Printable View
Well I do a beginner's install.. haven't tried a debian type of install.. I'm about to format and do the debian install, about the autologin thing.... the beginner's style doesnt do that
Another thing.. the beginner install has done everything that debian could do for me.. so... well ill see what the difference is right now
Also, what security problems are you talking about?
Yeah, I seem to recall trying it once and finding it to be pretty much a debian-type install that just does the extra hw-detection stuff at every boot. I didn't really play with it long though. I think I still prefer the debian-style, if for nothing else, just because it boots faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by PROhan
yeah... i just got done installing.. and umm... it's the same except for the autoconfiguring stuff in the beginning.
So.....
Also, it doesn't load any quicker
I don't really see the drama
Took me 15 minutes to get knoppix 3.4 with 2.6.5 kernel installed, and up and running, and as secure as I needed.
Boot time is really no different to any other 'full linux' distro that I have installed.
(Apart from a problem/bug with Xine) everything works perfectly. This is the most productive install I have ever undertaken (as opposed to the tedious fiddling that one has to go through to get a standard Linux install 'just right')
yeah knoppix is definetely the most painless installl.. if you are a newbie the partitioning thing could sorta get you, but I honestly believe you shoulnd't use linux unless you understand partitioning or cant find out about it in another way
Oips! Looks like I shouldn't have spoken too soon. If the beginner style install really gives a cleanish debian with hardware autodetection, by all means go for it if the boot time is reasonable.
I thought it was some kind of variation of the knoppix style install :oops:
I'd still go for the debian way, but that's just me.
I use linux because I have the option of not touching the partition in anyway in linux.Quote:
Originally Posted by PROhan
I don't know what that meansQuote:
Originally Posted by garyng
Not sure, I had to re-read the post, to be sure, but, I think:
Means, you don't have to mount the drive, if you don't want to, and add into this, you can mount it as read-only, write-only, or with read/write access - In Windows you have the option not to "mount" a device, but not much choice, speaking about Win98, myself, once a hard drive is "mounted", it can not be done with specific "options", R, W, or R/W - unless you do a global file/folder properties change, with attrib to set it to read only.Quote:
I use linux because I have the option of not touching the partition in anyway in linux.Quote:
yeah knoppix is definetely the most painless installl.. if you are a newbie the partitioning thing could sorta get you, but I honestly believe you shoulnd't use linux unless you understand partitioning or cant find out about it in another way
If this is what you mean, then yes, the mount in Linux has a lot more options in protection - because you not only have the "mount" for drive protection, but also individual user protections.
Not sure if I got that right, or not, but thats how I read it,
Ms. Cuddles
linux file system can be on any block device and partition is only one kind of block device but it needs not be. I can use a simple file on FAT/NTFS as the block device, or a read only file on CD-ROM/DVD, or a nfs mount or just a ram disk and the list can go on. So it is possible to have a diskless workstation with linux, but not Windows(well early days one does with some kind of DOS accessing Netware/Lanman share and launch 3.1).Quote:
Originally Posted by PROhan
For modern day Windows, one needs to know about partition but just that it is shielded by the installation program, not so for linux.