Kubuntu: Easy install and run, not for power user
I've been loyal to Fedora Core since it's inception. It's been one of the many mainstream user-oriented
distributions for some time now, since Red Hat focused on branding its core product to enterprise applications. Lately, when I'm Googling to solve a problem or visiting Linuxquestions.org, I've seen a growing number of people
encouraging people to use Debian-based Ubuntu. This past Labor day weekend I spent some time trying out Ubuntu.
First I visited the website. Rather than offer one monolithic distribution that allows users to customize various aspects of an install, the folks at Ubuntu opt to offer various flavors (via separate install ISO files) that perform a standard install. The typical Ubuntu offers a secure Gnome-based desktop installation. There's also a Ubuntu that offers a server installation. I'd also heard some praise about Kubuntu, a KDE based desktop installation. This approach allows new users to easily install Linux without having to understand a lot of extra information about what they are installing.
For me however, I didn't care for these options. Ubuntu offers these choices to promote security, which is a commendable effort. However, I'd personally have a need for something of a hybrid machine. Unfortunately, I couldn't find much feedback as to if it makes more sense to install a desktop installation and add server components or install a server installation and add desktop components. I wasn't certain which machine to test it on at this point. I then decided to go for a desktop installation on one of my high-use laptops. Further, I opted for the >A HREF=http://www.kubuntu.org/>Kubuntu flavor.
After downloading the (DVD) ISO, one cool feature was the fact the install disc was also a Live DVD. Meaning, I could boot up and play with the OS from the DVD without actually installing it on the machine. I've played with a few "Live CD" distributions that will also allow an install, but this is the first time I've seen a typically installed distribution offer the "Live" feature as a bonus. Of course, I'm basing this all off of Fedora - I don't know if other "big" distributions may already be doing this.
This leads me to two of my big gripes about the base Kubuntu install. One, lack of obvious and easy WPA support. Two, no build or compile tools installed by default. I'll elaborate on each.
As far as the wireless/WPA concerns go, I'm well aware that wpa_supplicant will do the trick. However, I would assume that an Operating system that is trying to give Linux to the masses would create some GUI utility to allow people to easily input key information. WEP isn't secure in either the 64 or 128 bit strength. More people will be using WPA. If you don't care enough about security to be craving WPA at this point, and you're okay with WEP - good for you. But if you're reading this web site, you'll probably realize that WPA is essential at this point. I don't know of any major distribution that's included a WPA GUI client at this point. I believe Fedora (wpa_supplicant-gui) and Debian (wpagui) do have some projects in the early stages.
The WPA issue I mention above ties into my second complaint. The laptop in question was Intel Centrino-based. It used linux ipw2200 drivers. Fortunately, Kubuntu offered the driver and the firmware. (Fedora Core does not include firmware.) If you look at documentation for wpa_supplicant, you may think that your command line for wpa_supplicant may look something like this...
wpa_supplicant -Dipw -c/etc/wpa_supplicant.conf -ieth1 -B
...which tells wpa_supplicant you're using the ipw2200 driver (-Dipw). This problem kicked my ass in Fedora also, but I had forgotten about it. A few months ago, on some obscure message board, I finally realized that changing the drivers to the Kernel's wireless extensions offer the fix. It wasn't until after an hour or two of trying to fix things I remembered this obscure detail, which isn't really documented anywhere.
wpa_supplicant -Dwext -c/etc/wpa_supplicant.conf -ieth1 -B
In the process of troubleshooting the issue, I looked at recompiling the driver from source. Fortunately, I had the latest drivers on a thumb drive just in case. This is my second problem, lack of build tools. I used the "make" command, but it wasn't installed. I was to use "Adept" to install the "build-essential" package from a repository, which was kind of screwy because I didn't really have network availability at this point. Yes, I know it's on the installation disc, but I couldn't get it to install for some reason. (I believe it was a dependancy issue, "Files not available", outdated, etc.) Even people new to Linux will eventually want to build something from source. It just seems to me like forcing people to use Adept to get packages early on isn't the right thing to do.
I installed XMMS, my favorite media player. It experienced one spontaneous crash, but I've had no other stability peculiarities other than that. As expected, the installation is solid and stable.
My impression of the distribution is increasing as time goes on. It seems like, as many people will likely agree, Kubuntu is more of a "I want a clean reliable OS for typical use functionality" and Fedora is more of a "Tweaker's Linux or purist's Linux."
Syndication