[Coco] Fedora 6 DVD ISO

[Joel Ewy]

Roger Taylor wrote:
> At 10:24 PM 5/1/2007, you wrote:
>> Now if Linux would figure out how to provide & install drivers as easy
>> as Windows & Mac.  The last time I tried Linux on a Shuttle SN85G4V3
>> with an old Nvidia 5500 agp.  The instructions: go to the web site and
>> get it.  Instructions on web site: just compile it & install. Then it
>> needed other bits that didn't exist. Around that time the GUI
>> disappeared to the command prompt. The error message basically said to
>> do a reinstall.  That ended that Linux attempt.  I forget which distro
>> it was.
>
> From the responses I get sometimes, I think some people must love
> tinkering with the OS instead of actually using it.  I admit, it looks
> like a field day for keyboard techies, and I'm not denying being one,
> but I just need it to work without having to build it myself.  
Roger,

You're quite right that in this list you'll probably find a high
percentage of people who like to fiddle with things.  It's a geeky
population.  And you're also right that there's a time and a place to
tinker, and then you need to get something done... See below.
> I think there's just way too many distros of "Linux", anyway.  I
> quoted the word because everybody calls their version Linux but yet
> they want to claim that it's different and better than other distros.
> And, if they Are that different, then Linux will never evolve the way
> we would like it to.  My 2 cents.
>
>
The need to tinker vs. the need to just use is one good reason why there
are so many operating systems that use the Linux kernel.  (And I think
you'll find that most of them don't call themselves "Linux".  They may
have "Linux" in their names, but they all have names aside from
"Linux".  The more closely they align themselves with RMS/FSF, the more
likely they will be to say GNU/Linux, or something like that. 
Whatever.  Calling a distro "Linux" is just an easy colloquialism, like
calling "Microsoft Windows Vista" "Windows".  It always irks me when
people talk about "Windows" as if any Microsoft product had somehow
originated that metaphor.)

This diversity is good, because you get something like Knoppix, which
was really innovative in pioneering the idea of a live CD.  That idea
(and perhaps some of the user-friendly hardware auto-detection and
configuration that makes a live CD possible) has migrated into the
mainstream distributions, whether they borrowed code from Knoppix or
not.  I don't use Knoppix on a regular basis myself, but I'm very glad
it exists.  I do use DSL a lot, which borrowed from Knoppix. 

You certainly wouldn't suggest that somebody clamp down and try to
prevent people from playing, experimenting, and innovating, and just
stick to developing one or two mainstream distributions?

If you want to cut through the confusion, here's a humble suggestion. 
The assumption is that you are using x86 hardware, you want a GUI and
reasonably modern end-user apps, and a distro that's still under active
development.  Server users can take care of themselves.  Get the latest
version of the distros mentioned below:
If you are installing on anything < a Pentium II-350 with 256M RAM,
install DSL (Damn Small Linux) or Puppy.
If you are installing on Pentium II-350 - low-end PIII or equivalent
(K6/2) you might try XUbuntu or Fedora with XFCE-4 and Thunar file
manager (especially if you are migrating from MS-Windows.)
If you are installing on mid-to-upper range PIII, Athlon, or above, just
use the default Ubuntu or Fedora.

There.  3 distros, a couple different versions of each.  I cut through
the confusion.  Now if you're not happy with the selections I gave you,
I can only say this:  If even that is too many choices, then this is a
stick-up -- give me your wallet!  :)  If it's too few, don't complain
that there are too many distros!  :)

As I've said before here, I've been using (X)Ubuntu a lot recently, and
even putting it on computers for ex-MS-Windows users for the very reason
that I can install it and use it with minimal tinkering.  It compares
quite favorably to any version of MS-Windows I've ever installed in that
respect.  Fedora is also good.  I had some troubles with it around FC2 -
FC3, but don't have anything major against it, and would still recommend
it.  DSL works great for the old beaters.  Firefox runs fine on a P-166
with 64M of RAM for casual browsing.  Really, it does!  And if you want
real speed, Dillo ain't half bad.

When I'm in the mood to tinker, I play with Debian on PPC and 68K Macs
(and also Ubuntu on PPC) (or turn on the CoCo or MM/1).  And right there
is the beauty of having a diversity of distributions.  The ones I've
mentioned above will allow you to get your work done.  I'm sure there
others that will too, but if you think there are too many choices, well,
let me be your dictator!  :)  Behind the scenes, somebody somewhere is
cooking up something cool using their own customized distro. 
Dyne:bolic, Cluster Knoppix, clusterix, Photoix, and customized distros
that turn your commodity PC into a network router/firewall, DVR, a VOIP
phone, or who knows what all -- you don't even have to think of them as
separate distributions, they are just customized packages of free
software that happens to use a Linux kernel, among other things.  But
that's where real innovation happens, and it migrates from the fringe
into the mainstream.  I believe I read that the Linux kernel's
framebuffer support got its start in the port for the 68k machines
(which is almost tangentially _on_ topic, since the CoCo uses a Motorola
processor :) ).  So never discount the value of diversity, and don't
count out the contributions of the oddballs and fringe players.  This is
a mail list for CoCo enthusiasts, after all!  :)

JCE
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> >From a review of Ubuntu 7.04 on PCMag.com, Linux still can't install
>> Nvidia drivers properly.
>>
>> Stephen
>> -- 
>>
>> -- 
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
>