Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Installing Linux on a Dead Badger

Posted by michael on from the slightly-ahead-of-its-time dept.

Elysdir writes "An article by Lucy A. Snyder at the online speculative-fiction magazine Strange Horizons provides information on the next frontier in Linux installations. 'Let's face it: any script kiddie with a pair of pliers can put Red Hat on a Compaq, his mom's toaster, or even the family dog. But nothing earns you geek points like installing Linux on a dead badger.' (Disclosure, in case it matters: I'm an editor for the magazine.)"

2 of 511 comments (clear)

  1. Re:what the... by Endive4Ever · · Score: 0, Troll

    Well, in a world where the linux kernel source is slowly being locked into proprietaryness, maybe alternatives like skinnable Windows need to be examined.

    I refer to the fact that today I downloaded the 2.6 kernel source. When I tried 'make xconfig' to configure the kernel before a build, it came back at me with some bullshit about needing QT.

    What The Fuck?

    Why did they change the way 'make xconfig' worked with the 2.4 and earlier kernels? Why is the kernel config now bound up into a proprietary X Toolkit?

    Is it fricking skinnable?

    --
    ---
  2. Re:what the... by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1, Troll

    It is not, however, LGPL (as a library as standard as one proposed to be *the* Linux widget set should be).

    It is also not available for Windows as a GPL package, unlike GTK.

    It is a proprietary package that is an attempt by a company to squeeze into a position where they can bleed GUI platform developers of money. Reminds me of Motif, actually.

    --
    May we never see th