Help Setting Up Linux
Archives Forums/Linux Discussion/Help Setting Up Linux
| ||
| I'm trying to set up a Linux system on my computer that is currently running Windows XP Pro purely to cross compile my BlitzMax apps. What Linux distribution would you recommend for me, i.e. one which: 1) Is the easiest to get set-up without formatting my only HDD? 2) Is less intrusive on my system (i.e. I could install it to a USB pen or something)? 3) Works best with BlitzMax and is Max friendly? 4) Is best for a so-far dedicated Windows user that gets scared by the likes of Linux filenames and directory paths :P etc. 5) Is very cheap or free? :) Please help, I've tried DSL (Damn Small Linux) and Knoppix to no avail. Any ideas greatly appreciated, Seb |
| ||
| [Posted in the wrong thread] oops! [EDIT] Might as well post something useful while i'm here! I've used Ubuntu linux quite a bit on the past (although never with BMax) and found it pretty good :) Although if you struggled with Knoppix you're probably gonna struggle with any linux distro... |
| ||
| Currently, I switched from Win XP to Landros, which is one of the easier versions of Linux to use at the current moment. However, I, too, have Ubuntu coming on the way, so that way I can see if Ubuntu would even be better than Landros. Here's Landros website (of course, I got mine free since it was included in a library book that I checked out recently). Outside of that SuSE 10 and Red Hat Fedora were pains in the butt to install, so I dumped them at the current moment. Xandros has served me well, so I got no complaints, either way. |
| ||
| You can also consider getting VMWare or Microsoft virtual server (I believe they announced today it is a freebie too now), where you can run a virtual computer on your existing operating system. It would create its own vrtual harddrive (one large file), and run the guest OS in a window (optionally full screen). The nice thing is that you can copy things back and forth between your real OS and the guest OS, and are able to do things like compile your blitzmax exe's. Note that full screen openGL may not be supported, so you can only run the bmax apps in windowed mode. It will also be a bit slower than running in a 'real' linux installation where it has full control over your hardware... But pretty nice, especially for beginners or those who can't afford to re-partition their drive to install a second operating system. |
| ||
| Another vote for Ubuntu Linux (which is also the version "supported" by Blitz Research Ltd. (note: they advise to install the 5.04 Hoary Hedgehog version, not 5.10 Breezy Badger) I expect this to change sometime in June (I think), when Ubuntu 6.04 Dapper Drake is released, which is a major upgrade version, and will be supported by the Ubuntu community for atleast 18 months (I think).. (I'm currently running Alpha Flight 5 of Dapper, and it rocks.. I'm gonna install Flight 6 in the following days) |
| ||
| Hi Everyone, Thanks very much for the help. I eventually persuaded myself last night to install Ubuntu (5.10) as a separate partion on my HDD. The GRUB program that comes with it allows me to choose which O/S I want to boot from and I've managed to get BlitzMax up and running. Two more question though, in Windows when you are at a console and you're in a directory that contains an executable you just type the name of the EXE and it will run. However in Linux, if I "cd" to my BlitzMax folder and type "MaxIDE", it says something like Bash: MaxIDE: Command not found. I read somewhere you need to type instead: .\MaxIDEand this appears to work. What does the ".\" do and how can I find a way of executing the MaxIDE exe from the console in any folder. (I know Windows has the %PATH% encironment variable for this.) Cheers Seb |
| ||
| Almost: ./MaxIDE Under Linux/Unix, the user / as a directory seperator, NOT the \ Also keep in mind that filenames are CASE SENSITIVE, so MaxIDE, maxide and MAXIDE are considered three seperate files. |
| ||
| Oops sorry, that what I originally typed but I went into Windows Mode again. :) But how come it doesn't work without the "./" at the beginning even though I've "cd"'d to the BlitzMax directory. |
| ||
| and this appears to work. What does the ".\" do and how can I find a way of executing the MaxIDE exe from the console in any folder. (I know Windows has the %PATH% encironment variable for this.) So does Linux, but unlike windows the current folder is NOT in the path by default. Anyway: / is the directory seperator . is the current directory so ./whatever means: run application 'whatever' in the current directory. Under DOS this is assumed to be desired by default, under linux you need to specify you want to run the version in your current directory Related to this, you can also do the following: ../whatever .. means the parent directory of your current one, so ../something will go UP one level and run a program in that folder. ../../../whatever will go up three levels, /whatever (without the leading period) means run the program 'whatever' in the root folder of the filesystem. /etc/whatever would run the program 'whatever' under the 'etc' subfolder of the root partition, etc... ~/whatever means go to the currently logged in user's home folder (~) and run program 'whatever' in that directory also, since it sounds like you're not very familiar with linux filesystems yet: Keep in mind that under Linux/Unix/Mac, the file and directory names are CASE SENSITIVE. This means that MaxIDE, MAXIDE and maxIDE are considered to be three distinct files, so if it is spelled MaxIDE, you can't launch it as ./maxide --- "file not found". You can add the 'current folder' to your path so it will automatically 'find' files in it. Where to configure that depends on what shell you're running, the location varies. If you're running bash: look in /etc/.bashrc (affecting all users) or ~/.bashrc (affecting just you) you would want to add the '.' folder to your path to include the current directory. Oh, that's another thing: a trailing period in front of a file names means it's a hidden file. those won't show up when you do a regular listing with ls, you need to do ls -a to view the hidden files as well. Anyway, while it can be convenient not having to specify the folder when running programs, it also makes things a less secure. For example, since all commands are seperate executables, it's possible for a piece of malware to put its own version of 'cd' or 'rm' in its own folder. Should someone manage to get something on your system through an exploit or something, you risk that you see something weird, enter its folder, thing 'hey, that shouldn't be there' -- type 'rm *' to try to erase, and unwittingly run the mystery 'rm' executable they had dropped in that folder as well, that could do who-knows-what to your system. So... default folder not in your path may be a tad inconvenient at times (although you get used to this behaviour *very* quickly), it definitely helps in the damage control department. |
| ||
| Brilliant xlsior! Thanks for your time in clearing that up for me. - I think I am better prepared for cross-compiling my modules etc for Max. Kind regards Seb |
| ||
| Sounds great. My copy of Ubuntu should be coming in tomorrow. Now, I just have to try getting rid of Xandros when that arrives. Even tho Xandros was nice, it's time to reformat my partition, and transition from an okay Linux system to a GREAT Linux system. I even gave SUSE an opportunity, but unfortunately, Novell didn't even want to install right, neither did Red Hat Fedora. I guess the little guy's distros far outdo the big guys out there. I can only imagine that those big egomaniacs are really feeling jealous about some of these little distros doing so well. Now, if I were to build my own Linux-based OS, I'd probably model my version of Linux around the Mac OS X style layout, not Windows like everyone else. To me, Mac's GUI's far superior to the MS layout in every way. I just happen to love that pull-down menu and the hotlink graphics that scroll on the bottom of the screen. I only wish that Linux would start to be like Apple's OS (of course, if Mac OS X were legal to install, I would've done so a looong time ago). I think that Ubuntu takes after this style fairly well, seeing those screenshots on their website. Then again, their "Windows" still looks like the M$ style, but I'll have to make do with that. |
| ||
| NEED HELP WITH UBUNTU!!! I have just installed Ubuntu now, and am trying to boot up the newly installed system right now. However, when I go to the main login screen, the screen comes in all blocky, and it looks like it's locked up. Please verify if I'm doing something wrong with the setup of the OS. I was expecting a clear as day look to the startup screen. The bootup screen was okay, but when I got to the login screen, it just blocked up, looked pixelated, and didn't look like it worked at all. |
| ||
| did the installation go well? if it did, have you tried entering your username and password you set up during the install procedure? I'm thinking it might be some screen resolution issue.. if that's a no-go, then I'd suggest the ubuntu linux forums for help.. you might want to try the IRC channel too.. (think it's #ubuntu at irc.freenode.net, not sure though).. |
| ||
| Okay, thanks. I have installed SuSE 10 on top of Ubuntu as a temporary fix, so I'll switch back once I find the problem out... Of course, SuSE's working out well on my notebook since I installed it on there, Win XP Pro still works, too. So dual boot on my notebook isn't a big issue... Ubuntu seems to make it difficult on HDTV resolutions, especially LCD TVs (which is what my desktop's hooked up to, BTW). |
   |