Slashdot Mirror
Historic Linux File Archive Created
jemagid writes "Ibiblio (nee metalab, nee sunsite)
has rummaged through all the old CDs and old
FTP archives we could find, to put together a
beautiful picture of the early days of the Linux community: Historic
Linux. The files include snapshots of
the early Linux archives including sunsite.unc.edu and tsx-11.mit.edu, and early distributions such as MCC (Manchester Computing
Center) and SLS (Softlanding Linux Systems), which were some of the first attempts to make Linux easy to install and use. The early RedHat releases are also included, as is early Suse, Debian, Slackware,
and Blade. The early distributions
ran on machines as small as 386's with 2-4 MB of RAM, so these could be
fun ways to resurrect ancient hardware."
The ibiblio Linux Archive
ibiblio has been involved with Linux since its founding in 1992. ibiblio currently houses over 171 gigabytes of Linux programs and documentation, with many of the most popular Linux distributions available at a snap. ibiblio also hosts mirrors of some of the most popular Linux distributions. Research at ibiblio includes methods to make the Linux distributions easier to insert into the ass and use through the Linsearch, which utilizes the Linux LSMs. If you prefer, you can view the ibiblio Linux distributions with an ftp view You're also welcome to submit your own Linux distribution or software to keep the balls rolling.
I can't wait to see how Darl contributed his own special magic to Linux back in the day...
NOT!!!
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Mod me down if you must, but linux was still very much a toy for comp sci students back then
How has that changed today? I'm not trolling.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Here is a news article I found on this in google.
Well, today you can put a small all-but-useless motherboard in a ammo box, install linux, call it an "embedded system" and get it posted to /.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Open Source? More like Openly Racist
The Open Source movement, otherwise known as 'Free Software', has been a topic of considerable debate on the Internet's most controversial site. The majority of this debate has centered around the technical merits of the software, with the esteemed editors argueing against adopting Linux by employing the full depth of their considerable intellects, and the other side hurling death threats and similar invective. This has allowed many who would not otherwise receive quality information about Open Source software to be made aware of many of its ramifications, but one issue has been left alone: The overt racism that is deeply embedded in the movement.
Allow me to explain.
Alan Cox; Richard Stallman; Bruce Perens; Wichert Akkerman; Miguel DeIcaza.
What do you see in this list of names? Are there any African-Americans on it? Absolutely not, none of those names sound like one a self-respecting black person would have! No Maurice, no Luther, no Lil' Kim. There are many other lists such as this, you can see one here. Flip through each page, do you see anything other than white faces? Of course you don't, because Open Source and its adherents are ardent racists and they absolutely forbid access to the sacred 'kernel' by any person of color.
Lets look at another list, this time a compendium of the companies using Linux. Are there any black owned companies on that list? Nooooooo. How about these companies? They all have something to do with Open Source software, any of them owned by an African-American? No again. Here is an extensive collection of photographs from a LUG (Linux User Gathering) meeting, more can be viewed at that link. What is odd about these pictures, and every other photograph I have ever seen of a LUG meeting, is that there is not one single black person to be seen, and probably none for miles.
More racist overtones can be found by examining the language of Open Source. They often refer to 'white hat' hackers. These 'white hats' scurry about the Internet doing good, but illegal, acts for their fellow man. In stark contrast we find the 'black hat' hackers. They destroy the good works of others by breaking into systems, stealing data, and generally causing havoc. These two terms reflect the mindset of most Linux developers. White means good, black means bad. Anywhere there is black, there is uncontrollable destruction and lawlessness. Looking further we see black lists that inform other users of 'bad' hardware, Samba, an obvious play on the much hated Little Black Sambo book, Mandrake, which I won't explain except to say that the French are notorious racists. This type is linguistic discrimination is widespread throughout the Open Source culture, lampooned by many of its more popular sites.
It is also a fact that all Unix 'distros' contain a plethora of racist commands with not so hidden symbolism.
It can hardly be coincidence that the prime operating system of choice of the 'open source supremacists' - Linux, features commands which are poorly disguised racist acronyms. For example: 'awk' (All White Klan) , 'sed' (shoot nEgroes dead), 'ln' (lynch negroes), 'rpm' (raical purity mandatory), 'bash' (bring a slave home), 'ps' (persecute sambo), 'mount' (murder or unseat nubians today), 'fsck' (favored supreme Christian klan). I could go on and on about the latent racist symbolism in Linux, but I fear it would take weeks to enumerate every incidence.
Is there a single unix command out there that does not have some hidden racist connotation ? Suffice it to say that the racism pervades Linux like a particularly bad smell. Can you imagine the effect of running such a racist operating system on the impressionable mind ? I don't have to remind you that transmitting subliminal messages is banned in the USA, and yet here we have an operating system that appears to be one enormous submliminal ad for the Klan!
One of the few selling points of Open Source software is that it is available in many different languages.
I remember one of the big attractions to linux was supposed to be the ability to make use of old hardware (I have a 386 sitting around here, as well as a 486). Unfortunately, that was never the case from what I could tell- three years ago I tried installing two different distros, and almost fell thru the hole in my ass when it said installation would require over 1gb! If I need a bloated OS that only runs on new hardware, why bother learning a different OS? Its not like I have nothing better to do than go through an entirely new learning curve, especially since Im already at high expert level on MS's OS and products. This isnt really a rant, but for me, I dont see a compelling reason to even try it out, much less switch over.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
Tom St Denis presents: Super MANHAM Canner Advance
> While GNU/Linux was nowhere nearly as useful as it is today, it could already do things MS Windows can't do today.
Yes, and MS Windows can do something Linux still can't do today, run Win32 software well. Don't even give me crap about WINE. WINE was crap in 1994 when I first looked at it, and it is crap now when I looked at it a few months ago. It was crap, is crap and will always be crap.
Oh, and if you don't like my smart ass remark, well, Windows can do network IO completion ports for high performance networking. Linux is stuck with select/poll still, which means wake up the thread, go in a FOR LOOP to check each socket, then do something... SLOW. And Linus still has something up his but with BSD style completion ports.
- Voxel
Modesty is one of life's greatest attributes