You state that you have used Debian, and OpenBSD, among others. I am trying to learn Linux,and will be taking a class for Linux. I have tried both Mandrake (IBM hard drive bit the dust) and currently Red Hat. What I can't understand is why start with Debian now, if it takes so long for them to release a distribution? They will be releasing Woody (I think) with a kernel that is much older than the other distributions. While this may provide stability, generally, a newer kernel is more desireable due to drivers being added, bug/memory/other fixes, etc. Debian to run Apache, or a limited set of services, I can understand that. Debian for a newbie, with an old kernel? That I don't understand. I need enlightenment. Please. Thanks.
If you need instant gratification and something that installs easily and works out of the box especially if an understanding of the system isn't really a goal - then Mandrake is good (I would use Mandrake if I was giving my users linux desktops). If you just want to use it and it isn't critical, then that's fine.
If you are an windows admin wanting to get some linux (or BSD) experience, I reckon you owe it to yourself to take the time to learn it from the ground up - it'll take more time to get something working, but you will have a better understanding about how to tweak it, maintain it and how to secure it.
You don't need all those new whizz bang features to practise with it on an old machine, and the simpler the environment the easier it is to pick up how it works. All those layers of extra software just get in the way of learning what your OS is doing. Once you have learnt the foundations, you are in a far better position to evaluate and use the newer more complex stuff that comes out.
The new kernels don't really feel any different to an admin or a user - all the userland stuff is still the same old stuff. It isn't like new versions of windows being noticeably different than the last.
For a (bad) physics analogy, you'd still have to learn Newtonian physics to be able to learn General Relativity. Patience grasshopper.
As a Windows Admin that jumped into the Linux/BSD world a little while back, I'd recommend not going down the Mandrake/RedHat/Suse path. I think those distros are kinda useful to just set up a machine that kinda works, but they really hinder learning what actually going on.
If you want to actually learn to understand what is happening (a lot more useful for an admin than a general user) I'd recommend using either Free/OpenBSD or Debian (maybe Slackware, but I have no experience with Slack). It's more work at first, but working your way up from the foundations without extra layers of software in the way makes things easier later.
I started with RedHat, but found it a bit murky. I then tried Debian, and then actually started to learn something (I loved apt-get). Now I find myself using OpenBSD more and more (I still like Debian though).
The BSDs are a lot more stripped down (especially the Net and Open flavours) and straight forward than the average Linux distro. This is a little daunting a first, but you gain a better insight into their inner workings and you begin to appreciate the elegance of it all.
You're right, I've always thought MS security models are usually good at the design level, but it's the implementation that they screw up big time.
Anyway, wouldn't it be amusingly ironic (although unlikely) if Mono's version of.NET eventually replaces MS's one due to openness, security, reliability, cost and stability (I mean stability in the not completely changing the APIs every new version sense).
Hehe the technology MS wanted to bet the company on to rule the world with ends up being commodotised by an open source project and MS losing control over where the market wanted to take it.
Just like Apache did to most web servers, and it looks like JBoss might do to BEA etc.
Yeah round these parts we are responsible for our own security - we don't need no steenkin telco telling us what we can and can't do.
Sure Citylink gives you enough rope to hang yourself, but you also get a lot of freedom to do what you want very cheaply. I like the flexibility.
It's not as bad as that though, each customer is connecting a router to the MAN. You get 1 MAC address (although you can pay for more) for your router/firewall (that's your responsibility). You can't really just plug your internal LAN directly into Citylink.
Yep, the network itself is layer 2. It's basically a big switched LAN acting like a MAN. When you sign up you tell them what your routers external MAC address is.
You need an ISP to get public IPs, although Citylink also has an unannounced/23 that they use internally for BGP4 routing.
We share a citylink cable with another office. It basically costs $295NZ per month plus another $50NZ for another MAC address for the other office.
So for about $70US per month each office gets a 10Mbit ethernet connection. 100Mbit doesn't cost much more than that.
Of course you need to use an ISP to get public IP addresses, and you have to pay the ISP for traffic that leaves the MAN (yes NZers still pay per MB unless they are on dialup).
You are basically handed a piece of cat5 and told you can do anything you like with it as long as you don't break anything. If fact they encourage users to try to use open source in creative new ways and share your ideas/experiences with other customers.
Most connections use Cisco routers, but there are a few Linux/BSD ones around. Our router is OpenBSD running Zebra for the BGP4 stuff. If you use BGP4 you get to bypass your ISP to talk to anybody else in town (including all the other ISPs). Our biggest use for that is free traffic and 900kB/s access to a Debian mirror and ftp for OpenBSD installs (installs faster than CD on our machines!).
I think Shane Cole (the founder of Paradise Net) has the only gigabit connection at the moment. He uses it to run his game server - that way he can cope with multiple 100Mbit clients trying to connect to it.
Most business connections are 10Mbit (I mean how much bandwidth do you really need?), but there are a few 100Mbit ones.
I can't understand why it excites any of you to be able to by a PowerPC chip from someone other than Apple. My dual processor G4 was reasonably cheap, Apple was friendly, and the package arrived quickly and was ready to go 90 seconds out of the box.
Ahhh... but making it work is where all the fun is! You must be one of these 'users' that wants to actually do stuff with their computer. That unhealthy attitude seems common with you Mac users.
A useful computer is a boring computer! Bah productivity schmoductivity! You just don't get it do you?
Personaly, I doubt it. the 386 didn't have any trouble with 16 bit code, but the p-pro did because intel knew it was time to move on. I don't think AMD will let up on 32bit support untill everyone moves to 64bit.
Yep, but I suspect the average user won't see the same benefits from a move to 64bit as they did from a move to 32bit.
I suppose part of that was due to MS - their 16bit software sucked due to no memory protection, real mode drivers and cooperative multitasking etc, while their new 32bit stuff (NT/95) was technically better (but still not great:-).
I don't think a similar leap will happen with 64bit end user software reliability - it'll probably just be able to access more memory. And that could probably be taken care of with extenders the same way it is with MS Datacentre Server that can handle 64GB while still being 32bit.
I know I was moaning about 16bit software for years before I could move to 32bit (I didn't try Linux or BSD until 97). I don't feel the same limitations to 32bit stuff now that 64bit is near - I don't run large servers though:-)
Re:I shoulda seen this one coming...
on
Debian NetBSD
·
· Score: 1
Any BSD you can legally distribute freely is not UNIX (tm).
C'mon, which media-formats today actually give you analog recordings? The LP? What kind of audiophile moron would want to buy a LP anyway.
It's got nothing to do with media format. ie analog recordings could be distributed on CD (like nearly all rock music), or digital music could be distributed on LP (like what DJs can do).
You are confusing recording (the bit with microphones and instruments) with the final product. Analog is still popular for professional studio recording ie reel to reel 24 track machine using 2 inch tape that btw has a comparable s/n ratio to a CD, but better subjective qualities (see the other post about waveforms and fourier stuff).
It might then get mixed and mastered digitally, but the recording was still analog.
C'mon, which media-formats today actually give you analog recordings? The LP? What kind of audiophile moron would want to buy a LP anyway.
You are confusing recording with the final product. A lot of professional studio recording is still done on analog tape eg reel to reel stuff on 2 inch tape for 24 track.
This isn't audiophile stuff, this is audio engineering stuff - ie the creation not the final listening. And analog is still popular for the recording stage (the bit with microphones and instruments).
Sorry to burst your bubble, but most (if not all) professional recording is done digitally.
Ahem, where did you hear that?
You can tell from the CD labelling itself. There is a 3 letter code (the SPARS code - look it up if you like) that indicates whether each of the recording, the mixing and the mastering stages are either analog or digital.
eg AAD means analog recording, analog mixing and digital mastering. I'll admit that ADD & DDD are becoming more common (especially for classical music), but the majority of CDs are still AAD.
Re:BZZT! Canada still constitutional monarchy
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 1
Actually both countries are just waiting for all the WWII veterans to die off before bothering too much more about it.
Which to me sounds like Scot's 'internal consistency' not the 'external consistency' you are arguing against.
He wants all the apps on his machine to behave consistently (ie internally), not that he wants his machine to behave the same as his next door neighbours (ie externally).
We now use a 40GB Seagate DAT drive. It's still not perfect, but it sure is a lot more reliable.
Ouch it must've been bad before. I know DATs aren't the best to begin with, but Seagates are the worst DAT drives I've used for reliability and compatibility.
We had 3 Seagate DDS3 drives that all couldn't read the tapes from the other two drives, but those tapes could all be read in an HP and a Sony drive we borrowed.
Slashdot Mirror
You state that you have used Debian, and OpenBSD, among others. I am trying to learn Linux,and will be taking a class for Linux. I have tried both Mandrake (IBM hard drive bit the dust) and currently Red Hat. What I can't understand is why start with Debian now, if it takes so long for them to release a distribution? They will be releasing Woody (I think) with a kernel that is much older than the other distributions. While this may provide stability, generally, a newer kernel is more desireable due to drivers being added, bug/memory/other fixes, etc. Debian to run Apache, or a limited set of services, I can understand that. Debian for a newbie, with an old kernel? That I don't understand. I need enlightenment. Please. Thanks.
If you need instant gratification and something that installs easily and works out of the box especially if an understanding of the system isn't really a goal - then Mandrake is good (I would use Mandrake if I was giving my users linux desktops). If you just want to use it and it isn't critical, then that's fine.
If you are an windows admin wanting to get some linux (or BSD) experience, I reckon you owe it to yourself to take the time to learn it from the ground up - it'll take more time to get something working, but you will have a better understanding about how to tweak it, maintain it and how to secure it.
You don't need all those new whizz bang features to practise with it on an old machine, and the simpler the environment the easier it is to pick up how it works. All those layers of extra software just get in the way of learning what your OS is doing. Once you have learnt the foundations, you are in a far better position to evaluate and use the newer more complex stuff that comes out.
The new kernels don't really feel any different to an admin or a user - all the userland stuff is still the same old stuff. It isn't like new versions of windows being noticeably different than the last.
For a (bad) physics analogy, you'd still have to learn Newtonian physics to be able to learn General Relativity. Patience grasshopper.
As a Windows Admin that jumped into the Linux/BSD world a little while back, I'd recommend not going down the Mandrake/RedHat/Suse path. I think those distros are kinda useful to just set up a machine that kinda works, but they really hinder learning what actually going on.
If you want to actually learn to understand what is happening (a lot more useful for an admin than a general user) I'd recommend using either Free/OpenBSD or Debian (maybe Slackware, but I have no experience with Slack). It's more work at first, but working your way up from the foundations without extra layers of software in the way makes things easier later.
I started with RedHat, but found it a bit murky. I then tried Debian, and then actually started to learn something (I loved apt-get). Now I find myself using OpenBSD more and more (I still like Debian though).
The BSDs are a lot more stripped down (especially the Net and Open flavours) and straight forward than the average Linux distro. This is a little daunting a first, but you gain a better insight into their inner workings and you begin to appreciate the elegance of it all.
You're right, I've always thought MS security models are usually good at the design level, but it's the implementation that they screw up big time.
.NET eventually replaces MS's one due to openness, security, reliability, cost and stability (I mean stability in the not completely changing the APIs every new version sense).
Anyway, wouldn't it be amusingly ironic (although unlikely) if Mono's version of
Hehe the technology MS wanted to bet the company on to rule the world with ends up being commodotised by an open source project and MS losing control over where the market wanted to take it.
Just like Apache did to most web servers, and it looks like JBoss might do to BEA etc.
Yeah round these parts we are responsible for our own security - we don't need no steenkin telco telling us what we can and can't do.
Sure Citylink gives you enough rope to hang yourself, but you also get a lot of freedom to do what you want very cheaply. I like the flexibility.
It's not as bad as that though, each customer is connecting a router to the MAN. You get 1 MAC address (although you can pay for more) for your router/firewall (that's your responsibility). You can't really just plug your internal LAN directly into Citylink.
Yep, the network itself is layer 2. It's basically a big switched LAN acting like a MAN. When you sign up you tell them what your routers external MAC address is.
/23 that they use internally for BGP4 routing.
You need an ISP to get public IPs, although Citylink also has an unannounced
We share a citylink cable with another office. It basically costs $295NZ per month plus another $50NZ for another MAC address for the other office.
So for about $70US per month each office gets a 10Mbit ethernet connection. 100Mbit doesn't cost much more than that.
Of course you need to use an ISP to get public IP addresses, and you have to pay the ISP for traffic that leaves the MAN (yes NZers still pay per MB unless they are on dialup).
You are basically handed a piece of cat5 and told you can do anything you like with it as long as you don't break anything. If fact they encourage users to try to use open source in creative new ways and share your ideas/experiences with other customers.
Most connections use Cisco routers, but there are a few Linux/BSD ones around. Our router is OpenBSD running Zebra for the BGP4 stuff. If you use BGP4 you get to bypass your ISP to talk to anybody else in town (including all the other ISPs). Our biggest use for that is free traffic and 900kB/s access to a Debian mirror and ftp for OpenBSD installs (installs faster than CD on our machines!).
I think Shane Cole (the founder of Paradise Net) has the only gigabit connection at the moment. He uses it to run his game server - that way he can cope with multiple 100Mbit clients trying to connect to it.
Most business connections are 10Mbit (I mean how much bandwidth do you really need?), but there are a few 100Mbit ones.
Excellent work! For your next project, might I suggest correcting "rediculous" to "ridiculous"? That one's starting to irritate me just about as much.
Good luck! I tried booking him for the "I could give a" to "I couldn't give a" correction, but he didn't want it.
You don't happen to be the mild-mannered LooseNotLoseGuy by day also?
After that campaign is finished, I think your next target should be the "I could give a ..." vs "I couldn't give a ..." confusion.
BTW for the unwashed masses... the correct version (ie the one that makes sense) is the one with "couldn't" in it.
I can't understand why it excites any of you to be able to by a PowerPC chip from someone other than Apple. My dual processor G4 was reasonably cheap, Apple was friendly, and the package arrived quickly and was ready to go 90 seconds out of the box.
Ahhh... but making it work is where all the fun is! You must be one of these 'users' that wants to actually do stuff with their computer. That unhealthy attitude seems common with you Mac users.
A useful computer is a boring computer! Bah productivity schmoductivity! You just don't get it do you?
Not only that, but the "I could give a ..." gets to me as well.
..."!
For crissakes people, it's "I COULDN'T give a
Think about what you're trying to say.
Personaly, I doubt it. the 386 didn't have any trouble with 16 bit code, but the p-pro did because intel knew it was time to move on. I don't think AMD will let up on 32bit support untill everyone moves to 64bit.
:-).
:-)
Yep, but I suspect the average user won't see the same benefits from a move to 64bit as they did from a move to 32bit.
I suppose part of that was due to MS - their 16bit software sucked due to no memory protection, real mode drivers and cooperative multitasking etc, while their new 32bit stuff (NT/95) was technically better (but still not great
I don't think a similar leap will happen with 64bit end user software reliability - it'll probably just be able to access more memory. And that could probably be taken care of with extenders the same way it is with MS Datacentre Server that can handle 64GB while still being 32bit.
I know I was moaning about 16bit software for years before I could move to 32bit (I didn't try Linux or BSD until 97). I don't feel the same limitations to 32bit stuff now that 64bit is near - I don't run large servers though
Any BSD you can legally distribute freely is not UNIX (tm).
Thank you for that insight Rev Don Kool.
C'mon, which media-formats today actually give you analog recordings? The LP? What kind of audiophile moron would want to buy a LP anyway.
It's got nothing to do with media format. ie analog recordings could be distributed on CD (like nearly all rock music), or digital music could be distributed on LP (like what DJs can do).
You are confusing recording (the bit with microphones and instruments) with the final product. Analog is still popular for professional studio recording ie reel to reel 24 track machine using 2 inch tape that btw has a comparable s/n ratio to a CD, but better subjective qualities (see the other post about waveforms and fourier stuff).
It might then get mixed and mastered digitally, but the recording was still analog.
C'mon, which media-formats today actually give you analog recordings? The LP? What kind of audiophile moron would want to buy a LP anyway.
You are confusing recording with the final product. A lot of professional studio recording is still done on analog tape eg reel to reel stuff on 2 inch tape for 24 track.
This isn't audiophile stuff, this is audio engineering stuff - ie the creation not the final listening. And analog is still popular for the recording stage (the bit with microphones and instruments).
Hmmmm... something tells me you are exaggerating, but I can't quite put my finger on it.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but most (if not all) professional recording is done digitally.
Ahem, where did you hear that?
You can tell from the CD labelling itself. There is a 3 letter code (the SPARS code - look it up if you like) that indicates whether each of the recording, the mixing and the mastering stages are either analog or digital.
eg AAD means analog recording, analog mixing and digital mastering. I'll admit that ADD & DDD are becoming more common (especially for classical music), but the majority of CDs are still AAD.
Actually both countries are just waiting for all the WWII veterans to die off before bothering too much more about it.
Which to me sounds like Scot's 'internal consistency' not the 'external consistency' you are arguing against.
:)
He wants all the apps on his machine to behave consistently (ie internally), not that he wants his machine to behave the same as his next door neighbours (ie externally).
I hope that makes sense
Yeah, in the future IPv6 never took off so they had to resort to IPv5 (although the name changed to IP2000 after Beta 2).
And along similar lines there's this one from the 1983 Return of the Jedi post...
I wish Lucas & Co. would get the thing going a little faster.
I can't really imagine waiting until 1997 to see all nine parts
of the Star Wars series.
We now use a 40GB Seagate DAT drive. It's still not perfect, but it sure is a lot more reliable.
Ouch it must've been bad before. I know DATs aren't the best to begin with, but Seagates are the worst DAT drives I've used for reliability and compatibility.
We had 3 Seagate DDS3 drives that all couldn't read the tapes from the other two drives, but those tapes could all be read in an HP and a Sony drive we borrowed.
Yeah, just in case an astronaut forgets his watch.
Southern Hemispehere no good, but I think May has the Aquarids - I don't know how it's spelt. They're fragments of Halley's Comet I think.