I'm going to indulge myself in the world of linux.

[wild_card_my]

I'm going to indulge myself in the world of linux. Prior to this, I have had no experience with it at all.

Dont get me wrong, I'm not totally fed up with microsoft products, in fact, both PCs and a laptop of mine are using winXPs. The thing is I am required, as a sub-admin of the computer cluster in my college library, to administer the computers there.

The biggest problem is the computers in the cluster that I'm in charge of, which is a third generation cluster and also a third-rate cluster, consist of pentium-3 class computers featuring only 64MBs RAMs.

Being third-gens, the computers are using win98 which is undeniably unstable and is very hard to maintain. Reformations are done regularly but to no avail. You know how "creative" we students can be, without any control of which files that can be executed (particularly *.EXE and *.VBS), the computers are always in the state of chaos. Bootups on certain computers can take as long as 10 minutes due to excessive start-up programs. Hangs-up and freezes are everyday things.

Being third gens and also due to the lack of economic sense, upgrading the win98 to winXP is totally out of the question.

So yesterday I was thinking of the sollution for this problem and linux came into my mind. Thus, here I am today, having ZERO experience in linux and its many variations, requesting some first insight in searching for directions in world of linux.

Some may want to know why I am choosing linux:

1) The computers in the cluster are only used for internet surfing. No programs should be installed by any unauthorized person. However, Win98 has little control and is also unable to restrict the types of files that can be run by the users. I have heard that certain linux packages offer restrictions such as read, write and overwrite; executable files restrictions; control over "users' folder" sizes; etc. This is perfect for the computer cluster.

2) Considerably low resource requirements: Having the ability to control and restrict the users' resource usage, linux is, in terms of resource requirements, better than winXP which takes at least 100MB worth of memory after fresh installation, and may take even up to 150MB after several other programes are installed. Am I on the right track? Does linux based OSes use less resource?

3) Cheap, next-to-free, or totally free: If I'm not wrong, packages such as Fedora and SuSe are free of charge. As I mentioned above we need features like those in winXP but we are not expecting to pay RM400 for each computer. Thus, linux is a valid option.

4) Many are unfamiliar with linux: As much as this can be a disadvantage to the linux community, it can also turn out to be an advantage, well at least to the cluster. As I mentioned above, we students love to install all sorts of mallicious applications like "Getright" which usually comes with several other "nuisance" softwares like Gator. Kazaa, Bittorent, Emule, Areis, etc. all the P2P softwares which are considered to be of no benefits to the others as they bring the overall bandwidth down crawling. Being unfamiliar with linux, and the scarce of junk softwares, hopefully the human-resource needed to maintain the cluster could be reduced.

5) Virus issue: The cluster has been infected several times. Well, should I explain more why I wanna use linux? U should know better.

6) I, deep down my heart really want to experience the linux world.

Well, this is just an introduction, hopefully I can ask more questions and get quick answers in my voyage deploy linux based OS in the cluster. DO note that I am awaer that this is not going to be an easy task, but I am up to leaning new things.

A few simple-questions:

1) The cluster combines a variation sets of computers with different sets of graphic cards which may require their own specific drivers. I am aware that certain linux OS packages do not offer a very wide range of GC drivers. But will this be a problem? Can I just search for a particular GC driver one by one?

2) If Im not wrong Red Hat offers the widest range of driver support, but being a licensed software I dont think it would be a viable option. An acquintance of mine suggested Fedora and SuSe instead. Is there much disadvantages in using these 2 particular FOC softwares? Over other paid-to-use packages?

3) I also heard that although Red Hat package is being sold, but once bought it can be installed across multiple computers even with only 1 bought copy? Is that true? Well, I think I'll opt for Red Hat if that's the case.

4) Networking: Ummm... I think I will need some experts and on-the-time help here, as I heard linux's networking requires manual configuration. Mind elaborating this in simple terms? I know its going to be deep down but I'm willing to learn. Just a basic break down will do, I will google.

Please post comments that you see fit, and I'm sure I must have given some immatured points here, but please, your assistance are not only helping me, but those who really need to use the cluster's computers and internet services too.

p/s I'm a student there, that's why I'm only a sub-admin... voluntary sub-admin... cuz the cluster is very very very badly managed... I cant blame the admin though, we students are way too creative... i'm planning to limit the users' folder size to only 5MB so that they wont be able to use bittorent by much... <evil grin>

[Thirdshifter]

Before you get any further. Please remember these 4 Letters. R.T.F.M. YOu'll be eharing this a lot when you ask people questions.. lol

ANyway since your going into more of a networking use of linux i invite you to my favourite board http://www.dslreports.com/forum/unixdsl

I'm also thirdshifter over there as well.

[wild_card_my]

Before you get any further. Please remember these 4 Letters. R.T.F.M. YOu'll be eharing this a lot when you ask people questions.. lol

ANyway since your going into more of a networking use of linux i invite you to my favourite board http://www.dslreports.com/forum/unixdsl

I'm also thirdshifter over there as well.

what are those? RTFM....

???

[masterof_none]

There are a lot of debates whether to use linux or other system.
Some proponent of linux pointed out that it's freely available, and can be freely modified and thus, could save cost considerably.

However, I'm on the side "If we can buy, buy". That save so much time and energy. I've never have experience on cluster, but as a linux user since my freshman year (now senior), I would say, try to get something that make your life easier first, before jumping to linux.
Unless your emphasize is in learning how the wonderful Unix OS works, you're going to loose a lot of productivity try to get Linux working.

I would say, MIcrosoft has updated it's windows, and uses a lot of
advance mechanisms for its windows server/2000. So, if you want to save yourself a lot of trouble, you can try those M$ new products.

But, I can feel your pain. I have the same problem with my PC that made me switch to Linux. After 2 years using it, I finally realize that
the best Unix box around is the Mac OS X. (if you have the money to buy those Mac Minis, go get it). But that's another story.

For linux, I recommend Mandrake. I have a beautiful experience with Mandrake, and it's great. (Mandrake now reside side my side with my Mac).
Not sure about Fedora. Fedora is a spinoff of Red Hat (Red Hat no longer support desktop based users). I heard from my roommate that it's not that easy either.
You can setup your cluster the Beowulf style.
http://www.beowulf.org/
(Warning: I've never tried it).

Good luck with the Penguin. Let us know how it goes.

[wild_card_my]

There are a lot of debates whether to use linux or other system.
Some proponent of linux pointed out that it's freely available, and can be freely modified and thus, could save cost considerably.

However, I'm on the side "If we can buy, buy". That save so much time and energy. I've never have experience on cluster, but as a linux user since my freshman year (now senior), I would say, try to get something that make your life easier first, before jumping to linux.
Unless your emphasize is in learning how the wonderful Unix OS works, you're going to loose a lot of productivity try to get Linux working.

I would say, MIcrosoft has updated it's windows, and uses a lot of
advance mechanisms for its windows server/2000. So, if you want to save yourself a lot of trouble, you can try those M$ new products.

But, I can feel your pain. I have the same problem with my PC that made me switch to Linux. After 2 years using it, I finally realize that
the best Unix box around is the Mac OS X. (if you have the money to buy those Mac Minis, go get it). But that's another story.

For linux, I recommend Mandrake. I have a beautiful experience with Mandrake, and it's great. (Mandrake now reside side my side with my Mac).
Not sure about Fedora. Fedora is a spinoff of Red Hat (Red Hat no longer support desktop based users). I heard from my roommate that it's not that easy either.
You can setup your cluster the Beowulf style.
http://www.beowulf.org/
(Warning: I've never tried it).

Good luck with the Penguin. Let us know how it goes.

The thing is, the cluster contains really old PCs, third gens, Pentium 3s with at most 64 MB rams. Some even have only 32MBs.

So to upgrade from win98 to any newer microsoft OS wouldn't make any ECONOMIC sense. The Hardware wont be able to support the OSes and the cost would be too much at RM400 per PC.

Additionally, after reading this article below, I figured that "Hell!!! The PCs will only be used for Web surfing and occasional Word Processing. Mozilla and Open Office would do."

http://news.com.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html?tag=lh

Win98 in those PCs really run slowly, down to a crawl. This is due, like I mentioned above, to the fact that students install mallicious programs in the PCs. There's no stopping them to do so, win98 just cant stop them.

I hope by deploying Mandrake or SusSe, the cluster can be much much more efficient in what it is meant to do:

- Web surfing
- Word processing

[masterof_none]

my PC with Pentium 3 run Mandrake with a blazing speed.
Try that.

[wild_card_my]

hey, there's a problem

during mandrake startup, i have the option to look at it's verbose startup..

during the chek-up, the compputer i installed mandrake on managed to get "OK" for everything, except for "interface for eth0" which got "FAILED"

incidentally, I coudnlt connect the mandrake to the net.

mandrake itself detected the network card and managed to give it's chipset's name such as "VIA 10/100" or sth like that.

so what's the problem?

the problem came across both terminals which i installed mandrake into. both terminals' specifications are not identaical.

thanks.

[masterof_none]

which version of mandrake do you use?.
mandrake would usually auto-detect ethernet card. card like linksys should be no problem.

suggestion:
1. check your ethernet card, whether it's registered. (is this the same old PC's?. if yes, theoratically, it should be no prob).

2. reinstall mandrake.

3. check all options while installing, just to be safe.

4. try Google if there's any other user has the same problem.

(I had that prob last time, but that we simply because the card was blocked by USC).

mandrake installation v.9/ v10 should be pretty straight forward.

[qedx]

try enabling DHCP

[masterof_none]

try enabling DHCP

Ahha, good call.

[masdie]

Hi. I've never touched linux before. I'm downloading SuSE 9.1's iso from linuxiso.org now. The main reason why I've decided to use SuSE is because most other distributions come in a few cds. Does that mean that I'll have to download all that cds and use every single one of them during installation? I used to think that linux is not as 'large' as windows. So if I want to say, install mandriva, do I need to download cd1, 2 and 3?

[masterof_none]

Usually, the most important CD is the first CD. And the rest of the CDs
are more like features for the distribution. I would suggest you download all of them, since you never know what that specific distribution trying to do about it. the safest way is to get it run first, and then , after you're familiar with it, customize it according to your need.

Of course, you can do fancy things - such as 'run only barebones kernel!'
or, 'the smallest linux!' http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/

but then, I would suggest you to get the standard distro first. SuSE is good.

[vseehua]

i've been trying on ubuntu for a while now and i really like it...only one cd, the installtion routine, although text based, is one of the most intuitive i've ever seem...perhaps you guys can give it a try :)

[masdie]

Can anyone tell me the minimum hardware requirements needed to run most linux distributions? I tried installing SuSE before this but when it was fired up, my screen turned into a beautiful piece of art with colourful pixels. Then I tried Mandriva and it worked perfectly (though it did hang on me a few times). But then I reformatted it back to XP. Why? Because my .doc files created by OpenOffice turned into some junk when viewed using Microsoft Word. It was still readable but all spacings were lost.

I read about Ubuntu and my hands are pretty itchy and I'm hoping to be able to try it out. So I'm wondering if a 4 years old 1.0GHz Celeron laptop on 128MB of RAM with 16MB shared video memory can run the latest Ubuntu?

Also, I was told that there's also this Kubuntu distribution which is powered by KDE instead of GNOME. Wonder which one is better? Any ideas?

I'm someone who are not interested to learn about command lines. I like GUI. And I'm tired of using pirated Windows versions (shhh!!) so I'm really looking forward to 'converting'.

PS: how good is the Ubuntu at recognising hardwares? Mandriva did an excellent job, I didn't have to install any drivers.

[masdie]

Ah, I found the inofficial requirements at http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=108856&highlight=hardware+requirement

But then there're Ubuntu 'minimalists' that're stripped down eg: Xubuntu, Ubuntulite.

And I found an interesting article here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=63315

[vseehua]

ubuntu will do a great job in detecting your hardware..so you don't have to worry about it...and since the installtion routine is very very easy,i mean the setup and all those things, you might give it a try though,test it and then be more comfortable with it..

we all live in an age where gui dominates the computing world..haha..but i tried using the command line for a while and found out that i actually liked it..at least within the gui environment that is..haha...because it can sometimes do the job even faster than clicking arnd at the desktop...haha...