Slashdot Mirror

Here is the removal link

I tried that, but my Windows-only applications and games stopped working.

Here is the removal link

Uh...I can sell you that upgrade for a lot less. In fact, I'll GIVE it to you for nothing. See: https://www.linux.org/

When a company repeatedly screws you over and over, it's downright foolish to continue using them. Try to learn from the past!

Ok...last post, but have you stopped to wonder why people on Slashdot are downvoting you in this?

You're trying to twist this, but it doesn't work. You'd like it to be that I haven't seen a Linux OS in almost 20 years, but I've already shown that I started with Linux about 20 years ago and was developing software for it in 2013. I'd be willing to bet that gives me much more experience with the OS than you will probably ever have.

As far as the difference between operating system and distribution, I will summarize it as follows:

The operating system is called linux. It's mainly the kernel along with its drivers. It's what makes the computer operate...turn on, recognize the hardware attached to it, etc. But, while that makes the hardware operate, there is nothing for that hardware to do at this point. So, you package together a lot of software from different parties to get a full fledged OS that does all the things you expect your computer to do. Now, if you package together all these programs with the linux kernel then turn around and offer it to others (ie distribute it) then you have what is called a linux DISTRIBUTION. It's not a separate operating system. The core is still the linux kernel. But, it is a separate linux DISTRIBUTION.

Now, as far as your android question, you're attempting to create a strawman and put words into my mouth, but we will let linux.org answer this one:

Many of you may be unaware of this, but Android is Linux. True, they are not quite the same, but Android is Linux. For example, Ubuntu is "GNU/Linux" while Android is "Dalvik/Linux". If an operating system uses the Linux kernel, then it is a Linux system.

Now, the point he brings up is an interesting one. Richard Stallman is correct on that point: when most of us say linux, we actually mean GNU/Linux. Android may be a version of linux, but it is NOT GNU/Linux.

I'd point you here.

Just because I am peppy (artificially, that is) and knew I'd seen it before I went and dug out this link for you.
http://www.linux.org/threads/o...

I have no idea if it's deleted but, at one time, I did have a VM of OS/2 Warp and (I think it was called OS/2 Connect - but don't quote me on that.) I went through a phase where I'd install every OS I could find (and I had an MSDN subscription at the time as an award gift from Microsoft - even though I don't usually use their products except a phone). I have Solaris, OpenIndian, MINIX, Free-Open-GhostBSD (I like the GhostBSD - a lot and want to put it on bare metal but I can't figure out how to get Linux software to work on it though they tell me I can), every single one (all of them - literally) that is listed as active at DistroWatch, and more.

I seed about 160 distros now (I added some more - I can do it from remote and that connection is on it's own isolated, disparate, DSL connection.)

Just how oblivious are you? Some zero-effort googling shows a chipset on a lenovo that wasn't supported: http://www.linux.org/threads/t...
And a good number of common wireless cards (broadcom specifically?) are "supported" but usually require a weekend of wading through various forum posts and how-to guides of dubious quality in order to get the thing to cooperate.

I've yet to install linux on a laptop that didn't have issues with either the wireless and/or the wired ethernet that required jumping through quite a few hoops to make work.

But you do have to be smarter than the average corporate drone.

http://www.debian.org/
http://www.linux.org/

I think I fear for our children's future... (and mine)

> I'm 30, and I am a technology teacher [and]
> I like Microsoft products and would head in that direction, probably.

Is that what you teach? I mean, I realize Microsoft is a HUGE company making billions and billions every year. Amazes me people STILL buy their crap. The software they produce has pretty much always been bloated, slow, buggy, and a complete waste of my time. Thus I don't use them anymore.

> Is it too late for me to think about this?

YES. Apparently so. Go learn UN*X. Try BSD, learn to love Linux. Understand UN*X compared to Windows. Once you do you'll laugh at Microsoft.

> What is the best way to get started on this path?

Go to http://linux.org/ -- click on everything. Download and install Ubuntu (just my choice :) -- then once you "understand" ... go buy a Mac.

Here's a nickel, kid, go buy yourself a better OS.

Here's the best part - after 'buying' that better OS, you'll still have the nickel!

Almost anything you can do or use today has an open source option. You have open source options for everything from your operating system to your chat app. You can read open source textbooks, cookbooks and encyclopedias. You can even build an open source airplane or brew your own free beer (free beer as in free speech, not free beer as in free beer).

Given all these options, what part(s) of your life would you be unwilling to open source? Your children's education? Vaccines? A pacemaker? If so, what would your test be for deciding that a closed-source option is the only choice?

I love the "testimonial" in the Latest News box from Pivatejetscharter.com that sounds like it was written by a Linux marketing specialist:

http://www.linux.org/article/view/privatejetscharter-net-why-we-love-linux

Open Source software gave us an extra level of security and speed that just wasn’t available through proprietary software. Our website has unique demands and we designed customized security for it that we are constantly changing and updating. Unlike static proprietary software that can be studied and then hacked in mass, attacking unique open source sites just isn’t profitable and it is much more difficult.

Proprietary software is static and easily studied and hacked. Open source sites are unique and can't be hacked in mass.

http://www.linux.org/ -> http://twitter.com/LinuxDotOrg -> http://twitter.com/rlsteelman/status/197909427179884544 -> http://twitter.com/@rlsteelman (Ronald Steelman) -> http://www.ronaldsteelman.com/

"Welcome to CodeIgniter! The page you are looking at is being generated dynamically by CodeIgniter. If you would like to edit this page you'll find it located at: application/views/welcome_message.php"

Maybe his first article should be about setting up a site with CodeIgniter...or not!

Wow so now we all are lawyers? I mean give me break, what has this world come to when copying a photo causes a deluge of DMCA takedowns. If you want to share, post it on the internet. Otherwise stay off of it and go to law school.

Does that include free software like Linux, Firefox, etc? So Microsoft should be able to download that software and do whatever they want with it? If you disagree with that statement, what's the difference between Linux, Firefox, and this guy's photograph? What makes the first two copyrightable and the last one not?

No pity for the Million Micro$oft Virus/Bots/etc. because smart people run one of the 452 stable, safe, secure, virus free GNU/Linux distros, or one of the 36 *BSDs! My tolerance for any businesses that run very vulnerable Micro$oft, thus risking customers, is now zero. If forced to deal with them, do cash only, with the 3% discount for cash! Get Linux or BSD! http://linuxmint.com/ http://distrowatch.com/ http://www.bsd.org/ http://linux.org/

What guarantee does OSS make that will save taxpayers millions of dollars?

Just a wild guess, but I'd say that it's because you don't need to pay to use it.

That's only one part of the cost of software. Granted, with a lot of mainstream commercial software that initial cost is not insignificant, however then the maintenance of it comes in to play. With a few notable exceptions, OSS systems tend to be far less implemented, leading to difficulties in finding staff to maintain the systems, and maintenance often can take longer.

At one volunteer organisation that I used to maintain some of their IT systems (on a volunteer basis, I should add) I recommended we ditch the Sendmail/Dovecot/DSpam email system and replace it with Exchange - simply because it was impossible to train any of the permanent staff on how to properly create and delete new email accounts and I got sick of getting calls every few days because someone had dome something stupid and the person whose duty it was to do this couldn't do any troubleshooting. The organisation already had a Windows domain and had Office throughout the organisation, which reduced the cost a bit further.

We have to be patient with the big dinosaurs. Word travels slowly inside such a large company.

1 June 2001, Ballmer's legendary comment, "Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches. That's the way that the license works."

From the comments in TFA, 8 April 2002 - FUD from Juan Gonzalez, General Manager of Microsoft Peru gets shot down in flames by Congressman Edgar David Villanueva Nuñez

20 February 2003, David Stutz, retiring group program manager, "delivered a kick in the pants to his former employer" saying "Microsoft is in danger of being swept away by open source"

12 May 2004, Windows Template Library (and Windows Installer XML) posted to sourceforge. The blogosphere reels in shock. Even slashdot isn't sure what to think.

I got bored at this point, but there's lots more popcorn-hour fun and games as this large corporation tries to deal with a rapidly changing industry.

      Looks released to me.
http://www.linux.org/news/2010/08/01/0001.html
http://www.linux.org/news/2010/08/01/index.html

      Looks released to me.
http://www.linux.org/news/2010/08/01/0001.html
http://www.linux.org/news/2010/08/01/index.html

Our company does business in China and even has an office there. We have to constantly remind our employees that it is illegal to use VPN in China. Using SSH is also disallowed.

You could, however, setup a unencrypted SOCKS proxy on some random port.

Here's how I'd do it:

• setup a Linux server at home with basic Telnet access, this will give you unencrypted shell access
• setup your router to forward several dozen ports to port 23 on the server, this will give you redundant paths back to your server
• setup a SOCKS proxy on your server, but do not grant any access yet (except maybe for your internal network to test)
• again, setup a few dozen redundant ports for the SOCKS proxy
• once you're in China, console into your server and allow only the IP you're connected on
• configure your browser (Firefox?) to use the SOCKS proxy
• happy surfing!

Notes:

• IANAL
• YMMV

In fact I run Linux, and all software I run is free, under various licenses that allow me to make as many copies as I want.

Key word: licenses. A license that allows copying is still as much a distribution license under copyright law as a license that unconditionally prevents copying, the law is simply being applied with a different intent. See Copyleft

For example, the GPL permits copying, but imposes conditions on derivative works. If there was no copyright on the original work it would not be possible to impose any conditions on derivative works.

I suggest to you, that as a Linux user, it would be wrong to assume it IS copyrighted.

Then your suggestion would be based on a fundamental misnderstanding (see third paragraph), and could lead to prosecution under the wrong circumstances.

-- Would you take a job as Steve "Monkeyboy" Ballmer's toe-cheese extractor if it meant Microsoft would publish only via OSS licenses?

Am I allowed to use tweezers, or do I have to do it bare-handed?

-- Would you take a position as Steve "Tyrant" Jobs' fashion consultant if it meant Apple would open up the app store?

Are you kidding? I'd do that for a living wage. "Here's another turtleneck, Steve. I'm going on break."

-- Would you lick Stallman's neck and armpit if it meant GNU/Hurd became a complete, usable, modern kernel?

Ugh, why? So we can have two?

It seems I'm a bit late to the party.

The only potential's I've seen in linux for this (aside from ZFS fuse already mentioned) is...

OHSM

CacheFS

If you want to do this in hardware, you can use MaxIQ from Adaptec which, IIRC, uses linux drivers to get this function from their storage controllers. There is also a few others, one of which only mirrors the first part of the hard drive.

As irrational as this seems (to me, at least), it looks like more popular Apple mobile devices could lead to an even less accessible and standards-compliant web.

Indeed. Standards-compliance is critical in establishing developer confidence by ensuring availability of services across multiple disparate platforms. To avoid doing that, Apple and M$ resort to tactics such as vendor lock-in or other artificial platform boundaries. Removing choice(or even the awareness of choice) from the market indicates to me both companies lack of faith in their own ability to engineer good hardware/software, but hey, who would want that anyway?

Link 1 Link 2

Why not just go all the way and get a real OS?
And ceiling cat sayed: "Let there b lulz", n there wuz.
Or even chrome

http://www.linux.org/news/2004/03/12/0006.html

I've only been waiting six years to post this.

You run it by getting set up with Lazarus. There is also Free Pascal for you. Both have good Delphi capabilities. GPC has merits, too. So you do have options if you were working on an electronic health records system.

Someone has to "save your nation", in both senses. Why not you? Follow the Good $RANDOMCOLORGROUP Road with your hands, not just your pie hole.

Sectors, blocks, clusters, cylinders... I hope that as we move to solid state drives, devs have the sense to exorcise these anachronisms from the kernel. We haven't been able to get rid of terminals in the 20 years since they've even existed.. this document is heart wrenching. Try reading it; it'll make you cry to see how deeply the now-irrelevant concept of a terminal runs in Linux.

You should find most linux people friendly and willing to help learn. You might try joining a linux user group before taking on the kernel development. Here is a list of user groups http://www.linux.org/groups/ You have to remember the kernel development is difficult, some people have been programming for 10 or more years to get to that knowledge. You might try this steps in your linux knowlegde. 1) basic user 2) beginner 3) proficient use of applications 4) some programming 5) development 6) kernel programming

When I buy a computer I don't want to chose between twelve versions of windows, I want some Linux options, or a least a no OS option.

And you're part of a tiny, tiny minority. The vast majority of people don't think of the operating system as different from the hardware. They think of the entire unit as "the computer." Very few people selling to consumers is realistically going to see a benefit to offering a softwareless computer. I'd like to put the blame for that on Microsoft, but realistically, that's just people. Microsoft made the PC affordable and easy enough for anyone to use, which made it possible for the PC market to flourish.

That said, there are companies that sell Linux computers. http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/ Patronize them if you don't want to deal with Microsoft.

A month or two ago, I was trying to find a place that would have current man pages for everything. I tried http://www.linux.org/docs , clicked the "Linux Man Pages" link, and..... file does not exist. I checked again today and it still doesn't open.

Let's see - couple of examples:

Downloading/simulating human minds: the philosophical and social implications of that are a recurring theme in Greg Egan's work - Permutation City, Diaspora and several of his shorts (such as "Learning to be Me"). If you want a side-order of ultraviolence with that, there's Richard Morgan's "Altered Carbon". Of course, that's never gonna happen.

Post-scarcity economics: Not tech in itself, but the implications of tech. What if we had sufficient resources and robotic "labour" that everybody could just take whatever they reasonably wanted? How would the capitalism/socialism debate change that? This is the basis for Iain Banks' "Culture", but it also crops up a bit in Star Trek TNG.

Ain't never gonna happen. I'd better explain that one: software is a microcosm in which a "post scarcity" economy is possible because the marginal cost of "manufacturing" and distributing software has become negligible.

Near-future space flight: Stephen Baxter wrote a whole series of books on the general thesis "NASA rejected my application to be an astronaut: NASA sucks!". We have Time which had private enterprise saving the space program; Voyage (what would happen if Apollo had stayed on track and gone to Mars) and Titan (what would happen if an anti-science US president didn't replace the shuttle and we suddenly had a good reason for wanting to go to Titan).

Desperately cobbling together a cheap launcher from surplus shuttle components? Going back to an Apollo-style capsule instead of wasting fuel boosting space-planes into orbit? Private spaceflight saving the day? Ain't Never Gonna happen

(Interesting lack of US authors in that list, though...)

Perhaps you need to re-read what you wrote.

You said, all that was necessary was to prove that code in a newer product was the same as code in the older product.

That's right I did, and I stand by it. If code in the newer product is in the older software then it's possible it was copied. I also said "I don't how much of the code has to be the same to show infringement but I imagine it has to be a significant percentage."

That is not the case, because that is exactly what SCO was trying to do. They were trying to prove that code in their product was the same as code in a newer Linux product, despite the fact that the code existed in even older Linux products.

SCO was not able to show one line of code in Linux that was in Unix. If you have evidence saying otherwise please provide a link to this. Doing a quick google I found this timeline of the SCO v IBM case. The most recent mention of "code", source code, has this to say:
"March 7"
"During a hearing on summary judgment, IBM lawyer David Marriott points out that of a million lines of code that SCO has claimed belong to them, the actual amount SCO may legitimately use in their allegations is 326 lines. Of these 326 lines, most of it is header files and therefore not copyrightable, argues Marriott." No where else does it say SCO has shown any lines of code in Linux that is in System V.

Thus my point is, merely proving that Microsoft has code that is in older GPL code doesn't mean Microsoft is guilty, because the older GPL code may have come from a source that wasn't encumbered by the GPL.

My point was that it's hypocritical of GPL advocates to say Microsoft is guilty without doing due dilligence on the source of that code when they were on the opposite side of the coin in the SCO case.

If I said MS is guilty because it has code in it's software that is in GPLed code that is older than MS's code I don't know where. Oh, also I don't advocate the GPL more than any other license. If there is a license I advocate more than others it's the BSD derived licenses, I'd like be able to close my own code which BSD licenses allow. MS has used code with the license itself.

Falcon

If you don't like Fedora, you are free to use one of 400 other distros. From what I've seen of the last few releases, Fedora has done a pretty good job of improving the quality of its releases.

If you want to throw around baseless numbers, you need to explain where you pulled those out from. Exactly what methodology did you use to determine that 0.1% of "the comments" are sexist in nature?

Eh? You are the one defending the claim that FOSS is sexist. It is logically on you to PROVE the numbers.

Linux mailing lists

There, I've provided hundreds of thousands of examples of non-sexists comments. You'll need to provide 100 sexists examples to even reach 0.1% and that is only assuming 100,000 non-sexists comments. Open it up to other languages, all the distros, and you'll likely need to provide 10,000+ sexists examples to reach 0.1%.

But perhaps you don't understand the numbers, so for comparison:

Number of Americans: ~300,000,000

Number of Violent Crimes committed in America in 2008: 1,382,012

Ratio: 0.4%

Based on your logic, it would be fair to say that "Americans are violent criminals"

This will undo some mods I've made on this topic, but oh well. Ask a linux geek, online, or at LUGs http://www.linux.org/groups/ Most linux people know hardware due to having to figure out how to get stuff to work, and what scams people try. They may try to "upsell" you to linux, but if you say you're fixing a gaming rig or somesuch, they'll help out ;)

Besides, most computer savvy people I know like to help people out, as long as it isn't a long term commitment. Most of us have figured it out on our own (best way to learn). I'll help as long as it doesn't take too much of my time. And all bets are off if it's a pretty girl :)

(disclaimer: married to female geek)

So all of the following are now illegal in Brazil, since they can be used to assist copyright infringement: Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera, Safari, Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, Filezilla, the cp Unix command, etc.

http://www.linux.org/apps/AppId_644.html

Oh I agree. I think that going to parties to install operating systems is totally lame. Surely no one on Slashdot would ever do something that nerdy.

That's fine enough, especially for projects where the people with a vested interest in the project are geeks or developers already.

However if you really want your project to be accepted you have to make an effort to make it accessible to business. The real world runs on time, not love of coding.

The Cathedral and the Bazaar is a particularly interesting essay that is pertinent. Essentially, Linux could be argued more popular today because of its openness and sellability. Read Linus' Linux announcement, it's so full of energy and approachability and it's COMPLETELY newsworthy for any press. Like 'Student takes on Microsoft'.

I love open source because it lets me do things I am incapable of and if it were not for well designed project pages, they would still be dead to me.

Publicity + accessibility = more users + more contributions

Your project will garner support if you put some initial effort into it. I wonder how many OSS coders think they're god's gift to the earth and feel that any time besides coding is a waste of time...

As you suggest, you have to provide the source even if you have not made any modifications to the GPL code if you are doing commercial distribution - it is not enough to point to an upstream source.

This issue pretty much happened a few years ago. The MEPIS Linux distribution was "forced" to comply with the GPL by distributing the source code itself rather pointing to an upstream distribution (found via linux.org).

That argument isn't actually based on the technical merits, and thus doesn't make any sense..

Just because a Real OS features a Real FS backed up by a real company, doesn't necessarily mean the FS or OS are any good on technical merits compared to a REAL project licensed under a REAL free software license backed up by a REAL community and supported by a REAL foundation.

I think it is hubris - the idea that "I'm smarter than everyone else in the industry, and I have ideas that none of them do".

Wow. Hubris? Really?

There is a long history of people doing stuff they personally find cool and interesting and succeeding wildly at it. Sure there are also a lot of failures, but you cannot succeed without taking risks, and it is pretty pathetic to see that your lame attitude is so prevalent these days.

This web tablet may fail terribly, or it might succeed wildly, but thank Dog there are still people willing to try.

http://system76.com/index.php http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/ubuntu?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&~ck=anavml http://www.linux.org/vendor/system/index.html

and having a soft spot in my heart for them since I discovered Linux in 1995 I still think linux.org and The LDP are way better then this...

Its not that "the need for the users to have a friend that they can goto with their questions", but rather Linux users need more friends. Lets admit it, we don't have many that we've met in person.

Maybe, but it's not like there are not plenty of oppurtunities to utilize.

> I also disagree that ASLR was old hat before MS announced support for it. ASLR isn't old hat even today.

Good God, man, ASLR was first introduced in 2001 with some patches for the Linux kernel, which is practically ancient history for a computer security geek. Next you'll be telling me that WEP is cryptographically weak. Although WEP was introduced in 1999, the cryptographic attack on the IVs wasn't disclosed until August 2001; around the time when the term ASLR was first coined. Just for reference, the Linux 2.4 kernel was not yet released at the start of 2001.

> As to your comments that MS NX and ASLR in Vista SP1 mean nothing, the back to back winner of pwn2own seems to disagree.

First, I didn't say that it "means nothing." I said that it wasn't as great as you're making it out to be and that Microsoft wasn't somehow at the head of the pack.

Second, security contests are a bad way to metric for a great many reasons that anyone who was part of the security community ought to know by now (they're gimmicky, they don't attract top talent, they're no replacement for a real security audit, and they're frequently used to "prove" things about security that simply aren't true). I'm not saying that guy who won is bad at security (anyone who can write their own exploits has to know a thing or two), just that you cannot and should not judge expertise by how many contests someone has won. Computer security is not a sport.

Third, I still say you're misreading what the guy is saying. You made me research it more than I had bothered to yet, but Vista's ASLR implementation isn't all that great (PDF). Apparently, this one guy hadn't worked out how to use any of that in time for the contest. Don't worry, even with the contest over, hackers will continue to analyze it and exploit those weaknesses later.

> There is only one mainstream OS that ships with it on, so it's not old hat yet.

If you're going to play the "mainstream OS" game, I'm going to have to ask for a definition of "mainstream" that isn't ad hoc. Especially when you say "ships." Nobody uses just the Linux kernel and nothing else, they use a packaged distro (several of which do, in fact "ship" with this on, because they're made with security in mind). Linus' kernel is not the end-all-be-all of Linux. Hardened Linux distros are widely used and generally contain features like ASLR by default (along with a great many other things).

Furthermore, OpenBSD is quite mainstream for security-critical applications. I personally prefer using Linux, but if someone wants a server and security is top priority, I would start by exploring OpenBSD-based solutions followed by various hardened Linux distros. There's no way in hell I'd go to Vista first. Their security records aren't even comparable, particularly if you want to compare default installations.

Now, you can either continue to insist on misunderstanding what some security guy you don't know wrote, or listen to someone who was a part of the security community when ASLR was new. It's old hat.

But that's okay, if you hang around long enough you'll find out that people often find really old stuff (say, the reasons for using SYN cookies) and think they've discovered something brand new. It happens all the time in the security community. That, too, is old hat.

It's been happening since long before I first learned the basics of the art.

Conficker Eye Chart

Conficker Eye Chart

How to interpret:

If you see this above:It probably means this:

= Normal/Not Infected by Conficker (or using proxy)
= Possibly Infected by Conficker (C variant or greater)
= Possibly Infected by Conficker A/B variant
= Image loading turned off in browser?
Any other combination= Poor Internet connection?

Explanation:

Conficker (aka Downadup, Kido) is known to block access to over 100 anti-virus and security websites.

If you are blocked from loading the remote images in the first row of the top table above (AV/security sites) but not blocked from loading the remote images in the second row (websites of alternative operating systems) then your Windows PC may be infected by Conficker (or some other malicious software).

If you can see all six images in both rows of the top table, you are either not infected by Conficker, or you may be using a proxy server, in which case you will not be able to use this test to make an accurate determination, since Conficker will be unable to block you from viewing the AV/security sites.

F-Secure and the F-Secure Logo are trademarks of F-Secure Corporation.

SecureWorks and the SecureWorks Logo are registered trademarks of SecureWorks Inc.

Trend Micro and the T-Ball logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Trend Micro Inc.

Actually, there are lots of good references and tutorials on the web. The trick is separating the really good ones from mere fluff.

One starting point is The Linux Documentation Project site at http://www.tldp.org/ The guides http://www.tldp.org/guides.html contain fairly decent references and examples on bash scripting, CLI utilities, etc. The howto section has more narrowly task-oriented stuff http://www.tldp.org/docs.html#howto Note that many of the items have not been updated recently, but they remain valid.

A less comprehensive but more frequently updated collection can be found at http://www.linux.org/docs This has many task-oriented howto guides but lacks extended reference guides. However, it does link to numerous free online books http://www.linux.org/docs/online_books.html

Actually, there are lots of good references and tutorials on the web. The trick is separating the really good ones from mere fluff.

One starting point is The Linux Documentation Project site at http://www.tldp.org/ The guides http://www.tldp.org/guides.html contain fairly decent references and examples on bash scripting, CLI utilities, etc. The howto section has more narrowly task-oriented stuff http://www.tldp.org/docs.html#howto Note that many of the items have not been updated recently, but they remain valid.

A less comprehensive but more frequently updated collection can be found at http://www.linux.org/docs This has many task-oriented howto guides but lacks extended reference guides. However, it does link to numerous free online books http://www.linux.org/docs/online_books.html