Slashdot Mirror

* 'lnx4win' for standard graphic installation using Linux for windows. This will create two files on your Windows partition which will carry the Linux installation and swap. Great if you don't want to get into some messy partitioning.

Back then we didn't have live distros so you couldn't just boot off the CD to try it out, you had to commit to installing it in a fashion first and the linux for windows method was the best way for newbies

Instead of one central purchasing order they will go after each state/county and government organisation parallely and independently.

And they'll say "Whoa, you're thinking of using what filthy hippy app? ...

The 1990's called, they want their talking points back. Notice that after all these years, the best MSFTers can do to counter RMS is to call him names? Can't handle any of the ideas or technologies, can they?

We've known for decades that FOSS is about making money. Some discussions which might make the point that FOSS concepts dovetail with that:

• Open Source Means Business
• Open Source and Capitalism
• Capitalist view of Open Source
• Is Open Source capitalist or communist?
• • Open Distribution vs Open Source
  • Open source is a capitalist's game
  • It's about capitalism, not freebies

and so on...

This seems to offer a pretty good explanation of how the filesystem works:
http://www.freeos.com/articles/3102/
Another guide is here:
http://tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/html/sect_03_01.html

It's obviously different than Windows, but as those articles describe there are lots of advantages to doing things that way. Modern distributions like Ubuntu have made it possible to easily handle CDs and other removable disks, which can be a bit of a sticking point.

"There are far too many vulnerabilities in office docs, and no way for me to lock those programs down"

I do this, set the msWord Viewer as the default for opening msWord docs, set normal.dot as readonly and use Open Office for editing msWord docs. Use Firefox and noscript for browsing and use anything but Outlook for email.

"Ok, you've got open LDAP authentication .. You're also missing Group Policy"

It really amazes me that Windows users need so many 'tools' for ding the simplest thing. The standard Linux directory structure allows for setting access to directories under a per group basis. Users can be members of a number of groups. All you have to do is set some rights on a directory.

http://www.freeos.com/articles/3127/

"Ok, you can do security updates. How about deploying software? What about configuring policies for things like disabling CD-ROM drives, enforcing screensaver timeouts, etc."

Disabling CD-ROM drives is the same as setting access rights on a directory. See, no special 'tool' to do the job. All you do is set owner of the CD-ROM to group cdusers and deny access to all others. Similar for USB access.

"We have 13 servers and over 100 individual pieces of software"

Jeez, sounds a bit over designed for a few autocad drawings .. :)

"our IT team is essentially two people"

Given the size an complexity of your network that does surprise me. I have worked in a f400 international consultancy where they had an IT dept consisting of twelve people on the helpdesk, a senior IT manager, a networking guy, and someone who traveled round the building with a case load of install CDs. Reinstalling was such a regular occurrence, that they set up a dedicated Ghost server. Each desktop station had two Ethernet connections, one for the Internet and one directly connected to the Ghost server, plug in the Ghost server and reboot and in went into install mode.

The support staff spent most of their time remaking Exchange profiles. Every so often the Fax server and printers would go offline, and no one could figure out why?

"and we have enough free time to do things properly, actively planning and testing projects for future deployment"

I have a box running openSuSE 9.0 as a SMB server, I haven't had to touch it on over ten months ...

But it is probably time to remind the world of FreeOS, a compendium of Free operating Systems.

Includes a gnice Activity Status comparison.

But it is probably time to remind the world of FreeOS, a compendium of Free operating Systems.

Includes a gnice Activity Status comparison.

And yes, it runs Linux. =)

How about a PC in a wristwatch.

This is from 2001 so it's a little dated.

http://www.freeos.com/articles/3800/

Yes it runs Linux.

I think id Games used to compile on SGIs. I know MS did some development on Xenix/i286 and Xenix/i386 (somewhere, there's an MS quote about how MS-DOS/Win is not suitable for serious development..hah). In fact, the i286 had a memory management unit, but the only OS (that I know of) which took full advantage of it was Xenix. Minix/i286 may have supported it to some extent, as well.
Some emulator pages....mac&ppc, simos (for SGI/IRIX5), DEC 10 and Big Iron, various DEC emulation, Apple Lisa, Z80 sim&development, yaze Z80, Apricot and Amstrad, bochs x86, ... and there's always emulators that run under DOS that you could run under Bochs or QEMU.

Other possibly helpful links:
emulators on freshmeat
OS kernels on freshmeat
OS's on freshmeat
bunches of old OS disk images
CP/M and MP/M
CP/M disks
Lisa Xenix
LisaOS
tandy xenix
elks and uclinux
freevms
freedos
Apple I (not II) development
reactos - winnt clone
MAME stuff and pinball Mame
info about tandy disk images
solaris minix
minix info and version 3
various free (as in beer and/or speech) OS list
The OS list at tunes.org

You can find a solution(s) to your problem at one or more
of the following locations:

http://www.centos.org

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/

http://en.opensuse.org

http://www.opensolaris.org/

http://www.ecomstation.com/

http://www.redhat.com

http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/

http://www.openbsd.org/

http://www.freebsd.org/

http://www.netbsd.org/

http://www.dragonflybsd.org/

http://www.osfree.org/doku/en:start

http://www.skyos.org/

http://www.freeos.com/

http://www.minix3.org/

Added to bypass the stupid slashdot lameness filter which apparently doesn't like a post full of links. WTF is wrong with the
stupid lameness filter? Jeez, what does it want, for us to type paragraphs of meaningless drivel just to get past the lameness filter?
Sheeesh. OK, this is really stupid. Why don't ajfajf al;djal a fa fa lkdf jaa fal ja;ljf af af ajf;lajf alfjalf a fjal;fjafl; jaflakjf af;laj
jalkfaj fjf af af fajjjajal jajfa f afjdlakej2233 2235t2352 dsfalkfjal f 222j2 afdkja f23 2 2 2t2352322 233252352 2323232.

...To quote the film Brewster's Millions, "None of the above."

I heartily recommend evaluating FreeBSD. For people seeking something a little less prickly than the vanilla tree, PC-BSD is also available, which adds a graphical user interface by default and a more graphically oriented form of package management, among other things.

Stallman raises some valid points with regards to how Vista users are likely to get the shaft...but what Stallman isn't likely to want you to know is that there is a third option, which means you don't have to climb aboard the FSF/Linux bandwagon either.

FreeBSD is a very solid system. The Linux binary support means you can get such things as Adobe's binary browser plugins working with it, and FreeBSD also has native binary nVidia video card drivers available, meaning that you can play World of Warcraft and all of the usual 3D games with Wine. Ports, the package management system, has makefiles for over 16,000 applications, and it's also pretty much the only package management system I've used that I consider genuinely reliable and decent.

You will possibly see some people aligned with the FSF shouting me down for writing this...Stallman doesn't want anyone using FreeBSD or the BSD license, and the reason why is because if people do, that's less people who end up seeing him as an authority figure, or who he has to use as extra bodies for his activism.

It's got to the point where to a large degree, using an operating system associated with any particular group means you're vulnerable to control by that particular group. With Microsoft, sure, you end up with DRM. With Linux, you end up with *only* the license/s Stallman wants you to use, and no other...as well as possibly getting conscripted for his activism if you become sufficiently close with the FSF.

The only solution I've been able to find is to seek an operating system which isn't affiliated with any particular group...or at least controlling agenda. FreeBSD is one, and is probably the most mature that I've been able to find...but there are a few others, for people who want to investigate those. That however is what we need...an operating system, without economic, political, or technological control. Microsoft want economic and technological control of people...Richard Stallman wants political control of people. The reason why I don't find the offerings of either of those two camps appealing is because I value self-determination...the ability to make my own choices.

This is just outrageous. If you read the groklaw article this is pretty serious move in the wrong direction. I cannot believe even they are trying to justify these actions.

It is a dark day in the history of Linux.

First RedHat now Linus and groklaw. Who's next to be corrupted by this?

Where can I turn for a free OS? Obviously anything with Linux in the title out.

I checked out FreeOS but most of their stuff is Linux or some very arcane OS.

I'm fast running out of hope. Where can I turn now?

http://www.freeos.com/articles/3800/

"...and the NetBSD folks want to port their system to anything bigger than a digital watch..." Linus has you beat again. http://www.freeos.com/articles/3800/ (Linux wrist-watch)

486? Eh? Are you quite mad? ;-) Thats a jolly good computer if I ever saw one. Try this one for size:

Its not the sort of OS I'd use on anything from a teensy-weensy wrist-watch to a cellphone to a PDA to an everyday desktop computer to a tv set-top box to a 512 CPU SGI system at all.

While interoperability with Microsoftware is sometimes difficult due to their use of proprietary technologies, a pure Microsoft environment is generally better in the interoperability department than a pure Linux environment. MS Office is integrated with IIS which is integrated with the OS which uses the MMC for a variety of administration tasks (including those outside of IIS), etc. Even under the application level, the GUI is integrated with the OS (it's part of the kernel).
All this comes at a price, however, because extremely strong integration (Microsoft's method for implementing interoperability) means that removing certain pieces is difficult to do. Servers usually do not need a GUI, because they sit there and run headless, doing their thing for years at a time with little local interaction. A GUI uses memory and adds a great deal of running code and therefore bugginess. In Unix, to rid yourself of the GUI, you simply never start X. In Windows, it is sort of possible to never start the GUI, but it is very difficult to do and the aforementioned integration of everything means that even if you do manage to accomplish this feat, you will have limited power over the system since at its core, Windows is designed to be administered with GUI tools.
Unixy OSes, Linux and the BSDs in particular, can be stripped down so thoroughly as to run on a wrist watch or low-power PDA. In order to run on PDAs at all, Microsoft had to develop an in-house custom Windows system, CE, in order to operate under the constraints of a limited system, and it is still far more resource intensive than a Linux system can be.
Granted, Linux has to be stripped down to run on such hardware as well, but since the source code is available, it can be done. You won't find any companies selling custom imbedded copies of Windows made by anyone but Microsoft.

That said, the use of open standards is a system that will eventually overtake even the best fully integrated but proprietary system because any company or group can work on improving the system, products, and ideas, to differntiate themselves. No matter how many resources Microsoft or any other closed company has, "not microsoft" has more.

I just found FreeOS...

http://www.freeos.com/ lists NetBSD as supporting 30 platforms. Perhaps this is now even more with the v2.0 release? That's amazing!

Read the article below for comparisons of free operating systems...
http://www.freeos.com/compare/

I just found FreeOS...

http://www.freeos.com/ lists NetBSD as supporting 30 platforms. Perhaps this is now even more with the v2.0 release? That's amazing!

Read the article below for comparisons of free operating systems...
http://www.freeos.com/compare/

You mean like this?

Come on, a 10s google.

So Fossil offers us a Palm based wristwatch. We already all knew about the Linux based wristwatch from IBM right. What the Slashdot crowd really needs to know is that the Microsoft/MSN based wristwatch will be here this fall. :-)

ok, so maybe not as breakthrough as to deserve any attantion, it does look to offer IM through Microsoftâ(TM)s dynamic new Smart Personal Objects Technology platform.

Modules don't push things into userland, they still run in kernel space.

I stand corrected. Granted, I didn't believe you at first since you posted AC. Pardon my bias. I found a very approachable article on kernel modules. (I wish all HOWTOs could be written so clearly.)

Please download this shell script. You can use the following instructions:
wget http://www.freeos.com/guides/lsst/scripts/q19
chm od 777 ./q19
link -s ./q19 winver
winver

These watches look pretty cool but I don't know if they are really that fun to use. Anyway, here is a review from FreeOS.

And here is another from big blue itself. They even got Bluetooth on that puppy.

Already been done:

IBM clocks in with new Linux watch Developers Warm Up to Linux Watch IBM's Linux Wristwatch IBM Research - Linux Watch

Just add a roll-up keyboard and you almost have one. Not sure about the mouse or CPU...

Of course, the CPU would be IBM's Linux wristwatch.

You are right, getting nice fonts its not as easy as windows. This is how I got mine to work

Maybe this is unhealthy nostalgia on my part, but remember the Freedows operating system? Apart from at least one personality involved, it sounded like an interesting idea. I wonder if it's still percolating in somebody's basement or if it'll ever get dusted off and looked at afresh. The Alliance OS project was going to use the same cache-kernel technology, but it apparently hasn't budged either.

Maybe this is unhealthy nostalgia on my part, but remember the Freedows operating system? Apart from at least one personality involved, it sounded like an interesting idea. I wonder if it's still percolating in somebody's basement or if it'll ever get dusted off and looked at afresh. The Alliance OS project was going to use the same cache-kernel technology, but it apparently hasn't budged either.

FreeOS is another good place to find out about these kind of operating systems.

yep, not many operating systems out there...

As was noted by someone, he doesn't seem to ask for help either, so I think that sums it up quite well.

Still, this is nice but I'm not sure it's stuff that matters© that much. Oh well...

You're taking one comment, one parenthetical comment, from my post and obsessing over it. If what you want to do is encourage the free distribution of software and the recognizing of contributors, then you should like the Berkeley license; it explicitly requires users of the code to give credit to contributors. It's much more sharing-oriented than the GPL. The GPL is a political tool to that perpetuates Richard M. Stallman's delusional, destructive, utopian vision of the world.

Hmmm...no. The GPL is just as "sharing-oriented", the stakes are different. That's what you mean. You call it delusional, destructive because it goes against your received ideas about property rights. It is not utopian, because it is a very effective and realistic conception of how to enact change. And it's working--Linux has emerged as an alternative OS for servers and the desktop. You should be more specific about your gripes with it, because its demonstrable success needs to be accounted for. Your comment about about it being a parenthetical remark is irrelevant, since the remark is clear evidence of your stance on IP.

Your remarks about medical tech and R&D are ill-founded, because there is real world evidence that suggests the opposite. Not only have public universities before the Bay-Dole Act generated many of the non-patented innovation in medicine in the past century, but centrally-planned economies like Cuba have been developing very important medical knowledge that is being used throughout the global medical establishment. Do your research before accepting the validity of your received ideas.

The issue of artist compensation is completely unrelated to labels efforts to undermine fair use rights. And I fail to see how destroying the recording industry is going to make anyone's life better. I can't express my frustration with your brand of idealistic delusion. But let me try to explain why you're a complete idiot: What does a label do? Yes, it manufactures and distributes music. Whatever. What it really does is tell people what music is important and what music they should listen to. Mass media students would call them gatekeepers. Labels shape public opinion. That's why artist sign up with labels.

Yeah I'm a complete idiot. You suggest this idea of labels as cultural gatekeepers, telling people what music is important. If I accept even that ridiculous idea--they're in the business of selling music they perceive as marketable, not good--the industry has an indisputably bad record of being the gatekeepers. Listen to the radio stations which are heavily affiliated with these companies, their advertising organs. The music is shit. I don't know about your musical tastes...

A few other comments: Using phrases like "you're a complete idiot" only diminishes your argument. This sort of ad hominem attack is pointless. Make your fucking point without being insulting. Secondly, I'm not a utopian, I didn't say I was, and the fact you think I am suggests you don't understand the argument I'm making. A revision of property right laws like the GPL has had a real world effect and success, and I say thank god. This makes software and other forms of information available for less-prosperous individuals and communities, including nation-states who need it to improve their services such as medical care, news, education. If you want to learn about it before dismissing it, check out sites like this.

Regarding your last remarks, perhaps you're enthralled with these sites and radio stations as purveyors of your newest musical and other tastes, but I haven't found them as interesting. Most people with broadband access to the Internet are getting their music off Napster, and many are checking more eclectic sounds. Good luck to them. If you still find yourself looking to the industry after substantial changes in music distribution and ownership, I suppose it's a testament to how unready you are to challenge your assumptions.

I was looking at the Interview at ZDNet and was hoping on some technical dope.. didn't find any. This may be a slightly dated interview but has some technical stuff. It was done in August.. when Linus said "Now it's been close to a year and a half and it's going to be another two months at least." Torvalds unplugged
Prakash

If you're more worried about hiring Indian programmers now because of this incident, you are either ignorant or racist, or both. Many of the biggest proponents of open source software are in India, and many of the local and national governments in the country are pushing open source solutions for various nationalized industries, health care, etc. Look at coverage on http://freeos.com

The ethics problems exist everyone, and should certainly spring up in a country with four times the US population. No, I think you should start worrying about hiring about anyone, beginning with US citizens. Considering the ethics of most multinational and transnational corporations whose capital generally flows to the U.S., if you want to talk ethics you should be worried about them.

Everything can be gotten for free in the RH case as well. RHN is so you can just have all your system's details entered (if you want to) and upgrades automatically installed (if you choose to), all using a high-priority server, and on all your systems.
This can of course be done manually as well -- just use your favorite RH mirror (everything is acessible for free on the mirrors) or use the up2date program, that will check your system's configuration and get the relevant updates and install them for you. So RHN is basically just a way to do this automatically and conviniently on a bunch of computers; you are of course free to write a script or something like that to do this for several systems if you don't want to use RHN.

I know of no tiered model of RHN as I described.

There are two tiers - either you get your updates yourself from a mirror, or you pay a little and get the best access to RH:s own server that RH can possibly provide you with, and the possibility to do this automatically with no trouble. I think this is exactly what you described.

RH 7.0 was a nightmare to me. The kernel wouldn't compile, PIs DRM/XFree 4.0 wouldn't compile, netscape seemed to go bonkers (even worse than usual) We tried oracle on it at work, and had to revert to 6.2...the queries would just hang the GUI.

Question: Did you even use the kgcc that is provided explicitly for kernel compiles (and all other compiles you want to use it for?). Also, I've had no problems with the XF4.01 that is provided with RH7, and no problems with Netscape either (at least none that can be blamed on any distribution).
Oracle, however, is compiled for glibc 2.1 and seems to have problem with glibc 2.2. I would wait on an upgrade from Oracle.

I like being able to use newer stuff, but I want it stable. I switched over to Debian, and it just seems very rock solid. XFree 4.0, helix-gnome, accerated openGL and quake3 -- all work great on my Debian boxes. I've never had this consistently on RH.

Red Hat has everything you mentioned. It has been rock solid for me.

Debian has a major learning curve, but I believe it is a better, more stable distro.

If you think a release every other year is good enough. Personally I enjoy getting all the new good stuff tested and packaged in a new release every half a year.

My only point is...if RH is so good at big projects and doing the GUI interfaces...and in many cases this is true...why not leave the distro integration and testing to Debian?

Because a release every other year when the current stable version has gone terribly obsolete is not good enough?

When I read the Debian bug database and compare it to RedHats...some of the people at Debian really, really shine. There are great people at RH, too....obviously. Maybe they should pool their talents...that's all I'm trying to say.

I think they do that quite well. Kernel hackers, glibc hackers, the glibc maintainer, gcc hackers, they are all working for Red Hat. To me, those people really shine.
Final good-to-read stuff would be this article with Michael Tiemann, core GNU person and Red Hat CTO.

We are working on reaching Linux to the 90% of the population who do not speak or understand English. Any help/suggestions would be greatly appreciated. The Indian Linux Project

I hope this will help in making KDE and GNOME more compatible with each other. Right now the newbies get fragmented and some use GNOME while some go the KDE way. Ofcourse we must give them a chance but we should also ensure that the applications are compatible with each other. Prakash FreeOS.com

We have a site dedicted to promote Free Operating Systems. Check it out www.freeos.com