Cacarulo: Which is the best Linux distro and why?

[Cacarulo]

> I have a serious problem with the sound, I
> can not listen nothing and I try to resolve
> the problem , my version of linux is RedHat
> 9.0, please if anyone know how I can repair
> this damage, I will be pleasured with you
> thanks

Strange. There shouldn't be any problem with sound in RedHat.
First you need to detect your soundcard. Go to System Settings/Soundcard detection for this.
Then you need to adjust the sound volume. For this you should go to Sound & Video/Volume Control.

Hope this helps.

Sincerely,
Cacarulo

PS: And don't forget to turn your speakers on first!

[Parker]

> I have a serious problem with the sound, I
> can not listen nothing and I try to resolve
> the problem , my version of linux is RedHat
> 9.0, please if anyone know how I can repair
> this damage, I will be pleasured with you
> thanks

It's been a while since I have run a Red Hat box, but IIRC there is a sound configuration utility. Open a terminal and type "sndconfig" (without the quotes). You will need to be root. This will detect the soundcard and play a sample sound.

There is also (I think) a GUI utility that does the same thing. Open a terminal and type "redhat-config-soundcard" again without the quotes and you must be root. Then follow the prompts.

If your sound was working and then stopped, it is probably a hardware problem as Cacarulo suggested. One time I spent several hours on my system playing with configuration files trying to get my sound working after it had quit. Finally I found the problem: The connector from the speakers that plugs into the soundcard was not making contact.

[spineless jellyfish]

> I have a serious problem with the sound, I
> can not listen nothing and I try to resolve
> the problem , my version of linux is RedHat
> 9.0, please if anyone know how I can repair
> this damage, I will be pleasured with you
> thanks

If you just installed, RH9 mutes the sound by default. Just unmute it, either with KMix or with the shell.

[Parker]

> I've a Pentium III 1000 Mhz w/128 Mb of RAM.
> Fedora or RedHat are really very slow on
> these type of PCs and that's why I need a
> change.

Your problem is the lack of RAM. You need at least 256 MB, and 512 or a gig is even better. I'll bet your hard drive is going almost constantly. Switching to Gentoo will not help this problem. If you're running the KDE or Gnome destop, switching to a lightweight desktop such as Fluxbox or XFce would help.

Just open a terminal window and type "free" (without the quotes) and you will see how much memory you have available. I'm betting little or none.

> BTW, I've noticed in Gentoo that there are
> different packages that apply to different
> types of processors (i386, i686, Pentium3,
> Pentium4, alpha, etc.).
> If I wanted to know what type of processor I
> have I simply type "uname -p" and
> get "i686". But my processor is a
> Pentium III so I really don't know what to
> use, i686 or P3? What's the difference
> between i686 and P3?

None, really. Intel got annoyed when they were making the 486 processor and other companies (AMD, etc) were also making CPU's and calling them 486's. It seems that you cannot trademark a number. So, when they came out with the 586 class CPU, they called it a Pentium, which they could trademark. Pentium II and above are 686 class CPU's.

Go ahead and take a shot at installing Gentoo (I can tell you're really, really itching to try it :-)) but don't expect any noticeable improvement in performance until you get some more RAM.

[Cacarulo]

> Your problem is the lack of RAM. You need at
> least 256 MB, and 512 or a gig is even
> better. I'll bet your hard drive is going
> almost constantly. Switching to Gentoo will
> not help this problem.

I'm not that sure.

> If you're running the
> KDE or Gnome destop, switching to a
> lightweight desktop such as Fluxbox or XFce
> would help.

But I didn't have this problem with previous versions. The problem is with RH 9.0 mainly.

> Just open a terminal window and type
> "free" (without the quotes) and
> you will see how much memory you have
> available. I'm betting little or none.

Yes, very little and of course too much swapping.

> None, really. Intel got annoyed when they
> were making the 486 processor and other
> companies (AMD, etc) were also making CPU's
> and calling them 486's. It seems that you
> cannot trademark a number. So, when they
> came out with the 586 class CPU, they called
> it a Pentium, which they could trademark.
> Pentium II and above are 686 class CPU's.

I understand.

> Go ahead and take a shot at installing
> Gentoo (I can tell you're really, really
> itching to try it :-))

Yes, how do you know I'm itching to try it?

> but don't expect any
> noticeable improvement in performance until
> you get some more RAM.

Will see

Sincerely,
Cac

[Parker]

> Parker's Excellent Evaluation says it all,
> but I'll throw in a couple cents worth of
> biased reply.

> Unless you're looking for a distro that will
> run off a floppy within 64K of memory, I
> would personally choose between either
> Fedora/Red Hat and Gentoo.

> If easy installation and management are your
> priorities, stick to Fedora. Despite the
> separate branding, it's still got the full
> force of Redhat AND an active development
> community behind it, and you can get RPMs
> for any package you could ever want to
> install.

SuSE and Mandrake are also RPM based - I have successfully installed many Redhat RPM's on my SuSE systems. Also, Debian has more applications then anybody (over 2500), along with an excellent package management system.

I haven't tried Fedora Core II yet, but Core I's update system was seriously screwed up. Considering it's Redhat heritage, I found Fedora Core I to be surprisingly rough around the edges.

All of the major distros (Fedora, Redhat, SuSE, Mandrake, Debian, Slackware, Xandros, Lindows and probably a couple more that I'm forgetting) have active development communities behind them - that's how they got to be major!.

> On the other hand, it optimum performance
> for CPU intensive computations is your
> thing, then Gentoo, the fastest growing
> distro, is for you. The core OS along with
> every little package you install is compiled
> and optimized to your needs. The downside is
> that it is a real bitch to install, but it's
> getting easier every release.

I think switching to Gentoo is sort of like becoming a full time professional card counter. When you're ready for it, you won't be asking if you should do it on an open message board. :-)

[Cacarulo]

> SuSE and Mandrake are also RPM based - I
> have successfully installed many Redhat
> RPM's on my SuSE systems. Also, Debian has
> more applications then anybody (over 2500),
> along with an excellent package management
> system.

Interesting.

> I haven't tried Fedora Core II yet, but Core
> I's update system was seriously screwed up.
> Considering it's Redhat heritage, I found
> Fedora Core I to be surprisingly rough
> around the edges.

Yes, there are some problems with the update.

> All of the major distros (Fedora, Redhat,
> SuSE, Mandrake, Debian, Slackware, Xandros,
> Lindows and probably a couple more that I'm
> forgetting) have active development
> communities behind them - that's how they
> got to be major!.

> I think switching to Gentoo is sort of like
> becoming a full time professional card
> counter. When you're ready for it, you won't
> be asking if you should do it on an open
> message board. :-)

Good analogy!

Sincerely,
Cac

[Phil]

Has anybody got statistical blackjack analyser running under a WINE. i tried but was having trouble, may have been because of the way you need your source tables in the directory that is current.(know this problem?)

i am using suse 9.1 right now. BTW i use it coz they have a decent business model and hence will be around for a while, meanwhile i get my CD's from ebay.co.uk for ?5!

[Parker]

> Has anybody got statistical blackjack
> analyser running under a WINE. i tried but
> was having trouble, may have been because of
> the way you need your source tables in the
> directory that is current.(know this
> problem?)

I don't have SBA, so I haven't tried that. I managed to get Casino Verite to install, but it crashes when I try to run it. BJRM 2000 will start, but it doesn't render properly and quickly crashes. I did manage to get Stanford Wong's little BJEdge houst advantage calculator program to run under WINE, and it works perfectly.

WINE is under active development and frequently updated, so I keep downloading the latest version and trying. If I could get Casino Verite and CVCX to run under WINE, I could happily live in a totally non-Windows environment.

> i am using suse 9.1 right now. BTW i use it
> coz they have a decent business model and
> hence will be around for a while, meanwhile
> i get my CD's from ebay.co.uk for ?5!

Agreed. I don't think Novell (SuSE's new owner) is going to go belly up any time soon.

[paranoid android]

> Personally I'm used to RedHat/Fedora distros
> but I know there should be better choices in
> terms of speed, use of limited RAM, etc.
> Let's assume that disk space is not an
> issue.

I think you'll find little difference in the main stream distributions in terms of speed (with the possible exception of Gentoo which you can force to compile every piece of software on your system with compiler settings optimal for your CPU) or ability to optimally use limited RAM. They're all running the same software. The main differences in the distributions are ease of installation, ease of upgradability, security, compliance to standards, and version release schedules.

I use Debian which is ideal in all the above categories except for ease of initial installation (although it's not as bad as its reputation IMO). Fortunately, since it's so easy to upgrade, installation only needs to be done once in a lifetime. Running "apt-get update; apt-get upgrade" is all that's needed to keep your system in sync with the latest versions of all software packages.

Personally though, if you're happy with the distribution you're using now, I think you have little to gain by trying another distribution unless it's for the fun factor.

[Cacarulo]

> I think you'll find little difference in the
> main stream distributions in terms of speed
> (with the possible exception of Gentoo which
> you can force to compile every piece of
> software on your system with compiler
> settings optimal for your CPU) or ability to
> optimally use limited RAM. They're all
> running the same software. The main
> differences in the distributions are ease of
> installation, ease of upgradability,
> security, compliance to standards, and
> version release schedules.

And specially compliance to standards.

> I use Debian which is ideal in all the above
> categories except for ease of initial
> installation (although it's not as bad as
> its reputation IMO). Fortunately, since it's
> so easy to upgrade, installation only needs
> to be done once in a lifetime. Running
> "apt-get update; apt-get upgrade"
> is all that's needed to keep your system in
> sync with the latest versions of all
> software packages.

For what I have read, Gentoo is also very easy to update and the installation needs to be done only once.

> Personally though, if you're happy with the
> distribution you're using now, I think you
> have little to gain by trying another
> distribution unless it's for the fun factor.

The problem is that I'm not happy with my actual distro so I think a will go with Gentoo.
Anyway, I appreciate your answer, thank you!

Sincerely,
Cac

[Parker]

> The problem is that I'm not happy with my
> actual distro so I think a will go with
> Gentoo.

Assuming that you do, please let me know how the installation goes. I spent most of a weekend screwing around with it before giving up in frustration. Of course, that was a couple of versions ago.

[Cacarulo]

> Assuming that you do, please let me know how
> the installation goes. I spent most of a
> weekend screwing around with it before
> giving up in frustration. Of course, that
> was a couple of versions ago.

Will do but if you take a look to www.gentoo.org you'll find that there are some new installation alternatives that don't need a full compilation.

Cac