SuSE is great
Poster Boy
handles RPM's amazingly, as well as a great tool for RPM management(YAST).
KDE1.1, StarOffice, Corel, Netscape, Acrobat,... I believe SuSE got it's
roots from Slack, so IMHO it seems to combine the best of both worlds.
j...@jkimball.com
loss as to how to get it. I have filled out the on-line order form at
suse.com and have sent numerous email messages trying to determine the
status of my order, all to no avail.
Has anyone had success actually ordering from suse.com?
Jim
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
dpc
That's where I got it from.
<j...@jkimball.com> wrote in message news:7km61v$kb7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
gordo
That's good to know. I considered SuSE before I bought RH --but RH was
on sale.
I'm just disappointed with RH. I'd liek to hear more opions as to
what's the generally best Linux these days.
mongoose
You can do an ftp install from one of the Suse ftp sites, thats what I
did to get suse 6.1
-Mongoose, WPI student majoring in Computer Science.
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to
pause and reflect."
-Mark Twain
dpc
time I left school for the summer. That's what I would have done, but I'm
home for the summer now. :-( ftp install just won't work to well on the
56K. <grin>
dpc
Prasanth
than red hat.
mongoose
>
> Oh, they have 6.1 on the ftp's now? Cool. They still didn't have it by the
> time I left school for the summer. That's what I would have done, but I'm
> home for the summer now. :-( ftp install just won't work to well on the
> 56K. <grin>
>
> dpc
>
> > You can do an ftp install from one of the Suse ftp sites, thats what I
> > did to get suse 6.1
mmm mediaone cable modem. FTP installs are the best since that sets up
your networking right away. Plus you only dl the packages you need and
its free. Ive never gotten an install working from off another hard
drive.
mongoose
>
> I ordered from them about 6 weeks ago,
> and my order was shipped the day before
> they relocated to their new building.
>
> I think the entire operation is still trying to get settled in, with the
> associated confusion. I got email from them just last week asking ME if I ever
> received my order.
Thats when you say no even if you did, just so you have a backup cd =)
mongoose
I have a fear of RPM's they've messed up my system twice along with a
friends. Basically the rpm partially installed the files from the
package and it thought all the files were installed but they weren't so
I tried to uninstall it but the rpm claimed that the package wasn't
installed even though it listed as being installed. Well now I just dl
tar.gz's or let Yast handle the RPM's.
Sparkzz
and my order was shipped the day before
they relocated to their new building.
I think the entire operation is still trying to get settled in, with the
associated confusion. I got email from them just last week asking ME if I ever
received my order.
Try emailing: mar...@suse.com.
.
.
....Ken
christiano presutti
> I have a fear of RPM's they've messed up my system twice along with a
> friends. Basically the rpm partially installed the files from the
> package and it thought all the files were installed but they weren't so
> I tried to uninstall it but the rpm claimed that the package wasn't
> installed even though it listed as being installed.
this reminds me a tragicomic windows behaviour.
christo (xo)
["To err is human, but to really foul things up requires a computer.",
Anonymous, 1978 ]
Maurits van de Kamp
> > I have a fear of RPM's they've messed up my system twice along with a
> > friends. Basically the rpm partially installed the files from the
> > package and it thought all the files were installed but they weren't so
> > I tried to uninstall it but the rpm claimed that the package wasn't
> > installed even though it listed as being installed.
>
> this reminds me a tragicomic windows behaviour.
Maybe, but with RPMs this is SO easy to solve, just use --force when you
remove the package. Windows' wizzards usually lack this functionality.
Maurits.
christiano presutti
> remove the package. Windows' wizzards usually lack this functionality.
you 're right, mauritius, but for some reasons i don't agree with RH policy
to oblige linux community to accept RPM, a someway windows style feature
wich is becoming a standard de facto. Maybe this is due to the financial
pressions from intel or other companies which are involved in RH affairs.
i like linux for its versatility: in every situation you fall, every time
your machine does not work for some reason, you can try out several manners
to solve the problem and often finally succed; if you need your machine to
do some special tasks you feel free to try without waiting for a proprietary
software or be afraid for system lacks, unknown undocumented features and
lack of stability (have a look at cafe-howto).
i like the option to download the source of a program and look what it does
to my system while installing.
wizard installations magically put a new program on your box (if everythings
work well, if not...), but the more you install programs and your machine
increases in power, the more you become extraneous to YOUR OWN computer, and
weaker if you have to manage strange behaviours or common problems.
sorry for the long message and for my bad english,
yours,
christo.
Maurits van de Kamp
> i like the option to download the source of a program and look what it does
> to my system while installing.
> wizard installations magically put a new program on your box (if everythings
> work well, if not...), but the more you install programs and your machine
> increases in power, the more you become extraneous to YOUR OWN computer, and
> weaker if you have to manage strange behaviours or common problems.
Ah well I fully agree with you. :) What I like about Linux is being in
control of things. But well, it's repeatedly heard in these newsgroups
that Linux should work without any effort from the user's side, and I
definitely don't agree with them. But RPM (or DEB for that matter) is a
nice middle way. First of all, you don't HAVE to use it. Second, there's
no DLL or Registry scare. Third, you can see exactly what it does in
case you think something strange has creeped in. And last but not least,
you can --force it to do something if you know what you're doing (and
the computer doesn't). :)
I'm not exactly a package fan but I do use rpm now and then when I'm
lazy. :) And it's certainly far far above blindly messing about with
your system with a Windows wizard (which to me always feels kinda like
driving 120mph with my eyes closed through a crowded city with a radar-
and GPS-controlled car - it SHOULD all work...) :)
Maurits.
christiano presutti
> your system with a Windows wizard (which to me always feels kinda like
> driving 120mph with my eyes closed through a crowded city with a radar-
> and GPS-controlled car - it SHOULD all work...) :)
great, great metaphor, really i liked it. you're a poet. 8)
you almost convinced me. maybe i exagerated in my last mail, but, you know,
sometimes i fear that increasing popularity of linux and its opening to non
technical customers could bring to changes drifting towards windows styles.
Only nightmares i hope.
xo.
Maurits van de Kamp
> great, great metaphor, really i liked it. you're a poet. 8)
Suffering bad circumstances always makes great poets. ;))
> you almost convinced me. maybe i exagerated in my last mail, but, you know,
> sometimes i fear that increasing popularity of linux and its opening to non
> technical customers could bring to changes drifting towards windows styles.
I do have the same fear. But I keep telling myself that, no matter how
far that goes, we'll always be able to look "under water", and
*hopefully* will always find sensible configuration files and a logical
file structure there. :)
Maurits.
Mary Lynn Zwald
chose to do it with SuSE. For an inexperienced person like me, it was a
nice feeling to be able to install this OS and feel in control of my system
again. The manual is well written and is good at directing you to finding
an answer, which in turn enables you to get things going.
One thing I have encountered though is people are afraid to get away from
the mainstream Microsoft. I must say I that I can understand why. Having
had a business and for general users, there is not always time to fuss with
things to LEARN how to do tasks - people just want to DO the task. I would
like to see as much application software available for Linux systems as
there is for Microsoft systems. So maybe Linux can find a way to keep its
accessibility and also have systems that allow people that don't have the
knowledge or experience to do the nitty gritty stuff, to just be users.
Many of the people that I've talked to in this last week have been
interested in an alternative to MS Windows. But there has to be a way for
them to sit down and use the software. They have to be able to try it out
and get familiar with it. I tried Linux out of curiosity and I am moving
forward with it because I have great hopes for its future. But it is very
time consuming to find out what the different programs do; how to set them
up; what are the functions they perform; what the commands are; how to even
enter them, etc. etc.
Do you have any suggestions on how to get more "Linux capable"?
Regards - Mackie
christiano presutti wrote in message <7knqah$19k$1...@pinco.nettuno.it>...
>> And it's certainly far far above blindly messing about with
>> your system with a Windows wizard (which to me always feels kinda like
>> driving 120mph with my eyes closed through a crowded city with a radar-
>> and GPS-controlled car - it SHOULD all work...) :)
>
>great, great metaphor, really i liked it. you're a poet. 8)
>
>you almost convinced me. maybe i exagerated in my last mail, but, you know,
>sometimes i fear that increasing popularity of linux and its opening to non
>technical customers could bring to changes drifting towards windows styles.
>
mongoose
>
> > I have a fear of RPM's they've messed up my system twice along with a
> > friends. Basically the rpm partially installed the files from the
> > package and it thought all the files were installed but they weren't so
> > I tried to uninstall it but the rpm claimed that the package wasn't
> > installed even though it listed as being installed.
>
> this reminds me a tragicomic windows behaviour.
Well I don't fear windows quite as much since its always expected to
crash or corrupt.
mongoose
>
> christiano presutti wrote:
>
> > > I have a fear of RPM's they've messed up my system twice along with a
> > > friends. Basically the rpm partially installed the files from the
> > > package and it thought all the files were installed but they weren't so
> > > I tried to uninstall it but the rpm claimed that the package wasn't
> > > installed even though it listed as being installed.
> >
> > this reminds me a tragicomic windows behaviour.
>
> remove the package. Windows' wizzards usually lack this functionality.
i tried that but even that didn't work.
mongoose
>
> > Maybe, but with RPMs this is SO easy to solve, just use --force when you
> > remove the package. Windows' wizzards usually lack this functionality.
>
> to oblige linux community to accept RPM, a someway windows style feature
> wich is becoming a standard de facto. Maybe this is due to the financial
> pressions from intel or other companies which are involved in RH affairs.
>
> i like linux for its versatility: in every situation you fall, every time
> your machine does not work for some reason, you can try out several manners
> to solve the problem and often finally succed; if you need your machine to
> do some special tasks you feel free to try without waiting for a proprietary
> software or be afraid for system lacks, unknown undocumented features and
> lack of stability (have a look at cafe-howto).
>
> to my system while installing.
> wizard installations magically put a new program on your box (if everythings
> work well, if not...), but the more you install programs and your machine
> increases in power, the more you become extraneous to YOUR OWN computer, and
> weaker if you have to manage strange behaviours or common problems.
Well people aren't required to use RPM's its up to the people making
the packages if they want to tar.gz it or RPM it. I would prefer tar.gz
then you can follow directions and know exactly whats going on and be
able to undo anything it does.
mongoose
>
> Guys my apologies for jumping in here - just got started with Linux and I
> chose to do it with SuSE. For an inexperienced person like me, it was a
> nice feeling to be able to install this OS and feel in control of my system
> again. The manual is well written and is good at directing you to finding
> an answer, which in turn enables you to get things going.
>
> One thing I have encountered though is people are afraid to get away from
> the mainstream Microsoft. I must say I that I can understand why. Having
> had a business and for general users, there is not always time to fuss with
> things to LEARN how to do tasks - people just want to DO the task. I would
> like to see as much application software available for Linux systems as
> there is for Microsoft systems. So maybe Linux can find a way to keep its
> accessibility and also have systems that allow people that don't have the
> knowledge or experience to do the nitty gritty stuff, to just be users.
>
> Many of the people that I've talked to in this last week have been
> interested in an alternative to MS Windows. But there has to be a way for
> them to sit down and use the software. They have to be able to try it out
> and get familiar with it. I tried Linux out of curiosity and I am moving
> forward with it because I have great hopes for its future. But it is very
> time consuming to find out what the different programs do; how to set them
> up; what are the functions they perform; what the commands are; how to even
> enter them, etc. etc.
>
> Do you have any suggestions on how to get more "Linux capable"?
just do a man <command> that tells you everything. I found Linux to
be very well documented. Much better than most windows applications.
When an error message comes up it usually means something. And compiling
the kernel, I was suprised every option had information on what it did.
I actually got my kernel to compile right on the first few tries ( other
than some idiot mistake I was doing before that...)
David Pollack
recompiles the source and then just makes a binary RPM for your computer. I find
the nicest part about RPMs is that they put all of the libs/man files in a spot
where you can just type man <command>. I know you can use mandir=/usr/local/man
or whatever but it gets tedious if you are compiling things and you give them
each their own folder in /usr/local or /opt or whatever. I think that RPMs are
great for simple programs that are not very flexible like an ICQ client for
example, but horrible for things like apache..
Maurits van de Kamp wrote:
> christiano presutti wrote:
>
> > great, great metaphor, really i liked it. you're a poet. 8)
>
> Suffering bad circumstances always makes great poets. ;))
>
> > you almost convinced me. maybe i exagerated in my last mail, but, you know,
> > sometimes i fear that increasing popularity of linux and its opening to non
> > technical customers could bring to changes drifting towards windows styles.
>
Bob Bryla
semi-German (Dutch?) translations that pop up when you least expect it (in
the installs and docs) is worth the price of admission.
BB
Poster Boy wrote in message ...
Jürgen Pfann
There just _have_ to be some critical words about SuSE and their
distribution in balance to most other postings in this thread, even
though (no - just because) I know them since their Sept.1995 'Snapshot'
('Linux aktuell' in German) - anyone else still remember the Stone Age ?
Modern distributions such as S.u.S.E. 6.1 are bloated; I guess, 900
MB HD space for a rather standard setup (without Applixware, without
Star Office !!) proof that well enough; even Billy G. could learn
from SuSE how to waste disk space in a more effective way than
"Win5000".
SuSE seems to be the winner (or at least, they want to be) in the
race for the maximum count of RPM packages included, but as user it is
hardly possible to keep track with them; I often realize only
"accidentally" there are 3,4 or more packages for the same purposes
(3 CD-Players for X, 2 for the console, 10 Windowmanagers etc.).
What or which, then, are the disadvantages of that ? Which properties
I liked in SuSE will be lost then ?
-I tell you :
a.Overview : It is not possible any more to simply _browse_ the
filesystem (in the original meaning) and learn a lot about your
whole linux system by reading a README here and one there
(additionally to the normal Doc., of course); you cannot keep
track of what part of the fs tree is for which any more.
b.Stability : I liked SuSE best, regarding the configuration 'out-
of-the-box'. A lot of small details simply made the entrance to
the linux world easier for newbies (Yes, once I was one too :-).
Nowadays, the features and the packages are knitted together too
rapidly, there are a lot of errata in the config files (RH 6 as
opposed to 5.x seems to suffer from the same disease, taking
the number of postings as a ruler...).
Of course, you learn more by solving a problem than with a flawlessly
running system, but no - that is no reason for the
annoying & famous "block-major-8" module problems a. others.
Consider as one more example the "mc" dilemma : While working with 'mc'
(still without the mouse, I _know_ the key shortcuts) the kernel
prints a buncha annoying and uninteresting "/dev/gpmctrl : No such
file or dir." messages; if I do them a favor and start gpm (still with
no
_real_ use for the mouse, I get my logfile filled with "gpm : no data."
Now what's this ? (I don't really wanna know, but it _is_ annoying).
Sorry, my opinion maybe has gotten a bit too long...
Bye
Juergen
Martin Klarner
"Jürgen Pfann" wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> There just _have_ to be some critical words about SuSE and their
> distribution in balance to most other postings in this thread, even
> though (no - just because) I know them since their Sept.1995 'Snapshot'
> ('Linux aktuell' in German) - anyone else still remember the Stone Age ?
Yeah, I do: In fact I stumbled over their very first release, Suse Linux 1.0,
still with a 0.99 Kernel, in April 1994. I used to be able to install and run a
complete system on a 200 MB Partition, and it was running pretty fast on my 60
MHz Pentium.
> Modern distributions such as S.u.S.E. 6.1 are bloated; I guess, 900
> MB HD space for a rather standard setup (without Applixware, without
> Star Office !!) proof that well enough; even Billy G. could learn
> from SuSE how to waste disk space in a more effective way than
> "Win5000".
> SuSE seems to be the winner (or at least, they want to be) in the
> race for the maximum count of RPM packages included, but as user it is
> hardly possible to keep track with them; I often realize only
> "accidentally" there are 3,4 or more packages for the same purposes
> (3 CD-Players for X, 2 for the console, 10 Windowmanagers etc.).
So, before installing, I always browse through _all_ the package lists by hand,
editing out the ones I don't need; sure takes a lot of time now, compared to the
old days, when they shipped all stuff on just one CD.
> What or which, then, are the disadvantages of that ? Which properties
> I liked in SuSE will be lost then ?
> -I tell you :
> a.Overview : It is not possible any more to simply _browse_ the
> filesystem (in the original meaning) and learn a lot about your
> whole linux system by reading a README here and one there
> (additionally to the normal Doc., of course); you cannot keep
> track of what part of the fs tree is for which any more.
I completely agree with that: Now that there's a graphical setup tool for
everything I wouldn't be able to learn so much about my system any more. Back in
1994, I had to do it all by myself (boy, I was happy when I finally figured out
the correct modelines for my X setup).
>
> b.Stability : I liked SuSE best, regarding the configuration 'out-
> of-the-box'. A lot of small details simply made the entrance to
> the linux world easier for newbies (Yes, once I was one too :-).
> Nowadays, the features and the packages are knitted together too
> rapidly, there are a lot of errata in the config files (RH 6 as
> opposed to 5.x seems to suffer from the same disease, taking
> the number of postings as a ruler...).
> Of course, you learn more by solving a problem than with a flawlessly
> running system, but no - that is no reason for the
> annoying & famous "block-major-8" module problems a. others.
Hey, what exactly is that? I frequently see error messages about that module in
my logfiles, but I've no idea what it is about. Doesn't seem to create any
problems, either.
One other thing (would be c. in your list, Juergen): I feel that Suse Linux
boots and halts _much_ slower now. The break-down seems to have happened between
version 5.3 and 6.0: 5.3 boots considerably faster on my old Pentium 150 than
6.1 on my new Pentium II 450!
What the hell have the guys in Fuerth done here?
--
MfG
MK
Dipl.-Inf. Martin Klarner
kla...@immd8.informatik.uni-erlangen.de Fon: +49-9131-852-9912
http://www.forwiss.de/~klarner Fax: +49-9131-852-9905
Lehrstuhl für Informatik VIII (Künstliche Intelligenz)
Am Weichselgarten 9
91058 Erlangen, Germany
pi...@bonbon.net
I don't think SuSE is that great. To me it is much slower then redhat
(5.x as well as 6.x). What is the reason for that? Some people say it is
due to YaST. Is that right?
Holt, Brady
system. All it does it setup things. What are you comparing Suse to?
The only difference between distributions is the software they come
with, & the setup tools. You can't say that Suse runs slower than
another distribution. Maybe you have an old version of Suse running on
a Kernel that may not be as fast as the newer kernels.
Brady
--
Brady Holt
bmh(at)nortelnetworks(dot)com
(972)-685-7011
mongoose
>
> Why would a simple setup program that runs once initally slow down a
> system. All it does it setup things. What are you comparing Suse to?
> The only difference between distributions is the software they come
> with, & the setup tools. You can't say that Suse runs slower than
> another distribution. Maybe you have an old version of Suse running on
> a Kernel that may not be as fast as the newer kernels.
Ya all distributions use the same kernel so speed should be the same
for each one, other than other programs that might be getting loaded up
when you start it up. I use SUSE now and I like better than any other
distro Ive used.
Lawrence Sayre
>
> I don't think SuSE is that great. To me it is much slower then redhat
> (5.x as well as 6.x). What is the reason for that? Some people say it is
> due to YaST. Is that right?
>
> pi...@bonbon.net
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
I just went back to SuSE (6.1) after a stint with RedHat 5.2, and I can
attest that there is little or no difference in the speed. BTW, I far
and away prefer SuSE!
---------------------------------------------
"Man's mind is his basic tool of survival!"
(a quote from the famous 'John Galt' speech
in the equally famous book "Atlas Shrugged")
Lawrence Sayre <lsa...@stratos.net>
---------------------------------------------
mongoose
>
> pi...@bonbon.net wrote:
> >
> > I don't think SuSE is that great. To me it is much slower then redhat
> > (5.x as well as 6.x). What is the reason for that? Some people say it is
> > due to YaST. Is that right?
> >
> > pi...@bonbon.net
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
> I just went back to SuSE (6.1) after a stint with RedHat 5.2, and I can
> attest that there is little or no difference in the speed. BTW, I far
> and away prefer SuSE!
Did you see the article on slashdot? Suse has more sales than linux.
George Dau
] Did you see the article on slashdot? Suse has more sales than linux.
]
]
]-Mongoose, WPI student majoring in Computer Science.
Hey, Mongoose! Sit down for a while... put that keyboard down.
Have a rest, you'll fell better for it.
Darren Paxton
SuSE was the first distribution of Linux that I used, and I found it
very helpful using YaST. I had used UNIX at University, and so I knew
some of the basics, but for the administration side of things, YaST
helped out a lot.
Not long ago, one of the UK Magazines, PC Plus, gave away the base
system of RH5.2, and while this is also a good distribution, I feel
that SuSE takes precedent.
I have now upgraded to SuSE 6.1, and find the system even better. Maybe
this is due to my increased knowledge of Linux, or whether its because
of the new kernel and other features, but I feel that SuSE are
acheiving a good level of products with their distributions.
Also, in response to one of the posts by someone who felt that SuSE
fill their CDs with too many applications, I would make the suggestion
that anyone who has used their, or anyone else's distributions, will
know to check which packages to install or not. SuSE, I think, are
providing a typical Setup, so that anyone who is not familiar with the
system, can install the "main" applications and get used to it, befire
installing any others. This approach would save them having to install
the base system, then once they had mastered that, having to install
more applications.
Anyway, that's my opinion
--
Darren Paxton
Work: dpa...@uk.ibm.com
Home: dar...@paxton.swinternet.co.uk
Leslie Palocsay
I am new to Linux and have tried both RedHat and SuSe
As a new comer to Linux I like SuSE better than red Hat for two reasons:
1) SuSE does give live technical support that has helped me in these beginning
times
2) SuSE Installer (YAST) was easier to understand and it was easier to get my
video card up and running.
Unfortunately, SuSE's marketing sucks and so they will lose out to RedHat. It
doesn't make any difference which system is better - it makes a difference how
many people are using you system and what the market "buzz" is all about. the
networking guy at work wants to go with RedHat for one reason -"that's all that
anyone is talking about" so that's what will be supported.
Les Palocsay
"Jürgen Pfann" wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> There just _have_ to be some critical words about SuSE and their
> distribution in balance to most other postings in this thread, even
> though (no - just because) I know them since their Sept.1995 'Snapshot'
> ('Linux aktuell' in German) - anyone else still remember the Stone Age ?
> Modern distributions such as S.u.S.E. 6.1 are bloated; I guess, 900
> MB HD space for a rather standard setup (without Applixware, without
> Star Office !!) proof that well enough; even Billy G. could learn
> from SuSE how to waste disk space in a more effective way than
> "Win5000".
> SuSE seems to be the winner (or at least, they want to be) in the
> race for the maximum count of RPM packages included, but as user it is
> hardly possible to keep track with them; I often realize only
> "accidentally" there are 3,4 or more packages for the same purposes
> (3 CD-Players for X, 2 for the console, 10 Windowmanagers etc.).
> What or which, then, are the disadvantages of that ? Which properties
> I liked in SuSE will be lost then ?
> -I tell you :
> a.Overview : It is not possible any more to simply _browse_ the
> filesystem (in the original meaning) and learn a lot about your
> whole linux system by reading a README here and one there
> (additionally to the normal Doc., of course); you cannot keep
> track of what part of the fs tree is for which any more.
> b.Stability : I liked SuSE best, regarding the configuration 'out-
> of-the-box'. A lot of small details simply made the entrance to
> the linux world easier for newbies (Yes, once I was one too :-).
> Nowadays, the features and the packages are knitted together too
> rapidly, there are a lot of errata in the config files (RH 6 as
> opposed to 5.x seems to suffer from the same disease, taking
> the number of postings as a ruler...).
> Of course, you learn more by solving a problem than with a flawlessly
> running system, but no - that is no reason for the
> annoying & famous "block-major-8" module problems a. others.
kste...@home.com
>attest that there is little or no difference in the speed. BTW, I far
>and away prefer SuSE!
Why do you prefer SuSE? What are the major differences between RedHat
and SuSE?
Thanks,
Ken