Slashdot Mirror
Lunar Linux 1.0 Released
Ivan writes "Lunar Linux 1.0 was released today. It's a source based distribution, with gcc 3.2 and the latest versions of packages such as Mozilla 1.1, OpenOffice.org 1.0.1 and GNOME 2 and KDE 3. From the about page on their website: 'In the beginning Lunar was a fork of Sorcerer GNU Linux (SGL). The fork occurred in late January to early February of 2002 and was originally made up of a small group of people who wanted to collaboratively develop and extend the Sorcerer technology.' Download the ISOs here."
They're evolving! Now they can survive in extremely low pressure environments without oxygen! Argh! Sorry, that picture on their webpage cracks me up.
Karma: Not Particularly Funny.
These guys are even better than Red Hat. Their mirrors are kickin and their announcement isn't even Slashdotted, yet. ;^)
'In the beginning Lunar was a fork of Sorcerer GNU Linux (SGL). The fork occurred in late January to early February of 2002 and was originally made up of a small group of people who wanted to collaboratively develop and extend the Sorcerer technology.'
It appears to be almost totally different now judging from the other info given on the site..
(Apologies to Jeff K.)
Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
For those that didn't catch the link before it became slashdotted, here it is:
Name Last modified Size Description
Parent Directory 01-Oct-2002 09:19 -
ChangeLog.lunar 02-Oct-2002 20:01 1k
ChangeLog.moonbase 30-Sep-2002 22:50 13k
ChangeLog.theedge 02-Oct-2002 20:02 8k
ISO.Changelog 01-Oct-2002 09:37 8k
art/ 18-Aug-2002 20:05 -
distrowatch.txt 02-Oct-2002 19:32 2k
init/ 31-Mar-2002 19:14 -
lunar-20021001.iso.bz2 01-Oct-2002 09:30 89.3M
lunar-20021001.iso.md5 01-Oct-2002 09:19 1k
lunar.lsm 01-Sep-2002 20:57 1k
lunar.tar.bz2 02-Oct-2002 20:01 104k
lunar.tar.bz2.1 02-Oct-2002 19:01 104k
mirrors/ 26-Aug-2002 13:57 -
moonbase.tar.bz2 02-Oct-2002 20:02 552k
moonbase.tar.bz2.1 02-Oct-2002 19:02 552k
old/ 01-Oct-2002 06:52 -
testing/ 01-Oct-2002 09:30 -
theedge.tar.bz2 02-Oct-2002 20:02 106k
theedge.tar.bz2.1 02-Oct-2002 19:02 106k
Will Lunar Linux run on Sun hardware ?
'Cause there's pr0n on it?
Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
This is desperately needed: YAFLD.
Now there are the source distro wars.
Anyway, I thought this was a humourous comment under the announcement on the Lunar site that indicates just how far out of the mainstream source distro geeks are:
Oh! I get it. First I burn the ISO and then boot and that gets to the MOTD. Then it points me to a man page which details lots of little command line programs that I use to install. That's gotta be the ultimate in user friendly!
Sorry, but it just made me laugh out loud when I read how easy [sic] it was. For what it's worth, I struggled through several Gentoo installs and, except at work where we have system administered by someone else, I use Gentoo and love it. Even "converted" one of my friends recently. I know what it's like to have to do obscure things, but sometimes it takes a comment like the above to realize just how "deep" I've fallen into the world of Linux geekdom.
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
I'm glad to see some new innovation in Linux distibutions. Lunar Linux is completely unlike those other Linux distributions. It includes innovative new software that other Linux distributions do have, such as Mozilla, GNOME, KDE, gcc, and the Linux kernel.
cpeterso
I tend to disagree with your line of thinking. For a big company like Microsoft, or even a smaller one like RedHat, then some customers might expect this. But, you need to think about the smaller companies.
If I have a linux distrobution, and I want to have a decent webserver with great uptime, the cheapest solution is probably not to host my own servers. One can select between a myriad of online hosts that already have the generators, UPS, backup systems, redundancy, and a fat pipe. So, clearly, if they are not running their own distro to serve web pages, I don't think it's a good deal.
While it may be expected of large companies to 'prove themselves', in a situation like this it would likely just cost more and deter from actually improving the distro and paying the workers.
If you had nuts on your chin, would they be chin nuts?
Old Command: rm -rf /
New Command: fakelunarlanding
Old Term: Kernel Panic
New Term: apollo13
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
I'll consider it when their server is running off of their own distribution.
Ever considered that they might be running on some dedicated server physically far away on which it's not worth the time to reinstall?
Does this mean that the guy from last week will now have 38 Operating Systems on 1 PC?
Since the lunar-linux site is probably bogged down at the moment, you can probably grab an ISO from:
DistroWatch
or
LinuxISO.org
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
Translate: "I don't think it's a good deal" to "I don't think it's a BIG deal". Ooops.
If you had nuts on your chin, would they be chin nuts?
Got burned by Sorcerer Linux before this offshoot started. Hope they improved on the system, but I'm a gentoo user now, and don't really see what could be missing...
If they are compiling in Ramfs still (Like Sorcerer used too), it is a horrible waste, the benefits are negligible compared to the pains in the ass it can cause and the limitations it must have to deal with under the circumstances. I thought RamFS would be cool, but there is not much of a difference on an operation the user rarely performs and one that isn't baby-sat. If you are already on the install-from-source mindset, you have given up the speed of, say, binary apt installs to gain what is needed in terms of speed at runtime (and customization).
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Here's good stuff about source based distributions, and comparisons to binary based. Basicly, if you install your operating system "once" and use it for say atleast 12 months, the cycles used during setup are not "wasted" - the bonus you get from it during the lifetime of your setup is significant.
If I have a linux distrobution, and I want to have a decent webserver with great uptime, the cheapest solution is probably not to host my own servers. One can select between a myriad of online hosts that already have the generators, UPS, backup systems, redundancy, and a fat pipe. So, clearly, if they are not running their own distro to serve web pages, I don't think it's a good deal.
/. right now so I can't check), then I'd sure want to have my own server running on my own distribution. For bragging rights if nothing else.
Yeah, but, it doesn't look like they're running a professional organization here, yet. If I making a distro with a few friends or other interested people (and their list of contributors if I recall was under 10 people....but the page is
Karma: Not Particularly Funny.
I have to disagree with you. I should preface this post by saying I am a Gentoo user.
:)
Here are two (of I'm sure many more reasons)
If you look at the ISOs that you get from Red Hat for example, they are for i386 arhcitectures. This is a least common denominator approach. It will run on any 386 or better processor. Those with a P4 will not get to utilize P4 specific enhancements.
The other reason I like a source based distro like Gentoo is that I can install only those apps that I want and configure and compile in the options I want. I don't have to rely on the makers of a bloated distribution to make those choices for me. They are shooting to please the majority of people with a single release.
The full distributions like Red Hat and Mandrake are quick and easy installs and great for probably the majority of users BUT if you want to try a fully and easily customizable and optimized distro, try a source based one.
Plus emerge rocks
Joe
If you think the whole thing is silly, run a source-based distro and compare it to an identical system with another distro with the same software.
There is quite a noticable difference in the bigger packages like KDE, Gnome, X, etc. just because it is optimized for your hardware.
Agreed, it more than most people want to do, but there really is a difference. The question is whether a noticable speed increase is worth it. TO most it simply is not. (Espcially on supder-duper fast modern hardware).
If you had nuts on your chin, would they be chin nuts?
Well, Source based distros are a just an extension of what some people (like myself) do. I try to compile everything from source. I hardly use binaries, IMHO they are not worth the effort. I've run into numerous problem where a certain library a program is expecting is one patchlevel behind what it was compiled with and it doesn't work, while when I compile it, it works fine. Source also lets me shove everything where I want it to go, if it doesn't support that option, let me plow through a couple of config files and do it myself. I've run into less problems with source then using binaries. I don't use gentoo, I like my slack, but I've been tempted to toss it on a spare machine sometime. I'm also debating downloading this, since I've already download 3GB of ISO images today.
Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
I have a 2.4 P4. I have the cycles to waste. No idea whether it is the P4, the custom compiles, the preemptive kernel or what. But the thing is damn quick.
Too bad the hard drive is utter shit.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
My question though is why begrudge someone the pleasure of working with a tool that they enjoy? I tried gentoo and I liked it. I still use suse but using gentoo made me understand a lot more about my system.
The crux of your argument is that source distros don't realize enough speed benefit to make it worth your while. Be that as it may, people use them for reasons other than speed: increased understanding, sheer boredom, quite granular customization, and a desire to be closer to the internals of their operating system. You may not care about these things either, but why be upset that others do.
It harms you in no way that people use source distros. You should be happy that people are enjoying free software and possible learning a lot.
-A
"The plural of anecdote is not data." -- Roger Brinner
This is a good thing. Without so many different flavors of Linux, people wouldnt be able to choose a distro closer to their personal preference. This is what makes Linux stronger than Windows, that and stability, security, free applications, ect. So im sure an all source version will fill someones niche. And if their careful, they wont even have to call it GNU/Linux....
The latest rage is to say that compiling your stuff is pointless, because the binaries are not that much faster than generic binaries.
Well, I really don't know, but I'm running Gentoo anyways... why?
Perhaps is that I like tinkering, and perhaps it's that I have too much spare time (although only some packages are time consuming, namely Mozilla and OpenOffice), but I find some advantages to source based distros.
After all, it's much easier for developers to provide packages for them. No need to support a zillion architectures. No need to choose ./configure settings (Gentoo's USE works very well). You can also make cvs packages available (that fetch the latest cvs version and compile it).
Even though I still consider Debian's apt (and esp. the quality of packages) superior to Gentoo (just a personal oppinion), Gentoo usually provides more modern stuff (for the reasons outlined before), but I have chosen to give Gentoo some time.
Certainly, the state of Linux distros is getting pretty interesting. Debian and Gentoo have worked perfectly for me. I keep hearing good things about SuSE and Redhat's newest releases.
Perhaps some of the myths about Linux are beginning to fall?
Speaking as a Gentoo/PPC user, there is definite benefit in source based distributions.
The 'two major CPU manufacurers' are not the only ones that matter, for one. They hardly make a difference between each other. There is Sparc, Mips, PPC, Alpha, and other architectures. Mostly source based distributions who don't rely on paying to support what they allow can more easily adapt to many different platforms, not just 'AMD or Intel'.
Secondly, it isn't merely about getting things installed on your system or squeezing every last optimization in, it is about installing it the way you want it. Binary packages are compiled with certain #defines and linked against libraries of other packages which you may not care about. For example, mozilla compiled against gtk or gtk2. xchat with or without Gnome support, gaim with or without gnome support. Freetype with or without the patent infringing bytecode interpreter. With binary distributions, they are forced to make decisions about what the best way to proceed is, and most often the answer is to compile with support for everything and require everything as a prerequisite, even if the source only optionally supports another piece of software. With Gentoo, I define USE flags and emerge, and it figures out dependencies on the fly and passes the right options to configure and applies the right patches to get the featureset I want, with as little of the optional cruft as possible.
Related to the previous point, the performance boost is not as negligible as you would think. First off, the compiler optimizations and omitting debug code (useful for support and development, so often included) do help significantly on their own. Add to this that packages aren't carrying baggage from other unwanted and unused packages unnecessarily. This also saves on drive space and, more importantly, memory.
Sure, installing goes from being measured in minutes/hours to hours/days depending on what you need, but the process requires little intervention and once started, you can walk away and do other things. The time spent running these compiles is the price to pay for very good benefits.
Of course, your post has troll written all over it, but it in part reflects some real concerns people have about source based distributions, so I think it is worthy of a response..
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Great, now that guy that was on TECHTV last week with the PC that had 39 O/S's loaded can break the 40 barrier.
This is like watching B.Bonds go for the HR record!
"This must be a Thursday, I never could get the hang of Thursdays."
Mainly because Lunar Linux and Sorcerer GNU/Linux aren't quite as difficult as Gentoo. More of the installation chores are automated. For example, while Gentoo expects the user to manually chroot and copy the system over from the CD to the root partition, Lunar and Sorcerer do this automatically. Also, optimisation is broken down into a series of easy-to-grasp choices (the optimisation setting for really fucking fast code is labelled clearly) rather than expecting the user to muck around with CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS.
Best of all, IMHO, it's feasible (though almost time-consuming as installing software through FreeBSD's ports system) to install Lunar on a machine using a dialup. As far as difficulty is concerned, I'd class Lunar between Slackware and Gentoo. Hope this helps a bit.
--
St. Matthew, Patron Saint of Cheeky Programmers
They make great sense when you have everything distributed from one core CVS tree, thus any snapshot of the tree will give you a choerent OS (if it is properly managed that is). That's the FreeBSD method, and IMHO it's fantastic. You shouldn't ever get a kernel & userland that are out of synch with each other. Given how many Linux distributions are packages taken blindly from all over and then duct-taped together I think this is a step in the right direction. Centralized control enforces coherency.
Now you gotta break the users out of "Linux freak mode" where they read freshmeat every day and upgrade individual items by hand simply to have the latest versions. "You'll get the new kernel when the core group says it's ready and not before!"
I use FreeBSD for this reason. Linux got to be a headache with multiple independent development projects moving at breakneck speeds such that it was impossible to build a coherent system at times. I gave up with RedHat 5 and haven't looked back. I don't need the latest version of everything. What I need is a reasonably recent working version. I'll let the FreeBSD core team work out all the integration headaches and I'll take the OS as a cohesive unit as opposed to managing all that stuff by hand. You gotta love "cvs update; make buildworld; make buildkernel; make installkernel; make installworld"
The reason is how easy it is to add software that your distro hasn't thought of. In most cases with Sorcerer and forks thereof, it's just a matter of making a small file that tells where the source tarball is located, and the defaults do the rest. You don't even have to figure out what files it installs because a daemon watches the installation and records the files it installs.
Updating software is a matter of changing the version number in a small file(the source location usually includes $VERSION). Changing from stable to unstable development versions is quite easy--modify the version number. Keeping the source available uncompressed or keeping the object files in case you update frequently are command line options.
If you know how to code, problems are easier to fix in a source distro than a binary(if not, though, they are more difficult).
Then there are optional dependencies. You don't need to download different RPMs if you can do without PHP's ability to create image on the fly.
In many cases, a source is a smaller download than a binary(exceptions being the linux kernel and Mozilla).
With almost any binary based distributions (except debian maybe), you have to wait for the next release to get updated software. For example, to update gnome under redhat 7.0 to the latest version you need to compile the thing yourself, breaking several other software in the process. Not to mention breaking your package management, forcing you to use --nodeps and/or --force almost every time using RPM. Later, after it is done, you upgrade to redhat 8.0, suddenly everything is not working, forcing you to reinstall from scratch.
On the contrary, under gentoo you can have the latest and greatest software without waiting for the next version. Everything just works and handled by package management. The only time you need to compile things without emerge is when the software you want is not yet available in gentoo portage.
It looks like Kyle, the original Sorcerer developer is maintaining it again at the original url sorcerer.wox.org. I gave up on following that soap opera a while ago, but what did I miss? Is Kyle back to running his Sorcery tree?
Debian is just the distribution for you, it seems! There's a reason their stable release is a bit behind, and it's not just the 11 architectures that have to be supported! You'll also love apt/dpkg.
It really amazing when looking at Distro Watch
How many distro's for Linux there are around. Some spouting optimised for 686 or desktop or server env. If you really are into Linux for the long haul, most of us usually do end up either rebuilding our packages or upgrading to a newer version before the actual vendor does. Be it because the package was fsck-up or because or some vendor favors a package verses another and doesn't look at the big picture of the software overall extending the software to it's fullest capabilities. my current dist is Arch Linux. Shameless plug I know, but this dist for the most part meets my current needs.
// what do you mean that was the only copy...
Version 1.0? I thought all linices had to be 8.x now? What the ?
.nosig
Would they want Soleil Moon Frye doing advertisements for it?
Your mind is squeezed by a blast of pain!
I agree with you inasmuch as the world doesn't need this at all, however it seems pointless to me to wish these people refocused elsewhere. They aren't being paid to do it - they do it cuz they *want to*. They won't refocus on what you want unless you're willing to pay them!
I doubt these tiny little distros will have any impact one way or the other with Billy G. affairs...
Cheers
DT
Now, you might be able to get another 2% of performance by compiling for your specific arch, and you can do that by recompiling.
Or you might not. A lot of high performance code is in asm, and that's independent of the architecture.
The configuration choices are a much better reason for building from source. The downside is that your installation is unlike all other installations.
Gentoo would suit you very well...when I was first introduced to FreeBSD I just loved the ports system. Then I tried Gentoo and realized how much better the Gentoo scheme (known as "portage") is...not to mention the way they handle runlevels/init scripts, config files in /etc, and just about everything else. Hands down the most coherent, logical system I've ever seen.
No, guys, Mozilla 1.1 is not the newest version, Mozilla 1.0.1 is the newest, yeah it's stupid, but 1.0.1 is actually a much better release.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
If you look at the ISOs that you get from Red Hat for example, they are for i386 arhcitectures. This is a least common denominator approach. It will run on any 386 or better processor. Those with a P4 will not get to utilize P4 specific enhancements.
;-)
I keep hearing about these enhancements, etc, from Gentoo people, but are there any NUMBERS to back this up? Are there any tools have shown a definite decrease in application latency (especially in X) ? Will my kernel compile faster? Will Vorbis encode noticably quicker? WHERE'S THE BEEF??!?
The Free desktop that Just Works
Anyone know how Lunar Linux works, what their philosophy behind it is, etc.? Their webpage is less than informative (other than to say that it is a "source distribution"--which can be taken a lot of different ways)...the closest thing I saw to "information" was a comment which said that it was "better than Gentoo in some ways", but never specified how or why.
Anyone used it and knows how it works, etc.? Those of us who've never heard of it would appreciate a little information before wiping our hard drives...
LUnix is a UNIX clone for Commodore 64 computers, unrelated to GNU/Linux.
Will I retire or break 10K?
One of the huge benefits of source-based distros is for sysadmins -- you can easily set up an "install" server on the network that contains the source code modules you want. Then instead of pointing each workstation's install scripts to the repository on the distro's web site you point them to the internal server. That gives you a customized library of sources and each workstation's software has been specifically built for that machine.
Of course, for slower/older machines it would take a while to perform the install, but based on my experience with SourceMage the install can be done remotely and for the most part unattended.
Who am I to blow against the wind? -- Paul Simon
And if someone else names their product Genesis, I'm going to hurt them!
How about Mega Drive?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Yea, I could sure use a source distro, my current is waaay to slow...
~# uptime
1:05am up 27 days, 1:14, 2 users, load average: 0.14, 0.12, 0.20
Actually, the list of contributors isn't quite accurate in my oppinion. I have been using Lunar for about 3 months now, but you won't find my name on the contributor list because I haven't really done much of the coding for it - I've been using it and trying to find issues with it. And I know there are a more out there like me who aren't on the contributor list. So, while there are the 10 or so dedicated individuals, there are others who were simply using the "pre-release" versions on a daily basis. I have to say its a great distro.
--Joe
wrt binary-distros customization: I see no problem there, vendors still distribute even the source packages and thus I use a lot of customized packages - I just edit its configuration in its .spec file, do a "rpm -bb project.spec;rpm -U project*" and I'm happy.
There must be some unique configuration of all packages being distributed to make the Q&A possible.
if sorcerer was so good, why not contribute to it? Aparently there was some problem with the Sorcerer licencing that started the fork.
On the contrary, under gentoo you can have the latest and greatest software without waiting for the next version. Everything just works and handled by package management. The only time you need to compile things without emerge is when the software you want is not yet available in gentoo portage.
I would just like to add that in my experience if you must install something that is not handled by portage, the best way to do it is to write an ebuild for the software in question. After the first time you do it it only takes 10 minutes to produce an ebuild for most standard (ie. uses AutoConf/Make) compile processes.
The advantage of doing this is that your package will then be maintained by portage for you, and provided you specify it's dependencies correctly portage will prevent them from being removed and killing your custom installed software.
Cheers,
Andy
reasons for the existence of Lunar Linux
There were reasons for the fork of Sorcerer. See this page on the Source Mage site. But no, last I looked Lunar Linux wasn't very clear about these reasons. People should be required to have a good reason for making a new Linux distribution.
If people were required to have a good reason to start OSS projects, we would never have got Linux in the first place. I won't even bother responding to the rest of your argument.
I too loved the FreeBSD ports system and wished Linux would have one.
Gentoo is finally it!
Instead of ports they call it portage.
To update your ports you would use:
emerge rsync;
to update everything you installed use:
emerge world;
I haven't read about something like make build kernel in Gentoo yet. What I do is get the latest source using emerge gentoo-sources;
then do the usual:
make menuconfig then
make dep bzImage blah blah.
its been great for me so far.
give it a shot if you like.
"If a show of teeth is not enough, bite
To synchronize your portage tree with the official Gentoo one:
/etc, does not by default overwrite any config files--so you'll never lose your favorite config file in /etc again. Instead, it write the file to the same directory, with the prefix like ._cfg0000_ for instance.
;-)
# emerge rsync
To install GNOME:
# emerge gnome
To update all of your packages to new versions:
# emerge -u world
To remove all of the *old* versions of the packages updated by the last command, since they are protected until "cleaned" out:
# emerge -c world
To forcibly remove a package:
# emerge -C $PACKAGE_NAME
To "pretend" you're running a given command:
# emerge -p$ADDITIONAL_FLAGS $PACKAGE_NAME
**
There are far too many conveniences to list them all so far as emerge goes, but those are just a few. Other conveniences:
The portage system (emerge, ebuild, etc.), when installing files to
Updating your default runlevel is amazingly easy:
# rc-update del telnetd default
# rc-update add sshd default
Each rc-script has a "dependency" function which relates it to other rc-scripts (for instance, "checkroot" must run *before* all other rc-scripts; or the mail server courier must run *after* all its components).
The default Gentoo kernel is based off the Alan Cox tree, and thus includes support for things like xfs, jfs, grsecurity, etc. Very convenient, and I have to say that xfs rocks.
The list of cool features like these just goes on and on...if you go to the Gentoo website there'll be plenty of info there.
I'm still a fan of FreeBSD, but I have to say that Gentoo's
In case this wasn't posted yet, there are two major forks from Sorceror: Lunar (which I believe kept the main contributor of Sorceror), and SourceMage. SourceMage (who keep the nerdy witchcraft shtick happening) is approaching 1.0, which I believe is due for a Halloween release.
Link: http://www.sourcemage.org/
Sorceror was a cult-hit when it first hit the attention of Slashdot (late last year?). Many people raved about it, so I'm happy to see that both prongs on the fork are following the same tradition.
This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
afaik, Sorceror was first among source based distros. And this has a lot of that development team and source code. So they did do something new. But not very well - they didn't have hardly any documentation, and it killed them.
At least compared to the other choice - Gentoo linux, which has a userbase the talks to each other on the forums (imagine!) and they update much more frequently than all the Sorceror distros.
My thought when I read this was: they JUST made 1.0? What took them so long?
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
What if I don't have a cdrom? How do I install gentoo?
Sony vaio laptop, no cdrom, USB floppy drive.
If it had boot floppies, I could rig something up.. but it seems to assume you have a cdrom that you can boot from.
Huh? How the !@#$ is asm indepentdent of the architechture?????
Why not fork?
Newbie: can someone tell me which is better gentoo or sorcerer [/source mage/lunar linux] ?
Gentoo Fan: Sorcerer sucks, use Gentoo.
Sorcerer Fan: Gentoo sucks, use Sorcerer.
So is there anyone who has used these distros who would be interested in telling us (rationaly :-))something about how they differ from each other and what their respective advantages might be? Any links to previous discussions or reviews?
As a side note, I would also be interested in knowing about any one using source based distros on dial up connections. I'm on 56k (for the moment; I might get ADSL soon), and while I don't mind doing reasonably long downloads at night with a DL accelerator/resumer, I do mind installs taking several days of phone time. I also can get friends with real connections and CD burners to help, but I'm not sure how useful that is in this situation...
No one would expect a business to be running a beta version of a Linux distro as a webserver. That said, and considering that they JUST released version 1.0 of their distro, I would not expect them to be running their own stuff yet. Now maybe in 6 months if they still aren't that could be another story.
Everything just works and handled by package management. The only time you need to compile things without emerge is when the software you want is not yet available in gentoo portage.
This is the main reason, for me at least, for using Gentoo. After using RedHat and Mandrake for several years, this is the first time I have ALL my apps working properly, and I'm actually USING my system (not just f'n around with it). The dependency management and package installation just works.
Well, gentoo does, and its not a large company. Gentoo has several servers all running gentoo. Why shouldn't Lunar?
Source-based distros let you do more then optimize for ur proc. With a source-based distro, you can put on other flags, such as things to omit the frame pointer, which prevents debugging on most procs, but lets you have faster code. There are a lot more choices you can make in a source-based distro then your processor. Or at least in gentoo.
These distros aren't designed for Joe Schmoe. They are for people that want specilized distros. They are niches in niches. But other then that, if there are not major chages, I think it should be contibuted to the source. If it's something entirely different, then it should be its own distro. But no matter what, these distros won't make linux more popular becuase they are designed for linux users.
Aparently there was some problem with the Sorcerer licencing that started the fork.
:) ]
Exactly... The guy who wrote the original Sorcery stuff decided to cry foul and take his ball [sorcery] home, and re-release it as non GPL code.
The reasons for this are kind of drawn out so I won't go into them here.
But the end result was two forks of the distro, Lunar Linux, which I have not tried, and SourceMage which is what I use and love, and contribute to in whatever small ways I can. [Although personally, I hate the logo, but we can't have everything
Ender-
Nothing to see here
.. just select the individual apps !
$ strings FTP.EXE | grep Copyright
@(#) Copyright (c) 1983 The Regents of the University of California.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
You know Lunar/Sun. But anyway, it's cool :-)
# emerge rsync
# cvsup /etc/cvsupfile
To install GNOME:
# emerge gnome
# portinstall gnome
To update all of your packages to new versions:
# emerge -u world
# portupgrade -a
To remove all of the *old* versions of the packages updated by the last command, since they are protected until "cleaned" out:
# emerge -c world
Not sure what this does, but looks a litte like portsclean.
To forcibly remove a package:
# emerge -C $PACKAGE_NAME
pkg_deinstall -f $PACKAGE_NAME
To "pretend" you're running a given command:
# emerge -p$ADDITIONAL_FLAGS $PACKAGE_NAME
$ANY_COMMAND -n $OTHER_ARGS
I guess, for me emerge won't be the reason to switch from FreeBSD. (Nor the others you mentioned.) :-)
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
i can say that these kind of distros are for those who want to play with their linux, to those who wont regret if their system crash, to those who love to update their system everytime without knowing what will happen after their updated the whole box. my slackware dont need to update regularly because i know i have a better and tested distro, i do upgrade when its needed.. cheers.
Most major linux distros ( and all *BSD's ) support this...
I use it to install on laptops via pcmcia ethernet that don't have a cdrom drive... works wonders.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Is source installation in Debian different from source installation with Sorcerer or Lunar?
You can also install Debian without a CD. Just get a suitable set of boot disks. If you get one with the correct NIC driver built into the kernel, you just need the rescue and root floppies and that big fat ethernet connection of yours. If you need driver modules, then you need an additional 4 disks of drivers, as well.
Or you can burn it all to a cd-rom. It's about a 12MB download. No fuss with slow floppies and you still get the newest version from the net.
Yeah, like I said I'm still a fan of FreeBSD. I just really, really wish that it had the filesystem support that Linux does...I really miss that when I'm working with FreeBSD machines. In particular, I heard something about someone working on journaling for UFS (has this come to fruition yet? haven't used FreeBSD in a while...)--this would be an awesome improvement to FreeBSD. Running fsck can really suck... ;-)
Who needs another Linux distro? I'd choose within 3/4 distributions...
http://smeschini.altervista.org