Slashdot Mirror


Google Just Made It Easier To Run Linux On Your Chromebook

TechCurmudgeon writes A story in PCWorld's "World beyond Windows" column outlines coming improvements in Chrome OS that will enable easily running Linux directly from a USB stick: "Have you ever installed a full desktop Linux system on your Chromebook? It isn't all [that] hard, but it is a bit more complex than it should be. New features in the latest version of Chrome OS will make dipping into an alternative operating system easier. For example, you'll be able to easily boot a full Linux system from a USB drive and use it without any additional hassle!"

169 comments

  1. Pedantic, but... by by+(1706743) · · Score: 1, Informative

    I think they mean "GNU/Linux," as Chrome OS runs the Linux kernel.

    1. Re:Pedantic, but... by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Funny

      Get back in your box, Richard Stallman!

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re: Pedantic, but... by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 1, Funny

      Like Godwins law, true linux pedantry will continue until the probability of descending into linguistic analysis of libre vs gratis reaches 1.0. At which point the thread should stop altogether.

    3. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

      Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

      There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

    4. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You summoned him!
      Apparently he doesn't have a /. account, but still is a reader.
      http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    5. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I use Buzybox/Linux, you insensitive clod.

    6. Re:Pedantic, but... by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 1

      As far as I have seen, the vast majority of the operational components in Android are not actually GNU but instead Google's own code. GNU components are available... no differently than they are part of SFU from Microsoft. As far as I know, even the bootloader is not GNU. I suppose the init.d may still be, but I'd imagine that since services/daemons are mostly in Java land, that could probably be replaced with a pretty small monolithic script.

      So, it is probably more correct to say Linux without the GNU unless we should call Windows "GNU Windows" since one might choose to run a Mingw app.

      I would suspect that moving Android to llvm on bsd really wouldn't be so hard since Google's now homegrown most of their stack.

    7. Re:Pedantic, but... by Dynedain · · Score: 5, Funny

      How long before that's SystemD/GNU/Linux?

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    8. Re:Pedantic, but... by arth1 · · Score: 2

      You summoned him!
      Apparently he doesn't have a /. account, but still is a reader.

      He probably doesn't like the license for using the anonymous account, and I can't really blame him.

      Anyhow, I think you're triggering a /. law here: As the mentioning of RMS in a Slashdot thread grows, the chance of Bruce Perens posting approaches unity.

    9. Re:Pedantic, but... by arth1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I believe I speak for everyone when I say

      You must be new here.

      Whenever I read the word "believe" anywhere, I replace it with "make up" or "confabulate". It helps my reading comprehension.

    10. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

      Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

      There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

      I starting reading this.

      But then I just thought Yipppppeeeeee!!

    11. Re:Pedantic, but... by epyT-R · · Score: 1, Troll

      Eventually systemd will replace GNU entirely, so it'd be linux/systemd.. eventually, the kernel will be forked too and it'll be redhat/systemd

    12. Re:Pedantic, but... by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      or maybe systemd/linux!

    13. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Liked the size relation between the gnu part of the system and the linux part:
      http://media.ccc.de/browse/con...

    14. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am someone and you do not speak for me.
      PS I failed the captcha the first time, so maybe I'm not actually a person.

    15. Re:Pedantic, but... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Richard, the GP did mention 'GNU/Linux', and while referring to the ChromeOS, mentioned just Linux. That is correct - ChromeOS doesn't use your GNU corelib or shell utilities. Google has used others in building both ChromeOS as well as Android. So it's not accurate to describe ChromeOS as 'GNU/Linux'.

      Also, if within GNU/Linux (let's take your favorite - gNewSense) - one doesn't go into emacs or bash, but instead, X11 comes up, followed by LXDE, and the user simply kicks up an instance of FireFox or Chrome, or say, runs a game of FreeCiv, would s/he still be using 'GNU'? In what way?

    16. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's ok, I also speak for spam-bots and Turing-deficient AI's, too.

    17. Re:Pedantic, but... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The original suggestion was LiGnuX - which as a name almost all thought it licked nuts and was worthless. Then the prefix to promote GNU was suggested and the rest is fairly pointless history since it just confused people. Many thought it meant the kernel was a linux project and the rest didn't care about GNU unless they had heard of it already.

    18. Re:Pedantic, but... by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux.

      Addition commonly uses the symbol '+' . Hence shouldn't that be

      "GNU divided by Linux" ?

    19. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't know if that's him. It might be just some random guy piecing shit together from the Linux and the GNU System page.

    20. Re:Pedantic, but... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Mr Stallman, I'm impressed that you didn't seize this opportunity to tell us all how evil Google is, and how it's spying on us w/ the Chromebook

    21. Re:Pedantic, but... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I guess that's why RMS now calls it GNU+Linux. This reminds me of people who used to deride OS/2 as half an OS

    22. Re:Pedantic, but... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      You used a webm format for the video, instead of an Ogg Theora? Normally, not a big deal, but given it's RMS, and what he asked people to do at the beginning of his speech, I found that interesting, to say the least

    23. Re:Pedantic, but... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Actually, LiGnuX was better, although the capitalization was still weird. A better way to have written it would have been either all caps - LIGNUX, or all lowercase (in keeping w/ UNIX CLI conventions). Too bad it didn't take hold

    24. Re:Pedantic, but... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Although the name sounds stupid that's par for the course in software - however the other "disadvantage" is it could not be mistaken for meaning complete ownership of the linux project. I've seen more than one journalist write "Richard Stallman, inventor of linux". I'm sure that helped a bit with those awkward "but what have you done since 1990" discussions in MIT staffrooms.

    25. Re:Pedantic, but... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      I think they mean "GNU/Linux," as Chrome OS runs the Linux kernel.

      actually no, any Linux will boot fine.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    26. Re:Pedantic, but... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that it isn't, since Stallman is said never to surf the Net directly, but only to read Web pages via email.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    27. Re:Pedantic, but... by allo · · Score: 0

      Chrome OS is GNU/Linux

    28. Re:Pedantic, but... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      In which case the snippet you quoted becomes "I make up I speak for everyone when I say".

      If that improves your comprehension it must be pretty poor to begin with.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    29. Re:Pedantic, but... by nateman1352 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now don't get me wrong, I really really appreciate all the hard work the GNU project and the FSF have contributed, but to imply that _only_ the GNU project and the Linux kernel deserve credit seems quite unfair to me.

      If we call in GNU/Linux because GNU deserves credit then we should name it GNU/Apache/Xorg/KDE/SystemD/Samba/LibreOffice/Mozilla/Linux, because all those other projects are just as critical to creating the modern, functional operating system that we have today.

      Or we could grow up and just call it Linux because its just a name after all.

      My theory is RMS and all his buddies over at the GNU project are still butt hurt about Linux stealing the thunder from GNU Hurd (25 years after the fact!) If they really want to have their GNU OS, then just finish Hurd already build your GNU package.

      It's amazing how childish RMS can be sometimes, look at how he reacted to the fact that Clang and LLVM are now technically superior to GCC. Wrote a whiny blog post about how he admits it hurts on a personal level and then in the same paragraph attacks Clang as not being open source enough because it is BSD licensed instead of GPL! Honestly I think deep down inside RMS would have preferred that Apple kept Clang closed source even though he would never say that publicly. Apple gives us something for free that they totally didn't have to give us so obviously we should bite their hand off because they licensed it in a way that would allow them to continue using it in Xcode.

      There is a lot of things I really like about the open source movement, but self righteous crap and the cliquey project leaders definitely leave a bad taste in my month.

    30. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We call "Unix" all the stuff that is not Unix but merely Unix-like (am looking at you OS X!) and we give so much credit to things that we don't actually use in 2015. Not even BSD is Unix, it's Unix-like. But we all together hate Stallman because he is one of the uncool kids. We all use Stallman's work but we diss him and we pray that our GNU/Linux distro of choice will drop the GNU stuff for LLVM, ZSH or something else. Seriously anti-Stallman people you make no sense. GNU is not Stallman. You can hate Stallman and give him credit for GNU. It's not that hard.

    31. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      everything he says is golden.

    32. Re:Pedantic, but... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      for now perhaps. In time it will be:

      What OS do you run?
      SystemD.
      Favourite browser?
      SystemD.
      Text editor?
      Oh they never got that working but everything else has been removed so I just cat > file.txt I mean sure it's a usability regression for regular users, but apparently the distribution builders love it because they don't have to worry about packing editors.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    33. Re:Pedantic, but... by grahamlee · · Score: 2

      While we're in a thread called "Pedantic, but..." I feel safe with posting that OS X actually _is_ a UNIX, with SUS03 compliance. They did that after being sued by The Open Group for claiming to OS X be a UNIX when they weren't in compliance.

    34. Re:Pedantic, but... by itzly · · Score: 1

      Chrome OS probably also runs glibc and other GNU stuff. Not much different from a regular Linux system.

    35. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It didn't take hold because the name was stupid.

    36. Re: Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't project too much on to RMS. You come across as very immature. Grow up, and maybe you can one day be at the same level. You are just not ready yet.

    37. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GNU has an operating system?

      Oh, yes, the one pretty much no one uses.

    38. Re:Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to substitute for the zero complementizer.

    39. Re:Pedantic, but... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      The term Linux becomes a problem as soon as there is a different user land bolted on top of it. Once Android became popular, the problem of conflating GNU with Linux finally became more than just an academic exercise.

      GNU tools were popular before the rise of Linux. They were popular even on non-Unix operating systems. That's the nature of something you are free to recompile anywhere.

      The fact that something is Linux/but-not-GNU matters when you try to do something with it not supported but commonplace with Linux/that-is-actually-GNU.

      That's kind of what this whole article is about: those of us that get disgusted with ChromeOS and install a proper Linux.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    40. Re:Pedantic, but... by jeepies · · Score: 1

      because they licensed it in a way that would allow them to continue using it in Xcode.

      As the copyright holder, Apple isn't bound by the license agreement. They own it and can do whatever. The license is what gives others the right to use it. I'm not saying they should go one way or another, but they could certainly license it as GPL and not impact their own usage of it in any way.

    41. Re:Pedantic, but... by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

      It's like I'm really in 2002!

      --

      +++ATH0
    42. Re:Pedantic, but... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Actually, so is GNU, if you think about it!

    43. Re:Pedantic, but... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Fully agree w/ this. Have said several times - I'd have a lot more respect for the FSF crowd if they finished HURD and came up w/ software that they wanted people to actually use, instead of preaching all the time - don't use flash, don't use MP**, don't use i****, don't use Windows, don't use FaceBook, don't use Amazon, don't use Google, blah blah blah

    44. Re: Pedantic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He would need to stop showering first.

    45. Re:Pedantic, but... by nateman1352 · · Score: 1

      Totally 100% agree. That said, making it GPL would pretty much mean that any improvements made by outside contributors would not be included in Xcode. So you would instantly create a fork where everyone on Mac uses a different Clang then everyone else. That's not helpful for the Clang project, the LLVM project, the devs using Clang, or Apple. Also LLVM was already BSD before Clang showed up so licensing a sub project under same license as the parent makes sense.

    46. Re:Pedantic, but... by by+(1706743) · · Score: 1

      You should be modded +5 insightful-yet-depressing ;)

    47. Re:Pedantic, but... by paulatz · · Score: 1

      The "/" symbol is often pronounced "above" in some mathematics field. Wgich would allow you to pronounce "GNU over Linux", which is quite accurate! Not to be confused with "Gnu over Linus", which is an entirely different thing.

      --
      this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
  2. But is that what people are actually doing? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I thought they were wiping the Chromebook's internal drive, then reinstalling with their preferred Linux variant.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I thought they were wiping the Chromebook's internal drive, then reinstalling with their preferred Linux variant.

      I don't know about most, but I keep the ChromeOS also. I use the Chromebook as my take out to breakfast and go on vacation computer. It's a breeze to use in a restaraunt on wifi, and if I need anything more serious, I boot into Linux. It's also nice to keep my stuff separate from my home computers, except for the gmail account I use that syncs on all my computers.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    2. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Protip: Most people are doing neither.

    3. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by Fwipp · · Score: 2

      Crouton is still my favorite approach, unless you need more disk space.

    4. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by aunchaki · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I replaced my nine-year-old ThinkPad a few months ago (it's slowly running the latest Ubuntu). I went round and round for about a year and finally decided to get a used Chromebook Pixel. It's awesome! I thought I'd play around with crouton for a while, but eventually wipe the whole thing and install Linux on it.

      I haven't done that. I do run crouton and can flip between ChromeOS and Ubuntu 14 in a keystroke. The thing is, ChromeOS is a really nice broswing experience and 75% of what I do is browser based. I could spend all day in Ubuntu, but it's just too nice using ChromeOS.

      I'm really happy with my Chromebook.

    5. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people are returning their chromebooks and buying surface pro's. They are wildly expensive but they do things that make you want to throw your chromebook t the wall.
      Linux now finds itself without purpose. Windows has gotten much better since the 90's and tizen is replacing it on the low end. When Nokia starts making linux phones, that will signal the end of Linux.

    6. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by quenda · · Score: 2

      I thought they were wiping the Chromebook's internal drive, then reinstalling with their preferred Linux variant.

      Why do that? Chromebook is already running Linux, and you can easily install a full Ubuntu (or whatever) environment under ChromeOS, running them side-by-side, using Crouton scripts.
      No need to reboot. A bit like a using a virtual machine, but its all native.

      The biggest problem is having to wipe all your data when switching to developer mode, and Google considers this a feature. Couldn't they just encrypt the private data instead? I cannot see the point. If a bad buy gets hold of your Chrome-book and switches to developer mode, he can just install a login screen that grabs your password, and gets all your private data from the cloud.

    7. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by stephanruby · · Score: 2

      Actually, no. Most people use Crouton in developer mode. That means they run Chrome OS side-by-side with their preferred Linux variant.

      It's less risky that way. Because if you replace Chrome OS completely with your own Linux distribution, you'll probably lose the small amount of free Verizon data that comes with it for three years, or the 10-fingers touch support, or the very high resolution support, that may come on some of those newer Chromebooks. Because don't believe what the Ubuntu guys say, they may claim to have designed Unity to be a touch interface, but Unity is actually just as awful for people with actual touch screens.

      That being said, running in developer mode carries its own set of risks. If a Verizon repair person ever opens my Chromebook, or one of my nephews opens it, they'll probably just wipe everything by mistake (because in developer mode, the first instructions that pop up is that you should wipe the device to get out of developer mode by pressing the space bar. Yes, thanks a lot Google for having that feature, I'm glad I don't have kids thought. This means I only need to hide my Chromebook Pixel when my nephews are visiting).

      And don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind wiping my Chromebook if I only had Chrome OS on there, but I've had to wipe my Chromebook so many times to get the linux environment on Crouton just right for Android development purposes, the next time I have to do it, I might have a complete melt down.

    8. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I call bullshit, since the objective of both are mutually exclusive. Chromebook is great if you live on the internet, have few to no local files, and just use your laptop for browsing & email.

      Surface Pros are full laptop replacements. There are some niche uses for it, other than just as laptops. Say I have a peripheral that only Windows can recognize, it makes sense to have something like a Surface Pro, or if one is on a budget, HP Stream or a WinBook. Like I have a Brother label maker, which my PC-BSD setup can't recognize. That's the sort of thing I'd want a Wintel tablet for, provided it has the appropriate USB slots and drivers.

      Other than that, non-Windows alternatives are great

    9. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If a bad buy gets hold of your Chrome-book and switches to developer mode, he can just install a login screen that grabs your password, and gets all your private data from the cloud.

      Right, but only if you don't boot. When you boot (which only takes a few secs) it's obvious that you're in developer mode, so if you didn't enable it yourself you'll know something is amiss.

    10. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people are returning their chromebooks and buying surface pro's. [..] Windows has gotten much better [..] the end of Linux.

      Get back in your cage, Steve Ballmer!

    11. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by quenda · · Score: 1

      With physical access, you can reflash the bootloader. There is a write-protect screw in some models.

      And why would a user reboot? By the time he does, its too late - the google password has been changed, and his data sucked out of his google-drive.

    12. Re:But is that what people are actually doing? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Why do that? Chromebook is already running Linux,

      CUPS.

      I don't have any interest in every little thing I do on my home network being tied to the Google collective. The same arguments for leaving ChromeOS can be applied equally to removing it and replacing it with Linux.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  3. I'm sold! by ThorGod · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've not bought one yet (who has the finances?) but this would be great...and I could consolidate my porn browsing to just it. That ought to keep the rest of my stuff safe...

    --
    PS: I don't reply to ACs.
    1. Re:I'm sold! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      For porn, get yourself an Android tablet. The user experience of the Chromebook is not optimized to keep and navigate your porn locally. So unless, you want to re-download the same porn videos again and again, consider using an Android tablet instead.

      The app support for porn on Android is awesome (personally, I prefer Opera the best for that, especially for the animated gif previews, plus an app for hiding the porn, plus a video app for looping the small parts of the videos I prefer). Also, consider a 7 inch or 8 inch Android tablet. A 10+ inch tablet gets really heavy if you're holding it with just one hand while in bed (even two hands gets tiresome). And even if you have a stand for your 10+ inch tablet, the stand won't really be that useful unless you can pivot it 360 degrees.

      Not to mention, you should probably consolidate your porn with your games, your music, and/or your manga collection, and Android has really the best free (free as in beer) support for any of those.

    2. Re:I'm sold! by dbIII · · Score: 1

      For porn, get yourself an Android

      Which Android?
      A Persocom (Chobits) or a Hubot (Real Humans/Äkta människor)?

    3. Re:I'm sold! by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      +1 TMI
      ;)

  4. Gee by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I've been running Linux dual boot on my Chromebook since last summer. I'm surprised that anyone thought it was so difficult to install and use. I think it took me all of 15 minutes to download and do the necessary alterations.

    It's fun actually

    "you'll be able to easily boot a full Linux system from a USB drive and use it without any additional hassle!"

    As opposed ot the insufferable hassle of hitting control+L and booting direct? If that's too much trouble, plugging a USB stick is too.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    1. Re:Gee by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      True, but you can run the USB stick on multiple computers, keeping your work environment and files all in one place wherever you go. With 64 gig USB 3.0 flash keys going for $25, and 128 gig USB 3.0 going for $40, why not?

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:Gee by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      True, but you can run the USB stick on multiple computers, keeping your work environment and files all in one place wherever you go. With 64 gig USB 3.0 flash keys going for $25, and 128 gig USB 3.0 going for $40, why not?

      Well, a thumb drive is a lot easier to lose than a whole laptop for one thing. I've found quite a few over the last several years. Also, I have to guess that the thumb drive is going to be slower than the SSD in the Chromebook. Because that's the biggest thing going for them. They move. Chrome boots in something like 7 seconds, depending on how fat you can type your password, and Linux about the same.

      Regardless, I don't think its necessarily a bad idea, just that the presumed inconvenience of doing a dual bootsetup, then install of a distro is way overplayed.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:Gee by GbrDead · · Score: 1

      depending on how fat you can type your password

      Yo password's so fat... oh, wait, that is actually a good thing.

  5. Chromebook Shmomebook by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wake me up when they post a useful article on how to run Unix on my Macbook Pro.

  6. I know the reason why they did it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    systemd fanbois kept spamming e10s's inboxes that they want poetteringd on chromeos and that binary logs are soooo great, and hey, what about an ntp daemon on a chromebook? So google made it easier for systemd fanbois to install GNU/poetteringd/Linux.

    1. Re:I know the reason why they did it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reading that mail thread gave me a strange compulsion to want to nuke Iceland.

    2. Re:I know the reason why they did it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Systemd is the future. Suck on it luddite!

  7. Already there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is amusing to read on my chromebook running a full linux distribution.

    1. Re:Already there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      i just got one yesterday and my model cant do it :(

  8. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by ThorGod · · Score: 1

    What's the problem? Or is it the ati driver still...

    --
    PS: I don't reply to ACs.
  9. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Funny

    Fuck that, I've been trying to install FreeBSD on my Commodore 64. Crapping Commodore 1541 disk drive keeps mangling my installation CD.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  10. I'm a bit skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There are non-free pieces of software which can frequently cause problems. It's not just MS Windows systems and with most Chromebooks your screwed because you can't swap wifi cards, etc.

  11. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try using a 1581 drive, you may have to fold the disc to fit.

  12. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FreeBSD

    That's your problem--you're using the wrong BSD. Try NetBSD instead. You can install it on a potato.

  13. Why not a full-on Linux environment? by mcrbids · · Score: 1

    If they are making it easy to run "normal" Linux, why not install the appropriate libs and allow Linux apps to run side-by-side with Chrome apps?

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    1. Re:Why not a full-on Linux environment? by arth1 · · Score: 0

      If they are making it easy to run "normal" Linux, why not install the appropriate libs and allow Linux apps to run side-by-side with Chrome apps?

      What are Google's business models? Ads and tracking.
      Installing anything that is going to make it easier to circumvent either is not likely to happen.

    2. Re:Why not a full-on Linux environment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of Chromebooks aren't made by Google at all.

    3. Re:Why not a full-on Linux environment? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The companies that make them still have to get Google's blessing.

  14. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or the 1571 so you can read both sides without flipping it.

  15. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by ogdenk · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's pretty easy. First, take it out of the box. You lift the LCD into a proper viewing angle and push the power button. There you go. Unix.

  16. C720 Pre-made ISO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.distroshare.com/new/
    Has all the Linux Distros all set to work out of the box - after your in dev mode and flash bios remove protect screw

    This is great - I have a new laptop that run very very well

    1. Re:C720 Pre-made ISO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      any hope for the c200m? https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=339572

  17. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When does it prompt me for what terminal type I am using?

  18. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sega cd works too

  19. Yea, POSIX complaint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and then littered with Apple bastardization everywhere and undocumented bullshit.

    1. Re:Yea, POSIX complaint by ogdenk · · Score: 2

      And this is different from every single commercial UNIX workstation vendor, how?

      Solaris was littered with AT&T and badly documented Sun bullshit everywhere.

      A/IX is littered with IBM bastardization everywhere.

      HP-UX is littered with indescribable horrors.

      Digital UNIX/Tru64? Now THAT was bastardization done right.

      A/UX was littered with Apple bastardization and undocumented bullshit too, that didn't make it any less interesting.

      So yeah, your argument is stupid.

    2. Re:Yea, POSIX complaint by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      and then littered with Apple bastardization everywhere and undocumented bullshit.

      Before I got a MacBook, I used a laptop running FreeBSD. I was able to move over 99% of my stuff with just a recompile. I have run into very, very, few Apple bastardizations.

    3. Re:Yea, POSIX complaint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? So UNIX documentation has traditionally been bad, so OS X gets a pass too? Okay, got it... :)

    4. Re:Yea, POSIX complaint by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      No it isn't. As a Unix MacOS is pretty unrecognizable once you scratch the surface. It's not really a Unix. It's just that the "certification" is so low level that it allows for a level of inconsistency that no Apple fanboy would tolerate (unless it's an Apple product).

      Really MacOS is only a Unix for marketing purposes. It's not something that Apple (or the cult) actually wants exposed to the masses. It's just something to tick off the checklist and to point to when Windows and Linux users snicker.

      "No. We're not really the product that panders to morons. It's a Unix and everything."

      The argument is not stupid. A lot of us actually use multiple Unixen and view the notion that MacOS is one too to be laughable.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:Yea, POSIX complaint by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      A lot of us actually use multiple Unixen and view the notion that MacOS is one too to be laughable.

      It's more UNIX-like under the surface of the UI than any modern Linux distro I can think of personally. A lot of us actively manage REAL UNIX boxes as well and think you're full of crap.

      The major difference is the fact that it doesn't use a dated clusterf**k of a GUI environment and has actually evolved since the 80's instead of piling kludge on top of kludge to mimic functionality found in other more high-performance GUI environments.

      Would OSX be my SERVER environment of choice? Probably not. But as far as UNIX WORKSTATIONS with real desktop software go, OSX is lightyears ahead of anything Linux or FreeBSD have to offer. Or any commercial UNIX vendor for that matter.

      OSX is quite a bit less f**ked up than Solaris. And OSX is the most widely used UNIX desktop environment on the planet. And I'm glad it doesn't use the GNU userland, I prefer BSD anyway. If you want OSX to be more traditionally UNIXy, install MacPorts, XCode, XQuartz and TotalTerminal. And go tick some checkboxes in various preferences in Finder and such to make it work as you expect.

      You bash OSX yet every modern FOSS desktop tries to mimic it terribly and cram Windows-like UI elements in as well. And the Linux crowd is doing its best lately to try to make Linux as un-UNIX-like as possible to the point where it's becoming difficult for a desktop environment to even properly compile and run under FreeBSD anymore which is far closer to real UNIX than modern Linux.

    6. Re:Yea, POSIX complaint by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      Oh, forgot to mention. OSX is directly derived from NeXTStep. Which also wasn't X11 based and was around since 1988. So no, it wasn't for "marketing" purposes.

      I'm pretty sure EVERY UNIX vendor used UNIX for "marketing purposes".... it couldn't have been because it was the quickest path to a full pre-emptive multitasking environment with full multiuser capabilities that had been rigorously tested for over a decade.

  20. Removing the GNU taint from Linux ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank goodness for clang and llvm and similarly minded projects that will allow us to remove the GNU taint from Linux over time.

    1. Re:Removing the GNU taint from Linux ... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Are there any projects out there that combine Linux w/ BusyBox, a shell other than bash, LLVM/Clang instead of GCC and so on?

    2. Re:Removing the GNU taint from Linux ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but there's a reason no one uses them. GNU is simply better.

    3. Re:Removing the GNU taint from Linux ... by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      You have Alpine Linux that uses musl instead of glibc, and busybox but it uses GCC. It's a small box/router/embedded kind of thing but with desktop packages too.
      I shall try it on some computer garbage with 128MB ram if/when I come across one, with dillo as the browser because hell, you won't be allowed to use the big stuff.

      Don't forget to use OSSv4 for the sound if you want to got all reactionary punk and stick it to the gnu.

    4. Re:Removing the GNU taint from Linux ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I was able to use firefox 8? awhile back on alpine linux and it worked well considering the computer running it was from 1998. pentium II 366mhz with 95M ram. I could never get the sound going though.

  21. Again, why? by unixisc · · Score: 2

    So there is this trend about wanting to run 'foreign' OSs on computers that come w/ one already. The other day, the question was running Linux on a MacBook Air, then one about running standard non-Libre Linux on the Librem, and today, running a normal GNU/Linux distro on a Chromebook.

    I can understand why people replace Windows - particularly Windows 8.x, which is what I did (using PC-BSD). What I don't understand is why anyone would replace any POSIX based OS w/ your run of the mill distro. If you have a MacBook, then OS-X already supports whatever the MacBook will be dealing w/. If you have a Librem, you have Purism OS, which is Trisquel, and which has been specifically engineered to that box. If you have a Chromebook, Google has already made ChromeOS support anything that the Chromebook will have to do.

    So aside from losing some of the capabilities you have of your laptop, what exactly is the fun in getting a run-of-the-mill Linux on your Chromebook, replacing ChromeOS? Why not take that box, and see what other apps are there - maybe Android apps - that could run on your Chromebook?

    1. Re:Again, why? by quenda · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you have a Chromebook, Google has already made ChromeOS support anything that the Chromebook will have to do.

      Oh, no they have not.

      A macbook can install 3rd party apps out of the box. It is not locked down.
      But if you want Skype, Minecraft, or Steam for example, on a Chromebook, you need to unlock it (developer mode, unsupported) and install a full Linux environment first.

      But yes, no need to replace ChromeOS, just supplement it.

    2. Re:Again, why? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      So there is this trend about wanting to run 'foreign' OSs on computers that come w/ one already

      It's typically all about running one or two applications that are not on the main OS or about getting rid of a whole lot of shit to just run one or two applications. If there was more cross platform stuff and less weird UIs like Win8 it wouldn't be so common. I've got a touchscreen tablet running Win7 because Win8 is shit even in that situation if you just have one main application you want to run.

    3. Re:Again, why? by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      So there is this trend about wanting to run 'foreign' OSs on computers that come w/ one already. ...

      "Trend"? I've been doing this for at least 10 years. And I know lots of folks who've been doing it for much longer.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    4. Re:Again, why? by maestroX · · Score: 1

      If you have a MacBook, then OS-X already supports whatever the MacBook will be dealing w/.

      Correct. I have an early 2011 macbookpro with all features supported. Since the battery life, performance and screen size is still sufficient today (after a $100 ssd upgrade), I will not be buying a new laptop soon.
      The only thing going down hill is OSX. Either on subjective issues (cloud, playdoh) or objective ones (hardware requirements), so I better prep for alternatives.

    5. Re:Again, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Huh? What if one wants to use local storage and applications which are not tied to Google or which do not send data to Google "for improving the experience"? If the Chromebooks had a bit more standard keyboard (lack of delete key is a showstopper for me), I would buy one of those to replace one aging Eeepc with it, and of course, replace the spyware-by-design OS with a Debian.

    6. Re:Again, why? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      So don't these OSs have VMs that one can use? OS-X? Trisquel? ChromeOS? Okay, maybe the last one doesn't, but what about the first 2?

    7. Re:Again, why? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Typical Chromebooks aren't powerful enough to run VMs nicely. The limitation is quite hard in the RAM department, one may not want to spend money in upgrading it when performance will be bad even after RAM upgrade - why not run proper Linux distribution on bare metal and save the expense and performance hit?

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  22. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by tlambert · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wake me up when they post a useful article on how to run Unix on my Macbook Pro.

    Mac OS X *is* UNIX. It's certified. Wake me up when Linux passes conformance testing.

    PS: We even put UUCP on the damn thing to pass the tests; it's definitely UNIX, so feel free to spin up your own NetNews node on your MacBook Air.

  23. Not POSIX compliant, certified UNIX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Actually Mac OS X is actually an honest to god certified UNIX, not merely POSIX compliant.

  24. Thank fricking God it requires developer mode. by tlambert · · Score: 0

    Thank fricking God it requires developer mode.

    That is all. A number of us fricking killed ourselves to make sure the thing would notify you when someone had futzed with your machine, and it'd be a terrible shame if 3 minutes and a screwdriver could trojan your machine.

    1. Re:Thank fricking God it requires developer mode. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I can't work out if you're joking. I would never want a computer where I couldn't replace the OS with 3 minutes and a screwdriver.

    2. Re:Thank fricking God it requires developer mode. by swillden · · Score: 1

      I can't work out if you're joking. I would never want a computer where I couldn't replace the OS with 3 minutes and a screwdriver.

      But do you want a computer where someone else can replace your OS with three minutes and a screwdriver without you being able to tell that they did so?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    3. Re:Thank fricking God it requires developer mode. by Pope+Hagbard · · Score: 1

      Funnily enough some Chromebooks require you to turn a screw to enter dev mode.

  25. Re: Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Running NetBSD on a yam here.

  26. Thanks Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See now this is why Google is so successful.

    1. Re:Thanks Google by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 1

      See now this is why Google is so successful.

      I agree.

      Google has had no problem in the past with people rooting (jail breaking) their product, once sending dev developers a soon to be released Android phone so they could have a head start.

      It's a good bet to say if you own an Android tablet/cell phone and enter "about device" clicking 7 times on say the "Kernel Number" listing or one of the info blocks you will enter Developer mode, for the Samsung S5 it's the “build number” info block.

      Once your in dev mode you can run ADB:
      "ADB, Android Debug Bridge, is a command-line utility included with Google’s Android SDK. ADB can control your device over USB from a computer, copy files back and forth, install and uninstall apps, run shell commands, and more."
      http://www.howtogeek.com/12576...

      A requirement and first step to rooting (jail breaking (owning)) a device.

      Motorola said it wasn't possible for the Google Xoom tablet to use KitKat 4.4.2, a developer showed it was http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/... making the old new again.

    2. Re:Thanks Google by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Motorola said it wasn't possible for the Google Xoom tablet to use KitKat 4.4.2, a developer showed it was http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/... making the old new again.

      Handset manufacturers are just liars. Sony claimed they couldn't put ICS on the Xperia Play after they promised all Xperia devices would get ICS, but the community has done it since, too.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  27. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 2

    I'm trying to install Solaris on my Vic 20 but transferring the CDs over to cassettes is taking forever!

  28. Chrome OS doesn't want user installed binaries by perpenso · · Score: 1

    If they are making it easy to run "normal" Linux, why not install the appropriate libs and allow Linux apps to run side-by-side with Chrome apps?

    Because that opens a big gaping hole in Chrome's security. Part of the security of Chrome OS is to not let users install binaries. They only get web apps.

    This model is broadening to a degree with the ability to run some Android apps. However my understanding is that these apps must be pure java, no NDK, no direct usage of the Linux kernel and other related system level libraries. The Android app lives entirely in its Java sandbox.

  29. glibc. probably sysvinit as pid1, etc. Still Linux by raymorris · · Score: 1

    I've never in my life uttered "gnu/Linux", until now, but to answer the question, glibc is approximately everywhere. Also, unless you've been infected with systemd, you're probably running gnu sysvinit as pid 1 (or upstart).

    You COULD run a minimal Linux system at runlevel 3 without any gnu code, but for a desktop system, running a graphical desktop environment, you're probably going to have some gnu in a few places.

  30. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When does it prompt me for what terminal type I am using?

    It doesn't have to, its a Mac, it knows what type you are using without asking: the terminal type Apple has chosen for you.

  31. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um ... OS X is a certified UNIX

  32. Lennart already announced the systemd glibc replac by raymorris · · Score: 0

    Lennart already announced that systemd will include it's own replacement for glibc, the most widely used gnu software.

    http://lists.freedesktop.org/a...

  33. we dual boot to an sdhc, except don't by raymorris · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I set my wife's up to boot Linux from a high-performance SD card. Her previous computer ran Linux, so I figured I'd make the Chromebook run what she's familiar with.

    It turns out, everything she does on the computer she does through a web browser, so she's never had any reason to boot to Linux. ChromeOS suits her use case perfectly. I find that surprising, but ChromeOS is apparently very good at what it's designed for - email, general web browsing, YouTube, Facebook, Netflix, etc.

    1. Re:we dual boot to an sdhc, except don't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so she's never had any reason to boot to Linux. ChromeOS suits her use case perfectly.

      Except that Google is trap, tracing, and profiling everything you do. This doesn't happen when running Linux.

  34. Pedantic busybody with busybox by dbIII · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think they mean "GNU/Linux,"

    Not necessarily. Some distros, especially for lean systems, have nothing from GNU. There is more than one libc and busybox is not a GNU project.

    1. Re:Pedantic busybody with busybox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which distributions are those?

    2. Re:Pedantic busybody with busybox by dbIII · · Score: 1

      uClinux and descendants for a start.

  35. So this Wndows tech guy was selling me his PC by Provocateur · · Score: 1

    but I put a linux live USB stick in. When he was startled as boot messages scrolled by, I asked him to relax, it's just getting your credit card info and your shoe size. No, you don't have to take them out of your wallet.

    --
    WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  36. Re:Lennart already announced the systemd glibc rep by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

    Sun Mar 31 17:22:15 PDT 2013

    April the 1st, east of the Atlantic.

  37. So much misinformation here it's absurd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    reposting from my comment in Google+ post linked in the article:

    A lot of people are really jumping to some incorrect conclusions here. The features listed above mostly are not new, just now you don't have to enable them via the command line. They have NOTHING to do with booting an OS that isn't ChromeOS/ChromiumOS.

    They won't magically enable you boot Linux from a USB stick, which you can only do if your ChromeOS device already has a working Legacy BIOS payload (ie, SeaBIOS -- which the Pixel and Haswell-based devices have).

    If you have a newer BayTrail based ChromeBook, you still can't boot an off-the-shelf Linux USB installer because your device doesn't have a legacy BIOS payload.

    1. Re:So much misinformation here it's absurd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah - you've got to have an Intel based Chromebook to install OTS Linux.

      Its confusing that you can get things branded "Chromebook", running ChromeOS, yet having completely different hardware architectures squirreling away inside.

    2. Re: So much misinformation here it's absurd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not true. I have the first ARM Samsung Chromebook and it will boot a Linux distro just fine from a USB stick. First you enable USB boot from the crosh shell, and you press Ctrl+U at the boot screen to boot from USB.

      Been like that since day 1.

  38. This enables.... by niftymitch · · Score: 1

    This may enable potentially important solutions like: http://www.spi.dod.mil/lipose....
    Lightweight Portable Security (LPS) creates a secure end node from trusted media on
    almost any Intel-based computer (PC or Mac). LPS boots a thin Linux operating system
    from a CD or USB flash stick without mounting a local hard drive.

    The LPS may be less than ideal but it is a good step forward and makes it clear
    that a like solution has a valid place in government and corporate America.
    Some think this is a baby step. I think it is a step in the correct direction.

    --
    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
  39. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Better yet, Minix 3.2

  40. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake me up when they post a useful article on how to run Unix on my Macbook Pro.

    Where is the problem? I am running Mint on my Macbook Pro for some 2 years without problem. Nowadays I very seldom use OSX.

  41. dont want it on a usb stick.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how about relaxing bios restrictions so we can load it or even windows (on x86 based ones) on the hdd or ssd without jumping through hoops instead??

  42. yes but was it missing usb boot before?wtf? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    the friggin 7 year old netbook I have playing music can boot from USB.

    so really - are they seriously saying that this was not available before? like what the fuck?

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:yes but was it missing usb boot before?wtf? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

      What they're saying is it wasn't an option on Crapbooks before. And what's the excitement - most chromebooks only have 2 gig of ram and 16 gig of storage. Even the "high end" ones only have 4 gig and 32 gig. And at the price of a high-end chromebook you can buy a laptop with 4 cores, 8 gig ram, and 500 gig-750 gig storage so if you're going to run an OS off a USB key anyway, you're better off without a chromebook. (Of course, you have the option of running it directly off the hdd as well with a laptop).

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:yes but was it missing usb boot before?wtf? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      No they weren't. This was all in the context of Chromebooks.

    3. Re:yes but was it missing usb boot before?wtf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      laptop with 4 cores, 8 gig ram, and 500 gig-750 gig storage

      Which would still run slower than even the mid level Chromebooks.

    4. Re:yes but was it missing usb boot before?wtf? by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Not really - I just finished checking.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  43. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clever...

  44. Google's bullshit by DECTerm · · Score: 0

    The best way to boot and INSTALL linux on chromebooks -mainly some older models - is to install the coreboot/seabios, wipe their shite OS and install something more functional.

  45. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by ogdenk · · Score: 2

    Depends how you have your login and shell profile scripts set up.

    In fact, you can plug in a USB->Serial adapter and set up a real VT220 as a secondary console, or if you have a hackintosh with a real serial port, you can just use that.

    Or if the machine is set up to ask for a username and password instead of clicking a picture, you can even type '>console' as the user name and drop directly to shell without using terminal.app.

  46. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by ogdenk · · Score: 1

    That's only true in iOS-land. ;-)

  47. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Crapping Commodore 1541 disk drive keeps mangling my installation CD.

    That's because the 1541 is a *floppy* disk drive and your CD is solid.
    You should soften your CD first by heating it in a microwave oven for a minute or so. Then quickly take it out and put it in the disk drive before it cools.

  48. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by kanweg · · Score: 1

    Getting it to run is probably more appropriate description.

    I've made several attempts to install Ubuntu. Following Canonical's instructions didn't work.

    I've also enlisted the help of an open source installation tool. I did get to a couple of screens for making basic installation selections and then I believe the installer was supposed to do its magic but the screen turned fully black and remained that until I forced a restart.

    Bert

  49. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The joke was that Chrome OS is Linux-bsaed, just like OS X is Unix.

  50. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    PS: We even put UUCP on the damn thing to pass the tests; it's definitely UNIX, so feel free to spin up your own NetNews node on your MacBook Air.

    But please, don't use UUCP. Because some of us have suffered enough with it that you shouldn't have to.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  51. Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean it (Linux) now runs on (Chrome) Linux??

  52. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by HuguesT · · Score: 1

    It already does unless you've forcibly removed OSX.

  53. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by unixisc · · Score: 1

    Why doesn't RedHat, or Oracle, or SUSE, or someone else run Linux through the compliance tests?

  54. VP8 is BSD licensed by tepples · · Score: 1

    Technology-wise: In rate-distortion terms, Theora is comparable to H.263-family codecs such as DivX (a popular implementation of MPEG-4 ASP). VP8 is comparable to the baseline profile of H.264. This means the picture can be more detailed at the same bitrate.

    License-wise: WebM is distributed under the revised BSD license. As a free alternative to a patented format, it's in a similar position to Ogg Vorbis, for which RMS approved of use of the revised BSD license.

  55. What makes GNU/* by tepples · · Score: 1

    So, it is probably more correct to say Linux without the GNU unless we should call Windows "GNU Windows" since one might choose to run a Mingw app.

    MinGW is just GCC with the C library of Microsoft Visual C++ 6. If someone were to install Cygwin, on the other hand, that might stand a better chance of being called GNU/Windows. (In fact, Cygwin stands for Cygnus GNU/Windows.) And you're not the only person to present this sort of reduction to absurdity argument. So I set out to define a "GNU/$kernel" userland for myself as GNU Coreutils plus two other major GNU components, such as Bash, Emacs, GCC, or shared glibc. GNU/Linux counts, Cygwin counts, and MSYS counts.

    Would "X11/Linux" be a better term to distinguish Fedora, Debian, and the like from Android and uses of Linux on router appliances?

  56. Hide teh LUnix by tepples · · Score: 1

    Perhaps you should try installing LUnix on your Commodore computer instead of *BSD.

  57. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by rdnetto · · Score: 1

    What's wrong with UUCP?

    --
    Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
  58. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    UUCP ... I used it a lot back in the day of dial up modems. It was painful, but I did get an SGI machine to dial in and out. Now, I sometimes use "cu" to connect to a serial port, but I tried that recently and found that the hardware flow control was on and I didn't see a way to turn off hardware flow control on "cu", so now I use "screen" or "picocom".

    Hard to believe, but I actually used "UUCP over TCP/IP" to get set up an email server behind a fireware... using "sendmail". The pain, the pain.

  59. Re:Lennart already announced the systemd glibc rep by greg1104 · · Score: 1

    Anyone who reads to the end should realize this a joke even without noting the date: "We can add a kernel later on, following the GNU/Hurd’s successful
    approach".

  60. it does if you use Youtube, Gmail, Google on Linux by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Absolutely Google is targeting ads to her based on many database entries associated with her userid. She gets ads for $8 off a $27 pack of baby formula, exactly the brand she uses, because Google's database indicates she has a baby. That's absolutely the price she pays for heavily using YouTube, gmail, Google search, Maps, etc.

    That would also be true if she was using Google maps, YouTube, etc on Linux. We've decided that we like YouTube, we even like Google Now, and in exchange for all of these services we're willing to let ONE company have us in their database. The other option would be to have an email provider who has access to our emails, someone else have our search history, maybe Microsoft maps and navigation would know where we go. We've chosen Google - on our Linux machines, our Android phones, my OSX Mac Pros.

    I understand other people might make a different choice. YouTube on Linux isn't really any different, though.

  61. Re:glibc. probably sysvinit as pid1, etc. Still Li by KBrown · · Score: 1

    You might want to contribute to http://linux-not-gnu.org/ . I have already been able to replace glibc with uClibc and now clang is able to fully replace gcc so it's only matter of replacing a couple more libs to get a 100% non-GNU operating system with a Linux kernel.

    --
    --
  62. why? by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Why? I wouldn't want to adopt Stalman's eating habits, by why such an effort to avoid Gnu software?

    I suppose the new GPL version can be problematic, the way the wrote the anti-patent stuff. It REALLY should apply only to patents related to a company's contributions, in my opinion. The fact that it can kill a patent from some other division, based on code that the company has never seen, creates an unnecessary risk for companies, which discourages them contributing.

  63. Re:Chromebook Shmomebook by tlambert · · Score: 1

    Why doesn't RedHat, or Oracle, or SUSE, or someone else run Linux through the compliance tests?

    Primarily? Because it won't pass the testing without a lot of work. In particular, there are negative assertion tests on header files (some things are not allowed to be dragged into the namespace, and the header are promiscuous). There's also a whole bunch of testing having to do with full and almost-full devices. There are also signal issues and process group membership issues. For example, you can "escape" an exclusion group on Linux by setting your default group to one of your other groups; Linux overwrites the membership in cr_groups[0] as a synonym for cr_gid, and doesn't handle POSIX saved IDs quite right, either (Neither do the BSDs, so this isn't a Linux-only problem).

    Last time I attempted to run the test suit on Linux as a lark, there were about 20K failures (mostly tests not compiling because of it bailing out over the header file issues. There are also some parts of the system that have been subsumed by systemd; this isn't intrinsically a problem on its own, so long as the system *also* supports flat config files as an addendum, at least for some aspects of logging.

    Also, getting the UUCP to work over USB serial dongles is likely to be something of a bear, unless you make the HDB modifications for handling the "rung indicate" as a notification to take the shared file lock on the callout device so the getty's don't start trying to chat with each other.

    Finally, there some considerable legal/licensing issues for the trademark.