The community’s new candidate for the poster child distribution, Ubuntu, recently unveiled the Live CD of its second version code-named “Hoary Hedgehog”. Meant for people who like to be on the bleeding edge (and can live with the few odd bugs), Hoary might not be the distro for the virgin Linux user. But that’s just one argument against a dozen which shout “Grandma use Hoary”, says the review. Elsewhere, Guadalinex will use Ubuntu as its base for version 2005.
I’m so glad it’s out!
Ubuntu (warty) on my system is much faster than Fedora Core 3. With many modern distros performing slower than XP it is nice to have a reason to use Linux again.
The only nitpick I have is that it takes a lot of getting used to to use a Linux distro with no root account. A large portion of the tasks I perform on Linux require root privs, and I end up using sudo enough that I should map that command to a keyboard key.
I’m wondering what all the fuss is about Ubuntu ?
One thing that impressed me immensely was the fact that they delivered a dual CD in cover to my P.O.Box after I filled in a request on thier site, with a live preview and a 1cd install version. That is worth making a fuss over, but ..
I tried the install and really couldn’t see what everyone is raving about.
I suppose being fond of slackware and Gnome, there’s not much more to Ubuntu except for a slimmed down package selection ?
It’s the first time I’ve tried a Debian based distribution and I did notice the similarity between Debian and Slackware which many people point out.
That’s probably why I’m not that excited by it ?
you can add a root password.
don’t ask me now, but I think it’s one simple command like:
pswd root <password here>
someone will correct me if I’m wrong.
Funny because User Linux was announced before Ubuntu but their website has no news, still talks about the Beta from September 2004. I wonder if it is even being developed?
Seems that UserLinux has no reason to exist. That hasn’t stopped many distributions yet though
sudo passwd root <password>
@Jim
There is always sudo -s
There was a similiar fuss when Libranet first came out, another Debian derivative. Now you hardly hear anything about it.
I don’t get it. Does Ubuntu not have an admin account, and uses a method similar to Mac OS X to protect it’s files, or is it just always running as Admin like in Windows XP?
Thanks.
if you want to know, just look at the responses to dozens of people with the exact same questions in every ubuntu article since its release
There was a similiar fuss when Libranet first came out, another Debian derivative. Now you hardly hear anything about it.
The difference is that a LOT of Debian package maintainers are in fact Ubuntu users themselves. That alone will make sure that Ubuntu is here to stay. This is the only distribution that I can actually switch my family and friends to with, minimal handholding!
-fooks
The first user created is allowed to sudo to gain root access. It is up to that user to decide who else should also be able to sudo, if anyone. Users can not trample over the system by accident though, they always need to enter their password before doing anything serious.
Neither. Whenever a certain operation requires super user privileges, such as installing software, you are prompted for a password. Think of it as mixture of the two Operating Systems you mentioned.
You can read more about the utility used here:
http://www.courtesan.com/sudo/
Yes, it’s implemented very much like in OS X. The account created during install is added to /etc/sudoers with something like:
username ALL=(ALL) ALL
For subsequent created accounts to have the same privilege, they have to be added manually, or you can just give the accounts the level of privilege needed. A password for root can be created if desired, but much like OS X, it’s not really necessary (at least I’ve stuck with just using sudo, without feeling the least bit hobbled).
Why is everybody going gaa gaa over this distro. It is odd for the root account to be disabled and It is even odder that it uses most of the runlevels for graphical. Can anyone tell me the reason for this.
If like me you get annoyed typing in your password constantly then you can alter /etc/sudoers to stop it asking.
Does Ubuntu not have an admin account, and uses a method similar to Mac OS X to protect it’s files, or is it just always running as Admin like in Windows XP?
There is a root account, but you can’t login as root because the password is something random (AFAIK). Instead what happens is that you run as a normal user and when you need to do something as root (Eg Install a package) you run the application using sudo (Eg sudo apt-get install wibble) which asks for your own password then runs the application using root privileges. It works pretty well, since the vast majority of the time root privileges are just not required. Only users named in the sudoers file can use sudo, so you can limit access to admin type operations to specific users.
“This is the only distribution that I can actually switch my family and friends to with, minimal handholding! ”
I don’t see how ANY Gnome based distro would be preferable for noobs when it’s not as easy to configure as KDE…little things like a PPP app. KDE’s had it for awhile, Gnome? Still not incorporated into the DE.
The only nitpick I have is that it takes a lot of getting used to to use a Linux distro with no root account.>>
That’s my nitpick with it, too.
Under OSX, being the Admin actually means something. You cannot touch (mess up) the core system files, but you are root for all other intents and purposes. If you are logged in as Admin, you can install software, create accounts, and pretty much do as you damn well please, and not worry about accidently hosing your system.
With Ubuntu’s implimentation and having to sudo every damn time … what’s the point/advantage?
Actually, gnome-ppp has been out for a while and ppp config is built into gnome-system-tools (which integrates with the modem lights applet) in 2.10.
As other people have pointed out a million times before, if you want to enable root account, you can, using the passwd command. And if you want a root shell, you can, using sudo -s. From a root shell you can run anything else.
So what’s the big deal here? Root account is disabled by default probably because Ubuntu maintainers think it’s a good move from a security Point of View. I’ve also heard that sudo is simply a more secure program than su.
I’m glad Guadalinex and Ubuntu will share their efforts in one single distribution.
Up until now all these distributions (Linex being the main one) built by regional governments in Spain have not cooperated enough.
Under OSX, being the Admin actually means something. You cannot touch (mess up) the core system files, but you are root for all other intents and purposes.
Not true. First, OSX does ask for your password before doing anything serious or dangerous, even if you are running as an administrator. In addition, administrators don’t, by default, have access to many system files as well as other users’ files. So “root” and “admin” in OSX are different. In fact, Ubuntu runs similarly to OSX in that regard.
With Ubuntu’s implimentation and having to sudo every damn time … what’s the point/advantage?
It has the same advantage that it has in OSX: allowing you to do stuff without the insecurities inherent in running the GUI as root. If you’re running Linux, you don’t really want to be running gnome as “root”. It’s a bad idea, if for no other reason than that you have a lot of unapparent things going on when you’re running a GUI, and root is too powerful to have unapparent things running as root. So you just don’t want any programs or processes running as “root” unless it’s necessary and explicitly requested by someone who knows what they’re doing.
<p>Now, with the way Ubuntu is being developed and the audience it’s aiming at, you aren’t going to have people dropping out of X-Windows to log in as root, but you’ll eventually need be be root to accomplish certain things.
<p>The solution is to have the programs that need root access to be run with sudo and request a password. Ubuntu offers a “root terminal” in its default menu setup, and you can always do “sudo bash” or something, so it’s really not too much of a sacrifice.
Speaking of my experiences with 4.10
1) Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
One CD contains what you need to get to a desktop thats, well, useable as a desktop. There’s not 6 text editors, 20 media players, 5000 themes, and 4 browsers.
The applications picked are picked not because they have the potential to be really cool, or because they have 1 or 2 neato features, but because they work. To my knowledge they haven’t bundled any packages they *know* don’t work.
2) Simple install.
If you’re doing single boot even the most nervious fumble fingered n00b can read and install. The options and choices are clearly explained.
(Dual boot isn’t quite so simple if you don’t know *nix, but once you find a good explanation of what to do and what the options mean, it’s pretty easy.)
3) Hardware support.
I installed it on a PowerBook G3/500.
Laptop. Apple. Everything detected correctly. PPC support is kind of an afterthought for Ubuntu, and they beat/equal YDL.
(Okay, I mean, granted, I can’t get my “old skool” airport card to work, but, I’m working on that.)
4) Clean desktop with Gnome
Outside of Aqua, Gnome has got to be the most elegant and simple to use UI ever. Less is more.
I have an unholy love of Nautilus. (sp?) People hate it, but damn, it.just.works. for me.
Well thought out menus. It took me less than 2 hours of pointing and clicking to figure out where stuff is.
(With KDE and its scattershot plethora of menus … I almost always clicked the wrong menu.)
4) Good, clearly written documentation and nice people on the forums.
Nobody ever snaps “RTFM”.
The FAQs are well written and easy to find.
Yes, I’ve had a few software install problems, but I’ve also got a lot of other stuff done because TFM was easy to find and written for Joe User, not Joe AlphaGeek.
I have Ubuntu on both a Shuttle PC and Apple Cube. Pefect installs and updates on both platforms. I agree with KadyMae’s five points in her post as to why Ubuntu is a great distro.
It isn’t that they’ve made some huge advance in some particular area that makes them stand head and shoulders above others. It’s just that the whole package put together is so good, including the website resources, etc. Ubuntu rejuvenated my interest in desktop Linux simply because it’s a pleasure to use in a total all around way and a pleasure to use the site.
If you want to do lots of stuff as the root user, just perform:
sudo su
Eh, I don’t feel a need to impliment the root account in either OS X or Ubuntu. (For me, mucking about in the system folder is the equvalent of handling radioactive waste with an oven mitt for protection.)
I completely understand the security issue. A lot of attacks against Unix machines are designed to capture control of the root account, and if there’s no root, that considerably complicates things.
But, in OS X, the *only* thing I don’t own outright as Admin is the System folder. Anything else is mine mine mine. I may not be God (the trinity), but being “the Son” comes with perks. I get to do the *nix analogs of loaves and fishes, cure the sick, drive the moneychangers from the temple, and water into wine.
Not so in Ubuntu. The other day I decided I wanted to attach an icon to Opera. Found the folder where icon images live and thought I’d just drag my icon image there and … I don’t have permission. Even when I’m logged in as ADMIN, I can’t alter this folder. Root owns it. (Does root really really *need* to own the picture icon folder?
Now, it’s not hard to bust open the terminal and type:
sudo mv filename directory/path/folder
(And why can’t a little window just pop open and ask me to authenticate like it does in OS X? I don’t like having to open another progam just to move some damn files.)
I just think the OSX implimentation of Admin is much more thought out and useful. I can install software without sudo. I can move files without sudo. If I need modify the *one* file owned by root, or if I need to trash something owned by root, *then* I sudo.
For everything else, there’s just my admin password and/or my unquestioned right to do whatever the hell I want.
(Yes, I know I can go to terminal in Ubuntu and sudo chown and sudo chmod folders from root to Admin, but that’s going to take a sucktacular amount of time.)
if you want root login, type ‘sudo su’
or you can use the (standart?) ‘sudo -s’ but this does not reset the $HOME and you end up with root files in your home directory. this is not ubuntu specific.
fed up with typing your password, just run ‘visudo’ (yeah, using vim not emacs 😉 and modify the line (in /etc/sudoers):
my_login ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD:ALL
there are no text login because this is a joe user’s distribution. you should not need CLI, but you can use it. don’t like that, then don’t use it (or modify your rc.d’s :-p). there are enough other distro to fill your needs.
the root password is not something random, it is disabled. see your /etc/shadow to see what i mean. there are no root password because it is easyer for joe to remember one password (his own) instead of two. OTOH I disable root passwords even on my servers because it is more secure. each password is a hole, removing one is good IMO
i think there is all this fuss because it ‘just works’ ™… well, it should. plug an usbdrive and an icon appears on the desktop etc… i mean, it is very well done. gratz to ubuntu developpers!
but this is not for you, power user that like to point out everything you don’t like. it’s for my friend Joe. hello Joe!
fed up with typing your password, just run ‘visudo’ (yeah, using vim not emacs 😉 and modify the line (in /etc/sudoers):
my_login ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD:ALL
In debian you can first run “update-alternatives –config editor” to change the default editor from nvi to something easier, possibly to nano. After doing this “visudo” uses the default editor you’ve configured. Because ubuntu is nothing more than debian optimized for the latest gnome desktop (oh yes, all those “universe” packages that you install in ubuntu come straight from debian, unmodified), you can probably do in ubuntu something like “sudo update-alternatives –config editor” and get the same result.
IMO, ubuntu has an excellent security policy. It’s made for clueless newbies who’d use the root account all the time if given the opportunity. Now, at least, they need to learn some workarounds before they can get rid of sudo altogether. In the meantime, they might just learn why it’s wiser to stick to normal user’s account and only use the root privileges when it’s necessary.
Ubuntu seems to have some uplift at the moment http://distrowatch.com/stats.php?section=popularity and, IMO, ubuntu has well earned it. It’s a great distro — good for debian, good for gnu/linux and good for its users.
The only thing that annoys me about Ubuntu is the number of posts in every Ubuntu related thread by people who suffer from a little sudo comprehension problem.
http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow.php?release=225&slide=1
”
The only nitpick I have is that it takes a lot of getting used to to use a Linux distro with no root account. A large portion of the tasks I perform on Linux require root privs, and I end up using sudo enough that I should map that command to a keyboard key.
”
do:
sudo passwd root
and then change it to whatever.
BTW the sudo concept rocks. The problem I always had with Linux was typing in the root password so often. Fedora Core had a messy way around, but it’s much nicer to just put “nopasswd” in /etc/sudoers with visudo.
for example, Eye of gnome no longer crashes with different themes.
just tested the update-alternative thing on my laptop’s ubuntu. I confirm it works [feed who=troll] but nano sucks. everybody knows vim is best ;-)[/feed]
RE: sudo and root account
sudo is really a neat tool and very configurable (eg: you could be allowed to only run one program as root or as another login). eg, I use it to allow apache do different things. but like all setuid tools, it can be dangerous if badly configured.
the people that suffers from sudo comprehension suffers because they know there is a root login and are used to it. in ubuntu, from Joe’s point of view, there should be no sudo and no root account. everything should be done using GUIs and password dialog boxes. (should…)
if you are new to linux, learn that way. if you know about root, swallow the (red) pill. that’s different. not more difficult nor easier, only different, really. if you are experienced, type sudo su and go on hacking!!!
IMHO the way to go.
RE: btw hoary is less buggy than warty
yeah, hoary is just that: unstable… but we here all know you like it… like I do 😉
Guys this is simple Ubuntu Linux is Amazing, what more ?
Have to agree. Ubuntu brought back my faith of Linux on the desktop. It’s damn fast – don’t know what they are doing there – and HAL and D-Bus rock.
I haven’t decided if I’ll wait for Horary to become official or dist-upgrade to the beat. Ubuntu “just works” right now.
Having one CD is nice too – even for those with broadband, and that they’ll send you out CDs for free. Having someone with deep pockets (Shuttleworth) financing this doesn’t hurt either.
“and HAL and D-Bus rock.”
Yeah, because, er, no-one else uses hal and dbus, do they?
Oh, wait, Fedora and Mandrake both do. And probably most other modern distros too. Sheesh, people talk about Ubuntu like it’s the second coming, when it’s just a nice stripped-down debian with a recent GNOME build on top; nice, yes, orgasmic, no.
Those who say, “it just works”, have never tried installing it on a Dell Latitude D800. There’s been quite a few things that didn’t work out of the box. Here’s a partial list.
1. nVidia driver
2. sound card
3. wireless card
4. weird usb errors on boot
Also, the apt-get install dist-upgrade broke Grub. I’m not talking about misconfiguring it, I’m saying like not on the MBR anymore. I was able to fix it without much effort. But, dang. It scared me.
The good news is that I might actually be sold on Ubuntu because the positives are outweighing the negatives, so far. The biggest positive of all is that the documentation for fixing all of my problems were easily found in the forums from previous posts.
I’ve always liked KDE more than Gnome. But, the more I use Gnome, the more I like it.
Is there a relatively painless way to bump up from Gnome 2.6?
Mandrake is a KDE distro. Ubuntu has put its resources into Gnome. Who knows about Fedora. Everybody claims its buggy.
I wish I still had the Slackware10 CD i bought with a Linux mag. It had mozilla configured with java and multimedia plugins right out of the box and JOE loves that. the CD created by the iso of Slackware10 does not compare.
So I bought another mag with a ubuntu distro and as everyone here am very pleased though i had to install plugins myself but easily found the documentation on the first page of a google.
Yes ubuntu does ifilm.com with the realplayer 10.02(sp).
When can I have my vrml, like activeworlds.com, with a linux/unix distro?? Then I can really get rid of Windows and fly free. That would be swell. joe javajazz.
Well, if you guys think Ubuntu rocks, you now know why there are so many slackware fans out there.
A combo of slackware and dropline gnome is to all intents and purposes, exactly what Ubuntu is on the desktop and it’s been around for ages.
As for people indicating the Ubuntu install is easy – yeah, sure, only if you want it to be the only OS on your PC !
The Live CD is a far better option for newbies to Linux – to dual boot requires you know a little more than just accepting the defaults.
In addition, Grub or Lilo (whichever you choose in expert install) don’t pick up the windows partitions during install, meaning you have to manually edit them.
Even proficient computer users who haven’t tried Linux before will have issues dual booting.
In fact, the install process is really not friendly for newbies at all.
If Ubuntu wants to aim itself at a newbie market, it needs to have a graphical installer by default and the ability to configure grub or lilo automatically. In addition, by default, it needs to detect the presense of a windows partition and inform the user of the options they have in terms of installing.
The bottom line, is that ANY distribution can be made user friendly for Gran or Sis, but it doesn’t mean they are easy to install.
Then again, neither is windows ! *MacOS wins hands down here*
Have they fixed it yet? It’s a problem with Grub, and causes a problem on installation.
FYI, it is warty that i found with the linux mag. I found that the expert mode of install was the best as it allows you to picl lilo and I never have fun with grub as i install the boot loader way up on hda5 and then run bootman from within BeOS to reset the master MBR.
I have 4 distros on the drive and ubuntu is sitting there fine. I had to figure on my own to delete partitions to make room for ubuntu and the ubuntu offered to automatically partition the free space after that. BUT gee whiz it only gave me 2G of space for / and a whopping 4G for home. Several times I had to remove files from var/cache/apt/archives/ to install additional hardware because I was out of space. No way do I need 4G in home. I will be on another adventure to figure out how to give some of that 4G to /.
I am very reluctant to break this warty with a upgrade to the hoary as everything is working, multimedia, evolution (but just how do I get to the office exchage server=more adventures),gaim. It is all working.
maybe there will be a slackware 10.1 CD under the plastic magazine wrap soon. be sure to give it a try if you really want to please grandma and be out of her house before midnight.
“I tried the CD on my lousy PIII-1.7 Gig Celeron box with 384 Megs of RAM”
What the hell is wrong with people in the US today? That is a powerhouse to most people. A liveCD better run good with that much power
I’m an Ubuntu user for the last 2-3 months, and I really think it’s great on my machine. I’ve also ran the hoary live cd on my girlfriend’s iBook g4 without problems, and as soon as I find her OSX cds, I’m thinking of dualbooting with it.
As far as being bug-free, it’s not. I’ve tried running the live cd on my best friend’s Shuttle w/ ATI Radeon, and it reboots at startx (probably something with the vid drivers, but still annoying). You also need semi-decent hardware. It doesn’t much like 128mb RAM, but that’s not a big problem for most people nowadays.
When people say that Fedora Core has all these bugs all over the place, I think that that has more to do with the amount of users trying Fedora vs Ubuntu. AKA, if there were as many users trying Ubuntu as there are Fedora users, there would be just as many bug reports for it. I know that for a lot of people starting with Linux, the distros they look at first are Redhat and Mandrake (this is my personal experience, at least). Seeing how Fedora is Redhat desktop (basically), that’s what a lot of noobs use.
I guess I ran out of stuff to say, but that’s how I feel about it.
> As for people indicating the Ubuntu install is easy – yeah, sure, only if you want it to be
> the only OS on your PC !
Have you even tried it, dude? I don’t know why something screwed up the MBR on darren’s machine but the Debian Installer did pick up my windows partition and configured GRUB accordingly. This worked on every dual boot machine where i set up Ubuntu so far.
You just picked up something from another post that suits your agenda, did not verify it and started critisizing for the sake of critisizing. Pathetic.
The problem that I had with the nvidia driver prevented it from booting to X after installing. I tried booting several times (like 3 or 4) before I realized the blank screen I was getting would eventually drop me to a console. It would hang at a blank screen for about 5 minutes (or so it seemed). No command prompt or nothing.
I thought my whole install was just hosed. I had tried Ubuntu a while ago and it wouldn’t install. In retrospect, maybe it was the same problem. Anyway, I solved it by picking the recovery kernel and installing the nVidia drivers. That’s when I discovered, “Hey. They didn’t ask me for a root password. I think I’ll give them one now.” After reading the posts here about the password, I see the logic. And, in the long run, it’s probably more secure because people won’t be tempted to just run their box as root.
I think the Ubuntu developers should test X to see if it works before finishing the install. And, if the nVidia card is detected, they should offer you the simple instructions for apt-get’ing it or just booting to the console.
After installing X, I had to add a line to my XF86Config file to get the correct resolution. All of the screens had the one and only resolution that works properly on this monitor, yet it was still not using it. Luckily, I found the solution with a little googling. But, my point is that Ubuntu is not that as easy as everyone says.
But, I really wanted Debian and I had my fill of Mepis and other distros that try to put graphical tools out there that conflict with the tools found in the window manager. I’ve been saying to myself for years that someone needs to make a KDE distro without adding anything to it other than an installation tool. And, build it on Debian. That would rock. KDE has a very nice Kcontrol. I think Ubuntu might have plans for this.
It just works. Picked up all my hardware and ran with it. I am very impressed and also that the maintainers of Debian and Gnome people are behind it means something.
Looks like Ubuntu has a good future behind it. I’m so impressed I might take it to work tomorrow and try it there on my workstation for a play. Can do real work on other computers if needed (-: (don’t bitch about that last comment, I just use Photoshop/InDesign/Office alot at work).
I never have fun with grub as i install the boot loader way up on hda5 and then run bootman from within BeOS to reset the master MBR.
You know that you can boot BeOS from GRUB? Simply add chainloader +1 below the corresponding line.
I now dual boot OS X and Ubuntu all the time. I’m a Debian guy and Ubuntu is the first distro that I’ve thought about replacing Debian with full-time on my desktops.
Yes, as other have pointed out it is more like OSX. When an application requires greater privileges it prompts for a password. And, just like in OSX root is disabled by default, but you can enable the normal root account by giving it a password, as in OSX.
Ubuntu & popularity: well as someone running it on an ibook, there is a dearth of good ppc based linux distros. Ubuntu has a good selection of pre-existing packages when universe & multiverse repos are activated in apt sources. Even when packages(c. 14k binary packages available) aren’t available I find that it is far simpler to create a debian package(maintaining package management control) than it is to create an RPM. Ubuntu will also be updated twice a year, with 18mo. IIRC securfity update support for older releases.
YDL: progressively more bloated, and yet it has few pre-compiled packages that interest me, which then leads to a) trying to use fedora binary or source RPMs, or b) building packages from tarballs or CVS checkouts which then leaves the package outside of RPM package admin unless you create an RPM package for it, which is a PITA. (Fedora is enough different from YDL that there are problems with using more complex package RPMs, or so I have found in the past.) Also YDL suffers from slow or non-existent security updates.
YDL in addition to these problems had poor sound support, and was, generally, slow even when running a lighter weight WM or DE, e.g. fluxbox(CVS) or xfce4.
Debian: a possibility which I had been toying with until Ubuntu came along. I suspect that Debian would be just as good an option if unstable were to be used.
Others: Mostly small distros, that I suspect will die or go for years between releases leaving one in a similar state as YDL building your own packages or just using tarballs.
Now, as to why it is popular on x86? The best that I can say is that Ubuntu DOES have a good initial desktop setup, it will have frequent releases & security updates. Beyond that: SuSE, Fedora, Mandrake, etc. all seem to be just as good, and offer more packages(CDs) at install. (With Ubuntu, anything beyond the default stuff, for the most part, has to be downloaded as individual packages.
IOW Ubuntu is just as good as any other x86 distro, but Ubuntu is really targetted to lower system requirements for basic desktop install, and even has a “limited” resources install howto to further reduce requirements. But, of course, with a expert install on other distros the same could be achieved with them.
(x86 distros seem to be more like the flavor of the month unless the user is in a) a corporate environment with a “standard”, b) a developer, or c) old-timers attached to a particular distro…)
(BTW: there’s a hawk in the tree next store eating breakfast , or one less pigeon… }:)
As for people indicating the Ubuntu install is easy – yeah, sure, only if you want it to be the only OS on your PC !>>
Well, yes, I have to concede this. If you’re a n00b, the steps needed to set up a dualboot are not self-evident.
My solution (for Apple hardware) is here:
http://members.cox.net/kadymae/dualboot.html
“Laptop. Apple. Everything detected correctly. PPC support is kind of an afterthought for Ubuntu, and they beat/equal YDL.
(Okay, I mean, granted, I can’t get my “old skool” airport card to work, but, I’m working on that.)”
Are you sure that you have an original airport card? I’m running ubuntu on a dual USB G3/500 ibook and airport worked right out of the box as well as sound(score 2 Ubuntu v. YDL).
The only problem that I DID have was with sleep, but there is a bug report with a patch, 1940 IIRC which mostly fixes it. (score 1 YDL v. Ubuntu as sleep did work under YDL. Beyond this its ALL Ubuntu over YDL on ppc.) Your best bet for immediate help is to try the #ubuntu channel on freenode, and then try the ppc web forums.
(You’ll probably will want to add universe/multiverse repos to your apt sources. Also for some things you’ll want to look at the howtos regarding adding repos external to Ubuntu that have some things that most people will want, e.g. DVD playback. This is really strange, this is the only distro that I’ve been really interested in using ever over 10+ years w/linux and 10+ distros(SLS, Slackware, RH, SuSE, etc.).)
“Mandrake is a KDE distro.”
No, it’s not. It’s a desktop-agnostic distro, and always has been. Mandrake has fine packages for KDE, GNOME, Xfce – and, hell, fluxbox and WindowMaker as well. I run GNOME on one of my Mandrake machines, and Xfce on the other.
If you miss the root account as I did type
sudo su
Password:**********
then you are at the root. Or you can open a root terminal from the menu also.
Im using hoary (with gnome 2.9.90) on my laptop and it works very well: it detected correctly & automatically my orinoco wifi pcmcia card (i had only to put ssid and wep key) and then started using it to update the distro without any flaw. Im not using the new auto_updater in gnome in order to keep the system updated.
Btw i suggest you all this great site: http://www.ubuntuguide.org
you can find a huge list of useful tricks: how to add repositories, mp3 and support, flashplayer on firefox, how to enable root account (something some of you asked) etc… Great Guide!
Are you *supposed* to be able to apt-get install dist-upgrade with no problems? With most Debian-based distros you have to really toe the line with apt or you will break things. They just aren’t designed to be 100% interoperable with Debian.
Is Ubuntu different? That’s one of the questions I’ve had about it and have been meaning to check out. I’d love a Debian distro that customized a nice desktop without (effectively) screwing with the chocolatey goodness of apt. It shouldn’t be that hard… the packages of the distro just have to be higher versions than the stock packages, or at least be properly pinned. But dist-upgrades could still pose a problem, even then. I know when Lindows people complain that apt-get install dist-upgrade wrecks their system I just laugh.
i may have some evidance that Mandrake is a kde distro.
I keep up with current on my NEC laptop PII and because of space only have icewm for a window manager. For the last couple of months every time I do a urpmi.update it wants to install kde to satisfy dependancies; no questions yes or no nor the reason why. I “control c” and then repeat piping in “more” if there are a lot of packages off the screen, then urpmi.update the ones I am interested in. Leads me to think that mandrake is pushing to be a kde distro.
Anyway I am still able to run all my apps fine upgrading this way, so far. firefox, gqview, clamscan and thunderbird and gaim all work. mplayer and realplayer I am not sure of lately as i seldom use the laptop for that but they worked at one time without KDE.
Maybe it is the mplayer that now needs KDE as a dependancy?? Hmmm. Or maybe mandrake is pushing KDE.
Yes, using this quide i succesfully installed flash, realplayer and java.
Note that mplayer mentioned on ubuntuguide for installation is not the latest version.