274 lines
12 KiB
HTML
274 lines
12 KiB
HTML
<!--startcut ==========================================================-->
|
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
|
|
<HTML>
|
|
<HEAD>
|
|
<title>Selecting a Linux Distribution LG #31</title>
|
|
</HEAD>
|
|
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#000000" LINK="#0000FF" VLINK="#A000A0"
|
|
ALINK="#FF0000">
|
|
<!--endcut ============================================================-->
|
|
|
|
<H4>
|
|
"Linux Gazette...<I>making Linux just a little more fun!</I>"
|
|
</H4>
|
|
|
|
<P> <HR> <P>
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
<font color="navy">A <I>Linux Journal</I> Review</font>:
|
|
This article appeared in the August issue of <I>Linux Journal</I>.
|
|
<P> <HR> <P>
|
|
|
|
<center>
|
|
<h1><font color="maroon">Selecting a Linux Distribution</font></h1>
|
|
<H4>By <a href="mailto:phil@ssc.com">Phil Hughes</a></H4>
|
|
</center>
|
|
<P> <HR> <P>
|
|
|
|
Any current Linux distribution most likely contains the software
|
|
needed to do your job, including kernel and
|
|
drivers, libraries, utilities and applications programs.
|
|
Still, one of the most common questions I hear is ``which
|
|
distribution should I get?'' This question is
|
|
answered by an assortment of people, each proclaiming their
|
|
favorite distribution is better than all the rest.
|
|
<p>
|
|
My new theory is that most people favor the first distribution they
|
|
successfully installed. Or, if they had problems with the first, they favor
|
|
the next distribution they install which addresses the problems of the
|
|
first.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Let's use me as an example. SLS was my first Linux installation.
|
|
Unfortunately, SLS
|
|
had a few bugs--in both the installation and the running system.
|
|
This, of course, isn't a surprise since this installation took place five
|
|
years ago.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Now, about this time, Patrick Volkerding came along and created Slackware. Pat
|
|
took the SLS distribution and fixed some problems. The result looked the same
|
|
as SLS and worked the same, but without bugs. To this day, I find Slackware
|
|
the easiest distribution to install.
|
|
<p>
|
|
I have, however, progressed beyond installation problems and found some
|
|
serious shortcomings in Slackware which have been addressed by other
|
|
distributions. Before I get into specifics, here is a rough estimate of
|
|
the number of times I have installed various distributions, in order of
|
|
first installation. I give you this information to help you understand the
|
|
basis of my opinions.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li> 100+ SLS/Slackware
|
|
<li> 5 MCC (a small distribution done for university students)
|
|
<li> 5 Yggdrasil
|
|
<li> 20 Red Hat
|
|
<li> 10 Caldera
|
|
<li> 20 Debian
|
|
<li> 5 S.u.S.E.
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<p>
|
|
That said, here is my blow-by-blow analysis of what is right and wrong
|
|
with each distribution. Note that this is my personal opinion--your
|
|
mileage will vary.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<h3>SLS/Slackware/MCC</h3>
|
|
<p>
|
|
All these distributions are easy to install and understand.
|
|
They were all designed to install from floppy disk, and
|
|
packages were in floppy-sized chunks. At one time, I could successfully
|
|
install Slackware without even having a monitor on the computer.
|
|
<p>
|
|
There are, however, costs associated with this simplicity. Software is
|
|
saved in compressed tar files. There is no information within the
|
|
distribution that shows how files interrelate, no dependencies and no
|
|
good path for upgrades. Not a problem if you just want to try
|
|
something, but for a multi-computer shop with long-term plans, this
|
|
initial simplicity can have unforeseen costs in the long run.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<h3>Yggdrasil</h3>
|
|
<p>
|
|
Yggdrasil offered the most promise with a GUI-based configuration.
|
|
Unfortunately, development stopped (or at least vanished from the
|
|
public eye), and it no longer offers anything vaguely current.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<h3>Red Hat</h3>
|
|
<p>
|
|
When I first looked at Marc Ewing's creation, I was impressed.
|
|
It had some GUI-based configuration tools and showed a lot of promise.
|
|
Over the years, Red Hat has continued to evolve and is easy to install and
|
|
configure. Red Hat introduced the RPM packaging system that offers
|
|
dependencies to help ensure loaded applications work with each other
|
|
and updating is easy. RPMs also offer pre- and post-install
|
|
and remove scripts which appear to be underutilized.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Version 4.2 has proven to be quite stable. The current release is 5.0, and
|
|
a 5.1 release with bug fixes is expected to again produce a
|
|
stable product.
|
|
<p>
|
|
The install sequence is streamlined to make it easy to do a standard
|
|
install. I see two things missing that, while making the install
|
|
appear easier, detract from what is actually needed:
|
|
<p>
|
|
<ol>
|
|
<li> The ability to save the desired configuration to floppy disk during the
|
|
installation process (something that both Caldera and S.u.S.E. offer) would simplify
|
|
subsequent installations on the same or other machines.
|
|
<li> The ability to create a boot floppy disk during installation.
|
|
</ol>
|
|
<p>
|
|
Red Hat has evolved into the most ``retailed'' distribution. First it
|
|
was in books by O'Reilly, then MacMillan and now IDG Books Worldwide. It also appears
|
|
to have a large retail shrink-wrap distribution in the U.S.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Versions of Red Hat are available for Digital Alpha and SunSPARC, as well
|
|
as Intel.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<h3>Caldera</h3>
|
|
<p>
|
|
The Caldera distribution was assembled by the Linux Support Team
|
|
(LST) in Germany--now a part of Caldera. Caldera, like Red Hat,
|
|
uses the RPM package format. Installation is similar to
|
|
Red Hat with the addition of the configuration save/restore option.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Caldera is different from other distributions at this time
|
|
in that it offers a series of systems including various commercial
|
|
packages such as a secure web server and an office suite. Caldera is
|
|
also the most ``commercial feeling'' as far as packaging and
|
|
presentation.
|
|
<p>
|
|
One complaint I received from a reviewer of my original version of this
|
|
article is that you cannot perform an upgrade. That is, you must save your
|
|
configuration files and then re-install.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<h3>Debian</h3>
|
|
<p>
|
|
Debian is one of the oldest distributions, but because development is
|
|
strictly by a team of volunteers, it has tended to evolve more slowly.
|
|
Since development is performed by a geographically diverse group,
|
|
the ability to manage and integrate upgrades is of primary importance.
|
|
To that end, you can always upgrade a system by pointing it at
|
|
an FTP site and instructing it to get the latest versions
|
|
of all the packages currently installed. In some cases, a service needs
|
|
to be stopped. (For example, to upgrade <b>sendmail</b>, you would need to
|
|
stop it, replace the program and then restart it.) This is all done
|
|
automatically.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Debian deviates from the common RPM packaging format (although it can
|
|
install RPMs) by using its own .deb format. The .deb format is the
|
|
most versatile and includes dependency checking as well as pre- and
|
|
post-install and remove scripts. This is why the sendmail
|
|
example in the previous paragraph can be handled automatically.
|
|
<p>
|
|
The most difficult thing about Debian is the initial installation.
|
|
Or, put another way, fear of <b>dselect</b>, the installer program.
|
|
The design of dselect is old, and while it made sense when there were only
|
|
50-100 packages in a Linux install, it is out of control now that
|
|
there are around 1000. A replacement for dselect is being developed
|
|
and will be available in Debian 2.1.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Versions of Debian (with limited applications/utilities) are
|
|
available for Digital Alpha and M68k.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<h3>S.u.S.E.</h3>
|
|
<p>
|
|
S.u.S.E. is a German distribution with an installation ``look and feel'' similar to Caldera. It also uses the RPM package
|
|
format and offers a save/restore configuration option during
|
|
installation.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Two things make S.u.S.E. stand out from the others. First, XFree86
|
|
support tends to be better than other distributions because
|
|
S.u.S.E. works closely with the XFree86 team. Second, there are more
|
|
applications and utility programs in this distribution.
|
|
A full installation takes over 2GB of disk space.
|
|
<p>
|
|
YAST, the install/administration tool, can handle .deb and .tgz packages as
|
|
well as RPMs. Also, upgrades are quite easy and can be performed by putting
|
|
in a new CD or pointing YAST at the files and telling it to perform the
|
|
upgrade.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<h3>Which Do I Choose?</h3>
|
|
<p>
|
|
It depends. I have one system running Caldera, three running Red Hat
|
|
(a PC, a Digital Alpha and a SunSPARC), two running Slackware,
|
|
one running S.u.S.E. (a laptop) and quite a few running Debian.
|
|
(Yes, I personally own too many computers.)
|
|
<p>
|
|
Further, there are problems with all the distributions--not
|
|
the same problems, but problems nevertheless. As a result,
|
|
I don't see a perfect answer--yet.
|
|
This is not to say they don't work--just that each has its
|
|
inconsistencies and limitations. They all suffer from the lack of
|
|
a common administration tool.
|
|
<p>
|
|
At USENIX in 1997, Caldera announced a project called COAS (Caldera
|
|
Open Administration System). The discussion at the
|
|
conference showed there were more concepts to consider and a lot of
|
|
implementation work before COAS could offer a uniform installation
|
|
system that would meet the needs of the majority of Linux users.
|
|
<p>
|
|
Today, for a general-purpose system I tend to install Debian.
|
|
I do, however, install other systems for other purposes.
|
|
For example, I have S.u.S.E. on a new laptop because the volume of
|
|
software included makes a more impressive demo system.
|
|
<p>
|
|
A better question is, ``which one should you choose?'' The answer is
|
|
still, ``it depends.'' Here are some hints to help you along the way:
|
|
<p>
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li> If everyone you know is running a particular distribution and
|
|
you are a newcomer, use the same one they do.
|
|
<li> If you like to roll your own--that is, you expect to
|
|
compile and install everything yourself--Slackware is probably for you.
|
|
<li> If you want to ``go with the crowd'' today, install
|
|
Red Hat.
|
|
<li> If you want ``everything'', install S.u.S.E.
|
|
<li> If you need the most ``commercial'' looking product
|
|
or you are a VAR (value-added reseller), pick Caldera.
|
|
<li> If the politics of free software is important to you and/or you
|
|
want to get involved in development of a distribution, pick
|
|
Debian.
|
|
<li> If you have a bunch of systems you need to interconnect
|
|
and upgrade, pick Debian or hope Caldera gets COAS completed.
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<p>
|
|
<h3>Conclusion</h3>
|
|
<p>
|
|
There is my input. Ask any other Linux user, and you will probably get
|
|
a different opinion from mine. If you are not sure you have the right answer,
|
|
there are some things you can do to make it possible to change
|
|
distributions in the future with minimal impact.
|
|
<p>
|
|
<ul>
|
|
<li> Make /home a separate file system. Then, if you change
|
|
distributions, you don't have to save and restore your files.
|
|
This also means you could have multiple distributions on one
|
|
computer and share /home between them.
|
|
<li> Select hardware supported by most distributions.
|
|
<li> If you need to add applications that don't come with the Linux
|
|
distribution, try to get ones that come with source code so
|
|
you can upgrade them and port them to different distributions.
|
|
<li> Start with a Linux archive CD set (such as InfoMagic's
|
|
Developer's Resource). That will give you at least three distributions
|
|
(Slackware, Debian and Red Hat) with which to play.
|
|
</ul>
|
|
<p>
|
|
Good luck and happy Linuxing.
|
|
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<center><H5>Copyright © 1998, Phil Hughes <BR>
|
|
Published in Issue 31 of <i>Linux Gazette</i>, August 1998</H5></center>
|
|
|
|
<!--===================================================================-->
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<A HREF="./index.html"><IMG ALIGN=BOTTOM SRC="../gx/indexnew.gif"
|
|
ALT="[ TABLE OF CONTENTS ]"></A>
|
|
<A HREF="../index.html"><IMG ALIGN=BOTTOM SRC="../gx/homenew.gif"
|
|
ALT="[ FRONT PAGE ]"></A>
|
|
<A HREF="./pelletier.html"><IMG SRC="../gx/back2.gif"
|
|
ALT=" Back "></A>
|
|
<A HREF="./richardson.html"><IMG SRC="../gx/fwd.gif" ALT=" Next "></A>
|
|
<P> <hr> <P>
|
|
<!--startcut ==========================================================-->
|
|
</BODY>
|
|
</HTML>
|
|
<!--endcut ============================================================-->
|