Slashdot Mirror


Sorcerer Review, and News of Impending Doom

osworks writes: "There is an review of the Sorcerer Linux distribution over at linuxworld.com that is worth a read. I've been running SGL on my Inspiron for a month now, and have the same impression as the author. It took a really long time to install, but was educational and rather fun. Some discouraging news near the bottom about how the maintainer needs some development help, or it will be the end of Sorcerer. This is one of the most exciting new distros to come along in a long time, and that would be a shame."

225 comments

  1. greatest idea ever... by edrugtrader · · Score: 3, Insightful

    i've used and loved mandrake for some time... sorcerer's update functionality is far better than mandrakes, and that is basically what open source is all about: GETTING THE SOFTWARE INSTALLED.

    --
    MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    1. Re:greatest idea ever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love SGL. My system is much faster than it used to be, I have had far fewer problems with install/updates then I have had with utter nightmare rpm situations in redhat/mandrake etc. I have a much nicer responsivenest out of my sp athlon box then my smp box w/ 2gb ram at work running redhat.

      I've been a sorcerer user for a month. It's been great so far. I'll be truely sad if it goes away. Mad props to Kile. If it turns out to be short lived, I can only hope that my next distro will be 1/2 as much the pleasure as this one was. I may go for LFS if this one falls by the way side.

    2. Re:greatest idea ever... by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      I'm in utter disbelief that the FIRST POST is redundant.....

  2. Gentoo by Cheesy+Fool · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    How does this compare with gentoo?

    --

    Hail to the king, baby!
    1. Re:Gentoo by phyxeld · · Score: 1

      First off, Gentoo doesn't have scripts called spells, or a cast command to run them.

      --
      __
      Choose mnemonic identifiers. If you can't remember what mnemonic means, you've got a problem. - Larry Wall
    2. Re:Gentoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I've found Gentoo to be really good.

      I just installed it last week. I was tossing up between Gentoo and Sorceror but went with Gentoo because Gentoo has lower minimum requirements. The machine it's installed is only a Celeron 300 with 128M of Ram. And then the disk of only 6Gig. If you take the Sorceror requirement of 1Gig of swap that is a large portion of my disk.

      It wasn't easy to install (I still don't have sound but thats because I don't know what sort of sound card I have) and there have been a few problems but generally it's been excelent. I managed to get the basic linux install going with no problems. KDE and X was as simple as typing 'emerge KDE'. The next day I had a working desktop system.

      I recommend it.

      The other reason why I didn't go with Sorceror is because commands like 'cast' and so on just strike me as kind of immature. It's a distro for all those D and D geeks. It's a petty reason I know, but I'm a picky guy. :)

    3. Re:Gentoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you take the Sorceror requirement of 1Gig of swap that is a large portion of my disk.

      Ok, since there seems to be a lot of people who still doesn't know this I'll explain the reason Sorcerer requires such abhorrant amounts of memory

      It's not like applications magically require lots of more RAM when running under sorcerer. The fact is that compilation requires a lot of diskspace, but rather than using normal partitions for this, Sorcerer performs all compilation inside tmpfs filesystems. This has several benefits. It can significally affect performance (try compiling X without ever writing to disk, possible if you have enough real memory) and it drastically reduces filesystem fragmentation. The drawback is that it requires a lot of memory to be available, which is solved by specifying the 1g ram+swap minimum.

      This means that you are not USING any more diskspace than you would in any case or with another source based system, the necessary space is just locked up in a swapfile or partition instead.

    4. Re:Gentoo by xerofud · · Score: 1

      It appears that the "wizardry" theme for naming
      tools in the Sorceror distro has put off more
      than a few people.

      Casting "spells" is appropriate however given
      the name of the distro, which itself is a clever
      choice given the binary-free nature of
      the installation process.

      Perhaps they should have called it Sourcerer Linux :)

    5. Re:Gentoo by trelaneopn · · Score: 2, Informative

      I asked this question of the SGL staffers awhile ago, and here is the answer I recieved. Somewhere out in the wide world of linux distros there is a Sourcer linux. The name Sorcerer, instead of Sourcerer was chosen to avoid confusion as much as possible.

      --
      a bit more about me http://www.advogato.org/person/trelane/ or my private page http://trelane.net
    6. Re:Gentoo by kingsal · · Score: 1

      I installed SGL the week before last. Last week I got tiered of tempfs and started using Gentoo.
      My first problem was that SGL needs faster dependency checking. I think it took about 45minutes to an hour to get the dependencies of the base system worked out. I was thinking that porting debian's apt would be a Good Thing. Maybe i'll play with it in bochs. In gentoo, if I choose 100 source packages, the dependencies are calculated in seconds.
      That tempfs was used for everything was a real problem for my poor desktop box that ONLY has 256MB RAM. I increased my swap bigtime, but it was eating up my resources. I ended up disabling the tempfs stuff which broke the scripts slightly. In Gentoo, I barely ever swap.
      I also enjoyed the Gentoo install process. Its a pretty well written text file. I learned a lot about what is done by distribution installers, inspiring me to look into writing an installer for gentoo.
      Also, neither of thesse distributions should be used at an installfest. as the take a very long time, like they should since they compile everything.
      Time willing, I will get started on either project mentioned here.

  3. Is it better now? by MindStalker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I tried installing sorcerer back when it was first mentioned here a few months ago. And I had nothing but problems (firstly that it wanted an internet connection for getting kernel patches before it had any idea how to connect to the internet (and it didn't want to sidestep this part) and then that its version of lilo wasn't really made for being in the MBR).
    Anyways, has anyone tried it sence, have these problems been fixed yet?

    1. Re:Is it better now? by spencerogden · · Score: 3, Informative

      I too have been using it for a month with very little hassle. I installed lilo on the SGL partition so that I could use grub which I already had installed. I have only done this with a broadband connection so internet wasn't too hard to set up.

    2. Re:Is it better now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It does work on the mbr if you follow their instructions, edit lilo.conf to show the last word on the boot line to read disc, and then install to the mbr. It's perhaps not highlighted as well as it could be in their docs, but it's there. I found the install time consuming, and it's easy to make a mistake by not RTFM carefully, but it's really a painless, well thought-out install process imho. I would hate to see this distro fall by the wayside. It's truly unique, exciting, very well thought-out.

    3. Re:Is it better now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somebody with karma mod this post up. I'm writing this quick while my IP still isn't banned...

      LILO not being placed in MBR was annoying and I'm glad to see this post.

    4. Re:Is it better now? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      No its just that there are obvious bugs in the installer, something which could have been done better if it was thought through. Thats all. Otherwise its a wonderful idea, and as its created by volunteers I really can't complain.

    5. Re:Is it better now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I found the install time consuming, and it's easy to make a mistake by not RTFM carefully, but it's really a painless, well thought-out install process imho.

      Nice contradictory statements. Which is it - easy to make a mistake or painless?

    6. Re:Is it better now? by trelaneopn · · Score: 1

      yes it is, and there are other issues, that being somewhat in the inner circle of sgl that they are addressing. sometimes useing the LATEST and GREATEST source package isn't the best thing. (those who have used debian unstable have probably been cut by the bleeding edge before and know what I am talking about). Something is in the works for those that want a little bit more stable system, but one that is still optimized for their arch and system.

      --
      a bit more about me http://www.advogato.org/person/trelane/ or my private page http://trelane.net
    7. Re:Is it better now? by MindStalker · · Score: 2

      HAHA, sorry no what I was implying was that I didn't expect it to be of commericial quality, but I liked many of their ideas. And am seriously considering helping them.

  4. Sorceror vs Gentoo by tongue · · Score: 2, Informative

    I just installed Gentoo last night--or started it, rather; the compile process takes quite a bit of time. What I'd like to know is how these two distributions compare, especially in the package management department. Considering that both compile the software on demand, it would seem to be a question of dependency resolution. Has anyone got experience with both of them? does one have any advantages over the other (aside from sorcerors cool nomenclature? :)

    1. Re:Sorceror vs Gentoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good choice, mate! After I bought my new notebook I wound up with the choice between GenToo and Sorcerer as well. However I decided against Sorcerer as GenToo seems to be more mature.
      All in all I have to say I'm very pleased with my GenToo thus far and can only recommend it.
      How about a shoot-out between Sorcerer and Gentoo?

    2. Re:Sorceror vs Gentoo by tongue · · Score: 1

      So far, aside from the time investment it takes to get a gentoo build (note: they do have a binary version to save the time needed to compile available as well, although I haven't played with that) up and running, i've been very impressed with the installation process. Quite light, and I can already notice just in the compile process the speed improvements. I've also had nary an error in the compilation processes, either in the source or in an absent dependency. So that's my 2 pfennig worth, take it or leave it. In the interests of equal time, of course. :)

    3. Re:Sorceror vs Gentoo by krasni_bor · · Score: 5, Interesting
      After the original Slashdot story on Sorcerer, I downloaded and tried Gentoo while waiting for Sorcerer's servers to become un-/.ed. I tend to be really impulsive about uninstalling and reinstalling different distros on my personal box. I don't want to think about how many times I've installed both of these on my fun box at home. I also put Sorcery a firewall and web server at the high school where I work.


      Both are source-based distros. Gentoo uses a Python and bash-based package system, influenced by the bsd ports system. It handles required dependencies automatically, and chooses optional ones based on a config file--you indicate if you want kde functionality in your apps, for example. Sorcery just prompts you for each dependency.


      That comparison is typical for the approaches to the two distros. Sorcery asks/tells everything in a very straightforward way. Gentoo is more automatic.


      On the other hand, Gentoo doesn't really have an installer at this point, just a shell and a bunch of well-written instructions.


      At this point I prefer Sorcery, because no other distro has made me feel like I really knew exactly what was going on with my box.

  5. requirements by gr3g · · Score: 1

    Did you check out the requirements on Socerer. I have looked at it in the past and it was something like 8gb hardrive and 256mb ram. That is an ungodly amount just to get things started. I can't afford to run that on my budget. I mean it seems like an interestnig distro but it's too much for my plate.

    --
    "It has always been this way and it won't change, god bless the fucked up USA" The Briefs
    1. Re:requirements by spencerogden · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have sorcer installed with 256mb and a 2gb root partition in addition to my regular 500mb home partition. This does not seem excesive to me.

      Spencer

    2. Re:requirements by gr3g · · Score: 1

      oh, I had read the minimum requirements on their page. Or maybe those were the suggested, anyway how did you do it? Right now I'm testing different distributions for my laptop. Each one is always missing something: Suse didn't want to detect my keyboard (really pissed me off), slackware doesn't want to do apm, mandrake doesn't like my pcmcia card, and debian doesn't like my video card. I'm giving mandrake another go but I'm open to anthing.

      --
      "It has always been this way and it won't change, god bless the fucked up USA" The Briefs
    3. Re:requirements by MisterBlister · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Computer's aren't for poor people!

    4. Re:requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got it working on a 5 gig partition with 128 megs of ram. Worked pretty well. Just think the 1 gig swap partition is a little big. That would need some fixing. Hope the distro continues thought since I find it to be a useful learning tool.

    5. Re:requirements by spencerogden · · Score: 1

      I have to tell you that it is quite cramped on those specs. At any rate, I went with a 500mb swapfile. As to how I did it, just follow the directions, and have another computer, or another distro handy to look up help files online. Depending on your situation you will need to do much configuration on your own.

      The two hurdles are networking and X. Once you get those configured a `cast kde` and ` cast mozilla` will get you to a very usable system very quickly.

    6. Re:requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I talked to the guy who wrote that guide with the minimum requirements, and he had basically picked those as random numbers. I'd say theyre absurd.
      I have it running on a 4GB, with 128 ram, and 1GB swap file. Runs perfectly.

      The big swap is because it uses a virtual ram drive to do all of its compiling. It needs enough room to hold the largest of packages while compiling. I have a feeling 1GB is still way too generous though. He didnt seem to know what he was talking about.

      Great distro though, I love it. I used debian for years, and thought quite highly of it. Sorcerer is my new favorite distro.

    7. Re:requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Video card support is not determined by the distro. Linux is Linux, it works with Linux or it doesnt.

      All distros can do APM, support keyboards, PCMCIA cards, and video cards. linuxdoc.org is your friend.

  6. Am I the only one by I+Lost+My+Password · · Score: 0

    That get a bit weary of installing a system with such childish names for tools?

    1. Re:Am I the only one by DrunkenPenguin · · Score: 0

      Me too. That's when I found Gentoo (www.gentoo.org) which has a professional touch on it.

    2. Re:Am I the only one by cybergibbons · · Score: 3, Insightful

      GIMP? LILO? Firestarter? Joe? Gnome?

      The list goes on. Linux is full of weird and funny names. Personally I think it helps you remember the names of tools better. It's called Sorceror Linux, so why not have a command called cast? Seems logical for me.

      Rather than call something a long name that may be descriptive, and accurate, why not use these shorter, easier to remember alternatives. It makes it a far better UI.

    3. Re:Am I the only one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about names for tools, but the name for the distribution gets me - in gentoo's case. I just can't take it seriously... even though maybe I should. The name is just so.. so.. 3rd grade?

    4. Re:Am I the only one by alex_ant · · Score: 1

      This is sarcasm, right? Is there anyone who will agree with me that although GIMP, LILO, Joe, etc. are cuter, they are actually more difficult to remember? What do gimps have to do with photo editing? What the hell is a lilo? I know a Joe, but he has nothing to do with text editors. I mean, if I want to set up a firewall, I'll look for something called "Firewall Setup" or "Firewall Configuration" or just "Firewall." I'm not an arsonist - firestarter sounds like some kind of script kiddie thing to me.

      Who has the balls to voice their agreement with this on /.?

      Alex

    5. Re:Am I the only one by cybergibbons · · Score: 1

      Say GIMP to any X user and they will know what you are talking about.

      Say LILO to pretty much any linux user, and again, they will know what you are talking about.

      Joe, not as well known, but many do use it.

      Firestarter differentiates the tool from any one of the hundreds of others out there.

      If GIMP was called as "ximageedit" or something, then is is long, and hard to guess. Most of the easy names have gone. If firestarter was called "simplefirewallconftool8" then i would never remember it.

      The power in linux results from being able to use simple tools together to perform complex tasks. There are many tools that do similar jobs, but are more suited to tasks in certain respects. You can't just call a tool "firewall" - how would you tell any differently from the actual daemon, program, or config tool?

    6. Re:Am I the only one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While you're at it, what does Excel have to do with spreadsheets, Dreamweaver with web design, or Visual Studio with software development?

      Face it - most people are bright enough to know what the program they want to run is called. If they want to use a spreadsheet, they quickly learn that they want to run a program called Excel (on Windows, at least). To my knowledge, it hasn't made the program any less successful that they didn't call it "MS Spreadsheet".

    7. Re:Am I the only one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What the hell is a lilo?"

      I named my cat Lilo. It's just the right amount of geeky. Non-techies just think it's a slightly weird cute name, without a clue of the implied geekiness.

      You can be a geek and still get laid.

    8. Re:Am I the only one by Macrobat · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I have the balls to disagree :)

      IIRC, when Arnold Schwarzenegger was told to change his name, he said something like: "It takes a little effort to remember, but once they do, they'll never forget it."

      I find the acronyms and "cute names" for some of the UNIX-style utilities to be the same way; they require a little more explanation to tie the meaning together with the word, but (like all good mnemonics) they make up for it by staying longer in the brain.

      --
      "Hardly used" will not fetch you a better price for your brain.
    9. Re:Am I the only one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's called Sorceror Linux...

      SorcerEr Linux, dumbass.

    10. Re:Am I the only one by JacobO · · Score: 1

      Actually, Lilo is brand of inflatable pool accessories, such as those things you float on while sipping cocktails. As one does, of course.

    11. Re:Am I the only one by alex_ant · · Score: 1
      I have the balls to disagree :)

      NOBODY disagrees with me! Sit down, shut it! :)

      I see your point. I guess I made my remark based upon the dozens (hundreds?) of entries I have in my bookmarks file referencing pieces of Linux software with various weird but cute-once-you-understand-'em names. I navigate through Google all the time, thinking "Argh, I remember hearing about this one app called X - what was the name of it again? Must find Linux software index... must find Linux software index..."

      Now that I think about it, though, perhaps Linux isn't any worse than anything else in this regard.

      Although the name "Photoshop" can never be beaten by any image editing app, ever. :)

      Alex

    12. Re:Am I the only one by baywulf · · Score: 0, Troll

      'It's called Sorceror Linux, so why not have a command called cast? Seems logical for me.'

      You haven't read the article did you? They do have a command called 'cast'!

    13. Re:Am I the only one by DrunkenPenguin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Gentoo is actually a specie of fast and small penguins in the real world.

    14. Re:Am I the only one by kevin+lyda · · Score: 3, Interesting

      dunno, i thought the gimp was cute.

      i note that you used the word google assuming we'd all know you meant "a search engine"....

      --
      US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
    15. Re:Am I the only one by cybergibbons · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I did, and was saying, why not have a command called cast? Why does this imply not reading the article. I've come across the distro before as well.

      And "You haven't read the article did you?" - should be "You haven't read the article have you?" or "You didn't read the article did you?"

    16. Re:Am I the only one by cybergibbons · · Score: 1

      SorcerEr Linux, dumbass.

      Constructive comment, well done. A spelling mistake, definately removed the entire point of the post. Hey, if you are going to post like this, why not get an account, so we can pick through all your informative, interesting, and humerous posts and find spelling mistakes?

  7. Gentoo's got it by DrunkenPenguin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Gentoo has got the whole pack together. Excellent support and tutorials from the developers. Not to mention the 100% optimization.

  8. Great Distro by spencerogden · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Like the submitter I have been using Sorcerer for a little over a month. This distro is exactly what I have been looking for.

    For one, I don't know if it is the optimized compiles, or the fact that it is a bare minimum system, but KDE feels fast!

    The project is in need of assistance. If you haven't tried it, give it a weekend, and you too will hope that this project does not die. The author has a paypal account linked to his email address.

    1. Re:Great Distro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It can optimize depending to your comfort level (check the features menu in sorcery). At the minimum it compiles for your processor type (x86/athlon/etc) so you don't need older compatability.

  9. Heh... by Picass0 · · Score: 5, Funny


    Red Wizard needs food badly.

    1. Re:Heh... by megauni · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has shot the food.

      come on, give me a break!

    2. Re:Heh... by SirRichardPumpaloaf · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      BSD is about to die...

      Sorry, couldn't resist.

    3. Re:Heh... by kiwipeso · · Score: 2, Funny

      BSD is dying, but it appears that it will return like a phoenix with the arrival of the Kaos BSD operating system.

      Meanwhile, the best linux ever is now dead. Nevermind the fact it only had a few dozen slashdot geeks actually use after waiting all week to compile it.
      Ladies (all 2 of you on slashdot) and gentlemen, Linux is dead. Tux the Penguin is extinct. (no, it's not the stink of GNU hippies)

      --
      - Kaos games and encryption systems developer
  10. SuSE still takes the prize for sysadmins by dlasley · · Score: 3, Insightful

    i like the thought behind SGL, but i think SuSE has kinda beaten everybody (except perhaps debian) with the update/config tools in YaST2. `/sbin/yast2 online_update` with an internet connection and usually before you can get a 2nd cup of coffee, there's a nice list of packages to download and update/install, all pertinent to your system. my only desire is for http connections for high-security areas that don't have ftp access ...

    --
    when it rains, it gets real soggy. when it pours, i'm under the tap just _waiting_ for the joy
    1. Re:SuSE still takes the prize for sysadmins by EllF · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You've missed the point. SGL, Gentoo, LFS, etc. are all about building your system from source, and getting the combined benefits of optimized binaries and a solid knowledge of *everything* that's installed. Someone who is going down the route of custom-compiled source isn't looking to "compete" with SuSE or Debian, because those distros are offering a binary update path.

      I find apt useful for grabbing source, but that does not put it in the same class as LFS or SGL when it comes to bragging rights or philosophy.

      --
      We who were living are now dying
      With a little patience
    2. Re:SuSE still takes the prize for sysadmins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only people who care about 'bragging rights' are little twerps such as yourself.

      I want my system to work and could give a flying phuck whether I have bragging rights or not. And it really is not such a big deal to compile from source ever since make.

    3. Re:SuSE still takes the prize for sysadmins by EllF · · Score: 1

      Ease up on the hostility, AC. I never said that I cared much for bragging rights - note that I mentioned that I used Debian. The point of my post was that the article was about a true "from source" distro, where everything was compiled by you, even your compiler. That's not the case with Debian, or SuSE - and your post on their respective strengths was a bit off topic.

      Ironically, the main reason most people turn to LFS systems is to make their system work *exactly* as they want it to. I've had more luck administering boxen that have been hand configured than with distros that install binaries haphazardly.

      "And it really is not such a big deal to compile from source ever since make."

      Thanks for that gem of irrelevant insight! :)

      --
      We who were living are now dying
      With a little patience
    4. Re:SuSE still takes the prize for sysadmins by dlasley · · Score: 1

      i should have noted that i'm looking at this from the enterprise world, where the strengths of YaST outweigh the strengths of building a system from source. i was commenting more on the reference to sysadmins being like wizards; my feeling is SuSE makes me feel like a wizard sysadmin, even though i'm not (and i'm not saying this is a good thing!) - but you can still do essentially the same thing as SGL by booting the filesystem virtually and doing the SuSEConfig by hand. you just won't see me doing it ;-)

      --
      when it rains, it gets real soggy. when it pours, i'm under the tap just _waiting_ for the joy
    5. Re:SuSE still takes the prize for sysadmins by rhaig · · Score: 1

      that might be fine if their config wasn't so schizophrenic. are they bsd (rc.config) or sysV?

      They don't know.

      and it only takes the prize for sysadmins if you're one of the "new-age" admins that doens't know a config file from a hole in the ground. suse won't let you edit the config files by hand. you have to use yast or yout changes get overwritten at random times.

      And, as much as I hate using NIS, yast still hasn't figured out that ypbind has a broadcast option. (ok, maybe add a warning about using it, but still...)

      so suse, in my opinion takes the prize for lusers who don't really know what's going on. Or for developers who only care about their code and the desktop. (wait... was I redundant?)

      --
      "We are not tolerant people. We prefer drastically effective solutions"
  11. what about Rock? by _narf_ · · Score: 3, Informative


    They're at: http://www.rocklinux.org , They've been around a while, and much of the ideas are similar re: rebuilding the whole thing locally.

    --
    Have you painted a shed today?
  12. BSD & Rock Linux comparison by CajunArson · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not being a BSD user, how does this distros 'spell casting' system
    compare to BSD ports? I've heard ports does a similar operation
    of downloading code and custom compiling it.

    Also, Rock Linux puts out a distribution where you basically compile all the packages, but I don't think it has the update ability that Sorcerer has.

    It looks like a fun distro to try.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
    1. Re:BSD & Rock Linux comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be at least comparable to the BSD ports system, since you are compiling the software before you run it.

      You might also want to look at gentoo linux. It seems to be as stable, if not more so. At least it's not "days away from collapsing."

      But since you're compiling software, Redhat, Mandrake, and Slack all allow you to compile software.

    2. Re:BSD & Rock Linux comparison by dcs · · Score: 2

      cd /usr/src
      make update && make buildworld && make kernel && mergemaster && reboot
      cd /usr/src
      make installworld
      portupgrade -a

      That updates *everything*, from docs to /bin/ls, on a FreeBSD machine. It assumes you have a /etc/make.conf appropriately configured (as in, uncomment the example lines), that you have cvsup and source installed and that you have internet connection.

      It takes a rather large number of steps because there are a few places where you must make SURE everything still works, or you may end up with an unusable systems.

      Let's dissect it a bit.

      /usr/src is the place where FreeBSD, the base system (as opposed to all the third party programs out there), is located.

      "make update" in this directory will call cvsup, a program that will check out a mirror of your choice on the Internet and download the diffs (instead of the whole files) for the whole FreeBSD source tree, FreeBSD documents and the ports tree. It need not download *all* of this, it's configurable.

      "make buildworld" compiles everything in the base system but the kernel and kernel modules. It does all the right things too, like first compiling a C compiler before compiling the C compiler. :-)

      "make buildkernel" compiles kernel and kernel modules. It uses the stuff compiled in the step before, so you get a kernel compiled with the latest tools even before you install them.

      "mergemaster" deals with /etc in a controlled fashion. It compare your files with the ones in the source, and those which were updated (infered from the CVS Ids) have their diffs displayed to you, and you have the option of installing the new, keeping the old, or merging the two of them selectively (as in, you control what and how).

      Though FreeBSD takes some pains to make this process painless, like having default configuration files and user configuration files, there's always exceptions (like the groups and password files).

      "make installkernel" installs the new kernel and modules. It keeps a copy of the old one.

      "reboot" reboots. :-) FreeBSD does not have to deal with LILO pains. If the new kernel is broken, all you have to do is interrupt the count-down and type "boot kernel.OLD" (or whatever other kernel name you may have chosen).

      If the new kernel works, you may install the new "world" without fear (some of the programs might be using features only present in the new kernel, which would have caused you problems if you installed world first). "make installworld" does that.

      Finally, "portupgrade -a" upgrades every port you have installed, dependencies first, and installing any new dependencies as necessary. Port's magic is rather complex, and there are whole articles on the internet about it. But it just works, so you don't have to concern yourself about it.

      Note that all of this is compiled according to the options you put in /etc/make.conf.

      HTH. HAND.

      --
      (8-DCS)
    3. Re:BSD & Rock Linux comparison by dROCKuser · · Score: 1

      And now the ROCKed way to go:

      cd /rock-linux
      ./scripts/Download -all
      ./scripts/Build-All localhost:/usr/src/rock-src
      # wait some hours
      ./scripts/Create-CD architecture

      This is just one of many ways to get ROCK running. We use nfs-mounted directories in a chrooted environment for building a "clean" system, without any dependencies to the outer world. In the upcomming 1.7 dev-tree everything will be more flexible and more configurable. It ROCKs!

      Check it out at http://www.rocklinux.org

  13. cast? grimoire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what a ridiculous idea. anyways is bets it's alias cast='apt-get install' anyway :-)

  14. Re:Linux is Doomed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With a superior OS like XP being offered by Microsoft how can linux even hope to compete?

    A: No product activation. You gotta admit, WPA sucks.

  15. Hmm.. by Pope+Slackman · · Score: 4, Informative

    [SGL has a] script that locates the latest stable source code for the application, downloads it to your system, configures it for your machine, compiles, and installs it. Pure magic.

    Sounds familiar...

    C-X C-S

    1. Re:Hmm.. by damiam · · Score: 1

      Yep.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    2. Re:Hmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, except apt sucks and ports are the greatest thing to ever come to *NIX.

  16. Gentoo is much better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Sorcerer is nice but its not as nice as Gentoo. I've used them both and I'll be sticking with Gentoo. http://www.gentoo.org/

    1. Re:Gentoo is much better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, that comment was interesting? WTF? How about telling why something is "nice" since distro usage should be based on niceness

      Ummm.. Mandrake is nice but not as nice as RedHat. I've used them both and I'll be sticking with Redhat. http://www.redhat.com/

  17. Great Stuff by althalus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been running this one my inspiron also, for about two weeks, and love it. This thing is excellent. The only thing I don't like is how the everybody (the maintainer especially) won't stop talking about how doomed it is. Hello, sure it's tough to get started, and find help, but don't say "It's doomed" after every sentence! I think Kyle has done an excellent job, and I understand his reasons for trying to get help. I'm doing what I can. But quit it with the doom and gloom all the time!

    1. Re:Great Stuff by geekoid · · Score: 2

      But quit it with the doom and gloom all the time!
      For some reason this struck me as something someone would say to a sorcerer...Just before it hit the fan. ;)

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  18. Re:Squeaky Clean by scorcherer · · Score: 2
    Many slashdotters run sourcerer

    It's called sorcerer without a u. Trust me, I ought to know.

    --

    --
    The Cap is nigh. Time to get a fresh new account.

  19. Sorcerer, Gentoo, and FreeBSD by Badam · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have all three of these installed on my hard drive.

    Sorcerer is pretty interesting, and certainly easier to use than the others, but if you have problems... good luck. The web page is spare, and the mailing lists aren't really busy enough yet to make for a good replacement.

    As far as I can tell, Gentoo is made by Debian types who wanted to be able to use the BSD ports system to download and compile all their software. Perhaps they prefer the GPL to the BSD license. Anyway, like Debian, Gentoo has a "Social Contract". Functionally, you can do the same things that are possible in Sorcerer, although the commands are slighly more complicated, and less friendly to newbies.

    Finally, there's FreeBSD, which has many more programs in its software collection than either Sorcerer or Gentoo. Frankly, unless people are really against the BSD license, think the Linux kernel is much better, or need to play some game that's tailored for Linux, I would recommend going with FreeBSD. Not only does FreeBSD have many programs, but it has many more port maintainers to track whether the system is working.

    That said, I'm going to Sorcerer and Gentoo on my hard drive, and will periodically check to see if their software collections have become competitive. If either had ports for as many programs as FreeBSD, this would be a much harder decision.

    --

    Check out my blog: My Galaxy is Milky Way Adjacent
    1. Re:Sorcerer, Gentoo, and FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, if you're going to go out and compile stuff yourself, you're better off using FreeBSD. It's easier, it's maintained better, and the Ports system is a very robust, well-maintained system.

      There are diminishing returns with any BSD port-like system. The amount of compiling you must do (say for gnome) will really only give you a marginal return on your time investment. Some people are okay with that. But really, exactly how many times do we need Gnome compiled for the Athlon 1800+ to run on a stock linux kernel?

      That said, I think that the ease of use that "casting spells" brings to linux should also be a mandatory part of a say, Redhat, Debian, or Mandrake distribution. (Sure, you can compile gcc for redhat, but have you TRIED to? It's not easy. And no rpm -ba doesn't work all the time. ;^)

      I played around with gentoo last weekend, and found that while it was fairly straightforward, it took (for me) much too long to get everything up and running, gnome, X, and all.

      But I wanted to get things done, and I want things to work with a minimum of effort and time. So, I chose a distribution with binary packages readily available. Others, who actually have weekends to spend recompiling everything, and don't mind the wait, would find Gentoo, FreeBSD and Sorceror to be useful. And if you're really serious about recompiling software, go with FreeBSD. ;^)

    2. Re:Sorcerer, Gentoo, and FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same for Debian.

      apt-get source gcc

      ./configure, compile... simple

    3. Re:Sorcerer, Gentoo, and FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you just do:
      apt-get source --compile gcc

      and that will compile the .deb file for you to install. If you want to do a custom compile, then you:
      apt-get source gcc
      ./configure, making custom
      dpkg-buildpackage

    4. Re:Sorcerer, Gentoo, and FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a FreeBSD & debian user, i'd recommand FreeBSD
      too except for those willing to develop in Java(tm).
      linux-jdk ports are not very stable, and the native port
      of jdk131 is also far from being ready for production.

      But some amazing work has been archieved, and
      soon, i'm sure we'll have a mature native JDK for FreeBSD.

    5. Re:Sorcerer, Gentoo, and FreeBSD by kiwipeso · · Score: 1

      I think that Public Information Service Software is a good name for "free software" or "open source".
      When I buy a linux distro, I want to ask 'Can I get some PISS here ?' or 'Will my computer work better if I PISS on it ?'

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=28988&cid=31 15 825

      --
      - Kaos games and encryption systems developer
  20. Building from Source! by ibnmaja · · Score: 1

    I can see the educational value that such distributions have LFS, RockLinux, Gentoo, and Socerer! but when it comes to runing servers on them, What is the best? Rocklinux has that in mind, LFS is going back, and forth now, Gentoo linux dealing more with cosmetics, When can we have a powerfull build from source distribution that competes with SID, and woody, something I will be able to install, upgarde easily! or am I missing the point here

    --
    #include #include return (0);
    1. Re:Building from Source! by PzyCrow · · Score: 1

      I'm running gentoo atm on my laptop, nice and clean.
      For servers I must say gentoo is good. No service is started without you telling them to: secure.

      With the command emerge --update --world every package you have installed is upgraded. Works nice. Put it in cron.

      And no etc files are overwritten so to add new features to them you run the nice script etc-update and just answer the questions.
      This could be better...

      Over all, gentoo is a nice dist but needs some development before all tools are at their best.

    2. Re:Building from Source! by ibnmaja · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the update, but still gentoo is known to break while sorcerer with it short life have been pretty stable, and I do belive the etc-update is also there in both and how about Drrobins, is n't he overworked, I do like his articles tho

      --
      #include #include return (0);
  21. self healing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What everyone failes to mention is the self healing ability of sorcerer which is IMHO its biggest strength. Doing #cast --fix will verify all applications on your system, recompile the once whose depandancies have changed, put back in place missing files and symlinks.

    One of the big challanges for sorcerer was upgrade from db3 to db4. That one tooked me 2 #cast --fix till system self healed. Try doing this with any other distro and see what happens.

    1. Re:self healing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of the big challanges for sorcerer was upgrade from db3 to db4. That one tooked me 2 #cast --fix till system self healed. Try doing this with any other distro and see what happens.

      This is the basic premise of FreeBSD's ports system. I suppose it also has the advantage of a working kernel, as well.

    2. Re:self healing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      #cast --fix
      bash: cast: command not found.

      Seriously, all major distributions:

      apt-get and rpm are both self-maintaining and won't install new software without the proper dependencies fixed.

    3. Re:self healing by be-fan · · Score: 3, Informative

      RPM, self-healing? My ass! RPM is like Microsoft software, it tends to break itself. It doesn't help that many packages basically *require* --force to install because of weird dependency issues (but they work fine afterwards). Besides, neither software heal's itself, you generally have to do it manually. (There is --rebuilddb for RPM, but you generally use that for when RPM hoses the database out and hangs when you try to install (or remove or query) any packages).

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    4. Re:self healing by captaineo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. The moment I lost my faith in RPM was when I saw this on the mozilla FTP site:

      Red_Hat_6x_RPMS/
      Red_Hat_7x_RPMS/

      Two different RPMs for different "versions" of Red Hat?!? I thought RPM was supposed to take care of dependencies automatically? (note: the reason for this is that Red Hat, for some unknown reason, shipped mutually-incompatible versions of libstdc++ in 6.x and 7.x.)

      That was also the moment I decided to switch to Debian - now *those* developers *care* about proper version management. Bye bye, Red Hat.

    5. Re:self healing by Lac · · Score: 2

      One of the big challanges for sorcerer was upgrade from db3 to db4. That one tooked me 2 #cast --fix till system self healed. Try doing this with any other distro and see what happens.

      Interesting. On RedHat, all I'm getting are cryptic "bash: cast: command not found", but my system does seem to run _much_ smoother now. Anybody try it on Debian yet?.

      heh.

    6. Re:self healing by SirRichardPumpaloaf · · Score: 1

      It's not RedHat's fault that g++ breaks backward compatibility. Debian will eventually switch to the new libstdc++ as well, probably in 2005 when they finally make the leap to kernel 2.4. I guess you'll have to switch to SLS or Yggdrasil then...

    7. Re:self healing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      One of the big challanges for sorcerer was upgrade from db3 to db4. That one tooked me 2 #cast --fix till system self healed. Try doing this with any other distro and see what happens.
      Well, don't be so sure...
      $ cast --fix
      bash: cast: command not found
      God damn it, you're right! All I got is this shitty apt-get dist-upgrade! Damn you Debian!!!
    8. Re:self healing by captaineo · · Score: 2

      It's not RedHat's fault that g++ breaks backward compatibility.

      Yes, it is! They could have shipped the older version, or both! The role of a distributor like Red Hat is to insulate users from version skew and API breakage. I'd expect compatibility problems if I were compiling from source, but not with a "professional" distro...

      Debian will eventually switch to the new libstdc++ as well...
      Of course. And when they do, they will *rename* the library, so that both versions can be installed concurrently, and no software will break.

      The Fundamental Law of Software Packaging is: if the API changes (in a backwards-incompatible way), you must change the name of the library. Debian understands this. Red Hat does not.

    9. Re:self healing by bgarcia · · Score: 4, Informative
      It's not RedHat's fault that g++ breaks backward compatibility.
      Yes, it is! They could have shipped the older version, or both!
      They did, you ignorant buffoon.

      host> rpm -qa | grep libstdc++
      compat-libstdc++-6.2-2.9.0.14
      libstdc++-2.96-85

      host> rpm -qi compat-libstdc++
      Name : compat-libstdc++
      ...
      Summary : Standard C++ libraries for Red Hat 6.2 backwards compatibility.
      Description :
      The compat-libstdc++ package contains compatibility Standard C++ libraries that are used by Red Hat Linux 6.2 C++ binaries and KDE 1.x C++ binaries in the current distribution.

      ...you must change the name of the library. Debian understands this. Red Hat does not.
      Red Hat knows exactly what it's doing. The problem is that you are talking without a clue. Please don't post on subjects for which you don't have a clue.
      --
      I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
    10. Re:self healing by Dwonis · · Score: 2
      Uh oh:

      cast cannot open cast-dictionary file: /home/dwon/.glimpse_quick
      (use -H to give a dictionary-dir or run 'buildcast' to make a dictionary)

      It *does* seem to work better now, though. :)

  22. Why was this project even started? by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1, Troll

    Why do people start projects they can't possibly finish or even maintain? He had to know he would need to get a job eventually. How many irrelevant distro's are going to be founded and then abandoned once the demands of time and real life creep in?

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    1. Re:Why was this project even started? by T3kno · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Damn, it's a good thing Linus didn't/doesn't subscribe to this philosophy. From what I read it sounds like he really wants to keep the project up, but he needs help. If I find a free minute I might look at the spells and see if I can help out, maybe you should do the same.

      --
      (B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)
    2. Re:Why was this project even started? by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Informative

      for fun&education. like, if you were hacking up something new would you just stop doing it before you have to just because you eventually have to stop doing it? having experimental distros certainly isn't a bad thing in my book. once you start thinking i dont have time for this or that or this has already been done you might as well give MS your CC-number

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:Why was this project even started? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sir, are so stupid, I can only guess this was a fiendishly clever attempt at sarcasm....

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

      ...good one...

    4. Re:Why was this project even started? by scorcherer · · Score: 2

      Evolution via natural selection. 'nuff said.

      --

      --
      The Cap is nigh. Time to get a fresh new account.

    5. Re:Why was this project even started? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That still doesn't explain Michael Jackson.

      Try again.

    6. Re:Why was this project even started? by Master+Bait · · Score: 1
      It doesn't matter if the author leaves the project. Since it is under GPL, somebody with Gentoo or LFS or anybody else for that matter can pick it up from where he left off.

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    7. Re:Why was this project even started? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup. Some things are just too cute to live.

  23. Nightmare by florin · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This may be meant for system administrators, but maintaining more than a handful of sorcerer boxes sounds terrifying. I for one just don't have the time to compile Gnome every time Dell comes by to deliver another server box.

    Managability quickly becomes more important than that squeaky clean feeling once you've got more than 10 systems running. I guess that makes me a sucky admin, but I really can't care. I'll have to stick with the Red Hat network and up2date over this, thanks.

    1. Re:Nightmare by poteet · · Score: 1

      I dont know if Sorcerer has this compatibility, but you can use the command (in Gentoo) #emerge --buildpkg foopackage to install the package AND build a binary to roll out to your other boxes. So it might not be SO nightmarish...(at least with Gentoo)

      --
      "Sometimes nothin' is a pretty cool hand." - Cool Hand Luke
    2. Re:Nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorcerer by default caches the binary result of all compiles. (Means you don't have to compile again if you uninstall something and then want it back)

    3. Re:Nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not too sure about the specifics of your situation, but it sounds to me like you may have glazed over the 'cabal' feature. It allows you to execute the same command on multiple machines concurrently. You can do all those Gnome rebuilds at the same time. And since YOU can record every step, you can also write a shell script to handle your specific dependency needs and configurations.

    4. Re:Nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one just don't have the time to compile Gnome every time Dell comes by to deliver another server box.

      Gnome on a server box? What?

      Do you drive a Honda Civic with a Kenworth engine too? Or a Kenworth with a Porche engine?

    5. Re:Nightmare by chrylis · · Score: 1

      Sorcerer's authors already considered this--Sorcerer includes a feature (whose name I cannot remember because I've not used it) that will allow multiple systems to be slaved to a server (via SSH, I believe) so that upgrading all of the machines can take place without having to manually go around and update things.

    6. Re:Nightmare by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Well if all the servers are of identical specification, you would just dd images of the disks and copy them over. And then just install whatever additional software was specific to the server.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  24. Whoaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First bigass ad sighted overhere

  25. Ahead of its time? by morbid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sourcerer is a brilliant idea, but may be ahead of its time. Downloading everything from source and compiling requires a lot of CPU horsepower (not a problem nowadays) but also lots of bandwidth. Many people still do not have the bandwidth so binary distributions are invaluable. However, I must admit that over the years I have used Slackware as a base OS and then built all my updates from source as and when they appear. This guy has the right idea. It would be a shame to see it fail.

    --
    I'm out of my tree just now but please feel free to leave a banana.
  26. If you like Sorceror, try Gentoo! by Hornsby · · Score: 5, Informative

    Gentoo Linux is an excellent distro that is very similar to Sorceror in the fact that you compile everything from scratch. It uses a Free-BSD style ports system, and it has a command-line driven package tool that's similar to debian's apt-get. The portage tree is huge and contains thousands of apps. One major advantage over Sorceror is that Gentoo has a very active development community, and it isn't in any danger of dissappearing anytime soon. If you want a distro where everything is compiled explicitly for your hardware for blistering fast speed, you should check out Gentoo. It's my favorite distro, and I've tried virtually all of them.

    --
    A musician without the RIAA, is like a fish without a bicycle.
    1. Re:If you like Sorceror, try Gentoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If you want a distro where everything is compiled explicitly for your hardware for blistering fast speed, you should check out Gentoo.

      You've benchmarked this, of course, so you can tell us just how much faster this would be?

      I've seen this "blazingly fast due to locally compiled" assertion SO many times, yet I've never seen the benchmarks to back this up as being worth the time.

    2. Re:If you like Sorceror, try Gentoo! by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      How does Gentoo compare to Sorcerer or LFS? There's no way I can compile Sorcerer on my box, and the problem with LFS is that I need 2 distros on a limited amount of HD space. Is Gentoo easier on the resources?

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    3. Re:If you like Sorceror, try Gentoo! by Shiny+Metal+S. · · Score: 3, Informative
      If you want a distro where everything is compiled explicitly for your hardware for blistering fast speed, you should check out Gentoo.
      Or Debian source packages for that meter. But I have yet to see blistering fast speed caused by only a local compilation.
      --

      ~shiny
      WILL HACK FOR $$$

    4. Re:If you like Sorceror, try Gentoo! by spencerogden · · Score: 2

      I don't know if it is caused by the optimized compilation, or the stripped down nature of the distro, but either way, KDE is noticably faster than under Mandrake(perhaps that is a bad comparison)

    5. Re:If you like Sorceror, try Gentoo! by Voom · · Score: 1
      I can't give precise measurements just anecdotal figures from games.... specifically tribes 2.

      Under w2k standing at a particular part of a map looking directly at a object in the distance I was getting 125ish fps. After installing RH7.2 on the same box I was getting 118ish at that exact point. After getting SGL installed, I was hitting 157 fps at the same point. This is with the 2.4.17 kernel and the preemptive patch( which SGL makes simple to install).

      Tribes 2 is highly CPU bound... on most machines changing resolution doesn't affect fps. On my machine now the frame rate is related to resolution in a way that is similar to CPU, which leads me to think I'm now video card bottlenecked.

    6. Re:If you like Sorceror, try Gentoo! by Voom · · Score: 1

      'in a way that is similar to CPU' should read 'In a way that is similar to other games like q3'

  27. SGL = excellent product, excellent install method by dogas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It would really be a shame if SGL stopped getting support. I switched from Mandrake a month ago and I'm more than satisfied with the results. Yes, the install is more difficult and time consuming, but it was worth it for the experience I got out of it. I now have an intricate knowledge about how the inner details of linux works.

    I also believe that their method of installing applications is better than any binary install system out there (apt-get/rpm). Although it may take a bit longer to compile things, they're installed *right* and are compiled specific for your architecture. All dependencies are automagically downloaded, compiled, and installed without any user interaction (although you can interact if you want).

    No other distro provides more control, flexibility, or ease of use better than sorcery. I hope it doesn't go away.

    --
    'When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.' -HST
  28. Another distribution?! by FurryFeet · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now, don't get me wrong. I'm all for choice. But I have to wonder if it's wise to keep creating new distributions instead of trying to consolidate the ones there are.
    I have been using Linux at home for over six months. Installed it myself, learned to use it myself; still, you guys might consider me a newbie. So let me tell you, as a newbie, once I decided to take the plunge, choosing distribution was a major headache.
    Check the Net. A lot of opinions, plenty of "favorite flavors", but not a lot of good advice, like "Mandrake is easy to install, but RedHat is easier to use".
    Maybe I'm ranting. What I'm trying to say is, it's hard to get someone to try Linux, and when they do and are faced with 10 choices, without a lot of help in making a decision, it is discouraging. So, turning those 10 into 11 hardly seems a great idea to me.
    Then again, IANALGY (I Am Not A Linux Guru... Yet) ^^

    1. Re:Another distribution?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      > Maybe I'm ranting. What I'm trying to say is, it's hard to get someone to try Linux, and when they do and are faced with 10 choices, without a lot of help in making a decision, it is discouraging. So, turning those 10 into 11 hardly seems a great idea to me.

      Your real complaint is not having too many choices, it's not having the info to make the best choice for a given need. That's a valid complaint.

    2. Re:Another distribution?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The complaint about so many choices is typical of the statements from newbies because they are so used to the M$ way being the only way.

    3. Re:Another distribution?! by clone304 · · Score: 1


      It's really simple. Any Linux newbie should go with Mandrake or Red Hat for their first distro. They should buy the CD, so that they have install media and support options, in case they get stuck.

      You don't give Slackware, Gentoo or Sorcerer to a newbie, because, though they can be ideal for an experienced user, the hassles associated with them will turn a newbie off of Linux.

      There is no reason to consolidate the distros, just so that newbies don't have to wonder which distro to try first. If a newb can't figure out how to make that choice, then they aren't going to have much luck with Linux, IMO.

      .

    4. Re:Another distribution?! by geekoid · · Score: 2

      hhhmm depends on the newbie.
      If the newbie want to learn about how Linux works, and is interested in becoming a Guru, then they shouod try slackware, or Sorcerer. If they just wnat to see how it runs, then by Suse,or mandrake. Of course hows a newbie supposed to know that?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:Another distribution?! by geekoid · · Score: 2

      I see what your saying, but how would you buy anything that gives you choices?

      Personally, If I know very little, or nothing, about something I wanted to purchase(TV, Stereo, widgets) I would see who has been at it for a while, and try their product.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re:Another distribution?! by nickjennings · · Score: 1

      I understand what you are saying. But actually this doesn't apply as directly to source-based distributions, which there aren't many of.

      Yet Another Linux Distribution, is for the most part useless, if the distribution is pretty much an RPM (or even just binary) based distro. There needs to be something different and innovative about the distro that provides something not widely available in other distros.

      A source-based idea, which I think is inherited from FreeBSD, is rather imperfected on Linux so far. There has yet to be very many attempts at this and I *fully* support SGL (and Gentoo) in going this route. They are doing very well!

      So instead of thinking about "Linux Distros" as one big clump. Think of it like:

      Binary Based:
      RPM: Way too many
      DEB: Only a few
      MISC: Hey! inovate a new package system!

      Source Based: Not very many, intrested to see how different ideas are implemented.

      If you see another RPM distro, RUN! :)

    7. Re:Another distribution?! by clone304 · · Score: 1


      If they're too new to know which distro they should have, they should start with an easy one. They can always switch over to a different distro when they understand linux basics. My point, though, is that most newbs need something that they can get their feet wet with, like Mandrake or Red Hat (sure, Suse might be ok too). But, if they have to sit there and wait for three days while X and gnome compile, I doubt their first impression of linux will be very good. Not only that, they probably won't have the Linux command line knowledge to understand what the hell they're doing when installing something like sorcerer or gentoo. So, they aren't really learning much of anything until they end up with a broken system and just say Fuck This!

      I don't know, that's just my opinion. I don't think newbs should go straight for an advanced distro. The idea is to get them to use Linux, not hate it.

      .

  29. Doubleclick Ad!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the hell is up with the big fucking ad embedded in the story details?


    <IFRAME SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/N815.slashdot/B 936343;sz=336x280;ord=101537300101537300" WIDTH=338 HEIGHT=282 MARGINWIDTH=0 MARGINHEIGHT=0 HSPACE=0 VSPACE=0 FRAMEBORDER=0 SCROLLING=no BORDERCOLOR='#000000'>

    It's big and damn fucking ugly!

    1. Re:Doubleclick Ad!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's for all us cheap-ass bastards who don't want to subscribe to slashdot.

  30. Originality. by saintlupus · · Score: 1, Redundant

    This is one of the most exciting new distros to come along in a long time, and that would be a shame.

    Well, unless you're absolutely bound to the Linux kernel for some reason (hardware support and the like), you can get something very similar from the Net or OpenBSD products.

    (FreeBSD is probably similar as well, but I haven't tried it.)

    Just do a basic install of the system from the network, and then use the ports/package system to add what you want.

    --saint

  31. I compiled GCC on RH7.0 by clump · · Score: 2
    (Sure, you can compile gcc for redhat, but have you TRIED to? It's not easy. And no rpm -ba doesn't work all the time. ;^)

    I have indeed compiled GCC on Redhat. It was actually quite simple.

    #rpm --rebuild gcc*srpm
    1. Re:I compiled GCC on RH7.0 by SkyLeach · · Score: 1

      Ok, now build GCC on a plain vanilla install of Solaris from the cc compiler.

      ::evil laughter from sun::

      --
      My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so :-p
  32. Several versions by oddityfds · · Score: 1

    Shameless plug: Or you can use a ports tree that allows you to have several versions of libraries installed simultaneously. ;-)

  33. We must support this one by Apostata · · Score: 1


    As a semi-seasoned Linux-user, I'm very impressed with what I've heard about SGL over the last few months. I'm not crazy about further confusing the already maxxed-out lexicon of terminology though ('grimoire' does sound cool, but would make me really feel like a geek after awhile...I'd be forced to read Tolkien and listen to more Rush).

    I really hope the recent attention placed on SGL will attract some faithful maintainers/developers.

    Remember: there's always room for a new distro, so long as it's good :)

    --

    This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
  34. Re:The Tale of a Linux Zealot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this appears me to be good for you

    but the world linux is not only you and your history

    it little to have derive yes

    I can choose love linux and to have friends

    I can choose to like linux and not have friendly

    if I prefere then I it does

    there is surely truth in this history

    question of sociology

    what linux allows me microsoft me it prohibits

    I am free

    my idea : http://www.nybooks.com/articles/15180

    i'm french sorry for my english

    what can make slashdot against this stupid pics

    " No more ads! "

    american is stupid ?

  35. Goddammit! by Scooter · · Score: 2, Funny

    I thought Doom3 was imminent :)

    try not to used reserved words in your headlines :P

  36. Distro comparison site by egrinake · · Score: 3, Informative

    It seems that every few weeks there's some new distro-related story on /., all asking pretty much the same question, in one form on another ;

    Which distro is best for what, and why?

    A site that answers most questions one might have about pretty much any distro is www.distrowatch.com

    1. Re:Distro comparison site by clone304 · · Score: 1


      So, what you're saying is that the editors should make a permanent news story on the front page of /. that points all distro comparators to distrowatch, right?

      .

  37. Why reinstall from scratch? by itwerx · · Score: 1

    You can just copy an existing system. (I.e. keep a hard-drive around with your base config).
    If you've never done this before, the disk-upgrade howto gives you all the info you need.
    You can also have several configs TAR'd up all nice and neat and just pull down whatever you need with a 'nix boot disk (or have 'em on CD).

  38. Linux is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has it escaped anyone's blind eye that
    Linux distributions are dying by the flea load?

  39. The same reason that EVERY Linux/BSD distro... by Twister002 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    gets started.

    Somebody doesn't like the way that X distro does things and decides to do it "right".

    That's the nice bit of flexibility in Linux/BSD, but it's a little frustrating too when you are trying to find support for your favorite distro.

    --
    "For a successful technology, honesty must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled." -Feynman
  40. the most amazing distro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, no I don't regularly post on Slashdot, hence the lack of account. But this topic really deserves any post I can give it.

    I have been using SGL (http://sorcerer.wox.org) now for a few months, and I must say that it is an unbelievable distro, IMHO the best for any personal geek box. Before this I had been skipping around on distros, i've been through Slackware, Mandrake, SuSE, and Debian. Debian was a longstanding favorite. SGL is much like Debian, except with a vastly improved updating and installing method, that is, if you look for bleeding-edge software releases and having your binaries optimized for your box. Think Debian but with more frequent updates ( a longtime complaint from debian users ), and an easier update system, 'sorcery update' is all you need, make it a cron job even, wake up to the next release of your favorite WM! I do not recommend this to anyone who has never use a *NIX before, but if you have, dedicate a weekend and give it a try, it'll be well worth your while. And for any of those amongst you who claim that with SGL you get 0 tech-suppor, try telling that to the great people on irc.openprojects.net #sorcerer because there always seems to be someone on who can answer your questions.

    The point is, SGL is an ingenious distribution, and if you love Slackware or Debian or just want to escape RPM hell, SGL is well worth your while.

  41. Cool distribution... by Junta · · Score: 4, Informative

    It can be a boon or a curse, depending on how much you really know about the packages you are installing. In theory, you get a pretty clean, smooth system as you only install the bits you specify, and you can hand tune the compiles and dependencies such that you don't have to install unwanted bits just to get what you want to work, and it will do all this without breaking the package manager (i.e. if you go from a non-RPM in redhat, those files are now kind of rogue).

    Unfortunately, there are pitfalls to be a ware of. One is that the occasional package is overlooked in terms of updates. For example, xmame is outdated in grimoire, so I manually edit the grimiore on every update to make sure it doesn't overwrite my more recent copy witha n older copy.

    Another thing is that by rolling your own custom configuration, you are really exploring brand new territory. No one has tested that particular combination of packages to see if there are any issues, and by mixing the latest and greatest of everything, invariably you get some mismatches that produce unpleasant results if you don't know what to be careful of.

    Also, the compilation of some packages on some hardware, particularly XFree. For example, if you have a Voodoo3, you need to get glide3 separate first. Even then you have to use tdfx for DRI rather than TdfxDRI or whatever is offered in the menu, as the ifdefs don't work in the .cf files.

    As to performance, yes it is highly optimized and you can omit debug symbols and such. However, it uses 2.95.3, which results in a more stable distro, but in a way counterbalances the advantages of compiling yourself, as the 2.95.3 doesn't optimize for x86 nearly as well as gcc 3...

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:Cool distribution... by Nutcase · · Score: 1

      If you have the skills to update xmame and manually edit the grimoire, why not simply submit a new xmame spell to the main grimoire? It seems that lack of that type of contribution is part of the problem. Then again, maybe I simply misunderstood what you were saying.

    2. Re:Cool distribution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check the spell docs for info on one of two possible solutions to this that are already built in.

      BF

    3. Re:Cool distribution... by Junta · · Score: 2

      You got it right, I should flag someone down and have them notice, it is a simple change to the DETAILS file, the problem is, I can't find anywhere that makes it clear who to submit updates to the grimoire to....

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    4. Re:Cool distribution... by Junta · · Score: 2

      Which problem?

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  42. A real-life sorcerer? by Rommel · · Score: 3, Funny

    I especially liked this line in the review (emphasis mine):

    A real-life sorcerer keeps his spells in a book called a grimoire.

    Where do I find a real-life sorcerer? I have some spells I wouldn't mind cast.

  43. Re:The Tale of a Linux Zealot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, what the fuck kind of gimmick are you? A Linux hippy zealot Time Cube impersonator?

  44. BSD Ports by NitsujTPU · · Score: 2

    I like the idea of this, it reminds me of BSD Ports, which I think was ported to Linux. Perhaps a Linux distribution based on BSD Ports would be interesting.

  45. Automated Linux from Scratch by capedgirardeau · · Score: 5, Informative
    The fantastic and mature distro known as "linux from scratch" does exactly this.

    It builds and bootstraps a basic utilitarian GNU/Linux installation all from source packages.

    I think its great as both a production system and an educational build/install process.

    The nice part is you end up with a fully functional linux you have built yourself. You will know _every_ package installed and why.

    And all the mystery of linux will be revealed in your build process, its very educational.

    Now, there is an partner group with the linux from scratch folks called automated linux from scratch.

    From the automated linux from scratch site:

    "Automated Linux From Scratch or ALFS, is a project that aims to create a generic framework of an extenable system builder and package installer using XML to describe the process.
    It's main goal is to automate the process of creating a LFS system."

    I have never used it, but I have used the straight linux from scratch and it is wonderful.

    --
    Wax on, wax off baby!
    1. Re:Automated Linux from Scratch by trelaneopn · · Score: 2, Informative

      basically SGL is an automated linux from scratch. it uses the cast scripts to download and build as necessary the libs and apps required to build a mature system. solving hours worth of dependancies to install a source package is not only pointless but annoying. one more thing that's nice about sgl is the XDelta. With X-delta if available sgl downloads the DIFF patches for files, to save on both time and bandwidth. (this also makes the distribution ALMOST USEABLE by modem goers.)

      --
      a bit more about me http://www.advogato.org/person/trelane/ or my private page http://trelane.net
    2. Re:Automated Linux from Scratch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually there is no package management with alfs. There is also no features like "autofix" for system repair.

      So no, ALFS is not the same.

      BF

    3. Re:Automated Linux from Scratch by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Is ALFS anywhere near useable? I had the impression that it was mostly experimental. The main problem I have with LFS is that I don't really have enough HD space for 2 full-blown distros, but if I could get a fully functioning ALFS desktop with KDE & mozilla in hours (instead of days or weeks), I could use a bare-bones distro to build it with.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    4. Re:Automated Linux from Scratch by lfslinux · · Score: 1

      Not yet. The initial release of ALFS won't have package management support, or any other 'extra' features. That's all planned for afterwards. If we wait to implement every single feature at once and release it, it'll take forever and a day to get the first version out, it will take twice that long to properly debug all that code.

    5. Re:Automated Linux from Scratch by lfslinux · · Score: 1

      It's usable. There are various implementations that a lot of people have been using over the last year or so with a lot of success, if you're ok with not having a fancy-schmancy GUI interface. The official ALFS implementation is still under development. An initial release shouldn't be too far away anymore.

  46. my thoughts on sorcerer by trelaneopn · · Score: 3, Informative

    (This will end up being almost an article/review in and of itself, some of which may be redundant, but I will attempt to keep that to a minimum.)
    SGL was created to automatically solve dependancies on a minimal system bootstrapped off a small cd iso. the entire distribution is written in dialogue/bash. from there they add 'sorcery', a dialogue app somewhat similar to the initial package selector in debian potato's installer. allows you to select and modifiy package groups in the grimoire. the packages are downloaded and the interface is similar to debian where you answer yes/no/maybe questions as cast downloads and processes the files. (note that since the last /.'ing the dependancy resolution and casting process have become MUCH more rebust and stable.) after casting the system a sorcery update will install the latest versions of the pacakage (some developers recommend doing this nightly, however I doubt that even on the computer I'm currently building that it would finish before the next night's upgrades).
    DOWNSIDES (and yes there are a lot)
    A: TIME: Sgl can take a week to do what a binary distribution can do in 30 minutes. a stable working system
    B: effort: you have to understand the system, or else you will break it during casting
    C: patience: this is a much and almost deserves to be capitalized with time.
    UPSIDES
    A: RPM: No messy RPM/DEB (and please debian purists I do like deb better but source is still more pure)
    B: optimization: from a custom kernel as a start to -fno-expensive-optimizations, it creates bulky code that runs REALLY fast and extreamly efficiently, and bulk in compiled code can be a good thing as the processor isn't used to remove the corners cut by the "optimization process"
    C: you know the entire system: from the libs installed to exactly what /usr/bin/ioahwoithjalwerh is, you have installed all of it and your knowledge of what's on the system is COMPLETE. this allows HUGE advantages
    D: creation of cast scripts: it's BASH, it's easy, and frankly even I can do it (gropes his bash howto) RPM is tricky if you've ever read through it, BASH makes it easy.

    --
    a bit more about me http://www.advogato.org/person/trelane/ or my private page http://trelane.net
  47. The problem with FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would switch to FreeBSD, but one problem: NO NVIDIA GL DRIVERS. How am I suppose to play Q3???

    On top of that, NO VMware support. Sure, you can load up the old version of VMware, but not the latest version (AFAIK, it's been a while since I looked).

    I would love to switch, I really like the *BSD's, but the drivers are lacking in some important areas.

    1. Re:The problem with FreeBSD by gladbach · · Score: 2, Informative

      the Nvidia deal is slowly but surely changing for teh better. you can already get gl drivers for freebsd, but I am not sure as to their stability.

      not sure about vmware tho

      --
      "Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms,
  48. To fix the dhcp / pcmcia error in the article... by arglesnaf · · Score: 2, Informative

    edit /etc/pcmcia/network.opts
    say "y" to DHCP
    blank the static values.

    Remove the networking scripts from the other run levels, since the pcmcia script starts networking for you. (both S and K, in the /etc/rc#.d dirs...)

    ln -s /sbin/dhcpcd /usr/sbin/dhcpcd so the pcmcia script can find dhcp.

    run:
    /sbin/dhcpcd -k
    /sbin/dhcpcd

    reboot
    viola, magic.

    I just submitted a minor fix for the install script relating to this yesterday =)
    (as the email sean dot power at uc dot edu)

    Arglesnaf

  49. OK, someone explain this by Arker · · Score: 2

    This has been bugging me for awhile - supposedly the tempfs increases performance - but it shouldn't the best I can tell. Doesn't Linux have a true intelligent disk caching system? There really shouldn't be any performance advantage to this tempfs bit, unless there is a serious problem with the disk cache subsystem.


    However, the bit about it reducing filesystem fragmentation I haven't seen yet, and that does make sense to me. Just don't see how it's going to improve raw performance.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    1. Re:OK, someone explain this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Filesystem caching improves performance on repeated access. Compilations doesn't benefit a lot from this, because it involves writing A LOT of files once, and then usually only reading them one or at most a few times.

    2. Re:OK, someone explain this by Arker · · Score: 1

      Filesystem caching improves performance on repeated access. Compilations doesn't benefit a lot from this, because it involves writing A LOT of files once, and then usually only reading them one or at most a few times.

      I understand that, but in that case the tempfs shouldn't boost performance either the best I can figure.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  50. The pending need for chip specific optimizations by Nelson · · Score: 2
    I've been wondering about this and kicking the idea of running sourcer on some non-Intel hardware I have.


    I have some alphas, of the 3, 2 run debian and one runs Mandrake. they are all fairly modern alphas, 21164s and a 21264. Running stock Debian, the 600Mhz 21164s run like crap. It feels like it's running like crap. I take a recent GCC, and start recompling some stuff and the system starts to perform better. I'm not joking. I don't know if it's Debian's compile or if the chip specific optimizations are that good or what, replace the kernel and the C library and the system get's snappier. It's noticable, now I admit I've never benchmarked it but webserver responses appear to be quicker, gzip seems quicker after it's recompiled everything seems to go faster once I compile it with optimizations for the specific chip..


    Remembering back to architecture and compiler courses at uni, I remember a few stunning things. I've hand optimized code on alpha and powerpc chips and I've seen the difference, it can be stunning. Big enough that it can easily make one chip outperform a similarly speced chip. So where am I going with this? Well x86 is hopefully starting to have a real competitor that will kill it. IA64 and other 64bit chips. I want it to die, it's time for it to die, or at least start to process of death. As I see it, one of the biggest hurdles is the code optimization thing, not not but wait until there are 4 IA64 chips to choose from. From everything I've seen, we can expect a pretty reasonable performance hit from not properly optimizing code for the chip it runs on. Is a distribution like sourcer or gentoo the solution to this?

  51. Um, behind its time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Historically, all Unix programs were done this way. It's only been recently (relatively speaking) that binary distributions have been popular.

  52. Is Sorcerer redundant? by Ogerman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Frankly, the idea of compiling absolutely everything from source 'just because' seems a little bit of a waste of time. The vast majority of software will only see very very minimal performance increase compared to a well built Debian package with the usual careful choice of compiler flags. (Note: compiling for your CPU's architecture vs. generic i386 makes little difference today since all modern CPU's do very extensive instruction scheduling and out-of-order execution.) Furthermore, from what I saw of Sorcerer, the chosen compiler flags are system-wide instead of being based on the individual packages needs. This is not wise. So, I personally think that Sorcerer is redundant considering the quality and ease of use of Debian source packages for the few programs that can really benefit from hand-tuned compiler flags (such as data compression or encryption software). You just edit the rules and run two commands.

    1. Re:Is Sorcerer redundant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree.
      Some people tend to think that the strengh of BSD ports is to have the ability of doing local-arch optimized binaries.
      IMHO, this is ridiculous :
      - System wide gcc flags say (-O3 -march=i686) will break a couple of packages, or just slow them down. The maximum performance gain with such compile opts, will be around 2%, at the cost of breaking or even slowing down everything, i think it's not worth.
      - The best way to tune things, is to carefully read the doc, and tune your Makefiles to suit your needs. Mostly, the Makefiles obtained by configure scripts are absolutely non "optimized".

      IMHO FreeBSD ports are usefull for 1 thing : features on demand.
      e.g i want to compile something with foo support, i type make ENABLE_FOO=y install.
      That's all ...

    2. Re:Is Sorcerer redundant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The number of replies to this comment aren't surprising given the lack of knowlege of the original poster. Maybe a little explaination is necessary. If everything is compiled to run on your hardware the system runs much more fluid and it isn't as though you'd be compiling every application over and over, only when updates are applied. Comments like the above reflect little Linux knowlege and too much M$.

  53. Re:The pending need for chip specific optimization by Bert64 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Download compaq`s compiler (ccc) from their site and recompile some apps with that (those which dont rely on gcc specific quirks) and you should see an even bigger difference.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  54. Sorcerer is great. Let's go to work... by danzvash · · Score: 1

    I started using Sorcerer a couple of weeks ago after checking the reviews on distrowatch.com. Having wanted to move to LinuxFromScratch for a while, but never really knowing how I was going to keep my packages in order, I've been trying various distros pretty randomly.
    Sorcerer seems to answer all my hopes! (Maybe Gentoo and Rock do aswell, dunno...)
    One of the things I used to love about RPM-based distros was the ability to locate the source of any file in your filesystem with "rpm -qf" - great for working out obscure shared-library mess-ups. LFS I presume leaves you guessing where that's concerned.
    And on Sorcerer? No worries! Use one of the many cool utilities: "gaze"
    #gaze from FILENAME
    -> tells you the tar.bz2 that weirdly-named shared object came from. There are so many more cool features and utilities I don't have time to list them.

    Coupled with the fact that I never have to wait for, search for or build my own RPMS (although my bash will undoubtedly improve as I start to create spells :) and I'd say this this distro is well worth keeping around.

    I am going to see what I can do to contribute to the continued life of Sorcerer and I dearly hope others do too.

    1. Re:Sorcerer is great. Let's go to work... by lfslinux · · Score: 1

      Well, no the LFS-BOOK doesn't come with a package manager. The idea behind LFS is that you are in the driver's seat, not us. So it's up to you to decide on a package manager. If you want to use RPM, feel free to do so. Want to use deb? Fine too. Or use a simple method of using the 'find' program to gather a list of files that were installed during a package installation (which I do). If I need to figure out where a file comes from, I run a command like this:
      grep /usr/bin/gcc /var/install-logs/*

      And I'll get back a list with all the packages that have something to do with /usr/bin/gcc. Now, /usr/bin/gcc will only return one match but since I'm using grep I can look for other patterns (all packages that install something in /usr/share/locale for example)

      Anyways, because LFS is so basic you get to decide yourself what to use and aren't stuck with whatever somebody else decided for you to use.

      sure, this isn't really suitable for Linux newbies, but then again LFS was never meant for newbies but rather for people who are knowledgable in Linux already and want more flexibility than most distributions can offer (not all distro's, I said _most_. Big diff. there).

  55. Get a spamlist HOSTS file: kill Ads by kiwipeso · · Score: 1

    I saw a link to a spam blacklist hosts file, it sets the major advertisers to be served from localhost (your computer).
    You could easily get one from askjeeves or google if you ask the right question.

    --
    - Kaos games and encryption systems developer
  56. Just like *BSD... by dcs · · Score: 2

    Talk about reinventing the wheel, eh? :-)

    --
    (8-DCS)
  57. make that portupgrade -ar by hawk · · Score: 2
    The r will call recomile of all packages depending on anythign else recompiled . . .


    hawk

  58. Money's not the problem... by salimma · · Score: 1
    It's that he doesn't have time to keep maintaining this. Unless his users manage to donate £3000 a month, or however much he is going to get from a full-time job :p

    Going to have a look, if it works on PPC hardware I'll give it a spin :)

    Michel

    --
    Michel
    Fedora Project Contribut
  59. And now for Gentoo's version... by agrafe · · Score: 1

    "emerge --pretend --update world"
    mustn't forget to check what it is going to do before letting it go nuts.
    "emerge --update world"
    leave it on over night and you've got a fully optimized, fully up-to-date system. Can't beat Gentoo as far as I'm concerned.

    1. Re:And now for Gentoo's version... by agrafe · · Score: 1

      er, whoops. I made a mistake. It's actually "emerge --world update".

  60. Exciting, if not a bit impractical� by pinkUZI · · Score: 1

    I played around with SGL for a while a couple weeks ago and it really is a neat setup, but by nature is a huge headache when it comes to maintaining the distribution. Of course, that is what they claim to do is take the headache out of building a Linux distro up from source.

    --
    You are receiving this message because your browser supports Slashdot Sigs and you have Slashdot Sigs enabled.
  61. Re:SGL = excellent product, excellent install meth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uhm, explain this:

    Yes, the install is more difficult and time consuming, but it was worth it for the experience I got out of it. I now have an intricate knowledge about how the inner details of linux works.

    and also

    All dependencies are automagically downloaded, compiled, and installed without any user interaction

    Those are mutually exclusive remarks. You do realise that?

  62. Why Source Distros are Superior by FreeUser · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Frankly, the idea of compiling absolutely everything from source 'just because' seems a little bit of a waste of time. The vast majority of software will only see very very minimal performance increase compared to a well built Debian package with the usual careful choice of compiler flags.

    Our enterprise is currently using Debian for many tasks. However, we are evaluating Sorcerer and Gentoo as a replacement.

    Why?

    1) Compiling everything from source 'just because' isn't a waste of time. What you overlook in your truncated 'just because' is that by compiling the source optimized for your hardware, against the library versions on your machine, you insure a level of compatability, and reliablity, that cannot be insured when mixing and matching binary libraries and applications. In short, you are compiling everything from source just because that is the only way to insure maximum performance and reliability on a given machine.

    2) The speed increases are notable. Your assertion that architecture tweaks vs. generic compilations make little difference are not born out by real world, emperical testing. Debian (my favorite distro before trying Sorcerer and Gentoo), even Mandrake compiled with i586 optimizations, is noticably slower in performing many tasks (like video capture and editing, smooth window scrolling in KDE, web browsing in mozilla) than either Sorcerer or Gentoo compiled from source on the same hardware.

    3) Distributions introduce their own level of bugs. Source compilations against existing libraries minimizes distribution-specific and distribution-induced bugs. Things like library version mismatches, subtle changes in behavior that break things but are unobvious, plague Debian, Mandrake, et. al. but are virtually eliminated by Gentoo and Sorcerer. What is more, the source based distros tend to stick closer to what the software authors intend in the installation of their software, reducing bugs that result from shuffling files or doing other "non-standard" things (from the orignial source author's point of view) in order to comply with the distro's file placement policies (for example). This isn't eliminated, as gentoo and sorcerer both have their policies, but it is reduced significantly vs. Mandrake, RedHat, and Debian.

    4) What is more, gentoo and sorcerer are able to remain closer to the current state of development. While one may initially dismiss this as "upgraditis" and, at best "nice but risky and not necessary," it turns out to offer significant advantages, advantages that in my experience outweigh any disadvantages.
    - one gets bug fixes immediately
    - as important, the cycle of develope/test/report bugs to the author/fix bugs is tightened dramatically, with the author getting feedback in days instead of weeks or months
    - one gets important new features immediately
    - finally, if one doesn't like the current version (e.g. X 4.2 vs 4.1) using the older version instead is a trivial matter, with recompilation of dependent packages a relatively painless process when the version is changed, be it upward to a newer version, or a reversion back to an older version.

    I cannot emphesize enough how many longstanding bugs, particularly distribution-related bugs, that have dogged us from RedHat to Mandrake to Debian, simply do not exist when running gentoo or sorcerer. What is more, we can use X 4.2 today, not months from now when it finally gets into Debian unstable. More importantly, we can use X 4.2 in a very stable environment, with one complete heirarchy of distro-induced bugs virtually eliminated.

    Furthermore, from what I saw of Sorcerer, the chosen compiler flags are system-wide instead of being based on the individual packages needs. This is not wise.

    Both gentoo and sorcerer allow individual ebuilds and spells (respective terms for suites of scripts which download, compile, and install a piece of software) to override and/or modify their respective compilation options. The "system wide" options and optimazations one sets are defaults that work for most ebuilds/spells. This is far wiser than hoping each ebuild/spell maintainer will think to optimize their own compilation (many would not, and many others would err on the side of caution). When optimization flags cause a problem the ebuild/spell maintainer typically strips the offending optimization out of the compiler options (a small sed pipe does the trick) and the spell or ebuild builds and runs fine.

    Source distros are hands down better, easier, and less buggy than binary distros, despite their young age and "green" state. I encourage you to give one or the other a try ... once you've begun using source-based distros you will likely find you can no longer stomach the issues that binary based distros, even one as well engineered as Debian, bring with them.

    And no, "apt-get source --compile" isn't at all comparable (though it does make Debian immensly more useful than many of its binary-distro counterparts). You still have the plethora of distro-induced bugs that comes with any binary distro as large and complex as Debian.

    Gentoo and Sorcerer aren't free of bugs, mind you, but they are free of several classes of bugs that exist in binary distros in addition to bugs in the software itself, and in the distro's configuration and layout. The difference may not sound like much, but in practice it is quite significant.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  63. Interesting installer by Fizzlewhiff · · Score: 4, Funny

    Casting spells to install applications sounds pretty cool. While I have found tools like Red Hat's Up2Date and Ximian's Red Carpet very nice there's still some dependancy problems encountered when you try to go with the latest and greatest versions of Gnome and other libraries. From the review it sounded like Sorcerer downloads and compiles the packages you are installing. Would it pull dependencies too?

    I'll have to check this distro out. I can see it now.

    >Turn on PC
    Your monitor flashes. You are greeted with the message "Loading Windows 2000..."
    >Insert Sorcerer boot floppy
    There is an audible click as the floppy settles in the drive.
    >Press Ctrl-Alt-Delete
    A menu is presented giving you several options [more]
    >Click Shutdown
    Your computer restarts. Your floppy drive begins to whirr and churn with excitement. You feel a sense of power rush through you. A message slowly begins to emerge on your screen.
    >read message
    Hail and well met sysadmin. Sorcerer Linux sees you have Windows currently installed on this PC. What is thy choice friend?
    >cast magic missile at /dev/hda1
    Formatting... Please wait.

    --

    'Same speed C but faster'
  64. It's funny, laugh� by kiwipeso · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Please tell me how Kaos is offtopic, when it does the same thing as Sorcerer.

    The rest is a joke, but it could also be an accurate description of almost any /. topic. Face it, BSD is 3 times more popular than linux in terms of users.
    User numbers count more than the opinion of geeks, so it's fair to say Linux is dying. BTW, I hope someone metamods me up soon.

    --
    - Kaos games and encryption systems developer
  65. Intel Compiler anyone? by sethdelackner · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know if you can get sorceror or gentoo to use the free (personal use) intel (kai) compiler? I know the kernel is gcc-specific, but most other things avoid gcc-isms, right?