Slashdot Mirror

There's a bit more to it than that. For a start they've been around for a lot longer than the Yahoo deal so I think it's safe to say they aren't relying on Yahoo. They also sell search capabilities to other sites (such as RedHat), and they sell licenses to use the technology in other applications.

Huh? I test Galeon regularly but I've never compiled neither Galeon nor Mozilla. The Mozilla RPMs provided by Chris Blizzard (http://people.redhat.com/blizzard/so ftw are/) work fine together with the Galeon RPMs downloadable from Sourceforge. It's three RPMs you have to install (mozilla, mozilla-devel, and galeon) and I don't see why they should be packaged as only one, and loose the modularity.

If you want to try Galeon 0.8, you might have better luck with more recent Mozilla builds than M18 (Blizzard has those too).

Java has it's niche, though. And it does what it was intended to do - make code HIGHLY transportable. But you can't outrun native code, no matter how good your universal language is.

And what stops you from compiling a Java program with gcj? And notice that gcj not only can compile Java source code into native code; it can compile bytecode into native binary!

Feel free to download TUX from ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/tux/Read the README file first, of course. :-)

I don't know if Tux (the web server) is based on that, or if it implements its own in kernel.

There are several memory profiling programs out there, but the only one I've used much is memprof. It can now handle threaded software (like mozilla), as well as software that forks (apache). I use it to examine the actual memory usage of my apache server (I do a lot of mod_perl development).

Red Hat Cygwin is an implementation of POSIX on Win32, with lots of ports of GNU software. It's free software licensed under the GNU GPL.

• Windows Me (I prefer to call it complete shite)
• Windows 2000 Pro (very happy with it)
• Windows 2000 Server (which I would run if I had more RAM)
• Windows 2000 Advanced Server
• Windows 2000 Datacenter Server

There are nearly as many flavors as Red Hat, and they only use one kernel!

--

TurboLinux Cluster Server provides High Availability functions that boosts uptime for services such as Web serving, mail hosting, news, and FTP. TurboLinux also has a high-performance clustering product called EnFuzion.

Red Hat provides a package called High Availability Server that includes load balancing, fault tolerance, and improved scalability for IP-based applications.

--Loge

I know that if the company I work for ever got audited, all hell would break loose. The licenses for each copy of NT Workstation 4.0 were left with the individual workstations, where they, uh, tend to disappear for some reason. And that doesn't even count Office, which every workstation has, but I've never seen a license for.

The question of the day is, would it cost more to pay M$ for the unaccounted-for pieces of software, or to switch to Linux? You can bet your a$$ that somebody in Virginia Beach is thinking hard about that very question right now.

And Virginia Beach is not all that far from Research Triangle Park...
---

Why do the Slashdot editors invariably refer to it as "the fish"? Do you think it's cool or clever or something, or is there some history that I'm not aware of? I think it would be better to just call it "Babelfish"; alternatively, editors on the dot could start using coolbreviations for the soft, the hoo, the 5hin, the hat, etc.

what gives?

For embedded work, there's ECOS already.

between ECOS, GNU HURD, RTEMS and others, there is a plethora of open-source hard real-time and microkernel systems available to the open-source hacker. closed source systems may be slick, but you will always be at the mercy of the closed-source owners.

or you can use the one that already works...

According to the Cygwin/XFree86 FAQ, XFree86 4 "may not work at all on Windows 9x/Me due to 16-bit code in the win 9x GDI. ... If you are using Windows 95 or 98, break out your debugger and start working around the 16-bit code in GDI32.dll and kernel32.dll." Upgrading all users to NT is not an option; they might as well install Debian anyway.

or you can use the one that already works...

I know that my company hires people to do linux, as we are onsite support for RedHat. Hence, we give tech talks concerning all sorts of different stuff. Recently, Curtis Preston gave a talk in Boston concerning Backup Recovery practices. I know with all the linux people within the company, we could dig someone out to talk about the place of open source systems in the corporate environment.

--
Gonzo Granzeau

Techniques: Apply patches, fend off port scans and DOS attacks, viral infections

Bonuses awarded: Service Packs

Objective: Avoid BSOD

The only way to win.

I can't imagine how you can replace the CRC handbook of physics and chemistry, but for math I suggest documenting and contributing to the GSL (GNU Scientific Library).

Whenever anyone asks me for a hosting recommendation, I always recommend Seagull.

No, Seagull is not an ISP. While it would be nice to have a secure ISP, you're better off using any random joker for your ISP, owning your own domain name so you can relocate it in the event your service tanks (I discuss this in Market Yourself - Tips for High-Tech Consultants) and accessing the hosting service via SSH and SCP (secure copy). Note that it does no good to only use SSH - you have to use SCP as well.

Here's a sample SCP command line, in case you can't figure it out, it's very simple but I had a hard time from the man page:

scp foo.bar crawford@www.goingware.com:.

The above places file foo.bar in the home directory of user crawford on www.goingware.com.

scp crawford@www.goingware.com:web/index.html stash

This copies index.html from directory "web" on www.goingware.com and places it in directory "stash" on the local machine.

Please read my web page on Why You Should Use Encryption

Besides being a good service, it's a small enough company to offer personal service. I've sent support email to the webmaster at 2am his time and had the problem fixed and the mail answered within the hour.

But even though it's a small service, it's not a low-quality service. They have high-performance machines, they are in a good colo facility with a high-speed connection to the backbone, they upgrade their service regularly and the webmaster, Paul Celestin, is just a damn nice guy.

I'm not sure if he still publishes it but Celestin used to produce a CDROM full of useful free source code for the Macintosh. Some of my own Mac open-source programs were on it.

These are the sites I personally have located there:

• http://www.goingware.com/ - My consulting company, GoingWare Inc. My livelihood depends on the reliability of this site.
• http://www.wordservices.org/ - Seagull hosts this public-service site for free in exchange for me placing a small banner ad on some of the pages
• http://www.geometricvisions.com/

I have a couple tips for you on checking email. I use PGP when I'm trying to be secure, but it's really not that much that I really care for complete security. But I just don't like people snooping on me, mostly I think it's none of their damn business what's in my mailbox even if it's spam.

So mostly I read my email at seagull using elm while logged in via SSH, and when my mailbox gets big, I move it to my home directory and copy it to my home machine via SCP:

goingware$ cp /usr/spool/mail/crawford ~

goingware$ echo "" /usr/spool/mail/crawford

back on my home machine:

C> pscp crawford@www.goingware.com:crawford .

It is also possible to download your email via POP with SSH via port forwarding. I describe this on the BeOS Tip Server. It doesn't seem to be responding right now but if you go to its search and enter "ssh" you'll find the tip I submitted called something like "Secure email download via ssh". The instructions have some BeOS specific items but most of what's there will work on any systems.

Don't have SSH? Try one of these:

• Nifty Telnet/SSH for Macintosh - includes a graphical SCP client!
• putty for Windows (also supports NT/Alpha) and pscp for secure copy
• CygWin - a GNU environment for Win32 - use bash, compile with GCC, a lot of linux code builds right out of the box in Cygwin
• The Secure Shell Community Site
• SSH Communications Security (commercial)

Documentation for this stuff is all over the net - try the Linux Documentation Project for a start. A good site for Linux newbies is LinuxNewbie.org

I think it would be far easier to implement this using a linux (or unix) solution than with WindowsNT/2000. All the basic funstionality for an internet server (e-mail, web, basic network stuff, firewall) is standard in most distros.

eCos Product Page.
eCos Development Page

Currently working with it for a NAS solution. Have also used QNX Neutrino and WindRiver VxWorks.

eCos Product Page.
eCos Development Page

Currently working with it for a NAS solution. Have also used QNX Neutrino and WindRiver VxWorks.

Noooo, this is an unbiased web site.

There's plenty of places on the web you can get contrasting opinions. You might try www.microsoft.com, www.redhat.com, or maybe www.sex.com if you're looking for a bias that favors some other POV... the web has something for (almost) everyone.

Keep an open mind and someone will come along a dump a bunch garbage in it.
0x0000

• You can use Steven Bolt's sp12 programmer which requires just a crystal and a few caps and resistors to build a stand-alone programmer, or requires nothing more than connectors and a few series resistors for an in-circuit-programming version.
• All parts are flash based, not just a select few.
• A low end established flash based part is available with a UART.
• Flash parts are available with PWM channels, A/D converters, 16 bit timers, SPI and analog comparators.
• A starter kit is available for $49 USD that comes with an in-circuit programming dongle and a demo board.
• The series includes devices with between 1KB and 128KB of flash program storage.
• (My favourite feature) GNU Binutils, GCC and even GDB target the AVR line. It's a joy to have access to a free and Free macro assembler and C compiler. Many micros come with free assemblers but these are often buggy and lack features, and it's very rare to get a free C compiler.

(Note that the latest binutils release supports the AVR, but the AVR GCC support is available as a patch to 2.95.2 at the location given above, or in the latest CVS & snapshots of GCC. The server hosting the patches seems to be down and has been for a short while, so Google's caching might come in handy. Google won't let me link directly to the cached version so just to to the cache of the first link for this search.)

http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i d=18707

Welcome to leap before looking school. You have successfully leaped to a conclusion without looking at the surrounding facts. To help you better understand your position, here are some facts that you may have missed:

• CCVS = Credit Card Verification System
  This is software intended to help online merchants interoperate with existing credit card clearing houses.
• Credit Card Clearing Houses use proprietary software!
  Red Hat (or more likely, the company they bought CCVS from) probably had to sign a lot of NDAs in order to get access to the specifications for those proprietary protocols.
• Releasing the source code to the resulting application would violate those NDAs.
• Red Hat is providing open source APIs to CCVS which allows developers to build open source applications that integrate with proprietary protocols.

• Thus Red Hat has released the software with a license that complies with the legal requirements, but still allows merchants to build Linux solutions. This is a GOOD thing. For details see this.

Please send bug reports on these, including sample code.

FWIW, all of Red Hat Linux 7, including Powertools and the Extra CDs for the European edition have been compiled with 2.96 using -O2 -mcpu=i686 -march=i386 without problems.

KDE 2.0 is completely c++, doesn't cause any problems with 2.96 -O2 -mcpu=i686 -march=i386.

the simple fact that exit(0) breaks in certain programs

Such as? There's no report about this in Bugzilla, and it most certainly doesn't happen here.

Provide a testcase, and it'll be fixed.

(And the compiler change is not related to kernel 2.4, by the way. Among other things, it's related to the need for ia64 support).

5. USAGE RESTRICTIONS LICENSEE may not modify, adapt, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Licensed Software. LICENSEE may not create derivative works of the Licensed Software with the exception of the right granted in Paragraph 3 herein to modify the sample source code. LICENSEE may not defeat, or attempt to defeat, the licensing mechanism in the Licensed Software which restricts use of the Licensed Software with a single merchant account number, nor may LICENSEE use the Licensed Software with more than one merchant account number.

There are many applications that don't compile with gcc 2.96. That's almost always not the compiler's fault.

gcc's syntax checks got much stricter; unclean code doesn't compile anymore.

If you think you have found something that is really a compiler bug (as opposed to the compiler complaining about broken code), report it and the problem will be fixed.

Generally, stuff that doesn't compile is one of three things -- the compiler (possible, but unlikely - I think there's only one confirmed this-code-is-valid-but-doesn't-compile bug), glibc (very possible -- make sure you apply the update to at least 2.1.94-3), or the code is broken with respect to the standard, and /will not compile with gcc 3.0 when it's done/. The most likely of the three, especially if c++ is involved, is the latter.

We usually fix any problems reported to
bugzilla.

Since nobody can fix problems without being aware of them, please make sure you report those problems rather than just complaining on your favorite message board/mailing list/IRC channel/...

When I go to RedHat's site it says "Important Updates Available!" in red letters right under the RH & now available link. (The updates link was not added to my reply for emphasis, it's on the RH site too.)

--

When I go to RedHat's site it says "Important Updates Available!" in red letters right under the RH & now available link. (The updates link was not added to my reply for emphasis, it's on the RH site too.)

--

If you're using RedHat, I'd recommend mod_ssl, only because the RPM setup is fairly easy and quick and the modular support of mod_ssl in Apache is easy to setup, all you need to do is edit your httpd.conf and restart httpd to load it up. If you're using other distros then it depends. The RedHat Knowledgebase FAQ has some information on setup (with lots of typos and mistakes, but informative nonetheless). The FAQ also mentions Verisign and Thawte.

This is news for nerds, stuff that matters.

Don't forget Redhat's own press release

Don't forget Redhat's own press release

XFree 4.0, RPM 4, filesystem reorg, ...

Most significantly, they have changed the kernel header files (to support the 2.4 version). That in itself should be enough to warrant a major version number increment. (That was how we did it in the good old VMS days!)

Red Hat lists the enhancements as

• OpenSSL with 128-bit encryption for secure web communication
• 2.4 kernel ready
• USB support for mice and keyboards
• XFree 4.0.1 for improved video performance
• Cleaner, faster, more customizable GNOME desktop and Sawfish window manager
• Graphical kernel tuning tool
• Graphical firewall configuration tool

Stop and think. Why would a distribution ship a compiler that is off the development branch? Why in God's name would they ever do anything so incredibly horrible as that?

Simple: features. Many of you may be C programmers, so you may be scratching your head right now, saying "Huh? What features?" But if you work with C++ (and you will notice it mentioned specifically in the post from the GCC team), you know what features RedHat was trying to get by going with the supposed "2.96".

Now, before someone goes off all half-cocked and starts bitching about C++ and C being better, go read up on Inti, specifically on the why's. RedHat will make its money either directly or indirectly from its distribution--the more people who buy Linux, the more ways for them to make money. More people will use Linux if there is software. More software will "appear" if companies use Linux as a development platform.

From what I have read about Inti and its reasons for being started, companies are passing on Linux because they cannot get good enough C++ support and tools in Linux. That's right--C++ support is hurting Linux.

Yes, yes--C++ sucks, yadda, yadda, yadda. Stop and think. The reason so many of you turn your noses up at companies and work is because they pretty much require you to use C++ anymore. I'm not saying it is fair. I'm not saying it is necessarily a "good thing". I'm just raising the issue--most development shops, if given a choice between C and C++ use C++. Perhaps this is all Microsoft's fault. I have no idea.

But I happen to use C++. And let me tell you, writing C++ with the gcc/g++ is a royal pain in the ass. The ANSI standard has been out, and many vendors are still getting their stuff together. But the gcc is one of the lagging ones (IMO--I may be wrong, please list any worse offenders). You buy the C++ Reference by Stroustrap and try to follow the examples (try using sstream with anyone besides RH 7.0, and you will see what I mean)--endless amounts of frustration.

RedHat is just sooooo evil. They included a compiler that had better C++ support. Before you demonize them, stop and try and see it from their perspective. I for one, appreciate a better STL implementation--the one in 6.2 was just aweful. 6.2 had a C++ library with a build date of February 2000. Now that may *sound* new, but it isn't. It isn't even close to the current standard in some areas.

All that being said, I'm not sure that the "negatives" that come with 2.96 were worth it. I would have rather seen RedHat include a good STL port (I hear there are a few good projects out there). Still, the C++ support found in current Linux distribution sucks. Just join any linux C++ project mailing list and see how many times gcc bugs will come up :-(

And if you think this is flamebait, you best check your moderator rules.

Apache may well ble slower than IIS (and probably is, as their main focus is portability and correctness, while many performance-tuning tricks must be applied manually), but IIS is by far slower than Tux as tested by Dell. Links:

• Tux
• Specweb, Q3
• Specweb, Q2

Try this one for more info.
------------------------------------------- --------

It looks like Dell is speaking out of both sides of the mouth

I have seen many different benchmarks. Some get Linux out ahead, some IIS.. Tux has been shown to kick butt as well.

The problem with the Apache 1.x series, is that it's not threaded. That means that memory usage under heavy load is outrageous compared to a threaded solution. So - I'm guessing this might be part of the problem.

Apache 2.x will be threaded. You can download their alphas if you're really curios.

Furthermore, if you get the 2.4 kernel, it also has a kernel space http stack that's used for static content. That way, apache can do what it does best, while all images and static pages will be handled by the kernel space server. Neat, huh?

It's a pretty well known fact that IIS kicks Apaches ass when only serving static content (dynamic content serving is pretty equal between the two IMO). If you're only serving static pages go with the Tux web server which just hit 1.0. It requires a Linux 2.4 kernel (since it uses the new kernel server) and it is in totally different speed league than either IIS or Apache.

The current WebSpec99 numbers for Linux and Tux blows away all other competitors.

Look at: http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/r esu lts/res2000q2/

Show your boss that Linux has twice the performance of Windows.

Tux is a kernel module that integrates the html protocol directly into the kernel. It can serve static as well as dynamic web pages and can be integrated with Apache.

Check it out at: http://www.redhat.com/tux/

There are several web servers that may outperform apache on serving static content. Search freshmeat for possibilities.

Dell themesleves (with RedHat) have claimed record-setting performance using their "Tux" kernel-space web server daemon. (again for static content)

If you need to support more general content, then look at the flexibility in apache (and other Unix web servers) to support a wide array of different services and the ability to tune apache.

There's more to performance than just performance. Can you tune the server? How easily? Content management? Scalability to multiple servers/load balancing? Integration with database back-ends or java servelets? Security! Server management? Ease of upgrading? Paltform-dependancy? Licensing costs?

IIS ties you to one vendor's solution FOREVER. You can migrate an Apache site onto just about any O/S and hardware platform. This may or may not be important to your decision.

Depending on what you need and the skills your company possess, Apache may be an excellent choice or just OK.

I know you asked for benchmark data; Sorry I don't have a link to any and benchmarks are usually heavily cooked beforehand anyway (such as the Dell/RedHat example). IIS has a marketiing-savvy corporation behind it. Apache has the largest installed base on the planet and thousands of success stories.

There may be some info at the main apache web site, Apache Today, the apache week and oreilly sites (don't have url handy).

Oh, unless your firm is tied to buying only Dell, look at the offerings from VA Linux and the other linux vendors - I know VA can provide specific tuning suggestions.

The Red Hat statement needs more context. The Red Hat 7.0 Getting Started Guide mentions the 1991 start of Linux. The 6.0 Guide recognized there were 100,000 Linux users in 1994 when Red Hat started. This Linux timeline refers to 100,000 Linux users in December 1993 -- with a link to a missing Red Hat page. Note that Slackware started in 1993. Is there a Linux timeline?

The Red Hat statement needs more context. The Red Hat 7.0 Getting Started Guide mentions the 1991 start of Linux. The 6.0 Guide recognized there were 100,000 Linux users in 1994 when Red Hat started. This Linux timeline refers to 100,000 Linux users in December 1993 -- with a link to a missing Red Hat page. Note that Slackware started in 1993. Is there a Linux timeline?

Actually, we had no problems with the i815 graphics processor. We could get it to work in previous distros, but this time around, anaconda auto-detected it.

I'm happily running RedHat 7.0 as we speak. It seems to be solid so far, with the exception of an X11 -> Console switching bug on one of the boxes.

I'm sure errata will take care of most of it in a week or two.

Has gotten the redhat network to work?