wow.. been reading for three years and this is my first post, which also happens to be first post...
Ah.. such a shame... three years of training.. three long years of awaiting that special moment.. that one shining point in your life where it all comes together. Ah to score that elusive and coveted first post that we all scoff at but secretly dream about...
So you hit the Read More link and you see NO POSTS...and your heart starts to race.. palms begin sweating... you quickly type your gibberish in then grope madly for the mouse... with high hopes you click the submit button then pray to the geek Gods..."Oh dear God.. just let me have it once.. please God.. just this one time"
Then the page loads and you are left looking at this:
And I'm only on RedHat 6.2 - I'd better upgrade to Slackware, as it's obviously a newer and better release!
Seriously though, why are the Linux distro's playing the (MS approved) numbers game? Do we really need this sort of numbering system (i.e. people jumping numbers to "keep up"). Is there a better way that actually provides a useful comparison (other than the kernel number, which in itself isn't that useful).
Does any site have a list of Distro releases, kernel versions, and major software versions (sendmail, gcc, etc)?
Remember that was Patrick's whole argument? The only reason he went to 7 in the first place was that RedHat had a higher version number and people were asking him questions like "When will you catch up to RedHat?" Since there are enough people out there that don't get that different products with different version numbers don't compare, mainly because they're *DIFFERENT PRODUCTS*...
It's a marketing thing - like "Oracle 8i" which sounds cool.. until you realize they haven't gone through 8 revisions. Then you have Microsoft's calling everything by years - which works rather well if you overlook the fact that they've never released it in the year that the product was named after.:)
Totally marketing. That's why I like the linux kernel - "We're at 2.2.16!" which obscures the fact that they have, infact, gone through dozens of development cycles by now. Or the *BSDs which due to an, uhh, interesting licensing conundrum with AT&T will continue releasing 2.x updates for an eternity (or until the copyright expires, which under the DMCA is the same thing as infinity).
Since linux seems to emulate first, innovate second with code, it seems logical that developers would follow in the naming schemes of major (proprietary) vendors as well. By emulating first I mean no disrespect - there have been legit free software projects that did come up with something original (ex, emacs).
Just a selection, more are in the MIRRORS.TXT file on any of these sites, FTP isn't slow if you use a server near you...
UK/European Users: The Slackware distribution is mirrored nightly at: src.doc.ic.ac.uk in directory/packages/linux/slackware-mirror ----------------------------------
USA: ftp.freesoftware.com:/pub/slackware/ is the home site. Also: uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu:/pub/systems/linux/distributions/slackware. ftp.cps.cmich.edu:/pub/linux/packages/slackware sunsite.unc.edu:/pub/Linux/distributions/slackware. mirrored nightly. ftp2.netis.com:/pub/linux/slackware ftp.nlife.com:/pub/linux/slackware/ full mirror of ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/pub/linux/slackware/ ftp.cs.umn.edu (160.94.277.144) mirrors nightly in/pub/Linux/slackware. ftp.linux.locus.halcyon.com/pub/linux/slackware: Updated daily at 08:30 Pacific. ftp.halcyon.com mirrors the distribution at 400 PST daily. ftp.thedalles.net:/pub/linux/slackware ftp.thepayne.com:/pub/unix/slackware-3.6 daily mirror @ 01:00 Pacific. ftp://ftp.cs.unm.edu/dist/mirrors/slackware-3.6 updated daily around 1:00am MDT. ftp.cs.columbia.edu:/archives/linux/Slackware mirrors the distribution daily (in the early morning). (they also have slackware_source) ftp.ccs.neu.edu:/pub/os/linux/slackware. Updated: Nightly
There is an explaination on the site as to the jump Here.
All of the information on what the current release includes is here, on slackware.com
You can always get all of the newest stuff by looking in the "current" directory on any slackware mirror.
Pretty much, Slackware went to 7 because Patrick was getting bugged by people who didn't realize that the numbers are just numbers, and thought that RedHat was eons ahead of Slack. Also, several major changes were made in that release, including shifting to glibc.
Slackware is very friendly to local compilation of software, if you don't like how far up to date a piece of software, just compile it yourself, also, you should always compile a customized kernel to get optimal performance from your machine with any distibution.
It is suprising that the next distro is not 8. I held off on submitting the beta as a story. The beta is actually an excellent product. It includes X4 and the newest verions of just about everything that there is to have the newest version of.
BTW, Slack is the best distro;-)
-- Eh...
Maybe they need a change of name
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 4
As a professional consultant for a major Fortune 500 software company, I've recently gotten involved in the whole open source phenomenon as started by Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman with the release of the GNU/Linux operating system (or is it Linux? I'm not too sure on this point).
Anyway, after having compiled a report on the commercial viability of open source as an alternative to closed source in the e-commerce/b2b world, I've become quite interested in Linux myself, and thanks to a handy Corel Linux distribution, consider myself to be someway to becoming a "guru" as people here like to call themselves.
Anyway, my point is that Slackware, as a distribution, doesn't give out the professional image that Linux is trying to gain at the moment. On one hand, you've got respectable players like Red Hat, Corel and SCO pushing Linux's corporate image to new levels of respectibility, but on the other hand you've got a distribution named "Slackware", hardly the name your tech-savvy CTO wants to represent a core part of their enterprise solution.
The whole name seems to give the distribution a half-finished, "slack" even, image, surely not one that's in anybody's best interest, whether they be the average long-haired Linux sysadmin or a suited CTO looking for the next big thing. And this image taints all of Linux.
No, whilst Slackware may produce a decent distribution, they definitely need to think about a name change to ensure continued acceptance in the increasingly corporate-driven Linux market.
Re:Maybe they need a change of name
by
be-fan
·
· Score: 3
Are you kidding about the marketing hype part? Linux is not popular because it stands on its own merits. In all fairness, BSD did it a long time before Linux became a plausible solution. Linux's increasing popularity in the business world is simply a byproduct of people reeling from Microsoft looking for another solution. Linux happened to be one of the only free OSs that were viable at the time, and also the only one that had a community vocal enough to hype it (Unlike BSD.) As such, there is nothing technical about Linux that makes it stand out. Its popularity with business is ENTIERLY hype related. In this end, the hype that OSS and the FSF create help a great deal. PS: I'm not saying that Linux has no merit for people who like the OS. I'm also not saying that OSS and the FSF is just hype. I'm saying that these things are true in the business world. (Are you going to tell me that these companies give a damn about the GPL and the philosophy behind it?) Linux and the FSF are very meaningful the members of the community, just not the business world.
-- A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Re:Maybe they need a change of name
by
medicthree
·
· Score: 3
You use Corel linux and think you're on your way to becoming a guru? Bwhahahahhaha...
I'm sorry, I'll take the karma hit on this one. I'll even start it at 2.
Re:Newbie question:
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3
When I log into my Xenix system with my 110 baud teletype, both vi *and* Emacs are just too damn slow. They print useless messages like, 'C-h for help' and '"foo" File is read only'. So I use the editor that doesn't waste my VALUABLE time.
Ed, man! !man ed
ED(1) UNIX Programmer's Manual ED(1)
NAME ed - text editor
SYNOPSIS ed [ - ] [ -x ] [ name ] DESCRIPTION Ed is the standard text editor. - ---
Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first alphabetically, but because it's the standard. Everyone else loves ed because it's ED!
"Ed is the standard text editor."
And ed doesn't waste space on my Timex Sinclair. Just look:
- -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 24 Oct 29 1929/bin/ed - -rwxr-xr-t 4 root 1310720 Jan 1 1970/usr/ucb/vi - -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 5.89824e37 Oct 22 1990/usr/bin/emacs
Of course, on the system *I* administrate, vi is symlinked to ed. Emacs has been replaced by a shell script which 1) Generates a syslog message at level LOG_EMERG; 2) reduces the user's disk quota by 100K; and 3) RUNS ED!!!!!!
"Ed is the standard text editor."
Let's look at a typical novice's session with the mighty ed:
- --- Note the consistent user interface and error reportage. Ed is generous enough to flag errors, yet prudent enough not to overwhelm the novice with verbosity.
"Ed is the standard text editor."
Ed, the greatest WYGIWYG editor of all.
ED IS THE TRUE PATH TO NIRVANA! ED HAS BEEN THE CHOICE OF EDUCATED AND IGNORANT ALIKE FOR CENTURIES! ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!! ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! ED MAKES THE SUN SHINE AND THE BIRDS SING AND THE GRASS GREEN!!
When I use an editor, I don't want eight extra KILOBYTES of worthless help screens and cursor positioning code! I just want an EDitor!! Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED! ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!
TEXT EDITOR.
When IBM, in its ever-present omnipotence, needed to base their "edlin" on a UNIX standard, did they mimic vi? No. Emacs? Surely you jest. They chose the most karmic editor of all. The standard.
Ed is for those who can *remember* what they are working on. If you are an idiot, you should use Emacs. If you are an Emacs, you should not be vi. If you use ED, you are on THE PATH TO REDEMPTION. THE SO-CALLED "VISUAL" EDITORS HAVE BEEN PLACED HERE BY ED TO TEMPT THE FAITHLESS. DO NOT GIVE IN!!! THE MIGHTY ED HAS SPOKEN!!!
Slashdot Mirror
wow.. been reading for three years and this is my first post, which also happens to be first post...
Ah.. such a shame... three years of training.. three long years of awaiting that special moment.. that one shining point in your life where it all comes together. Ah to score that elusive and coveted first post that we all scoff at but secretly dream about...
So you hit the Read More link and you see NO POSTS...and your heart starts to race.. palms begin sweating... you quickly type your gibberish in then grope madly for the mouse... with high hopes you click the submit button then pray to the geek Gods..."Oh dear God.. just let me have it once.. please God.. just this one time"
Then the page loads and you are left looking at this:
(#8)
Ah well...always a bridesmaid and never a bride.
anyone know if you can still get Slack on 8" floppies? (wink)
And I'm only on RedHat 6.2 - I'd better upgrade to Slackware, as it's obviously a newer and better release!
Seriously though, why are the Linux distro's playing the (MS approved) numbers game? Do we really need this sort of numbering system (i.e. people jumping numbers to "keep up"). Is there a better way that actually provides a useful comparison (other than the kernel number, which in itself isn't that useful).
Does any site have a list of Distro releases, kernel versions, and major software versions (sendmail, gcc, etc)?
UK/European Users: /packages/linux/slackware-mirror
The Slackware distribution is mirrored nightly at:
src.doc.ic.ac.uk in directory
----------------------------------
USA: /pub/slackware/ is the home site. Also: /pub/systems/linux/distributions/slackware. /pub/linux/packages/slackware /pub/Linux/distributions/slackware. mirrored nightly. /pub/linux/slackware /pub/linux/slackware/ /pub/Linux/slackware. : Updated daily at 08:30 Pacific. /pub/linux/slackware /pub/unix/slackware-3.6 daily mirror @ 01:00 Pacific. /archives/linux/Slackware mirrors the distribution daily (in the early morning). (they also have slackware_source) /pub/os/linux/slackware. Updated: Nightly
ftp.freesoftware.com:
uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu:
ftp.cps.cmich.edu:
sunsite.unc.edu:
ftp2.netis.com:
ftp.nlife.com:
full mirror of
ftp://ftp.cdrom.com/pub/linux/slackware/
ftp.cs.umn.edu (160.94.277.144) mirrors nightly in
ftp.linux.locus.halcyon.com/pub/linux/slackware
ftp.halcyon.com mirrors the distribution at 400 PST daily.
ftp.thedalles.net:
ftp.thepayne.com:
ftp://ftp.cs.unm.edu/dist/mirrors/slackware-3.6 updated daily around 1:00am MDT.
ftp.cs.columbia.edu:
ftp.ccs.neu.edu:
~ppppppppö
There is an explaination on the site as to the jump Here.
;-)
All of the information on what the current release includes is here, on slackware.com
You can always get all of the newest stuff by looking in the "current" directory on any slackware mirror.
Pretty much, Slackware went to 7 because Patrick was getting bugged by people who didn't realize that the numbers are just numbers, and thought that RedHat was eons ahead of Slack. Also, several major changes were made in that release, including shifting to glibc.
Slackware is very friendly to local compilation of software, if you don't like how far up to date a piece of software, just compile it yourself, also, you should always compile a customized kernel to get optimal performance from your machine with any distibution.
It is suprising that the next distro is not 8. I held off on submitting the beta as a story. The beta is actually an excellent product. It includes X4 and the newest verions of just about everything that there is to have the newest version of.
BTW, Slack is the best distro
Eh...
As a professional consultant for a major Fortune 500 software company, I've recently gotten involved in the whole open source phenomenon as started by Linus Torvalds and Richard Stallman with the release of the GNU/Linux operating system (or is it Linux? I'm not too sure on this point).
Anyway, after having compiled a report on the commercial viability of open source as an alternative to closed source in the e-commerce/b2b world, I've become quite interested in Linux myself, and thanks to a handy Corel Linux distribution, consider myself to be someway to becoming a "guru" as people here like to call themselves.
Anyway, my point is that Slackware, as a distribution, doesn't give out the professional image that Linux is trying to gain at the moment. On one hand, you've got respectable players like Red Hat, Corel and SCO pushing Linux's corporate image to new levels of respectibility, but on the other hand you've got a distribution named "Slackware", hardly the name your tech-savvy CTO wants to represent a core part of their enterprise solution.
The whole name seems to give the distribution a half-finished, "slack" even, image, surely not one that's in anybody's best interest, whether they be the average long-haired Linux sysadmin or a suited CTO looking for the next big thing. And this image taints all of Linux.
No, whilst Slackware may produce a decent distribution, they definitely need to think about a name change to ensure continued acceptance in the increasingly corporate-driven Linux market.
When I log into my Xenix system with my 110 baud teletype, both vi
*and* Emacs are just too damn slow. They print useless messages like,
'C-h for help' and '"foo" File is read only'. So I use the editor
that doesn't waste my VALUABLE time.
Ed, man! !man ed
ED(1) UNIX Programmer's Manual ED(1)
NAME
ed - text editor
SYNOPSIS
ed [ - ] [ -x ] [ name ]
DESCRIPTION
Ed is the standard text editor.
- ---
Computer Scientists love ed, not just because it comes first
alphabetically, but because it's the standard. Everyone else loves ed
because it's ED!
"Ed is the standard text editor."
And ed doesn't waste space on my Timex Sinclair. Just look:
- -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 24 Oct 29 1929
- -rwxr-xr-t 4 root 1310720 Jan 1 1970
- -rwxr-xr-x 1 root 5.89824e37 Oct 22 1990
Of course, on the system *I* administrate, vi is symlinked to ed.
Emacs has been replaced by a shell script which 1) Generates a syslog
message at level LOG_EMERG; 2) reduces the user's disk quota by 100K;
and 3) RUNS ED!!!!!!
"Ed is the standard text editor."
Let's look at a typical novice's session with the mighty ed:
golem> ed
?
help
?
?
?
quit
?
exit
?
bye
?
hello?
?
eat flaming death
?
^C
?
^C
?
^D
?
- ---
Note the consistent user interface and error reportage. Ed is
generous enough to flag errors, yet prudent enough not to overwhelm
the novice with verbosity.
"Ed is the standard text editor."
Ed, the greatest WYGIWYG editor of all.
ED IS THE TRUE PATH TO NIRVANA! ED HAS BEEN THE CHOICE OF EDUCATED
AND IGNORANT ALIKE FOR CENTURIES! ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS
BODILY FLUIDS!! ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! ED MAKES THE SUN
SHINE AND THE BIRDS SING AND THE GRASS GREEN!!
When I use an editor, I don't want eight extra KILOBYTES of worthless
help screens and cursor positioning code! I just want an EDitor!!
Not a "viitor". Not a "emacsitor". Those aren't even WORDS!!!! ED!
ED! ED IS THE STANDARD!!!
TEXT EDITOR.
When IBM, in its ever-present omnipotence, needed to base their
"edlin" on a UNIX standard, did they mimic vi? No. Emacs? Surely
you jest. They chose the most karmic editor of all. The standard.
Ed is for those who can *remember* what they are working on. If you
are an idiot, you should use Emacs. If you are an Emacs, you should
not be vi. If you use ED, you are on THE PATH TO REDEMPTION. THE
SO-CALLED "VISUAL" EDITORS HAVE BEEN PLACED HERE BY ED TO TEMPT THE
FAITHLESS. DO NOT GIVE IN!!! THE MIGHTY ED HAS SPOKEN!!!