Linux - Nvidia 6629 installation done

carldon

Member
Aug 28, 2004
166
0
76
After hearing a lot of good things about Linux, I decided to give it shot. But trying to decide which distro seems like the hardest decision of the whole process of adoption. I have some basic programming skills but sometimes the guides dont seem to make sense when you're trying to figure out if your hardware is going to be compatible with a particular distro and installing it.

I would glad if someone could explain why there are so many distros and why isnt all the effort of linux programmers directed towards one distro? I am making an assumption here that drivers/software etc created for a prticular distro is not readily compatible with another one. Please correct me if I wrong in assuming this because I see different downloads for different distros. In trying to create something better than Windows, free of all its faults, it seems that Linux lacks some of its major strengths too.

Any help is appreciated.

CD
 

rmrf

Platinum Member
May 14, 2003
2,872
0
0
Everyone likes to have their own tweaks on their OS. With open source, you can modify the code, and let other people download it. Some of the distros are very specialized, such as smoothwall. Smoothwall is a firewall operating system, you really wouldn't use this for a desktop OS because it's primary goal is to set up a firewall. Live cd's such as Knoppix are there for people that either want to try out linux, or just be able to take their OS with them everywhere, imo.

I used to be a fan of redhat/fedora, but I tried ubuntu and won't go back to anything else. The great thing about it, is that it only has one cd to download and install from. The installer is text based, so it is not as pretty as other installers, but it couldn't get much more simple than it already is. Once you boot up, you really won't see a difference from any other if you use KDE or Gnome. One great thing about debian/ubuntu is the package manager/update system. APT is the greatest thing ever, you can download apt for other distro's, but this OS takes full advantage of it's features.

Hope this helps.
 

phisrow

Golden Member
Sep 6, 2004
1,399
0
0
Cross compatibility between distros is actually pretty good. The main issue is package managers. When you see a download for Redhat or Suse, for example, you are seeing an RPM. A debian download is a .DEB package. Those are only semicompatible(e.g. you can use alien to install RPMs on Debian systems, don't know about DEBs on Redhat). There can also be little oddities of one sort or another, custom kernel patches and the like. Overall, though, compatibility is not a problem, for two primary reasons: Drivers and kernel code are all shared(though sometimes one distro is better than another for a specific setup) and, since most Linux software is some flavour of free, it can be(and usually is) recompiled as necessary. Pretty much everthing is available as source, which can be built on any Linux box(and usually *BSDs as well), though it is often more convenient to use the packages your distro supplies. The only real issue is with proprietary software. Most of that is designed to run on either Redhat or Suse. It may well work on other things as well; but the company usually doesn't feel any obligation if you aren't running a "standard" distro.
 

screw3d

Diamond Member
Nov 6, 2001
6,906
1
76
Why can't we use two different package managers at once like both RPM and APT? :confused:

<-- n00b
 

carldon

Member
Aug 28, 2004
166
0
76
phisrow, so what you're saying is that I could essentially download a driver/software for a particular distro and compile and have it work on a different one?

rmrf, I was leaning towards Debian for the installation to get a better understanding of Linux, but I guess I could try Ubuntu since its the same.

CD
 

rmrf

Platinum Member
May 14, 2003
2,872
0
0
Originally posted by: screw3d
Why can't we use two different package managers at once like both RPM and APT? :confused:

<-- n00b

with debian based systems, you can download .rpm, and use alien to convert them to .deb and install on your machine. I have only used this a few times, so I am not sure whether or not this works on all packages, I do know that it has come in handy for the times that I couldn't find the .deb files.
 

phisrow

Golden Member
Sep 6, 2004
1,399
0
0
Screw3d: In theory you can. Purely for sake of example, it appears that APT can be installed on Redhat(RPM based) and Portage(Gentoo's package manager) can also be installed on various distros. While you could do this, it would be rather painful. Package managers have a few diffirent purposes. RPMs, for example, are very similar to windows installer packages(at least by default) You download them, you run them, they just work. DEB packages can also be used this way, but they are generally employed out of the Apt-Repository, which also allows you to simplify installation. For instance, instead of searching the web for the program you want, downloading the package, and then running it to install, you issue a command like "apt-get install gaim" this will then download the gaim package, all the packages it requires, and then install them all. Portage is similar "emerge gaim" but it compiles everything from source at install time. Package managers keep track of what packages you have installed(at least Portage and Apt do, I don't know much about Redhat) and also make it easy to upgrade things, uninstall things, etc. This is why using more than one package manager is somewhat asking for trouble. The two managers will probably start overwriting one another's changes, installing slightly diffirent packages, etc. It is much better to just pick one manager and stick with it. With Debian based systems, you can use alien as rmrf described. With RPM based systems, you can either just use RPMs, or stick to RPMs for commercial software, Apt for free, or something like that.

Now, I'm sure it is possible to make package managers play nice, if you really know what you are doing; but I'm not that l33t.
 

drag

Elite Member
Jul 4, 2002
8,708
0
0
Well there are subtle differences between distros.

You have differences in init scripts for instance. These are the bash scripts that are used to configure and setup your computer as it enters different 'runlevels'. You have several runlevels, runlevel 6 is usually shutdown, runlevels for booting up and stuff like that. It's all controlled thru bash scripts.

People have different styles. Redhat/Fedora/Suse/Mandrake have similar versions, Debian has their own style, as does Slackware. If you have a daemon (background proccess) that needs to be started up at boot time or whatnot then it has be done thru one of the init scripts. It's fairly difficult to make a package that would access all equaly as well.

And there are differences in how the filing system is setup, or how the dependancies are figured out, or how the packages are versioned. All sorts of small details that are irritating to figure out.

The actual packages are VERY simple.

For example slackware's tgz file are just tarballs. They have a extra directory that contains package information and scripts to run at install and uninstall time, but that's it (it gets deleted after the package is installed). You can pretty much install them manually by going: cd / ;tar zxfv /path/to/slackware.random.package.tgz

But you loose the niceties of slackware package managment that way.

Deb files are only slightly more complex. They are a 'ar' archive and contain several tarballs. One is the control that has the different scripts and such that are run to configure and setup the particular package. The other is a data tarball and that contains the actual program and such.

To install them manually you would go (in a temp directory):
ar x random.debian.deb
tar zxfv data.tar.gz

then you move the resulting directories to root to copy the files. Then you untar the control tarball and run the install script.. or hack at it.

RPM files are only slightly more complex then that.

My point is that the packages are very simple. If you were to make them work on as many distros as possible they would end up being a huge pain in the rear to manage with lots of bugs and testing that needs to be worked out. Debian, rpms, and tgz (slackware version) files are so simple to make that a average Linux geek can make their own packages simply using a few tools. After you get good at it, then it's a simple thing to build from source code.

With most software they use autotools to make it simple to install from source code. First you make sure that you have the dependancies of the programs you want to install.With Debian it's the *-dev packages of libraries and such you need to install. It's similar with Fedora and Suse and them all. They have devel versions most of the time. To make sure you have those you do a 'install all' selection when you install your distro.


Then you untar the source code in a scratch directory. cd into the directory and run:
./configure
(then you check to make sure that configure has worked correctly and has found everything)
make
sudo make install

And that's it. Sometimes it's a huge pain in the rear, because you have to triple check dependancies and have to setup enviromental variables to get it to work properly. Other times it's dead simple.Most of the time a person used to dealing with source code can get it done correctly in 2 to 3 tries.

The programmers usually provide some README files and INSTALL files, which you should read. Some programs all you have to do is simple make and then copy the resulting binary file to a */bin directory in your PATH. Other programs use alternatives to configure and make, some use scons for example. Sometimes, especially if your using code from a CVS repository you have to use the autotools themselves to generate the configure script and Makefile yourself manually, then you do the ./configure ; make ; make install

Generally these packages are installed in /usr/local directory. That way you keep your custom compile programs from messing around with the distro-specific packaged stuff. So if you want to delete the resulting program look in /usr/local and the directories within that.

When you install using generic non-specific linux install stuff, like a install program for neverwinter nights, or Unreal Tournament, they give you the choice of install directories.. Usually the default is /usr/local/games for most games.

If you have some reason that you only can use pre-compile packages in your computers... (like say you have 300 debian desktops that get updated automaticly everyweekend thru apt-get in a cron script.) you can make your OWN custom packages. Since most packages are pretty simple, it's not hard to knock off a couple yourself.

There are howtos on the web for deb, slackware, and rpm files. After a few tries you can begin to bang out custom packages in no time. As long as they are designed to work on your own machine then it's fairly simple, It's much harder to design them to work on lots of machines though.If you get good enough at making good then you can start sending packages to be included in the official distro stuff.

One of the bad things about RPM's that gave them a poor reputation is that people would bang out their own custom packages and then try to distribute them with no quality assurance. Usually they have lots of custom software, or forget to do proper dependancy checking or have files that conflict with files from other packages. Stuff like that. So after a while of using rpmseek and such you pretty much f**ked your system up. But if your making your own packages then it's not something you usually have to worry about.

Which is why Debian rocks so much. They put a LOT of time and effort into bugtracking and doing quality assurance on packages. And they have LOTS of packages. And they have a smart package handling program called apt-get.

Other distros are beginning to pick up on this. Slackware now has third party intellegent package handling programs. Fedora has Yum and a rpm-version of apt-get (check out and read the FAQ's at Dag Wieer's rpm site). Gentoo has intellegent package handling thru portage.

Mandrake has urpmi... But by far the best is Debian, nexty up with Gentoo, then Fedora, then Slackware.

There are efforts underway to make it so that you can have 'universal' packages easier. The LSB project aims have having standards for how to setup directories and such.

For Debian there is alien designed to transform RPM files into deb files.

Also there is a universal intellegent package manager called 'smart' that will handle and install any package from any major distro. I wouldn't trust it right now though.. Maybe after it matures some. I haven't touched it though.

It's easier, IMO, to use Debian for the massive amounts of packages it supplies, use a few third-party repositories (look at apt-get.org) and compile from source the few odd programs that aren't aviable in my distro's package format. That's what most people do.

smart, the next generation package handler if you want to check it out.

If all of that mystifies you, don't worry. Linux is different, and most of the time you don't have to deal with that sort of crap. Most programs you'd want are aviable from your distro...
 

Nothinman

Elite Member
Sep 14, 2001
30,672
0
0
But trying to decide which distro seems like the hardest decision of the whole process of adoption

Assuming you're old enough to own a car, did you complain that there were too many models available when you went to buy one? With Linux it's more work, but it's also easier because you can just download random distros and try them all for free. Eventually you'll figure out which one you like and you'll stick with it.

why isnt all the effort of linux programmers directed towards one distro?

Do you really think you could get all of them to agree on how that distro should work?

I am making an assumption here that drivers/software etc created for a prticular distro is not readily compatible with another one.

That assumption is largely false, especially for drivers. Since all of them run Linux as the kernel any Linux driver can work, the main hurdle is that you can't (or atleast don't want to) load a binary driver compiled for one version of a kernel with another, so a module compiled for 2.4.18-blah on RH won't load on 2.4.18-foo on Mandrake. If the source for the driver is available you can compile it just fine on any distro and it'll probably be integrated eventually so that you won't have to worry about it anyway.

Userland software is a little more hairy because of library version differences, but generally if it runs on Linux it'll run on any Linux.

In trying to create something better than Windows, free of all its faults, it seems that Linux lacks some of its major strengths too.

The distro differences are a strength because it promotes better software and lets users do things the way they want instead of how some big nameless corporation wants them done.

Why can't we use two different package managers at once like both RPM and APT?

You can. APT supports RPMs just fine. What you probably mean is why can't you use Debian packages (.debs) and RPMs on the same system and why shouldn't you mix RPMs for different distros?

In both cases, you can do it but you shouldn't. You can use alien to convert RPMs to .debs and install them on Debian and you can usually force the installation of a Mandrake RPM onto a RedHat system. But both are frowned upon because of the different filesystem layouts and potential conflicts in the packges. For instance, if RedHat puts Apache modules in /usr/lib/httpd and Mandrake puts them in /usr/lib/apache, installing the Mandrake RPM for mod_ssl will put the module in /usr/lib/apache which won't be seen by the Apache installed from the RedHat RPM. And on top of that you have no idea what compile-time options were used, gcc versions, library versions, etc on either system and mis-matching any one of those could cause problems.

Basically it's not worth the effort, you'll save yourself a lot of headaches if you stick to your distribution's packaged software or even compiling things yourself. This is one reason why I recommend Debian so highly, in sid there's over 16,000 packages so chances are good that anything you want will already be packaged and you won't have to worry about any packaging problems.
 

Sunner

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
11,641
0
76
Basically, all the "redundant" distros, programs, package formats, etc are out there because someone had a problem with what was out there, or just felt they had a better idea, and since the code is out there for everyone, they decided to do something constructive, giving birth to yet another distro/package format/etc.

OSS is largely about scratching itches.
 

Armitage

Banned
Feb 23, 2001
8,086
0
0
Particularly as a beginner, I don't think the choice of one mainstream distro over another will make that much of a difference to you. I'd just pick one and run with it. When you get a bit more experience under your belt, you might want to play around with different onces and see what you like better.
 

silverpig

Lifer
Jul 29, 2001
27,703
12
81
Originally posted by: Sunner
Basically, all the "redundant" distros, programs, package formats, etc are out there because someone had a problem with what was out there, or just felt they had a better idea, and since the code is out there for everyone, they decided to do something constructive, giving birth to yet another distro/package format/etc.

OSS is largely about scratching itches.

Bingo. Finding and compiling .tar.gz source packages was bad so someone invented rpms. However dependencies were always a huge pain, so yum and urpmi came out to check dependencies for rpms, but debian came up with apt-get, and gentoo borrowed portage from bsd to do everything for them.
 

carldon

Member
Aug 28, 2004
166
0
76
Appreciate all the replies. I'm downloading Debian and Ubuntu as of now. I was put off by the thought of having to compile source code to have things work, but I'm going give it a shot.

CD.
 

Winchester

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2003
4,965
0
0
I would stick with Ubuntu. Easiest installation and quick. I installed it last night in very little time + only 1 CD compared to 3 on others.
 

carldon

Member
Aug 28, 2004
166
0
76
My friend had a previous version of Debian on CD and the jigdo incremental download is great. Downloading Ubuntu too. A quick question here, what would you guys suggest on partition size for Debian and Ubuntu. I'm thinking about 5 each. Also, do both these distros come with the partitioning utilty or do I have use something else?

CD.
 

Nothinman

Elite Member
Sep 14, 2001
30,672
0
0
Honestly, installing Debian and Ubuntu on the same machine is a waste IMO. Ubuntu right now is pretty much just a released version of Debian sarge with a nice default desktop, 95% of the packages are exactly the same.
 

drag

Elite Member
Jul 4, 2002
8,708
0
0
Debian and Ubuntu are essenctially the same operating system.

In fact the software you use in Ubuntu is probably 90% directly pulled from the Debian project.


Stick with Ubuntu and don't bother to download the entire thing... just do the net install. That will download the peices that you need.

Also Linux is very disk space hungry, much more then Windows XP. This is because you get 10x the software that you get when you install Windows. I'd alocate 10gigs to Ubuntu or Debian.

Also you need to have that as 'free space' on your harddrive, or you need to delete partitions in order to get it. I don't beleive that they have the ability to resize partitions. Ubuntu and Debian use the same installer.

If you need to resize partitions use partition magic or download knoppix and use qtparted.
 

rmrf

Platinum Member
May 14, 2003
2,872
0
0
Most all distros come with a partitioning utility, and allow you to either specify partitions during the install, or it will automatically do the partitioning for you. On testing machines that I know I'm going to mess up, or reinstall frequently, I just use the auto partition tool during the install with swap and / partitions. If you were going to be installing this machine to use everyday, and don't plan to mess it up or reinstall frequently, I would use the manual partition tool to make your home directory a separate from the / partition in case you ever do have to reinstall.

I tried installing debian a few years ago when I was a noob, but it didn't work. I haven't tried since, but I really like ubuntu, and it has all the features I want, plus it's basically debian like others have said.
 

carldon

Member
Aug 28, 2004
166
0
76
I guess I'm going with ubuntu now since I dont have that kind of space on the hard disk. I didnt know that the packages in Debian were compatible with Ubuntu. Thanks for that. I would like to move to Linux completely for a while and the reason I chose Debian was the sheer number of packages. Also, the only game I play now is America's Army, so thats no problem either.

CD.
 

drag

Elite Member
Jul 4, 2002
8,708
0
0
Ya. Ubuntu has it's own repositories, so don't try to use a regular Deban mirror with apt-get... It probably won't work out to hot.

They mostly use Debian packages, but I think they modify them a little bit. Some packages, like those to decrypt dvds and play mp3s are only aviable from third party sources and you can use Debian versions of those in Ubuntu. It's outlined in the FAQ section of Ubuntu's website.
 

Nothinman

Elite Member
Sep 14, 2001
30,672
0
0
I would like to move to Linux completely for a while and the reason I chose Debian was the sheer number of package

Then I would stick with Debian and run 'sid', Ubuntu makes a nice install and has a nice default desktop but it's still really young and there are problems if you upgrade to hoary. And now that Gnome 2.8 has made it through to sarge everything in Ubuntu, minus x.org, is available in Debian.
 

carldon

Member
Aug 28, 2004
166
0
76
I just installed Ubuntu but just when the login prompt appears, the screen flickers a bit and then I get the error message about Xfree86 and that it has been disabled. I have 6600gt and I went online and found this to install the drivers.

$ sudo apt-get install nvidia-glx
$ sudo apt-get install nvidia-settings
$ sudo nvidia-glx-config enable
$ nautilus applications:///System

Now a complete noob question. Do I have to download the drivers before I do this and if I do where do I have to download them to? Any help is appreciated. Thanks,

CD.
 

Nothinman

Elite Member
Sep 14, 2001
30,672
0
0
I believe nvidia-glx includes the drivers, but I'm not 100% sure since I don't normally use packaged kernels on my notebook or home workstation.

What's the harm in trying it and seeing what happens?
 

EmperorRob

Senior member
Mar 12, 2001
968
0
0
The "nautilus applications:///System" is a command to launch the Gnome file browser to your 'System' folder in the applications menu. It has nothing to do with the nVidia drivers so I'm not sure why that's there, but do install those packages. Hey if they don't just "apt-get remove".