|Moving to Linux|
Have a few questions
| 4:01 pm on Mar 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
About 7 years ago I ran a spare pc with linux but that ended up in one of the kids rooms, so, I have just ordered a new spare pc so I can put Linux on it and run it next to my windoze machine, no dual boot.
The pc has an AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5600+ 2.80GHz processor
I have decided to go with Debian but am unsure of what to download from their site, the download page has lines of files under different headings, ie
full CD/DVD sets
CD: [alpha] [amd64] [arm] [hppa] [i386] [ia64] [mips] [mipsel] [powerpc] [sparc] [s390] [source] [multi-arch]
Do I just download the six files in debian-cd/4.0_r3/multi-arch/iso-cd?
I take it the first 5 files can go on one cd and the 6th on another or am I missing something, I remember it being about 7 CD's last time I did it.
Thanks for any advice
| 4:30 pm on Mar 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I presume you will need the AMD64 one. If not that the then 32bit i386 one. That list is the different architectures.
| 4:36 pm on Mar 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Get the DVD for AMD64. Take it from me - you will get blazing performance with that processor on a linux 64 bit OS :) Careful though - there can be a few 'features' with the 64-bit versions - if you find them too much trouble - 32 will run almost as fast .. and is generally more road-tested
| 5:28 pm on Mar 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the pointers guys, vvv I don't need it to use the 64-bit 32 is fine with me, which do you suggest now, or still the [amd64] DVD?
I was just looking at the Ubuntu site, they say "based on debian" what exactly is Ubuntu then?
| 6:44 pm on Mar 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Ubuntu is Debian with a friendly face. It's intended as an end-user-friendly workstation.
I run Fedora 8, but I think I'd pick Ubuntu over Debian for a home workstation. There seems to be a very strong support community.
And Ubuntu is where all the eye candy is happening. :)
| 7:14 pm on Mar 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
thanks jtara, I started downloading kubuntu about 10 minutes ago after reading a few web sites.
On my windoze pc I sometimes use dreamweaver wysiwyg mode, what packages are available in linux, I am busy studying the kubuntu site at the moment and haven't come across web development software or the mention of it, thought I would ask here too.
Can software downloaded originally for windoze also be run in linux or must you find linux based alternatives
| 7:40 pm on Mar 4, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Can software downloaded originally for windoze also be run in linux or must you find linux based alternatives |
There are several ways to run Windows software on a Linux machine.
The most popular is through the use of Wine - a set of third-party libraries that implement the Windows APIs, along with a loader for Windows-format executables.
I'd imagine that Wine is available in Kubuntu.
There is a commercial version (based on Wine) as well that is probably worth the small cost, that supports the Microsoft Office suite, etc. "out of the box". (My understanding is that Wine might require some fiddling.) Basically, the commercial product come packaged with the appropriate configuration to run a wide variety of common Windows programs, which have all been tested.
There are a number of virtualization schemes, as well, but I think Wine is probably your best bet.
Kubuntu isn't as popular as Ubuntu. But it's the only one of the two I would choose, as I'm a KDE fan. I find Gnome too simplistic.
| 12:43 pm on Mar 6, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Hi jtara, thanks for the reply. Well so far so good, I am typing this from the new computer with Kubuntu 7.10.
Wine IS available (isn't Adept Manager cool?) however it seems it needs a dual boot system to locate the windoze software, and doesn't seem to want to look over the network, so.
I have tried bluefish, kompozer and am busy testing Quanta Plus.
Bluefish = code view only.
kompozer = poor, it doesnt like opening .php .css files etc, maybe I didn't give it a fair run but gave up when I read it isn't being further developed.
Quanta plus = so far looks and feels closest to dreamweaver however, still need to do a fair bit of testing with it, I think I have all the add-ons/plugins but the first thing that I found a bit of an issue is in wysiwyg mode images and tables dont seem selectable.
Are there any other posabilities for dreamweaver replacement, cant seem to find any yet, but have seen many web developers on forums etc, who will not move over to Linux until a suitable replacement is available.
| 3:37 pm on Mar 6, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Dreamweaver MX works in wine without the need for a dual boot.
Using wine 0.952
You will probably get an error about dreamweaver needs blaaa to run. Just ignore it.
Don't bother trying to run dreamweaver it will probably hang.
A configuration window appears
Click on the drives tab and remove all other drive mapping
except for ../drive_c'
You should now be able to start Dreamweaver without it hanging.
Somewhere in the umbongo forums you can find a better howto and also get IE installed.
| 2:32 pm on Mar 8, 2008 (gmt 0)|
nice, Dreamweaver and Fireworks are working fine, did have to bring over all my windoze fonts though.
appi2, there is other software I use that I can install in Wine BUT it wont run, any idea where to look? do?
| 6:31 pm on Mar 12, 2008 (gmt 0)|
what a week, ok the 64bit went fine untill saturday, the network/internet were MIA, it found the network card, ip's gateway everything, even the router said the machine was 'attached', just wouldnt connect, couldnt be solved on the kubuntu forum so I formatted, again installed the 64bit lasted 2 days, this time it was the 64bit version of firefox doesnt show java applets, theres no plugin available and after all the "this may work" suggestions on the ubuntu/kubuntu forums I gave up. Pointless running a system if somethings missing or not available yet.
Downloaded the 32bit install disc this afternoon, up and running in 32bit mode with wine and other software loaded and working and viewing applets fine.
what strikes me as odd on the linux forums, everyone has a different way of doing/finding problems/errors. Or stating "well, it worked for me" I guess theres a lot of noise, and filtering it out if your a noob isn't easy, bit of a learning curve, enjoying it though
| 9:12 pm on Mar 12, 2008 (gmt 0)|
The 64 bit situation looks the same to me as when Windows 95 came out. Officially it was a 32 bit OS, but it relied on so much 16 bit code that it was more hybrid than pure 32 bit. The same with 64 bit Linux at the moment. As long as you use standard well supported applications and not so fancy hardware, the move to 64 bit can be relatively painless. I installed a 64 bit server just a few days ago.
But if you want to build a multi-purpose workstation with lots of applications where the extra 20% or so processing power offered in 64 bit mode is no issue, staying with proven 32 bit technology is really an option.
Not everyone is a developer, and not everyone should have to be one to perform a clean installation of a Linux box. I have had some installation issues with the server this weekend (mainly because of a new type of drive controller, not specific 64 bit problems) where the Neanderthaler like commands to load drivers and fix kernel issues makes you think if more than 35 year of development on unix like systems couldn't have brought a little bit more user friendlyness on the system administration side.
To give an example, the driver I had to load for my HP on-board RAID controller was shipped with the following command list for installation of a kernel update via a USB floppy drive.
|chroot /mnt/sysimage |
mknod /dev/sdb b 8 16
mount /dev/sdb /media
Only after 10 minutes of error messages and retrying I realized that my USB floppydrive wasn't on device address 8,16 but on 8,32 because I had a slightly different RAID configuration than standard with two volumes, rather than one. My second RAID volume was already occupying the address range 8,16 to 8,31. So I had to change mknod /dev/sdb b 8 16 to mknod /dev/sdc b 8 32. I have many years of unix administration experience and I understand how mknod and other low level system commands work, but 95% of all casual computer users would have stopped here, pulled their hair out and after one night of sleep certainly would have installed a Windows version instead which installs out of the box.