Choosing a Linux Distro...

[sheila]

Eventually (some time in the next several months) I'm going to get together a dual boot system with a Linux boot option. (I used to have that, a long time ago, but when the little hard drive with my Linux files crashed several months ago, we didn't replace it, so I've just been limping along with Win98 only.)

Anyhow, the last time I had Linux, my husband installed Slackware. This time I want to do it myself, and so I'm thinking about what distro I want to get. I've heard that Mandrake is supposed to be a really nice beginner's distro. Although, I've also heard that some people think it is "too easy". Like it insulates you from the command line or something. (I really don't think that is going to be a problem for me, though.)

BUT, I think I would like to be able to compile stuff on my machine at home and then transfer the files over to my FutureQuest account. So, in that case it seems to me, that I probably have to install the same distibution that FQuest is running, which is (I think?) RH 6.2 ??

Well, that's what I'd like to try, anyway. Anyone have any comments or suggestions? (The spouse and I were out at Best Buy this afternoon, shopping for a new dishwasher, and took a tour through the software department on the way out the door. Looked over the Windows 2000 and the Linux offerings, which included RH and Mandrake, two version each.)

[Terra]

Our servers are based on a RedHat-6.2 core program set as this eases updates and administration for the more generic utilities like: cp, ls, mv, gcc, cat, find, etc...

However, our servers configurations deviate from the RedHat way of doing things for scalability reasons, though this should not be a concern for you...

All the major Daemons (Apache/MySQL/PHP/Perl/etc) are custom compiled from scratch, as per my exacting specifications, as well as the Linux Kernel itself...

Overall, we are a RedHat-6.2 hybrid server with *many* enhancements working behind the scenes... The biggest trick (achievement) to all this was ensuring that my backside modifications did not muck up (or alter) the frontside command line experience for those used to stock RedHat systems...

--
Terra
--Tis a shame though, that I can't really talk about the backside enhancements as it is what makes us unique--
FutureQuest

[sheila]

Right, I understand that FutureQuests servers are based on RH 6.2, but are actually far more than that.

My concern, is being able to compile compatible binaries on my home machine, and whether they would run on the FutureQuest servers. Or would I have to do all the compiling on the FutureQuest servers?

If I can do the compiling on my home machine, do I need to have the same operating system? (I would think that maybe the Linux kernel would at least have to be the same.)

[Arthur]

Sheila, in order for your compiled binaries to run, you don't need to have the same distro or even the same kernel. But you do need the same version of the libc library. The libc version in this case needs to be 2.1.x. Same goes for any other libraries you would use.

RH 6.2, 7.0 or 7.1 are all based on 2.1, so you can use those. Some other distros, like Mandrake, are based on RedHat, so you shouldn't have any problems with those. I haven't tried any other distros in a while, so I can't tell you much about those.

[sheila]

Originally posted by arthur:
you don't need to have the same distro or even the same kernel. But you do need the same version of the libc library. The libc version in this case needs to be 2.1.x. Same goes for any other libraries you would use.

RH 6.2, 7.0 or 7.1 are all based on 2.1, so you can use those. Some other distros, like Mandrake, are based on RedHat, so you shouldn't have any problems with those. Cool. That sounds great. I will probably pick up a copy of Mandrake, then. It seems to be getting very popular.

When you write:

Same goes for any other libraries you would use.
Could you give me some examples? I have no idea what other libraries there might be???

Hmm. I wonder if I could always just copy the library file from the FutureQuest server onto my machine if I needed to? (Well, at least for *.so files that should work, right?) I suppose something like that wouldn't work for stuff that was compiled into the distribution. Hmm...

[Arthur]

Could you give me some examples? I have no idea what other libraries there might be??? You have C libraries, C++ libraries, X-Windows libs, security (PAM) libs, encryption libs. All those things you find in the lib directories (/lib, /usr/local/lib, etc.).
Handy commands;
file filename - what kind of file is it (text/binary, a.out/ELF, etc.)
ldd filename - prints the library dependencies

[sheila]

Originally posted by arthur:

Handy commands;
file filename - what kind of file is it (text/binary, a.out/ELF, etc.)
ldd filename - prints the library dependencies
Very nifty. Thanks.
I was playing around with those just a bit, so I tried this out:

[username@FQ-Nine:/big/dom/xthinkspot/bin ]$ file python2.1
python2.1: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1, dynamically linked
(uses shared libs), not stripped

[username@FQ-Nine:/big/dom/xthinkspot/bin ]$ ldd python2.1
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x00128000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x0013b000)
libutil.so.1 => /lib/libutil.so.1 (0x0013f000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x00142000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x00160000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x00110000)

Yikes! What a lot of file dependencies! I have a lot to learn. :\

[YFS200]

I have both Mandrake 8.0 and RH 7.0 (soon to be 7.1). I happen to like RH better because it's quicker to find things and more command line driven. Takes a lot less membory and HDD space.

Mandrake does put a fluffy feeling on Linux. Tons of UI interfaces for everything. It seems to do it's best to hide the command line from the user. I still can't figure out how to get that stuipd splash screen from covering up the kernal boot messages.

If your new to the Linux world, vote Mandrake.
If you want to compile your old kernal, go RedHat.

YFS
-How late is it?

[Dunx]

Just a vote for SuSE as a distro; I was originally interested in SuSE because it comes with lots of software on the distro discs, which is a big thing when all you have is a UK dialup account charged per minute. That's less important to me now I have DSL, but the hardware detection in the SuSE installer is the best I've encountered so I still like it. The admin tools are quiet good too, although there's still a requirement to do proper manual config on some features.

However, the layout of the system config files is rather different in my experience between Red Hat and SuSE. It can be confusing.

As for Mandrake being based on Red Hat; that's rather less true than it used to be, isn't it?

[Bruce]

Originally posted by arthur:
RH 6.2, 7.0 or 7.1 are all based on (glibc) 2.1, so you can use those. Not true. One of the big changes in RH 7.0 is the switch to glibc 2.2 (other big changes include the switch to the 2.4 kernel and the new XFree86 package). Many binaries produced with glibc 2.2 can run on glibc 2.1 systems, but this is far from guaranteed.

[Arthur]

Time to use my smiley :)
:BPG: