Yellow Dog Linux 2.1 Shipping

Durindana indicates this announcement of the newest version of Yellow Dog Linux, writing: "PowerPC fans, this is a big deal. YDL's certainly improved over its former state lately; hopefully 2.1 continues that trend. Does this make it the "best of class" (Mandrake's favorite term) for PPC?" There are at least four strong Linux-on-Mac contenders now, which is nice to see.

Comments

installation?

[TheMMaster]

I just really hope they improved the installation routine, because I really hated it... Maybe I'm just too big of a fan of YaST2
(insert flame on memory usage here)

Re:installation?

[pauljlucas]

These comments are with respect to 2.0, not 2.1, so some things may have been fixed.

The installation is "different" not really improved (since 1.1). It's now defaults to a graphical installer (couldn't care less), but it still has issues, or at least it did on my Lombard PowerBook.

In case anybody else has this problem: the installer segfaults if you try to partition the unallocated portion of your disk. The workaround is to put a temporary MacOS partition there, then delete it from within thr YDL installer and replace it with Linux partitions. After that, it works fine.

I still think Intel-based distro installers are much better. YMMV.

Why?

[LoudMusic]

... surely I'm not the first post ... am I?

Why would anyone run Linux on a new Apple though? OSX will have so much more support and software availability than Linux on PPC ever could imagine. I see how YDL could be awsome on some older G3s (the beige ones that I have laying around at work), but there really can't be much demand for Linux on the new boxen. Can there?

~LoudMusic

Re:Why?

[Auckerman]

"Why would anyone run Linux on a new Apple though?"

People who want a cheap, lightweight notebook (iBook), without having to use a "proprietary" OS, which has the cavet of "locking in" people to an OS. Not that I'm one of them, as I'm posting from Mozilla in OS X.

Re:Why?

[alfredo]

YDL is so fine. The installer is good if you read the instructions.

Re:Why?

[egreB]

The ting about Linux is that it's.. well, Linux. Why would you run Linux on a wrist watch when you can run Casio's wrist-OS (or whatever it is named, the thing that shows the time)? Because it's great fun (-8

I dunno about the perfomance of OSX (I haven't got a chance to get my hands dirty on it yet, unfortunatly), but the way I see it is that Linux might rock compared to OSX. I've seen it before on older Macs..

And there's a lot of things you can do with Linux that you can't do with OSX. I won't get technical, you all know. (-8

-B

Re:Why?

[SanLouBlues]

Software availability!?!?! Download GPLed source, type "make". Oooh, can't do that with much software. Plus if the author didn't consider multiplatform issues and it doesn't build properly you can help improve free software, so everything available for Linux will be available for Linux on PPC.

Re:Why?

[Queer Boy]

One of the most obvious is that maybe some people want an ultra-modern operating system that runs just as well on hardware a few years old.

Another reason may be to do some serious programming (serious meaning developing other tools, things like Apache and Gimp), where there are tons of free already ported and tested dev tools.

There's a lot of support behind Linux, and not all that much behind Darwin right now. It all boils down to the right tool for the job.

Some people just want to get behind something that is free (as in beer and speech) while having a stylish computer to do it.

Re:Why?

[anlprb]

I picked up a Pismo (Powerbook G3 firewire) strictly with the intent of putting GNU/Linux on it. Why, you may ask. Because it is the operating system that I want and need, on hardware that I never have to worry about a hardware problem, something not supported on the hardware level, it has Ethernet onboard, the display is great, and it is an elegant chipset, with tons of power to boot. My 400 gives any 550-600 depending on systems specs a run for its money. Plus, how many of you have a glowing apple staring out at everyone when you are working on your laptop. OSX is not an OS that I can get behind. It is proprietary, does not run the software I need to run, and is slow as a dog going uphill in the middle of winter with molasses booties on, at least on a 400 with 128 megs of ram. Plus OSX's interface is not something that I care for. For those who like it, great, but E is for me. :) In the end, it is all about choice, right? Great RISC hardware, OF implementation, all good things.

Re:Why?

[anlprb]

Whoops, I meant to put int Troll tags but I guess the post filtered them out. No offense to OSX users out there. :)

Re:Why?

[maloi]

To have a choice.

Re:Why?

[schwanerhill]

Software availability!?!?! Download GPLed source, type "make".

Same goes for Mac OS X. But Linux can't run Mac or Windoze programs (at least not nearly so cleanly as OS X, and certainly not with official support).

Xfree running rootless with both Mac OS X native and Classic programs is a beautiful thing that no other OS (not Windows, not Linux) can do.

(By the way, Microsoft now produces software that runs on a Unix system. Who'd have thunk it?)

All that said, (back on topic) more Linux distros for the Mac can only be a good thing, particularly for older machines (as has been said umpteen times).

Re:Why?

[czardonic]

Are iBooks really that cheap? I haven't shopped around that much so I may well be wrong, but aren't equivalent Wintel notebooks cheaper.

Just curious. A friend of mine needs a new notebook, and she would probably prefer another Mac.

Re:Why?

[LoudMusic]

Hey there you go, I forget that Apple is still selling some 'somewhat' lower end Macs. I could see running YDL on a new G3 based Mac. But the G4s just beg for OS X and a gig of ram (:

By the way, I'm not a Mac guy, but I work with about 30 of them.

~LoudMusic

Re:Why?

[The Infamous Grimace]

Because not all of us can use OS X. And don't get me wrong, I'm talking about an iMac DV 400 and a PB G3, both with OS X 10.0.4 and 192MB of RAM. I'm one o' those lucky ones who 'supported' OS X early on, and now can't get an upgrade to a USEABLE version without either 1) sending Apple $20 and waitin' for the mail, or 2) driving 100 miles, over a mountain pass, to the nearest CompUSA. Can't just wander down to the authorized dealer (Connecting Point) from whom I purchased my copy. Why exactly did Apple put those coupons in the box? What are they for, if not this? So Apple has lost at least two software purchases (another 10.1 OEM for the PB, and AppleWorks 6), and possibly a hardware sale (my mom is thinking about a notebook, and she already has a Dell desktop...) because I cannot upgrade from 10.0.4 easily. So I shall stay with 9.1 for the time being, and take a look at Linux for PPC. I already have SuSE on my PC.

(tig)

Re:Why?

[4of12]

Well, I've always found

• x86 hardware is dirt cheap
• gettin apps, particularly binaries, easier for x86

but that's just me - cheap and lazy.

A friend that runs both UNIX and Macs has his Mac laptop setup to run Linux on PPC.

He likes it because he spends all day in XEmacs on a Sun and the Linux box is a good facsimile of the same environment but in a portable. But, he also gets the Mac and GUI that he's liked for many years.

Also, I noticed recently that the as-yet-still-vaporous G5 looks to really cook, blowing the doors off the 2 GHz P4 from the quoted SPECint2K and SPECfloat2K figures. That kind of performance is always interesting, and having a Linux platform that runs on it is a plus.

Re:Why?

[LoudMusic]

Ok great, it has a nice installer. That still doesn't make me want to use the OS. QNX has a bad ass installer (insert CD, select partition size, watch progress, remove CD and reboot), but I have no desire to use it either.

~LoudMusic

Re:Why?

[kerrbear]

Why would anyone run Linux on a new Apple though?

I for one need to test my software on Linux Systems. Yellowdog makes this possible on my TiBook. Its also fast and not as irritating to use as OSX when installing software- especially software designed for Gnome or KDE.

Your question perhaps is why somebody would choose one or the other. However Yaboot allows multi-OS booting on Mac hardware. At boot time I can choose OSX, Linux, OS9, or a CD as my OS of choice. Its pretty awesome and impresses the hell out of people :-)

Re:Why?

[DrSpin]

All those open source apps will run on OSX without any problem. If your kit's too old, use NetBSD. Either way, it will be easier and more reliable than Linux.

The only obvious reason for Linux on a PPC is the recursive one - you are developing Linux for the PPC!

Real nerds use *BSD - and flame everyone who doesn't :-)

Re:Why?

[_Mustang]

Why would anyone run Linux on a new Apple though?

True but it won't be *new* for long though - will it?
I may not be running Apple hardware these days (unless - are IIe 's supported?) but I love the idea of it being available immediately. The sooner an alternative comes around the more likely it is to be perceived as "competition". That's probably the key point since we've seen just how unlikely companies are to innovate when there's a competitive void. And the MORE competition then the more consumers as a whole will benefit.

So I say to the YDL folks - Keep it up!!

Re:Why?

[LoudMusic]

To quote myself, "I see how YDL could be awsome on some older G3s (the beige ones that I have laying around at work), but there really can't be much demand for Linux on the new boxen. Can there?". So yea, I agree with you on your first point.

I don't see why programmers would want to do serious programming on Apple hardware. Personally I can't stand their keyboard and mouse, and there are so many better options for hardware configuration going to x86. And it's sooo much cheaper.

There is support for Linux, but not necassarily Linux on PPC. And just how good do you think the support is? I ask because I honestly don't know. I would imagine it could be hard finding quality Linux support without hitting a few biggots first.

Ah, supporting free software and open source. AMEN BROTHA!

~LoudMusic

Re:Why?

[LoudMusic]

Yup. Apple scored big by making the latest iBook. It's very affordable, competes with the small Dells, and has some really cool features.

You won't find Apple hardware cheaper in one place than another. Everyone sells at Apple's price, unless you're getting a discount, like educational or governmental.

Heh, *she* wants a new notebook, eh? Well it depends on how much support you want to do. If you'd like to be over at her place more often, get her the one she'll be asking more questions about (:

~LoudMusic

Re:Why?

[Jeffrey Baker]

Linux can run all MacOS 9 software using Mac-on-Linux, which is the functional equivalent of "Classic" which MacOS X uses to run the same applications. Linux PPC supports an aweful lot of PCMCIA cards on the powerbook that OS X doesn't. Linux PPC has better power management than OS X (yes I'm serious). Linux can play DVD movies on the external monitor of a powerbook, but OS X cannot. Linux has a journalling filesystem and OS X doesn't. OS X is loaded with local root vulnerabilities, and probably a lot of undiscovered remote vulnerabilities as well.

Honsetly OS X hasn't got that much going for it.

Re:Why?

[cbowland]

ibooks base price ranges from about $1,300 to $1,700 depending on model / features. Check out apples store for exact details.

Apple Store

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are iBooks really that cheap?

Now that the new iBooks are out, the "old" ones (ie, pre-monday) are being cleared out. 1,200$US for the low end or 1,500$US for the one with the DVD/CD-RW drive.

check Small Dog Electronics [smalldog.com] or MacWarehouse.

Re:Why?

[jchristopher]

Unfortunately, OS X has one thing going for it that Linux doesn't - and that is an easy installation, maintenance, and installation of software programs. I like linux, but if you think that Linux is the equal of OS X for a nontechnical person, you are deluding yourself.

Re:Why?

[NDPTAL85]

The simplest answer is often the best one. People run Linux because they want to. Not because its convienent or "not Windows". If one has gotten used and likes Linux, what could Mac OS X give them? There are some similarities of course, the Unix parts of Mac OS X are quite good but they aren't exactly the same as Linux.

Its just a matter of personal taste really. They would run Linux on anything they had probably, Sparcs, Power4's, PA-RISC, MIPS, Athlons and Pentiums....so why not G3's and G4's?

Re:Why?

[TerryG]

All rihgt, GPL'ed software on proprietary hardware! Way to stick it to the man.

I have an iMac Rev. A dualing booting LinuxPPC 1999, oh well.

Re:Why?

[kilgore_47]

Personally I can't stand their keyboard and mouse

Thats a weak criticism of apple hardware, considering that almost any USB mouse or keyboard will work with any recent mac.

Price is a better argument, but apple has taken strides there and even has a $799 offering now (and you can use whatever input devices you want).

The MacOS is my reason for using apple hardware though ;-)
(i use a mac at the office, doing web and photoshop drivel)

Re:Why?

[GMontag451]

You don't need YaBoot to do that anymore. On any New World Mac (i.e. any Mac made after the first iMac), all you have to do is hold down the Option key during boot. This will bring up an OF based OS menu that will include all bootable volumes available.

Re:Why?

[Elfboy]

because I can...

Re:Why?

[inio]

Honsetly OS X hasn't got that much going for it.

Aqua.

Ever tried to lick X11? Blegh...

Re:Why?

[Moridineas]

What do you mean "serious programming"...your parenthetical doesn't explain anything. Tools like Apache and Gimp? Tools like Apache and gimp compile and run on OS X!!

And I would also say there is a lot of support behind Darwin right now--I believe the sales of OS X speak for themselves.

Scott

Re:Why?

[Ryan Amos]

OS X also has a lot of things going for it that Linux does not. Full QuickTime support (native, not through MOL, which is pretty resource-heavy) OS X also has an *EXTREMELY* easy to use programming API (once you learn the quirks of Objective C, it's almost point-and-click GUI programming) as well as native use of AltiVec, PDF and XML, not to mention all the cool transparency stuff.

OS X can also run almost anything Linux can; XDarwin rootless is pretty mature, and has run everything I've thrown at it without a hitch. Coming right around the corner are fully OS X optimized Adobe applications (I've used betas.. those things kick ass, ultra fast) True, you can do all this under Linux with MOL, but as long as you're going to emulate Mac OS, you might as well just run it natively. :P Most of OS X's problems come from its immaturity; give it a year and see what it's like.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux can run all MacOS 9 software using Mac-on-Linux, which is the functional equivalent of "Classic" which MacOS X uses to run the same applications.

Except they run better under Classic than MOL because Apple spent a lot of time optimizing. Further, Classic apps share the desktop with other apps. You don't need to house the MacOS desktop inside a giant X window.

Linux PPC supports an aweful lot of PCMCIA cards on the powerbook that OS X doesn't.

Maybe so, I wouldn't know. But in general, OS X supports a lot more Apple hardware than Linux. For example, XFree86 4.1 is still unaccelerated for a lot of video cards in Apple systems, Firewire device support in Linux is flaky, and sound doesn't work under Linux in many systems (particularly laptops).

Linux PPC has better power management than OS X (yes I'm serious).

BS. I've got an iBook with YDL 2.0 and it doesn't even support suspend/sleep mode, nor does it dim the display. It can spin down the disk and blank the display, but that's it.

Linux can play DVD movies on the external monitor of a powerbook, but OS X cannot.

BS again. I just watched a DVD on my TV this past weekend driven by the AV connector on my iBook, in OS 10.1. Further, I'd like to know what version of Linux for PPC supports video out on my iBook. YDL 2.0 and Mandrake 8 certainly do not, and even if they did I've yet to see a full featured player on Linux.

Linux has a journalling filesystem and OS X doesn't.

I'll have to concede this one. I would love to run OS X with a modern filesystem. However, OS X users are pretty much stuck with HFS+ for now because Classic apps depend on the resource forks in HFS/HFS+.

OS X is loaded with local root vulnerabilities

Like what? Are you going to provide any examples, or are you just making stuff up?

and probably a lot of undiscovered remote vulnerabilities as well.

I doubt it. OS X networking is basically straight from FreeBSD, which generally suffers from a lot fewer vulnerabilities than Linux.

Honsetly OS X hasn't got that much going for it.

Not much huh?

1. How about the ability to run:
-- Pretty much all the same UNIX/X11 software Linux can run
-- The vast majority of Windows software thanks to VirtualPC (unlike Wine, it can actually run real Windows apps)
-- Legacy MacOS apps
-- OS X native apps (Most importantly, all those commercial offerings you'll never see on Linux).

2. How about easy installation?
3. How about an attractive & easy to use GUI with a consistent L&F across all native apps?
4. How about video editing capability that Linux can't touch
5. How about timely support for future hardware you're likely to buy?
6. How about development tools & frameworks (Interface Builder & Cocoa) that Linux developers would die for.

Re:Why?

[Jeffrey Baker]

It's a big post, lemme see if I can cover it all.

Maybe so, I wouldn't know. But in general, OS X supports a lot more Apple hardware than Linux. For example, XFree86 4.1 is still unaccelerated for a lot of video cards in Apple systems, Firewire device support in Linux is flaky, and sound doesn't work under Linux in many systems (particularly laptops).

I disagree with this pretty strongly. Linux PPC runs on essentially any Apple PCI PowerPC machine ever made. MacOS X runs only on recent G3 and G4 models. It doesn't even fully support the DVD decoding hardware in older G3 laptops. It doesn't support the original PowerBook G3 at allApple's new OS doesn't support hardware they were shipping only 18 months ago. Now that's service with a smile! (Reference: System Requirements for MacOS X 10.1)

XFree86 is accelerated for Mach 64, Rage 128, and Radeon which covers all the Macs I care about. 2d drawing, video scaling, colorspace conversion, and 3d OpenGL are all supported. Sound works on everything that OS X supports except the newest iBook.

BS. I've got an iBook with YDL 2.0 and it doesn't even support suspend/sleep mode, nor does it dim the display. It can spin down the disk and blank the display, but that's it.

YDL is the worst Linux PPC distribution you can buy. Get Debian/PPC and install a BenH kernel which supports power management on PowerBooks (and iMacs, Cubes, etc.) Linux powers off my PCMCIA cards when the PowerBook sleeps, where MacOS X does not. If I put my PowerBook to sleep under MacOS X 10.1, my battery will be drained by morning. With Linux it sleeps as long as MacOS 9 does.

BS again. I just watched a DVD on my TV this past weekend driven by the AV connector on my iBook, in OS 10.1. Further, I'd like to know what version of Linux for PPC supports video out on my iBook.

Well that's great for the iBook, but on the PowerBook neither the TV nor the external monitor can play movies, and you also can't play movies on the LCD with a TV or monitor attached. Linux does this just fine. I use VideoLAN which has Altivec acceleration, and incidentally also has an embryonic MacOS X port. Read the Apple Technical Note 60895 "DVD Player 3.0 Does Not Work With External Monitor Connected to PowerBook"

Like what? Are you going to provide any examples, or are you just making stuff up?

Hear me now or hear me later: OS X is *loaded* with local root exploits. Here's one article.

5. How about timely support for future hardware you're likely to buy?

How about support for hardware I just bought a few months ago? Oh wait, that might cut into Steve's personal slush fund.

Re:Why?

[theNeophile]

One of the most obvious is that maybe some people want an ultra-modern operating system that runs just as well on hardware a few years old.

Like he said, on new apples.

Another reason may be to do some serious programming (serious meaning developing other tools, things like Apache and Gimp), where there are tons of free already ported and tested dev tools.

Get your facts straight, both Apache and the Gimp run on OS X (and Apache comes with it). And if you want dev tools, maybe you should look on the dev tools cd that comes with OS X?

Re:Why?

[Jeffrey Baker]

Yeah it has improved a great deal. I now get battery lifetimes equal to what I get in OS 9. Sleep works fine by just shutting the lid. or using the snooze command.

Re:Why?

[demon]

Except they run better under Classic than MOL because Apple spent a lot of time optimizing.

People have done performance tests. In the general case, Classic and MoL perform about equally well.

Further, Classic apps share the desktop with other apps. You don't need to house the MacOS desktop inside a giant X window.

I rather prefer it. I happen to think that's what that relic of an OS deserves. :)

Maybe so, I wouldn't know. But in general, OS X supports a lot more Apple hardware than Linux. For example, XFree86 4.1 is still unaccelerated for a lot of video cards in Apple systems,

Anything Rage128 or Radeon-based does 2D accel, and 3D accel is in the works (works on some, not on others - mostly with Rage128s). nVidia isn't very well supported because of their binary drivers. We can't do anything about that.

Firewire device support in Linux is flaky,

FireWire support is still under heavy development, and that doesn't work for me at present.

and sound doesn't work under Linux in many systems (particularly laptops).

Sound support for DACA (on the clamshell iBooks) and Texas/Tumbler (on iBook2), as well as Screamer (on the TiG4) is supported. I don't know about sound support for the Pismo, Lombard and Wallstreet, though. Haven't run Linux on any of them.

BS. I've got an iBook with YDL 2.0 and it doesn't even support suspend/sleep mode, nor does it dim the display. It can spin down the disk and blank the display, but that's it.

I sleep my iBook FireWire ALL THE TIME. It works great. You need a recent kernel, that's all. Display blanking in X doesn't work yet, but I head that's supposed to work by XFree 4.2.0.

Re:Why?

[demon]

What's easier than 'apt-get install [package]'? I can't think of much. And most people, even most Mac users, can't really take care of computer "maintenance" - that usually involves asking a knowledgable neighbor, or wiping out and reinstalling, not all too different from Windows, sad to say.

Sure, OS X is aimed more at those who don't know what UNIX is, or why they would even care about it. Yay for them. However, for those of us who prefer Linux, and want better stuff than Intel hardware, Apple systems make fine Linux boxen. Don't knock it till you've tried it.

Re:Why?

[staeci]

Why you ask? I dunno. Maybe open/free software all the way through. Or maybe I don't like translucent blue. Or maybe I don't trust apple anymore than Microsoft. Or maybe I'm one of those crazy long haired freesoftware freaks.

Or maybe we have reached the stage now where there are two sorts of OS's. The 'consumer, easy install, no brain, looks pretty above all else, locked up propriatory' OS and the 'have to know what you are doing, I can custom compile my kernel, and tune every inch and dig around in the guts' OS. And most importantly you can used the free OS to do pretty much everything that the consumer one can do.

Thus there will be demand for Linux on Macs, because the hardware rocks but not everyone likes consumer OS's.

>>but there really can't be much demand for Linux on the new >>boxen. Can there?

Re:Why?

[demon]

Oh, and didja know - you can put an Airport card in that Pismo, and take advantage of wireless networking without using your PC Card slot? *g*

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

OS X is loaded with local root vulnerabilities

Like what? Are you going to provide any examples, or are you just making stuff up?

Check bugtraq from either yesterday or the day before.
Two point-and-click root exploits where described there. That's right, point and click. That means no code hacking, no buffer overflows, simply click the right icons in the right order and you have root. So simple my mother could do it.

Re:Why?

[gig]

The whining about the $19 handling fee for 10.1 upgrade packages (3 CD's and a manual) is really embarrassing to me as a Mac user.

Users of other platforms, please understand that this attitude is not representative of most of Apple's users. Most people were very pleased to get a free license and a choice of either a $19 upgrade kit by courier or a free one at Apple Stores and CompUSA's. You can use one of these kits to upgrade any number of 10.0 machines.

As for whether this is worse than what Linux offers, it's easy to pay $19 for a distro with 3 CD's and a manual and telephone and other support. Mac OS X 10.1 is a much bigger and better upgrade than Windows 98 to Windows 98SE, which was $69 in most parts of the world, but free in the UK because the small number of new features were deemed to be too little a change to charge for by the courts!

Re:Why?

[The Infamous Grimace]

I already posted one reason, heres another (since Slashdot rejected it as newsworthy; apparently it ain't 'stuff that matters')

Scott Anguish of Stepwise is reporting on a security exploit that allows any user with Desktop access to gain 'root' access.

Fun fun fun. 'Course, as one person put it, now I can empty my trash without logging out.

(tig)

Re:Why?

[jchristopher]

Are you honestly suggesting that people shopping for a new computer on which they intend to run Linux would seriously consider PPC hardware?

There are more 'issues' than with x86 linux, not to mention the hardware is dramatically more expensive. Why would anyone buy a mac if they don't intent to run MacOS on it? For the same price you could custom build a server with all the trimmings on x86...

Re:Why?

[demon]

Are you honestly suggesting that people shopping for a new computer on which they intend to run Linux would seriously consider PPC hardware?

And why not? It's good, stable hardware, better than most of the x86 hardware out there. Oh yeah - and BIOSes suck. Having a real boot ROM is nice.

There are more 'issues' than with x86 linux,

Really? What issues would those be? I can count the issues I have with this iBook on one hand:

• DPMS blanking doesn't work (being worked on)
• DRI with R128 is unstable and only works with 16bpp (being worked on)
• FireWire doesn't work right yet (being worked on)

Other than the lack of FireWire, neither of the other 2 are huge issues to me. And - THE MODEM WORKS. It's not a retarded WinModem/software modem. It 100% works with Linux, no problems.

Why would anyone buy a mac if they don't intent to run MacOS on it? For the same price you could custom build a server with all the trimmings on x86...

Yes, there's LOTS of cheap x86 hardware out there, but to match the quality of the hardware that Apple puts out, you'd have to spend serious green anyway, so to say that x86 hardware is cheaper is a questionable statement at best.

Now tell me - how many Apple systems have you run Linux on? I'm running it on a FireWire iBook, a blue-and-white G3 tower, and a PowerMac 6100. It's stable on all of them, and supports pretty much everything (FireWire being the main lingering issue at this point).

Not a troll, a serious question

[psxndc]

First: Terra, more power to you. Second: Why? Seriously, are there that many PPC's out there? I really don't know. While any development for linux is great, is there a market for this? And don't tell me that Linux isn't about markets. I know Linux isn't, but a business that distributes it is and that's what Terra is, a business. Why not aim for newer hardware?

psxndc

Re:Not a troll, a serious question

[psxndc]

Addendum: before I wrote this, I _did_ actually send the link to a friend that wants Linux on PPC hardware. The thing is, he's the only person I've ever met that wants to do so (or even still has a PPC).

psxndc

Re:Not a troll, a serious question

[dankow]

The term 'PPC' includes G3 and G4 machines, not just the original PPC architecture. So yes, there are a lot of PPC machines out there.

Re:Not a troll, a serious question

[psxndc]

That answers my question. I understood them to be different. Thanks.

psxndc

Re:Not a troll, a serious question

[pi radians]

Because Mac hardware is great hardware. I use a G4 at work (with OS 9.2.1) a G3 at home (with OS X) .

The problem isn't with the market (Apple ship millions of Mac every year) but with support. But all of that is changing. Just look at the amount of Linux distributions that are coming out. Look at the number of Slashdot readers that have discussed there own Macs or about purchasing one.

Don't be so ignorant about Mac hardware and popularity.

My next computer purchase will be a used 9600 Power Mac and I am planning on installing YellowDog on it. I know of at least 3 other people that already own a Mac with Linux on it.

I am also trying to convince my employer to let me install Linux on the 8600 at work.

Re:Not a troll, a serious question

[__aaaaxm1522]

You wouldn't *believe* all the Powerbooks at the Ottawa Linux Symposium, a gathering of hardcore Linux developers. I'm sure I saw Tridge carrying one around too...

Apple's always made nice hardware, and geeks appreciate that. The only reason why I bought x86 is because of MacOS. But, Linux on PPC means I can now run my favorite OS on kickass hardware. It's win-win.

Re:Not a troll, a serious question

[psxndc]

Don't be so ignorant about Mac hardware and popularity

It just isn't a world I live in. I just didn't realize that PPC includes G3's and G4's. I thought it was only original PPC equipment. My mistake. To be fair, I think Mac hardware is fine, the little that I know. I even plan on getting an iBook when I scrap up enough dough. It's small, it's cheap, and I can use all the apps that other people demand (MS Word, etc) while giving me the Mac GUI and the UNIX stability. That's a pretty sweet combo.

psxndc

Re:Not a troll, a serious question

[lunatik17]

Is it possible to get a PPC machine without buying a off-the-shelf Mac, though? I would like to build a PPC but I don't want all the bundled software and crap--those things are expensive enough as it is.

Why YLD is great for the Linux community.

[heldlikesound]

Even as a hardcore Mac user (start up the flamethrowers), I have always been sympathetic to the open source cause and been interested in the dev. of Linux. However, without and old PC to muck around with, I'd never had the chance to try it out for myself. Along comes YLD, and now I'm able to install Linux on my old Power Computing (apple clone) machine. There were a few hiccups, but due to all the great Linux resources on the web, I figured them out and now I have my very own Linux box! Anyway, YDL gives mac users that WANT to get more techincal a chance to and provides the Linux community with good exposure, and that's always a good thing!!!

Re:Why YLD is great for the Linux community.

[NDPTAL85]

Were you making a funny?

debian ppc

[hereward_Cooper]

anyone used debian for the ppc? what is it like compared to yellow dog?

H

Re:debian ppc

[Tom Rini]

In general terms, it like comparing Debian/x86 to RedHat. YellowDog is still somewhat RedHat'ish last I knew.

But more importantly, Debian/PPC is doing great. I can't think of any glaring PPC-specific bugs in either Woody or Sid right now.

Re:debian ppc

[mac4]

You should try out woody. I have it on my powerbook (lombard) and it works great. Far preferable to the read Hat derivation (albeit out of date) which I was running a month ago.

nm

Cross-platform developers

[__aadkms7016]

Developers working on software that runs
both on Linux and Mac OS X can test their
application on both machines with a simple
reboot.

Re:Cross-platform developers

[Tom Rini]

Not quite. VMWare is x86-only I believe. But there is Mac-On-Linux which will work with OS 9.x (but not OS X) and you can run a PC emulator in side of that if you feel the need for a Windows-only program.

Re:Cross-platform developers

[kilgore_47]

Using the setup described above, you could have a $1700 iBook that could simultaneously be running Linux, MacOS 9, and Windows!

(granted, window's performance on that setup would be sub-optimal, but it's still damn cool)

Re:Cross-platform developers

[gig]

On the Mac, you can run x86 stuff inside of VirtualPC. It runs great and it's the best way to test Web sites, because you can keep a whole room full of testing machines on one hard drive and even run them side by side in separate windows. When I use it full screen it's easy to forget that I'm not on an actual Windows box, at least on a G4. You get decent speeds on a G3, too. It's only about $50 + Windows as well.

Linux on an iBook or PowerBook is great if you're into Linux. You get long battery life and really nice machines with lots of connectivity. Kudos to all of the Linux on PPC developers for enabling more people to use great Apple hardware.

Linux on Open Firmware Machines

[johnalex]

I really don't recommend Linux on the new Power Macs (B&W G3's and newer). The times I've tried to install LinuxPPC and YDL on these Macs, I nearly hosed the machine when I had to mess with the firmware.

I'm running OS X 10.1 on my beige G3, and I haven't had any trouble with it. Sure, I had to buy more RAM, but hey, I paid only $25 for a 256MB DIMM.

There's only one drawback to using OS X on the beige G3's: no serial support. Fortunately, I needed another printer anyway.

Re:Linux on Open Firmware Machines

[mir@ge]

I run debian on a new ibook. Coming from the x86 world, partitioning properly took me hours to figure out and three tries to get it perfect. Here is a hint RTFM. Installing any OS can potentially hose your system if you don't know what you are doing.

It runs fantastic, is identical to my desktop at work, and is not slowed down by all the chrome in OS X. I would reccomend running Linux on any of the Open Firmware machines. I tried several distributions and I favor debian for x86 or PPC. It may not have all the bells and whistles and it may not be for your average OS X user, but for a serious developer there is no substitute.

Re:Linux on Open Firmware Machines

[Baconator]

I run a fairly active server at a university for file sharing... FTP, HTTP, netatalk, etc. It's even doing software RAID and has a tape drive. It's a B/W G3 running LinuxPPC. No problems setting up, and today I hit 300 days uptime.

I think the G3 machines are top-notch Linux boxen.

Re:Linux on Open Firmware Machines

[m0nkyman]

I've been having problems booting from the debian ISO I burned using Toast...Is there a trick or did I do a booboo?

Yes, I have an iBook 2001, and I dual boot OSX and (currently) YellowDog Linux. Linux is useful for a number of things. and X10.1 is light years faster on my 128MB iBook than 10.0.4

Re:Linux on Open Firmware Machines

[demon]

Don't mess with the firmware if you don't have to. Recently, yaboot and ybin were rolled into one package. The ybin installer knows how to use the nvsetenv utility to set the boot partition, and so you avoid even having to deal with OF. (Not that it's that tough, once you get the hang of it...)

Re:Linux on Open Firmware Machines

[demon]

You may have to use the Option boot menu (just hold the Option key before it bongs) or drop to OF and type 'boot cd:,\\yaboot'. Try the former first. I've used the Debian ISOs (that's how I installed on this FireWire iBook!), so I know they do work (unless Toast does stupid things that it shouldn't to the ISO - but that would be really bad form).

ext3

[mz001b]

I am not a PPC user, but I am a Linux user. I find it intersting that they are going with ext3 (as is RH). It will be interesting to see which journaling file systems the different distrobutions go with. Perhaps by years end, one or two of them will be dominant. Does OS X have journaling?

Re:ext3

[toupsie]

Does OS X have journaling?

Not yet. Currently the only choices for filesystems are HFS+ and UFS. I would love to have a journaling file system. Great thing about Mac OS X is the open source project, Darwin. So even if Apple doesn't add a journaling FS some open source hacker can!

Now if I can only get X Windows w/ GNOME running smoothly on my G4/Dual 500, I would be in OS paradise!!!

Re:ext3

[TotallyUseless]

check here for an easy to follow tutorial to get xfree86, gtk+, gimp, etc set up and running on OSX. It gives a link to download a binary for xfree86, install instructions, and tells you how to use fink to install just about anything else you could want. enjoy

Re:ext3

[TotallyUseless]

type 'fink install wget'
it is the first thing I did using fink, as I truly like wget as well. If you have followed the instructions in the fink manual to get software working, wget will work normally. If you open fink.conf using su, and add in "unstable/main" to the line where it tells fink to look for distros, you can access many more programs that may or may not work with 10.1. Most that I have tried have worked fine, with an exception here and there.

XFS for PPC Linux?

[green pizza]

Has anyone attempted to port the XFS filesystem from SiliconGraphics to a PowerPC Linux variant?

Re:XFS for PPC Linux?

[Tom Rini]

Not personally, but it does work. There's even unofficial kernel debs floating around with support for it, and yaboot just added support for booting off of XFS partitions.

SuSE for PPC vs YD ?

[green pizza]

How does YD compare to SuSE's PPC offerings? Looks like SuSE has put together a pretty nice PPC distro too:

http://www.suse.com/us/products/suse_linux/ppc/ind ex.html

Linux 4 PPC is a great Mac Saver...

[toupsie]

I have been using Linux on Macs going back to Apple's Mklinux DR2 distro to maximize my old Macs. Unlike my x86 boxes, when my Macs get long in the tooth, I can't bear to throw them away or sell them. I can't tell you why but I just can't part with them. That's the beauty of Linux and Darwin. Once they are no longer useful for my desktop work, they are backed up, reformatted, LinuxPPC installed (sometimes Darwin) and stuffed into my server closet until they blow their motherboards (which hasn't happened). The 604e chipped PowerMacs make great e-mail and web servers for a small to medium sized business. I can't wait to try out Yellow Dog's latest distro. I have had such great results with the LinuxPPC folks. These guys are supposed to be top notch PPC folks.

On a side note, I finally tried out Mandrake 8.1 x86. That is an AWESOME graphical install!!! Almost as nice as installing Mac OS X.

Re:Linux 4 PPC is a great Mac Saver...

[Hal-9001]

Wanna post some URLs or IPs so we can really stress test those motherboards? ;-)

Re:Linux 4 PPC is a great Mac Saver...

[toupsie]

Sure! try http://127.0.0.1/ ! Bet ya a dollar to a donut, it will run as fast as your machine!

Re:Linux 4 PPC is a great Mac Saver...

[Hal-9001]

Really? :-p

Sideline?

[mapinguari]

From what I can tell, they sell their own Linux distribution as a sideline of their real business, which is clusterable servers running YDL. While a 500MHz G4 isn't the absolute newest, it's not bad.

Re:do it the right way

[treellama]

NetBSD is great for a lot of platforms; it's running right now on my alpha, decstation, and i386. But for macppc it's just not there compared to linux. The documentation is even worse than with other major netbsd platforms (netbsd documentation is pretty bad/outdated). It _still_ comes with XFree 3.3.x (yes version 4 is in the package system), so no easy accelerated video if you've got a Radeon. Plus to boot it you have to muck around in OF trying to figure out the right settings (which if you have a machine built after 1996 aren't included in the install docs), compared to Yellow Dog's hacky-but-easy-to-use booter.

Now, I prefer netbsd to anything else (except OS X on my mac) but it needs a lot of work on macppc (mainly documentation-wise). I just wish I were up to the challenge.

Question for Linux Gurus:

[Uttles]

It seems to me that most Linux users on normal PC's like to have a dual boot system so that when the dreaded instance comes up that you HAVE to run Windows, you can reboot and do what you have to do. Does anybody know if it's possible to setup a dual boot on a PPC? (Linux and MAC OS) If so, any reccomendations?

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[treellama]

The distros I've used (Yellow Dog and linuxppc) have included hacky booters that will allow you to dual boot. You can screw with Open Firmware too which is a more elegant but frustratingly undocumented way to dual boot; I once had my G4 set up to boot into linux if you didn't hit the space bar within 10 seconds of it booting. I ganked somebody's Forth script to pull that off. Can't remember where I got it though, that was 2 years ago.

Of course, you can run Mac-On-Linux which runs a lot of mac programs nearly perfectly and without noticable performance loss, without need to boot into MacOS.

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[ichimunki]

Dual boot between Mac OS and YDL2 is a breeze (pre OS X, at least-- I've seen some list traffic that indicates care is required with OS X). The yaboot loader pops up a little menu and you can press M for Mac, L for Linux, or C for CD (at least on my system), press nothing and it goes into whatever you set as the default. Of course, if you haven't already partitioned your Mac HD, you will have to reload Mac OS after partitioning.

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[mmontour]

Dual boot between Mac OS and YDL2 is a breeze (pre OS X, at least-- I've seen some list traffic that indicates care is required with OS X).

I have an iBook2 with YDL2.0.

Whenever I switch the Mac startup preference between OS9 and OSX, it overwrites the boot setting so that the machine will bypass the yaboot loader and go directly to Mac every time. To correct it I have to go into the Open Firmware screen and change the boot-device variable to point back at the yaboot partition. It's not a huge bother because I don't use the Mac side very often, and when I do I normally stay in OSX.

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[monolith25]

Setting up a dual (or triple, quad, etc) boot is very possible, and is usually set up for you during the initial install of your distro of choice.
Generally speaking, most of the distros use a utility called yaboot, which in turn uses a utility called ybin to set up a bootstrap partition containing a Forth script which is 'blessed' to make the Mac firmware think its a System Folder. The Forth script is loaded initially, and presents you with a dialog asking which OS you with to boot; if Linux is chosen, yaboot is called and allows you to choose which kernel to boot from and what partition to use as / . If MacOS is chosen, the Forth script passes the location of the relevant System Folder to the firmware, and off you go with the little happy Mac icon. Of course, there are various caveats/pitfalls which I don't have time to go into, but this link provides lots of further info on the subject:
http://penguinppc.org/projects/yaboot/

I've currently got Mandrake 8, MacOS 9.2.1, and OS X running using this method on a rev.b iMac, and it works beautifully.

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[ichimunki]

I have no direct experience with it, but I have to wonder if you can't set up the two Mac OS's on different partitions and use yaboot to choose between them, that way you don't let the Mac OS side fiddle with the firmware and the boot process.

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[vividan]

It seems to me that most Linux users on normal PC's like to have a dual boot system so that when the dreaded instance comes up that you HAVE to run Windows, you can reboot and do what you have to do. Does anybody know if it's possible to setup a dual boot on a PPC? (Linux and MAC OS) If so, any reccomendations?

This is where linux on a mac really shines.

Assuming you like being in linux all the time, it is possible to run MacOS 9.x in a window in linux... see http://maconlinux.org for details. You get to still have ethernet, sound, the whole bit.

That won't run MacOS X.x, but it is kinda there.

The other option is just to reboot, yaboot is a great boot loader (simmilar feature set to grub in the x86 world). It will let you boot MacOS 9.x and 10.x, to cd, and also to the openfirmware.

I have an x86 desktop, and one of the new TiBooks. The desktop and the laptop preform just about the same (I can't tell the differance), but I like working on the laptop so much more, even if I am at my desk. The PPC arch is much nicer to work with. (please note before flaming: the above paragraph is my opinion, and opinions can't be wrong)

Happy computing!

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[m0nkyman]

I can confirm that. This is an issue for me as well. Good to know that it isn't something that I did wrong. Either that or both of us did the same dumb thing :)

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[demon]

I prefer, on systems that are too old to have the Option boot selector, to _remove_ (yes, remove, as in delete) the Startup Disk control panel in both OS 9 and OS X, and just use the boot selector script generated by ybin to choose the OS at start time. Just make sure your yaboot/ybin bootstrap partition is of type 'Apple_Bootstrap', so that OS 9 won't boot up and then unbless your boot loader. :)

Re:Question for Linux Gurus:

[havardw]

As long as you have 9 and X on separate partitions, you can easily set yaboot up to triple boot. Just add "macosx=/path/to/partition" in yaboot.conf and rerun ybin.

Mandrake

[Dr. Sp0ng]

I run Mandrake 8 on my Powerbook (G3 Wallstreet second edition), and I'm quite impressed with it. There are *very* few differences between it and the x86 edition. I used to run LinuxPPC on it, but it seemed to be a very halfassed recompiled version of RedHat. How does Yellowdog compare? Also, does anybody know the state of the FreeBSD port? I'd really like to run it on there, since it's my favorite x86 OS...

Re:Mandrake

[OverCode@work]

YDL (2.0 at least) is also more or less a recompile of Red Hat, but it doesn't seem half-assed at all. I've been running it on my iBook2. It's just a Linux box. I've been very happy with it so far.

As for some of the earlier comments about using Linux version OS X, here is why I switched: I found myself running all of my old Linux apps on XDarwin anyway (XFree86 port), and just about every piece of free software I downloaded had to be ported, with changes at least to the build environment and often to the code. It became incredibly annoying, and I decided that if I was going to treat this machine like it was a Linux system, it might as well be a Linux system. So I installed YDL 2.0 and never looked back.

The native OS X stuff is very nice, and it's by far the prettiest OS I've ever seen. It'll be really great once more applications and ports appear. I understand OS X.1 is faster and more stable already. But for the time being, Linux is far superior to OS X for my purposes.

-John

Re:Mandrake

[Dr. Sp0ng]

If you're running it on a laptop, you'll want YDL, because version 2.1 now provides full sound and power management support for the full line, including the newer iBooks.

Well, I used to run LinuxPPC on here, which had pretty shitty hardware support out of the box, so I know what needs to be done to get everything working on this thing. After a kernel recompile, I have everything working (sound, ethernet, modem, power management, IR, PCMCIA, etc...)

Also, Mandrake PPC is fairly immature and has a few bugs, particularly in the installer.

Yeah, it screwed this thing up and I had to fully reinstall MacOS and Linux. I never did get it to boot into Linux from the installer, I had to manually set up BootX from the MacOS side.

But on a desktop machine, Mandrake might be more desirable because it has better config/admin tools, and if you use GNOME, you have to visit Ximian to get 1.4 for YDL.

Ack, Gnome :P KDE, baby :)

Not on their FTP...

[__aaaaxm1522]

Well, in keeping with YDL tradition, the iso is not available on their FTP and probably won't be for a couple months.

I'm a little ambivilent about this - I can understand that they want to make money from their open source endeavors, and by withholding the ISO, they ensure that if you really, got to have it, you'll buy it from them.
On the other hand, it would be nice to actually play with it before putting the cash out. I was once called an OS slut by another sysadmin, and he was right - I like to play with every distribution - not just of Linux, but OSes in general. So to me, freely available ISOs are a godsend. When I find a distribution I like, I've often purchased the retail version, to support the company/group in question. But I *do* enjoy trying before buying.

Re:Not on their FTP...

[jspectre]

i have to agree. it's a little annoying they don't offer the iso along with the release. it was months before 2.0 was available to download after it was released.

new people going to the site after reading the press release are going to be either confused, frustrated, download the old buggy 2.0 release or just walk away unsatisfied. can't say that will help sales would it?

Re:Not on their FTP...

[Anonymous Coward]

It will be available in two weeks. You have to understand. PPC is a reallly tiny market. The only way we stay in business is by selling CDs. So, while we don't really want to delay the ISOs.. it is necessary for our continued survival (especially given the economy right now).

Regards,
Dan
co-founder
Terra Soft Solutions

Re:Not on their FTP...

[dburcaw]

Whoops.. that is infact me posting above.
Sorry about the AC :-)

-Dan

Re:Not on their FTP...

[__aaaaxm1522]

Excellent news Dan. Was it my imagination or was the delay between 2.0's commercial release and ISO release much longer than two weeks? Seemed that way at the time.

This is good news though. Now that I've got a shiny G4 Ti, if YDL 2.1 is as good as I hope it will be, a week or two after I play with the ISO you'll have an order from me for a package.

I don't mind paying, I just like to know what I'm getting first. (I too work for an open source Linux company, and understand the survival issues... ;)

Re:Not on their FTP...

[influensa]

I know it's really important to make money, and I know that you guys must've done a lot of work on YDL before releasing it, but I really do take issue with holding back on releasing the iso for free.

Because no matter how much work was done at TerraSoft, when it gets right down to it, most of the code was written by somebody else. And it wasn't written so that you guys could make money off of it, it was written for everybody, on the condition that if changes were made to it that they would be available for everybody too.

Is it even legal under the GPL to delay the free release like that? It certainly is a grey area.

Gnome on OS X (Was: Re:ext3)

[johnalex]

Based on this article on MacSlash, XFree86 4.0 has already been ported to OS X. That's how MacGIMP runs on OS X.

I don't know if you could run Gnome in it or not. That would be a sight to see: Gnome on top of Aqua. :-)

Read the article for some interesting info on X and OS X.

Re:Gnome on OS X (Was: Re:ext3)

[Hal-9001]

When that happens, could Apple be nice and give us our Aqua themes back?

Re:Gnome on OS X (Was: Re:ext3)

[toupsie]

Thanks for the note. I already have Mac OS X running X Windows and GNOME, just not well. I get a ton of errors and program crashes. Sure Mac OS X can handle the crashing apps well, but I can't when one of my GNOME games does and my high score is in sight! :)

Re:Gnome on OS X (Was: Re:ext3)

[sakusha]

Yes, Gnome runs on OS X. I used Fink to install Gnome on my Powerbook G3/500, it runs fine, although a few applets are a little flaky (this will improve with time). XWindows even runs rootless with XDarwin, you can have the Gnome control strip across the bottom and I put the OS X dock across the right side of the screen, so both are accessible at the same time. You ought to see a screenshot I made, I fired up Virtual PC with two windows of Win98SE, Win2k, then I fired up rootless XDarwin with Gnu Midnight Commander, then MacOS X and then Classic, and MacMame for good measure. By my count, that's 6 OSes running at the same time! Try that on your pathetic x86 machines!

Re:Gnome on OS X (Was: Re:ext3)

[Voidhobo]

Wow! Not too shabby, sakusha!

This gets somewhat close to what you described.

Is Linux PPC a profitable business?

[chrysalis]

Times are bad for OSS companies. Progeny is dead, Eazel is also dead, Corel had so pass the Linux baton, SuSE did massive layoffs, Mandrake did an IPO in a hurry to avoid bankrupt, Redhat focuses on services, training and databases because they lose money by working on the distro, Dell has no more interest in Linux, Loki filled chapter 11...

And all these companies did something real. They worked on quality products, they weren't stupid start-ups selling vaporware. But the market wasn't large enough, and they failed.

Now, what about Linux PPC? Macs users are about 4 % of computer users. That's huge.

But now, if companies selling distros and Linux-related products on PC (+ some other architectures) went (or are going) bankrupt, how can a company survive with only 4 % of other's market?

Yellow Dog is a very good distro. I installed it once, and it was very easy, and it ran flawlessly. Plus the name is funny, I love it.

Having Linux vendors for non-Intel architectures is also very important, because portability is a strength of OSS.

But I can't understand how a company can survive by working on a PPC-only distro. This is a niche market.

I really hope the best for Yellog Dog Linux, but after the death of Progeny (an excellent, non-niche distro), I'm really doubtful.

Re:Is Linux PPC a profitable business?

[call -151]

The company LinuxPPC.com converted from to a nonprofit corp a while ago (January 2001-ish), see slashdot story, around the time not only that lots of open-source companies were struggling, but also in the wake of Jason Hass' dreadful injuries after being hit by a drunk driver and his decision to go to college.

Re:Is Linux PPC a profitable business?

[betis70]

A better question is whether any Linux distro is a profitable business. Reading the first sentence of your post, the answer is probably no. Service/support yes, but distros?

But does that matter? Not to me ... I support the open source community by testing out alpha software, finding bugs, whacking on a program till it croaks, that kind of thing. Still thinking of getting my development feet wet sometime and contributing that way.

Profits are great for a company. Linux is a hobby for me, not a way to make $$$. If you want to make big $$$, serve up some pr0n.

Re:do it the right way

[SkywalkerOS8]

Not every PPC can run OSX. I have an older 604 PPC that won't run OSX so this is the type of solution that will give me a *nix flavor on my computer.

Re:OLD MACS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST RUN LINUXPPC!!!

[bluGill]

Most old macs I know of cannot run linuxppc. Appearently you have forgotten that the first ppc mac was released about 7 years ago, but macs themselves are about 17 years old. I have a coupld m68k macs sitting around that won't run linuxppc no matter what you do.

Now there were some linux m68k versions out there that would run on some of them, but they are not linuxppc

Re:Question for Linux Gurus: -- YES

[jspectre]

using ybin/yaboot you can easily multi MacOS 8.x, MacOS 9.x, MacOS X and Linux. Even multiple installs of each OS. Check out http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/ybin/ for more info.

Not all PPCs are Macs

[Midnight Thunder]

Not all PPC based computer are made by Apple. The PPC is a good chip and runs quite happily in the RS/6000, the GameCube ( not really a Linux candidate though ) and other unnamed machines.

Re:OLD MACS NEVER DIE, THEY JUST RUN LINUXPPC!!!

[jspectre]

Ok. Sorry. I should have said "mature" macs vs. "elderly" macs..?

For "elderly" Macs that won't run LinuxPPC you might want to try MkLinux www.mklinux.org.

Newbie question

[sulli]

How old does a Mac have to be before it can't run YDL or LinuxPPC? I have a PowerBook 5300 (yucko) that I would like to use for something other than a doorstop, and wonder if installing YDL on it is possible, or sheer folly.

Re:Newbie question

[treellama]

Has to have open firmware; so no ydl or linuxppc for your 5300. mklinux works for some older macs but I don't think the 5300 is one of them.

Re:Newbie question

[sulli]

I looked at the faq and found that it won't be very useful:

Under MkLinux, the PowerBook 1400, 2300, and 5300 are partially supported. External SCSI support is not working yet, nor is support for the internal modem or card-based ethernet (internal). PCMCIA cards are not supported on any PowerBook. Thus, the systems are a bit isolated, but they're useful for development, etc.

Oh well!

Re:Newbie question

[mapinguari]

Another alternative to consider is the NuBus branch of LinuxPPC. The most recent kernel listed is 2.4.5.

How old does a Mac have to be before it can't run YDL or LinuxPPC?

Since NuBus-LinuxPPC boots 6/7/8100's, theoretically, a Mac would have to be so old as to have a 68K instead of a PowerPC processor before it can't run some version of LinuxPPC.

The PowerBook 5300 is listed among the "known to work."

Re:Newbie question

[demon]

Wrong. Try here - there is support for the old NuBus-based systems to run an actual complete Linux kernel. I have a Workgroup Server 6150/66 (basically the same as the 6100/66, but more RAM out of the box) running Debian with that kernel, and it not only runs, it's quite stable. (The 6100 does, however, require a basic MacOS install to bootstrap from - its MacOS ROM doesn't work with BootX or miBoot, so the MkLinux Booter has to be used.)

Re:Newbie question

[Voidhobo]

Whatever you do: Stay away from MkLinux. Try anything before you try MkLinux! I have installed MkL on my Performa 5200 and it is a nightmare: no access to floppy (crash), kernel crash when I try to access the internal modem... IDE hang when running X (frequently!)... plus, the community seems to have died out, so support isn't great; the bug reports I sent in seem to have floated off into nirvana. I've invested a couple hundred for something more usable, because even though my MkL experience wasn't rewarding in a practical way, I did get more of an appreciation for Unices, strangely, and finally want to use it productively, not just for running DadaDodo and playing XBill...

I'm a Linux on Power PC Junkie

[Laplace]

Ever since I left graduate school almost three years ago, I have been running some distribution of Linux on some Power PC. My first experience was LinuxPPC on pre-G3 beige computer (I can't even remember the model). LinuxPPC was a pain in the ass, X only had 16 bit color depth, and many applications didn't work correctly. That said, it worked fantastically as an X client for the SGI servers that I worked on.

From there I used Yellow Dog Linux 1.2, which was a huge improvement. I installed this on a G3 iBook. Once again the graphics sucked, but the interface was clean and very easy to switch to. This distribution was essentially based on Red Hat 6.2. X still sucked, though.

When I traded my iBook for a blue G3 minitower, I upgraded my Linux distribution to SuSE 7.1. After some false starts on the installation (mostly due to USB hardware problems), I had the system up and running. I was stunned. 24 bit color, upgraded kernel, and tons of applications. SuSE rocked.

I'm tempted to try YDL 2.1, mainly because I like Terra Soft Solutions. That said, I think that the SuSE 7.3 PPC distribution will be absolutely amazing (they skipped the 7.2 release so they could concentrate on 7.3). I'll leave my system in place, and patiently wait.

Nice GNU tools site for OS X

[call -151]

One thing that OS X has going for it is that lots of the gnu tools are available and very easy to install via the fink mechanism and the other nice installers available. There is a good central clearing place of various tools, including XFree86, various window managers, and lots of good things at osxgnu.org which is worth checking out. For a while, XFree was broken in 10.1 but there is a patch there that works great. It seems like with so much available for OS X, it is harder to justify using LinuxPPC or the other linux distros for Apple machines.

YellowDogLinux on Titanium Powerbook

[ThwartedEfforts]

I put YDL on my Titanium powerbook as soon as I got it. It is easily the fastest linux machine I've ever used in a solely desktop capacity. It is only 400mhz, but it runs nice and fast, the graphics are snappy, and with my favorite DVD player, ogle, it even plays my DVDs. Sound support is a little questionable, but that may be the kernel in general on apple hardware. It is nice to have a nice looking machine (despite all the hardware design flaws -- one of them being the DVD drive doesn't read redbook audio natively, so no CDparanoia/cdda2wav) that runs an OS that I can actually use -- OSX isn't usable for me (perhaps it will be in the future).

Re:YellowDogLinux on Titanium Powerbook

[MrDBCooper]

> (despite all the hardware design flaws -- one of them being the DVD drive doesn't read
> redbook audio natively, so no CDparanoia/cdda2wav)

Of course it does. Try SCSI emulation if it doesn't work otherwise.

needs better ease of use

[jchristopher]

Yellog Dog is trying to market to existing Macintosh users. Those users are accustomed to Apple's ease of use. I tried Yellow Dog, and it was not nearly the equal of the latest x86 (RedHat or Mandrake) installers. I can't imagine that they will persuade many mac users to switch.

Re:do it the right way

[Noxxus]

Don't forget FreeBSD and OpenBSD. OpenBSD is already supported on PPC, and FreeBSD is working on a port...of course I'm waiting for the x86-64 port of both. woohoo!

Re:a bit offtopic...

[Cro Magnon]

Officially, it will be ready when it's ready. :) I hear rumblings that it will be released this coming Monday, just before Windows Ex-Pee.

Not quite...

[wholesomegrits]

There are at least four strong Linux-on-Mac contenders now, which is nice to see.

No, there are not. LinuxPPC is all but stagnated, MkLinux development has slowed to a snail's pace after Apple tossed them of the USS Jobs into rough seas, in an old Zodiac with just one oar, SuSE is, well, SuSE, and Mandrake PPC is a bitch to install on Pre-Grey G3 boxen.

Hardly a steller showing for a fantastic platform. I all but abandoned my efforts at converting a StarMax 4000 (aka PowerPC 4400) into a Samba box. Installation is anything but straightforward unless you have a NewWorld machine, and the packages and updates are not particularly well kept up.

I'm not faulting any particular distro or person here, but fact of the matter is, to call it a strong showing is just Linux bunko.

stale LinuxPPC?

[staplin]

LinuxPPC used to be a good platform. I had it running on my B&W G3 for quite a while as a student. But since I finished off my degree I hadn't had a burning need to boot linux.

Armed with a few spare hours last weekend, I decided to give it a boot and see how it compared with my new installation of 10.1... And I couldn't boot. I figured that this was a sign to go get the latest distro and install a 2.4 kernel. But lo and behold, I seemed to already have the latest version of LinuxPPC (2000). And half the links on their pages were broken.

Has LinuxPPC really stalled out completely? Is anybody out there still working on the distro?

Java on ppc

[HyperbolicParabaloid]

Is any one doing Java development in Linux on an iMac?
I'm currently using a Toshiba 3010, which is pretty sweet (4 pounds), but cramped, so I'm thinking about moving on, and the new iMacs are interesting...

Re:Java on ppc

[ephe]

I am currently writing an optimizing Pascal compiler on a G4 PPC with Yellow Dog 2.0 as
the Linux distro. I am immensely comfortable with this machine, though I had to change the NVidia driver for an ATI card to get > 8bit color depth..

Re:Java on ppc

[demon]

Well, you can. There are builds of the Blackdown JDK (not officially branded by Sun, but yes, they work) available for PowerPC Linux systems.

Re:Java on ppc

[BDeblier]

I've tested Blackdown 1.3 recently and found their BigInteger implementation so horrendously slow that it was virtually unusable on an iMac 400 MHz.

yummm!!!

[commodoresloat]

Yellow linux dogs! Scrumptious, especially when smothered in chili....

ISOs, anyone?

[yelvington]

After a week with OS X.1, I'm ready to reformat and start over. But there are no ISO images in the Yellow Dog archives. ??

Linux-on-Mac solutions

[Weasel Boy]

I assumed the writer was referring to Yellow Dog, SuSE, Mandrake, and Debian. Adding LinuxPPC and MkLinux brings the tally up to six, and Linux-m68k makes seven. Linux on the Mac is flourishing.

Re:Linux-on-Mac solutions

[jkorty]

Success is *not* measured by seven distributions fighting for a share of the microscopic Mac (compared to PC) market, with no one able to get the upper hand, and claim enough of the business to be able to make some money.

Re:Linux-on-Mac solutions

[Weasel Boy]

I agree. To me, success is measured by how easily I can make my box into a fully functional system. More distributions is evidence that there are a significant number of people working on it.

Here's a heck of a deal on the PowerBook G4 Ti

[SethJohnson]

From www.dealmac.com

PowerBook G4/400 spotted for $1,699 at TX Fry's 12:12 pm

An Austin, TX, reader reports that the local Fry's Electronics has stock of the Apple PowerBook G4/400 Titanium 128/10.0/DVD/56k/100BT 15.2-inch TFT, model no. M7952LL/A, for $1,699. That beats the best mail-order price we could find for a new, factory-sealed unit. The offer may only be available at this location, assuming that it's still in stock.

Best of

[eviltwinimposter]

Does this make it the "best of class" (Mandrake's favorite term) for PPC?

What about "Pick of the Litter" or "Best of Breed"?

-- Answers: the cause and effect of questions

"Best in Show"

[rmassa]

Seem's like it should be awarded "best in show" to me...

Yeah! kick this Linux Luddite's ass!

[MrBomb]

Of course, you've forgotten the recently shipped Qt/Mac which should make for painless porting of Qt/KDE apps to Mac OS X. Other than that, a through "FUD decloaking" :)

Debian on Mac.

[saintlupus]

But more importantly, Debian/PPC is doing great. I can't think of any glaring PPC-specific bugs in either Woody or Sid right now.

Incidentally, for older mac hardware, the Debian port to m68k Macintosh is wonderful as well. So far as I know it's the only natively english distro for the old Mac II and Quadra series. Check it out if you've got an old Apple box in the closet.

--saint

Thanks everyone!

[Uttles]

Great info, I appreciate it.

Re:apache-1.3.14?

[MrDBCooper]

Debian has 1.3.19 in woody and 1.3.20 in sid.

Yellow dog was never worth it, still isn't.

[azephrahel]

I'm sorry, but yellow dog never was worth it.
Its just a repackaged linuxPPC that has become VERY source un-friendly. Any release on any platform that isn't compleetly source friendly is just a waste. Now what I'm really waiting for is a Slackware PPC distro...

Re:Yellow dog was never worth it, still isn't.

[demon]

If you like Slackware, and want a distro for PowerPC systems, try Debian. I have it running nicely on a FireWire iBook right now (I'm typing this on it, in Mozilla 0.9.5, running 2.4.12 on a sid install).

Re:Why? & OS X performance

[akalamathes]

I triple boot between OS X, OS 9.2.1, and YDL 2.0 on my laptop, which is a powerbook G3 series 266mHz with 384mb. I heartily agree that Apple does put out excellent hardware. I have to say OS X v10.1 is really quite good, too.

The dp releases were sluggish, and I had my own doubts, but the latest release is great. Screen redraws and launching programs have become as fast as any OS I've seen, even with the graphics-heavy Aqua look-and-feel. I am more impressed by its perfomance on my older laptop than I am by YDL 2.0, which I installed at the same time.

I will be the first to admit that most of my problems with YDL 2.0 have been my own lack of experience with Linux. I haven't given up on it, though. I'm pro-Linux, I'm just saying don't dismiss OS X due to performance issues that have mostly been remedied by now.

Something screwy with your install

[1 inch punch]

If I put my PowerBook to sleep under MacOS X 10.1, my battery will be drained by morning. With Linux it sleeps as long as MacOS 9 does. Dunno about you but on my Pismo 500 with full charge it can sleep for the whole weekend and when it awakes on Monday it's still got half-charge remaining. Hear me now or hear me later: OS X is *loaded* with local root exploits. Here's one article [stepwise.com]. How is one exploit == loaded? FYI, that one has been fixed. Look for it in Mac OS X10.1.1. FYI there are lots of other articles explaining how to get OS X running on pre-G3 Macs.

Off on an iBook Debian tangent

[m0nkyman]

Sorry, I guess I should have been more specific. The CD boots... It's just to a blank screen. I've installed Yellow Dog Linux onto the machine, so I'm not a complete idiot but I want my apt-get!

Re:Off on an iBook Debian tangent

[demon]

Ahhh. I see. Type 'debian video=ofonly' at the yaboot prompt. That'll tell the kernel to use the OpenFirmware driver for the display device. It's more compatible that way, and that should (hopefully) get you going. Good luck.

Re:Old Macs Never Die, THEY JUST RUN LINUXPPC!!!

[Voidhobo]

I'd suggest Debian potato m68k. If you want the official binary set, they are giving one away for free at the Gravis Shop in Bonn (yes, that is in Germany). ( :

Because Mac software is only bare-bones

[DoctorNathaniel]

I'm an old mac user. Or was. The problem was, I want my computer for two things:

a) doing physics
b) playing games

I'll leave (b) out of it, but (a) is pretty damned important.. I need a system where I can easily compile some really monolithic, old linux libraries. I need a good FORTRAN compiler. I don't have much money.

I think that there are a lots of fields where this is true: if you're using your computer as something that manipulates numbers, there just isn't software on the Mac side. This is true for a lot of things: if your application is 10% of the market share, and you're on a Mac (10% at the best of times) your are in a measily little 1% of the total population: no support group, no sofware aimed at such a small demographic.