Ask Slashdot: What Is the Best Distro For Linux Lessons? 319
MBtronics writes "I work at an embedded hardware/software company and we are currently moving all our products for Windows CE to Linux. Our core development team already uses their favorite distro for development, but the rest of the developers are still working on Windows. We are going to give a series of Linux lessons (from 'what is Linux' to installing, using and developing) for everybody in the company who is interested (including non-developers). They will be allowed to choose their own distro, but we will certainly get requests for recommendations. My question to the Slashdot crowd: what distro (and window manager) do you think is the best to teach Linux to the generic public? We are currently thinking of Ubuntu, Fedora or Mint."
Ubuntu (Score:4, Informative)
Ubuntu is the most common, with the most online forums and such... I would recommend that one.
Re:Ubuntu (Score:4, Insightful)
True if most people will accept the default installation, else the forums will not as much. I think acceptance of the default is more likely in mint at the moment.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Uh... Mint I think you'll find:
http://distrowatch.com/
Re:Ubuntu (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
That assertion is unsupported. Page Hit Rankings are meaningless, and so easily gamed by enthusiasts for various distros.
Actually, DistroWatch keeps track of the OS signatures of visitors. According to that [distrowatch.com] Ubuntu (and all derivatives based on it) account for only 3.2% of the visitors using Linux. The distro with the most users visiting DistroWatch is "Unknown", at 36.3%.
Linux visitors combined account for 41.5% and Windows visitors account for 48.7% of all visitors. So, most of the people
Re:Ubuntu (Score:4, Insightful)
2.3% are still using VISTA!
Vista is a hell of a lot less bad than people think it is. That is, as long as you get it working right. I've had 15 second boot from mbr times to usable desktop, and over 3 months uptime. This is on a personal computer I use for everything, games, etc.
I personally think turning off masses of the dumb services are key.... but what do I know.
The reason I'm still exclusively MS on my PC is that fakeraid failed with Linux, back in the day.
Debian Base (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
After a few too many issues with Ubuntu on sizable server deployments, I ran back to Debian.
Re: (Score:2)
I was a Fedora fan for some time, but the conflict with Nouveau and Nvidia drivers forced me to switch over to Ubuntu permanently.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ctrl-alt-t
Re: (Score:2)
Not very intuitive for GUI-centric users, which would be a sizable percentage of Ubuntu's target audience.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fedora in my opinion is going to take the lead.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Agree but choose Xubuntu. Unity is teh suck unless you're on a seriously cramped display and Gnome3 isn't mature enough to use yet. At least it wasn't two months ago when I was forced to upgrade my Debian systems. I tried for a week but it didn't work.
Re: (Score:2)
I personal use I like Ubuntu / Debian. But for work I would use Fedora, because for production work you'll almost certainly be using Redhat.
I think... (Score:3)
I think it would be openSUSE... #germanophilia
What do you run internally? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would you teach a different distro than the one you currently run internally?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
it sounds like there isn't *only* one that is in use internally ("development team already uses their favorite distro"), which i think is a mistake. they should settle on one, whether it be ubuntu, debian, suse, rhel, or whatever.
for 'general' lessons to other employees that just want to learn linux.. choosing from a list of 2-3 free distros that the teachers are qualified or experienced enough in to teach is fine.
for the general public (which is what the question is for)... stick with ubuntu or maybe suse.
Re: (Score:3)
Years ago, I chose RedHat because I understood where people would be obligated to make it work, even if they didn't want to. Strangely, RedHat abandoned people like me, and now I depend on unpaid volunteers (CentOS) to give me the RedHat I learned to depend on without getting raped in the process.
I don't know if CentOS will work forever, but I'm pretty used to the RedHat way and I've never regretted going this route.
Re: (Score:2)
Because it's very likely to be used for different things to solve different problems for different purposes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Instead of trying to teach new users a particular distro (or 3), teach them:
1) How to download and burn/create a bootable ISO of a Linux distro (maybe use netbootin?).
2) How to boot their machine from the LiveCD/DVD/thumbdrive they've created.
3) And then encourage them to try 2 or 3 distros out to find their own best "fit".
One advantage of this is that some distros will natively support 'X' hardware that another may not.
And one distro I haven't seen yet mentioned,
This may seem shallow.. (Score:3)
Slack! (Score:5, Informative)
Slackware for the win!
Re:Slack! (Score:5, Informative)
Yes.
I cut my teeth on Slackware 3.5
Back then of course the two most common were Redhat and Slackware.
They used to say "If you run Redhat, you know Redhat. If you run Slackware, you know Linux"
There are no shortcuts with Slackware. The students can learn how and why. Then, once they get the base knowledge, they can move on to easier distros. I don't bother with endless tinkering anymore, I just don't have the time. But the knowledge I picked up when I had to still serves me well.
Re: (Score:2)
We are going to give a series of Linux lessons (from 'what is Linux' to installing, using and developing) for everybody in the company who is interested (including non-developers).
If they have non-developers joining in I would say something like Debian, Ubuntu, RHEL, SUSE, something easy, that also looks familiar
If it turns out no non-developers join, then sure Slackware, but most people don't need to know that much just to get Linux to run, heck I doubt very few non-developers could even do a Windows 7 Install which is point-and-click.
I am also going with those distros because it gets you/and
Re:Slack! (Score:4, Informative)
I found Gentoo instructive for similar reasons. Painful, but instructive.
Re:Slack! (Score:5, Informative)
I found Gentoo instructive for similar reasons. Painful, but instructive.
After going through the Gentoo installation handbook one should acquire some basic knowledge about the inner workings of a Linux based system. Not just how to use a Linux system but also how to assemble and manage one.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes.
I cut my teeth on Slackware 3.5
I likewise started with Slackware 3(something).
Back then of course the two most common were Redhat and Slackware.
They used to say "If you run Redhat, you know Redhat. If you run Slackware, you know Linux"
There are no shortcuts with Slackware. The students can learn how and why. Then, once they get the base knowledge, they can move on to easier distros. I don't bother with endless tinkering anymore, I just don't have the time. But the knowledge I picked up when I had to still serves me well.
As much as I agree with what you've said, I wouldn't recommend Slackware for teaching purposes because of it's BSD startup methology, because I found switching over to any other System V type startup with /etc/init.d/ scripts to be painful. Last I checked Slackware 13(something) didn't have an official package manager of any kind. The lack of package management back in the 1999 to 2000 timeframe is what forced me to switch distros to something that did. Than
Re: (Score:3)
That's very true, but I think you take the wrong lesson from it. SysV init is a monstrosity that should be killed with fire wherever it is found. Switching over to it is always painful, but apparently not as painful as it needs to be to keep people from using it, unfortuna
Re: (Score:3)
Slackware package system has always worked very well for me. It definitely does have an official package management system and it works wonderfully. On the other hand RPM and even DEB based systems have driven me back to Slack many times. I have lived through many horror stories with those systems - but installpkg has never failed me.
That's because a Slack package is literally a tarball. I used to maintain a couple of packages on Linuxpackages.net, and have plenty of experience... you could easily build a Slack package even on a system that doesn't have pkgtool installed, by using make install DESTDIR=/work, and then creating a tarball of /work (piped with gzip), and renaming the resulting file from .tar.gz to .tgz. Pkgtool would still happily install the file on a Slack system, and it would still work as long as the dependencies were i
Re:Slack! (Score:4, Interesting)
"Learn Redhat, know Redhat. Learn Slackware, know Linux".
Re: (Score:2)
I am generally more proficient in Linux development and sysadmin duties than anyone I've ever met in my age/pay bracket.
Presumably more proficient at being a blast to talk to at parties, as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Slackware (Score:5, Insightful)
Slackware is great if you want to learn how Linux works - not how one specific distribution does things for you.
KDE (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:KDE (Score:5, Insightful)
Definitely a good idea to
- first make Windows look like Linux (using Open Source software like Libre/Open Office, etc.)
- then make Linux look like Windows (similar layout/style on the screen, programs available where they were, etc.)
- then later introduce people to the new possibilities. We should learn from the massive Linux transitions e.g. in governments -- some have success/failure stories, and some give "lessons learned" summaries.
Re: (Score:2)
The bestg way to impliment your recommendations is to use the KDE desktop environment. Using that, pretty much any distro is the same because you learn one DE and maximize its power settings.
I began using KDE with the 1.0 beta release when it came with SuSE 5.3 in Sept of 1998. I am currently running Kubuntu 12.04 Precise, which features KDE 4.8.0. If you like mime and mouse options control and the ability to configure your DE very similar to XP or Win7 so there is less difficulty working back and fo
Re: (Score:2)
One word of advice: "Classic Menu Style" for the launcher will help keep things much more traditional.
Yes, because default Windows launcher still looks the same... *sigh*
Even Microsoft finally embraced the idea that the "Classic" launcher is not the most productive design.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're bringing people over from the Windows world, please encourage KDE. It's a pretty good take on the "taskbar w/ a start button" GUI-style and will be immediately familiar to most folks. One word of advice: "Classic Menu Style" for the launcher will help keep things much more traditional.
Agree with the above, with one addition: immediately explain how to turn of Strigi "Desktop Search" functionality, or the people using KDE are going to think that it sucks. Nepomuk/Strigi immediately wants to run 6+ background "ontologies" to search and index files in your home directory, which is such an I/O strain that on old computers it's hard to even operate the mouse on the screen.
Depends what you're trying to teach (Score:5, Interesting)
If you're trying to teach them to use Linux for general purposes, I'd go with Mint. It passes the Aunt Tilly test with flying colors in my experience.
If you're trying to teach them about Linux and how stuff works, Slackware or Arch would be the choice.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're trying to teach them to use Linux for general purposes, I'd go with Mint. It passes the Aunt Tilly test with flying colors in my experience
Because I kept getting people recommending Mint to those of us who were pissed off with Unity on Ubuntu, I gave it a try. I honestly don't understand what people like about it. Mint made me jump through hoops to get google as the default search engine in firefox because google doesn't pay mint to "send customers their way." I can understand getting paid to be the default option, but having to go through extra steps to make Google an option? That's an attempt at extortion, and I won't support it. There'
Re: (Score:3)
If you're trying to teach them to use Linux for general purposes, I'd go with Mint. It passes the Aunt Tilly test with flying colors in my experience
Because I kept getting people recommending Mint to those of us who were pissed off with Unity on Ubuntu, I gave it a try. I honestly don't understand what people like about it.
There are two distributions of Mint: "Linux Mint 12", based on Ubuntu, and "Linux Mint Debian" that's based on Debian. As a Debian user I tried Mint 12 and also didn't like it, then tried Mint Debian and was much happier with it. I normally use DuckDuckGo via SSL as my search of choice, so if Google wasn't an option by default, I probably wouldn't have noticed. I just double-checked, and Google was the default search engine in Iceweasel (which is Firefox renamed due to trademark action from Mozilla) in M
Remember your audience (Score:2)
Start with the command line (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
--How about Knoppix ? Live-cd, you get the best of both worlds and can access command-line only stuff.
Solve problems once, or over and over? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are paying for their time, a question I would ask is do you want to solve problems once, or over and over with all the permutations of each of your distros and versions?
I would recommend against Fedora unless you want to do fresh installs at least once a year (twice a year to follow each release). I would recommend CentOS (7-10 year install length).
Whichever you go with, I would standardize on a single distro. Then when you run into an issue you solve it once, and not corner cases that each distro have.
It really is like learning/deploying/testing 3-4 flavors of Windows all at once (Win2000, WinXP, Vista, Win7) and that's not even introducing 32bit vs. 64bit issues, and actual distro version differences (EL5.x vs. 6.x, etc.).
Let people dink and learn the Linux distro of their own choice on their own time. Just my two cents.
Re: (Score:2)
That.
If you're looking for developer distros, pick one that has the developer tools; I'd go with Debian just because it's stable as a rock and about as exciting.
If you're going with end-user eye candy, I'd go with Ubuntu. That way you still have the underlying Debian base with a lot of windows-like fluff.
If... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
In that case I would go with Linux From Scratch. They should learn from the ground up!
Re: (Score:2)
In order to start from the ground up, they will first need to create the universe.
With apologies to Carl Sagan.
Re: (Score:3)
If you are teaching sysadmins, then yes Gentoo is the way to go. It teaches you very precisely what exactly you need and exactly what you don't. And, it keeps you getting reliant on a particular vendor's special config tools. If you can get and keep a Gentoo system running, you are genuinely distro-agnostic.
Re: (Score:3)
I used to use Gentoo, mostly because it was the only distribution which had a bleeding-edge kernel new enough to handle my TV capture hardware. Happily, the MythTV variant of Ubuntu now does just fine...
Gentoo is good for learning the underlying system though ; the installation manual alone makes you learn a lot.
It depends... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
+1
If you just want to teach new developers command-line Unix tools, Cygwin is definitely the way to go. If you just want to give them a taste of Linux, distribute some VMs with a distro of choice on it. I've always preferred Ubuntu as the newbie distro of choice, but I haven't really taken a good look at the current state of distros from that perspective in a while.
Realistically for the average user, once you install the OS for them and choose a desktop environment, the choice of distribution is almost ir
Re: (Score:2)
Needs assessment? (Score:2)
How much time do you have to invest in this project, and how deep does their knowledge need to be?
I learned more from doing a slackware install (back in about '98 or so) then from all my experience with other Linux installs. I've heard people say similar things about Gentoo/Portage, so YMMV, but a distro that more or less forces people to do things by hand will both teach them, and teach them respect for, the system. You mention two systems that use apt, and one that uses rpm... Pick one architecture, yo
Re: (Score:2)
That depends how much learning you want to do. I'm a hardcore Gentoo fan, not because the source is more easily accessible, but because its package manager makes sense to me, as a developer.
- It asks me when it's about to do something important, like updating config files or replacing core system tools.
- It lets me choose which features to build into each package, rather than shoving a preconfigured binary down my throat.
- It offers timely updates if I want to install them.
- It shows which patches are appl
CentOS (Score:2)
I'd go with CentOS.
It's not primarily a mainstream desktop Linux distro but you're in a work environment dealing with a embedded Windows -> Linux transition, so it doesn't matter. For this reason you don't have to deal with the bullshit UI fucking around that seems to be going on in the Linux ecosystem right now, plus it's a very stable and clean distro given its relationship with RHEL. It's our distro of choice for our VME single-board computers.
I despise Linux on the desktop at home but at work, for ou
Re: (Score:2)
Its packages are generally pretty downrev and limited but rock solid.
However CentOS 6 comes with Gnome3. That's a deal breaker for me.
Re: (Score:2)
You sure? I installed CentOS 6.2 this week (I selected the "Desktop" set of packages), and it booted into GNOME 2. Unless you're thinking of something else.
There are a lot of answers.. (Score:3)
I think it depends on exactly what you want to teach your general public. If you want to go down and dirty with installation & good documentation then maybe something like "gentoo" (or it's derivatives).
Otherwise if you just want to familiarize them with a basic gui interface similar to what they're used to and also simple maybe try something like Lubuntu or Xubuntu? Ubuntu's Unity may be too radical a departure for this (yet).
Mint is cool but stability might be a concern depending on the flavor especially if you want the old-school gnome paradigm.
Just my 2 cents..
FreeBSD (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe it's not the kind of answer you were expecting, but FreeBSD is great example for teaching how operating systems work. It's not very different from Linux but is very simple and clean despite doing little to hide its inner workings.
umm (Score:5, Insightful)
"They will be allowed to choose their own distro,"
don't do that, it's going to be a nightmare.
Re: (Score:2)
At least not in the "Which distro do you want?" form, because they probably have no idea. They expect you to know this best. I'd say something like "As I'm sure many of you know, unlike Windows there are many companies and organizations that create distributions of Linux. All of these are built on the Linux kernel but can look and behave quite differently. For those of you who have any experience or preferences in that regard, you're free to choose your own distribution as most of the current developers hav
What do you want to teach (Score:2)
Your audience is programmers, so highly technical is not an issue. So what do intend to teach? How does Linux work, how is it organized, what is its structure? Gentoo stage 0. How do I use the new system you're making me use? Whatever all of your tools best supports, or if that's not a concern just go with the popular Ubuntu.
Re: (Score:2)
these are developers that seem to need the hand held to fgo to a new OS. So I wouldn't be so quick with the " highly technical is not an issue" statement.
only one correct answer (Score:2)
You don't administer the machines as everyone uses their favorite distro, it is not your responsibility.
If you give developers a choice for platform, anything will do as long as they accomplish what they are hired for. Linux distros are a matter of taste, each with benefits and downsides. Choosing is part of the experience.
Which one do you use to deliver product? (Score:2)
It sounds like you may be using an embedded Linux for your products.
If so, you should be using the distribution that most closely resembles your delivery systems, rather than letting users pick whatever they want.
In fact, I can't imagine ever allowing users and developers in any department I'd be managing to choose whatever distribution or operating system they want. Corporate standards are there so that maintenance and integration are manageable issues, and the differences between some distributions
Decide on a single distro before you begin (Score:3)
A mis-mash of various distros inhouse will make backups and other admin tasks more complicated. Choose a distro+version and then mandate its use throughout the company. Backups, package management, user management are all different between distos.
If you are putting your products on a specific type of linux (embedded), then use a close relative of it.
I do not recommend Ubuntu variants for learning. Fedora would be better. Dont forget to learn about GPL if you are embedding!
Speaking as a teacher (Score:2)
Slackware! (Score:3)
CentOS or *BSD (Score:2)
Forget about Ubuntu. It may be big, energetic and popular, but one thing it is not is "industry standards" focused.
CentOS (or RHEL) is based largely on the same old notions and ideas that the earliest Unixes have been based on forever.
If you want to teach *NIX, then start with where it is most "normalized" and perhaps later show where it varies and deviates. Don't start with a unique, deviated and/or customized Linux like Ubuntu or even anything Debian based. It's just too different.
as many as is possible (Score:3)
based on my current experience:
at least three linux flavours, at least two BSD flavours, and add in an additional 'classic' UNIX, like Solaris, IRIX, AIX, True64 or HP/UX, and don't forget OS-X.
focus on the differences, not on the similarities. Genetic differentiation is what counts, not the similarities.
'Distro-agnosicm' is what counts.
XUBUNTU (Score:3)
Notice the "X" in front. Not Ubuntu - but Xubuntu. The US resembles Windows more than any other. It's highly customizable too, and you don't need to do a bunch of command line hacks to make it happen.
For teaching debian packaging -- debian unstable. (Score:2)
Debian unstable is not that unstable, most of it works most of the time. It is the source of ubuntu.
There are some people that run debian unstable as their primary environment.
Wrong Question. It should be "how many to show?" (Score:2)
- Show them one or two distributions that are noob friendly enough but do things differently, such as fedora vs ubuntu vs mint, to show what the differences between distributions might be (and more importantly, what the similarities are).
- Then show them that whichever system you end u
Go with your environment (Score:2)
It will probably be the easiest long-term if you go in the same neighborhood as what your using in your dev/prod environment... If you're using RHEL or CentOS, go with RHEL, Fedora, or CentOS. If you're going with something from the Debian branch, stick to those choices (Debian, Ubuntu, Mint), or with Suse, go with Suse.
I've been a linux guy for a bunch of years (Started with RedHat, moved to Debian, but have tried all of the big players) and it's always the little differences (such as netconfig, default
Which distro are you moving to? (Score:2)
It is perfectly suitable for learning, though you mostly deal with RHEL specific install management(RPMs), but most distros are part of a few different management schemes.
Support? (Score:4, Informative)
This is the million dollar question, but also comes with a price tag. If you want support, then you want Redhat. Support includes more than you would get with Mickeysoft for much less money.
RHEL gets you a few other things besides a check book full of support. There are far more experts with Redhat than any other distro (at least in the US). This means if you can't afford, or don't want to pay Redhat you can still find help. Good luck finding that "Gentoo" or "Slackware" expert when something breaks, or good luck affording them since he's booked by some other schlep that went with that brand.
Lets face a simple fact. At home, you can use what ever you want. Who cares about down time, bugs, learning curves, etc... none of that matters. When it comes to business, you need to have something with a support chain. You also need a fall guy when the shit hits the fan.
At work, we strictly run RHEL. Kickstarts include the full KDE suite, desk top is changed to KDE and KDE's Kiosk features are used to manage the desktops and give a common look and feel. RHEL will include everything you want from the standard linux stack, though you may have to get both a desktop and server set of media.
Any one of them. (Score:2)
Shouldn't this be a poll? (Score:2)
Pick a single distribution (I suggest Debian)... (Score:2)
...and install it on all machines. Set up FAI or Puppet or something to administer it and establish a local repository. Tell the developers that if they want to use anything else they can but they're on their own for support.
Linux Mint for new students (Score:2)
Time was I would have said "any of those is fine".
But Ubuntu sets up the Unity desktop, and Fedora sets up GNOME Shell. Both of these are very different from other desktop environments, particularly Windows.
Unity is very Mac-like, but rather different from Windows.
GNOME Shell in particular has a brand-new interface that is not like Windows and not like the Mac. It is designed to be easy to learn and use, but IMHO it is egregiously different from what has gone before, and using it is (for me) an exercise i
Wrong question (Score:3)
The qestion shoud be something like, "What distro would you use to teach (x)..?" What you are going to teach and the criteria for teaching it are more important than the software version.
If you are going to teach Linux administration, I would suggest OpenSuse, Debian, RedHat or Fedora. If you want glitch-free production systems, use something that has universal appeal and stay away from Ubuntu and Mint. (My experience is that they change too much from one release to another, administration tools are not standard, and, although installing some things like LAMP is a snap on Mint, advanced administration takes too much time. My list consists of distros I would never use again because I have work to do and I'd rather not spend a lot of time looking for the exotic configurations that make my distro work. (Top of the list: Ubuntu and CentOS, followed by Mint, Debian Mint and Fedora.) I prefer Debian, but I would go with RHE or OpenSuse without crying. I do development work on multiple hybrid systems that may require computer-machine interfaces, but you should match your requirements to your audience' needs.
FreeBSD (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
KNOPPIX or similar live CD/USB (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LFS is more work and easy to screw up.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been trying out various KDE distro's myself and the biggest differences have mainly to do with the apt vs. rpm repositories whereby apt is superior.
Additionally the Kubuntuforum.org site combined with the Kubuntu sections of Ubuntuforums.org are among the most helpful places you can find.
KDE is at the moment the most complete/ feature rich/ editable desktop and well inte
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I had mod points today. The Linux From Scratch project is an excellent learning tool, for understanding Linux internals as well as Unixish thinking in general.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus, the OP is looking for a teaching tool for embedded hw/sw developers. That suggests a very high degree of customization. Something Linux in general and Linux from scratch in particular excels at.
I'm guessing that the object is both to teach Linux as a platform for development as well as a development desktop.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with you -- just tweaking with a small amount of aditional advice.
I use Ubuntu and TinyCore at work, and Debian with KDE at home.
I think the real issue is not the distro, so much, as desktop environment. Gnome is for people who really aren't too familiar with Linux, IMO. It hides much of the complexity/functionality to provide a simplified interface. KDE provides a lot more control, at the expense of simplicity.
Ironically, in the local LUG I belong to http://mhvlug.org/ [mhvlug.org] the majority of the knowledgable people in the group use Ubuntu and Gnome, and I seem to be the only KDE user as well as the only Debian user. Even stranger, several core people in the group are switching to Unity. We're having a "Desktop Shootout" meeting this Wednesday (March 7), and the current Desktop Environments to be discussed are KDE, Unity, Cinnamon (Gnome2 shell o
Re: (Score:2)
Who also fraternize with popular people. The Linux users' stereotype, though...