Slashdot Mirror
Open-Source Netware-Aware OS Under Construction
jjr writes "An article over at Infoworld say that a former exec of Novell is creating a open source(GPL) netware compatible OS. you can play with it over at www.timpanogas.com" The operating system is named MANOS, so I keep expecting to see a lot of hands involved.
And for anyone who still don't get it, "manos" is spanish for hands
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
Man is it ever annoying when these open source projects spend tons of time on giving people titles, setting up cool websites and such before (or even instead of) doing any coding. For instance, from the website:
"TRG's MANOS logo was painted approximately 1500 years ago by an ancient artist who was one of the earliest inhabitants of Utah."
That's right, this project has been around for 1500 years and they are just now starting to code. Sheesh.
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
Why not concentrate on something useful, like making Samba and NT to cooperate better ?
If i had any moderation points left, this would already be a (score 0, troll) article...
since when did the open source movement start telling people to stop development on any field because this other field is more important? if that was the case we could argue that maybe we should be growing from netware up to make linux/unix better, and stop working with samba since NT is already a piece of crap. but we don't say that because open source offeres something for everyone, regardless of what the ohters say. your argument is as bad as the one used by people who say that we shouldn't spend money on space travel becasue there's still a lot of problems here on earth that need solving.
Besides, Netware is not horrible and you know it. I've never come across any system that was as intuitive and easy to administer than Netware, but i don't think that's what this is about.
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
Shouldn't that be 'man os'?
It's a new word; it mean "compatible, but not quite". Some uses:
"Gah, this file's not compatible - it's not even complatible!"
"My partner and I are highly complatible."
"This hardware is 100% IBM complatible, which equates to 85% IBM compatible."
etc. etc.
Isn't it apparent? We have ESR & RMS. Isn't that what Linux is all about?
L0phtCrack
and for you CDC fans out there BackOrifice is installed by default!!..
Ok it sounded better in my head... *sigh*
Cool! Think of the features:
I would pay $50 for one!
(This will make no sense to anyone except MST3K fans. It refers to a movie that makes "Plan 9 from Outer Space" look like "Gone With the Wind".)
(*) Natalie Portman skin optional
He has been an active contributor to (at least) the discussion on the linux-kernel mailing list for the last year or so. Check out his entry in the Kernel Traffic People index.
It's very interesting to watch his interaction with the community, since he came in from a large software house and seem(ed, s) to not "get" the way Linux development works. Some of the discussions he's brought up really seem bizarre in the Linux world (incorporate fsck into the kernel, like w2k, or this little diatribe), but others have led to very positive developments (NTFS help, legal help, ...).
Some times this guy seems like he just doesn't get it, but then again he provides a very active *different* voice in l-k land. And the best part is that due to the nature of the project, people can basically ignore him when he rants and maybe still pick up some useful ideas along the way.
Directly related to this story, I'm not sure how much use an open NW-alike is, but hey, it's a free world.
-- Have you ever imagined a world with no hypothetical situations?
I think Netware is great. Its user and object mamagement is unmatched by any other server operating system I've ever used. Its sturdy, has good support, and does its job.
I'm not sure what else you need from it, it has a purpose and fullfills it. I consider its user management to be far superior to the standard linux or NT setup.
Altho Novell seem to be running around like headless chickens trying to decide what direction it is going in tho, trying to aim Netware 5 at the internet market is a late, and probably bad decision.
==============================
==============================
PROUD to be GEEK
- but whenever I look at that GNU image on the topic bar, I see an caped eagle with a leather face mask and an erection.
See, you have to think of the gaps between the horns as an eye. The leftmost horn is the beak. The blanket becomes a cape. The eagle is standing proudly with an arched back, and, as any fool can plainly see, he has an erection.
Good for him.
Except that one of the principals of the project, Jeff Merkey, already contributes scads of code to Linux and is very active on the lkml. He's already worked on lots of filesystems and he's contributed a new open source debugger for debugging a running kernel. It seems that Linux has already benefited.
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
Now that we can have Linux or BSD used as both Netware, TCP/IP, Web, RealAudio, AppleTalk, Samba, etc. servers, how could one OS that is not, at this moment, guaranteed to work as well as the Linux/BSD things be successfull ?
Netware has indeed a great reputation but convincing people to switch to it and thus lose the extra protocol/services they would have under another already available Free OS sounds risky, IMHO...
Has there been a "market-pemetration" study ?
--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
"Our intent is to support existing Linux applications and drivers on an optimized NOS [network operating system] kernel that provides comparable performance metrics to today's Netware product line."
Thats all very nice to hear but when you take a look at the current server market (and the market shares offcourse) you will notice that Novell's share is decreasing very rapidly. Despite the fact that their NOS is a very robust and stable one its obvious, judging by the statistics, that the people want something else (more) nowadays. One could speculate on how people seemed to loose interest, IMHO one of the reasons is due to their own 'special' way of supporting TCP/IP but thats besides the point.
So I wonder why they want to focus on a complete new OS, which is based on a fading one, instead of supporting the currently available OS'ses even better? Sure; a Netware based OS which can also run Linux applications sounds nice but not necessary; if I need Linux support I'd just setup another server running Linux, its free remember?
As for the Netware part; if I'd have to choose between a (proven) stable NOS like netware or a new (free) product on the market I'd choose for Netware. Thats how it works when running a business. Even these folks feel the same on this: "Our first target shipment is geared to providing NetWare 4.11 NDS and networking capability in an open-source form to Novell's existing customers,". This also sounds very promising but don't forget that they plan to release somewhere in "the second half of 2001". How many Netware users will be left then? No one can predict this for sure but I really don't think it will be enough to make this whole product commonly accepted. It would take time, much effort and a lot of people supporting it.
If these folks really want to give out more support for Netware I'd personally suggest focusing on building and extending NDS support for Linux instead of selling it.
Linux and BSD have "almost all of the mindshare"!!!!
Quick everyone!! abandon all other OS development!!
(seeing this sort of thing at +3 insightful makes my heart sink. finding myself replying feels just as bad)
-- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz
The big problem is that a lot of companies, including Novell, signed license agreements with RSA. To get them, they had to sign agreements that extended beyond the life of the patent, September 20th, 2000. So, basically, Novell often can't release stuff open source because of the RSA agreement, and there are limits to what they can do to get around the problem.
They should have named it MENOS as in "mas o menos." :-)
-JD
I could actually use something like this. Can't upgrade the clients past Win 3.11 because the software will only function under Win 3.11 with low-end hardware. Inherited the project with no documentation. And if there's any downtime on one machine, we lose three others. It's a spaghetti setup :)
If there was an open-source LanMan replacement, we could probably streamline the updating of the macines.
That the Master approves.
.. which it very well may. How will Novell react? Ms likes to react by changing their API so only they can use it. Novell, selling their server software as server software more than an OS to develop a lot on. Will Novell cut down on their licensing fees? Will they try to take legal action?
---
-
ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only
"Hey guys, what should we call our new company?"
"How about.. ummm.." [FART] "Oh, excuse me!"
"Hey, that's it!! Now we just need to make it sound classy..."
"Anal Thunderclap? Magnum G.I. Tract? Sousaphone Orifice? Timpani Gas?"
"Timpanogas! Yeah.."
Mr. Ska
Milhouse?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Why is it that every announcement on Slashdot made that is vaguely related to free software (or to something being GPL'd) is tagged with the GNU logo?
This story has no relation to GNU whatsoever. Can someone come up with a "free software" logo for this sort of news?
That the above comment was ever moderated up is sad... Until recently, free software was never about "mindshare" and IPO's. It was about programmers creating things they loved and believed in. RMS didn't start the GNU project because he though it would someday have a huge "mindshare". Linus, Alan Cox, and the other early Linux developers didn't start hacking on Linux for "mindshare". They did it because they believe in the project, and because it was something they loved tinkering with.
Now I'm not saying that I'm unhappy about the commercial success that some companies are having with free software. I love the face that a greater percentage of the servers I work with are Linux servers.
But free software isn't only about things like mindshare and marketshare. Sometimes it's just about a project you love and want to hack on. And it doesn't really matter what the "installed base" of your program is. It matters how much you love writing it.
As long a there is a free software movement, as long as hackers write code for the love of learning, and the love of the challenge, there will still be room for more free OS's and other free software projects. The day there isn't, is the day that the "free" software movement has truely died.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Whoever they are, they don't know how to spell Timpanogos, that alone is pretty embarrasing.
Maybe it's not their fault. See, it's the name of the tallest mountain around these parts. There are two trails to the peak, and the easiest one is the one maintained by the girl scouts of america. And since they're ignorant, they spelled the sign at the trail head Timpanogas. And since they're cheap, they never fixed the sign. But it's still embarrasing. It's spelled Timpanogos. Anyone who had to study it in elementary school knows that.
So, aparantly, these guys have never hiked it (and it's almost a requirement to hike it at least once if you live here), or they've only hiked it the easy way.
All that being said, there are facts to be pointed out.
1: They've been mentioned here before. At that time i think it was netware support for linux or somesuch.
2: Former Novell Execs are a dime a dozen. Honestly, being a Vice President at Novell is like being a middle-managment pencil pusher anywhere else. They have so many of them that the term no longer has any meaning.
3: If they can't spell the name of the valley's most prominant landmark correctly I've absolutly no faith in them.
This is just like television, only you can see much further.
What saves Novell's butt outide of the file-&-print world is NDS. Directory Services done right. No crappy NT wierdness, no bizarre limitations, this thing is a true distributed object-oriented directory you can stick about anything into. Novell took all of that time in the field and learned what SysAdmins really want : the ability to manange everything from one point fast, easily, reliably, and in quantity. No six-tools-piped-together-then-hand-added-to-each-s ystem, no custom-scripts-only-their-writer-understands-&-he- left-last-year, no scramble to find & close accounts when someone jumps ship, no you-do-it-this-way-here-and-that-way-there - instead all in one easy to read, easy to architect, very flexible directory. User information? Here. Maiden names? There. Desktop prefs? There. Printer settings? There. Printer drivers? Over there. Notes account? There. AIX acounts? There. Phone numbers? Here. Fax box? There. Billing center? Here. AOL Chat? Here. All there - everywhere.
Unfortunately Novell hasn't figured out how to make this wonder universal. Sure it runs on a couple of platforms but there's little to encourage new folks to move to it. If any product ever needed at 200-user-&-90-day free trial this is it. Let the masses get a taste and they'll want more. Unfortunately Novell hasn't figured out how to do so.
What they have done is put out a few lame Netware-drivers that rely on IPX (remember IPX? Secure, smart, but not TCP/IP) and were closely tied to specific kernels. They want to let other folks in but are afraid of loosing the jewels. NDS on open-source boxes - their fear is how to get them to pay for the intellectual property (& Novell has staked their fortune on developing NDS!) Most of the /.'ers just want their hands on tech they don't want to pay big upfront license fees for but when that's the only model you have then you're stuck. Sell support? Not much use in a business like directory services. Charge for development tools? Yeah - developers don't need anyone that much anymore.
Anyway, this crew from Novell helped develop & pre-market the Novell's next-gen clustering technology and when it was about baked jumped ship and started telling folks they were going to sell pretty much what they'd been developing at Novell. Lawsuits ensue and these folks find out that you can't just walk out the door with the tech. Big bills are paid and so they decide to go off in the Utah desert & reinvent Netware. Unfortunately they hadn't noticed 'till recently that no one needs another Netware, particularly a third party one that couldn't run what apps Netware already has and is only compatible with an obsolete (4.11) version.
So now they're offering is drivers to read Netware file systems (nice but not an overwhelming need in most quarters) and a new OS that can use Linux drivers under a new "MANOS" kernel to integrate with Netware environments. Oh, and there's some talk of an open source NDS clone but no one has seen any evidence of this (at least that I'm aware of.) This of course all has to be done without violating the legal decisions against them from their last run-in with Novell where they had to agree not to use or release any secrets.
Yay. Another open source OS, albiet from a good developer, whose sales feature is the ability to integrate with a platform that's not growing and a promise to deliver an open-source version of NDS - something that has taken a lot of very bright folks a lot of time to develop & tune, all without infringing on trade secrets or legal agreements. Oh, and this thing will be like Netware - no apps for it (the ability to read DLLs and such is interesting but without the infrastructure to host them not much good.) Just what the world needs.
Here's an idea: someone develop a good set of open-source libraries for an NDS clone. Or someone figure out a model for Novell to release theirs yet still make money on them. But please, lets not tie them to another limited-application OS. Enough reinventing the wheel - we're at the point where everyone just wants components that an be added a la carte to their favorite and/or most appropriate OS.
Please, before folks start posting how they recall with disfavor their experiences with Netware in '86 or whenever recall what the competition was also like back then. Also, if you haven't used Netware 5.0 then you really should be quiet - these days it's very different from what you recall; very sophisticated, very polished, and very good at what it does. Frankly if I could use Netware for my file & print serving, Linux for my application hosting, and NDS to tie everything together they'd kick.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
If these guys worked on NetWare, how can they create a competing OS without violating trade secret and copyright laws? Every other OS built to directly compete with another commercial OS uses clean-room techniques to ensure that the code is not tainted.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
Half the problems attributed to Windows95 were problems integrating it with Novell networks. Who wants obsolete IPX traffic gacking up their network? Novell's never implemented TCP/IP properly, they did far worse than Microsoft ever did, trying to make it propietary and lock in that customer base.
Want to triple the service calls for workstations on your network, at the same time acheiving a four-fold drop in system response time? Simply install Novell's Network Client on an NT Workstation.
I worked for one of the best Novell shops in town, and my job was converting networks to NT and cleaning up the crap Novell left behind. I left to pursue NT, and the company stuck with Novell. Less than two years later they've folded.
Linux does NOT NEED to be dragged down to the level of a Novell network. It can do everything Novell can do faster and better, except run propietary software that requires a Netware server. That's not software anybody needs.
Anyone else thinks this looks like a "sleezy" OS? I don't know, I just got that first impression. That is the first word that came to my mind when I seen their home page. I haven't used it and am pretty sure it isn't "sleezy".
But I felt kinda dirty looking at the web site, when a co worker walked by I quickly closed the window, like it was porn. I don't do that with any other OS web site, including Microsoft and Sun's, well expect for the p0rn OS homepage.
"`Ford, you're turning into a penguin. Stop it.'" -THHGTTG
If they do this without Novell's approval, then, well, "I'll have my lawyers talk with your lawyers." They're likely to get snarled up in legal wranglings regardless of the precise correctness of their actions.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Seeing as how the company's Partners includes Novell, the Canopus Group, and Caldera, it seems reasonably likely that the enterprise comes with the "blessing" both of Ray Noorda and of Novell.
I'm sure the lawyers have "already talked," and were perhaps even involved with the initial establishment of Timpanogas...
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
ipxgateway_enable="YES"
There are some other tools in /usr/ports for NDS, etc.
I'm not sure about Net/Open, never used them extensively.
[Rewind the clock about six or seven years...]
With Linux, our intent is to support existing Windows applications (with Wine) on an optimized OS kernel that provides comparable performance metrics to today's Unix product lines.
That's all very nice to hear, but when you take a look at the current server market (and the market shares, of course) you will notice that Unix's share is decreasing very rapidly. Despire the fact that their NOS is a very robust and stable one, it is obvious, juding by the statistics, that the people want something else (more) nowadays. One could speculate on why people seemed to loose interest. IMHO, one of the reasons is their own 'special' way of supporting SMB, but that's besides the point.
So I wonder why they want to focus on a complete new OS, which is based on a fading one (Unix), instead of supporting the currently available OSes even better? Sure; a Unix based OS which can also run Windows applications sounds nice but not necessary; if I need Windows support I'd just setup another server running Windows; it comes with the PC, remember?
As for the Windows part; if I'd have to choose between a (proven) stable NOS like Windows NT or a new (free) product on the market I'd choose Windows. That is how it works when running a business.
Don't forget that they plan to developing into 2000 and beyond. How many Unix users will be left then? No one can predict this for sure but I really don't think it will be enough to make this whole product commonly accepted. It would take time, much effort and a lot of people supporting it.
[For the clue impaired: Everything the original poster says about NetWare can be applied almost verbatim to Linux six years ago. Funny how point-of-view makes such a difference, eh?]
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Half the problems attributed to Windows95 were problems integrating it with Novell networks.
Indeed. But is that a problem with Windows95 or with NetWare? Given the deliberate brain-damage in Microsoft's "Client for NetWare Networks", and their past track record in general, I know who I would blame.
Novell's never implemented TCP/IP properly...
While they were dragged in screaming, fighting tooth and nail, Novell finally did wake up and smell the Internet. NetWare 5.0's IP stack is actually pretty good.
Want to triple the service calls for workstations on your network, at the same time acheiving a four-fold drop in system response time? Simply install Novell's Network Client on an NT Workstation.
A short version is, IMO, "Simply install NT Workstation."
I left to pursue NT...
But you're not biased or anything...
Linux does NOT NEED to be dragged down to the level of a Novell network.
Regardless of which way Linux would be dragged, it is worth pointing out that this project is only tangentially related to Linux. It is mainly a project to implement an ABI compatible NetWare clone under an Open Source license. I don't remember Open Source being declared limited to Unix.
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.