🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 13:37:41 GMT
WereCow <boing@waste.org> wrote:

>   I was wondering if some very-experienced linux users could offer
>   their advice on a first-time linux installation.  Both the equipment
>   and linux distribution are a bit dated (but the prices were great
>   :-).
> 
> HW: Gateway P5-200 Intel(MMX)200MHz CPU/66MHz motherboard  (don't
> laugh, it was free).  32MB RAM.  2 USB ports (I have a funky "natural
> curve" USB keyboard I'd like to use).
>  Mounted chips: ATI Rage II+DVD chip, 
>                 Ensoniq ES1370 AudioPCI chip
>                 Intel PCIset FW 82371AB  L7282071  SL23P
>                 Intel PCIset FW 82439TX  F7298638  SL28T
>    
> The four in-box linux distros I have to choose from (total cost for
> all four: $2):

<SNIP>

>  Considerations:
>  I was saddened to see how large Linux seems to have grown since I
>  last looked at it (which is why I'm reserving space on this new HD
>  for QNX- just in case).  Last time I really checked into linux, they
>  were saying it could boot from a floppy.  The years have flown :-). 
>  I'd like to pick a lean linux, but what do I lose (if anything) if I
>  go with one of the larger versions?  Right now I'm leaning towards
>  Linux Mandrake 7.0 Complete despite how bloated it is (well it
>  requires less RAM than Corel's).

I'd recommend you download a new ISO of Debian (since you seem
knowledgable wrt *nix) or Mandrake. There's generally little point
in going for an old version. If you're really concerned about space,
Peanut Linux is a good choice. 

> --
> Swap partion/file issues?:
<SNIP>

Can't help you here

> --
> Which GUI should I choose?
>  I've used various *ixes since the mid-80's (I'm just of a semi-casual
> user), mostly via telnetting to a shell or by a directly-connected
> terminal.  I've tried Solaris (seemed nice) and one or two other GUIs
> (Xwindow based) but I don't recall what they were (they were on Suns
> and HP's).  It seems like KDE and Gnome are my in-box options.  What
> do you guys think are the ups and downs of both?  I prefer lean,
> unless there's some real advantage in going with the bigger stuff.

I'm fairly certain there are other WMs on your discs -- it's just that
they're not advertised, as they lack the, uh, bloat of KDE and Gnome. =)

There's no real reason to use KDE or Gnome unless you really love
Windows-style GUIs. You might just want to try XFCE (a CDE clone -- CDE
is/was the default Sun/Solaris window manager), Blackbox (fast and
small), Enlightenmnet, or FVWM. Blackbox is a very, very small download,
even if it's not included on the disc (make sure to get BBkeys along
with it).

> Now for my specific windowing/GUI concerns (probably voiced in
> non-linux terminology):
> 
>  * KDE and Gnome seem to be too much like Windows.  Ick. :-)

They're meant for people who like the inteface. If you don't like the
Windows inteface, *don't* use KDE or Gnome.

>  * I *despise* the Windows/Mac way of automatically bringing a window
>  to front just because it's been clicked on.  I prefer the way the
>  Amiga and the Suns I used handled it: you can either double-click a
>  window to bring it to front, or click on the front/back gadget on the
>  corner of the window.  IMHO windows should never ever change position
>  unless the user expressly requests it.  Where do KDE and Gnome rate
>  on this matter?  This is probably my #1 GUI/windowing concern.

There are several focus options -- this is true of most window managers.
 
>  * I prefer windowing that supports separate front and back gadgets. 
> Clicking on one sends a window all the way to back, the other brings
> the window to front (this latter bit isn't so important as long as you
> can double-click a window to make it come to the top/front).

Blackbox is set up so that a middle click on the frame or titlebar sends
to back and a left click brings to front. Other window managers have
similiar methods of raising and lowering windows. I don't know of any
that provide explicit buttons, however.

>  * Many of the screenshots in these distros show the window scrolling
> gadgets at *opposite* ends of the scrolling-slider bar.  This seems
> like a huge step backwards, ergonomically speaking.  Maybe this is
> user-configurable?  Even around 1990 I remember Suns and Amigas
> clustering all the scrolling gadgets in the same corner as the default
> window-resizing gadget (lower right corner).  

That's usually a function of the theme you're using and not so dependent
on the window manager.

>  * Is it too much to ask for multiple sliding screens, each with their
> own resolutions and color depths?  Or is that still only an Amiga
> thing? 

Eh... I don't think you can go for different resolutions and color
depths on different workspaces. X just doesn't work that way, AFAIK.

>  * Is there a way to easily switch between GUIs in case I want to try
> several out?  What other GUIs exist for linux?

There are a ton, and all you really need to do is change your .xinitrc
or .xsession file. E.g., my current file is:

  aterm -ls -bg black -fg green -title StickyTerm &
  bbkeys -i &
  exec blackbox

To run FVWM, I'd go for:

  aterm -ls -bg black -fg green -title StickyTerm &
  exec fvwm

KDE?

  exec startkde

A good place to look for info on window managers is over at:

http://www.plig.org/xwinman/


> Random HW support issue:
<SNIP>

Sorry

> 
> Thanks in advance,

No problem!

-- 
Best,
                                                           Imad Hussain
+========== GBAfan Editor in Chief == http://www.gbafan.net ==========+
+===== OpenBSD. Functional. Secure. Free. http://www.openbsd.org =====+