Slashdot Mirror
LinuxPPC 2000 Update
Ryan writes: "LinuxPPC 2000 Q4 includes the "first graphical versions of the yaboot and miboot boot software" and the installation CD-ROM is now "bootable on all PCI-based Apple Power Macintosh computers, including the dual processor G4, the G4 Cube, and the FireWire PowerBook" (previous versions would only boot on older Macs)." They've got a press release up and everything.
Just look at our FTP mirrors. It's also on LinuxISO.org.
:-)
Also, the Macworld Expo is in less than two weeks.
It's not just hype. Please reserve your cynicism.
Haaz: Co-founder, LinuxPPC Inc., making Linux for PowerPC since 1996.
-- haaz.
A lot has happened in the past few days! We're making the most of the "2000" part of the product's name. ;-)
:-D
As has been noted on here, the LinuxPPC 2000 Q4 ISO images are now available. Look on our FTP mirror list or on LinuxISO.org.
The CD-ROM set (FWB HDT*PE, install, extras, and source) is now available for pre-order. Shipping is scheduled to begin on January 10.
We have changed our subscription policy and lowered the prices on Myth II and Applixware Office.
And, www.linuxppc.ne.jp has gone live. Look for the announcement about the Japanese version of LinuxPPC 2000 Q4 on there.
That's it. Whew!
Haaz: Co-founder, LinuxPPC Inc., making Linux for PowerPC since 1996.
-- haaz.
OS X will wipe the floor with LinuxPPC on all iMacs and newer. It's a complete BSD Unix not rinky-dink Mac OS 1->9.
LinuxPPPC will only ever get onto whatever hardware OS X won't run on. And that's a shrinking legacy base.
Sad fact: LinuxPPC docs suck and the installation software's even worse. If something's not documented, it doesn't exist. The job's not done until the docs are there and the docs aren't there.
The installation software and manual are a sad, sorry piece of butt-wipe. If it installs, you're okay. If it doesn't, you'll never have enough information to figure out why or what to do about it. (Hey we're talking Linux here. I should have the source, right? Wrong, its NOT Linux, its BEFORE you can INSTALL Linux.)
If you're the average user, you toss it and the old hardware into the trash. I just wasted time and money trying to get a usable system because my old Apple hardware is so damn durable.
But given the results, I can't recommend it. No QA... Might as well use M$. I'll toss out my old Macs before I attempt to use LinuxPPC again.
Its not worth my time. (12 hours @ my billing rates to get nowhere? [Expletive deleted] it!)
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Sit down, you're in for a shock:
I think Mac OSX won't hurt LinuxPPC much and may help a bit here and there.
I don't think you were going to get many mac "converts" to Linux to begin with, mostly people who already are disposed to Unix who like Macs. While Mac OSX will drain some of these people out, it will make it more respectable to install an alternate Unix in a Mac only shop (there are still quite a few of these), which some folks will do for experimental purposes or for apps that haven't been ported to Aqua or BSD. Then there is the "gateway drug" theory. It will help some people who are interested in the Linux movement to take the plunge; particularly it will introduce a generation of kids in Macish households and schools to Unix. When they need a free Unix to run on a doorstop they won't be afraid to turn to Linux.
What LinuxPPC really needs is some indepdent source of cheap PPC motherboards, or a cheap book PC style form factor computer that takes advantage of the PPCs relatively low power consumption.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
NetBSD and more recently OpenBSD both support typcial Apple machines. FreeBSD is well bound to x86, so I don't expect a ppc port from them.
OpenBSD is a bit rusty still on the ppc, if the mailing list traffic about it I see go by is any indication. I have no idea how well NetBSD runs on ppc.
Yes, there's nothing as liberating as having a hardware platform tied to your OS.
It should also be noted that with any decent open source system, portability for the kernel is basically limited to finding someone to write the (hopefully small) portion of code in the OS that must be platform-specific. The 4.4BSD book talks about writing a portable OS in detail in the beginning of the book.
As for userland, you're only tied down by what the kernel runs on (duh) and your compiler (you won't have the kernel running on the architecture without compiler support for it in the real world, too). So, what's so special about Linux here? You could make the argument for anything, given modern BSD tends to be easier to do things from source (make world, ports, etc.) then if anything, the argument would be more in BSD's favor.
Also, your logic is flawed. The x86 line maintaing compatibility back down to 8086 has nothing to do with Windows; Windows won't run on an 8086 and an 8088, and only in a limited manner on the 80286. Intel could drop 8086-80286 compatiblity without much of a fight. But why would they?
The problem with the x86 line is not maintaining backwards compatiblity, but rather that it's outdated. There's really no "wasted" silicon by having an 80686 be compatible- the 8086 instruction set is a subset of the 8086 instruction set, etc. What needs to be done is a full redesign, getting around all of the issues that causes x86 to be hated by so many people (how interrupts are handled, etc.) and going from ground-up. For as long as we make super-fast 8086s, throwing a handful of new instructions on every generation or so, you still have an 8086 at the core- and that's the problem.
Think twice before mindless x86-bashing or mindless Linux-advocacy.
-bugg
While the party line of LinuxPPC is that it only supports PCI-based machines, there is, in fact a non-Mach Linux kernel which currently runs on 6100, 7100, and 8100 (NuBus) Power Macs. Granted, it's not part of LinuxPPC.com's distribution, but it's still part of the LinuxPPC world.
The mklinux project is actually quite successful, and as far as I know, the only version of Linux that will run on Nubus based Macs. Anyhoo, Mach acts as an abstraction layer and pager for the hardware, making it much easier to port the Linux kernel. (no hardware-specific code was required; just a matter of gettign Linux to talk to Mach.) So you can call it GNU/Linux/Mach if you want.
LinuxPPC and OS-X will live in harmony. First, LinuxPPC (IMHO) is significantly faster than OS-X at everything. Also, Apple seems to have forgotten that it has created computers before the Beige-G3 series (circa 1997), so all of those people with a 7500/8500/9500 class machine that wants a robust, server operating system will have no other supported choice. Finally, Linux has matured for several years both on intel & PPC, where MacOS X is a brand new OS that will encounter some maturing problems.
Doh!
This discussion is largely moot. MacOS X (Contrary to popular belief) is not UNIX. It's not even UNIX like. Yes, there is a layer burried deep under Aqua and the NEXTStepish file system, and most unix software can be made to compile, but for most UNIX/Linux enthusiasts, using OS X as a Unix variant would be like mainstream Mac users trying to switch to Linux to improve stability--yes, you can probably live with what you'll get, but it's far from ideal...even compared to what you left.
I'll trade my ppclinux G4 for Mac OS X when I see mac users flocking to Linux for it's ease of use. Probably not any time soon.
-fp
This would be called fair use.
It would definately be difficult to argue that the usage here could be construed as an endorsement by Apple nor could it be easily argued that it dilutes their brand.
The use of their logo, however, in a window manager theme would be such a use. Also, Apple can write C&D letters all they want, but that doesn't make them right. Apple has lost a LOT of lawsuits because they attmpted to file baseless legal suits in an effort to intimidate other companies.
-fp
this is true... but osx is still in beta and it does have all that singing and dancing to support...
2 1337 4 u!
LinuxPPC is not only "good enough" to use as a workstation, it is perfect. I myself run LinuxPPC on a PowerMac 8550/132 (Pretty much the same as your box I think), and it runs so smoothly that I use the machine preferentially to my G4/500 running MacOS. I also use it for some serving -- solid as a rock and pretty quick, too.
I can say pretty confidently that you will experience no stability or performence problems with LinuxPPC on that hardware, either. I've only ever had one kernel panic on my LinuxPPC workstation, and that was when I was trying to write to a badly damaged HFS partition. The 604-based PPC machines are probably the ones that LinuxPPC has been most extensively tested on.
One note, however, is that you will need to disable Gnome and use a more lightweight window manager. Gnome is just unacceptably slow on older hardware. Also, figuring out all the OpenFirmware settings can be a hassle.
Good Luck!
The BSD core notwithstanding, I think it may be a couple of years before OS X becomes as fast and robust a server platform as LinuxPPC. Great job guys!
It's worked for quite a while.
I don't mind the apple lawsuits. Why do so many people think they have to copy them? There are so many varations in design besides all in one translucent boxes. How about making a truly convergent PC based on ATI Radeon All-in-Wonder?
Wouldnt Apple be pissed about having the Apple logo on this story? As seen lately they have been asking most of the community not to include any copyrighted or trademarked material and I'm sure the logo falls into that. Could someone from the /. editorial answer. Thx.
Trust the source!
CDs not available until MacWorld? Download not available yet? What gives? Did slashdot fall for an early announcement? The product is called LinuxPPC 2000 so I assume if it was announced in 2001 that would be bad. Sounds like slashdot reprinted a 2-bit marketing ploy.
No matter what, LinuxPPC (and Linux in general) is and will be creating interesting times :)
Bill - aka taniwha
--
Bill - aka taniwha
--
Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak
Why doesn't cheaper non-x86 stuff exist?
One word: Volume
I work at API NetWorks. We have an ATX sized Alpha motherboard with USB, sound, ethernet, PCI, etc... A -complete- system is about $3000 or under from our resellers. (We don't sell direct, tho you can buy the board/CPU alone thru a distributor of ours)
Back to the volume answer. Without volume, you don't get price. Everyone would "love" an Alpha but in the real world, the people that buy it are the people that need it. (scientific/high performance computing) There's NOT a large influx of Slashdot readers knocking our doors down looking for an alternative. Why? #1 issue: Cost. My first 486 cost $4000. Most Slashdot readers will be damned if they pay more than $1000 for a PC. Tell me, how is Alpha, or any other "non-x86" CPU supposed to compete at those price levels?? I'd really like to know! CmdrTaco likes to "avoid stories about the businessy side of the whole Open Source thing" but quite frankly, it's the "businessy" (sic) thing that pays MY paycheck.
What's my Karma Mr. Burns? "Excellent"
What do people think about the prospects of linux ppc with os x just around the corner and darwin just now gathering steam? I hope it survives just to provide some variety and so the projects can benefit from each other, but i think its outlook is rather grim on all but older macs.
--aiee
As a nerd, I'm always interested in good hardware and good software. We've been blessed with good software for a while :) And now with the excellent Apple hardware, I think we have a winner. If your a videophile, then I think this is the best place to start messing. I've done some coding on the video encoding/decoding side for mpeg and would really like an excellent firewire implmentation worked out. The current kernel has some really nice hooks and latches for firewire and soon this would go into PPC's. I know a number of mac users who would jump onto Linux just as soon as the video software on it gets better. Right now, with gimp, coreldraw and so on we do have a pretty good image editing collection. One other media related improvement would be something to do with sound (which seems to be totally ignored). I would help if I understood the many qualms in coding sound software. Wont it be nice if SoundForge dudes ported their software to a free OS? (Probably to i386 Linux :( ).
Trust the source!
I am not an expert in these matters, so I ask you, is this possible? Could we have completely unique hardware setups that cater for Linux specifically? I hope so, I think it would be very liberating.
--Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The
--