SLUniverse Forums

Aodhan McDunnough

Actually it's worth it because 8.04 is one of the Long Term Support builds.

__________________

We can't get rid of Landbots but we can stop the damage.
VOTE this proposal on the Jira. Current votes: 71
http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-2905

Kontours Classic 1-prim chair. Sculpted, menu controlled
http://www.sluniverse.com/php/shop/s...ct=786&cat=500

Psyke Phaeton

If you are running a company web-server, sure. If you want the latest stuff, like hardware support, nope.

__________________

Walker Moore

You know, I prefer Fedora to Ubuntu. I've tried both before, and preferred Fedora then too. I'm not entirely sure why. The UI (from Grub thru to the desktop) seems more uniform and polished, and it overall feels more responsive to me. Maybe it's that.

You kind of disappear off the face of the interwebs when trying different Operating Systems don't you? I've had emails and tweets asking where I am....

__________________
twitter | last.fm | flickr

Sobriquet Kryakutnoy

If you're looking for responsiveness there's really no reason not to set up a Gentoo build from stage2. It's a great learning experience, and extremely snappy, though you mention you have extensive previous experience with Gentoo, so I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir.

The only really difference I found in using Fedora vs Ubuntu was traditional administration and package management scheme (Root user, RPMs) versus Debian-style (sudo, DEB repositories)

__________________


[20:25] Mocksoup Graves: I am just like that.. I am a judger
[20:26] Mocksoup Graves JUDGES YOU

Walker Moore

Oh, I'm not specifically looking for responsiveness (although I do kind of expect it, given my specs). Fedora just doesn't seem as sluggish as Ubuntu. Maybe Fedora is better optimized for my system or something?

I did use Gentoo for a few years, commencing around the time v1.0 was released in 2002. I built for my processor and architecture from stage 1 tarballs every time I reinstalled, but maintaining the system became a nightmare whenever lots of packages with a huge number of dependencies were released within a short time frame.

When you don't login for days, the updates (or rather, their dependencies) seriously accumulate, and I don't like the idea of Portage downloading and compiling tons of code whenever I boot into Linux. It's just there for convenience right now. Not as my primary OS.

Walker Moore

I held off of answering this until I played around with them more last night. When did you last try both? On a PC?

Fedora 9's Gnome2 implementation is without a doubt more snappy than Ubuntu's. I have no idea why this is, but on my setup, it is noticeably so.

Apart from that difference, Fedora's auto-partitioner is more user friendly than Ubuntu's because it automatically prepares un-partitioned space. Ubuntu makes you do that manually, offering a pleasant automated experience only if you want to resize or wipe an existing primary partition. The fonts on Fedora also look a lot better upon initial installation -- more like those on Windows, but I'm assuming they just tweaked the font server better than the folks at Ubuntu and users can easily fix that.

Fedora also installed a graphical boot loader with a splash screen consistent with the desktop, but Ubuntu did not. Having seen this however, I'm wondering if that happened because Ubuntu made me manually create and format partitions?

Having said all of that, I'm reluctant to recommend Fedora to complete newbies because I feel it doesn't hold your hand as much as Ubuntu. Installing legacy NVidia drivers (needed for SL) is hardly difficult for example, but requires a look at the Fedora FAQ and some command line intervention. Ubuntu seems to know when they're required and installs them automatically.

Tyche Shepherd

Just a little Hijacking of this thread to ask for some Linux advice

In the next few days I'm ordering a new desktop PC, one of the uses for this is as a testing/dev platform for a project I'm working on which will be in production on a dedicated server running Red Hat Enterprise Linux. I understand the CentOs is essentially an unbranded but otherwise identical distribution to the commerical RHEL so I can use this to create an OS environment as close as possible to the production server. I also plan to have this machine dual-bootable into Vista as well (which will probably be pre-installed)

However - If I've a working Linux Desktop I'd like to be using all the bells and whistles and explore Linux further, but don't want to screw up the dependencies on the CentOS partition .

Should I look at either
1) Adding a third bootable partition and loading say Fedora on this ?
or 2) Look at virtualization , and if so which would be the best base operating system (Vista, CentOs or Fedora or ...) ?

I don't want to throw any more money other than time and h/w costs so any virtualization s/w should be preferably be FOSS

__________________