Shit!
I thought Ubuntu 9.10 was bad.
I hadn't tried Fedora 11 yet.....

So after getting totally pissed at Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic, fucking up, blowing
up and just not working, I decided to wipe and install Fedora 11.
What a mistake......

Again, I ask the question, does anyone actually test these Linux
distributions before releasing them into the wild?
It sure doesn't look that way.

So, Fedora 11....
What can I say....

The partition manager is a mess.
A noob will never figure out how to set up the system.
The LVM just confuses the issue and Fedora seems to want to use all 4 of
my NTFS drives for something or another even though I have 40g of free
space on one of them.
Gee, Ubuntu has no problems finding and using this free space.
Why does Fedora get lost?

Ok...So I get the beast installed.

Surprise!!!!! dual monitors (LCD) work fine although I have to change them
to reflect one large desktop.
Easily done and thanks Fedora for doing that correct.
Ubuntu?
A nightmare with an Nvidia card.

Printing: Wow! Fedora sees and apparently sets up my HP P1006...
Problem is it don't print...
Ok....More googling, maybe....
Network?
Why doesn't Fedora dafault to enabling my network on boot?
IOW why do I have to manually turn it on each time I boot.
Easily fixed, but yet another example of untested Linux slopware.

How about browsing Windows or Linux shares?
Doesn't work....
WTF?
Diable the Fedora firewall, change the smb.conf to reflect Workgroup
rather than Myworkgroup.
Why does the Fedora firewall by default block whatever is needed by Samba
to access Windows shares?
More idiotic not tested stuff.

How about audio?
Glad you asked.
Never got it working with a M-Audio Delta 66 card.

Why does grub install on on Hd0 even after I told it to install on
/dev/sdc3 ?
Totally hosed my Windows 7 boot record.

And it just goes on from there....

Bottom line....
Linux sucks....
It really does....
Ubuntu is bad but Fedora is worse.

Ignoramus13931 <ignoramus13931 at (no spam) NOSPAM.13931.invalid> writes:

On 2009-11-02, Hadron <hadronquark at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Sharing /home between distros is fine as long as you keep your User and
Group numbers consistent. RPM distros start numbering Users at 500,
Ubuntu starts at 1000. I mostly use Redhat (Fedora and CentOS) which
follow the 500 convention as does Mandriva and I'm pretty sure SuSE. When
I put Ubuntu onto one of my systems I don't specify /home when I create
the partition table. At the first boot I edit Ubuntu's /etc/passwd and
/etc/group files to change the User and Group numbers to 500. I then
edit /etc/fstab to mount the /home partition and then reboot and
everything is fine. Gnome has done a really good job over the years of
maintaining backward and forward compatibility for it's .gnome*/*
configuration files, I haven't had any problem there for many years.
However even if you do have a Gnome config file problem all you have to
do is delete the .gnome* directories, log out and log in ah the OS will
reinitialize them. There is nothing that can go very wrong with the
exception of the User number and that's easy to deal with. On every
distro except Ubuntu the User number thing isn't a problem either because
there is a root directory (which is on / not /home) so you can just login
as root and fix it. I've been operating this way since the days of Redhat
5.2 in 1999 and it's never been a problem.

We'll beg to differ then.

I shared a home for a short while between Debian and Ubuntu.

My gnome settings got hosed.


I can think of worse things that hosed gnome settings. I think that by
sharing, most people mean that /home stays same, but the root
partition (with OS) can change for upgrading and such.

A little bit of messing around with symlinks, e.g.

ln -fs $HOME/.gnome2-debian $HOME/.gnome2
ln -fs $HOME/.gnome2-fedora $HOME/.gnome2

could possibly help with booting different oses.

What you are trying to do is pretty fancy stuff, that would
necessitate some creative fixes to things like this.

Yes. But my point is correct : you can not just blindly re-use your
/home across different installs. No matter what others tell you here.

On 2009-11-03, Hadron <hadronquark at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Ignoramus13931 <ignoramus13931 at (no spam) NOSPAM.13931.invalid> writes:

On 2009-11-02, Hadron <hadronquark at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Sharing /home between distros is fine as long as you keep your User and
Group numbers consistent. RPM distros start numbering Users at 500,
Ubuntu starts at 1000. I mostly use Redhat (Fedora and CentOS) which
follow the 500 convention as does Mandriva and I'm pretty sure SuSE. When
I put Ubuntu onto one of my systems I don't specify /home when I create
the partition table. At the first boot I edit Ubuntu's /etc/passwd and
/etc/group files to change the User and Group numbers to 500. I then
edit /etc/fstab to mount the /home partition and then reboot and
everything is fine. Gnome has done a really good job over the years of
maintaining backward and forward compatibility for it's .gnome*/*
configuration files, I haven't had any problem there for many years.
However even if you do have a Gnome config file problem all you have to
do is delete the .gnome* directories, log out and log in ah the OS will
reinitialize them. There is nothing that can go very wrong with the
exception of the User number and that's easy to deal with. On every
distro except Ubuntu the User number thing isn't a problem either because
there is a root directory (which is on / not /home) so you can just login
as root and fix it. I've been operating this way since the days of Redhat
5.2 in 1999 and it's never been a problem.

We'll beg to differ then.

I shared a home for a short while between Debian and Ubuntu.

My gnome settings got hosed.


I can think of worse things that hosed gnome settings. I think that by
sharing, most people mean that /home stays same, but the root
partition (with OS) can change for upgrading and such.

A little bit of messing around with symlinks, e.g.

ln -fs $HOME/.gnome2-debian $HOME/.gnome2
ln -fs $HOME/.gnome2-fedora $HOME/.gnome2

could possibly help with booting different oses.

What you are trying to do is pretty fancy stuff, that would
necessitate some creative fixes to things like this.

Yes. But my point is correct : you can not just blindly re-use your
/home across different installs. No matter what others tell you here.

True. But the exceptions to the general rule are not of life and death
nature.

i

Ignoramus13931 <ignoramus13931 at (no spam) NOSPAM.13931.invalid> writes:

On 2009-11-03, Hadron <hadronquark at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Ignoramus13931 <ignoramus13931 at (no spam) NOSPAM.13931.invalid> writes:

On 2009-11-02, Hadron <hadronquark at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Sharing /home between distros is fine as long as you keep your User and
Group numbers consistent. RPM distros start numbering Users at 500,
Ubuntu starts at 1000. I mostly use Redhat (Fedora and CentOS) which
follow the 500 convention as does Mandriva and I'm pretty sure SuSE. When
I put Ubuntu onto one of my systems I don't specify /home when I create
the partition table. At the first boot I edit Ubuntu's /etc/passwd and
/etc/group files to change the User and Group numbers to 500. I then
edit /etc/fstab to mount the /home partition and then reboot and
everything is fine. Gnome has done a really good job over the years of
maintaining backward and forward compatibility for it's .gnome*/*
configuration files, I haven't had any problem there for many years.
However even if you do have a Gnome config file problem all you have to
do is delete the .gnome* directories, log out and log in ah the OS will
reinitialize them. There is nothing that can go very wrong with the
exception of the User number and that's easy to deal with. On every
distro except Ubuntu the User number thing isn't a problem either because
there is a root directory (which is on / not /home) so you can just login
as root and fix it. I've been operating this way since the days of Redhat
5.2 in 1999 and it's never been a problem.

We'll beg to differ then.

I shared a home for a short while between Debian and Ubuntu.

My gnome settings got hosed.


I can think of worse things that hosed gnome settings. I think that by
sharing, most people mean that /home stays same, but the root
partition (with OS) can change for upgrading and such.

A little bit of messing around with symlinks, e.g.

ln -fs $HOME/.gnome2-debian $HOME/.gnome2
ln -fs $HOME/.gnome2-fedora $HOME/.gnome2

could possibly help with booting different oses.

What you are trying to do is pretty fancy stuff, that would
necessitate some creative fixes to things like this.

Yes. But my point is correct : you can not just blindly re-use your
/home across different installs. No matter what others tell you here.

True. But the exceptions to the general rule are not of life and death
nature.

i

I don't understand what kind of angle you are coming from here. The
point is that many people say you can use the same HOME for multiple
OSen : possibly totally different distros with different WM/DE
versions. I pointed out that that can corrupt your gnome/KDE/whatever
system. No. Its not life and death. But its not as fool proof as many
would have you think. I believe my point is now made.

I thought Ubuntu 9.10 was bad.
I hadn't tried Fedora 11 yet.....

On 2009-11-03, Hadron <hadronquark at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Ignoramus13931 <ignoramus13931 at (no spam) NOSPAM.13931.invalid> writes:

On 2009-11-03, Hadron <hadronquark at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Ignoramus13931 <ignoramus13931 at (no spam) NOSPAM.13931.invalid> writes:

On 2009-11-02, Hadron <hadronquark at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Sharing /home between distros is fine as long as you keep your User and
Group numbers consistent. RPM distros start numbering Users at 500,
Ubuntu starts at 1000. I mostly use Redhat (Fedora and CentOS) which
follow the 500 convention as does Mandriva and I'm pretty sure SuSE. When
I put Ubuntu onto one of my systems I don't specify /home when I create
the partition table. At the first boot I edit Ubuntu's /etc/passwd and
/etc/group files to change the User and Group numbers to 500. I then
edit /etc/fstab to mount the /home partition and then reboot and
everything is fine. Gnome has done a really good job over the years of
maintaining backward and forward compatibility for it's .gnome*/*
configuration files, I haven't had any problem there for many years.
However even if you do have a Gnome config file problem all you have to
do is delete the .gnome* directories, log out and log in ah the OS will
reinitialize them. There is nothing that can go very wrong with the
exception of the User number and that's easy to deal with. On every
distro except Ubuntu the User number thing isn't a problem either because
there is a root directory (which is on / not /home) so you can just login
as root and fix it. I've been operating this way since the days of Redhat
5.2 in 1999 and it's never been a problem.

We'll beg to differ then.

I shared a home for a short while between Debian and Ubuntu.

My gnome settings got hosed.


I can think of worse things that hosed gnome settings. I think that by
sharing, most people mean that /home stays same, but the root
partition (with OS) can change for upgrading and such.

A little bit of messing around with symlinks, e.g.

ln -fs $HOME/.gnome2-debian $HOME/.gnome2
ln -fs $HOME/.gnome2-fedora $HOME/.gnome2

could possibly help with booting different oses.

What you are trying to do is pretty fancy stuff, that would
necessitate some creative fixes to things like this.

Yes. But my point is correct : you can not just blindly re-use your
/home across different installs. No matter what others tell you here.

True. But the exceptions to the general rule are not of life and death
nature.

i

I don't understand what kind of angle you are coming from here. The
point is that many people say you can use the same HOME for multiple
OSen : possibly totally different distros with different WM/DE
versions. I pointed out that that can corrupt your gnome/KDE/whatever
system. No. Its not life and death. But its not as fool proof as many
would have you think. I believe my point is now made.

Sure. I agree.

i