Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Review: Yellow Dog Linux 2.2

Posted by timothy on from the less-and-less-painful dept.

fabiolrs writes: "imaclinux.net is running a review on Yellow Dog Linux 2.2. They could manage to run it on the iBook. YDG 2.2 is a great distro with KDE 2.2.2, Gnome 1.4, kernel 2.4.18 and Xfree86 4.2.0." Nice to see PPC systems (meaning "Apple," mostly) getting so much attention in the Linux world lately -- Mandrake's 8.2 PPC is also getting close to a release.

4 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I don't get it by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not to be mean, but how about Macs without OS X support?

    To be fair, it seems weird for the developers to be playing with *modern* Macs, instead of 6 year old Macs, but hey, the new iBook is cool.

    --

    GPL Deconstructed
  2. Why? by Moridineas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I really don't get the appeal of Linux on Mac (or PPC more generally). Sure, I can understand running linux on older macs, but for any OSX capable computer, what's the point? I can't think of anything you can do in linux but can't do in OSX, and MANY things you cannot.

    1. Re:Why? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I can't think of anything you can do in linux but can't do in OSX, and MANY things you cannot.

      Use Linux?

      Look, you may think OS X is the perfect OS and given a free copy the whole world would instantly convert, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to break it to you - that wouldn't happen. There'd be people who would tell you to get lost

      I'd do it for personal beliefs (more below). Others don't like Aqua, don't like the Apple way. Whatever.

      I, personally, believe the OS should be open. The OS together with the hardware are absolutely key to computing. Everything else revolves around them, which is why I believe they should be open. Now don't get me wrong, I'm no zealot, I don't give a monkeys ass about the applications on top. That can be as closed or as open as you like, suits me fine either way. I don't mind paying for software. But if one organisation controls the OS then you're heading for trouble, I mean look at Microsoft. I don't believe Apple would be any different in their shoes. And worse, Apple control the hardware too!

      Once again, don't get me wrong. Apple produce lovely hardware, and lovely software. I'm willing to pay for those things, but only if I know they are open. Macs aren't standard hardware, though they are getting that way, they basically are made up of components that are standardised throughout the world. And OS X is like the Mac itself, sorta open.

      But for me, sorta open isn't good enough. I think the OS should be like the web - governed but not chained to a neutral independant standards organisation like the W3C. Nothing like that exists .... yet

  3. Re:I use a PowerPC by David+Roundy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You should try debian. Debian works very hard to make sure their packages work on all their platforms (which, of course, includes powerpc). This involves seeking out and fixing the endianness/signed char issues that keep packages from being portable. Eventually those patches (in theory, at least) make their way upstream.

    That being said, even on debian, other architectures are in a sense second class, since most of the developers use the i386 platform. This means that packages get autobuilt more slowly on powerpc, for example, but on the whole, it's a great powerpc distro.