good build for learning linux?

[wheels]

im interesting in leaning linux. i heard debian linux would be good for me. do I just install it, or do I gotta have certain hardware? Do i need to go with intel or amd? a certain ethernet card? Anyone recomend me a build or a pre built laptop thatd be good for learning linux. I dont want a really old computer tho. My budget for a desktop would be give or take $500 or for a laptop i say $1000.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Most x86 hardware works pretty well. Avoid nVidia chipset motherboards, but go with an nVidia video card.

 

[OffTopic1]

I have a Celeron 500 (all most 6 year old) and a Semperon 2400+ (less than $300 el-special, ASRock mobo, Semperon 2400+, 512ram, 80gb hdd, DVD burner, 350W case ) and they do well with any thing that I threw at it. (both have 512 megs ram)

Debian is a nice start if you are comfortable with reading because the install interface is quite dated, however it will become second nature to you after a few installs. SimplyMepis (KDE defaut) is quite a polish Debian variant that you might want to take a look at (very nice GUI install interface), and I heard Ubuntu (Gnome default) is another nice one to try.

Fedora, Mandrake, and SuSE (Yast - IMHO, it the best install/control console) are also nice to try because their GUI install interface is just as good or better than MS.

You can expect minor glitches with Xconfig with most Linux distro, but it wouldn't take much to iron out.

IMHO, you should download a few distros and spend a few weeks install & getting familiar with it to find out which distro you like best. You might endup dualboot/or more distro till you find one that you are most comfortable with.

Good luck!

[Edit] It just dawn on me why I like SuSe 9.2, because Yast reminded me of my brief but good experience with Netware 5-6 years ago.

 

[Infohawk]

I think slackware is nice for learning linux because what you will learn will be applicable most places. Gentoo is good because it has good documentation apparently.

 

[Abix]

I think gentoo is the best for learning because you set it all up manually. Additionally, its not very difficult to do because they got excellent documentation that leads you every step of the way through the process. If you do more than just type what it tells you to, you can learn a helluva lot by the time youre all done.

Gentoo ftw!

 

[dragonlord2112]

Well, I just decided to build a Mythtv box and am playing around with a lot of distros.
I have a nforce2 mobo/sempron 2200, via envy 7.1 sound card, leadtek tv card and only ONE distro so far has found all of the hardware: Fedora 3. I think "learning" would be easier if you don't have to worry about the drivers IMO.
Now trying to get Mythtv to work.... that's another story (more learning to do)

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: dragonlord2112
I think "learning" would be easier if you don't have to worry about the drivers IMO.

Personally, I like the get dirty approach. Know how to load drivers and then once you've got stuff down go to a more automatic distro.

 

[Nothinman]

I think slackware is nice for learning linux because what you will learn will be applicable most places

Except for the init system, the package manager, etc.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I think slackware is nice for learning linux because what you will learn will be applicable most places

Except for the init system, the package manager, etc.

The package manager that's apt-like? Yeah, that's a crappy system.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I think slackware is nice for learning linux because what you will learn will be applicable most places

Except for the init system, the package manager, etc.

Init system sure, but isn't it applicable to bsd stuff?

I dunno about the package manager thing. Sure, you can use some stuff but I always thought slackers went the ./configure route.

It doesn't seem like there as many slack-specific administrative tools as there are say debian-related tools. So in that sense, the things you learn in slackware can be used elsewere.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I think slackware is nice for learning linux because what you will learn will be applicable most places

Except for the init system, the package manager, etc.

Init system sure, but isn't it applicable to bsd stuff?

It's the bastard child of SysV and BSD.

I dunno about the package manager thing. Sure, you can use some stuff but I always thought slackers went the ./configure route.

It doesn't seem like there as many slack-specific administrative tools as there are say debian-related tools. So in that sense, the things you learn in slackware can be used elsewere.

There were previously two slackware package managers: swaret and slapt-get. I believe there is an official one now too (new to 10.0, IIRC). All three are modeled after apt-get.

 

[Nothinman]

Init system sure, but isn't it applicable to bsd stuff?

Sure, but if you're trying to learn Linux why mix in BSD stuff which probably won't be relevant?

I dunno about the package manager thing. Sure, you can use some stuff but I always thought slackers went the ./configure route.

But how many people compile things on servers? Hell how many compile things on their desktops these days? I know I sure don't because there's virtually no reason to. Packages make it much easier to upgrade and remove things and they enforce a bit of consistency in a way. I would rather build a custom package on one box and deploy that than compile the thing on each box manually, especially since RPMs are so simple to make.

It doesn't seem like there as many slack-specific administrative tools as there are say debian-related tools. So in that sense, the things you learn in slackware can be used elsewere.

But does slack use /etc/sysconfig like RedHat does? If not that'll be a shocker when you try to change some setting on RH. The tools handle a lot of that, but if you're really trying to learn you'll want to know where things are kept and you'll probably find it easier just to edit the files than to fight with redhat-network-config or whatever it's called.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
But how many people compile things on servers? Hell how many compile things on their desktops these days? I know I sure don't because there's virtually no reason to. Packages make it much easier to upgrade and remove things and they enforce a bit of consistency in a way. I would rather build a custom package on one box and deploy that than compile the thing on each box manually, especially since RPMs are so simple to make.

That's possible to do on Slackware, and from the docs looks damned easy.