Re: Anyone tried basiclinux?

• Previous message: J.O. Aho: "Re: /dev/hda 100% busy"
• In reply to: Day Brown: "Anyone tried basiclinux?"
• Next in thread: Day Brown: "Re: Anyone tried basiclinux?"
• Reply: Day Brown: "Re: Anyone tried basiclinux?"
• Reply: ernobe: "Re: Anyone tried basiclinux?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2003 10:24:26 +0200

Day Brown wrote:

> I downloaded BL-2, got it installed from a Dos directory.
> But, trying to add xwindows, mozilla, or any other software aint so
> simple. I'm wondering if it is feasible to use BL to launch from the
> dos promt onto another ext2 or ext3 drive, and perhaps to run a more
> recent Kernel, such as 2.4
>
Damn. Don't want to see the dos prompt anymore. A nice $bash gives a lot
more to me.

> I've tried lots of different distros, but found something lacking in
> all of them. Mandrake has problems with video cards. Redhat demands

Which version - and which video cards?

> that I use passwords on a single user desktop, and like the others that
> do this, complicate the shutdown process as well.
>
You are not prepared to use linux yet. Sorry.
 
> Most of the problems with Linux derive out of its heritage as a network
> OS; hence user names and permission needed to shutdown. But for the
> single user desktop, annoying. BL solves this problem by always being
> root, but like dos, I think it knows how to lock a file or directory if
> one is worried about sabotage software.
>
So you are eager to have someone logging on to your machine making a nice
DDoS-box or a childporn-warez-ftp server without your knowledge?
Linux does _NOT_ know about blocking access to files or executable files.
YOU have to know this. By correctly using permissions and passwords. And
BY NO MEANS use the root account to logon for doing regular work with
(also regularly) exploitable programs. You will regret that.

> But, unlike dos, getting a graphic browser running is daunting. I like
> the speed of the CLI interface, and as a touch typist, hate dragging a
> mouse around to get things done.
>
As a beginner, you should rather stick to a distribution like redhat or
(better imho) mandrake with its msec (please set it to "high") and the
control center, and, most of all advantages, urpmi - which lets you auto
update the thing from commandline once you have added the update
sources.
 
.....
> So often I have seen an entire install trashed because of some problem
> which could have been dealt with later. I was just appalled when the
> first distro I looked at, Redhat 5, crashed trying to make the backup
> boot disk, and wiped out the entire install.
>
Now redhat is at 9.0 and significantly better regarding hardware
detection. Boot floppies are a legacy thing nowadays, the first linux
distribution cd will be bootable and offer a rescue mode.
 
> I can understand how a screwup with xf86config would result in
> x-windows crashing, but I have also seen where distros messed up the
> text mode screen as well, necessitating the user to go all the way back
> to thru the entire install process to that point.
>
Probably you messed up your config files running as root when you
shouldn't do that.
man su
man sudo

> With Basiclinux, that wont be a problem. The 2meg download dont take
> all that long to deal with. Another thing I like about it, is that
> since it can boot from the dos prompt, if you have a serious hardware
> problem that wont even run dos, you can quit trying to figure out the
> software.
>
There are a lot of mini-linux distributions. But I suggest you try out a
knoppix cd first: it will boot from almost any 586+ pc, without even
touching the harddrive. Later when you got familiar with it, you can
install it on the hd and update with debian apt-get.

> BSD, to its credit, recommended that the user setup a small dos
> partition which could be used to troubleshoot the system. if it also
> had BL, then even if the main Linux drive was totally trashed, you
> could always boot dos, then BL, then use bash to recover your personal
> files off the Linux drive before trying a new install.
>
You can use "linux single" at the boot prompt of any linux distro and you
get there straightforward. As long as your / and /usr partition are not
garbled yet.

> Again, like Dos, I like the incremental approach of BL. if they come up
> with a new kernel or whatever for it, I automatically have a paritition
> to which I can copy my bookmarks, documents, graphics or whatever, in
> case the new kernel or whatever application install trashes the drive.
> Drives are so cheap these days, you'd think a distro would figure this
> out.
>
You can always try a new kernel with its modules set. No need to delete
the old working one. Well, some user modules will have to be recompiled,
new graphic drivers and stuff. Which you will have to revert when going
back. Therefore it's a good idea to set default runlevel to 3.

> But I dunno if dealing with Basiclinux to get it to run Mozilla is so
> complex it is best left to experts, or if I have just not found the
> right site with adequate instructions and links that work. or one that
> doesnt swamp me with hundreds of files and options to consider.

Again disagree. The (almost too) simple mandrake setup now makes a
working box included browsers, openoffice, 2 nics or ppp+nic and
internet connection sharing ... even including a ntfs resize to fit on a
oem-recovery-disc prepared pc ... within 30 minutes. Try to install 2K
or XP together with office in that time.

-- 
Longhorn error#4711: TCPA / NGSCB VIOLATION: Microsoft optical mouse 
detected penguin patterns on mousepad. Partition scan in progress
 to remove offending incompatible products.  Reactivate your MS software
 (3 days grace period).

• Previous message: J.O. Aho: "Re: /dev/hda 100% busy"
• In reply to: Day Brown: "Anyone tried basiclinux?"
• Next in thread: Day Brown: "Re: Anyone tried basiclinux?"
• Reply: Day Brown: "Re: Anyone tried basiclinux?"
• Reply: ernobe: "Re: Anyone tried basiclinux?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]