Slashdot Mirror
SuSE Cluster
nicedreaM writes "Found this link:
SuSE will be introducing a new cluster
system called SALT (SuSE Advanced Linux Technology).
Also they'll be releasing an Alpha distribution."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
ESR himself has said it: "SuSE is the worst" of the Linux distributions for its inclusion of non-free software and for not making it known to the user when he is installing as to what is free and what is not.
I think RMS said it, but I could be wrong. Anyway, it doesn't matter, because your still an idiot. Have you even installed SuSe? It lists commercial software in a separate area. When I installed suse I always knew what I was getting, and I always got exactly what I wanted.
More to the point, SuSe gives users a truck load of software, yes some of it is not free. It is still the users' choice to install whatever they want. I get that with SuSe.
Next time, know what you're talking about before you comment.
Uh, have you ever installed SuSE Linux? SuSE's actually really good about separating non-open source software out under "pay." At least they give people a clear choice.
But I guess if you're going to be dogmatic about it, your overall point about SuSE is right.
First, is the processor clustering or redundancy clustering?
Secondly, forget Beowulf. Check out DIPC (Distributed IPC). http://wallybox.cei.net/dipc/
So What! SuSE Rocks! It is the most comprehensive Package out there, and dare I say, the easiest transition from those accustomed to Slackware.
Perhaps it packages several Demo programs, but they each contain their own liscensing which the user can read if he feels the umption.
I for one LOVE the fact that I can install like 3 Gigs of nearly current cool stuff at one go..
JWitt
Maybe ESR *did* say it, and maybe ESR isn't god and makes mistakes sometimes, but gee, I have to say I feel real sorry for ESR these days. People put all kinds of words in his mouth, man. And all kinds of losers claim credit for what he's done, too. Like OSM, for example.
When will they get it that the US market is more important?
Since SuSE is the subject here -
I've got a 3c509B (3com etherlink III - ISA pnp) that I can't get either 5.3 or 6.0 to recognize for an FTP installation.
The bootdisk doesn't have the new module, and neither does the modules disk. Anyone have any pointers? (I don't even have access to a DOS box to run the 3Com pnp-disable utilities!)
thanks.
In general I think you are correct...This time, however, I think the writer was simply disappointed that "he" ("she/it"?):-) couldn't deal with it in German.
Sorry dude, the assumption / belief that USA is ahead of the game in hi-tech is not going to hold water for very long. Linux is not an American invention and many of the best developers live in Europe/Russia. You can't really expect them to put out English versions BEFORE their own language versions.
Oh well, at least you'll still get MS software first.
Recently we discussed whether Microsoft pays people to post opinions against their competitors in public forums.
I wonder if RedHat does the same...
We have seen quite a bit of rough tactics from RedHat recently, so this seems quite possible. After all, SuSE is probably the biggest competitor to RedHat, and practically everybody who has tried both agrees that SuSE is technically superior (esp. quality of implementation).
Maybe RedHat tries to keep people away from testing SuSE this way.
As for the facts:
SuSE's install tool Yast gives tons of warnings if you select packages with non-free licenses for install.
That they include non-free sw is a great thing, as downloading all this stuff would be horrendously expensive in Europe.
And, BTW, RedHat includes non-free stuff as well, although it comes with far less software than SuSE (maybe 1/3).
As for the statement:
It wasn't from ESR, but from RMS, and it was made based upon wrong/obsolete information.
Caldera, for example, is much worse than SuSE with regard to freedom. They have non-free networking stuff and their non-free (Looking glass?) desktop buried deep inside their distro.
SuSE, however, is the biggest contributor to XFree86 (but maybe this is what pisses RMS off: X is not GPL).
Recently we discussed whether Microsoft pays people to post opinions against their competitors in public forums. I wonder if RedHat [sic] does the same...
And your proof that Red Hat does this is...?
You don't have any, do you?
Let's see your evidence of "rough tactics", whatever the fuck that means.
You don't have any, do you?
If you don't have anything meaningful to say, shut the fuck up. We have enough division in Linux without bigots such as yourself.
And Richard Jelinek does confirm this (yes that's me rj@suse.de).
Every software shipped with SALT I is open sourced. Every software that will be presented at CeBIT on SALT I is open sourced. period.
In my experience, the only *pre-selected* "non-free" package is xv, and they do in fact point out that it has a restrictive, shareware-type license. I also recall that, when you select the qt libraries, there is a pop-up cautioning you to make sure that you understand the license terms for qt. It always seemed to me that they were simply less dogmatic than RedHat. My biggest problem with SuSE was always that, while they include an astounding number of packages, they don't seem to be able to keep up with recent releases. Some of the stuff on SuSE 5.3 is over a year old and three versions behind. Since they don't have the same level of contrib activity as RedHat, one often has to get down and dirty with RPM SPEC files to bring your system up to date. That, and the fact that it was virtually impossible to install a 2.1 kernal without just about rebuilding the whole OS. I really hope that they've fixed most of these problems in 6.0, which I haven't tried yet.
If you have a fast net connection, or you could burn a CD off one, you could make your own Alpha Debian set. I'm working off the slink tree of about a month ago, and I've had no problems so far (running kernel 2.2.1 and the TGA X server).
Anyway, whatever he said, your very stupid. Your posting says 'I don't have my own brain, but someone else said so and so, and since people generally like him that's my opinion as well, because I hope the think _I_'m smart when I repeat things other people who ARE smart have said'
--
Michael Hasenstein
http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/
Or there's a translation problem, which is what I think is the most likely scenario.
Hmm.... another alpha distribution. I have never used suse linux before, but it is good to see that someone else is making an effort to port to alpha. I am using redhat 5.1 right now on my alphas and I am a bit dissapointed. The more distributions that get ported to alpha, the faster all of the problems will be resolved.
Not true. Open Source and free software are _exactly_ the same thing. Open Source is just a new name for free software. See http://www.opensource.org.
The "Open Sound System" for Linux is not Open Source, because it doesn't meet the Open Source definition. (And the term Open Source was invented only about a year ago, specifically with this meaning.)
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
I'd like to see how it compares to beowulf, performance, usability, and complexity wise...
Get a life! As everyone else has said, SuSE does keep the "pay" software by itself (even Netscape).
All software does not need to be free. Heck, RedHat, SuSE, etc. all make money w/ Linux!
Why is it so many people who claim to be in support of programming and computer "freedom" take every opportunity to compalain about software that isn't free?
Free software won't always be the best option in every circumstance, simply because there are some areas where the free software world hasn't produced any finished products yet. (KDE vs. GNOME anyone?)
Freedom usually includes freedom of choice, including the freedom to choose not to use free software.
Uh... from the article itself (emphasis mine):
"According to Richard Jelinek of SuSE, the software cluster technology *IS OPEN-SOURCED*..."
I have 3c509 up and running since SuSE 5.2. After I upgraded (reinstalled) to SuSE 6.0 the card was working too.
Hope the following document will work for 3c509B
"3c509: howto Linux"-
http://www.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=309254354
http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/mosix/
(Requires Linux kernel 2.2.X, when finished.)
http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/mosix/
(Requires Linux kernel 2.2.X, when finished.)