|
I tried it with Gentoo a while back but it poo poo out because it needed exact and precise access to the system, but how about Linux in VMware? Is there anything keeping me from slapping Ubuntu, Mandriva, Debian etc on a virtual machine? Is it going to work as intended, or is it going to have too many bugs?
|
# ¿ May 29, 2007 18:34 |
|
|
# ¿ May 8, 2024 16:51 |
|
dfn_doe posted:Linux works great with vmware as the host and/or vm. I'm not sure what problems you had before, but Linux is solidly the most stable OS for running on top of or underneath a virtualization system. Running it in a VM sounds really good though, I can throw a few distros on there and really mess around. I can't believe I never thought of that before. Every other time I've tried Linux it was on my laptop which I hardly ever use and it's all inconvenient. Now I can mess around with it on my main box. Whee!, and such. I'm thinking Gentoo (always a special place in my heart), Ubuntu and... hmm, maybe one or two more.
|
# ¿ May 29, 2007 19:30 |
|
What's the deal with Debian? It's 3DVDs or 20CDs? That seems like a bit much.
|
# ¿ May 29, 2007 22:56 |
|
dfn_doe posted:I'm confused about what the problem you had was. Installing any linux ontop of vmware should be the same proccess as installing it onto a regular old box. thenameseli posted:That is to download every single package in the repository. If you have a halfway decent internet connection you can just install from CD 1 and then download new packages to install as you want them.
|
# ¿ May 30, 2007 00:27 |
|
Yeah, I wish they were though. There's something so romantic about the whole thing. I know a lot of it was just the placebo effect, but everyone really believed that their gentoo install was so amazingly fast. I'm sure the real gains were microscopic (hence eliminating stage 1 entirely), but drat what a cool idea.
|
# ¿ May 30, 2007 02:45 |
|
6174 posted:If you actually do want to build everything from source, there is always Linux from Scratch.
|
# ¿ May 30, 2007 03:59 |
|
Gonna rebuild a 5 year old laptop - Athlon 3000xp processor, 512mb RAM, 60gb HDD. Suggestions for an up to date but barebones distro? e: But not gimmickly small - the laptops been running the same Windows XP install for years, and that's a fully functional OS, so I'm not saying like "oh I need a <1 GB install" or anything, just something that's going to run quickly on a laptop with those specs. e: Probably just Ubuntu netbook edition, no? MC Fruit Stripe fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Jun 8, 2010 |
# ¿ Jun 8, 2010 00:18 |
|
I'll show my Linux idiocy quite freely. I've played around with Ubuntu just enough to do anything I need, but not a lot more. Is it a good use of my time, if I want to learn more about Linux and not just Ubuntu, to get another distro and use that for a while? I found a few very nice images which describe the timeline of forks and give me a pretty good feel for how far apart two distros might be from each other (HERE'S ONE) so choosing one shouldn't be hard, but I'm wondering if it's in any way useful, or if learning two distros would just be unnecessary. e: Specifically, my eye is drawn to openSUSE. Is Ubuntu+openSUSE a good spread of knowledge, or is that just going to prove redundant? MC Fruit Stripe fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Feb 22, 2012 |
# ¿ Feb 22, 2012 22:16 |
|
God, how I love and appreciate you both. evol262 slightly more, but both of you in your own way. Thanks very much. I will go ahead with SuSE (oh, the U is lowercase, well then!), as getting experience RPM-based distributions will be good. Thanks one more time.Longinus00 posted:A better question is "what do I want to learn?" MC Fruit Stripe fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Feb 22, 2012 |
# ¿ Feb 22, 2012 22:32 |
|
|
# ¿ May 8, 2024 16:51 |
|
Craptacular! posted:Are you planning to go into the enterprise and server based world of Linux? If not, there's not really much reason to except to see the different philosophies at play.
|
# ¿ Feb 23, 2012 00:00 |