Slashdot Mirror
Distribution Wars at User Friendly
merrell I think Illiad
has been reading Slashdot again: the latest user friendly cartoon almost
looks like a conversation lifted
from these pages.
Wacky.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Where is gnulix?
Nope.
Where is Slackware ? they forgot to mention slackware??
Redhat = Microsoft. .RPM, hmmm, can you say .CAB? Either they're going for proprietary garbage just like M$ or they've never heard of .tar.gz, .zip, .sh, with an embedded script or info file. If you have a proprietary program, fine, but you don't need a proprietary program AND format.
Anyone remember Redhat 5.0? fstab was totally messed up along with half a dozen other functions, and the 5.2 install is still makeing grown hackers cry.
And how the hell does the mac blow? Forget about the proprietary hardware, we all know about that.
... after all, anyone who can equate Red Hat with Microsoft (or, for that matter, refer to RPM as 'proprietary') is either trolling or smoking crack.
USer Friendly is stupid. He is trying to hard. His average cartoon is like this:
"Uh no, a customer is calling for tech support"
"I bet he is running Windows 95!""
"Yeah, Windows is dumb, people calling for tech support are dumb. blah blah blah"
get a life. Dilbert rulez.
On a side note, ironic that PC's had USB for years but itlanguished until Apple's iWhack came out
I know Win98 w/'newimprovedusbsupport' came out at the same time but all those peripherals are iMac schemed, not Win98 schemed if you catch my drift.
Really, I think this is more an example of MS' sad controll over hardware than Apple pushing innovation.
USB was "out" what... 2 years ago? Early adopter hardware was devoloped to use it. However, few wanted to put the effort into developing Windoze drivers since MS was bringing out their new OS Real Soon Now. Why duplicate the work? So the whole USB thing went into a holding pattern as MS's OS release slipped time and time again (or perhapse MS continued to hype vaporware?). Either case... innovation that should have happened years earlier takes a back seat. That is, until the marketing droids at MS are good and ready for the "innovation" at hand.
Granted... iMac's... severe... use of USB is an interesting twist to the tale. Its pretty obvious Apple is the one marketing USB heavy when compared to MS' "oh yea... and there's this other USB feature thingy... but check out our Browser!" marketing viewpoint.
Yeah, whatever happened to that distribution. Me thinks it's going extict. Evolution, baby! You evolve or you die!
As for RPM being proprietary, have you ever visited www.rpm.org, where the specifications, thorough documentation, the source, and more, for RPM is available, including a port to Solaris (which works great, btw.).
If that's proprietary, I wonder what isn't. Oh, and if you insist on tar, gz, etc, there's a small script called rpm2cpio that strip of the RPM header so you can use cpio to extract the archive.
As for being standard, cpio is way more standard than tar.gz - there's still commercial Unices that are shipped without gnu tar or gzip.
Just had that discussion last friday.
So today's strip got printed out and posted in my cubicle as soon as I saw it. Way to go, Illiad.
Rhymes with Crisco
I guess your dictionary and mine differ on what exactly "proprietary" means. Yours must have a rather unique definition.
.tgz and and *install* script? How to you keep track of what's installed? Or package dependancies? And do you have just as much of a beef with Debian's "proprietary" .deb files?
And how the hell do you *uninstall* or *upgrade* packages cleanly with a
My god. S/N is getting mighty low on Slashdot.
rpm is WAY more advanced than tar.gz .zip etc. Its nice to be easily able to UNINSTALL things. the rpm --rebuild option is pretty damn nice too.
then there's options to verify, options to query what all you have installed, "etc"x100. And the last I checked, the source to rpm is free. I couldn't find a GPL licence to it, but I would figure that Redhat would know that if they decided to not release the source or specs to their latest and greatest version of rpm, etc, Many of us that do use redhat would quickly revolt, and I would hope they know that. They aren't stupid.
If you really don't like rpms, you can convert them to debs or tar.gzs by alien. (however, I'm not sure how alien handles preinstall scripts).
btw, (since I am not sure you understand the meaning of proprietary) wouldn't zip fit your definition of a proprietary format?
None of those arguments give me any reason to consider switching to a *BSD version, and a couple of them even give me reason to stay away from BSD. If this is going to become a fight, the BSD people will have to find some more provocative arguments. As it is, it's only nitpicking on details and personal taste.
Why decide? I really don't get this "one thing is good, thus something else must be bad" mentality. (I think Dilbert is better as well, but the DustPuppy still cracks me up :)
...) anyway. Why not spend your time either a) discussing pros and cons or b) reading/using stuff you like? You don't have to read it, just because /. has a link to it. After all it's a free web.
;)
Why polarize issues (such as OS's, cartoons,
And if you have to blast someone just for the sake your ego I suggest hitting your head repeatedly against a wall instead (hey, it works for me
I agree 100%.
Only the humor challenged could find Dilbert even remotely funny.
Be careful! MkLinux only supports a small subset of PowerPC-based Macintoshes... Has there been *ANY* activity re: MkLinux lately.
And potential LinuxPPC users may want to avert proprietary Apple ASICs and other Apple-specific weirdness by investigating other PowerPC alternatives (Motorola MLB's, PIOS, future offerings from IBM, etc.).
In other words, there is a greater PowerPC world than Apple - in fact, Apple and their shoddy proprietary hardware should be considered the low end for any PPC Linux user...
There was a time (a heady time before Mac OS X) when it seemed Apple truly wanted Linux on Mac... But now with Mac OS X imminent, Apple seems to be ostracising MkLinux (and just about any other OS that will run on their hardware)...
Alternate OS users should voice their opinion on this matter and seriously consider PowerPC alternatives other than Apple.
Oh.
He's soo cool.
Why do you call an iMac a dumb terminal? I'd think it's a very smart one, probably significantly faster than my old P200.
I use Red Hat at work because I want to be certain that if I should move on (or up--yeah right) or have to take a significant amount of time off, my organization will be able to obtain support (which they can buy from Red Hat) and the person taking my place will be able to obtain documentation easily and do upgrades without much Linux knowledge. Red Hat covers all of these bases rather well.
I use Red Hat at home because that's what I use at work.
If I didn't have these concerns I would probably be more inclined towards Debian. The OS I've enjoyed tinkering with the most, though, isn't even Linux. It's OpenBSD!
Mandrake is not mentioned, but it is the one that I use... It is the best distribution actually, IMHO (http://www.linux-mandrake.com)
nah, SuSe pays more attention to multilingual issues. He's Russian, ya know.
Forget Gnulix! I am offended they didn't mention Slackware, the obviously superior distrib!
I think it's great that we have such a variety of operating systems to choose from, and all of it's free!
I want more free operating systems, not fewer! Dammit, why are there only three BSDs? What's wrong with you people?
Someone needs to do something about this wacky idea that there can be only one OS, or a few "serious" OSes. A healthy ecosystem requires diversity and specialization, and I think software works the same way. People who piss and moan about "fragmentation" and how it allegedly killed commercial Unix really get on my nerves. What killed commercial Unix was all of them trying to be the One True Unix instead of learning to play nice with everyone else.
Fragmentation is a strength of both Linux and BSD, and together of open source operating systems, because we get diversity, specialization, and cross-polination. Vendors may not like it, but are these operating systems for them or for us?
Red Hat sells a distribution too? Wow.. I wish someone would have told me! Here I've been wasting all this time just doing ftp installs from their mirrors and I could have just bought a CD.
Sigh. Out of all the posts so far, nobody
"Gets It" (tm).
All You Zombies are a living example of the
joke in the cartoon. Let's analyze the strip,
shall we?
Frame 1) Corporate policy has changed, the
programmers are no longer forced to use M$.
They are allowed to use Linux.
Frame 2) CEO expects this will make the
programmers happy.
Frame 3) Programmers aren't happy. They are
spending their time in-fighting over which
distro to use -- instead of installing and producing!
Don't you see? If we don't get over the childish
squabbles (or at least, put them in their proper
perspective), we'll continue to squabble while
we eat our Microsoft Toast(tm) from our Microsoft
General LifeFunction Appliance(tm).
The first cartoon I check every day is always Sluggy Freelance. Bun-Bun Rules!
Then I go check out the geeks at User Friendly.
Finally, If I have time, I go read Dilbert. (Yawn)
Either Mac users have a higher percentage of Linux users than PC users do (I wouldn't be suprised) or the Mac market is bigger than people really think.
Why are Mac users so myopic? There are _many_ other PPC boxes than Apple PowerMacs - what are BeBoxes, IBM RS/6000, etc.? Another poster mentions Motorola raw hardware and other PPC integrators.
From the NetBSD people, it seems that Apple hardware is the most difficult to port to, and often must rely on a MacOS bootloader as well.
Somehow I would thoroughly object to seeing MacOS (*yecch*) prior to booting into NetBSD or Linux...
Enough already, it's only a comic strip!
Whaaaaaa, but where is Mandrake?
Whaaaaaa, but where is Slackware?
Get a clue, get a life, get a lobotomy, whatever it takes!
Whaaaaaaaaa
Since I haven't seen the standard "This is why MS
will win..." response yet, I thought I'd post one:
It's because of all these choices that Linux users
have to cope with that MS will win in the end. Life
is so much simpler when you have no choices. Being
enslaved by software monopolies is totally underrated.
Ooops! Maybe not.
It is available in the Jammy Cap distribution, especially designed for running porno web sites and smut surfing the web.
your right!! once linux crushes micro$oft, then the distributions are gonna go to war!! it's gonna suck... maybe we can all just agree that linux rules, no matter which distribution you have. who cares?! who gives a fuck?! they're all not THAT different...
http://www.mcg.mot.com/WebOS/omf/GSS/MCG/products/ overview.html?[prodid=MTX604-070
http://www.essi.fr/~degea/pios/index.html
Also, recent announcements by IBM re: support for Linux on RS/6000.
All have been mentioned on Slashdot recently.
No, you won't see a large installed user base yet, but hopefully Apple's heavy-handed tactics re: their proprietary low performance firmware and their lip service to Open Source OS should sway most intelligent potential PPC users to non-Apple PPC hardware.
The PowerPC is an excellent architecture - it would do much better without Apple continually crippling it!
is redhat forcing you to use it? no
can you still install programs from other formats? yes
.rpms are optional, redhat is not like microsoft at all, you moron...
Well its that or the other extreme (Red Hat) personally I'd rather use something I have more control over (Slackware).
:)
And you have more control over Slackware how? I'd never use slackware on a critical server. Too much dicking around with idiotic and outdated crap.
Or a perfect mix (Debian). Truth is (Debian is balanced so I'll ignore it.)
Debian is balanced so you'll ignore it. Sounds like Slackware logic to me.
I'd rather use Slack cause its not so capitalistic as rhl
Care to compare results? What has Slackware given the world of Linux that compares to RPM, Gnome, etc.? Capitalism is the only way you'll have the resources to give something back to the community.
has fewer bugs
Care to quantify that? I've never seen empirical data suggesting this. And if my experience with both distributions is any indication, Redhat gets the bug-fixes out much faster than Slack. Oh, that's right... Slackers are supposed to compile the fixes themselves.
doesn't configure everything for those of you who can't read man
Umm... I can and do read man pages and docs. I can and do configure systems. But I'd rather my distribution do the menial shit for me. My time is obviously quite a bit more valuable than yours.
and in general is better for the linux community since it provokes the user to actually have a brain instead of click around
My users don't want to have to spend weeks of reading HOWTOs just to run a friggin' app. They want a *modern* OS that works. They also want an OS that can be configured with a GUI. But those of us who are power-users want access to the config files as god intended it -- with vi. Redhat gives us all what we need. You must think you are just so 'leet to think that everyone should learn vi and the ins and outs of all Linux's config files. Christ.
RedHat sells their linux
Oh... yep, they sure do. And they give it away. Or have you not seen the Redhat distribution directory at your favorite Sunsite mirror?
Don't forget about 'make world'. Someone I knew showed me this once. He set his default compiler to egcs and ran a 'make world' on his FreeBSD box. A couple hours later, every program on his box had been recompiled from the latest sources on the FTP servers.
What do you mean by 'SUSE is dreamy'?
AND they both provide caffeinated beverages for FREE to their employees.
Now there was a distribution.
they both sell their product... (the sole reason rhl gets any press)
Free as in speech, not as in beer. Hell, even RMS endorses the selling of free software.
they are both a mostly visual product (bet that 90% of rhl's users are xwin only)
Of all the RH users that I know of, none are XWindows only.
they both have more bugs than their competators..
Caldera's LISA tool is one enormous bug. YaST is nice, but non-free, and given a choice between bugginess and freedom I'll choose freedom. Debian achieves stability by using old kernels and old builds -- the development tree is no more or less stable than RH is.
they both get lots of hype off each other
Of course they do. It's free advertising for Red Hat. They're not a philanthropy, they're a business, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
they both have bloody morons for users (since the gui system requires no knowledge of what you are doing)
Of all the RH users I know, only one doesn't have a college degree in CompSci, and that one has a double major in math and physics.
they both have their own webbrowsers (Red Baron/MSIE)
When was the last time Red Baron was shipped with Red Hat?? 4.2?
they both have the same concept for logo's and sayings... (the little RedHat PimpGuy running somewhere with his hand on his hat and briefcase in hand suggests he is going somewhere and in a hurry, "Where do you want to go today?" is quite similar, just in print)
Oh, so now you're saying that Red Hat is evil because they've got a marketing division?
both foster point and click "hacking"
Don't see how they can foster that. GUIs are used by people who don't want to hack, they want to get productive use out of their systems. GUIs, CLIs, and lots of caffeine are used by people who don't care about productive use, they just want to hack.
both would buy each other if possible
Mmmhmm. They're BUSINESS COMPETITORS. That's what they're supposed to do.
redhat is (chances are) the most common os for dual boot on primarily m$ machines (whose users say that they are primarily linux just to fit in with the geeks)
Ah, so now you're judging the merits of software according to the "distasteful" people who use it? I learned better than that in kindergarten. If you like, I'll give Mrs. Lawton a call and see if she can't give you her special lesson on how to judge people and things by themselves, not by stereotypes.
In short, you're either a complete crackhead or a troll. If you want to hate the capitalist free-market economy, that's all well and good, but have the intelligence to actually stake that out as what you're in opposition to, instead of opposing a perfectly reasonable free software company that happens to be making absurd profits.
The UNIX paradigm is this: If a tool already exists, expand upon it.
Ummm... no. The UNIX paradigm is "small tools that can be combined".
Er, "fast, cheap and good".
Huh. "Reliability, Stability, All In One"?
UNIX airlines -- they give everyone a set of mechanic's tools and let them build their own airline. No two people want to go the same place, but once they land, everybody's sure enjoyed the trip.
The fact that you can claim what the UNIX paradigm is says very definitively that You Do Not Grok UNIX.
And while you're at it, you contradict your own post. Even if we accept your paradigm statement, we're stuck thinking that you've been smoking your sweat socks, because RPM *does* build on an existing tool -- cpio.
Debian, SuSE, RedHat
Actually, he's Estonian. Trust me.
... only more general. Scott Adam's sure as heck wouldn't have a distro war :)
Well non-emulation mode works with better BIOSes.
That can be any size... actually NT uses it which is why so many boxes which claim to be able to boot CD's can't boot NT4.
Mac OS X will have the best GUI of MacOS and the stability of BSD Unix. Apple has NeXT technology. Apple has MACH. Apple makes the best G3 PowerPC boxes, PERIOD.
Mac OS X will have WebObjects and NetBoot among its superior technology. See www.macopinion.com for full details on Mac OS X!
Why fool around with Linux when you can soon get a G3 and Mac OS X?
I think the context of the cartoon was to show the GOOD versions of linux, not the most security hole ridden, sloppest management .. and all around crappy version of linux.
Again, maybe I am wrong and fixed the 100 or so holes that were present for THREE tears without being fixed (wakes up from dream and laughs.
Maintains within very small values of `maintain'.
:-)
:-)
Not to dis Pat, he must do a hell of a lot of work. Just think how much better Slack would be if he assigned maintainers to software packages, had strong policy, and built it like most OSS projects. Oh, hang on.. isn't that like Debian? *runs*
If you like Slack, good for you. If you try to make me run it in a production environment, bad for you.
Ahh, flamefests are fun. I'm feeling all toasty now.
Somehow I would thoroughly object to seeing MacOS (*yecch*) prior to booting into NetBSD or Linux...
Incidentally, if you use the Open Firmware method of booting LinuxPPC, the first thing you see at boot is the happy little penguin followed by a series of console text. Nothing there to say the computer used to run MacOS.
Bring on the different distros. Bring on diversity. :-)
There will be too many targets for M$ to target.
Diversity and choice are the cornerstones of Linux.
We need the different distros. If RedHat gets too big
and conceited I will go with SuSE. Or Debian.
Or GreenCat
True, first 3 that were good.. Still says VERY little for slackware (the slack is in the name for a reason ya know)
Now now. Lets not pick on the humerly challenged that think Dilbert is good and UF isn't.. I use to read Dilbert all the time, but starting 2 years ago it stoped being all that funny.
... don't know any more.
Then I found UF and could relate to it. To the people that don't think UF is funny, they must be the ones that are on the calling tech support end. Because 90% of the comics ARE bassed on Real Life. Where as dilbert
If ya don't like it, shut yer ya and let the UFNWO roll you over. UF is here to stay and will overpower Dilbert in the tech/copertate comic.
Your vague, yet insistent questions beg their own question: why the f*ck are you asking? Having admin'd a boatload of Redhat boxes, I'm not sure what exactly you are after (other than sheer enjoyment of asking idiotic questions) since I've never had a problem with 'rpm -e' removing a package. RPM removes them quite cleanly.
A proper question on this would be something along the lines of "I've had problems with 'rpm -e' not removing package X cleanly. Here's what happens..." I'm sure everyone would be willing to help you figure out what the problem is.
Now... that said, there are numerous RPMs contributed by well meaning, yet ignorant packagers who don't know how to correctly construct their uninstall scripts, leaving it up to the hapless user to fend for themselves. You won't find this sort of carelessness in official RPMs.
ar xv package.deb
gunzip -c data.tar.gz | tar xvf -
I believe rpm is just a short header followed by a cpio archive.
Yea, will my daddy can kick yor daddies arse.
Notice how the Dilbert fans have poor logic about hating UF?
The mouse - and the keyboard, for that matter - is the perfect size for the target market It's just that your hands are too big.
The only thing I'm wondering is, how come Apple has decided to stop making computers for adults?
First, make the packages yourself and ensure that everything is taken care of.
Then, rpm -e package_name
Overall, packages from RedHat do contain the proper list of files, and the pre/post un/in-stall scripts are reasonably well. I haven't looked over each and every one, as I pretty much just make things myself. But how well a package uninstalls comes down to whomever made the package. If they do things properly, there's no trouble.
Mandrake is really just Redhat with KDE as the default window manager and all, and maybe some updated RPMs. If your Linux box is up and running fine, there's little point in trying it. But if you're out for some adventure, go ahead and format and go.
I set Mandrake up on a spare PC recently. I had all the network, X, etc configurred nicely in under a half hour. Gotta love Redhat for that FTP install (no CDROM in this computer).
I was looking at making some modifications to a RedHat cd I have (update, add different RPMs, etc). But one thing that's stumped me is the boot information on it. Several Windows CD burning programs I've looked into (it's all they have the CDR attached to here), say to make a boot floppy then use it's image in the program. But there's gotta be a way to just rip that image off the CD, for modification and eventual re-burning. Would just dd'ing 1.44mb from the start of the CD do it?
- A.P.
--
"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
BTW, if you're using LinuxPPC (or any flavor for PPC other than the MkLinux), the new 2.2.x kernel screams!
--
I thought Pitr was more the Slackware type, myself.
--
Let's see...*every* User Friendly is available (as opposed to the last month of Dilbert, with a 1-week delay). And the copyright of UF is less restrictive than that of Dilbert.
Also, UF mentions the terms "Open Source" and "Linux". UF loads faster (to me anyway).
Posted by Mike@ABC:
I find it extremely hard to believe that Red Hat is getting slammed for trying to make money, and that you're letting this debate get so out of hand! Do you folks want Linux to succeed? In ten years, do you want your mom running a Linux box at home instead of Windows? (Actually, that question is kind of iffy.) Anyway, the success of Linux will depend on a standard most everyone can agree on, and it'll depend on vendors to sell support and apps. Hard-core tech heads have to realize that in order for the penguin to take on Microsoft, some of that hacker purity will have to be sacrificed in the name of standardization, profits and marketing. Is that a good thing for Linux? I wouldn't presume to debate that. But geez...factionalism like the kind I've read in this string will certainly doom Linux faster than Win98 running an IE beta.
And as for User Friendly, it's perhaps the funniest thing on the Web. One of these days, I'll convince my editor to run a story on him.
..should be a battle between Gnome, KDE, and console freaks.
Where would there be a roll your own FAQ? It sounds complex, but it should be a really good culmination of a lot of good Howtos that are somewhat complex and incompatable otherwise. Someone let me know if you find one.
^~~^~^^~~^~^~^~^^~^^~^~^~~^^^~^^~~^~~~^~~^~
A roll your own distribution faq in a distribution?
~ ^~
j/k
Almost every distribution comes with a download of the Linux Documentation Project, and at last look there wasn't one. I'm owning up to the fact it just might be too ambitios for any one person.
^~~^~^^~~^~^~^~^^~^^~^~^~~^^^~^^~~^~~~^~
P.S. Granted, too many distros is stupid too and I think we've got more than enough now.
P.P.S. Okay, I'll admit it, I use Red Hat... :)
This is the ultimate in NewSpeak. One has the individuality and balls to make choices and then argue over them and you have the audacity to compare that with Zombie-ism.
If that were really the case, then none of these personal preference items would be an issue.
Only because your comparison is absurd is there a potential problem. Even then, it becomes a philosophical or engineering issue over what one should spend more time on: design or implementation.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
RPM, while designed and implemented by RedHat, is hardly proprietary. You can install rpm on any Linux system and be able to use .rpm files just fine.
.tar.gz packages. If you wanted to upgrade an existing .tar.gz package, there's no easy way to do it short of duplicating the installation procedure, overwriting what's already there. This can end up leaving orphaned files (no longer used by the new version) and overwriting existing configuration files. I'm not saying RPM is the only format that supports some of these cases, but it certainly does a better job of managing your applications than .tar.gz, .zip and .shar packages.
To my knowledge, there is no set "standard" for "script or info file"s in
Isn't the source code available for the RPM utils? Doesn't that, by definition, make it not proprietary?
And, for the record, the only time I've ever had trouble with RedHat (5.0 *or* 5.2) is when I tried to install it over an existing Slackware installation. Obviously this is kind of a dumb thing to do. Since then I've never had problems on any system I've installed 5.[02]. Now, I'll admit that some people do have problems, but those people (like you) should be able to at least admit it's possible that your specific configuration or administration "habits" might be the source of your problems, not some inherent flaw in the distribution.
The main difference is that all Linux distros use almost exactly the same code base..the only real code tweaking individual distros do is to patch up extremely nasty bugs while waiting for the next version..
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
A while back I read an article that compared the speed of Apache on different distributions. I was surprised at the speed differences and wonder if there's similar differences with other software if no superfine speed tweaking has been done...
It's funny you mention this. It's like the MSNBC article comparing RedHat, OpenLinux, and SuSe. They reported Apache ran faster on OpenLinux. Well...it's ashame they didn't use the same version of Apache on each distribution. They used a newer version of Apache on OpenLinux than RedHat and SuSe.
"In true sound..." -Agents of Good Root
It HAS to be Caldera!!!!!
Deleted
no glibc
no (powerful) package management
no problem
or something
I still wish I had more comparative information on the different distributions. I've used both Red Hat and Debian and if I really had to make a choise between the two, I probably couldn't tell which one to choose.
A while back I read an article that compared the speed of Apache on different distributions. I was surprised at the speed differences and wonder if there's similar differences with other software if no superfine speed tweaking has been done...
Anyone know good data on the subject?
Oh, nice toon, too.
"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."
..I only have to chose from MkLinux, LinuxxPPC, and YellowDog. Soon Debian and others will also have PPC distros as well for my Mac. WHY?! Either Mac users have a higher percentage of Linux users than PC users do (I wouldn't be suprised) or the Mac market is bigger than people really think. I'm not complaining mind you, it just seems like Apple/Mac users either do something so far advanced it takes years to catch on or they wait for it to become standard on PC's then they overdo it like this USB thing. On a side note, ironic that PC's had USB for years but itlanguished until Apple's iWhack came out :-)
I know Win98 w/'newimprovedusbsupport' came out at the same time but all those peripherals are iMac schemed, not Win98 schemed if you catch my drift. Anyways. I can't wait til I've got some more cash so I can replace my aging Tower of Power Macs with a G3 Pro and iWhack dumb terminals so I can run my Mac stuff and access the linux server thru Mac X to compile and shit.
whatever, I'm just rambling, must be the flu.
bugger off you cowardly little bastard.
not only can I kick your ass but my ancient Mac could kick yours. how do I know, anyone whos posts shit like that anonymously must be afraid of reprisals.
bah, you're probably not worth the bother, you've already died a thousand deaths.
I decided that the best use of my 6100 was to turn him (his name is Alan Turing) into a Linux box. Why? Well, 6100's are notoriously ssssslllooooowwwww, and have NuBus (a strange interior config) as well. They vie in general wonkyness with the iMac that replaced him. However, he does right dandy with a command-line interface, and can render KDE with exquisite color and graphics. As a matter of fact, after playing with the iMac running 8.5.1, I began to really crave Linux...
teleny, friend of cats.
I have been making a point of installing an OS each week on my spare Cyrix 200MX, 64M system.
So far:
Slackware, SuSE, Redhat, Debian, Turbolinux, Stampede, BeOS, FreeBSD, Solaris 2.6, NT. I also booted Plan 9 for a moment...
Which is best? I suppose this would comprise an entire article. Debian appeals to my free software sensibilities, and has an excellent package manager, and follows the File System Standard fairly well. SuSE is dreamy; I love it, and that is the OS running on it now (Debian is still on my primary system). BeOS was neat, but is interesting only as a developer, not a user; there is almost no software for it on Intel. Everything else was less than excellent, though many were more than satisfactory. Notably sad, of course, was NT, with Solaris coming in a close second for silliness and bloat.
Linux versus BSD arguments have been the worst because neither side has any real advantage over the other. Each system has advantages and disadvantages. (Perhaps a compromise? BSD/Linux? Running Linus' kernel as a microkernel over BSD would prove interesting, albeit with a lot more overhead...)
Oh, and some fuel for the fire: BSD has real threads support. Have at you, Linux dogs! :)
Three Step Plan:
1. Take over the world.
2. Get a lot of cookies.
3. Eat the cookies.
The advantage to ports is when installation of a package can't be done due to a dependency failure, it automatically fetches the dependency as well. rpm, for example, will just tell us what's missing.
However, given that most ftp sites for any given rpm or deb will also have a dependency rpm/deb package, this may be a moot point.
Three Step Plan:
1. Take over the world.
2. Get a lot of cookies.
3. Eat the cookies.
One of the facts that a lot of people neglect is, no matter how much flaming occurs, splinter O/S's _WILL_ be produced. Open source isn't just about free, or reliable software; a lot of it is to hack the good hack just because you want to!
People love to compare aspects of their favorite O/S's because, let's face it, each O/S has its strong points. We all wish we could have an O/S with the strengths of every other O/S with none of the weaknesses.
For instance, FreeBSD executes system calls directly from the stack (as opposed to Linux, which calls it from the stack to a register). Whether this is a good or bad thing is dependent on what you're looking for.
The speed of DMA for a syscall is a plus for speed junkies on x86. On the other hand, it means that you can't port it easily to RISC processors, which require that all calls be run from registers anyway (thank you patterson and hennessy). Linux would be a wee bit more portable then, at the risk of losing DMA. What is more valuable? Totally subjective.
oh well...
Three Step Plan:
1. Take over the world.
2. Get a lot of cookies.
3. Eat the cookies.
DAMN SKIPPY!
Slackware is the best, in my opinion. I run 3.6 on a Pentium 100 at home on a 2.2.2 kernel, and I've never had a problem. I've tried Debian 2.0.2, but just getting past the Install was a chore in itself. I promptly switched back to Slackware.
Accipiter
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
I've used just about every single distribution available, including some that are not even out yet.( we get sent a LOT of betas) ;-)
;-)
Thus far I've enjoyed Mandrake as it's easy to install, doesn't default to that ugly FVWM (uses KDE instead
Administration has been a breeze and it comes with the basic GNOME libs and apps as well....
Not to mention the extra CD's that come with it that really save me time from downloading them off of the net!
Go Mandrake!
Nick
Linux Systems Group
UF is funny when it's not running fanfic that fawns over Linux or OSS. I liked the general geek stuff, like when the dustpuppy understood the idea of christmas decorations after looking at a modem rack. Or The Smiling Man. I mean the occasional references to geek culture are nice, but when you try to look like an insider by regurgitating every reference you can come up with, you look more like a reporter ("that there newfangled internet ...") than an insider.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
nuff said.
Slashdot's not the only place in the world where discussions like this go on.
You're all just a bunch of juvenile flaming idiots. This was supposed to be about the cartoon! I wanted to talk about the cartoon! Waaa!
I personally that a combination of Redhat and SUSE .sh. All you get more is dependencies and management.
is the best linux distribution. Redhat's RPM tech is fine for most users and personally I like the convienence that it provides. On the other hand I don't really like not being able to trade packages with my Slackware box. I think after a little more development RPM will become an essential part of Linux. RPM is nothing more than a glorified version of tar.gz and
-Kp2
Eat my butt
The iMac case is a dead on clone for the old dumb terminal ADM3's. You know, the ones out there just before the VT100 hit the scene. One of the last terminals that didn't support full screen mode, forcing you to use line editing or else :)
Well, less the pretty colors (or are they flavors?). Regardless, I can't see an iMac without laughing - just because of the cases (I've got nothing against the machines themselves per se).
The subject says it all :-(
~Linux is not The Answer. Yes is the answer. Linux is The Question.
Actually, I've done this before. It's pretty simple. Use the boot disk image that comes with redhat. :)
Worked for me.
X
"As for being standard, cpio is way more standard than tar.gz - there's still commercial Unices that are shipped without gnu tar or gzip."
Our DEC Alphas here at work don't have gzip; neither does Solaris (although I haven't checked the new Solaris 7 distro yet). What an odd omission. Anyone know why they don't include it?
Read the thread. RPM DOES build on an existing tool. It's called "cpio". Read your man page, it's a standard UNIX utility. And RedHat supplies rpm2cpio so those who are inclined can read just the cpio parts.
.tar files for only being readable by tar? Oops, not true: cpio can read .tar files.
What's next, flaming
-- Blame any errors on your own stupidity. All wrongs reserved.
:-)
-- ATTENTION: do not read this sig. It doesn't say much.
but it's true, you know.
I agree; this is where the real heated debate appears.
But I do have to take issue with your threads comment; it should be the other way around.
Is it just me, or does this person have WAAAAYYYY too much free time??
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
He just said that the only CDR's he had were attached to Windows boxen.
Or didn't you see that?
--
- Sean
It's a fine line between trolling and karma-whoring... and I think I just crossed it.
- Sean
Wow, This sounds like a Microsoft Windows / OS2 flame from 5 years ago. I think each distribution has its own good qualities. I like the lean-ness of Slackware. I use it for my firewall / ipmasquerading machine and it has been up for 3 months now(I'd like to see NT do that). I use redhat for my desktop machine because I like Gnome and Enlightenment. Instead of flaming each distribution, we should appreciate the fact that we have a choice......
Mike Smith