Picking out the OS that best suits you BinaryZer0 binaryzer0@box.sk OS, redhat, slackware, debian, bsd, freebsd, openbsd, gnu, linux, system, help, how-to Before the actual intended content of this article hopefully lives up to its title, I would like to explain the origin and "context" of this document. It is, first of all, intended for new-comers to the world of Minix and BSD-based systems, but some people who know more than the average new-comer may enjoy this just as much. The "context" and content in this article will be based on my personal (experienced) opinions on which OS may be easiest for whom, and why. The actual intended content of this article, begins! The transition to a Minix-based system is one of a rocky road. You may have only heard of linux before, and maybe don't even know what it really is. Linux was a project that was initiated by a person who lived (and still does now, unless he's moved elsewhere [America?]) in Finland. The person's name is Linus Torvalds. Linus, upon project-initiation, posted a message asking whether there were any Minix programmers who would like to help in creating a new OS based on Minix, and do it from scratch [Minix is an OS that is very much so like the current UNIX work stations]. Finally, in the early 90s, he and other programmers created the first Kernel. In only a few years' time, there were already millions of other programmers all around the world who were writing drivers for printers, mice, monitors, speakers, scanners, and all other PC accessories, for Linux. A person in Japan would buy a new microphone that was not yet supported by the current Linux Kernel, so he would write drivers for it, and so on. Soon afterwards commercial companies began to take advantage of Linux by making their own versions of it, by customizing the kernel and the installation packages (what came with it). The companies were Red Hat, Slackware, and so on. The companies would allow for Linux to be downloadable off their Web sites for free, but could be baught on CD which often came with an installation manual among other things. After a while, more and more companies realised the new Operating System and its advances and followed companies like Red hat to make their own distributions (also known as "flavours"). Some of distributions would be harder to install than others, while they may have had better packages. [If you still do not understand the aspect of distributions, such as Red Hat, Slackware, S.u.S.E., Debian, etc, here is something that would help explain this: Most Windows users who make a change to Linux, I have noticed, have probably used mIRC to connect to IRC, and if this is true, then you have probably also heard of different scripts that could be used with mIRC that other, 3rd party, non-affiliates, make. Think of these other distributions of Linux (Red Hat, Slackware, etc) as scripts for Linux. Although these are far from being like "scripts", I thought this example would best explain this.] Currently, there are many distributions of Linux. Some that I don't even know about, and others that could run off a fat16/32 partition on the same partition as Windows, while others (the "real" kinds) need their own filesystem type and partition. Distributions of Linux that run on fat16/32 partitions are not "real" in the sense that they are not capable of everything the full versions are. For example, they are not able to use an xserver (no xwindows), and other things. The only reason for these kinds of distributions I see, is for learning purpouses before you get the "real" thing, or if you just want to "fool" around with and experience Linux, then this may also be most effecient. But in all seriousness, one does not fully experience Linux unless he/she has the full version. The following list of distributions are ones that are most popular with both home and ISP-based PCs: 1) Red Hat (RedHat.com) 2) Mandrake (mandreake.org) 3) S.u.S.E. (Suse.de/e) 4) Slackware (slackware.com) 5) Debian (debian.org) 6) FreeBSD* (freebsd.org) 7) OpenBSD* (openbsd.org) 8) NetBSD* (www.netbsd.org) 9) SunOS/Solaris Before continuing, I would like to make the BSD's clear to you. The ones reading this document who have experience or knowledge about UNIX / Minix-based systems probably know that BSD has nothing to do with Linux. BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) was a project at Berkeley University, CA. UNIX, originally created by Bell Labs, and BSD both evolved into current BSD-type and Linux (Minix)-type systems. Now that you know a little more about the background of distributions, I will give you my experienced opinions on which operating system would be best for what. The reason the list seems grouped is because I think of the distributions by the type of packages, difficulty level of installation, Kernel customization, among other things. Please note that this does not mean that this is a "chart" of difficulty levels, from 1 to 9. Red Hat is probably the most famous of the Operating Systems listed among beginners. This, partly, is because it is easiest to install, but also because it is sold in almost every book / computer store, and that is the first "Linux" distribution they see, because they don't know where to look for others. Red Hat is also probably the most official commercial business of other *Linux* distributions. And because of these things and the excellent technical support that all registered Red Hat users are capable of receiving, new-comers pick Red Hat over any other Operating System. I, too, recommend Red Hat for beginners or light Linux users / hobbiests. This is because it is easy to configure, as well as easy to install and use other programs, servers, etc.... The current version is 6.0 and comes with kernel 2.0.36. Mandrake is very much like Red Hat. I only recently found out about Mandrake, and from what I have seen of the distribution, it comes with the same packages as Red Hat, etc.... So, I would recommend Mandrake to beginners / light hobbiests, but I do not know much about their documentation and technical support. S.u.S.E. is another distribution with origin in Germany. I also place this distribution with Red Hat and Mandrake, even though it can be thought of as a little more advanced. The current version is S.u.S.E. 6.1 and comes with kernel 2.2.5. Like Red Hat, its kernel is easy to configure and compile. Slackware was and probably still is, just as famous as Red Hat for all the same reasons. After Red Hat, most beginners go on to Slackware for reasons of being known as more advanced than Red Hat. Slackware "rc" files and configuration, command parameters, and some other things, are a little different from Red Hat's, but are also more flexible and compatible with other systems. The current version is 4.0 with kernel 2.2. Version 3.9 offers the same as 4.0 with a 2.0.x kernel. Debian is a distribution made by GNU ([G]NU is [N]ot [U]nix). An free (opensource) software distribution organization. Again, for me, Debian goes into the same category as slackware. I feel that slackware and Debian are both Operating Systems that are not meant to, but are for the "next"-level Linux users (those that want to try something new after using Red Hat). The current stable release of Debian is 2.1, which is a.k.a. the "Slink" version. FreeBSD is not Linux, but because of its popularity and "likeness", it is included here. FreeBSD is based on the Berkeley Softare Design OS, which was created around the time (if not before) Linus was even born. I have noticed that after people are tired of using Slackware (or Debian), they don't go to any other distribution, but expirement with FreeBSD; hence it's place after Slackware/Debian on the list.. This is because FreeBSD is more flexable, and is also a lot more like UNIX than Linux is. A very nice and useful feature in FreeBSD, is that if you are still a Linux fan, but would like to use FreeBSD, you are able to clone FreeBSD to feel a bit more like Linux by running FreeBSD using Linux libs. The current FreeBSD version is 3.2 (released in May, 1999). OpenBSD comes on my list after FreeBSD because, once again, I have noticed that people begin to use it after using FreeBSD, and rarely after using Linux. This may be because most people think it is hardest (of the BSD's and Linux's) to install. To me, it seems that recompiling the kernel is the hardest of all. OpenBSD is excellent for the experts. It, like FreeBSD, is very secure. I have seen holes being patched no more than a week after it was found. I guess this is because many hackers use OpenBSD, and probably prefer it over any other Linux / BSD distribution. The current version of OpenBSD is 4.5 (released May, 1999). NetBSD is another house-hold famous Operating System, but just as any other house-hold-based Operating System, it is capable of doing anything, from running major servers to your own, mom-and-pop-type domain. I know less about NetBSD than the average Joe, but I included it because it is becoming as popular as Open/FreeBSD, even though it has been around for nearly 7 years now. For more information on NetBSD visit their Web site.