Slashdot Mirror
Caldera's Almost-Linux Skips The Linux Kernel
Cassivs points to this UnixReview article, which says "Caldera has released Open UNIX 8, which includes a complete GNU/Linux distribution, except that it runs on the SVR5 kernel, acquired from SCO. It uses the same packages as Caldera's OpenLinux 3.1. It should scale much better, and provides a commercial UNIX kernel with the ability to natively develop GNU/Linux applications." It sounds like a non-Linux kernel has advantages on certain hardware, even running exactly the same software otherwise -- I wonder how long that will be true. Caldera has talked about this product, with it's Linux Kernel Personality, for a long time, and this is an informative review for anyone following it.
so its much like AIX5L wich caldera(SCO) helped them create as far as I can work out
(any info ?)
this might be a nice product but it runs on x86 hardware and the clustering is not something that is revelutionary you can get heartbeat for linux and D.Becker seems to have MPI + rest going nicely
But its a nice way of going about things as proved by the AIX impl
But IBM sells the hardware thats where they get the suppport contracts from where is Caldera going to get them from ?
How about geting the UDI project running nicely and chargeing vendors for drivers on unix or about the nice update stuff the caldera has?
this as far as I'm concerned is the SCO staff trying to accert their will over the company
regards
john jones
C'mon don't be lame, I have been using every single 2.4 update with ntfs support and MANY experimental features...never had a single problem. I am not saying you are incompetent, but an informed comment would be far more helpful than that kind of ridiculous statement.
This is the problem running alternative os's on x86 platforms.
Caldera needs to hook up with particular OEM's who want to create mission critical using openunix. If caldrea can't convince OEM's that openunix will sell, then the OS is doomed. No sane IT manager would buy an OS without approved hardware. Most Linux servers for example run on Dell or Compaq systems that are linux approved. This issue will not go away unless the kernel is opensourced and the gnu community can write drivers for it. I also hope it doesn't use the openserver libraries. Microsoft made Xenix as proprietary as possible and openserver was based on Xenix. Compiling gnu apps might be difficult. Hopefully OpenUnix's libc libraries are those from AT&T.
Anyway Caldera is dying. Its a shame because it was my first linux distro. Caldera was ahead in the linux and dos game but they did not have good marketing. Redhat totally took over. Also Ransome love's comments on the evils of gnu and opensource did not help. Client access licenses also hurt it severly. Caldera just got rid of one of the main arguements of using linux instead NT or Unix. The cost and licensing issues for small projects on limited budgets is what linux's key market is. Also linux runs on cheaper hardware. If Caldera keeps this up, then the arguement to use OpenLinux or even OpenUnix is moot. I chose Redhat for my servers thank you.
http://saveie6.com/
Well on a serious note, this does hint at what RMS means. Most (including me) think he's barmy for insisting on GNU/Linux, but if this system works much like (GNU/)Linux just without the kernel, perhaps he's just being mad for trying to change the way everyone speaks, rather than being wrong. Sounds to me that GNU/Linux without the Linux could be as similar or as different as without the GNU. If that makes sense ;-)
With regard to the kernel itself, what are the ramifications of this structure security-wise? While I know this particular kernel has been around awhile (hell, SCO is ancient), it makes me curious.
To me, one of the primary advantages of using a Linux kernel is the "many eyes" approach to security. While I appreciate the fact that the distribution using a full suite of GNU/Linux utilities and such, I'd be somewhat apprehensive about the kernel itself (stability through age aside).
Anyone who has any insight into this, please reply!
With debian we have debian on Linux and debian on Hurd.
:( Duty calls.
So in a way Caldera is a little bit like debian.
There are other ways Caldera is like debian which I would list if I had time... But I must be off.
My earlier reply is there also (to the original poster). As a sys admin, or junior IT guy or maintainer of any system, it's your job to read read read the Changelogs, Mailing Lists, and all associated docs. Seriously a competent IT person should be all over their systems.
I mean this guy was complaining (original poster) that he almost got fired! Well, ummm *duh*...these are 2.4 issues...I promise someone has run into it before. What sys admin runs out adhoc and grabs new kernel source (even 2.4 source) without checking the implications of what they are doing. I am a coder, not a sys admin, although I used to be and it just goes against everything a sys admin *should* stand for. Many guys I know admin'ing linux systems which are critical are very very wary of any kernel upgrading unless *absolutley* neccessary. Then when the decision is made to upgrade it is *thoroughly* researched, planned, carefully implemented with redundancy in case of any bad circumstances.
It certain does not seem to be the case here. Beware the l33t sysadmin!
Just my 2 cents.
So can I go download a Caldera Unix 8 iso image? I couldn't find one on their site. If I'm not mistaken, they still have to make the GNU tools they use available in source form, right?
Has anyone found a place where you can d/l this release, or is it only available for purchase?
Not the Win NT filing system, but the standard Network File System.
Caldera, from the beginning, has tried to be the Microsoft of Linux. Most recently, Ransom Love has taken to publicly slagging the GPL, and has said they were looking for ways to proprietize their stuff so they can rape the users more fully. This looks like the beginning of it.
I haven't liked, or trusted, these guys for at least 5 years. I used to use Caldera, but now, I've sworn off them more than I've sworn off Windows.
Slack, Debian, Redhat, BSD, whatever. They're all better than Caldera, just because of the "Caldera Attitude". Ransom Love thinks he deserves a stable of Ferraris for packaging someone else's code and selling it.
Bah. I'd use Windows before I use Caldera.
Clearly thou miss understandeth my post!
Forsooth, I simply stateth that Debian is not unlike Caldera in that they have interchangeth the kernels there unto. Ye Caldera has chosen Open Unix while ye old Debian can found to use HURD or on occasion FreeBSD.
The similarities there in are obvious to all! Therefore, I must prostest vociferously the my post was most unquestionably On Topic!
Certainly, thou seemest to be on crack!
The issue we're trying to discuss here is the quality of recent "stable" kernel releases. And you're here telling us that there's nothing wrong with the kernel releases, the problem is that the guy is a shitty sysadmin.
Well, first of all, you don't even know the guy or the specifics of the situation, so I don't think you are qualified to judge him. Second, you're being hypocritical by telling him he didn't have any business blaming the kernel without more information, yet you seem perfectly willing to blame him. Third, I don't think that his failure to effectively avoid a problem excuses the kernel maintainers from repeatedly letting simple obvious errors sneak into the stable series.
So lighten up, OK?
"Of course, when I submitted the story, it got rejected."
This is why I don't bother to submit stories at Slashsnot anymore. You have to be part of the elite.