Re: Prob w/ virtual terminals



On 2008-03-01, zeno <geoffrey.froner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 1, 7:33 am, Tom Newton <t...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2008-03-01, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nka...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


<snip>

Gee Whillikers! If there were any doubt about Babel being
spawned by misguided geeks, the flurry of responses to my query
does give it substance.

Speaking of babble...

I will look through some of the files mentioned to see what
I can find and report back. Since few of us Linux users are
'Experts', I believe it's important to be very careful and
considerate and detailed when making suggestions.

Isn't that nice.

I'm using Ubuntu because it's fairly simple and even has some
resemblance to Winduhs which I dislike because its deliberately
deceptive and confusing for obvious reasons: keeping their
secrets.

And a lot of Linux distros are going down that same path.
KDE/Gnome, both windows-clone artificial user interfaces, are a
major aspect of this downward trend.

Previously I used CLI with RedHat and it seemed pretty
straightforward. It is necessary for me to have a graphic
capability though since I am a visual artist and the Gnome
desktop (including GIMP) is a blessing.

That paragraph doesn't make sense. _I_ run Linux from the CLI
(command line) and have a fully graphical box. I have a GUI,
which includes a basic X install and a good window manager, but
nothing resembling KDE or Gnome.

I could easily run the GIMP if I wanted to, and any of the
applications that come with KDE (only the kdelibs are necessary
for that, not KDE itself), or any X application.

I use firefox regularly...But I run my box from 'xterms'.

Calling KDE/Gnome a "GUI" is like calling a motorhome a
motorcycle. They are artificial user interfaces, nothing but
large collections of applications with a common graphical theme,
built on top of a GUI. Those collections include a window
manager, of course.

And thinking that the CLI is limited to the non-graphical
console environment is simply erroneous.

What consensus is there about
using Debian instead of Ubuntu?

Myself (and a lot of other Linux runners) can run any Linux/Unix
box, with or without X. If they have monstrosities like Gnome or
KDE installed, I just ignore them.

They are all basically the same under all the eye-candy,
the supposedly 'user-friendly' interfaces.

No reason you can't do the same thing. Just the most basic
knowledge of bash is required.

Or what about Slackware, given my
needs?

I'm running Slackware 12.0 right now. Its package management
system is much more 'manual' than the others, and thus not
prone to arcane glitches that drive people insane and take
endless hours of web-searching to fix, which the complex package
management systems of the other distros are famous for.

It's the most clean and stable distro.

The stock install includes the Korporate Desktop Environment
(KDE).

You can run the GIMP on it, of course, with or without
KDE.

What more do you want?

Any simple statements (for my simple mind) would be
appreciated.

Okay:

Try Slack. You wouldn't regret it.

You can get the ISOs to burn on the main site and a couple of
mirrors, or use bittorrent:

http://www.slackware.com

:-)

And thanks to everyone who contributed their comments, complex or
simple.

No problem.

If you don't understand something, google it and/or ask.

Don't whine. :-)

Tom

--
calhobbit (at) | The Truth will set you free:
gmail [DOT] com | http://www.sethcenter.com

.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Are there advantages of Linux over XP Pro.?
    ... Excuse my ignorance but what does KDE mean? ... dual-boot 98SE/XP PRO machine for a copy of Linux. ... small file server with RAID and Backup storage with the easy addition of ... The Mandrake 10.1 install was also painless, but the GUI would not run. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Newbie needs help with SUSE 9.1
    ... I think there is a setting in KDE Control Center somewhere that let's ... frustrating because there are some really nice features in Linux. ... I thought I'd install some tools that I ... serving Windows boxes from your Linux box. ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: Why is Linux so slow?
    ... > I chose a kde system because from what I have read Suse seems to favor ... > Displaying graphics seems to be a problem for Linux because it is very ... No problems, install went smoothly, auto configured all the network settings ...
    (alt.os.linux.suse)
  • Re: Are there advantages of Linux over XP Pro.?
    ... I would be interesting in creating a seperate partition on my ... migration and experimentation with Linux. ... KDE was much faster than ... the SUSE install, and the services and apps responded quickly. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: OT: Ubuntu?
    ... And while the update manager is handy, ... I installed my LAMP server in minutes using UM, ... Oh bear in mind all of Linux is case sensitive. ... This would be to install new apps, and you shouldn't be doing that all ...
    (alt.smokers.cigars)