General discussion


Hey I am liking free O/S more and more

By zlitocook ·
I am a MS system builder and partner but with each update I get a little more p*ssed off at them. I have set up four companys with server 2003, and two with data center. All have XP Pro on all workstations. I have set the Amin. guy up to be able to install and update each workstation by SUS and it worked great until the last update.
Now he gets svhost.exe is using 99% of CPU, and some times wuauclt.exe is doing the same. Why dose MS keep doing this? I posted some thing about the WGA doing this.
Is this some thing new that MS is trying out or just a new update bug?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

25 total posts (Page 2 of 3)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Let me also suggest SPM (Smart Package Manager)

by jmgarvin In reply to software management on Fe ...
Collapse -

It looks promising . . .

by apotheon In reply to software management on Fe ...

As promising as that looks, I won't be adopting it any time soon, I think. I won't trust any package manager but APT with my Debian systems for a while yet -- that thing needs more maturity before I'm willing to entrust my production systems to it. The description of the state of the GTK interface is less than heartening, too: Synaptic (for APT) sounds like the clear winner for GUI interfaces to package management (it kicks *** all over YaST2, which had the best GUI interface for package management I'd ever seen before I encountered Synaptic, for instance).

I'll be keeping an eye on the project, though, to see how it's progressing. Thanks for the link.

Collapse -

Thank You Apotheon

by w2ktechman In reply to software management on Fe ...

This looks like it may be a good thing coming soon.
I will try it when it comes out of beta. Since I am pretty new to the Linux world, I do not feel comfortable enough using beta SW. In Win, I use it all the time though.

Thank You

Collapse -

I'm crazy

by Jaqui In reply to What version of Linux

I use lfs, which is not for newbies. :)
it's the hardest to install and configure of all.

fedora, suse, mandriva are about equal.
for install and functionality.
and for their lack of respect for standards they match microshaft.

Collapse -


by Ed Woychowsky In reply to I'm crazy

Jaqui, what can I say, I need training wheels.

Collapse -


by Jaqui In reply to Sorry

lfs is for going from system/network admin to guru levels

it's a tool to take your skills higher, but require both familiarity with building from sources and comfort with the cli to use it.

it's not meant as an enterprise server or workstation, since the build is not a fast process.
it can be used as either, but I really don't see any responsable admin using a 3 day build process to install a few hundred workstations. [ 3 day per workstation if you have different hardware on each and can't image the final build. ]

Collapse -

I agree with recommending SuSE

by stress junkie In reply to I'm crazy

SuSE is great. I've used it since v9.0. Novell has done a lot of work to improve on the ideas that were behind the original SuSE project. System administration tools are very good. Software package management is good. Dependencies are generally handled well. Hardware recognition is generally good. Software patches install quickly and easily.

In short, SuSE is a good choice for people who want to try Linux and for people who are more interested in doing work with their Linux system than in learning system administration.

Collapse -

my two biggest complints with Suse

by Jaqui In reply to I agree with recommending ...

their non standards compliant use of the /opt partition / folder.
The Standard says it's for addon packages, which means packages you get completely separate from the distro media not the gui, apache webserver, cvs server... [ with suse, everying but the base system ]

stupid mistake on their part, no-one sets enough space for their config of using /opt the way they do, since even the commercial software companies with linux products use the /usr hierarchy for their software, when it's those commercial apps that should be in /opt

the other, is in using Red Hat's bugware software management tool, yast is the worst tool available.

Collapse -

for Jaqui

by w2ktechman In reply to I agree with recommending ...

So, for beginners what do you recommend? Personally I do like the YAST control center, a common place to do a lot of things (if root PW is known).
But if there are better sources out there, I am listening.
I keep hearing that most distros are more complex for a beginner, and to start with Fedora or Suse. I have learned enough to get my MS exchange mail, and do about 70% of my job with it (cant quite lose Windows yet -- token authentication card for many of the internal sites will not work in Linux). But, I have no problem with downloading and trying another distro

Collapse -


by Jaqui In reply to I agree with recommending ...

most distros have the same integrated control center.

none of the "user friendly" distros is better than 50% standards compliant.

though since the FSF's LSB has gone lightyears beyond what a BASE standard should be the standard is becoming a meaningless document.
[ base should not specify anything more than the base system required to get a linux box running and have the ability to add more software, and administer the system. everything else they specify is grounds to tell them to stick the standard.

as far as a specific distro, it's personal choice, if you like the suse/fedora/rhel distros tools, then it's the right one for you.

Mandriva's Drakx tools are far more user friendly, and function far more efficiently.
[ 5 hours to get fedora updates with yast is a common complaint, same number of updates with mandriva is about half an hour... about 750 mb of updates, suse did update faster than fedora, but the tools organisation and the default config settings for fedora, rhel and suse are a complete screwup. ]
I told each one to not start the gui at boot, all of them ignored that.
then they disable root login from a gui.
stupidity to not pay attention to user input during install and try to stop the user from configuring it to function the way they want.
even debian seems to start a gui by default when you install it during the initial install.

none of them but mandriva gives you a config screen during the install to tell you what services are starting by default and allow you to disable those you don't want running by default.

I'm not impressed with any distro for making grub the default bootloader, I like LILO for my bootloader.
[ this includes mandriva ]

most of the distros have actually stopped offering any bootloader but grub.

debian offers lilo, if you fight it for the bootloader, but during a network install it refuses to actually install lilo. I install via network since getting debian's 14 cdrom software repository to read in for local repository has always left me seriously unimpressed with performance of debian for package management, the network install it works better.

[ ubuntu, kubuntu, edubuntu all don't offer any bootloader but grub, and refuse to give you a cli only box. ]

because of my strong opinions on what I want with my boxes, I use a distro that is 100% only what I want above the base system, far more so than even debian, slak or gentoo are.

Back to Windows Forum
25 total posts (Page 2 of 3)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums