Re: linux size

[damaged justice <frogfarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoting akira@kalamazoo.net (akira@kalamazoo.net):
> 
> and i remember a long time running slackware with kernel 1.2.3, i had a 250
> meg partition with only like a 50-65mb install, but that was like before it
> had ELF support. but now, 2gb for slackware is about right for most people,
> heck now i wouldn't reccomend linux on less then a gig..

Au contraire, mon frere! A look at my recent posting of URL's, noting at
least seven different distributions of differing size and complexity,
should dispel that myth. Not all of these will fit everyone, but they
exist, and they are increasing in number and variety as people adapt Linux
to fit various needs the commercial market cannot easily fill.

"Turnkey" systems can be installed on low-end hardware, offering infinite
customizability [izzat a word?] and remote administration capabilities you
can't get with Windows even AFTER adding thousands of dollars in third-
party apps. My favorite Linux story on the web so far is the fellow who set
up a Linux box for his parents: He could easily configure it to be usable
in whatever way they wanted; nine times out of ten, he could log in from
anywhere in the world and fix any problems; and if all else failed, "Hey,
my dad's an iron worker, he's not stupid. He can take the case off, unscrew
some screws, take the hard drive out and mail it to me."

> i know this might seem like a stupid question, but is redhat any harder to
> use? i heard one person on irc say that slackware is for idiots, maybe he's
> just stupid or didn't know what he was talking about. i also heard NASA uses
> debian, so well you'd think it'd be halfway decent if they did.

It all depends on your particular background, and what expectations and
experiences you bring to Linux (and to Unix in general). Understanding "the
Unix philosophy" is essential if you want to work with the system in great
detail, but in reality you can learn as much, or as little, as you want.
Obviously, the more you learn, the more you'll be able to use the tools
effectively (unless you get distracted by the infinite customization
options, as so many Windows users discovered...programs to randomly change
one's background wallpaper? Well, "for those who like that sort of thing,
that's the sort of thing they like.")

> speaking of linux distrobutions, the worst has got to be mini-linux, the
> copy i had was in one big zip you extract with the full pathname into
> c:\linux on your dos partition, then load it with loadlin,  it was just an
> edited version of slackware with some really ugly color scheme, but it had a
> menu based ppp config and BitchX already installed.

True 'nuff, it's an ugly dog, but it does the job. It doesn't claim to be
more than what it is -- it doesn't even claim to be pretty. It provides
exactly what it advertises: a way for the typical DOS user to "give it a
spin" in a quick and easy fashion. However, this is far from the only "alt"
distribution -- someone recently released a modified mini-linux, in fact,
which consists of a boot and a root image. Haven't tried it out yet except
to verify that it boots. :) Take a look at my list -- if you missed the
post, my full list (including non-Linux stuff) is at

http://frogfarm.home.ml.org/pcshit.html

> i dunno, i think one of the reasons people don't use linux is just because
> they don't know how to use it, or unfortunatly how to get it installed, well
> slackware anyway. some people don't even know where to get it, but since
> redhat is out in stores that makes it alot easier.

Exactly. Fortunately, this is changing more quickly than any other area,
with the possible exception of "ease of use" (Gnome, KDE, the concept of
the Linux Standard Distribution (or is it the Linux Distribution Standard?)
and many more). KDE in particular (or something else that comes out of
nowhere!) just might be the killer interface that gets your grandmother
using Linux (a cliche, but a good yardstick nonetheless).

> when i first used slackware, i got so sick of it, a major pain, so i deleted
> it, later i'm like, man why the heck did i do that?! and reinstalled it. to
> start i really never learned it from books or man pages, i just had alot of
> help from friends and #linux on irc helped out alot.

One of Linux' greatest strengths is its multitude of options. You can go it
totally alone, read HOWTO's and FAQ's, buy lots of different books of
varying quality and accuracy, network with people through the Internet and
user groups like KLUG, and even (gasp!) PAY someone to provide you with
technical support. All of these need to be emphasized; they complement each
other, and we would be much worse off if any of these areas were neglected.

> i just love seeing people go in there and asking "hey, how do i make a
> bootdisk?!" one person came in there and said it sucks because it only had
> one console, turns out he didn't know about alt-f1, f2 etc hehe.

Current trends continuing at approximately the same rate means computers
will continue to get cheaper. If you're just talking "Internet access",
however, you can't get much cheaper than a dumb terminal (ranging from free
to about ten bucks), and a standard phone line (roughly twenty bucks/month
in the United States). Used 486's are being thrown away every day. With net
access and computing power this cheap (and we should be sending more of
this stuff overseas so all the ungrateful disaffected elitists don't have
to look at those ugly dinosaurs anymore...), motivation is more a factor
than economics. Learning itself is an economic investment: What is your
time worth?

 * First, you need to convince people that they don't need to go into
   bankruptcy buying a lot of geegaws just to keep up with the Joneses,
   that it is possible to explore the exciting (well, to some of us :)
   possibilities of computing with minimal financial outlay.

 * Then (and more importantly), you must show them how using the computer
   will be entertaining and/or useful TO THEM, PERSONALLY -- because all
   the tools in the world are worthless without a person and a purpose
   behind them.

 * Finally (and just as importantly), they need to have as much access
   as possible to accurate information, so that they can make effective
   use of the tool (the computer).

These latter two points are far more difficult to achieve, and, I believe,
are where we should be focusing our efforts.

> most linux books i really don't like, the thing that annoys me the most,
> those linux books that are nothing but faq's and howto's from the net! but
> the thing is, is that they charge like 50 bucks...

Too true. So it's a good idea to read reviews, as well as look through
books on the racks and see how much real content they offer, as opposed to
repackaging the fruits of the open source community's efforts. The only
positive part of this is that it gets the information into the hands of
those without net access themselves.

--
     http://frogfarm.home.ml.org/      .:. Ye have locked yerselves up in 
Civil Liberty thru Complex Mathematics .:. cages of fear - and behold, do ye 
 Four out of five politicians prefer   .:. now complain that ye lack FREEDOM!
  unarmed, ignorant peasants.          .:.        - Principia Discordia