SANE configuration file. No kernel recompile.

I just added another "officially windows only" laserprinter with a proprietary driver for Linux. No problem, just two RPMs to install , CUPS restart, and it prints. No kernel recompile.

You have also apparently never installed Linux on a computer with a piece of hardware, say a NIC or a sound card, that was so new there were only third party drivers, and you had to compile those, and also recompile your kernel to eliminate any other driver for that piece of hardware or it would try to use the wrong one. BTDT.

Again, yes, also that happens sometimes. I did install a new soundcard recently. There was no driver available yet. Just an experimental one by the ALSA people. So what to do? Well, get the current ALSA snapshot, compile it, install it, runs. No kernel recompile.

But with the ALPS touchpad, to use all its features, yes, I needed a kernel recompile. Or better, a compile of the kernel modules only, to get the alps driver kernel module adapted to the kernel and installed.

Same with the latest nvidia drivers for the latest nvidia grapgics cards. It is a compiling of the kernel module needed only, no kernel recompile.

But then there is this Philips webcam. And yes, to get the full size picture I had to recompile the kernel. That was about a year ago, but now also that is not needed anymore.

You are, of course, right, IF the distro you are using includes (IIRC) kudzu or something like it for hardware detection at startup. Not all distros include that, though, as kudzu had some unfriendly conflicts. SuSe definitely does, as do most other Red Hat based distros. Debian based distros, not so much.  Plug it all in before installing.

Dunno about kudzu, I think SuSE is going for hal. And lots of SuSE developed scripts. Didn't look at details yet, this means it seems to work good enough

I cannot speak for real Debian distros, I haven't used them for years. For SuSE I know, that there is no kernel recompile needed to add a driver, just because the device was not plugged in at install.

The new distros "Just Work" the same way Windows does, by including every single blasted driver in the base system installation. It's then only a matter of recognizing and loading the right driver module for whatever you plug in. Better to recompile and leave out all the excess crap you don't need.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Distros such as SuSE do include all drivers, but not load them. They load them only when you need them, because you configured a printer etc. needing them. Most stuff is in kernel modules, which are loadable on demand, and not compiled in the kernel anymore. As you said, "It's then only a matter of recognizing and loading the right driver module for whatever you plug in." SuSE has invested much in a good hotplug and coldplug system. It works better and better. With SuSE 10 now I did not need to manually add anything anymore (except proprietary stuff of course).

So there is not much overhead in the official kernel anymore. That is why I gave up to optimize and recompile my own kernel long ago. And not even Win4Lin asks me to recompile it anymore

Again, this is for SuSE and similar. Debian distros might show the behavior you describe.

As you said, it is good to connect all and switch it on, to get all installed and configured right away. (Just no kernel recompile for every forgotten to switch on device at least not with SuSE & Co.)

[francois]

You have apparently never installed a distro without your printer connected...and had it leave out the kernel bits that deal with printing, because it assumed you didn't need them.

I do it all the time, really! Every SuSE version, since years. Many many times:

Install first.

Then, a day later, oops, I need to print, switch on the printer. Fire up YAST, configure, printing.

A week later, oops, I need to scan, switch on the scanner. Fire up YAST, configure, scanning.

No problems. No recompile.

SuSE and similar do provide a already compiled kernel. Basic features like printing (CUPS), scanning (SANE), and all the USB stuff is included, ready to get used, or not, up to you.

As said, I usually plug in the printer(s) much later. Then it is a configuring of them (at SuSE with YAST). Easy and usually automagically.

Same for scanner. I have an exotic one which needs the firmware as a file. No problem, just an entry in the SANE configuration file. No kernel recompile.

I just added another "officially windows only" laserprinter with a proprietary driver for Linux. No problem, just two RPMs to install , CUPS restart, and it prints. No kernel recompile.

You have also apparently never installed Linux on a computer with a piece of hardware, say a NIC or a sound card, that was so new there were only third party drivers, and you had to compile those, and also recompile your kernel to eliminate any other driver for that piece of hardware or it would try to use the wrong one. BTDT.

Again, yes, also that happens sometimes. I did install a new soundcard recently. There was no driver available yet. Just an experimental one by the ALSA people. So what to do? Well, get the current ALSA snapshot, compile it, install it, runs. No kernel recompile.

But with the ALPS touchpad, to use all its features, yes, I needed a kernel recompile. Or better, a compile of the kernel modules only, to get the alps driver kernel module adapted to the kernel and installed.

Same with the latest nvidia drivers for the latest nvidia grapgics cards. It is a compiling of the kernel module needed only, no kernel recompile.

But then there is this Philips webcam. And yes, to get the full size picture I had to recompile the kernel. That was about a year ago, but now also that is not needed anymore.

You are, of course, right, IF the distro you are using includes (IIRC) kudzu or something like it for hardware detection at startup. Not all distros include that, though, as kudzu had some unfriendly conflicts. SuSe definitely does, as do most other Red Hat based distros. Debian based distros, not so much.  Plug it all in before installing.

Dunno about kudzu, I think SuSE is going for hal. And lots of SuSE developed scripts. Didn't look at details yet, this means it seems to work good enough

I cannot speak for real Debian distros, I haven't used them for years. For SuSE I know, that there is no kernel recompile needed to add a driver, just because the device was not plugged in at install.

The new distros "Just Work" the same way Windows does, by including every single blasted driver in the base system installation. It's then only a matter of recognizing and loading the right driver module for whatever you plug in. Better to recompile and leave out all the excess crap you don't need.

Distros such as SuSE do include all drivers, but not load them. They load them only when you need them, because you configured a printer etc. needing them. Most stuff is in kernel modules, which are loadable on demand, and not compiled in the kernel anymore. As you said, "It's then only a matter of recognizing and loading the right driver module for whatever you plug in." SuSE has invested much in a good hotplug and coldplug system. It works better and better. With SuSE 10 now I did not need to manually add anything anymore (except proprietary stuff of course).

So there is not much overhead in the official kernel anymore. That is why I gave up to optimize and recompile my own kernel long ago. And not even Win4Lin asks me to recompile it anymore

Again, this is for SuSE and similar. Debian distros might show the behavior you describe.

As you said, it is good to connect all and switch it on, to get all installed and configured right away. (Just no kernel recompile for every forgotten to switch on device at least not with SuSE & Co.)

hi'

I'll second this strongly!

Suse is one of the most stable version(distro), but it's the only one with wich you never get a problem to plug a new device!

Slackware is nice, but forget to plug an usb device in less than a minute, same for Debian and all the others!

alright, when you use Linux you would like to build or rebuild things to your own taste,

make it if you can, it's not for every linux user.

recompile a kernel is not a simple task, every user knows it!

insert a new module is in the same way ...

this NEVER happens with Suse since version 9 ...

I installed a few mandrake without printer and set it up then, no problem!

draktools and yast2 are very close

what can we say for sure?

these days, since kernel 6x.xx, things are getting easier, you are not obliged to plug every device before to start install ... may be some distro don't work the same way ...

or some updates simply don't do their job

I have tried a few ... but I stick to Suse!

and I'll never forget that Linus Thorwald use Suse

he must have a good reason for this

francois

[francois]

hi'

just to confirm what I said, as I changed a sound card for an audigy, I had one Sb live free, I have chosen to set it in my Linux machine(was on board snd before), so slot it in, closed and boot!

SuSe Linux boot ... new harware!

would you like to configure it now?, yes sure!

and hop, sax2 popup and took a few minutes and now writing here listening to radiobkk

who said that Linux wasn't plug and play?

as long as you don't use exotic hardware, everything's fine

francois

[Crushdepth]

Ok, I may give this SUSE a go. Apart from the recommendations here, there is actually a *manual for it* on sale in SE-ED, so I can read up on what the hel_l is going on (if Mandrake is so popular, why no books???).

In the meantime I've still been toying with Mandrake, which is not too much of a headache compared to (say) Ubuntu, which reduced me (Linux Numpty) to an angry ape battering away at the case when I discovered I needed to learn how to configure the ######ing permissions just to open the ######ing CD drive.

There are some things I like to take for granted

[francois]

hi'

so take this one as is

choose Suse linux pro 9.3, to begin, plug all devices(it eases the way), and boot from cd, the pc will restart leave the first cd in place, and the install goes on, on second boot let do

if you use the dvd, it's a bit different but, finaly same

you won't be disapointed

even my old iomega usb 100mb works, plugin, plug out, never any problem!

try it is adopt it

francois

[OxfordWill]

Mine is better than yours because I have a patched version of Enlightenment that makes the window panel switching so smooth it is almost too sexy to watch.

[francois]

hi'

I have used enlightment with red-hat, but gnome is more convenient on Suse for me

kde ... hmm hmm, windows look

francois

[Wallalai]

I also made my first steps with Slackware, then tried Mandrake, Suse, RedHat, many others and finally two source-based distros : Gentoo and Sourcemage for a long time.

My prefered was gentoo, but too much waste of time to compile every package from source, especially gcc or xorg, at every update.

I got a try to Archlinux, and definitely love it. http://www.archlinux.org/index.php

An i686-optimized Linux distribution

Very quick and customisable installation, very good hardware recoignition, a large range of packages available from stable to unstable, and a powerful package manager (pacman) who let you upgrade your system with a single command in a shell. Some gui's are available for pacman too.

Maybe not begginers friendly but an interesting alternative for who want to understand and control his system.

PS: Salut François, çà fait un bail

[francois]

Mine is better than yours because I have a patched version of Enlightenment that makes the window panel switching so smooth it is almost too sexy to watch.

hi'

missed the end

oh yeah, LINUX is sexy

neve fail, always fresh and ready to use, and overall works 24/7 without command arguments

francois

[francois]

salut,

Salut François, çà fait un bail

un peu oui, je suis en france pour le moment ...

alors tu as laché gentoo?

françois

[Wallalai]

Yes Archlinux has replaced Gentoo om my computers, I had a lot of fun and learned a lot with Gentoo but to much waste of time to upgrade and maintenance (source based).

What is Arch Linux? : http://www.archlinux.org/about.php for the answer.

After nearly 2 years of use I never had to re-install the OS even for the gcc update, just use the

pacman -Syu

command as root to update and everything run perfectly.

I have installed a thaï-Arch (Gnome desktop) for my wife and even if she doesn't understand nothing to computer she is able to browse the net and chat on MSN (Firefox & Gaim).

Perfect for us.

[francois]

hi'

nice way

I'll send you an email soon ...

I guess that you changed mail adress?

you can tell me by pm or even by email too

à bientôt

francois

[kelv23]

is anyone using SLAX?

Ive never used LINUX before and have downloaded a few ISO files but they always seem to have the wrong checksum file and cant get them to install.Am I wasting my time downloading SLAX while witing for a live CD from UBUNTU?

I'm not going to be using anything like a printer etc,the only thing that would be USB connectable would be a digi cam.

[Crushdepth]

Ok, I got some Suse 9.3 CDs today and a book as well, so: Here goes!

I have one more question: I'm interested in Linux mainly because I want to learn about system administration (probably should have said that at the start!). Is Suse a good choice/commonly used for running a small office network, or a webserver? Or are there other distributions that are better for that sort of purpose?

[francois]

Ok, I got some Suse 9.3 CDs today and a book as well, so: Here goes!

I have one more question: I'm interested in Linux mainly because I want to learn about system administration (probably should have said that at the start!). Is Suse a good choice/commonly used for running a small office network, or a webserver? Or are there other distributions that are better for that sort of purpose?

hi'

SuSe is perfect for a home or small business, less than 10 machines on a network as a server, and for desktop work, for a bigger network you should take a look ar Slackware it's safer, but less easy to manipulate, so start with Suse and get used to the Linuux file system then, you may explore Slackware or Debian both very safe on network, even being a server for a load of machines

but, one step at a time

Suse is a good choice, start with it and enjoy the Linux world

francois