Printable View
Hello Friends,
In my past experience with MS Windblows, I have had to do a re-format of the HD just about everythree months. I would have to do this because the OS would become ustable and use excess memory and resources. My question is Linux more stable or does it also need a re-format (reload) to maintain it's efficiency.
I have redhat 9.0
Scat
Simply the answer is no ..... kept up-to-date and patched it should give you untroubled service.
If it weren't for the fact I wanted support for some newer hardware (wireless card, tv card etc ..) and the fact I am a sucker for some of the newer eye candy ... I would probably still have Mandrake 8.0 on my machine and probably never had to reboot it, all barring a kernel upgrade of course.
PP
You should certainly not get so much of the slowdown due to too many programs having been installed.
The Linux filesystem is more organised, and does not insist that applications put all their files in the same (system) directory. Therefore you don't get as much grief caused by excess files in system directories.
However you can get a bit of a problem if you have used a very large number of programs - your home directory tends to get a bit clogged with "dot" files - per-user configuration files created by programs that you probably only used once.
Therefore it's usually worthwhile every now and then having a clear out of the hidden "dot" files out of your home dir. This does not require a reformat however.
Using only properly packaged software for your distro (RPM or DEB for instance) will enable you to uninstall things without bits getting left behind.
As long as you limit the amount of stuff you install from source, you're alright.
On the other hand if you install every package you can find from source, it will get messy quickly :)
but then source is a lot faster, install core libs as source and stupid programs as rpms or debs is a good idea. linux needs a good source manager, that would be a great addition
I agree that *nix can generally be alot more stable than M$ but in refernece to the reformatting etc every few months alot simpler and quicker method is when you have a clean bug free (ha ha ha) installation then take an image of it (drive image,ghost etc) then when your OS becomes screwed then it takes but a couple of minutes to blow your image back into the partition and hey presto you are back to a bug free system.
I have 7 OS in multiboot with images of all so that is one or many become todged i can just blow any of the images back to the partition and become OK again.
but yes your right *nix is alot more stable anyway ! but personally i love xp but then everyone has there demons !
live well and love life
both linux and ms could be very stable depending on how well you maintain the machine. it would really depends on the operator to install necessary program versus testing. if you're going to test apps and so forth you should really have another test box or use something like vmware to create test guest OS and apps. if you start playing around and creating your own kernel in linux, less you would need to "reformat" since you're only compiling core's only. lot of good documentation can be found at: http://www.tldp.org
i would also recommend finding a local linux user groups (lugs) in your area and get their opinion or attend one of the installfest to understand building linux from scratch. check out knoppix as well if you just want to learn how to use linux and not use your HDD.
-w0rm3y
Moste of the source you download comes with the automake manager..Quote:
Originally posted here by wassup
but then source is a lot faster, install core libs as source and stupid programs as rpms or debs is a good idea. linux needs a good source manager, that would be a great addition
to install the source you just type
./configure
make
make install
to clean the intermediate objects you can type
make clean
most of those programs you can also
make uninstall
and if you use CVS to get the latest source ( sourceforge projects and lots of others have this too ) even updating is easy with
cvs update
so (GNU) linux already has source manager
1. if you are looking into making restoring your windows partitions to a certain state use Deep Freeze ...
2. Linux has it's own swap partition by default
3. Linux doesn't defragment nowhere as much as windows
oh yeah and as far as pckg manager ... debian's apt is the best ... nothing beats "apt-get install somthing-somthing"
Gentoo has a pretty good source/package manager called portage, its like the one in free bsd apprently altho I have never used bsd and cant comment. Its as easy as (usually) typing "emerge 'program'" and it downloads the source and dependences, configures, compiles and installs it for you, very easy to keep updated with one command " emerge -u world" (I think). anyway this is not supposed to be a review, just letting you know that its there.Quote:
Originally posted here by wassup
but then source is a lot faster, install core libs as source and stupid programs as rpms or debs is a good idea. linux needs a good source manager, that would be a great addition
Hi
The main problem of urs is excessive instalation of programs.So install only what u required.