What Linux Distro do the Linux users of GH use?

[xtrafrood]

For CAD I've found FreeCAD to be decent enough.  I've never tried my hand at using a libre CAM control software.

For stability purposes I use Ubuntu LTS on my server. Server's running now for 3 years day-in-day-out.. no one single config or update break. Holy miracle..

On desktop, I mainly now use OS X with a terminal with tmux+vim+tools, but I used to use Arch Linux. But now they got rid of the installer in base, I do not like it that much anymore. I can do the manual install, I've done it multiple times, but I simply don't like it. A bit too barebones for me. I also always had update breaks like 1-2 times every 3 months. Became too annoying for me, so I took the plunge, emptied my wallet and bought a mac somehere in 2008.

Started with SuSE 7 somewhere in 2000, proceeded with Mandrake, RHEL, Debian. Tried Gentoo / Penguin Linux on the side. Ultimately sticked with Arch because of i686 and it's speed and xubuntu coz of laziness.

I would not advise chasing uptime.  3 years between reboots on Ubuntu LTS means you're forgoing critical kernel security patch backports.  I would be quite careful about what services you run on machines that are not receiving regular kernel security updates.  Sure, if your userland is fully patched you may consider that a mitigating factor, but the likelihood that your userland is impervious to penetration is extremely low.  There have been a myriad of local root escalation vulnerabilities disclosed in the last several years, many of which likely affect your running kernel.

You are completely right and I am fully aware of that, but thanks. What I meant to say is not that it is running 3 years WITHOUT REBOOTS, but that it has been running even with kernel updates not bricking the boatloader or other config.

The whole bricking the bootloader is the reason I quit dual booting Linux. I hate reformatting.   

What do you mean by "bricking" your bootloader?  If you are already chainloading your other OS (assuming Windows), the absolute worst case scenario is having to re-run grub-install (or similar MBR-paving tool if you're using a different bootloader).

I was testing the limits of my graphics card using a tool I've never used before.  A few kernel panics/freezes later and I couldn't fix the bootloader.  I had to do a fresh install. I assumed that "bricking' was similar to what people experience after bricking their Android phone. My intention wasn't to say, "hey, dual booting is a bad idea." I'm just not comfortable with the issues I'd had in the past with dual booting. Please keep in mind that my experience with Linux as a whole is limited to basic distros. If I were to dive back in I would learn more about the environment that appeals to me, and build it up myself.

[iLLucionist]

You cannot image what a show stopper "just rerun grub-install" is. First, I need to boot from a cd / USB stick. For that, I need to get into the bios of my server, because I disable boot from something else than my GUID hdd for physical compromise security. Then, I need to manually mount my software raid setup. Then I need to find chroot into that environment and rerun grub-install.

And I still have not figured out how I can properly ensure that grub is OK before I reboot.

[deduction]

Grub sometimes get overwritten on the MBR but that's pretty rare because something else (Windows) has to write to the same MBR.  Doing a Linux to Linux reboot should never affect your MBR and if it is, you should file a distro bug on whatever update hosed your boot record.  But, Windows has been known to write to the MBR when applying updates.  I know, booting to a LiveCD/USB can be a bit of a pain, all for the sake of running grub-install.  However, there are lightweight boot environments that might ease this pain.  Alternatively, don't boot to OSes that you don't control (Windows). 

[romevi]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

[user 18]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

[romevi]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

[user 18]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

I don't know that I'd call either one more customizable out of the box. Linux as a whole is essentially as customizable as you want it to be, whether that means installing packages from the package manager, compiling from source, or writing your own scripts and apps.

To my knowledge, Mint and Ubuntu draw on a lot of the same repositories for precompiled software, so there shouldn't be a ton of difference in that regard. What sort of customization are you asking about in particular?

[romevi]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

I don't know that I'd call either one more customizable out of the box. Linux as a whole is essentially as customizable as you want it to be, whether that means installing packages from the package manager, compiling from source, or writing your own scripts and apps.

To my knowledge, Mint and Ubuntu draw on a lot of the same repositories for precompiled software, so there shouldn't be a ton of difference in that regard. What sort of customization are you asking about in particular?

Actually, I dunno. That's just what people have said.Will read up on the two and decide which to try.

[sean]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

[Leslieann]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

Mint is basically a distro built on the foundation of Ubuntu, which isn't a bad starting point since there is so many tutorials, support and installers built around Ubuntu.

While Ubuntu tries to give you everything, Mint is a bit more barebones... Here's what you need, nothing more. Besides the desktop itself, other changes are a few tweaks and improvements here or there, and removal of Ubuntu's shared search results. Mint offers more desktop options, but once installed your options to customize any Linux distro is pretty much unlimited really, with most having similar options, it's just a matter of starting point.

[iLLucionist]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

Out of the box, Linux Mint aims to provide a fuller and completed experience compared to Ubuntu and other distros. For instance, back in the day you had to manually install Microsoft fonts and codecs, which Linux Mint already installed by default.

[iLLucionist]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

Mint is basically a distro built on the foundation of Ubuntu, which isn't a bad starting point since there is so many tutorials, support and installers built around Ubuntu.

While Ubuntu tries to give you everything, Mint is a bit more barebones... Here's what you need, nothing more. Besides the desktop itself, other changes are a few tweaks and improvements here or there, and removal of Ubuntu's shared search results. Mint offers more desktop options, but once installed your options to customize any Linux distro is pretty much unlimited really, with most having similar options, it's just a matter of starting point.

I would say that for a complete newcomer who wonders "how it looks like" (e.g. graphical desktop experience), Linux Mint is more close to Windows XP / 7, whereas Ubuntu is more close to Windows 8 by trying to be both desktop and tablet compatible to a certain extent.

[skitty]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

I think Ubuntu's Unity is much prettier than Mint's Cinnamon or Mate but I know that's kind of a controversial opinion. You can try both out before installing though!

[iLLucionist]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

I think Ubuntu's Unity is much prettier than Mint's Cinnamon or Mate but I know that's kind of a controversial opinion. You can try both out before installing though!

Curious.. What do you actually like about Unity? I really hate it myself and I have always wondered what people may like about it.. (no flame intended)

[romevi]

While Ubuntu tries to give you everything, Mint is a bit more barebones... Here's what you need, nothing more. Besides the desktop itself, other changes are a few tweaks and improvements here or there, and removal of Ubuntu's shared search results. Mint offers more desktop options, but once installed your options to customize any Linux distro is pretty much unlimited really, with most having similar options, it's just a matter of starting point.

This helps a lot, thanks. Sounds like Ubuntu has more than I need, and I can always tweak here and there later. I'd like to try out as barebones as possible and then modify later.
Mint it is!


Edit:
Ooh, and thanks to everyone else! Didn't refresh my page after this last post. 

[iLLucionist]

While Ubuntu tries to give you everything, Mint is a bit more barebones... Here's what you need, nothing more. Besides the desktop itself, other changes are a few tweaks and improvements here or there, and removal of Ubuntu's shared search results. Mint offers more desktop options, but once installed your options to customize any Linux distro is pretty much unlimited really, with most having similar options, it's just a matter of starting point.

This helps a lot, thanks. Sounds like Ubuntu has more than I need, and I can always tweak here and there later. I'd like to try out as barebones as possible and then modify later.
Mint it is!

You'll like it. I've used it for years and liked it more than Ubuntu for the default out of the box experience.

[skitty]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

I think Ubuntu's Unity is much prettier than Mint's Cinnamon or Mate but I know that's kind of a controversial opinion. You can try both out before installing though!

Curious.. What do you actually like about Unity? I really hate it myself and I have always wondered what people may like about it.. (no flame intended)

I really love Dash and the dock/launchbar thing on the left of the screen. I kind of prefer it to a standard toolbar. I do kind of value looks over functionality though so I know a lot of people don't like Unity since some actions are a bit slower to perform.

Also, I'm not sure if this is strictly a Unity feature, but I love the way you can move between four workspaces in Ubuntu. It's really easy to manage windows and I couldn't find anything as nice back when I was using Linux Mint with Cinnamon.

[iLLucionist]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

I think Ubuntu's Unity is much prettier than Mint's Cinnamon or Mate but I know that's kind of a controversial opinion. You can try both out before installing though!

Curious.. What do you actually like about Unity? I really hate it myself and I have always wondered what people may like about it.. (no flame intended)

I really love Dash and the dock/launchbar thing on the left of the screen. I kind of prefer it to a standard toolbar. I do kind of value looks over functionality though so I know a lot of people don't like Unity since some actions are a bit slower to perform.

Also, I'm not sure if this is strictly a Unity feature, but I love the way you can move between four workspaces in Ubuntu. It's really easy to manage windows and I couldn't find anything as nice back when I was using Linux Mint with Cinnamon.

Cool, thanks, interesting to know. The dock / workspaces is what drove me to a Mac for desktop. I can see how you like that. But indeed, I do not find unity aesthetically pleasing.

[CSCoder4ever]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

I think Ubuntu's Unity is much prettier than Mint's Cinnamon or Mate but I know that's kind of a controversial opinion. You can try both out before installing though!

Unity is nice... but my problem with Ubuntu is it doesn't always remember my keybindings, and the ones I desire are taken up by something I don't care about. 

[user 18]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

Ubuntu is decent. I personally like Linux Mint, as it was the one that got me into using linux full time (something Ubuntu was never able to do). Both are fairly common and well-supported distros, and I was happy with how both were put together.

I hear Linux Mint is more customizable, yes?

If you're looking at Ubuntu's Unity desktop compared to Mint's Cinnamon desktop then they are actually about on par in terms of customization.

I think Ubuntu's Unity is much prettier than Mint's Cinnamon or Mate but I know that's kind of a controversial opinion. You can try both out before installing though!

Curious.. What do you actually like about Unity? I really hate it myself and I have always wondered what people may like about it.. (no flame intended)

I really love Dash and the dock/launchbar thing on the left of the screen. I kind of prefer it to a standard toolbar. I do kind of value looks over functionality though so I know a lot of people don't like Unity since some actions are a bit slower to perform.

Also, I'm not sure if this is strictly a Unity feature, but I love the way you can move between four workspaces in Ubuntu. It's really easy to manage windows and I couldn't find anything as nice back when I was using Linux Mint with Cinnamon.

One of the things that bothered me the most about Cinnamon was that I couldn't find a way to put the panel to the side, like the dock in Ubuntu.

Cinnamon definitely has workspaces though -- I used two when I had Mint installed last year.

Also -- just a heads up that anyone who uses the Austere theme (so about half the forum) will have difficulty reading your posts, because that theme uses a white background. The pink is almost invisible (at least to my bad eyes).

[vivalarevolución]

Yea, I can't read Skitty's pink text.  I'm sure it looks pretty with the default Geekhack theme, but I can't read a darn thing.

[vivalarevolución]

Also, romevi, I would recommend just googling "Linux for beginners" or something along those lines and you will find lots of information about your query.  I'm quite the Linux beginner myself, and I found that somewhat useful.

If you like to mess around the arrangement of your desktop, the default Ubunty Unity can feel a little bit ...constricted.  Both Ubuntu and Linux Mint (and others) can be highly customized if you dive deeper than the default.  Linux can be a black hole, if you are the curious type.

[skitty]

Yea, I can't read Skitty's pink text.  I'm sure it looks pretty with the default Geekhack theme, but I can't read a darn thing.

What's the background color of the theme you're using? Is a light color like white?

[vivalarevolución]

Yea, I can't read Skitty's pink text.  I'm sure it looks pretty with the default Geekhack theme, but I can't read a darn thing.

What's the background color of the theme you're using? Is a light color like white?

I'm using the Thoriated theme, which is a light brown/tannnish theme.

[skitty]

I'm using the Thoriated theme, which is a light brown/tannnish theme.

I guess I'll stop using pink then...
Also, why do you use a theme with a light background color? I find that light text on dark backgrounds is much easier on my eyes.

One of the things that bothered me the most about Cinnamon was that I couldn't find a way to put the panel to the side, like the dock in Ubuntu.

Cinnamon definitely has workspaces though -- I used two when I had Mint installed last year.

Doesn't Cinnamon have those workspaces that only let you move windows left and right though? In Unity you can move them up and down.

[user 18]

One of the things that bothered me the most about Cinnamon was that I couldn't find a way to put the panel to the side, like the dock in Ubuntu.

Cinnamon definitely has workspaces though -- I used two when I had Mint installed last year.

Doesn't Cinnamon have those workspaces that only let you move windows left and right though? In Unity you can move them up and down.

I had two workspaces, so one was left, and one was right. I'm not sure if it's possible to have up and down spaces as well, I never checked. I didn't know that was an option in Unity either, so good to know!

[deduction]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

The Ubuntu variants, as others have pointed out, are a great place to start.  Mint and Ubuntu are based on the same package management architecture.

I would advise playing around with a few different desktop environments, no matter what distro you pick.  Install KDE, XFCE, Mate, etc., so you can try a few for yourself.  The desktop environment is going to "feel" the most different to you between the distros that have been suggested.  The CLI structure won't differ much (if at all) as long as you stay in the apt package management family (Mint, Ubuntu, Debian, etc etc).  Even if you decide to get adventurous and branch out into different distro families, all of the common utility commands will be the same.

[vivalarevolución]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

The Ubuntu variants, as others have pointed out, are a great place to start.  Mint and Ubuntu are based on the same package management architecture.

I would advise playing around with a few different desktop environments, no matter what distro you pick.  Install KDE, XFCE, Mate, etc., so you can try a few for yourself.  The desktop environment is going to "feel" the most different to you between the distros that have been suggested.  The CLI structure won't differ much (if at all) as long as you stay in the apt package management family (Mint, Ubuntu, Debian, etc etc).  Even if you decide to get adventurous and branch out into different distro families, all of the common utility commands will be the same.

Command line and package management are a little confusing to newbs, let's take it easy here. Coming from Windows and Mac OS, you don't even know about packages, you just think in terms of updates.

But when you start getting serious with Linux, you learn that command lines and packages are the essential parts of any distro.

Also, this is my 2K post, and I would not have wanted it happening any other way except talking about Linux and keyboards.  If we could throw the viola and my girlfriend into the mix, I would be in heaven.

[deduction]

This already may have been asked, but what's a good distro for someone who's never used Linux, and has grown up using Windows and Mac? Is Ubuntu a good place to start?

The Ubuntu variants, as others have pointed out, are a great place to start.  Mint and Ubuntu are based on the same package management architecture.

I would advise playing around with a few different desktop environments, no matter what distro you pick.  Install KDE, XFCE, Mate, etc., so you can try a few for yourself.  The desktop environment is going to "feel" the most different to you between the distros that have been suggested.  The CLI structure won't differ much (if at all) as long as you stay in the apt package management family (Mint, Ubuntu, Debian, etc etc).  Even if you decide to get adventurous and branch out into different distro families, all of the common utility commands will be the same.

Command line and package management are a little confusing to newbs, let's take it easy here. Coming from Windows and Mac OS, you don't even know about packages, you just think in terms of updates.

But when you start getting serious with Linux, you learn that command lines and packages are the essential parts of any distro.

Also, this is my 2K post, and I would not have wanted it happening any other way except talking about Linux and keyboards.  If we could throw the viola and my girlfriend into the mix, I would be in heaven.

I totally agree.  Sometimes I get a bit carried away when talking about the differences between distros. You're absolutely right that, at the end of the day, package management is the largest difference, yet it may be something completely invisible to the average user.

Happy 2k!!  I made you a present in gimp.

[vivalarevolución]

Happy 2k!!  I made you a present in gimp.

Nice! Thanks!  I'll frame it and put it on my wall.

[iLLucionist]

I'd like to clear up some confusion I notice. Some people seem to think that Ubuntu has a specific graphical user interface and Linux Mint has another specific graphical interface.

But technically, you could get Unity on Linux Mint and Cinnamon / Mate on Ubuntu.

The only difference between the two distros is what they have INSTALLED BY DEFAULT.
Since both even share the same package manager (apt), you could easily install another desktop environment / window manager on either of the distributions to whatever you like (KDE, Unity, LXME, Fluxbox, evilwm, i3, Mate, Unity, whatever!).

[vivalarevolución]

I'd like to clear up some confusion I notice. Some people seem to think that Ubuntu has a specific graphical user interface and Linux Mint has another specific graphical interface.

But technically, you could get Unity on Linux Mint and Cinnamon / Mate on Ubuntu.

The only difference between the two distros is what they have INSTALLED BY DEFAULT.
Since both even share the same package manager (apt), you could easily install another desktop environment / window manager on either of the distributions to whatever you like (KDE, Unity, LXME, Fluxbox, evilwm, i3, Mate, Unity, whatever!).

A few months ago, coming from Mac OS, I didn't even know what a desktop environment or windows manager was.  And when you do learn about them, you realize how much of a constricted computing experience you have with Windows and Mac.

[user 18]

I'd like to clear up some confusion I notice. Some people seem to think that Ubuntu has a specific graphical user interface and Linux Mint has another specific graphical interface.

But technically, you could get Unity on Linux Mint and Cinnamon / Mate on Ubuntu.

The only difference between the two distros is what they have INSTALLED BY DEFAULT.
Since both even share the same package manager (apt), you could easily install another desktop environment / window manager on either of the distributions to whatever you like (KDE, Unity, LXME, Fluxbox, evilwm, i3, Mate, Unity, whatever!).

Absolutely true -- But for someone new, I would recommend they pick a distro where they're happy with as many of the defaults as possible. The more things you strike out on your own to change, the more difficult it will be to get support if necessary, and the more effort you'll have to put in to get your system how you want it. While it's certainly possible, it's not the most newbie-friendly way of doing things.

[Leslieann]

I'd like to clear up some confusion I notice. Some people seem to think that Ubuntu has a specific graphical user interface and Linux Mint has another specific graphical interface.

But technically, you could get Unity on Linux Mint and Cinnamon / Mate on Ubuntu.

The only difference between the two distros is what they have INSTALLED BY DEFAULT.
Since both even share the same package manager (apt), you could easily install another desktop environment / window manager on either of the distributions to whatever you like (KDE, Unity, LXME, Fluxbox, evilwm, i3, Mate, Unity, whatever!).

Absolutely true -- But for someone new, I would recommend they pick a distro where they're happy with as many of the defaults as possible. The more things you strike out on your own to change, the more difficult it will be to get support if necessary, and the more effort you'll have to put in to get your system how you want it. While it's certainly possible, it's not the most newbie-friendly way of doing things.

It's also, at times, the more reliable way to do it.

You can get Debian with Cinnamon, and Mint Debian base with Cinnamon (LMDE).  They should be the same other than included apps and installer, but they are actually quite different when using them. The most obvious of which is that Cinnamon is better integrated in the Mint version.

[fohat.digs]

I am setting up an older box to utilize some older gear with Mint 17.3 and I have one of these  http://www.ebay.com/itm/Promise-Tech-Ultra100-IDE-Hard-Drive-PCI-Controller-Card/262287757452?_trksid=p2141725.c100338.m3726&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20150313114020%26meid%3Dcd64ef245d4d4393b3742bc4bd14b0cc%26pid%3D100338%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D8%26sd%3D272121654679   that I would love to have available for some various drives, but the OS can't seem to find it/them.

Any ideas?

[deduction]

I am setting up an older box to utilize some older gear with Mint 17.3 and I have one of these  http://www.ebay.com/itm/Promise-Tech-Ultra100-IDE-Hard-Drive-PCI-Controller-Card/262287757452?_trksid=p2141725.c100338.m3726&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20150313114020%26meid%3Dcd64ef245d4d4393b3742bc4bd14b0cc%26pid%3D100338%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D8%26sd%3D272121654679   that I would love to have available for some various drives, but the OS can't seem to find it/them.

Any ideas?

Does lshw reveal anything interesting? Some legacy hardware support has been deprecated as of late, even in modularized distribution kernels.  Are you sure that kernel exists for this particular IDE controller?  If you can identify the name of the module that should support your controller (if one exists), then try doing `sudo modprobe <modulename>` and see if that affects anything (watch dmesg).  If the mainline kernel contains support, but your system does not provide the module, you may have to recompile your kernel which is not that terrible on a Debian-based distro like Mint.  But, it's probably going to be more work than one would want, unless one is into that kind of thing.

[smknjoe]

I am setting up an older box to utilize some older gear with Mint 17.3 and I have one of these  http://www.ebay.com/itm/Promise-Tech-Ultra100-IDE-Hard-Drive-PCI-Controller-Card/262287757452?_trksid=p2141725.c100338.m3726&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20150313114020%26meid%3Dcd64ef245d4d4393b3742bc4bd14b0cc%26pid%3D100338%26rk%3D3%26rkt%3D8%26sd%3D272121654679   that I would love to have available for some various drives, but the OS can't seem to find it/them.

Any ideas?

If you just want to pull data off of the drive then these types of adapters will work with just about any modern OS: http://www.directron.com/usbdsc5.html

I wouldn't trust used parts from ebay. Here is a brand new one for half the price: http://www.directron.com/sdvia1a2s.html If you still want to use PATA instead of SATA (they are both IDE actually) then I'd guess that  you'll have better luck with "server" versions of Linux OSs. It could be that your adapter is bad or that there is no native support for the chip(set) the adapter uses. I haven't used PATA in a long time, but I'd be surprised if support was completely removed from the kernel.

[PQTran]

I've mainly been on Windows my entire life, and last year had a chance to play with a macbook. Now I'm trying out ArchLinux, I really hope it'll be my next big OS 

[Matt3o]

Arch Linux is the only distro I can live with on desktop/laptop.

My file/backup server runs on debian.

[Leslieann]

I am setting up an older box to utilize some older gear with Mint 17.3 and I have one of these  (trimmed)   that I would love to have available for some various drives, but the OS can't seem to find it/them.

Any ideas?

A lot of older drivers have been culled from some distros, Ubuntu in particular has removed a LOT of older drivers you would expect to be there considering how Linux evangelists tell you more hardware is supported than Windows. I have an old HP server with a scsi card which was considered almost a mainstay in it's day, nope, won't run, same with an old 3com nic. 

Your options are find a driver and insert it, try another distro, Debian, Gentoo or Arch are the 3 biggest and most likely to support it, however, Gentoo and Arch are really not a beginners distro. Neither is Debian when compared to Ubuntu and Mint, but Arch and Gentoo are on a whole other level.

I would probably try Debian just to see if it can find it, if not I would probably just look for a driver. Odds are, if nothing else, i would bet the network Debian installer would do it. Gentoo and Arch are good, but for someone new to use them, it isn't like diving in head first into the deep end, it's more like diving head first into the deep end from the high dive, backwards. If you know exactly what you want from your distro, great, by all means, have at them, but if you are new, a more common distro is going to be A LOT easier. Even if it means having to manually install a driver or two.

[fohat.digs]

Does lshw reveal anything interesting? Some legacy hardware support has been deprecated as of late, even in modularized distribution kernels.

Thanks guys, but it seems to have worked itself out. After taking it all apart and carefully re-seating all the parts, and a couple of re-boots, the hard drives are recognized and working.

Now if I can get my floppies (3.5" and 5.25") to mount I will be good. The mobo has a floppy receptacle, and the OS seems to see that there is at least one floppy drive (cable length/bay locations/etc dictate that the 5.25" has to be "A" and the 3.5" has to be "B") but after lighting up the lights (at least on A) I eventually get an "unable to mount" error.

Maybe I am silly for wanting the native ability to read ancient disks, but I have not found a simple way to make it happen with the 5.25" floppies or to house them externally. I have a couple of outboard USB 3.5" drives that work fine for their part.

[vivalarevolución]

I'd like to clear up some confusion I notice. Some people seem to think that Ubuntu has a specific graphical user interface and Linux Mint has another specific graphical interface.

But technically, you could get Unity on Linux Mint and Cinnamon / Mate on Ubuntu.

The only difference between the two distros is what they have INSTALLED BY DEFAULT.
Since both even share the same package manager (apt), you could easily install another desktop environment / window manager on either of the distributions to whatever you like (KDE, Unity, LXME, Fluxbox, evilwm, i3, Mate, Unity, whatever!).

Absolutely true -- But for someone new, I would recommend they pick a distro where they're happy with as many of the defaults as possible. The more things you strike out on your own to change, the more difficult it will be to get support if necessary, and the more effort you'll have to put in to get your system how you want it. While it's certainly possible, it's not the most newbie-friendly way of doing things.

I agree with this sentiment.  As a newbie, trying to customize too much at the start might turn you away from Linux, considering all the problems you run into.  Find something you like out of the box, then start messing around from that base.  You don't want to have a non-functioning computer, that's super frustrating.

Also, my Broadcom wireless card was a huge hassle when I was started out.  I couldn't even get openSUSE to recognize and connect with my Broadcom card.  And openSUSE is a Top 5 distro.  I ended up buying an Intel wireless card so I didn't have to worry about downloading the proper packages and drivers every time I tried out a new distro.

[fohat.digs]

Find something you like out of the box, then start messing around from that base.  You don't want to have a non-functioning computer, that's super frustrating.

Also, my Broadcom wireless card was a huge hassle when I was started out.  I couldn't even get openSUSE to recognize and connect with my Broadcom card. 

Internet connectivity was the one over-riding reason that I abandoned OpenSUSE even though there was a lot to like there and I really wanted to make it work.

The final straw was when my son and I built a computer out of obsolescent but by no means antiquated gear (as I recall, something on the order of an AM2 socket mobo (probably Gigabyte or Asus) with plenty enough RAM and a good-sized hard drive) about a year ago. Under OpenSUSE I could not connect to the internet, and I tried the onboard ethernet socket, a NIC in a slot, and 2 different USB wireless dongles (all of which worked elsewhere).

The OpenSUSE forum was a monumental and epic fail - not only were the "answers" cryptic and incomplete, but almost every member who even tried to "help" me was breathtakingly arrogant and condescending and usually indicated that I was simply too ignorant and stupid to be there at all. And the 1 or 2 members who were slightly nice to me had no clue about the actual solution. They just tossed out random thoughts, but when it was a matter of showing somebody pages-long output of commands when you cannot connect - well - about all you can do is take screen shots and go to another computer with a flash drive or something equally kludgy.

Although I do not have experience with that many online forums, I always felt like they were usually built as helpful communities. But the OpenSUSE forum is definitely an aggressive wall of gatekeepers determined to keep ordinary civilians and casual users out of the club.

[vivalarevolución]

Find something you like out of the box, then start messing around from that base.  You don't want to have a non-functioning computer, that's super frustrating.

Also, my Broadcom wireless card was a huge hassle when I was started out.  I couldn't even get openSUSE to recognize and connect with my Broadcom card. 

Internet connectivity was the one over-riding reason that I abandoned OpenSUSE even though there was a lot to like there and I really wanted to make it work.

Yea, that's the one reason I abandoned openSUSE as well.  Beginner's don't need this hours long process just to connect to the Internet.

Any online forum can be like that, they tend to thicken your skin.  Geekhack is friendly anomaly, in that respect.

[ResonantPixel]

Arch Linux is the only distro I can live with on desktop/laptop.

My file/backup server runs on debian.

Currently using arch, but god-damn, setting it up on a RAID zero array is basically impossible(been trying to get it to boot on my desktop) : L, having said that I have been running it on my laptop for the best part of a year and I love how quick it is! (admittly gnome doesnt help on that front), I am thinking for my desktop I am going to hopefully get nixos to install; because apparently it has pretty solid RAID support. I guess that shouldn't be suprising though considering it is quite popular for use on servers. That'll have to wait though as currently not in the same place as my desktop, until then arch will rule! 

[KRKS]

Some legacy hardware support has been deprecated as of late, even in modularized distribution kernels.

Gee, I wonder if it was inspired by a certain person removing readahead because "nobody uses HDD's nowadays".

In other words, your best bet is Debian Wheezy(NOT the newest one, Jessie) or Gentoo

[CSCoder4ever]

Or just use a different unix entirely  )

[smknjoe]

Arch Linux is the only distro I can live with on desktop/laptop.

My file/backup server runs on debian.

Currently using arch, but god-damn, setting it up on a RAID zero array is basically impossible(been trying to get it to boot on my desktop) : L, having said that I have been running it on my laptop for the best part of a year and I love how quick it is! (admittly gnome doesnt help on that front), I am thinking for my desktop I am going to hopefully get nixos to install; because apparently it has pretty solid RAID support. I guess that shouldn't be suprising though considering it is quite popular for use on servers. That'll have to wait though as currently not in the same place as my desktop, until then arch will rule! 

Still using Debian and Slackware for just about everything, and OSX for work. Fully encrypted RAID 0 is doable on both (it's downright easy on Debian). I tried Arch years ago and didn't care for it...super popular though...

[xondat]

Tried Mint in college for a few days, I like it but I feel like I'd never switch simply because so much more is supported for windows. Feel free to enlighten me though, I'd love to hear why I should switch to Linux.

[Leslieann]

Tried Mint in college for a few days, I like it but I feel like I'd never switch simply because so much more is supported for windows. Feel free to enlighten me though, I'd love to hear why I should switch to Linux.

There isn't necessarily "more", it's just that you are used to your windows programs. The Android Play store has "more" than the Itunes store, but how much of the Play store is garbage? Do we need 90 fake fart sound apps, 80 of which are the same exact app?

On the surface, Windows has more than Mac and Linux and in some specific things it does, but think about it more deeply. For graphics it's Photoshop, for office it's MS Office. There's Corel, Krita, Gimp, Open Office, and more for Windows, but how many know they even exist? Same with Office. Ask most office workers what text editor they use and most will say Word. Even when they have options, they don't even know they exist. So is there really more? Or is 90% of that just perception. The fact that the programs you know are not on Linux doesn't equate to significantly less options, just not the options you're used to.

Unless you play the latest trendy games or need something specific for work, odds are you could get by on Linux every bit as good as Windows. I'm not saying you should, you like Windows, you're familiar with it and see no reason to change, which is fine, just don't mistake quantity for quality.