Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #1554 > unrolled thread

Good Linux to start with

Started byHalberstam Reader <joe.snod@yahoo.com>
First post2011-07-03 18:40 -0700
Last post2011-07-18 09:35 -0400
Articles 5 on this page of 85 — 28 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc


Contents

  Good Linux to start with Halberstam Reader <joe.snod@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-03 18:40 -0700
    Re: Good Linux to start with John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2011-07-03 20:53 -0500
    Re: Good Linux to start with bosco <boscopelone@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-03 21:16 -0600
      Re: Good Linux to start with bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) - 2011-07-04 04:07 +0000
    Re: Good Linux to start with Dan C <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> - 2011-07-04 03:28 +0000
      Re: Good Linux to start with Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2011-07-04 12:04 -0400
        Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-04 23:07 +0200
    Re: Good Linux to start with David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-07-04 10:15 +0200
    Re: Good Linux to start with Bob Henson <rh547477@gmail.com> - 2011-07-04 10:00 +0100
    Re: Good Linux to start with Torsten Mueller <dev-null@shared-files.de> - 2011-07-04 11:10 +0200
      Re: Good Linux to start with Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2011-07-04 16:11 +0530
    Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kimber <richardkimber@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-04 06:59 -0500
      Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-04 13:35 +0100
        Re: Good Linux to start with David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2011-07-04 15:25 +0200
      Re: Good Linux to start with Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-05 11:41 +0100
    Re: Good Linux to start with jmclnx@SPAMisBADgmail.com (Jack McCue) - 2011-07-04 12:50 +0000
    Re: Good Linux to start with Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2011-07-04 07:47 -0700
    Re: Good Linux to start with ray <ray@zianet.com> - 2011-07-04 14:50 +0000
    Re: Good Linux to start with Stefan Patric <not@this.address.com> - 2011-07-04 17:23 +0000
      Re: Good Linux to start with Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2011-07-05 07:39 +0200
        Re: Good Linux to start with JohnT <john@example.com> - 2011-07-05 07:52 +0000
          Re: Good Linux to start with Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-07-05 15:51 +0000
          Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-06 03:46 +0200
            Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-07 22:35 +0200
              Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-07 23:06 +0200
                Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-08 13:44 +0200
                  Re: Good Linux to start with Hans Georg Schaathun <hg@schaathun.net> - 2011-07-13 08:58 +0100
                    Re: Good Linux to start with Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-13 09:41 +0100
                    Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-13 10:07 +0100
                      Re: Good Linux to start with Hans Georg Schaathun <hg@schaathun.net> - 2011-07-13 12:46 +0100
                        Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-13 13:47 +0100
                          Re: Good Linux to start with Hans Georg Schaathun <hg@schaathun.net> - 2011-07-13 14:20 +0100
                            Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-13 15:26 +0100
                    Re: Good Linux to start with John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2011-07-13 07:37 -0500
                      Re: Good Linux to start with Hans Georg Schaathun <hg@schaathun.net> - 2011-07-13 14:16 +0100
                        Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-13 14:35 +0100
                          Re: Good Linux to start with Hans Georg Schaathun <hg@schaathun.net> - 2011-07-13 15:13 +0100
                            Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-13 16:36 +0100
              Re: Good Linux to start with Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-08 08:53 +0100
                Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-08 14:09 +0200
    Re: Good Linux to start with Anton Meyninger <anton.meyninger@gmail.com> - 2011-07-05 13:07 +0200
      Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-06 03:52 +0200
        Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-06 12:16 +0100
          Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-06 19:10 +0200
            Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-06 18:30 +0100
              Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-07 01:57 +0200
                Re: Good Linux to start with Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-07-07 03:26 +0000
                  Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-07 05:48 +0100
                  Re: Good Linux to start with Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2011-07-07 11:15 +0530
                    Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-07 07:14 +0100
                Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-07 05:45 +0100
                Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-07 09:53 +0100
                  Re: Good Linux to start with Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-07 10:41 +0100
                    Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-07 11:32 +0100
                      Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-07 13:49 +0100
                        Re: Good Linux to start with Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-07 15:01 +0100
                          Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-07 15:16 +0100
                            Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-07 23:04 +0200
                              Re: Good Linux to start with Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-08 08:58 +0100
                                Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-08 14:19 +0200
                              Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-08 13:44 +0100
                                Re: Good Linux to start with Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-11 09:39 +0100
                        Re: Good Linux to start with blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-07-10 19:02 +0000
                      Re: Good Linux to start with blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-07-10 19:01 +0000
              Re: Good Linux to start with Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-07-07 03:16 +0000
                Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-07 05:47 +0100
                  Re: Good Linux to start with Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-07-07 05:00 +0000
            Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-07 22:42 +0200
              Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-07 23:41 +0200
                Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-08 14:07 +0200
                  Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-09 02:05 +0200
                    Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-09 21:10 +0200
                      Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-10 02:16 +0200
                        Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-10 10:42 +0100
                          Re: Good Linux to start with Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> - 2011-07-11 05:03 +0200
                            Re: Good Linux to start with The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2011-07-11 08:23 +0100
                              Re: Good Linux to start with Mark <i@dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> - 2011-07-11 09:52 +0100
                            Re: Good Linux to start with Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2011-07-11 11:16 +0100
                      Re: Good Linux to start with Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2011-07-10 03:49 +0000
                        Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-11 13:56 +0200
                          Re: Good Linux to start with blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-07-11 22:31 +0000
                            Re: Good Linux to start with "Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> - 2011-07-12 15:30 +0200
                              Re: Good Linux to start with blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-07-12 22:28 +0000
    Re: Good Linux to start with Feranija <feranija@net...> - 2011-07-06 11:37 -0700
    Re: Good Linux to start with TJ <TJ@noneofyour.business> - 2011-07-18 09:35 -0400

Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]


#1747

Fromblmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com>
Date2011-07-11 22:31 +0000
Message-ID<981bt4FlgtU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#1745
In article <slrnj1lp7e.ffn.hjp-usenet2@hrunkner.hjp.at>,
Peter J. Holzer <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
> On 2011-07-10 03:49, Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> wrote:
> > On 2011-07-09, Peter J. Holzer <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
> >> On 2011-07-09 00:05, Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:

[ snip ]

> > Yellow Pages, later renamed to NIS, and some more recent
> > directory services, extend the Unix multiuser paradigm for
> > networked environments.
> 
> YP/NIS (which I first encountered in 1987 or 1988, I think) does little
> more than synchronize password files[1] (and other config files) between
> a master and several slaves. 

[ snip ]

> [1] It keeps them in a different place and uses a different format for
>     performance reasons, but that doesn't change the principle.

Where is this other place?  My CPOE uses NIS on a network on Linux
systems (Red Hat and derivatives), and it sure *seems* like login
on an NIS client machine requires communication with the NIS server,
except for those few users listed in the local /etc/passwd file.
I'm not saying you're wrong, just puzzled/curious now ....

[ snip ]

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1755

From"Peter J. Holzer" <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at>
Date2011-07-12 15:30 +0200
Message-ID<slrnj1oj3e.co0.hjp-usenet2@hrunkner.hjp.at>
In reply to#1747
On 2011-07-11 22:31, blmblm  myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnj1lp7e.ffn.hjp-usenet2@hrunkner.hjp.at>,
> Peter J. Holzer <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
>> On 2011-07-10 03:49, Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> wrote:
>> > On 2011-07-09, Peter J. Holzer <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
>> >> On 2011-07-09 00:05, Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
>
> [ snip ]
>
>> > Yellow Pages, later renamed to NIS, and some more recent
>> > directory services, extend the Unix multiuser paradigm for
>> > networked environments.
>> 
>> YP/NIS (which I first encountered in 1987 or 1988, I think) does little
>> more than synchronize password files[1] (and other config files) between
>> a master and several slaves. 
>
> [ snip ]
>
>> [1] It keeps them in a different place and uses a different format for
>>     performance reasons, but that doesn't change the principle.
>
> Where is this other place?  My CPOE uses NIS on a network on Linux
> systems (Red Hat and derivatives), and it sure *seems* like login
> on an NIS client machine requires communication with the NIS server,
> except for those few users listed in the local /etc/passwd file.

It's been about 10 years since I last used NIS, so my memory may be
spotty, but AFAIR:

The files to be shared over NIS are kept in (subdirectories of)
/var/nis (or similar) both on the master and the slaves.

They are in dbm format, typically replicated for each key (so for the
passwd file there is one copy indexed by name and one indexed by uid)
for fast access.

Updates happen on the master, and are immediately replicated to all
reachable slaves. In addition there is a cron job to synchronize slaves
which have missed an update because they were unreachable.

Read-only operations on the slaves access only the local copy. So a
login should work even if the master ist unreachable. I do remember that
there were some cases where a slave tried to contact the master even
though that wasn't really necessary but I don't remember the details.


	hp

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1757

Fromblmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com>
Date2011-07-12 22:28 +0000
Message-ID<98403rF6jtU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#1755
In article <slrnj1oj3e.co0.hjp-usenet2@hrunkner.hjp.at>,
Peter J. Holzer <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
> On 2011-07-11 22:31, blmblm  myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <slrnj1lp7e.ffn.hjp-usenet2@hrunkner.hjp.at>,
> > Peter J. Holzer <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
> >> On 2011-07-10 03:49, Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> wrote:
> >> > On 2011-07-09, Peter J. Holzer <hjp-usenet2@hjp.at> wrote:
> >> >> On 2011-07-09 00:05, Aragorn <stryder@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > [ snip ]
> >
> >> > Yellow Pages, later renamed to NIS, and some more recent
> >> > directory services, extend the Unix multiuser paradigm for
> >> > networked environments.
> >> 
> >> YP/NIS (which I first encountered in 1987 or 1988, I think) does little
> >> more than synchronize password files[1] (and other config files) between
> >> a master and several slaves. 
> >
> > [ snip ]
> >
> >> [1] It keeps them in a different place and uses a different format for
> >>     performance reasons, but that doesn't change the principle.
> >
> > Where is this other place?  My CPOE uses NIS on a network on Linux
> > systems (Red Hat and derivatives), and it sure *seems* like login
> > on an NIS client machine requires communication with the NIS server,
> > except for those few users listed in the local /etc/passwd file.
> 
> It's been about 10 years since I last used NIS, so my memory may be
> spotty, but AFAIR:
> 
> The files to be shared over NIS are kept in (subdirectories of)
> /var/nis (or similar) both on the master and the slaves.

Interesting -- these directories exist on both server and client at
that CPOE, but they don't seem to contain any files.

So either implementations have changed in the past 10 years (imagine
that :-) ), or there's a configuration parameter, or something?

> They are in dbm format, typically replicated for each key (so for the
> passwd file there is one copy indexed by name and one indexed by uid)
> for fast access.
> 
> Updates happen on the master, and are immediately replicated to all
> reachable slaves. In addition there is a cron job to synchronize slaves
> which have missed an update because they were unreachable.
> 
> Read-only operations on the slaves access only the local copy. So a
> login should work even if the master ist unreachable. I do remember that
> there were some cases where a slave tried to contact the master even
> though that wasn't really necessary but I don't remember the details.

It sounds sensible, but my experience is that logins don't work if
the server is unreachable, with the exception of those usernames
listed in the local password file.

Possibly different configuration, changes in implementation, .... ?
Hm.

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1639

FromFeranija <feranija@net...>
Date2011-07-06 11:37 -0700
Message-ID<iv2a1l$rbq$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#1554
On 2011-07-03 18:40, Halberstam Reader wrote:
>
> Which is a good Linux distro for a competent (non-Linux) computer
> person to install on a computer.


Any.


> I've heard that Debian is best, but a major pain to install, and
 > that a newbie should avoid it.  What's the next best?


You are wrong on Debian. Debian today is as easy to install and run 
in no time as any other distro which caters to people who will be 
satisfied with its quite reasonable default options.

Try to install pre-2000 debian, for example v2.0. Your question would 
be sensible if you have asked it with mentioning Debian some 12 or 
thirteen years ago. Back than, besides a generic kernel able just to 
get the system up and barely running, you had nothing; without 
compiling your own kernel printer wouldn't work, no sound etc... You 
had to select those modules in kernel config and compile. MAKEDEV for 
your devices if they are antyhing but common and widely used.

Today even Slackware comes with so called "huge" kernel with all 
precompiled modules for almost everything, and udev takes care of 
your devices, you need to do nothing - if you are a Windows person 
who is not willing to mess with fine tuning. Compared to Debian from 
pre-2000, installing Slackware of today is a pure luxury.

Any distro will do; take one with a GNOME or KDE graphic environment, 
and the rest is just a matter of knowing names of applications you 
want to use and installing them by couple of clicks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1838

FromTJ <TJ@noneofyour.business>
Date2011-07-18 09:35 -0400
Message-ID<j01cru$fb4$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#1554
On 07/03/2011 09:40 PM, Halberstam Reader wrote:
>
> Which is a good Linux distro for a competent (non-Linux) computer
> person to install on a computer.  I've heard that Debian is best, but
> a major pain to install, and that a newbie should avoid it.  What's
> the next best?

I stumbled onto this thread a few minutes ago. If you haven't been 
scared away by the discussion by now, you have the determination to do 
just fine, no matter which one you choose.

TJ

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc


csiph-web