Linux ITP

[Yarram]

I'm a Linux user, as I'm sure some have noticed, and I'm interested in which distro's of Linux the other playgrounders use, and what they think of the versions I'm using.
On my desktop, I currently use Ubuntu Karmic Koala with the Gnome GUI, but I've been experimenting with Arch Linux on my laptop.
What are your experiences with using the command-line?
Arch doesn't come with a pre-installed GUI, but I've just set-up FluxBox and am seeing what I can do with it.
Do most people who use linux avoid the command-line?
I like Gnome, but I don't like it's flashy moving parts. I'm more of a K.I.S.S. person when it comes to UI, but on the other hand the windows classic theme is so very ugly.:smallwink:

[Crimmy]

Well, in my house there are 2 machines with Windows xp, and one with Xubuntu.

[valadil]

At work I use Centos4 with KDE3. I prefer Gnome, but the Gnome installation at work is buggy and I don't have root access to change it. KDE is tolerable but I'm not a fan.

I'm running Debian at home. Used to run Ubuntu but I hate Karmic with the burning passion of a thousand suns. I use the xmonad tiling window manager, which is definitely one of the more esoteric WMs I've found.

Here's the deal with tiling. It splits the entirety of the screen among all the windows on that screen. Like other WMs, xmonad has several virtual desktops so you can tile all your aim chats or all your firefox windows in the same desktop instead of squishing everything into one single screen. How the tiles are split depends on your settings and can be changed at any point. There are no window bars or close/maximize/hide buttons.

This sounds like a strange way to manage your windows and I was resistant to it for a while. Then I got wrist pain and started to think about ways to use the mouse less often. Clicking and dragging sucks for me, so I wanted to eliminate it from my workflow. When I started thinking about how a mouseless window manager would work, the logical conclusion was tiling. I let the computer place the windows and I do a couple keyboard commands when I need to move things around.

I'd babble more about tiling, but this guide does it better: http://xmonad.org/tour.html

Yarram,

I tried Arch briefly. I wanted to like it but it was a little too hardcore. I don't mind being dumped at a command line after the installation, but Arch expected too much from the user. I installed X and got that running and then discovered that xorg's mouse and keyboard drivers were in a separate package. At that point I decided it wasn't the distro for me, at least not with the amount of free time I currently don't have.

[drakir_nosslin]

I recently bought a new laptop (Win7), and now I'm thinking of installing Linux on my old one, just to get to know it.

What would you recommend starting out with? I have no previous linux experience, but I've done a bit of programming and know how to follow a guide if it comes to that.

[valadil]

Do most people who use linux avoid the command-line?
I like Gnome, but I don't like it's flashy moving parts. I'm more of a K.I.S.S. person when it comes to UI, but on the other hand the windows classic theme is so very ugly.:smallwink:

I realized I ignored this part due to my xmonad rant.

I used the command line for a majority of what I do on the computer. The big exception is firefox. The websites I visit expect you to have a mouse. I could use elinks or w3m, but what's the point? I draw in the gimp and I watch videos in mplayer. Neither of those tasks makes sense for a commandline app. I still listen to music in rhythmbox, though I'm not sure why. Whatever music app I use is going to be controlled from the multimedia keys on my keyboard, so it doesn't really matter to me if it's got a GUI or a TUI and rhythmbox hasn't pissed me off enough to make me want to switch yet.

Just about everything else is command line based. When you really learn the command line it's just more efficient.

What about gnome is too flashy? I don't think it has a lot of moving parts. If you're running compiz (which I think Ubuntu comes with these days), that adds some fancy eye candy (like the wobbly window effect) and I agree that that's a frivolous waste of CPU cycles.

[valadil]

I recently bought a new laptop (Win7), and now I'm thinking of installing Linux on my old one, just to get to know it.

What would you recommend starting out with? I have no previous linux experience, but I've done a bit of programming and know how to follow a guide if it comes to that.

Ubuntu is the standard for newbies. Unlike Arch or Debian it will have a graphical installer that leaves you with a complete desktop system ready for use. I wasn't a big fan of the current release, but the next one is due out next month. It's a good starting point and the forums are excellent.

[raitalin]

I use Ubuntu karmic with the Gnome GUI. I've considered trying other distros, but after wrestling with Red Hat back in the day I'm just happy to have something that works without a lot of effort on my end. KDE makes me feel dirty. I liked Enlightenment way back when, but I don't think its supported anymore.

Unlike a lot of Linux users I don't do computer-related work, I just got tired of Spyware, rampant RAM consumption, frequent crashing and constant slow-down in Windows.

So I don't have much use for the command line. I know enough to get by, but for the most part I cut n' paste commands for it from the Ubuntu forums. I don't have a great memory for commands and I constantly screw up the formatting, so the less I go to Terminal the better. It might be easier If I hadn't used DOS so much way back when, I keep trying to use DOS commands.

[valadil]

It might be easier If I hadn't used DOS so much way back when, I keep trying to use DOS commands.

You might want to look into the alias command. You can use it to translate your DOS commands into linux ones. For instance

alias dir='ls'

will run the ls command whenever you use dir. You can type this in a shell to try it out or add it to your .bashrc file so it gets run every time you start a bash shell.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I tend to use Ubuntu, although I think I screwed something up on my install, most recently.

When I was successfully using Ubuntu, I used the terminal a lot.

[Whoracle]

being a Sysadmin I have experience with various flavors of Linux.



* Suse
* RedHat
* CentOS
* Debian



On the desktop side I have tried some Distros, but mostly stuck to openSUSE, up until 11.2. Since then I've been using mainly LFS and ArchLinux, both of which I enjoy. Fedora is nice if a bit unwieldy, Ubuntu is the DEVIL, Debian is stable (obvious tautology is obvious), sidux is funny, OpenGEU is Eyecandy but tends to crash a lot and Gentoo is... well... Gentoo.

Apart from older openSUSE releases I'd have to say that ArchLinux is the best Linux experience I've had up to now. Great speed, great customizability, great Forums/Documentation. I'd even recommend it to someone who has only the most basic Linux knowledge.

As for Window Managers/Desktop Environments: I've been using Fluxbox for some years now. Nothing like it. Highly customizable, fast, looks nice enough and does what it should.
I'd recommend padding it out with various tools from XFCE4, like thunar and the mixer, and maybe Sonata as audio player.

If anyone is interested in trying Arch, my mailbox is always open.

And regarding CLI: Nothing like it. Except for web browsing it's the best since sliced bread. I'm using CanterIM as my instant messenger, irssi as the IRC client, and all in all the only reason for me to have a window manager is to manage the open terminals. Currently RXVT-Unicode is the terminal emulator of choice. Nice looking, fast, customizable.

What shells do you people use? I've been trying zsh, but while I loved it's features (YAY! for parameter tab completion :D)somehow it seemed buggy to me. maybe I just configured it the wrong way...

On an interesting Sidenote: I've been thinking of starting a Thread like this since yesterday. Damn ninjas :smallbiggrin:

[KjeldorMage]

Right now I'm using Karmic 64bit on my custom I3 system.

(Can't wait for Lucid so I can finally use the onboard video power muahahaahaha!)

[valadil]

What shells do you people use? I've been trying zsh, but while I loved it's features (YAY! for parameter tab completion :D)somehow it seemed buggy to me. maybe I just configured it the wrong way...


Just plain old bash for me. I'm intrigued by zsh but deal with enough systems where it's not an option that it's just not worth investing in for me. I'd rather learn some crazy new bash features that I can use everywhere than unique zsh stuff that's limited to my primary machine.

[Yarram]

I realized I ignored this part due to my xmonad rant.

I used the command line for a majority of what I do on the computer. The big exception is firefox. The websites I visit expect you to have a mouse. I could use elinks or w3m, but what's the point? I draw in the gimp and I watch videos in mplayer. Neither of those tasks makes sense for a commandline app. I still listen to music in rhythmbox, though I'm not sure why. Whatever music app I use is going to be controlled from the multimedia keys on my keyboard, so it doesn't really matter to me if it's got a GUI or a TUI and rhythmbox hasn't pissed me off enough to make me want to switch yet.

Just about everything else is command line based. When you really learn the command line it's just more efficient.

What about gnome is too flashy? I don't think it has a lot of moving parts. If you're running compiz (which I think Ubuntu comes with these days), that adds some fancy eye candy (like the wobbly window effect) and I agree that that's a frivolous waste of CPU cycles.

It's probably the compiz that's turning me off it. It's dirty and horrible.
I'm mostly using Ubuntu because I know it works. I tried Fedora, but had a whole bunch of problems with freezing up that I couldn't fix, and I assume were graphics related. (It would freeze when the install bar was moving)
I'm really glad that I've tried out arch. I'm learning so much stuff that I'd have never considered otherwise.

A silly error this morning: When I type "exec fluxbox," the system prints an error message and reverts to the root user, "Couldn't connect to Xserver."
But when I type "startx" it start's with no problems...
Weird.

On firefox, one of my lecturers said that there's a addon that lets you use vim commands to navigate.
I think I should get it and experiment.

[valadil]

A silly error this morning: When I type "exec fluxbox," the system prints an error message and reverts to the root user, "Couldn't connect to Xserver."
But when I type "startx" it start's with no problems...
Weird.

That's unsurprising. Fluxbox is nothing without X.



On firefox, one of my lecturers said that there's a addon that lets you use vim commands to navigate.
I think I should get it and experiment.
Vimperator? I tried it a couple times but couldn't get into it. And I like vim to begin with.

[Yarram]

On one hand, it's alien and confusing not to have a url bar... On the other, ":o url" is way quicker than moving to the mouse, and less likely to give me RSI.
I think I like it. Plus it will help me learn VIM quicker.

Edit: I got a question. How can I permanently bind the word "owriter" on commandline to open "/usr/bin/soffice -writer"?
Google was failing me. I don't know the jargon I'm looking for.

[valadil]

Edit: I got a question. How can I permanently bind the word "owriter" on commandline to open "/usr/bin/soffice -writer"?
Google was failing me. I don't know the jargon I'm looking for.

The jargon you're missing is alias. See my post above about aliasing dir to ls for syntax. Just include the path to soffice and the writer option in quotations when you set it.

[Yarram]

I read that, but wasn't sure if it worked forever or not. Thanks valadil.
EDIT: Oh, and vimperator is way superior to navigating with a touchpad it seems. I shall continue to use it, if only to get more used to Vim.

[valadil]

I read that, but wasn't sure if it worked forever or not. Thanks valadil.
EDIT: Oh, and vimperator is way superior to navigating with a touchpad it seems. I shall continue to use it, if only to get more used to Vim.

No problem. Just for yucks and giggles, here are my aliases. There are a few for commands I can't remember. A few more for bundling command line options into the command. And a whole lot to save on typing.



alias bd='popd'
alias bell="echo -e '\a'"
alias bt='btdownloadcurses.bittornado --minport 34567 --maxport 34577 --max_upload_rate 25 --responsefile'
alias btupload='btdownloadcurses.bittornado --minport 34567 --maxport 34577 --max_upload_rate 200 --responsefile'
alias dux='du -sk ./* | sort -n | awk '\''BEGIN{ pref[1]="K"; pref[2]="M"; pref[3]="G";} { total = total + $1; x = $1; y = 1; while( x > 1024 ) { x = (x + 1023)/1024; y++; } printf("%g%s\t%s\n",int(x*10)/10,pref[y],$2); } END { y = 1; while( total > 1024 ) { total = (total + 1023)/1024; y++; } printf("Total: %g%s\n",int(total*10)/10,pref[y]); }'\'''
alias e='emacs -nw'
alias fontcache-refresh=' fc-cache -f'
alias ls='ls --color=auto'
alias myip='curl http://whatismyip.org ; echo'
alias n='nano'
alias tf='tail -f'
alias s='screen'
alias sx='screen -x'
alias su='su -m'
alias sudo='A=`alias` sudo '
alias wake-rj="ssh dreamhost ./wol.sh ; delay 35 ; ssh home"
alias v='vim '


And here are my functions. They're kinda like aliases but more powerful. Aliases are limited in that they just replace the beginning of a command. Sometime you want to pass in another argument or wrap an alias around a command and that's just not possible. In that case you use functions. Functions can be scripts unto themselves.



#ls which does ls -lh on result of which. useful if /usr/bin/$BINARY is a symlink and I need to see where it points
function lw() {
if [ $# -gt 0 ] ; then
for bin in $@ ; do ls -lh `which $bin` ; done
else
echo "lw (ls which) requires more than 0 arguments"
fi
}

#make a dir, cd into it
function mkcd() {
mkdir -p "$@";
pushd "$@" > /dev/null;
echo $PWD;
}

# extract archives. should handle multiple files.
function x() {
case $@ in
*.tar.bz2) tar -xvjf "$@" ;;
*.tar.gz) tar -xvzf "$@" ;;
*.bz2) bunzip2 "$@" ;;
*.rar) unrar x "$@" ;;
*.gz) gunzip "$@" ;;
*.tar) tar xf "$@" ;;
*.tbz2) tar -xvjf "$@" ;;
*.tgz) tar -xvzf "$@" ;;
*.zip) unzip "$@" ;;
*.xpi) unzip "$@" ;;
*.Z) uncompress "$@" ;;
*.7z) 7z x "$@" ;;
*.ace) unace e "$@" ;;
*.arj) arj -y e "$@" ;;
*) echo "'$@' cannot be extracted via x()" ;;
esac
}

# packs $2-$n into $1 depending on $1's extension. add more file types as needed
function pack() {
if [ $# -lt 2 ] ; then
echo -e "\npack() usage:"
echo -e "\tpack archive_file_name file1 file2 ... fileN"
echo -e "\tcreates archive of files 1-N\n"
else
DEST=$1
shift

case $DEST in
*.tar.bz2) tar -cvjf $DEST "$@" ;;
*.tar.gz) tar -cvzf $DEST "$@" ;;
*.zip) zip -r $DEST "$@" ;;
*.xpi) zip -r $DEST "$@" ;;
esac
fi
}

# like sleep, but spits out a . every second
function delay() {
typeset -i NUM
NUM=$1
if [ $NUM -gt 0 ] ; then
for i in `seq $NUM` ; do sleep 1 ; echo -n '.' ; done
echo ""
else
echo "Invalid argument. Please use a positive integer."
fi
}

# changes cd to pushd. as a function so that cd with no args still brings you home. see bd as popd
function cd() {
if [ $# -eq 0 ] ; then
pushd $HOME
else
pushd "$@" > /dev/null
fi
}

# screen attach. if multiple, presents a menu for choosing.
function ssx() {
OPTS=`screen -ls | grep "[0-9]\." | while read line ; do echo "$line" | sed -e 's/\s/_/g' ; done`

case $(echo $OPTS | wc -w) in
0)
echo -e "\nNo screen sessions open\n"
;;
1)
SESSION=$OPTS
echo -e "\nAttaching to only available screen"
;;
*)
echo -e "\nPick a screen session"
select opt in $OPTS ; do
SESSION=$opt
break;
done
;;
esac

screen -x $(echo $SESSION | sed -e 's/\..*//')

}

function calc() {
awk "BEGIN{ print $* }" ;
}

# returns age of file in seconds
function age() {
CURRENT=$( date +%s )
FILEAGE=$( stat -t $1 -c %Z )
calc $CURRENT - $FILEAGE
}



Most of that should be self explanatory.

Pushd is like cd except that it remembers the directories you've visited. Popd goes back to them. To use these I overwrite cd with pushd. I called popd bd, which stands for back directory.

Screen is awesome for the command line. It lets you put multiple terminals in a single term window. What's amazing about it is that you can detach from your screen session and reattach later. What this means is I can leave my IRC session running at home, go to work, ssh back home, and open the terminal I left for myself. I just included some helper aliases for functions that I type a lot.

The alias for sudo is a little weird and I don't really understand it. What it's supposed to do is call my aliases before I call sudo. That way if I do sudo v file" it remembers my v alias instead of making me type vim. I have no idea why A= is necessary in that alias, or even how I discovered it.

Bell is an alarm. It lets a window tell me when it's done processing something. The way I have my WM set up, each desktop can light up when it has something demanding my attention. Most of the time that only matters for email or aim. But sometimes I want to leave a long running script going in the background. I don't always hear a beep, so it's nice to have xmonad know when my stuff is done. This probably doesn't apply for anyone not using a weird WM like xmonad.

[Whoracle]

After searching and not finding a good exit-app for Fluxbox, I spent the day writing one myself. Here it is, dependent on python and gtk+:


#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-

import pygtk
pygtk.require('2.0')
import gtk
import os

class DoTheLogOut:

# Cancel/exit
def delete_event(self, widget, event, data=None):
gtk.main_quit()
return False

# Reboot
def reboot(self, widget):
os.system("sudo shutdown -r now && fluxbox-remote \"exit\"")

# Shutdown
def shutdown(self, widget):
os.system("sudo shutdown -h now && fluxbox-remote \"exit\"")

# Logout
def logout(self, widget):
os.system("fluxbox-remote \"exit\"")

def __init__(self):
# Create a new window
self.window = gtk.Window(gtk.WINDOW_TOPLEVEL)
self.window.set_decorated(False)
self.window.set_resizable(False)
self.window.set_position(1)
self.window.set_border_width(20)


# Create an accelgroup and add it to the window
accel_group = gtk.AccelGroup()
self.window.add_accel_group(accel_group)

# Create a box to pack widgets into
self.table1 = gtk.Table(2, 3, True)
self.window.add(self.table1)

# Create shutdown button
self.button4 = gtk.Button("Shutdown")
self.button4.set_border_width(5)
self.button4.connect("clicked", self.shutdown)
self.button4.add_accelerator("clicked", accel_group,
gtk.gdk.keyval_from_name('s'), 0, 0)
self.button4.show()

# Create reboot button
self.button3 = gtk.Button("Reboot")
self.button3.set_border_width(5)
self.button3.connect("clicked", self.reboot)
self.button3.add_accelerator("clicked", accel_group,
gtk.gdk.keyval_from_name('r'), 0, 0)
self.button3.show()

# Create logout button
self.button5 = gtk.Button("Logout")
self.button5.set_border_width(5)
self.button5.connect("clicked", self.logout)
self.button5.add_accelerator("clicked", accel_group,
gtk.gdk.keyval_from_name('l'), 0, 0)
self.button5.show()

# Create cancel button
self.button1 = gtk.Button("Cancel")
self.button1.set_border_width(5)
self.button1.connect("clicked", self.delete_event, "closed")
self.button1.add_accelerator("clicked", accel_group,
gtk.gdk.keyval_from_name('Escape'), 0, 0)
self.button1.add_accelerator("clicked", accel_group,
gtk.gdk.keyval_from_name('c'), 0, 0)
self.button1.show()

self.table1.attach(self.button4, 0, 1, 0, 1)
self.table1.attach(self.button3, 1, 2, 0, 1)
self.table1.attach(self.button5, 2, 3, 0, 1)
self.table1.attach(self.button1, 1, 2, 1, 2)

self.table1.show()
self.window.show()

def main():
gtk.main()

if __name__ == "__main__":
run_it = DoTheLogOut()
main()

Installation instructions:
copy the code to some file (I called it fluxshutdown). Then copy the file to /usr/bin or somewhere appropiate. chmod +x the file, add yourself to the sudoers files and add the following line to .fluxbox/menu:
[exec] (Exit) {/path/to/fluxshutdown}

For the "Logout" button to work, you have to set the following in your ~/.fluxbox/init to true:

session.screen0.allowRemoteActions: false (around line 58, I think)

Here's a screenshot:
http://www.frozeninfinity.de/austausch/lax/fluxshutdown.png

Have fun with it.

[Yarram]

Wow. Just wow.

Do people ever tell you how cool you are?

Thankyou. I've just been using "exit" or "halt" in the command-prompt...

[Whoracle]

You're welcome :smallsmile:

I've been using the cli or commands in the menu myself. and since there was no suitable tool for fluxbox it was high time to do one myself.

Forgot one thing in the install instructions, though:
For the "Logout" button to work, you have to set the following in your ~/.fluxbox/init to true:

session.screen0.allowRemoteActions: false (around line 58, I think)

[Surfing HalfOrc]

Ubuntu Netbook Remix (Karmic Koala build), set to dual boot with Windows XP on my son's Acer Aspire 1 netbook. The original hard drive crapped out just before the warranty did, and when it finally got back from the repair place in Texas it had a hard time playing YouTube videos. So I installed Ubuntu, and he normally selects Linux since he wants to watch his videos WITHOUT having the computer lock up.

Yes, Ubuntu Linux, so simple a nine-year-old can use it, and works so well even a nine-year-old can tell the difference! :smallbiggrin:

[Whoracle]

Fluxboxers ITP, I need help.

I want a graphical task switcher for my FluxBox. So far I have only found skippy, which is
a) unmaintained
b) slow
c) won't run on x86_64 systems
I need another alternative. Anyone know of one?

[Yarram]

A graphical task switcher?
Oh, you mean so when you push alt+tab it shows what task you're navigating too?
I'm about as stumped as you are tbh.

[Whoracle]

A graphical task switcher?
Oh, you mean so when you push alt+tab it shows what task you're navigating too?

Yep, exactly that. I found superswitcher, but that uses Super+Tab, and I need my windows key for a lot of other shortcuts. Looks like IIll have to try and write one myself, although I haven't got the slightest Idea on how to do that...

We'll see.

[valadil]

Whoracle,

Have you tried running compiz on top of fluxbox? I haven't used it in a while but I'm pretty sure it came with an alt-tab task switcher. It was one of the only things I liked about running compiz.

[Whoracle]

Valadil, that won't work. compiz is a window manager like fluxbox, so it'd replace fluxbox. Plus, even if it would work, I use Flux because of it's low memory footprint, which compiz would kinda defeat.

[valadil]

Valadil, that won't work. compiz is a window manager like fluxbox, so it'd replace fluxbox. Plus, even if it would work, I use Flux because of it's low memory footprint, which compiz would kinda defeat.

I thought there was a portion of it that could be run without the wm part? Maybe I'm thinking of the compositer? I know I was able to get that running with xmonad. It's a moot point though because of the memory aspect you mention.

[Natael]

I'm looking around to build a linux server, CentOS was recommended, though I think I'd rather use Arch to learn and build up if possible. Was recommended to use FreeNX for the server software. Any opinions or experience on this? Also, what would be the best file system to work on this?

I've toyed with Enlightenment a little bit before, wondering if anyone has had any positive experience with it. Seemed like a spiffy DE.

[Whoracle]

Re: Server
I don't particularly like CentOS, and if you're not going for corporate support you can always try arch. What kind of services is it going to run? Fileserver? Webserver? LDAP? DNS/DHCP? Video/Audio streaming?

For the file system, that depends on the setup you'll use, on the hardware available and on the desired availability. RAID? Cluster? Single Setup? Network shares?

Re: Enlightenment
I've never used E16, but I dabbled in distros like OpenGeu and eLive. Having used E17 I'll say it sure looks nice but it's nowhere near productivity use, by any stretch of imagination. Plug, I found the handling kinda "meh". Nothing groundbreaking in usability, just a pretty gnome/kde clone. YMMV, though.

[Natael]

More specifically on the file system, I need to be able to access it with Windows machines. For the server, I really just need a hard drive I can access from anywhere, so something like a media or FTP server in effectiveness, though I'm not really sure on specific implementation. Port-knocking was suggested to me as a good form of security to be added.

So enlistenment is pretty much just a prettied up DE, and I ought to just stick with gnome or KDE, maybe XFCE?

[valadil]

I'm looking around to build a linux server, CentOS was recommended, though I think I'd rather use Arch to learn and build up if possible. Was recommended to use FreeNX for the server software. Any opinions or experience on this? Also, what would be the best file system to work on this?

I've toyed with Enlightenment a little bit before, wondering if anyone has had any positive experience with it. Seemed like a spiffy DE.

I have some CentOS servers at work. It's not my favorite OS, but it's serviceable. The big difference you'll notice between it and Arch is in the versioning. Centos 5 is Centos 5. It's a complete set of packages. Updates will include bug fixes within those packages, but no major changes. Arch on the other hand is based on rolling releases. If Apache 3 comes out, it'll show up in Arch sooner than later. You'd need to deploy Centos 6 (or maybe even 7) to get the new Apache, unless you felt like installing it from scratch. I like Arch's setup a little better for a desktop distro, but think I prefer stability on a server. Arch will leave you with fewer running services though (as you have to explicitly choose which services you want), so the system will be a little more secure.

Enlightenment is cool. I used e16 for while. Moved on to other things before e17 came out. It's in what I consider to be the second tier of WMs. The first tier being the Windows style ones. Gnome, KDE, and XFCE fall into this category. After that comes the Next inspired ones. They forgo desktop icons and have a main menu that appears whenever you right click on the desktop instead of on a specific icon. Afterstep, fluxbox, enlightenment, and windowmaker are in this category. I consider it the second tier because it's where people end up when they realize that they can pick a GUI that doesn't feel like Windows. These are usually lighter weight than a full desktop GUI. They also traditionally have less decoration, so if screen real estate is a concern they're a good choice. I recommend trying several of these WMs and see which you like. The feature that I always found coolest was the ability to set up dynamic menus. I mostly remember this in waimea and kahakai (which are both defunct), but I'm sure others have it too. Basically instead of having the same menu all the time you can write a script that gets run when you right click and the output is used as a menu. Fun stuff.

[valadil]

More specifically on the file system, I need to be able to access it with Windows machines. For the server, I really just need a hard drive I can access from anywhere, so something like a media or FTP server in effectiveness, though I'm not really sure on specific implementation. Port-knocking was suggested to me as a good form of security to be added.

So enlistenment is pretty much just a prettied up DE, and I ought to just stick with gnome or KDE, maybe XFCE?

Define access. You can install samba to share folders. It'll be just like windows file sharing and it won't matter what file system you're on. The FS only matters in this way if you're dual booting and want the windows partition to be able to read the linux drive. My recommendation is to go with the distro's default WM which will probably be ext3 or 4.

If you're just getting started with linux I think you should stick with gnome or kde. There's a lot to learn and you'll be best off focusing on one thing at a time. When the server is set up, try something else new.

[Natael]

Define access. You can install samba to share folders. It'll be just like windows file sharing and it won't matter what file system you're on. The FS only matters in this way if you're dual booting and want the windows partition to be able to read the linux drive. My recommendation is to go with the distro's default WM which will probably be ext3 or 4.

If you're just getting started with linux I think you should stick with gnome or kde. There's a lot to learn and you'll be best off focusing on one thing at a time. When the server is set up, try something else new.

I goofed around with Ubuntu for a few months about a year ago, so not entirely (just mostly) new to Linux.

For access, I want to be able to have remote read/write access to specified folders/files from my linux box via any other computer I have setup for it (mostly windows machines). Good to hear on FS not mattering in that case too, so I'll stick with ext3/4 then.

Thanks much

[Whoracle]

Yeah, for a Win-accessible fileserver you can use whatever you want. And what you want is definitely a journalling FS, so ext3/4 is the way to go. For the distro to use I'll mostly second what valadil said, although I'd recommend Debian over CentOS if you're looking for stable. CentOS' only value (imho) is that it's packages are 1 to 1 those of RedHat, so Redhat support and patches apply for the respective versions. Since you're not going for enterprise support, though, you might as well go with the ultra stable Debian

If you could provide some more specs on the expected load of the server, I may be able to cook up some more specific recommendations.

[Natael]

I plan on giving access to about 4 or 5 people in total. Mostly going to use it as a mechanism of sharing videos/music etc... with my family in other states, as well as give me access to it through my laptop when I am away from home to compensate for my low drive space on it. Perhaps as a backup if I have to format my main desktop as well. Also using it to learn Linux. I had fun working up Arch before, though am willing to give Debian a try if that'd be better.

[valadil]

[QUOTE=Natael;8132618Mostly going to use it as a mechanism of sharing videos/music etc... with my family in other states[/QUOTE]

Ah. In that case the samba server I previously mentioned won't do you any good. That's just for sharing files on a LAN. The easiest way to do what you want to do would be to install an sftp server and give your family accounts for that. The openssh-server package will do if you go with debian. You'll want to make a family group and put each user in that group. Your shared folder will have to be read/writable by that group. And you may have to play with umask to ensure that files people add to the shared folder are also owned by the family group.

[Natael]

Ah. In that case the samba server I previously mentioned won't do you any good. That's just for sharing files on a LAN. The easiest way to do what you want to do would be to install an sftp server and give your family accounts for that. The openssh-server package will do if you go with debian. You'll want to make a family group and put each user in that group. Your shared folder will have to be read/writable by that group. And you may have to play with umask to ensure that files people add to the shared folder are also owned by the family group.

One last question I think, any specific reason to use Debian over Arch (as well, how is the installation/setup experience different?)?

Thanks

[Yarram]

That's easy:
Arch doesn't come with a GUI installed.

If you don't know what that means, all the more reason not to get it.

[Natael]

That's easy:
Arch doesn't come with a GUI installed.

If you don't know what that means, all the more reason not to get it.

More looking for anything specific on server stability, or any strong opinions on Apt-get vs. Pacman. Arch has some pretty spectacular documentation and should be easy enough to set up, I've worked with a command line enough to not mind at all.

[valadil]

More looking for anything specific on server stability, or any strong opinions on Apt-get vs. Pacman. Arch has some pretty spectacular documentation and should be easy enough to set up, I've worked with a command line enough to not mind at all.

Debian installs more stuff for you. If you install firefox through apt it'll also install xorg and maybe gnome. Arch expects you to install those sorts of dependencies on your own.

I find Debian's style easier, but I've been using Debian (or sometimes Ubuntu) since 2003 so it's what I'm used to. Arch fans enjoy the extra control they have over their systems. It only includes what they explicitly select. This is nice in a server environment because you can omit any services you don't want to run, which means there will be fewer vectors if someone tries to take over your server. Of course you can simply disable or uninstall unwanted services from Debian, but that might be more work than going with Arch.

[Whoracle]

The main reason to choose Debian over Arch is the update schedule: Debian is as stable as they get because they test the packages extensively. so your system is not as up-to-date as with others, but you won't run into unpatched applications with security holes the size of my fist either.

Arch has a rolling release system, meaning that (almost) as soon as a new version of a program is out, it gets pushed onto the repositories. Advantages: bleeding edge package selection, disadvantages: possible security/stability issues (that's where they take the "bleeding" part lietrally in terms of pain, apparently :smallbiggrin: ).

And for a server you need stability and security, not bleeding edge and usability.

Come back to arch when you want a great desktop system.

And regarding the documentation: If you subsitute "pacman -S <packagename>" with "apt-get install <packagename>", most (I'd guess about 90%) of the arch documentation'll apply to debian, too. At least on the server side of things.

[MorseCodePython]

I use two machines, both of them have Arch with fluxbox installed on them. On one of them I usually start X and the other I leave in command line SSHed in. On the rare occasion I do start the X server on the second, I have it set up in .xinitrc to start synergy. Rarely do I ever need to use the keyboard attached to the second machine.

On the topic of command line vs. GUI, I tend to use command line for most things. If a good command line app doesn't exist I'll revert to GUI (Transmission over rtorrent, for example). I don't have a GUI filesystem. I prefer bash scripting; it's versatile and fun to learn.