Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19

Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19

Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19

Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19

Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19

Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19

Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19

Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19

Warning: Function ereg() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 4

Warning: Function split() is deprecated in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 19
SuSE 10.1 - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19

Thread: SuSE 10.1

  1. #11
    That is true, to some extent. I have had a few library issues (and can't seem to find out where to get them), but for the most part, everything is VERY different than the days when I was TRYING to use RH6-ish. That was one thing that kept me away from Linux for so long. I was SO tired of not being able to just install a GD program... or should I say, having to jump through hoops just to install a program. All of that is gone. You just gotta love YaST (or whatever of the 40 package managers you happen to use).
    Asus A8V Deluxe Mobo
    AMD Athlon64 X2 4400 -939
    2GB Crucial DDR3200 Dual-Channel
    ATi AiW 9800 Pro 128DDR
    Audigy2 ZS
    Sony DRU-810 DVD+RW DL
    3 x Maxtor MaxLine SATA 160Gb 16Mb Cache
    1 x Maxtor MaxLine SATA 300Gb 16Mb Cache
    1 x Maxtor MaxLine SATA 120Gb 16Mb Cache

  2. #12
    Moderator
    Good Guru
    Schotty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    5,760
    RHL 5.1 was my entrance to Red Hat. It stunk. RHL 7 was my first RHL that I could use and enjoy. I was using slackware previous to that. Nowadays, as long as the system is desinged sanely, it usually doesnt do more than bug me. Like SuSE. Linspire, Ubuntu, CentOS and Fedora are all just forks as to how I want to do things.

    For uber-reliable systems, CentOS is a nobrainer. If I dont need gaming or windows interoperability, OpenBSD is the choice then (for the uber systems at least).

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


  3. #13
    Moderator
    Good Guru
    Compunuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,935
    YUM not as good as APT.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    - The truely community run Linux/Floss forum !

    No IT BS !!

  4. #14
    Moderator
    Good Guru
    Compunuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,935
    Yeah, I still remember RH 5'ish days. My real install that I did it myself was 6.0 (I still have the disc). RH pissed me off big. So I went with Debian and never looked back. I wonder RH world once in a while such as with RH 7.1 and 7.2. I think the best distro RH ever put out (at least in Desktop sense) is 7.2. The rest are all crap.

    My first useable Linux desktop was Storm (anyone remember that one?). It was based on Debian and after a few months, I went straight to Debian.

    I tried a few distros here and there, I keep track of SuSE and Slack, Fedora once in a while, all that stuff. But my main working horse had been Debian. Even Ubuntu disappoint me time to time so I'm not sure I will ever leave my belove Debian.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    - The truely community run Linux/Floss forum !

    No IT BS !!

  5. #15
    Moderator
    Good Guru
    Schotty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Compunuts
    YUM not as good as APT.
    I fail to see how. I have yet to have an issue that is yum's fault ever. I have had (albeit few) snags with apt. I would like to hear technical deficiencies here. As far as I can tell they both work fine for the job at hand.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


  6. #16
    Moderator
    Good Guru
    Schotty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by Compunuts
    I think the best distro RH ever put out (at least in Desktop sense) is 7.2. The rest are all crap.
    7.3 was the best, better hardware support with less woes, more current versions of GNOME and KDE, and had some nice backports from RHEL kernels. This continued thru RHL9, and into Fedora, but wasnt present before as much.

    As for my favorite list:

    RHL 7.3
    CentOS 4.3
    Ubuntu 6.06
    RHL 9

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


  7. #17
    Moderator
    Good Guru
    Compunuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Schotty
    I would like to hear technical deficiencies here.
    This would be useless. Remember, "it's not a bug, it's a feature" argument. They will ALWAYS argue this way no matter what. The reality is, in overall functioning, APT beats YUM outright.

    One question though, Is YUM being able to handle distro upgrades now? Something similar to "apt-get dist-upgrade" in Debian?

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    - The truely community run Linux/Floss forum !

    No IT BS !!

  8. #18
    Moderator
    Good Guru
    Schotty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    5,760
    As far as the end user the functionality of yum and apt are rather identical with one difference. Yum will query the server(s) each time you connect for updates and new packages. This can slow things down by a minute or so. Apt doesnt. On the server side, yum is a bit easier in that regard for bleeding edge distros for that reason -- you can force the latest and greatest. I haven't seen that being utilized with any of my distros of choice, but that doesn't mean it isn't occuring.

    Quote Originally Posted by Compunuts
    One question though, Is YUM being able to handle distro upgrades now? Something similar to "apt-get dist-upgrade" in Debian?
    From what I hear with this, is yes. I have never used that, simply since I will always want a DVD of the latest release and will upgrade with that. But that is me ...

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


  9. #19
    Hi all,
    I am a complete newbie to linux, but mid level with Windoze. I have just given up trying to get FC5 latest download working on my Note book (Compaq Presario V6002) as it could not correctly identify the CPU or get a display up and running. I klnow all you command line wizards will tell me the command line is where all the action is, But I'm a babe in the woods, and have forgotten all I ever new about Dos, so I need to ease myself back in gently.
    However I installed Suse 10.1 Enterprise from the cover disk of a pc magazine, and the installation ran very well. CPU and GPU correctly identified and set up, desktop up and running fine. I had already created a FAT32 partition to hold my docs with a view to accessing them thru both OS's, and after suse instal was pleased to see that Suse has picked up both the Fat 32 and NTFS partitions, so that I can browse and access files directly from "My Documents" and "c" drive straight from Linus with no hiccups.
    Great result for a beginner like me. It also setup my wired NIC first time, so net access via cable is now happening. All I have to setup now is the inbuilt wireless adaptor- (Broadcom 802.11a/b/g) and I will be one happy geek.

    I will add a new post regarding thi e wifi issue, but I wanted to add my experience with Suse 10.1 Enterprise in case any other newbies are struggling with command line setup of FC5 etc.

Similar Threads

  1. SuSE 9.2 Pro
    By alan2273 in forum Linux - General Topics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-28-2004, 10:57 PM
  2. SuSE 9.0 ISO's
    By Ashcrow in forum Linux - General Topics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-15-2004, 10:28 AM
  3. Red Hat and Suse
    By mugs in forum Redhat / Fedora
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-01-2002, 11:49 PM
  4. SuSE 8.0!
    By johnqpublic in forum Suse
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-09-2002, 03:51 PM
  5. SuSe 8.0 (on its way)
    By coltrane in forum Linux - General Topics
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 05-03-2002, 07:35 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •