Linux: Is implosion of the brain a normal part of installation?

[Broken Viking]

Hail all!
As many of ye have probabally figured out already, I'm a fairly strong supporter of the Open Source ideal; The idea that program and utility code should be made freely available to all (With proprietary stuff like DRM routines and copyright protected content removed beforehand, if necessary) and come with rights for reverse engineering and continued development as standard, as outlined in the GNU General Public License. Therefore, it should come as no surprise to find that I consider Linux to be the best OS around, and that - Given the practical choice - I would easily choose Linux above any other OS.

However, every time I try and make the switch, I keep running into the same old problem:
The way that Linux operates is so damn complicated and "alien" to me - As someone unfortunate enough to have been bought up on the MS Windows family - That it's literally impossible for me to make the switchover to this far better system! ad:

Practical example of the above:
I installed Redhat 9 on an old box earlier this morning so that I had a non-critical system that I could play around with - Even under the root account - Without having to worry about killing anything vital if I messed it up. Unfortunateley, Anaconda probed my monitor wrong and set the resolution in X-term far too high...Meaning that the monitor couldn't display anything, and I couldn't use X-Windows at all.
Although I managed to change my default runlevel to 3 and gained access via the terminal insted, nothing I tried (Editing XF86config and similar files, trying to run Anaconda again etc.) would set the resolution in X to a level where the monitor could render the display.

As I write this, I'm currently reinstalling RedHat from scratch (A very long process!) in the sole hope that I'll be able to set a generic 1024x768 monitor driver and that it'll work properly. Now I know that there must've been some way that I could've fixed it without reinstalling - Given that I had perfectly fine access to the terminal at all times - But despite running through at least half of the man-page database and spending ages navigating through the filesystem, I couldn't figure it out no matter what I tried. ad:

Now what also throws me here is how confused and inept I appear to be at adapting to Linux. Given that I can make many ancient boxes do things that no-one could reasonably expect under Windows (WinXP Pro running on an IBM 286, anyone? ) I do find it rather disconcerting that my skills in Linux seem to go little further than being able to log-on to a system, use the ls command, and understand how iptables could be configured to create a very adaptable and completely secure router.

So what I'd like to ask - In summary - Is:

• Have we any experienced Linux users on the forum? (Or are most of us going Mac nowadays? hock
• How long did it take ye to learn how to use Linux at the system level, and was it as difficult for ye as I'm finding it now?
• Given that I'm much more used to a win32 environment, are there any easy conventions and techniques that I can employ to make the transition between OSs much easier than the current Try, try, try again, fail, tear hair out, punch hole in PC, take cricket bat to PC approach that I keep being forced into?

Aye...Whilst I'm at it, I already know that Redhat 9 is very out of date (They're on Fedora 12 now! hock but it's the only full Linux install set that I have here at the moment, although I think I've got a Ubuntu 7 live/install disk knocking about as well.
Until I know how to use Linux properly though, I'd rather not go investing scarce and valuable CD-R media burning ISOs that I might not be able to use at all.

Preferance-wise, I'd probabally gravitate mainly towards Fedora as my preferred distro so I can build and work on my previous experience with using Redhat. 8)

Anyhow...Farewell for now, and many thanks in advance for any advice offered.
>> Death <<

 

[Geezertronic]

I've used Debian Lenny for high-end servers, Development servers, and desktops running the GUI and had no issues

 

[generalvegitable]

I recommend Ubuntu for its ease of use, it is debian based which I know is not what you are used to, and incredibly easy to use, at the moment I use the netbook version because I have a netbook, but I did recently use the desktop version but I won't go into that.

to answer your main questions,
before I used ubuntu I had only used windows and it took me about a month to get used to it

there are two main different interfaces you can choose from gnome (the standard one) and KDE (Kubuntu, and microsoft "borrowed" alot from kde for windows vista and 7 e.g aero glass, that was originally KDE). if you are looking for an environment similar to windows I suggest Kubuntu because it is near identical to the win 7 desktop style but if you want something completely different to windows try the standard distro.

also ubuntu is a good introduction to the linux system, I am still learning the terminal codes and stuff, but if you install it open the terminal and type "sudo apt-get moo" for a bit of a laugh (you will need to put in your password)

 

[MrC]

Have we any experienced Linux users on the forum? (Or are most of us going Mac nowadays? hock

Well I've used Linux since about 1992 using a SLS disk set which I've still got up in the loft somewhere, as well as various other Unix flavours from about the same time. Currently using Gentoo.

How long did it take ye to learn how to use Linux at the system level, and was it as difficult for ye as I'm finding it now?

I originally converted from using Tandem kit (see Google if you need to know more) and found Unix a bit of an unstructured mess which, given it's roots, is to be expected. I used Unix in a financial environment and it probably took me about 12 months before I was as confident on it as I was on Tandem for system and application (primarily db) support. IMHO, networking on Unix is a lot easier to get your head around than on other environments. Unix is a functionally rich environment and there's usually a number of ways to achieve a goal and that can make it confusing when coming from a proprietary OS such as Windows.

Given that I'm much more used to a win32 environment, are there any easy conventions and techniques that I can employ to make the transition between OSs much easier than the current Try, try, try again, fail, tear hair out, punch hole in PC, take cricket bat to PC approach that I keep being forced into?

I don't think there is but I'd certainly try a more up-to-date distro as there's been huge usability and integration changes over the last year or so. A distro that at least installs without too much aggro reduces the initial learning curve a lot as the Windows and Linux environments are converging at least in functionality. These days just about all main sysadmin tasks can be performed from a GUI which doesn't tend to give such a good understanding of the basics as learning the same from the CLI.

Another alternative if you want to learn elements of Linux/Unix is to install the Cygwin environment on a Windows box. This'll let you learn about basic Unix fundamentals in a Windows environment before going the whole hog on a Linux installation.

 

[Tom B]

Another alternative if you want to learn elements of Linux/Unix is to install the Cygwin environment on a Windows box. This'll let you learn about basic Unix fundamentals in a Windows environment before going the whole hog on a Linux installation.

I agree with this. I found it much easier to use Linux after a combination of cygwin and using it at uni. Now, I find some of the things that MS Windows does or insists on completely backwards.

 

[generalvegitable]

if it helps there is a huge difference between Unix and Linux see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix

 

[Broken Viking]

Hail again!
Firstly; Many thanks for all of the advice so far! I've been poking and prodding about with an old box that I've installed Redhat 9 on (The sandbox system I referred to yesterday) and I'm just starting to become familiar with a *NIX style environment again...Though as some might expect, I'm still finding one or two odd "bugs" that I can't work around. Anyway... 8)

I recommend Ubuntu for its ease of use, it is debian based which I know is not what you are used to, and incredibly easy to use, at the moment I use the netbook version because I have a netbook, but I did recently use the desktop version but I won't go into that.

I must admit that I'm trying to avoid Ubuntu for the time being whilst I try and learn Linux at the more fundamental level. I know that Ubuntu is one of the easiest versions of Linux to get to grips with, but where possible I try to start off with the fundamentals of a new system first so that I can learn a wider range of skills for use on other systems and distros derived from the same technology.

I know that if I started off with Ubuntu, I'd find it very easy to use at the desktop level...But there would be two big sacrifices that I'd need to make in choosing Ubuntu:

1. Being a primarily desktop orientated distro, Ubuntu only comes with the bare necessities for a desktop environment. Although that's perfectly fine for most PCs, I tend to prefer client/server orientated infrastructure (My current Windows network is domain based, run using NT4 Server, and uses roaming profiles) and the more "mainstream" Linux distros come with the tools and utilities that can allow this.
   .
2. Under Ubuntu, I'd only learn a very small percentage of what may be found in a typical "big" Linux distro...And although adopting Ubuntu for a few months would allow me to learn that first 10%, it would split my learning up into two main parts - Whereas I prefer to learn everything in one straight-up "block".

To put it another way: If I ever wanted to learn and use MacOS - Perish the thought! hock: - I'd want to start off with learning how FreeBSD (The OS from which MacOS was plagarised) works beforehand, as opposed to just installing MacOS and using it straight out of the box. With the knowlege of FreeBSD behind me, I'd then be able to tune MacOS to my requirements and disable things that I don't particularly like (iTunes especially).

An added advantage of that is that I'd be able to fix any OS-based faults myself, rather than having to pay through the nose for an Apple technician to spend 30-secs looking at it before saying You need to buy a new Mac... :roll:

there are two main different interfaces you can choose from gnome (the standard one) and KDE (Kubuntu, and microsoft "borrowed" alot from kde for windows vista and 7 e.g aero glass, that was originally KDE).

I normlly install both GNOME and KDE so that I have the choice of either depending on my requirements. That said though, I prefer to start the GUI manually (My boxes are set to boot into runlevel 3 as I prefer a terminal logon, and all I need to do is type startx to get my GUI up! ) so that it only runs if I actually need it...But I still havn't worked out how to tell X which GUI I want to run!
When I get the time, I'll have to remember to try startx --help to see if the GUI can be specified at command invocation.

...but if you install it open the terminal and type "sudo apt-get moo" for a bit of a laugh (you will need to put in your password)

Sounds quite interesting, going on a Google search!* Will have to try it when I finally hook my sandbox up to the network!
* - My natural inclination is to look-up any commands given by others that I don't know myself before I run them, especially ones that require entering a password. Pray take no aversion to this, it's a part of my routine security practice.

I once read about another Linux newbie who asked an IRC channel for advice on mounting a CD-ROM. Some joker advised him to run dd bs=8M if=\dev\urandom of=\dev\hda2 >> /dev/null as root, and he - Unfortunateley - Actually ran that command! hock:
(For those who don't know it: That command basically means "Write random data to the 2nd HDD (Normally root) partition in 8MB blocks, and show no output!")

I originally converted from using Tandem kit and found Unix a bit of an unstructured mess which, given it's roots, is to be expected. [...] Unix is a functionally rich environment and there's usually a number of ways to achieve a goal and that can make it confusing when coming from a proprietary OS such as Windows.

That's pretty much what I'm finding at the moment...Especially as I instinctively know where to find anything (Or where to start fault-finding) in Windows without even having to think about it. On the other hand, I have to look up a filesystem reference to do anything like that on a Linux box! hock:

I have to confess that I prefer the default filesystem arrangement that Microsoft use, as it's a whole lot "cleaner" and more logical than a *NIX based system - Simply one folder for the OS, one for the programs, one for the user trees, and an addressable swap file as opposed to a swap partition. That opinion's probabally as a result of my long-term Windows usage though, and I'm already confident that a Linux system could be arranged in exactly the same way if ever I wanted to have such a "Lin-dows" installation. 8)

Another alternative if you want to learn elements of Linux/Unix is to install the Cygwin environment on a Windows box. This'll let you learn about basic Unix fundamentals in a Windows environment before going the whole hog on a Linux installation.

Actually, that's not only a brilliant idea for getting used to the nature of a Linux system (I'm already familiar with BaSH, thankfully) but it'd presumably allow me to set up an NFS server on my Windows box for transferring files over to my Linux server, once it's been built...Wouldn't it?

That said, I will almost certainly be keeping at least one Windows box knocking around even after the switch. From wandering around the web, it seems that error-free CD/DVD burning (Something I do a lot of) is much more achievable in Win32, I have a number of Win32 applications that I'll still need to use (Although I am aware of WINE) and much to my misfortune, the manufacturer of my laserjet printer seems to think it's alright to only support Windows at the driver level...They don't even do drivers for the Mac! hock:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyhow...So far I seem to be doing more or less alright with Redhat, and I havn't managed to fry my sandbox yet! I also downloaded both the live and full versions of Fedora 12 last night (Trust me, the Uni of Kent mirror is a great place to get Linux distros...I managed to download 3.65GB of data off of there last night in just under an hour! hock so that I could have an up-to-date distro available.

However, I have run into one rather odd (And most annoying) "bug" of sorts, and I'm hoping it's just a simple one to solve:

As root, I've been trying to add entries for /dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1 to /etc/fstab so that I don't have to do an su root every time I want to mount and access a USB volume. However - Despite making the relevant edits using gedit from X, and using vi from the terminal whilst logged in as root - Any changes that I make to fstab seem to get shifted into /etc/fstab.REVOKE on subsequent reboot, and the mount points that I create (/mnt/usb1, /mnt/usb2) also get deleted. :?

Now, the first thing that I don't get is why anything on the system is "revoking" changes that are implemented by the root user, given that root is effectively the "God" of that system? Moreso though, I made exactly the same changes to fstab on my previous Linux box (Same OS, same distro, same configuration etc.) without any such problems occurring...So I can't understand why something (A security service that I'm unaware of, maybe?) is reverting my fstab back to the one originally created by anaconda?

Can anyone spot what's going wrong here? Could it be something to do with specifying the actual partition in fstab rather than the logical device /dev/sda?

Farewell for now, and many thanks in advance for any further advice!
>> Death <<

 

[MrC]

If I ever wanted to learn and use MacOS - Perish the thought! hock: - I'd want to start off with learning how FreeBSD (The OS from which MacOS was plagarised)

Urgh, no! MacOS was not plagiarised from FreeBSD - parts of MAC OS X are derived from parts of FreeBSD, but then so are large parts of other OSs, many of which developed in parallel. An example would be FreeBSDs networking stack. A knowledge of FreeBSD would be of little use when trying to understand the low-level fundamentals of the MACH microkernel at the base of MAC OS X. And thinking you need to know about FreeBSD to disable iTunes is just weird.

But I still havn't worked out how to tell X which GUI I want to run!

Generally change ~/.xinitrc to exec the relevant window manager.

I have to confess that I prefer the default filesystem arrangement that Microsoft use, as it's a whole lot "cleaner" and more logical than a *NIX based system

Changing the default Linux filesystem hierarchy is possible but would be painful beyond belief and be of no benefit whatsoever. After all if you ever wanted to use Linux commercially you'd have to support standard filesystem layouts. Standard package managers assume standard places for various bits as well.

but it'd presumably allow me to set up an NFS server on my Windows box for transferring files over to my Linux server, once it's been built...Wouldn't it?

Probably easier to install MS's SFU which would allow you to mount a remote NFS filesystem. See http://technet.microsoft.com/en-gb/interopmigration/bb380242.aspx for details.

That said, I will almost certainly be keeping at least one Windows box knocking around even after the switch. From wandering around the web, it seems that error-free CD/DVD burning (Something I do a lot of) is much more achievable in Win32,

I've not had too many problems here for the last few years

I have a number of Win32 applications that I'll still need to use (Although I am aware of WINE)

WINE is very much more mature now, especially if you use the development branch. I use it for Steam based games (eg HL2 and the like) and it works surprisingly well.

and much to my misfortune, the manufacturer of my laserjet printer seems to think it's alright to only support Windows at the driver level...They don't even do drivers for the Mac! hock:

CUPS tends to handle most things these days and visiting the CUPS website or maybe http://www.openprinting.org/printer_list.cgi should give you an idea of whether your printer will work under Linux.

As root, I've been trying to add entries for /dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1 to /etc/fstab so that I don't have to do an su root every time I want to mount and access a USB volume.

TBH you shouldn't have to do this now. Modern Linux distros should have udev set up to do all of that automagically (Google udev usb pen drive).

Any changes that I make to fstab seem to get shifted into /etc/fstab.REVOKE on subsequent reboot, and the mount points that I create (/mnt/usb1, /mnt/usb2) also get deleted. :?

Looks like you have something like kudzu running.

 

[yorkie]

Ubuntu is very easy to install in my experience. I don't have experience of installing any other version of Linux, but that's down to the individual vendors if it's difficult to install them. I'll send you a PM you may be interested in....