Linux Question: New Laptop

I have an NP8170 on order. I want to dual boot windows and linux. My question is currently I have linux mint at home. I was wondering what a good boot manager is and also what flavor of linux is best. I am going to be doing a lot of work with ethical hacking and studying this for work.

 

Most distros today come with GRUB2, but some still have GRUB legacy and even others still have LILO. I don't think it will make any difference which one you use unless you have very special requirements.
I have no idea if any of those requirements might arise in the context of ethical hacking. Are you planning to hack the boot manager?

As for a distro for penetration tests I think you should have a look at Backtrack.
You might also want to try Damn Vulnerable Linux as a test bed. Unfortunately the website is down, but maybe you can find a torrent to download it.

 

I am just looking for a good version to use. I need to learn unix for work and I am trying to find something similar that may help me with that. I am also a gamer and would love to game on the linux side. Worst case I will just game in windows and do everything else under linux. I use Linux Mint now but was interested in possibly Fedora or something.

I have it narrowed down to Fedora, Ultimate Edition, Ubuntu and Linux Mint. I have linux mint now and it runs smoothly. I also want a really snazzy graphical desktop etc lol. I know, I am weird I am just sick of windows and not being able to change much.

 

Grub/2 is a fine boot manager and like debguy said, it comes prepacked on most distros now. For gaming, you really aren't going to find much beyond the odd indie game (world of goo!) that supports linux, stick with windows for gaming.

As far as 'best flavor', that's all a matter of opinion combined with your specific needs. Ubuntu is the most mainstream flavor of linux and has the 'snazzy desktop'. I've never tried mint so can't comment there. Backtrack is extremely unfriendly for 'learning linux' (it says so on their site too), it assumes you know a good chunk of console commands; it's also very efficient and well maintained/streamlined, my personal distro is based off BT.

I would stick with a debian distro (does anyone have the link for that huge linux map that was here a while ago?), because I just like deb distros (always type in apt-get in fedora and go huh? oh yum )

 

Linux is not UNIX. Both have many similarities but you really shouldn't look for an easy Linux distro if you do this to be prepared for another UNIX. Which one is it?
Linux might not be the best choice at all, maybe you should look for something like OpenSolaris or one of the BSDs. In nearly every case BSD will be the better choice.

I disagree totally. If you're a fan of a specific game that can only be played reasonable under Windows you're right, but if you just like one or the other genre and don't stick to a specific game you can find good alternatives for most of them under Linux.
I'm only a casual gamer, but for a Linux user I play quite a lot. Search the Linux forum, there is a pretty good Linux gaming thread!

I disagree here too. Just because it has a steep learning curve doesn't mean that it's not beginner friendly. It just depends on whether you want to accept that challenge. My first attempt to switch to Linux was openSuse, but I failed because it was too much like Windows. Everything looked so familiar (e.g. yast vs system control) yet it was too different for just using my Windows skills. Then I tried Debian and Slackware more or less in parallel and it was a totally different experience. It was obvious from the very first step that my Windows skills won't help me at all. There was no way to ignore that I was a raw beginner. I accepted that and with this point of view it was quite easy. It just comes down to have reasonable expectations when you start something new.

btw: I wrote the source code for my diploma thesis software in vi, which I hardly knew at all when I started. I started with a traditional point-and-click GUI text editor but one day I was forced to do some minor edits without a GUI and I used vi. As time went by the things I did with vi became more and more. And after two months or so I switched completely.
This is also an example of accepting the challenge. Sometimes it's better to jump in at the deep end.

 

If you want to learn Unix, OpenSolaris is the only real "true" Unix out there that's free (afaik).

That said, learning Linux is a good idea as well, but realize that the GNU toolchain on Linux is similar but NOT THE SAME as the Unix toolchain.

For learning, I actually highly recommend messing around in virtual machines. The hardware is simple and is always the same and it just works, and it's dead simple to take a snapshot of a machine to roll back to if you break something.

 

Yeah I have never worked with either. I am fairly proficient with computers and I am not afraid to buy a book and dig in to it. Can you run backtrack from a usb or live dvd? That may be the way to learn that one. I will check out open solaris as well.

 

You can (and should, while learning initially or messing around) run most popular distros from live USB sticks, as well as run any number of repair tools from distros focused towards live usage (knoppix for example). Google for unetbootin, that is what you can use to create a stick.

 

If you ask me due to OpenSource nature of Linux, it is even more widely deployed than UNIX hence it is definitely worth learning.
The semantics of Linux is very similar to UNIX learning 1 should make the other easy (if you learn to operate it using shell).

 

Yourself being "proficient with computers" is the first thing you should forget when starting with Linux/Unix. The experience about hardware you might have will not help you to handle the system and you have no idea of how the software works.
This is not meant to be offensive, but you're a raw beginner, no matter what you've done with computers so far. If you accept that you have good chances to learn the new system and it won't matter which Unix you'll work with. If you don't you'll fail inevitably.

That's the most common usage of Backtrack.

+1 for the virtual machines approach.

 

I work for the DOD so Unix is what I am going to be using and trained on. I may just forego a Unix like system and go for a Linux based one. They are going to be sending me to a week long bootcamp to learn Unix so that should help either way.

What I meant by proficient with computers is that I have done a lot and currently I am finishing up a masters in computer science. I am not afraid to learn a new system and beginning or not I usually pick up things quickly once I get involved. I appreciate all the comments, it is really helping me decide on what to try.

 

DOD is department of defense? (I'm no US citizen)
Afaik the DOD uses BSD systems, but I don't know which ones (maybe that's classified). Learning how to work with a Linux distro that focuses on a colourful desktop wont help you much. I think the most similar system to what you'll work on would be FreeBSD or openBSD.
If you still want to use Linux I'd recommend to go for Slackware or better Gentoo.

 

DOD uses everything.

I've been a Sysadmin for 20+ years, and the differences between any two "unix" systems like HPUX and Solaris and SunOS and DG Unix and (you get the idea) is just as great if not greater than the difference between Solaris and Linux. I.e. they all vary a LOT in how they're cobbled together and how to admin them.

Learning on linux or BSD is fine to start with, you'll learn how unixish OSes work in general. BTW, for the person who said OpenSolaris is the only free unix, BSD IS UNIX. It is free. So Open Solaris is NOT the only free unix out there.

The question of linux being unix or not is more a question of semantics than behvaiour.

 

The problem is that most Linux newbies (the ones that stick with Ubuntu or Mint) usually won't learn to work with the Unix toolchain but with some fancy desktop applications. This won't help them when trying to work on UNIX.
An Ubuntu user will hardly ever need to use the console, and even if he does he has no chance to learn about things like BSDs ports system. Therefore Ubuntu and many other distros that are commonly considered to be user friendly are not a good preparation for UNIX systems. This is why I recommended Gentoo. Portage has its name for a reason.

That's wrong. UNIX (in capital letters) is a trademark of the Open Group which only Unices are allowed to use that are certified by the Open Group. The BSDs are not certified, so they are not allowed to use the label UNIX. BSD is Unix, but it is not UNIX.

That's true.

 

How hard is it to dual boot w/ Free BSD or Open Solaris? I guess I need to get a guide and read through it to see which I will like best.

 

OpenSolaris comes with Grub, so it's the same like with Linux. BSD - no idea. I never had BSD in a dual boot scenario. But if you install BSD first Grub should detect it.
You surely know distrowatch [1]. If you want to learn something about OpenSolaris and its derivatives I suggest to have a look at genunix [2] too.

[1] DistroWatch.com: Put the fun back into computing. Use Linux, BSD.
[2] Genunix

 

How is slackware? That one looks to be a good linux flavor. My issue is I am interested in System Admin but I am going to work on Ethical Hacking and infosec for now. Would that change your suggestions?

 

I found some books on Free BSD so I may read them as well to make a decision. My other goal is to use this for my last quarter in school which will involve some software programming in java and of course my capstone which will be a lot of writing.

 

Slackware and BSD are both good starting points. Also look at learning RHEL / Centos as it's quite popular commercially.

 

Caps were used for emphasis, not trademarking. however, technically, BSD is considered a non-registered Unix like system, not in fact allowed to be called unix either. Which is kind of backward, since it's the historical basis for so many Unix systems. But that's semantics. The differences between all the unix / unix like OSes, as I said before, is far greater due to the differences in how their built than in the fact that they may or may not be a registered and official Unix.

BTW, you can learn unix quite well on Ubuntu. I run Ubuntu servers at work. No GUI, all command line, and it's quite a capable OS. it's basically Debian with more frequently updated packages and commensurately less testing.

 

That's true but it's not the point. If you talk about free and non free unices you are on a legal level not on a technical one. And then the registration does matter.

As for the technical aspect I still think that this is not entirely wrong, but it doesn't conform with the experiences beginners make with Ubuntu. Yes, you can learn how to use the command line on Ubuntu, but if that's your main intention you won't chose Ubuntu. Ubuntus strength is a very good desktop integration of most tasks so that you ideally don't need the console.
If you want an easy and clean command line Linux you will chose something like Slackware. If you want to get an idea of how BSD ports work and you still want to use Linux you will go for Gentoo. There simply is no way to learn about ports/portage on Ubuntu.

 

Have you ever run a Debian or Ubuntu in production? I honestly don't see a big need for a source build system in most production environments, and it's only one aspect of what is being a unix sysadmin. There are source packages available in all the other unix flavors and you can make the changes needed and create packages there too. I've done it in RedHat and I've done it in Debian and Ubuntu. I've done it on BSD. I find them all useful in their own ways, and frustrating in their own ways. There is no such thing as "the one way to build from source that makes sense and all others are useless."

 

I have a few Ubuntu servers around here plus some SLED/S and tons of openSuses and somewhere must still be 2 or 3 SUNs (don't know where, but I can still access them via ssh and they run fine).
I use Debian as my primary desktop OS for several years now and my employer just started to consider to move the whole infrastructure to Debian. My last employer used Red Hat everywhere and I had a colleague who introduced me to FreeBSD. But I have only 5 years of experience with Unix. So much for the "who's the biggest" contest.

I agree, but I fear we're just talking about different things. My point is not about source or binary distribution, it's about resemblance with the target system. You have decades of experience with unixoid systems, most likely you ripped most of them apart and put them together again. You know exactly how they look from the inside.
But in this thread we're talking about a newbee who is about to see Unix for the first time in his life. He knows Windows very well which is basically a point and click adventure, even in server environments. And now with this experience he wants to run Unix which is a console based system that might have a GUI. The starting point is a totally different one. For desktop users it doesn't really matter if they use Ubuntu or Mint or Fedora or whatever. They all look pretty much the same (even if you switch between DEs). Your Windows experience will work on the desktop because they are designed to work with that knowledge. But being on a console is a completely new thing, and if something is new even small differences might lead to confusion. Therefore I think this thread should be about finding the free system that has the most resemblance with the system that Nibert will work with in his job.

 

This is the OP just in case anyone forgot while the train fell way off the rails:

A good distro to try is all of the major ones -- at least Fedora, OpenSUSE, Debian, Slackware, Ubuntu and its derivatives like Mint, etc. You can try others like Arch or Gentoo if you are looking to learn the system from the ground up. Maybe just look at DistroWatch.com: Put the fun back into computing. Use Linux, BSD. and shoot at random. It doesn't matter where you start, eventually you will develop a taste for a certain distro. Choose one that looks friendly and read the documentation. Since distros are made by people it's often a good idea to read the development mailing lists.

Most people use grub or grub2 these days, but there are others. If you are seriously interested in alternatives, one list is on wikipedia: Comparison of boot loaders - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for how it's going to run on your hardware, maybe you can post your detailed specifications.

The snazzy desktop stuff is easy to find, if you know where to look.

Looking into other non-GNU/Linux systems is a good idea. You can easily get exposure to BSD and Solaris on x86 and it's pretty easy to find an old Indy to mess around with IRIX if you want to get into weird stuff.

 

Thanks for the update. I originally wanted a snazzy desktop but I am learning towards slackware. I am on a couple of the ethical hacking sites and this is a good OS. I do need to learn the shell and as long as it will work in Slackware or another flavor then I dont mind. If the shell is something I need to learn (it is) then as long as I have access to it in any form of Linux then I will learn it. I already have windows to game with and I will use Linux for everything else.

My system specs: (On Order: Sager NP 8170 - i7 2630qm, GTX485m, 500GB HDD, 6GB RAM)

Update:

I have the guidebook to Slackware and I think I will use this as my first one when I get the new laptop. I will also have backtrack as a liveDVD and learn it. It will be dual booted w/ Win 7 Professional so I am researching on how to set it up for dual boot.

 

Wow, you're sure taking this personally. Your focus on source build and how ports is the be all and end all led me to believe that while you might have plenty of experience, there was a good chance you hadn't run Ubuntu or Debian in a production environment. Calm down...

My point was that saying "ubuntu bad" is kind of ridiculous, considering you can install it with NO GUI if you want and do everything command line. Also, Windows Server 2008R2 has no GUI by default. odd huh?

Anyway, I say that instead of treating the OP like a child who can't use Ubuntu to learn Unix, we treat him like an adult and present him with the options. And Ubuntu's as good as any for learning Unix. So's slackware, or RHEL, or SLES, or Gentoo, or BSD etc. He's obviously not someone with no idea how a computer works, and he's eager to learn, so no need to use the exact match for his OS. And having worked with DOD, I can tell you they have a little of damned near everything.

And another thing, thanks to the beauty of virtualization, the OP can run as many of whichever OSes he wants to learn on them. So the base OS is more a starting than an ending point.

Edit: In this post previously I made a joke referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Laboratories which was obviouly right over some folks heads. jeeze no sense or humor or history.

 

Yeah, I am probably just going to do a full install if windows 7 and download free bsd, slackware and some others and throw them on virtual box. Once I get a good flavor I will dual boot

 

I also agree with experimenting with virtual machines. However, I think the BSD distros are also good Unix alternatives; PC-BSD is probably the most desktop-oriented spinoff of BSD yet.

 

Isn't openSolaris dead?

 

I'm looking forward to hearing how the latest Backtrack works with that video card.

 

There is no "unix". What unix based or unix-like operating system specifically do you need to learn?

 

I am not sure on specifics I was just told I need to learn the basics of Unix.

 

I'd grab a book like "Linux in a Nutshell" or "The Complete BSD" from O'Reilley and use that to get a start.

 

Ah ok, I have free access to Oreilly books through school. Well until July when I am finally finished with my masters.

 

Excellent! They've got a lot of good books!

 

No, I'm not. We just disagree in some points and I like discussions.

Like I said before, my point is not about source vs. binary distribution.

I'm not saying Ubuntu is bad. I'm saying that Ubuntu is not the best reference for learning how BSD works if you have other Linux distributions at hand. That's a difference.

I'm guilty of not having seen a Windows server in the past 6 or 7 years.

Do you think I treat him like a child?

But he's someone with no experience in Linux/Unix. Without wanting to be disrespectful, in my eyes that makes him someone who doesn't know (yet) how a computer works under Linux/Unix. I still remember my own first steps into Linux and I know that what I learned on Slackware was much more useful when I tried FreeBSD than what I learned on openSuse (which is quite comparable to Ubuntu when it comes to ease of use for beginners).
Because Nibert is eager to learn I think he can be thrown in at the deep end with Slackware.

 

I am hoping the laptop comes before the end of the month so I can play with it a bit more prior to my final term starting. The help in this thread has been pretty nice so I look forward to trying it all out.

 

I'd add these as required O'Reilly reading: Unix Power Tools, Essential System Administration and Mastering Regular Expressions.