Slashdot Mirror
Test Drive Debian at Compaq
Jacob wrote in to tell us about Compaq adding Debian (potato) to the list of systems available for use in Compaq's "Test Drive" program. From the press release: "By registering for a shell account at http://www.testdrive.compaq.com
developers can evaluate the Debian distributions running on Compaq
AlphaServers and ProLiant Servers. Current Debian systems are:
AlphaServer DS20 (ev6), AlphaServer XP1000a(ev6.7), and ProLiant
5500 (x86 PIII). All systems have at least two (2) gigs of ram and as
much as 100 gigs of '/home' storage courtesy of a network file system." Wicked-slick.
Doing a test povray image, povray compiled with gcc finished in 12 minutes, with their Alpha compiler, just over 4!
This compares with 15 on my Celeron 300a.
The Compaq compiler was available on the Red Hat machine, I hope it is available under the debian one, too. If it isn't, ask for it!
-- Erich
Slashdot reader since 1997
Ok, this is a test run that we haven't really had access to in the past. Pretty sporting of Compaq to show their hand. However, AlphaServers and ProLiants are not exactly new, or exceptional hardware. When are we going to see the communal tests on something that is more in the range of a Turbo Laser 8400? After all they do own DEC.
More race stuff in one place,
than any one place on the net.
When I tested Tru64 on their Alpha 21264 6 months ago they sent me a free model car (ala Test Drive) in the mail (Canada). I also managed to get a licence plate that says:
Compaq 1999
LIVE FREE OR DIE
LINUX
EraseMe
That none of us do something stupid and try to crack the machine. That sure would be a good way to pay them back for their "generosity"...
For the love of $DEITY, try to behave...
If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.
For linux tips: http://www.linuxtipsblog.com
Debian is an excellent distro, it works great and has a devoted following (I prefer SuSE though, but I have Debian on a 486 just to play with it). If the software does what you want, and the price is right, you should get it. Personally, I don't care what his personal ideologies are, I don't care that he's an admitted socialist. That's his right. If it disturbs you, you have the same right not to do business with his. While I may not agree with his philosophy, I will defend his right to choose and voice it.
Debian does offer a bit of bloat, but it's still optional what you want to install. BSD also offers great options, but I prefer a bit more of the bloat. To be honest, it's just because I'm too damn lazy to configure a lot of the mundane items manually. They're offering different options... something even the most devoted socialist-phobic should agree is good for everyone -- choice! I personally enjoy the options available in Linux, it's a far cry from Micro$oft's idea that what's good for Bill is what's good for you.
Boycott Debian if you think it's important. I don't think you'll get too much support, though.
"First things first, but not necessarily in that order."
- Doctor Who
Incidentally, I've wondered . . . when you sign up for this thing, do you get a permanent account, or is it something where it lasts like two weeks and then you have to sign up again?
It sure would be useful for test-building stuff, at least before SourceForge gets them Alphas . . .
iSKUNK!
I haven't registered yet, but I might just have to try it. It seems pretty cool.
JeremyI TechSeek- http://www.tech-seek.com
For this heresy, I condemn thee to read ESR essays until sundown.
Remember: Chairman Torvalds loves you.
What do you use the other bits for? 2^32 is 4G in my book.
Yup, it says it right there :-] (I didn't see anything about that the last time I was there, so I didn't bother checking this time)
So it's thirty days. I sure hope they don't mind, um, repeat customers <g>
iSKUNK!
36 bits is the limit on Intel's newest chips, the older ones 32 or less (2^32 ~= 4GB, 2^36 ~= 64GB). Even the older Alphas actually have 38-40 physical address pins on the chip.
The limitation was that 32 bit PCI couldn't reference anything higher than 4GB.
If your on another unix box, you should be able to just export your display ( export DISPLAY=myhost:0.0 or setenv DISPLAY=myhost:0.0). If your on windows, then you can try an XServer like Exceed or similar. You could also download VNC and try to get it to compile on alpha linux, and the standard WinVNC client should work.
treke
Erhm, GNU has been around for about 15 years. And RMS was writing free software for about another 5 years before that. So it's been around for a bit more than 5 years.
And how many did RMS write himself? None? I thought so. I use them because I *paid* Red Hat for them. You see, in a market economy that's how things work. Clever, no?
Where did you get the idea that red hat wrote the GNU tools?? The GNU shell, fileutils, and textutils were written long before redhat, possibly by RMS himself, although I don't know who specifically at FSF wrote them.
You seem to have ignored the fact that the BSD utilities predate GNU by *years* AND they're more free. You can use them without bying into Stallman's "Slavery is Freedom" (ie, the GPV) philosophy.
No, the BSDs used GNU fileutils and textutils until very recently (98 or 99).
"RMS: Whatever I say is free is good for you" BSD is free, but he regularly attacks it, its users and its developers. Why? I don't know. Jealousy, most likely.
RMS:
Not exactly fightin words.
That's what I do. That's why I can make money. I can't do that with Deviant GNU/Linux because they make you sign away your code to RMS or put it under his license. And you can't make money doing that.
You realize, of course, that RMS gives you way more freedom than anything you buy from microsoft. All that's really going on here is that RMS is saying he dosen't want you to take his code and resell it without the code. The BSD ppl are saying they don't care what you do with it. And the proprietary developers are saying they don't want you doing anything with it unless you pay them, and they don't want you changing anything unless you pay them a lot of money.
I find your arguments to be rather hypocritical, since obviously you are interested in creating proprietary software. So isn't your argument much like Microsoft calling Red Hat proprietary? :o
They'll should see a positive return for letting their creative people do some interesting things with their own systems, instead of just boot licking the same ol' same ol' boring Monopolsoft boots.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
I normally read /. at with my filters set to '2 and above' so as to avoid this sort of flame fest, but this one attracted my attention and I backtracked it.
Some observations: it's notable that the people (or possibly just one person) attacking RMS here doesn't choose to reveal [his|her] identity.
Secondly, there's some extremely sloppy thinking going on. For example, the assertion that just because you paid for RedHat, anything you develop under RedHat you can automatically sell on. You can't. The C compiler RedHat distribute is the Gnu C compiler; the standard libraries RedHat distribute are the GNU libraries. If you use those tools, and if you believe software licences have any validity at all, you must abide by their licences. RedHat cannot issue those tools to you under any different licence than the GPL, and don't try.
Then there is the assertion that RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and Debian want to stop you making money out of software. This is just simply obviously untrue. RMS makes his living out of software; so did the guys at Cygnus who have done so much of the maintenance of the GNU toolkit over the past several years. What RMS wants to persuade you not to do is make money out of hiding the source of software, restricting the freedom of users of software.
Finally, there is the assertion that Marxism is the same as socialism, and that both are the same as standing up for the right to freedom of speach. Anyone who can believe this is either so politically naiive, or so indoctrinated, that their other opinions are invalidated.
Face it: RMS, for all his querkiness and his occasional displays of ego, is necessarily one of our heroes. Without him, there would be no GNU toolset; without the GNU toolset, there could be no Linux. There's no sense in the sort of argument you see frequently between supporters of different free software/open source heroes. All of them - RMS, ESR, Linus, Alan Cox, even Larry Wall - have contributed hugely to making the movement we find ourselves in. All of them are human and have their querks, but we all owe them all a huge debt of gratitude, and this sort of anonymous attack is simply childish and undignified.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Please consider revealing your identity. I'd simply love to nominate you for a net.kook award. And do tell if commander Spock has a beard in your reality.
Just to fill you in: in this reality the very definition of "Open Source" is based on the DFSG, the Debian Free Software Guidelines, which were written in mid-1997.