Slashdot Mirror

The first link that returns is an old kernel patch, specifically for enabling the L2 cache on a Celeron, although with "powerleap", whatever that is. That is something to try though, just make sure you have a backup kernel to boot from.

Also, there was a post to lkml with a similar question here without a solution.

If you don't find a solution, the best place to post isn't slashdot but to LKML.

FTP is marginally better supported by interactive text clients, which means that geeks who haven't gotten any new software in the past decade will find it more convenient.

Really, it doesn't make sense to call HTTP wimpy when it's what's used to distribute The linux kernel, perl,
glibc, and so forth.

So you see two URLs for the same file from (for argument) the same server. You try both the FTP link and the HTTP link from your browser. Let's say (to be fair) you try them simultaneously. The HTTP download finishes first. Now you blame the FTP protocol because your HTTP user agent handles HTTP better than FTP? Surprise, surprise, web browsers can download via HTTP faster than via FTP. But try comparing a download of the same file from the same site via FTP using an FTP client and via HTTP using an HTTP user agent. I have found the FTP download to be faster. For a large download, I will take the time to drop down to a shell for ftp. The saved download time greater than the login time. Problems with firewalls? Most FTP clients can use passive mode (PASV), which is what web browsers do when using FTP. Firewalls that allow FTP tend to prefer passive mode. Now corporations that don't allow FTP at all, that's a different and misguided issue. I say misguided because blocking FTP and allowing SMTP and HTTP neither prevents downloads nor increases security inside the firewall. The proxy server can scane for and block file transfer with SMTP and HTTP? Okay, but not with HTTPS. Not sure what part you think is kludgy. As a simple example, check out the Apache proxy module or Squid. Enable the proxy and you get HTTP, HTTPS, and FTP in one fell swoop. Nothing kludgy there. And yes, big expensive commercial firewalls bundle Squid, so this is a valid corporate example. If you mean forming an FTP URL is kludgy compared to forming an HTTP URL, I don't understand what you mean.
FTP
HTTP
What was kludgy about the FTP link that wasn't kludgy about the HTTP link? Now if the original poster is in a situation where 95% of the users don't know any interface outside of a browser, then the option of an HTTP link is a good idea. But the poster did not specify.

So you see two URLs for the same file from (for argument) the same server. You try both the FTP link and the HTTP link from your browser. Let's say (to be fair) you try them simultaneously. The HTTP download finishes first. Now you blame the FTP protocol because your HTTP user agent handles HTTP better than FTP? Surprise, surprise, web browsers can download via HTTP faster than via FTP. But try comparing a download of the same file from the same site via FTP using an FTP client and via HTTP using an HTTP user agent. I have found the FTP download to be faster. For a large download, I will take the time to drop down to a shell for ftp. The saved download time greater than the login time. Problems with firewalls? Most FTP clients can use passive mode (PASV), which is what web browsers do when using FTP. Firewalls that allow FTP tend to prefer passive mode. Now corporations that don't allow FTP at all, that's a different and misguided issue. I say misguided because blocking FTP and allowing SMTP and HTTP neither prevents downloads nor increases security inside the firewall. The proxy server can scane for and block file transfer with SMTP and HTTP? Okay, but not with HTTPS. Not sure what part you think is kludgy. As a simple example, check out the Apache proxy module or Squid. Enable the proxy and you get HTTP, HTTPS, and FTP in one fell swoop. Nothing kludgy there. And yes, big expensive commercial firewalls bundle Squid, so this is a valid corporate example. If you mean forming an FTP URL is kludgy compared to forming an HTTP URL, I don't understand what you mean.
FTP
HTTP
What was kludgy about the FTP link that wasn't kludgy about the HTTP link? Now if the original poster is in a situation where 95% of the users don't know any interface outside of a browser, then the option of an HTTP link is a good idea. But the poster did not specify.

The Linux kernel you can download from here, the Red Hat distrubution here.

I guess your problem is that MS Network Client for DOS (Lan Manager 2.2 client?) works well over netbeui and badly over tcp/ip (memory and other problems). NT offers SMB over Netbeui, Samba doesn't as yet AFAIK (some info here).

Where I work, we have to support one elderly networked DOS app. It runs splendidly in a DOS window under NT or 2000, 640K DOS memory! The network redirections are all passed through to the underlying NT/2000 operating system which talks nicely to Samba.

yeah, i kind of think that while OSS has only been actively promoted for five years, the concept has been put to use for far longer. (:

It is.

who can't afford 50 bucks on a virus scanner or decent firewall software

Then don't pay 50 bucks.

I saw Nimda infections up until the end of last year

Norton and McAfee both provided free available Nimda removal tools. Besides, if you can afford IIS, you can afford a virus scanner.

From the features page:

# Microsoft Windows98 SE, Windows ME, Windows 2000, Windows XP and Mac OS compatible

Is that a feature? Or a limitation?


All I need for my "secure" alternative:

128 bytes of storage for some random data, to which I then append a password to and use as the encryption key in my crypto-loopback software implementation.

What do those "artistic" MAC users have that they need to keep secret anyway? This? Also mirrored (aka stolen) here

The people who designed this hard disk are confused about how DES works. First of all, DES has a 56-bit, not a 64-bit key. Second of all, the days of being forced to use 40-bit encryption are, thankfully, over.

If one is going to all of the effort to encrypt a hard disk, why will they encrypt it using only Single DES? It is possible to build a single-DES cracker for under $10,000 US; the 56-bit key which single DES has to offer is just not long enough.

They would have been much better off encrypting this unit with AES, which uses Rijndael to encrypt files. Rijndael has a key size between 128 and 256 bits long, which can not be brute forced with current technology. Rijndael is also more efficient than DES when implemented in software.

Also, security is only as strong as its weakest link. If the hard disk is always readable when the key card is attached, then great care must be taken to detatch and hide the key card. Far better security can be obtained by a system which asks for a passphrase. Ideally, have a system which needs both the key card and the passphrase.

While I think this is a good idea, I think one is better off with the kernel patches which allow one to encrypt filesystems in Linux.

(For windows and Mac users, sorry, I use neither so can not help you)

- Sam

Based on that 5th paragraph, I can tell you're just being sarcastic. But I'm bored and feeling like explaining things, so:

1) Red Hat linux is only one distribution. Mandrake is, yes, based on Red Hat, but they aren't the same company. Red Hat does not *own* linux, nor did they even create it. Search for "Linus Torvalds" on google. Red Hat was merely one of the first companies to package it and sell it for money. I consider them the AOL of linux: They make it easier for idiots to use this operating system, what with their packagae manager.

Debian and Slackware have absolutely nothing to do with Red Hat, except providing a copy of the rpm software (mainly because it's so easy most people use it. I refuse to, I like to compile my own). Each distro has its own list of software packages that they include, and THAT'S what separates them. Each incremented version (Red Hat 7.0 vs Red Hat 8.0, or Slackware 8.0) only means there are more recent versions of the programs included, maybe some programs added or removed. I believe they all use the kernels available at kernel.org, but I could be wrong.

I personally don't think Red Hat themselves are going to get anywhere *near* as large as microsoft, but I'm sure they're trying.

2) The GPL (open-source license) is the reason linux is as big as it is today: It allows people the ability to acquire this and LEARN it, without having to shell out too much money-- Even better, it allows them to take the software and modify it, making it better or adapting it to their purpose. This is what the linux community is all about. Microsoft taking the code and changing it, and then *charging* for it (which you know they ain't gonna give nothing for free) would go against that license, and they could be sued.

What's to keep hackers from creating virii to specifically target this OS? Nothing. Except that then *they* become susceptible to this virus as well. Personal opinion, most hackers use some flavor of *nix.

3) Kill the command line? The *reason* *nix is as powerful as it is? When was the last time you were able to modify *every* one of your 1,421 mp3 files with a single command? Windows has NOT eliminated the command line. Every single version of windows (excepting maybe CE, perhaps) comes with what they call "Command Prompt" or "MS-DOS Shell". What do you think this program is? it's like the joke "Windows 98 is a 32-bit patch to a 16-bit overlay on an 8-bit operating system created by a 2-bit company." (Isn't there a "4-bit" in there?)

4) I totally agree on the games. I'd like to see linux surpass Mac on game availability. I *would* purchase games for linux that were not released under the GPL. Close-source that crap, I don't care, just don't make me boot into windows to play games! Especially you, Blizzard!

i need to update that page. i posted it a couple years ago when the company i work for was working on the first redhat annual report - which folds out into a poster with the word "open" across the front. there were some ideas thrown out for what to put on the back of the poster; at the beginning it was just going to be blank to save money, IIRC.

being the "web guy" and the only person at our mac-based graphic design company to actually have used linux (it was around that time that i replaced our old mac file server with a linux box, guaranteeing my job security) i threw out the idea of putting the kernel source on the back.

well, needless to say, the people we were working with at redhat loved it (and loved it more after talking to some programmers). so i popped over to kernel.org and popped the concatenated text over to the designer working on the poster. the current source being about 4,000% larger than the original at that time (2.2something), we stuck with the original :)

redhat's legal folks wanted to be sure the source was safe to use and print, since v.01 wasn't covered by GPL. i noted the copyright that said the code was free for use so long as it contained that text. the writer for the report traded emails with alan cox on the subject.

then they wanted me to go through the text and take out the comments.

WTF?

oh no! it has bad words in it! they didn't seem to think there would be anything decipherable in the code, i think. in particular, someone had stumbled on linus' comment about leap years in mktime.c "I also hate Gregorius, pope or no. I'm grumpy." and thought there might be problems with its anti-pope nature.

that and "Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it up :-)" in vsprintf.c

in the end, cooler minds (i.e. mine :) prevailed, and we didn't even have to replace fuck with f**k, which was a proposed compromise at one point.

anyhoo, it ended up a cool poster, and i still have a copy hanging in my office at home. from our subsequent work for redhat, i hear that a number of the programmers have copies up in their cubes, too.

wait for 2.4.21 if our using USB, otherwise 2.4.19 is good. check out the change logs to see if there are any issues.

I would suggest the CK patchset for the 2.4 series.

or maybe 2.6.3-4 (I expect any incompatabilitys in common software will have been resolved by then and any binary drivers will have been updated)

I hope that was your question?

have fun filling up that hard drive...

oh, and you'll probably need on of these soon

Lie-nucks is definately the American-ised way of saying it. In Britain, the correct way to say it is with a "flat" i, as in lihnuks.
Which incidentally is closed to the way Linus says it
Obviously, he has a Swedish accent, so he says it with the longer ee sound, but converting that into UK English, it would go from leenuks, to lihnuks. Lienuks is due to the Americans changing the word - there are some examples of this in other words, but I can't remember them.

Kernel.org mirrors Debian and Redhat. Or didn't you know? Plus they've moved from 100 to 250Mb/sec

Grab em while they're hot.
http://mirrors.kernel.org/redhat/redhat/linux/beta /phoebe/
Don't forget to use your local mirror from kernel.org if the main one gets slow. I find .pk and .ph are fast for me in the UK, believe it or not.

This is not whoring. It's showing people an alternative source for the future.

mplayer also handles Quicktime, though you may have to recompile your kernel.

Several people seem concerned about nVidia's drivers and the forthcoming 2.6 kernel. I can't say much for tomorrow, but today, I have the latest (4191) nVidia drivers working just fine with the most recent development kernel.

To make it all work, the drivers need a minor makefile patch and updated modutils, but otherwise work just fine. You can obtain the required files from:

Unofficial nVidia driver patch
Updated modutils

Those did the tirkc for me. Your mileage may vary.

LVS was able to handle a medium-sized HTTP/HTTPS load at my last job quite well. It had 6 months of uptime serving 5-10 hits/second, and I literally never had to worry about it going down. In combination with mon, bringing machines up and down was never a problem, and failure situations were handled without the end user noticing.

Installation was a bit frustrating because I hadn't dealt with the networking issues before (the ARP problem). However, in the end it was only my lack of networking knowledge that was lacking, and the ARP problem turned out to be simple to overcome.

Support from the mailing list was great, I got thorough replies to my questions in a few hours. The documentation is good, although some parts of the HOWTO could be trimmed back a bit (more information than is needed to understand the problem, takes a bit of time to filter).

The hardware was two slower UP boxes (one live, one for failover), and the load was esstentially 0, even with mon and MRTG running.

LVS is of course just the load balancer, and the setup also included mon for monitoring, heartbeat for failover, and MRTG for trending. They all play well together, and create a very reliable, informative, load balancer setup.

Depending on your setup, one of the meta-packages such as Ultra Money or Redhat's HA suite might be best, but installing the components individually isn't much of a hassle either.

Quoting the 2.4.20 changelog, "replace end user confusing 'on fire' joke with real info"

Patches for even earlier kernels are available over at that site:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v1.3 /patch- 1.3.99.gz

It's an odd number, but the development release thing only started with the 2.x kernels.

Wrong. That started at least with 1.3 as development kernel. Among other things, you can see that by the fact that the LATEST link points to 2.0. AFAI can remember, even 1.0 was already a stable and 1.1 a development kernel.

I was not able to quickly come up with a reference to an announcement of that time, but the fact that there are only so few releases for 1.0 does make it look a lot like a stable tree.

Granted there hasn't been a NEW patch for 1.3 since 1996, but that's because 1.3 is DONE. There's nothing left to fix. I defy anyone to find a bug.

A slew of all-new features were implimented and it became 2.0.

Well, that's equally wrong. 1.3.x has been a devopment kernel, indeed (see above). And the fact, that there was no patch since 1996 is because the stable, 2.0.0, has been released in 1996. If you want to have a bug for 1.3, simply look for the last security bug in 2.0. Easy as that.

Patches for even earlier kernels are available over at that site:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v1.3 /patch- 1.3.99.gz

It's an odd number, but the development release thing only started with the 2.x kernels.

Wrong. That started at least with 1.3 as development kernel. Among other things, you can see that by the fact that the LATEST link points to 2.0. AFAI can remember, even 1.0 was already a stable and 1.1 a development kernel.

I was not able to quickly come up with a reference to an announcement of that time, but the fact that there are only so few releases for 1.0 does make it look a lot like a stable tree.

Granted there hasn't been a NEW patch for 1.3 since 1996, but that's because 1.3 is DONE. There's nothing left to fix. I defy anyone to find a bug.

A slew of all-new features were implimented and it became 2.0.

Well, that's equally wrong. 1.3.x has been a devopment kernel, indeed (see above). And the fact, that there was no patch since 1996 is because the stable, 2.0.0, has been released in 1996. If you want to have a bug for 1.3, simply look for the last security bug in 2.0. Easy as that.

Fine, so go and find a patch for a 2.0 kernel. The point remains the same.

You would be talking about
this
perhaps?

When was the last 2.1 patch?

That would be version 2.2 then. 2.1 is a development series kernel which was never supposed to be put into production use - only testing. If a vendor chooses to branch one and support it themselves, that is their choice - but don't complain about it not being supported any further by the mainstream kernel.

2.0.x, 2.2.x and 2.4.x are all being supported right now - and you can consider 2.2.x to be the logical end of the 2.1.x development series.

Fine, so go and find a patch for a 2.0 kernel. The point remains the same.

What, like this?
Your point remains WRONG.

The standard line is "just upgrade"

What do you think patches are? Just call it a patch instead of an upgrade if it makes you feel better. They're both free over in Linux and there's really little functional difference between the two.

When was the last 2.1 patch?

Probably right before 2.2 came out. Odd-numbered releases like that are development releases. You use them at your own risk even when they're current. They never have support in the first place. Why tivo's using it in a product is something only tivo knows.

Someone here is definitely delusional. I'll give you a hint: It's you.

If you visit kernel.org/mirrors, you'll see that each country link is clickable, and lists several alternative sites. Having said that, the site I use ftp://ftp.rutgers.edu is not listed among the US mirrors, was updated with the new kernel by the time the article appeared, and is on the US East coast with big time bandwidth. Excellent source for kernel stuff and debian packages.

Also, yesterday a new version of the unstable kernel was released, 2.5.50. You can download it from kernel.org (if someone has a good list of mirrors, please post, I'd prefer not to post the actual download link so we don't /. is to death) and the changelog can be viewed here. Aside from this, I assume all of those who use the currently schedule 1 substance in the US known as tetrahydrocannabinol should be able to appreciate the current version number of the stable release, 2.4.20, lol. If you mod this down for saying that, then I'm very dissapointed in you and your narrowminded cultural views.

Although I am an avid supporter of linux, I have alot of trouble keeping up with the latest version of my principal programs as well as the ever-changing kernal.

installing service packs in windows2000/XP, it updated the kernal and main programs like IE and media player all at once

but I won't begin to start using [Linux] as my primary OS untill it has service packs.

In case you wanna see if you even need the nwe kernel. You can find the changelog here. Dont download it now if you dont need it. there are peopel waiting to use those servers.

What does this "kernel" program do and where can I download it?

The kernel can obviously be downloaded from kernel.org.

What it does:
It closes the hole that Win9x opened.

Download ;)

Alan Cox :

• replace end user confusing "on fire" joke with real info

A number of early distros can be found on Ibiblio's ftp site.

Or you could get this just for fun.

[...] Microsoft could sell it for $45 and still make a profit.[...]
Well, could they?
Even then, many would not be willing to pay the price, I guess.
If you can get something so much better for free ...
Since we have a site license here,
I could have all the crap MS produces for free,
but even with that, I don't feel like it.

That's it.

Already integrated into solaris and linux.
Lots of apps supports it.
It also support many scheme of authentication, from simple passwd file to NT logon / SecureID / biometrics (ugh).

FYI, Red Hat != Linux. Red Hat == Linux Distribution Please use the correct reference.

Isn't having one person in charge of the official tree against the whole idea of open-source?

" That tree is called "Linus' tree" for a reason. The only thing you are ENTITLED to is to have your own tree."

It isn't "the official tree" - it's "the Linus tree". If you don't like it, use Alan's tree, or any of the dozens of others out there.

Shouldn't everyone have input of equal value?

Then again, a certain popular linux site also has 'super-users' who control everything. I guesse the open-source world is full of contradictions.

Would you like to write the code that keeps them separate depending on which box I fill with an 'X' in menuconfig? What about all the other aspects of the kernel where we have two, five, ten, or a hundred different patches that all do the same thing? I don't know about you, but I don't really fancy downloading a 500MB Bzip2-ball of kernel source. HDDs and bandwidth may be cheap, but come on, there are limits.

So in short, if you don't like the way Linus manages his tree - branch. Take the entire code base of any of the trees you'd like as a starting point and implement your anarchist's paradise. Let me know when it becomes stable and I'll give it a whirl.

I'm not sure why everyone is complaining. My Intel Pentium III with Speedstep runs perfectly well under linux and winders. And, I have complete control over the power management settings. If you're curious about the ongoing development of the linux kernel drivers to support speedstep and similar technologies from AMD and others look here. These drivers are available in the 2.4.19 kernel.

Now, caveat emptor, the linux drivers (at least) are still very much in development. Intel has (god bless them) chosen to withhold specifciations for SpeedStep and the cpufreq project is, therefore, having to reverse engineer them.

But, I find this feature to be very cool -- it helps my laptop run longer on battery power, which road-warriors like myself really appreciate. Especially during cross country flights. Ugh. Nothing like 6 hours to kill and no computer to code on, right? ;-)

If you are finding you can't run (say) XP with all those fading menus and visual candy canes, then you have my sympathy. Honestly. Go buy yourself a new laptop, its sure to fix whatever problems you're having with the current one.

• RedHat 7.3
• openmosix-kernel-2.4.18-openmosix3.i686.rpm
• openmosix-tools-0.2.4-1.i386.rpm
• openMosixUserland-0.2.4.tgz
• openMosix-2.4.18-4.gz
• 2.4.18 kernel source installed in /usr/src/linux/

1. Install RedHat
2. Install openMosix rpms
3. Install kernel source to /usr/src/linux and patch with openMosix-2.4.18-4.gz
4. Compile and install openMosixUserland-0.2.4
5. Configure /etc/openmosix.map
6. Reboot new openMosix kernel

7. setpe -W -f /etc/openmosix.map

   on each node
9. ...and you're clusterin'

Get the latest source from here.
As non-root user, create if needed
mkdir ~user/src
cd src
cp ~/tmp/linux.2.5.44.tar.gz .
gunzip -d linux-2.5.44.tar.gz
tar -xvf linux-2.5.44.tar
mv linux-2.5.44 linux-2.5.44-xxx#
# use a unique xxx# (example: yih1 for Your Initials Here 1)
# If you do another build for 2.5.44, then use yih2, etc
cd linux-2.5.44-yih1
# edit the Makefile, and on the 4th line make it
# appear as: EXTRA_VERSION = -yih1
# if you have a .config from a prior build then
cp ~user/src/linux-2.4.18/.config .
# I used 2.4.18 as an example. If you've never
# built a kernel before, you may have a .config
# in /usr/src/linux but it will likely be a
# very full one that will build stuff you don't need
# if you have an old .config
make oldconfig
# that will add new CONFIG_* items that are needed
# note that you'll have to Return your way through
# that to add the new items in a disabled state
# next, whether you had an old .config or not, run
make menuconfig
# go through this from top to bottom.
# it can be confusing at first, but at a
# minimum, get your processor type correct
# Use the help function
# one item you definitely want to enable is
# your IDE or SCSI stuff obviously.
# sorry, I can't provide more guidelines here
# it all depends upon your hardware. You may end
# up with unusable kernels until you get it correct
# which can be very frustrating indeed.
# but once you have a working .config, you'll
# always be able to use that as a base for future builds.
# continuing, still as non-root 'user'
nohup nice make dep clean bzImage modules &
# wait until it's done. I monitor the build via
tail -f nohup.out
# assuming the build is clean[1]
su # no dash, you want to be root but in the 'user' environment
# a pwd here should be ~user/src/linux-2.5.44-yih1
cp arch/i386/boot/bzImage /boot/2.5.44-yih1
# substitute i386 as needed for your platform
cp System.map /boot/System.map-yih1
make modules_install
# edit your /etc/lilo.conf and add a new boot item, and run lilo
# if you use grub, do the grub stuff
# make sure you keep your current kernel boot item in case the new kernel craps out
reboot

note that you don't build the kernel as root, nor do you put it into /usr/src/linux.
Only the install of the kernel is done as root.
All of the above allows you to keep multiple kernel trees, and allows you to manage them properly.

[1] - if the build is not clean, try turning stuff OFF in make menuconfig
Anything new of course may cause compilation failures

I hope that helps, that was all of the top of my head. I'm sure others can point out extra items to consider.

The 2.1 series got as high as 2.1.132.

The 2.1 series got as high as 2.1.132.

So download away and start testing!

Linus's original .99 version (the first he released publically, or anyway the first that I can find)

They put USA in the "countries" list, and it took me a while trying to find THE USA amongst all that 3rd world scum.

Here is what you are all looking for.

--

No that's why linux has linux from scratch.

For obvious reasons, and "ADV" wont work. Now, Lessig makes the mistake of thinking that the US is the whole world. That's a very bad mistake. Another mistake is not to realize that my mailserver and bandwidth has suffered from the spam if I accept it. These costs are very large indeed. The only way to avoid this cost is that spam is never sent.

I've been a regular in NANAE for a long time (not right now), and I have supported RBL and SPEWS, and I still see many positive things about them.

Yet, I don't think people realize how much power they have, and what costs a mistake will have. Use of RBL and SPEWS is voluntary, so Lessigs "vigilantism" reference is highly inappropiate. But effectively, so many people are using them that an error on the part of us is too costly for those that it hits.

Mistakes are human, and we all make mistakes, but it is easier to make mistakes when you're not working full-time on an issue, when you don't have the time to research properly. Nevertheless, these mistakes are unacceptable. By mistakes I'm not talking about the RBLing of Peacefire. They chose to stand by scumbags and chose to go to the press rather than resolve it in a manner that everybody would benefit from. I'm talking like the case of Ed Felten's "Freedom to Tinker" experiences with SpamCop and the SPEWS listing of The Linux Kernel Archives. These are examples of things that should never happen. Most of us strive for many 9s of uptime, and can appreciate what it is like to be blocked for days. Traumatic, that's what it is. :-)

Yet, that is going to happen many times more if we continue with current practices.

I think the US needs good laws. Here in Norway we have a law that requires confirmed opt-in and bans business to consumer spam. It works quite well. While I get quite a lot of religous spam from US, I get nothing from Norway, though that is not regulated. It could be that the message is quite strong that spamming is unacceptable anyway, so even the morons don't spam.

While spammers can move off-shore, I wouldn't mind blocking whole countries untill they get good laws. Moving off-shore won't work.

It will not totally stop spam, but only totalitarian regimes want total solution to problems. With laws in place, we may get a spam a month, I don't mind as long as I can turn the spammer over to the justice system and let them decide whether he overstepped the boundaries or not. That's what the justice system is there for.

Now, Lessig's proposal is bad from another angle too, and that is that it to a great extent encourages vigilantism. I really don't want a bunch of script-kiddies running around trying to obtain evidence that some randomly accused person committed spamming. Joe-jobs happen a lot, I've been joed myself. True spamfighters know a joe-job when they see it, but a random script-kiddie out to make a fast $10k won't.

A US ban on spam is needed. Blacklists should be abandoned.

Have you looked at Kernel.org lately?

it's a wonderful system, and one that carries forward the true unix tradition, something that UNIX lost long ago.

Dare I say PAM?
Pretty much every Linux distribution uses it these days.

To me, the most critical thing in the Linux market right now is the lack of good software courses, books and software itself. Without good software and an owner who understands programming, a hobby computer is wasted. Will quality software be written for the Linux market?

Almost a year ago, Alan Cox and myself, expecting the linux market to expand, hired Marcelo Tosatti to maintain Linux 2.4. The the initial work took only two months, the three of us have spent most of our lives documenting, improving and adding features to Linux. Now we have reiserfs, ext3, a robust VM, UML, and the 2.5 development tree. The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $40,000,000.

The feedback we have gotten from the thousands of people who say they are using Linux has all been positive. Two surprising things are apparent, however, 1) Most of these "users" never bought Linux (less than 10% of all computer owners have bought Linux), and 2) The amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the time spent on GNU/Linux worth less than $2 an hour.

Why is this? As the majority of users must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid?

Is this fair? One thing you don't do by stealing software is get back at Berkeley for some problem you may have had. Berkeley doesn't make money selling software. The royalty paid to us, the manual, the CD's and the overhead make it a break-even operation. One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 10-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free? The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money in Linux software. We have written 3 stable kernels, and are writing Linux-2.5, but there is very little incentive to make this software available to Linux users. Most directly, the thing you do is theft.

What about the guys who re-sell Linux, such as linuxmall.com, aren't they making money on hobby software? Yes, but those who have been reported to us may lose in the end. They are the ones who give
Linux users a bad name, and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at.

I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up, or has a suggestion or comment. Just write to me at:

3940 Freedom Circle
Santa Clara, CA 95054 USA

Nothing would please me more than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the Linux market with good software.

Linus Torvalds
Transmeta Corporation

This is an absolutely amazing thing. I'll be downloading the latest kernel tonight. I've been wanting to try out UML and now I can do so alot easier.

Make sure to use one of Jeff Garzik's Linus tree daily snapshots since 2.5.35 isn't released yet.