Slashdot Mirror

Try this for an idea... The whole concept of "installation" is wrong.

Build your own distributions. One per purpose.

Use something like RockLinux

to build a ramdisk image which contains all of the software and configuration required for a particular application. By "all" I mean "only". You end up with a single file which you put on a tftp server, you boot your servers over dhcp, they pick up the OS image and boot to the image on a ramdisk.

e.g. You might have one squid image, one PHP app server image, one Mysql rdbms server image etc. When the image boots it does whatever is required to run the app successully. e.g. putting a filesystem on the hard disk.

The benefits:

• Zero server configuration. (or close to it) this means no need for YUM, no RPM, no APT. No dependencies.
• Massive scalability because of above.
• Only tested images reach production. You know it is going to work because the production image is the same single file, you know exactly how it is going to perform because you tested exactly the same file already.
  
• Everything is version controlled and completely repeatable as part of the build process.

2 admins can run 500-1000 systems in a site easily because there is really only one machine; the network. Logarithmic increase in effort with the number of systems.

A possible solution for some distributions would be rPath's rBuilder Online, a tool whose use is free for non-commercial purposes and which allows users to build their own distribution using a repository of the Conary packaging system.

Try ROCK Linux. It's designed to be a "Distribution Build Kit". The releases are quite out of date, but grab it from SVN to get current stuff.

and want to take the shortcut there's http://www.rocklinux.org/

http://www.rocklinux.org/powerpc.html

with a Live CD for PPC here

http://www.rocklinux.org/149.html

Regards, Walter.

http://www.rocklinux.org/powerpc.html

with a Live CD for PPC here

http://www.rocklinux.org/149.html

Regards, Walter.

... is to build their own Distro, brand it with the Microsoft logo, and get it into distribution channels as far and as wide as possible.

It makes no sense for Microsoft to 'resist' Linux at all. Microsoft are just as capable of doing a kernel.tar.gz and stage1.tar.gz style release as anyone else. Why don't they just do it?

If there were a "Microsoft Linux", then Novell wouldn't stand a chance. Any existing MS-only shop looking to upgrade to Linux would definitely consider an "MS Linux" package over any other option, at least at first.

Seems to me, this article, and a few of the other ones recently from Microsoft on the subject of "Linux", is all a big prep-job to open the doors for a Microsoft-sourced Linux distro.

It could happen. I'd like to see it happen, personally. It'd be good to give people like these guys, and heck, even these guys a bit of competition from Microsoft ...

There is also Rocklinux.

Isn't that exactly what the Rock Linux folks are doing? A modular toolkit for building distros/systems?

Many options are selected at compile time, rather than in configuration files, for instance processor selection. My php configuration includes "--with-mcrypt --with-gd --with-jpeg-dir --with-png-dir --with-freetype-dir". The number of different downloads for any pre-compiled distribution will be enormous.

Rock Linux isn't a Linux distribution: it's a distribution build kit, that allows you to build your own tailored distribution from sources, with your choice of configuration options.

Even if there aren't currently the options that you want, the simple text-mode configuration files allow you easily to add your own.

As I am not a Gentoo user I won't be able to give you the Gentoo way. I can give you the way I do things in my DIY linux disro called Fire Dragon Linux . Probably should be called GNU/Linux but I don't think its high on the important list right now.

Basically I treat the Ultra 5 as if it where a SparcStation era Sun. This means that everythign is compiled for the Sparc V7 CPU (V7 is the least common denominator Sparc 32bit CPU, V8 is more common and includes a few functions more, and V9 is the Sparc64 or UltraSparc CPU line).

As I have 2 SparcStation 2 computers and 2 Ultra 5 computers I try to keep things running on both. The SS2 is a sun4c machine (SS5, SS20, and so forth are all sun4m machines), and Ultra 5 is sun4u machines. Sun3 machines exist and are m68K CPU. Linux doesn't support those well, NetBSD works on them.

In the case of applications like OpenSSL which benifit from instructions available in later Sparc V8 and V9 CPU I compile multiple versions (one for each CPU) and install the one that matches the CPU I have. Sparc for the V7, SparcV8 for the V8, and SparcV9 for the UltraSparc.

Kernel compiles on the UltraSparc require a special Binutils and GCC. Binutils should be compiled with --target=sparc-linux --enable-targets=sparc64-linux. Once installed, you need to go to the ${PREFIX}/bin directory and symlink sparc64-linux-* to the sparc-linux-* commands it installed (as, ld, nm, and so forth).

GCC is tricky on sparc64 as it requires usage of EGCS64 for the compiler (Yes, this compiler is from 1999). Debian is a good source of this package. GCC 3.2.x and 3.3.x can currently compile a sparc64 kernel but may generate invalid code from time to time.

GCC can be done with --target=sparc64-linux --with-cpu=v7 and then doing some symlinks I am told. I currently don't know as I have not gotten this part to work yet for me.

To close this I would highly recomend using Aurora Linux on a Sun machine right now unless you want to get into fixing the compiler tool chain and the C library on the platform. ROCK Linux in the latest version appears to have working support for generating a 32bit and 64bit userland. You may find things work there if they do not with Gentoo.

First answer your question on kernel - the kernel optimization by default is good enough, e.g. it uses -Os instead of -O3 because some program like kernel usually run faster with less memory trace. You might want to optimize individual modules, though.

For the rest of the packages(I know you didn't ask, but it doesn't stop me. :), you could try some crazy optimization. The hardest thing to decide is that which optimization flags in gcc work best for your system. Should you use all optimization flags? Will these flags break your system?

Inspired by rocklinux, I've tried to benchmark individual optimization flag, i.e. test each flag and discard those flags which don't give your system performance gain. Of course, the script used in link above is pretty old and you must modify for gcc3.2+. Thanks to lameass filter I won't post my script here.

That sound like wasting of time but the result is satisfying. The max. yield I could gain is as much as 19% in comparing to plain -O3 optimization. Here are the result:

vendor_id : GenuineIntel
model name : Mobile Pentium MMX
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 mmx
gcc version 3.2 (i586-pc-linux-gnu)
Result: '-O3 -march=pentium-mmx -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions-fcse-follow-jumps -funroll-loops -frerun-cse-after-loop - frerun-loop-opt -fno-cprop-registers -funroll-all-loops -maccumulate-outgoing-args -fschedule-insns'
Performance gain(compare to -O3 only) ~ 9.9%

vendor_id : GenuineIntel
model name : Pentium III (Coppermine)
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr sse
gcc version 3.2 (i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Result: '-O3 -march=pentium3 -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -funroll-loops'
Performance gain(compare to -O3 only) ~ 13.7%

vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
model name : AMD Athlon(TM) MP 2000+ (a dual CPU system)
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr sse syscall mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
model name : AMD Athlon(TM) MP 2000+
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr sse syscall mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow
gcc version 3.2 (i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Result: '-O3 -march=athlon-mp -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions -fforce-mem -s -funroll-loops -frerun-loop-opt -fdelete- null-pointer-checks -fprefetch-loop-arrays -ffast-math -maccumulate-outgoing-args -fschedule-insns'
Performance gain(compare to -O3 only) ~ 19.6%

19.6%!! If you asked me, it worths it to optimize your desktop; but to the server, you'd like to have it running stable than to have it running 19% faster, you can trust me on that. :)

PS. In the processing of testing, I found some flags are dangerous and better use with care: -fmove-all-movables, -frename-registers and -malign-double. I suspected that they broke my file-util, which corrupted my entire fs. Just be careful.

ROCK Linux?

ROCK Linux is a distribution-build-kit, with which you can easily create targets, for example a "small" target. Everything is compiled from source, optimized to your wish (gcc{2,3}, glibc{2.2.5,2.3.1},dietlibc...) once you start a build.

The download of the source tar.bz2/gz's is done by a script, too.

We are currently working on integrating uClibc, and already use dietlibc for the "bootdisk"/ "rescue system" target.

maybe worth a look ;)

FAKE

Get a source distro! Nothing beats a compile-yourself distribution optimized for your system in every ELF:

lunar linux
Gentoo
Rock linux
Sorcerer linux
SourceMage

In the end... binary distro's are just like windoze

afaik, and to my best knowledge,
ROCK Linux ( http://www2.rocklinux.org) was the first distribution to roll out with devfs enabled, the first distribution with devfs-only support, and the first distribution with devfs-only on more than [1,2,3] platforms.
ROCK Linux first deployed devfs when the devicenames where still "/dev/scsi/c0t0d0s0" style, with rock-linux 1.2.0 from 17th august 1999 - i don`t know whether any of the earlier releases already used it, but they have been supplying most current (kernel+devfs+glibc) for about three years now. you can check out the old sources at http:www2.rocklinux.org/releases/old/.

afaik, and to my best knowledge,
ROCK Linux ( http://www2.rocklinux.org) was the first distribution to roll out with devfs enabled, the first distribution with devfs-only support, and the first distribution with devfs-only on more than [1,2,3] platforms.
ROCK Linux first deployed devfs when the devicenames where still "/dev/scsi/c0t0d0s0" style, with rock-linux 1.2.0 from 17th august 1999 - i don`t know whether any of the earlier releases already used it, but they have been supplying most current (kernel+devfs+glibc) for about three years now. you can check out the old sources at http:www2.rocklinux.org/releases/old/.

• While Gentoo does rock...

If Gentoo rocks, does Rock Gentoo?

Rock Linux sounds pretty similar. Anyone know how they compare?

What the heck do user interfaces and packages have to do with an operating system? Why would any developer include packages when latest versions can be downloaded from the official web sites? Linux people, I'll never understand them.

Point for point:
In the case of the Debian Operating System, they are more significant than the fallacious significance of a kernel to the entirety of an OS. Some reasons include the desire for permanence and local reproducability of an instance of an OS enviroment, as well as potential scarcity of Web connectivity. The final statement is not a question. If you are referring to AI, then I am amazed that there are "Linux people" that are beyond the comprehension of the average HomoSapiens Technophilia. If you express puzzlement over the preferences exhibited by Linux-based OS bigots, then perhaps I can help point you in a direction to enligtenment. If youd rather remain Linux segregated, then go in peace; we are done here.

The confusion over the importance of UIs to OSes in my experience indicate an affinitty for Unix. Perhaps it would be a better world if an OS were naught but embedded daemons. There was a revolution, for better or worse, in which the "Personal Computer" lead the forefront, resulting in the sanctity of computer becoming debased. Now computing is a public phenomenon, and has at the very least benefitted from economies of scale. Your elitism against common "lusers" seems naive.

As for "packages", I can only assume that that you are a BSD fan. You already implied that you don't use a package independant Linux distribution, and I infer from your championing Web downloads that you aren't likely a commercial Unix weenie. Commercial Unices do tend to be use packaging systems in my experience. If I am correct in considering you a BSD fan, then statstically I can consider you a FreeBSD user.

Why exactly do you find Linux people inferior? Unless you are among the minority of kernel hackers, you likely find the userland inferior. UIs differences between BSD and Linux based "Unices" being as trivial as the are, the only deficiency apparent from your message is that of many packaging systems associated with Linux. In that case, May I suggest that you give Rock Linux which doesn't use packages, but rather compiles binaries from officail sources, much like FreeBSD ports. It isn't makefile based, but maybe spending time with it will enlighten you, or at least elucidate your perceptions of Linux's apparent shortcomings. Note that FreeBSD also offers packages, so your criticism isn't very valid as it stands. Perhaps you have more fruitful criticisms to offer. Most likely, IHBT, IHL, HAND.

In any case, Debian news items should contain a disclaimer that Debian is not Linux! Debian is a very modular and comprehensive system that offers Linux, just like it offers GNOME and Emacs. Debian needs GNU, but it doesn't need Linux, and there are plenty of Debian users that aren't "Linux people". Debian can just as easily look like VIM running over the Hird. I look forward to a stable Debian/NetBSD running on SGI MIPS R5K hardware, hopefully decades before Debian "Soldier" release 4.0.

-castlan

Rock Linux has ports to Alpha AXP, PowerPC, and Sparc

Not being a BSD user, how does this distros 'spell casting' system
compare to BSD ports? I've heard ports does a similar operation
of downloading code and custom compiling it.

Also, Rock Linux puts out a distribution where you basically compile all the packages, but I don't think it has the update ability that Sorcerer has.

It looks like a fun distro to try.

After the years of RPM-Based Distros, it seems as if those "self-building" distros are the new trend. We now have 3 of them:
RockLinux
Gentoo Linux
and Sorcerer Linux...
From my experiences and what I've heard Gentoo is the by far stablest and easiest to install of them and recently got a really good review at Newsforge.

I don't really know if that is good concept, because the time/use of self-compiling every bit of software is quite low IMO. What is needed is a new Distro, that builds the Kernel itself and installs all the other application through RPM. That would maximize Speed and usability. My friend and I are working on something like this right now ;).

Red Hat isn't the be-all/end-all of Linux distros, in fact it's not even one of the best ones. (They do a lot of good work for the community and they work hard to gain visibility for themselves and Linux in general. That's great and I appreciate them doing it, but the Red Hat distro just isn't that good.)

Rock Linux is hard. SuSE and Mandrake are easy. Red Hat and Slackware are somewhere in the middle.

I guess my point is, anyone who can install Windows can install Linux. If you're putting something together for someone who isn't capable of installing Windows, Linux is probably a better choice for them since you can set it up right and feel reasonably secure in the knowledge that it's going to stay that way. I've been using Windows for a long time, and I've never seen a Windows system that didn't need a reinstall within a year. Conversely, the only reason I reinstalled Linux was because I wanted to switch to reiserfs. (Yes I know win2k will upgrade your fat32 to ntfs without a hitch, I've done it about 20 times. e3fs will upgrade e2fs without a hitch, too, or so I'm told, but I wanted reiser.)

Sorry for the rambling. My basic point is that you're right. I guess I should know better than to post before coffee.

Well, how is this better than Rock Linux?

Rock's package management system is source based, and updates, etc...

And as for elitism, I spoke with the creater on the phone a few years ago when he was starting it, and he's a really jolly bloke.

Rock Linux uses the Device Filesystem by default.

I just don't get Suse, the company. Their YAST and YAST2 programs are under their own, non-GPL license. I believe the distribution as a whole is under a funny license as well. They refuse to release installation iso's for 7.0 or 7.1 for x86. If you frequent LinuxIso.org you know what I'm talking about. But Suse released "live evaluation" iso's of 7.0 and 7.1. You can install Suse from ftp. You can even download installation iso's for every other arcitechture that they support. But not for x86. It just baffles me.

Linux Central just recently added a Suse 7.0 disc to their Linux Cental CD-Roms selection. But not 7.1. I know I could roll my own and stuff, but the new Redhat, Conectiva, and Debian beckon to come and try them out as well. Rather waste my time messing with getting Linux From Scratch working, than trying to get Suse installed.

I know. The patent answer is "It's business, stupid", but that argument doesn't make much sense when *all* of your competition is offering 'free samples', but you're not. As a dumb American, what's the reason for going with Suse instead of Redhat or Mandrake, or even Storm or Progeny? I just don't get it.

One other thing, if anyone can help me. One of the most annoying things right now for me is the lack of good fonts in web pages under Konq. Do the boxed distros include fonts that aren't included in the download versions? I haven't bought a boxed distro in almost six months and it's about time to get one. I'll definately get one sooner than later if I can get some better fonts.

And finally, I feel the need to pimp some of the very cool distros I've come across. I've haven't been able to try these out yet (doh. got to get a cd burner.) but they do look cool. First, Caldera has released a beta for their upcoming 3.1 workstation release. Their is a review of it at Linux Planet. The coolest transistion distro I've found is Redmond Linux. Tries to focus on the destop and do away with the need for the command line. There is also Demudi. The Debian Multimedia Distribution. The name says it all. Then there's a few of the more hardcore, hacker type distros: Rock Linux, Stampede Linux, and Linux From Scratch. And last, but not least. The most vaporous of them all. Microsoft Linux.

I have Windows XP and Linux running on the same HD on my laptop, what exactly are you guys talking about?
btw, Windows XP is damn good and so is Rock Linux

If it works as a desktop, then there is nothing wrong with running it as such. I'm tired of the "OpenBSD is a server OS" and "FreeBSD is a workstation OS" and "Linux is a silly little toy OS" .. Most OSes will work out-of-the-box as either a server or a workstation OS. Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD are all this way. (ps: Mac OS X does work fine as a server OS. and with netinfo it easy to admin. versus NIS+ on Linux/FreeBSD).

ps: for you Linux geeks out there wanting to be cool like the FreeBSD guys, I recommend running Rock Linux. :) easy to install if you know how to run unix. no silly-ass menus to go through. Boot the rescue disk. ifconfig you eth0. fdisk, mke2fs then download the .tar.gz for the base system. set your root password, reboot. then you have full access to "extensions" which are pretty much like FreeBSD ports. scripts just download source, compile, config, install. viola!

sorry for talking more about rock linux than FreeBSD as a desktop OS. since that's such a non-issue since it does both quite nicely.

• Debian
• LinuxPPC
• SuSE
• Yellow Dog
• ROCK Linux

Look at the crack, it exploited wu-ftpd. Anyone dumb enough to run that program with pathetic security deserves to be cracked. Run something like ProFTPd if you need FTP, or even better, the Linux port of OpenBSD's FTPd.

Also, use a good distribution (like ROCK Linux). Or at the very least, Mandrake.

When you install it, it brings up a system onto a ramdisk. You have to partition your HD's, format, and mount you partitions yourself (including your source partition or cdrom).

Then you start the installer. Or perhaps I should say "the sorry excuse for one". You are now at a shell-like prompt with a few commands. One lists all the packages available, and the status (will this be installed or not). So you list all the packages, sees that for example Binutils is not selected. Then you issue the command for selection (was it S??), f.x. "S binutils". Repeat the listing and selection part until happy.

Then you issue a command which unpacks all the packages to /mnt (you better have mounted a partition there!).

That's all. Now you chroot to /mnt , configure away, and if you want, make a new kernel and reboot the system.

Good luck ;-)

crond@undernet
Norwegian Linux Community

Contrary to almost every other Linux distribution out there, we have a functional source-based Linux 'distro' using a single source tree (ala BSD). Instead of having to untar/configure/make/install, a single command allows us to rebuild the entire system. In addition, system coherency is greatly enhanced when the entire system is built and maintained in a common tree.

Unfortunately, the Linux community as a whole does not seem interested in a system like this. The closest 'main-stream' distribution to do anything like this is perhaps Rock Linux, though they still use tarballs and scripts to extract/configure/build/etc. Otherwise, binary distros are the norm.

BTW, yggdrasil hasn't had an offering since '95 or '96. If you are still using an original yggdrasil distribution, you are probably complete out-of-date. Hell, you might as well be using SLS.

• If so, how would it handle process sharing?
• Are you going to lay dynamic process scheduling over some sort of heterogenous message passing system?
• Or similarly, but more simply, are you building a preemptive process distribution without dynamic scheduling? (Gathering data from network when finished.)

There are several other linux ppc distributions under way including:

Debian Linux
Rock Linux

Turbo Linux
APUS Linux for Power Up Amigas
Yellow Dog Linux (Based on RedHat)