Is it running any faster now, after 15 minutes or so?
I have the same problem as the other guy who replied to you: I started out at like 70K/s down and up, now after about 25 minutes, I'm at 1K/s down and 45 up. Speeds do vary (of course), but my download is hovering in the single digits. I even see 0K/s from time to time. I opened port 6881, but I don't think it's helping.
BitTorrent sounds like a good concept, but I'm getting all three ISOs concurrently at around 14K/s (each) using curl. I don't think I'll bother with BT much more if speeds don't increase.
And I thought you were being sarcastic. I'm sure other people will see your post as saracastic as well. But you have a good point. Red Hat is clearly doing the pay-for-prerelease thing to make some green. If people can get it for free, then they likely will. That isn't a good thing for Red Hat.
I personally ponied up my 60 bucks, but then again I also go out and buy boxed copies.
Screw all this inkjet/laser nonsense. I want a dot matrix printer. It doesn't even have to be a 24 pin either. As long as it can do long, long sheets out of a whole friggin' box of alternating green and white lined fanfold tractor paper, then I'd be on it like white on rice. All I ever print is basically 7-bit ASCII anyway. And I could redirect STDOUT to it in a pinch (or syslogd even).
The only printer I have working now is the old receipt thermal printer from my former cash register. It's blazingingly fast, but only does 60 columns. And it's really small text. Great for grocery lists, for code not so much. And I only have two rolls of the free Service Merchandise paper left.
Anyway, there's my random thought for the day. Thought I'd share. I think now I'll head over to ebay.
8.0.94 (the latest beta) comes with glibc 2.3.1-46. Red Hat 8 has 2.3.2-4. Red Hat 7.3 came with 2.2.5-43. Lord knows how much they packed in that '-46' on the end there.
I've been running version 8.0.94 for a little bit now. It's got KDE 3.1 and gcc 3.2.1 and other new stuff, but it isn't advanced enough that I thought the beta was a precursor to a major version rev.
I think the versioning is a marketing decision. It probably ties into Advanced Server and Advanced Workstation somehow as well.
A teenage cheerleader who runs around killing vampires in a large, modern day city. Space exploration. Tough one.
The movie at least didn't take itself too seriously. I don't know when the show failed to do so. I could never understand its appeal. Maybe's there only so much disbelief I can suspend. Eh, to each his own I guess.
Both shows are pretty silly when you think about it.
They beat analysts' expectations, revenue is up more than they thought ($60.2 million this year vs. $19.4 million last year), licensing means they'll sign up more people than they thought this year. They didn't meet their growth projections for the holidays only because stores didn't have enough product to sell. That isn't necessarily a "bad" kind of problem. More info on news.com.com.com.com.com.
If you're on Red Hat, SuSE, etc, then you can use alien to convert the debs to rpm (make sure that you have the Alien::Package::* perl modules installed). You can also grab the Red Hat 7.3 PortSentry package from freshrpms.net if that's all you need.
-B
Re:Maybe I can save some people some time
on
Linux Server Hacks
·
· Score: 1
Pejorative \Pe*jor"a*tive\, a. [F. p['e]joratif, fr. L. pejor, used as compar. of malus evil.] Implying or imputing evil; depreciatory; disparaging; unfavorable
You know that one can use a pejorative, right? Something can be called a pejorative? That it can be a noun as well as an adjective? There's more than one definition for the word?
Shit, why am I bothering to respond to thick-headed ACs...
Naturally there's nothing grammatically wrong with his words, except for the abuse of "pejorative".
How was the word abused? A pejorative, as you know, is "a disparaging or belittling word or expression". It always seemed to me that "hack" is used to describe criminals and script kiddies, which is exactly the opposite connotation the foreward would have you believe. I've also seen it used to describe "hacks" which were shoddy pieces of work and in no way clever.
However, there is much that is stylistically wrong.
Seems I got my point across, in spite of not having proofread it before submission.
Were I reading a text on any non-geeky subject I would be very surprised to see those particular phrases, as the immediate impression is that the author picked a set of words from random points in the review and then checked for alternatives in a thesaurus. This is the expected behaviour of a smart-ass 14 year old, but is not "exquisite English".
Nope. I'm well beyond 14, although I'd much rather be called a smart-ass than a dumb-ass. I wrote the review last night in one sitting, and not a single thesarus was harmed in its making. I didn't use any word or phrase I don't normally use, so pardon the perceived affectation.
What are you whining about? I always run nonstandard kernels, and I've upgraded both my home machine and work machine a dozen of times without any problems, using the procedure that you describe.
I'm using a machine right now that, save for a kernel and some drivers, couldn't be upgraded using the procedure that I describe. From where I'm typing, it's stating a fact, not whining.
Oh yeah, would it kill ya to at least try to be partially civil? Jeez. I swear the Net has made people mean...
If you roll your own kernels, (assuming newer version) can't you just backup the system map, and then delete the new kernel and tree before you upgrade? so it 'doesn't know' you rolled your own? I never delete old kernels or trees anyway.
You know, I think the upgrade installer looks in the RPM database to see what kernel you have. It might try to find out via 'uname -r' or something though.
I've had more than a couple machines which had the stock kernels fail during upgrade. They usually barfed during dependancy checking (after you pick "Select packages to upgrade"). The machines were never hosed, but I wasted a lot of time. The reason was that I had install stuff (like apache) that didn't come from rpm.
Oh, and I wouldn't try to upgrade from remote anyway, no way. I am HOPING we will move into our new building by july, with a shiny new T1. I have two dual p3/1g, and three dual ppro200's that I will setup to replace everything. lots of redunancy (the ppros actually still scream, IBMs, all scsi). We will only get about 30k to 100k users a month on this system (seasonal) and we outsource the ecommerce. Now I just need an OS to put on them.....
I've only done one remote kernel upgrade. Did it from source. Staring at the xterm window waiting for ping to say the machine was responding was a tense couple minutes...:-)
And I hear on the old hardware. I have a K6-3/450 that is still in use and works just great (although it doesn't see as much load as yours). Boatloads of RAM is the key.
Actually, up2date defaults to NOT upgrading the kernel. You CAN force update the kernel. I have done this twice (on a test box, while sitting in front of it) and it worked great. rebooted and it actually worked. but generally it tells you it is skipping the kernel because it is marked to skip.
I wasn't very clear in my original statement. Get a testing box, install 7.2. Now download, patch, configure, build, and install a new kernel. Now put a 7.3 CD in the drive, reboot, select "Upgrade" from the installer and see how far you get.
I had to do these very steps to get a better VM and a new IDE (a driver that let me use DMA) driver for a machine at work. In order to get that box functioning, I basically had to make it "un-upgradeable". Therefore when support runs out in December, I will have to either:
a) re-image it, and reconfigure everything on it (at which point I should just buy Advanced Workstation, right?)
b) upgrade packages by hand
c) twiddle with up2date's config so that it think it's a newer release
d) done nothing, switch distros, hope, use apt4rpm, etc.
You wil be forced to do something. Red Hat has decided it.
As to them not supporting after a year, I need to check into this.
Beginning with the 8.0 release, Red Hat will provide errata maintenance for at least 12 months from the date of initial release. At certain times, Red Hat may extend errata maintenance for certain popular releases of the operating system. End of Life dates for errata maintenance for currently supported products are listed below:
Red Hat Linux 8.0 (Psyche) December 31, 2003
Red Hat Linux 7.3 (Valhalla) December 31, 2003
Red Hat Linux 7.2 (Enigma) December 31, 2003
Red Hat Linux 7.1 (Seawolf) December 31, 2003
I use, and PREFER 7.2. I have installed 8.0 on a couple machines, and don't like it quite as well, perhaps because I am just used to 7.2.
Pardon my French, but tough shit. You'll have to either constantly upgrade, buy AW, or you'll upgrade everything by hand. See the list above. My big beef with Red Hat is that in their move to get everyone on AW/AS, they have forgotten the "little guy" like you and me. You don't even have the option to pay for errata support, no matter how badly you need it. Even thought they'll still be making packages for the same release of AW (which will be almost completely compatible with the free version of Red Hat), they won't be making them available to people who want to install packages by hand. It's not just that up2date will stop working -- there won't be any packages anymore.
I worry about upgrading my RENTED RACKSHACK boxes. Its not advisable to update a box that is located 1300 miles away via ssh.
Agreed. That's a sticky issue. I'd make sure someone around there will be able to powercycle if you need them too. I'd also see about getting a failover box or a hot spare similarly configured.
Now if they follow thru with their EOL products 12 months after new release, then my opinion of RH would change, and I would be looking at other distros.
Their EOL plans are certain and definite. Start looking. I've been looking at KRUD (although I wonder where they will get packages), SuSE and Gentoo. The KRUD people, BTW, are evaluating EOL contracts to support older Red Hat releases. That may be a way out for you (and me), provided it's cheap enough.
Outside of building new kernels, which i can do by hand, i see no reason to switch from 7.2, period.
Really? Again, tough shit. Red Hat has made that decision for you. Or, at very least, forced you to decide. That force comes from business needs, not your needs. I'm personally fed up with Red Hat. I've been using it since 4.2, and I own RHAT stock. The thing I liked about Linux was that decisi
I gladly have the $60 annual on autorenew, because I have the choice to run one for pay, the others for free.
If you automatically renew your support, you might wind up paying for support you won't be able to use. If you're running 7.x or 8.0, your support will run out on December 31st of this year because Red Hat has EOLed everything which is currently in release as of that date (6.2 errata support ends at the end of March). I'd either:
a) Make sure to upgrade when 8.1 comes out
b) Turn off autorenew and pay for up2date 12 months at a crack, coincident with new releases
Also make sure to upgrade as soon as 8.2 comes out, as 8.1 will no longer be supported 12 months after release. You don't want to pay for support you're not getting. In order to continue to get errata support, you'll have to keep up this cycle, ad inifitum, or buy Advance Workstation (which has 3 year support, IIRC). In other words, you stay on the upgrade treadmill or lose your bargain. At least you have a choice, like you say.
Best of luck to you. Don't upgrade your kernel by hand, and remember to always install software from RPM, and backup and custom configuration stuff. You don't want to have to completely re-image a machine just because you have to upgrade the OS in order to get support you've paid for, do you?
Some of our stuff it stripped, too. Drives missing, whatever. We just had some office moves, and bought 20 new Dells, so we had lots of pieces and parts.
I've been meaning to go there for a while, but haven't needed a new project for my extensive backburner...
UCSD has somethign called "suplus sales". We just got rid of a bunch of monitors and old Sparcs and stuff. Word is it'll all sell for real cheap. I've only worked there a few months, so I don't know where it is, or how to buy things from it, but I could probably find out. Apparently, it's open to the public.
If you knwo any academic types, you might try asking them as well.
Put the main executable in/usr/local/bin and all other files in an application specific directory and set a shell variable to hold the application home directory location and have the main executable read the appliation's home shell varible to find everything.
There a limit on environment variables? Would having 934 such env vars slow down bash? I wouldn't even know.
The more I think about it, the more I think emerge and apt have the right idea.
Slashdot Mirror
I have the same problem as the other guy who replied to you: I started out at like 70K/s down and up, now after about 25 minutes, I'm at 1K/s down and 45 up. Speeds do vary (of course), but my download is hovering in the single digits. I even see 0K/s from time to time. I opened port 6881, but I don't think it's helping.
BitTorrent sounds like a good concept, but I'm getting all three ISOs concurrently at around 14K/s (each) using curl. I don't think I'll bother with BT much more if speeds don't increase.
-B
I personally ponied up my 60 bucks, but then again I also go out and buy boxed copies.
-B
Nevermind. You must be young.
-B
-B
The only printer I have working now is the old receipt thermal printer from my former cash register. It's blazingingly fast, but only does 60 columns. And it's really small text. Great for grocery lists, for code not so much. And I only have two rolls of the free Service Merchandise paper left.
Anyway, there's my random thought for the day. Thought I'd share. I think now I'll head over to ebay.
-B
Might makes right. I get it.
Can I use your post when someone asks me why I think MS is evil?
-B
-B
I think the versioning is a marketing decision. It probably ties into Advanced Server and Advanced Workstation somehow as well.
-B
-B
A teenage cheerleader who runs around killing vampires in a large, modern day city. Space exploration. Tough one.
The movie at least didn't take itself too seriously. I don't know when the show failed to do so. I could never understand its appeal. Maybe's there only so much disbelief I can suspend. Eh, to each his own I guess.
Both shows are pretty silly when you think about it.
-B
-B
Doesn't look to me like TiVo needs a savior.
-B
You can get PortSentry and Logcheck from the Debian unstable mirrors.
If you're on Red Hat, SuSE, etc, then you can use alien to convert the debs to rpm (make sure that you have the Alien::Package::* perl modules installed). You can also grab the Red Hat 7.3 PortSentry package from freshrpms.net if that's all you need.
-B
You know that one can use a pejorative, right? Something can be called a pejorative? That it can be a noun as well as an adjective? There's more than one definition for the word?
Shit, why am I bothering to respond to thick-headed ACs...
-B
How was the word abused? A pejorative, as you know, is "a disparaging or belittling word or expression". It always seemed to me that "hack" is used to describe criminals and script kiddies, which is exactly the opposite connotation the foreward would have you believe. I've also seen it used to describe "hacks" which were shoddy pieces of work and in no way clever.
However, there is much that is stylistically wrong.
Seems I got my point across, in spite of not having proofread it before submission.
Were I reading a text on any non-geeky subject I would be very surprised to see those particular phrases, as the immediate impression is that the author picked a set of words from random points in the review and then checked for alternatives in a thesaurus. This is the expected behaviour of a smart-ass 14 year old, but is not "exquisite English".
Nope. I'm well beyond 14, although I'd much rather be called a smart-ass than a dumb-ass. I wrote the review last night in one sitting, and not a single thesarus was harmed in its making. I didn't use any word or phrase I don't normally use, so pardon the perceived affectation.
-B
I don't do backups of any of my machines. The time I save makes me a better admin that someone who spends time working up a backup/restore plan.
-B
Because the dumbass writer proofreads the review after he's submitted it?
Do people who make this mistake think it is the suggested reading direction?
No?
-B
I'm using a machine right now that, save for a kernel and some drivers, couldn't be upgraded using the procedure that I describe. From where I'm typing, it's stating a fact, not whining.
Oh yeah, would it kill ya to at least try to be partially civil? Jeez. I swear the Net has made people mean...
-B
You know, I think the upgrade installer looks in the RPM database to see what kernel you have. It might try to find out via 'uname -r' or something though.
I've had more than a couple machines which had the stock kernels fail during upgrade. They usually barfed during dependancy checking (after you pick "Select packages to upgrade"). The machines were never hosed, but I wasted a lot of time. The reason was that I had install stuff (like apache) that didn't come from rpm.
Oh, and I wouldn't try to upgrade from remote anyway, no way. I am HOPING we will move into our new building by july, with a shiny new T1. I have two dual p3/1g, and three dual ppro200's that I will setup to replace everything. lots of redunancy (the ppros actually still scream, IBMs, all scsi). We will only get about 30k to 100k users a month on this system (seasonal) and we outsource the ecommerce. Now I just need an OS to put on them.....
I've only done one remote kernel upgrade. Did it from source. Staring at the xterm window waiting for ping to say the machine was responding was a tense couple minutes... :-)
And I hear on the old hardware. I have a K6-3/450 that is still in use and works just great (although it doesn't see as much load as yours). Boatloads of RAM is the key.
-B
I wasn't very clear in my original statement. Get a testing box, install 7.2. Now download, patch, configure, build, and install a new kernel. Now put a 7.3 CD in the drive, reboot, select "Upgrade" from the installer and see how far you get.
I had to do these very steps to get a better VM and a new IDE (a driver that let me use DMA) driver for a machine at work. In order to get that box functioning, I basically had to make it "un-upgradeable". Therefore when support runs out in December, I will have to either:
a) re-image it, and reconfigure everything on it (at which point I should just buy Advanced Workstation, right?)
b) upgrade packages by hand
c) twiddle with up2date's config so that it think it's a newer release
d) done nothing, switch distros, hope, use apt4rpm, etc.
You wil be forced to do something. Red Hat has decided it.
As to them not supporting after a year, I need to check into this.
From http://redhat.com/apps/support/errata/:
I use, and PREFER 7.2. I have installed 8.0 on a couple machines, and don't like it quite as well, perhaps because I am just used to 7.2.
Pardon my French, but tough shit. You'll have to either constantly upgrade, buy AW, or you'll upgrade everything by hand. See the list above. My big beef with Red Hat is that in their move to get everyone on AW/AS, they have forgotten the "little guy" like you and me. You don't even have the option to pay for errata support, no matter how badly you need it. Even thought they'll still be making packages for the same release of AW (which will be almost completely compatible with the free version of Red Hat), they won't be making them available to people who want to install packages by hand. It's not just that up2date will stop working -- there won't be any packages anymore.
I worry about upgrading my RENTED RACKSHACK boxes. Its not advisable to update a box that is located 1300 miles away via ssh.
Agreed. That's a sticky issue. I'd make sure someone around there will be able to powercycle if you need them too. I'd also see about getting a failover box or a hot spare similarly configured.
Now if they follow thru with their EOL products 12 months after new release, then my opinion of RH would change, and I would be looking at other distros.
Their EOL plans are certain and definite. Start looking. I've been looking at KRUD (although I wonder where they will get packages), SuSE and Gentoo. The KRUD people, BTW, are evaluating EOL contracts to support older Red Hat releases. That may be a way out for you (and me), provided it's cheap enough.
Outside of building new kernels, which i can do by hand, i see no reason to switch from 7.2, period.
Really? Again, tough shit. Red Hat has made that decision for you. Or, at very least, forced you to decide. That force comes from business needs, not your needs. I'm personally fed up with Red Hat. I've been using it since 4.2, and I own RHAT stock. The thing I liked about Linux was that decisi
If you automatically renew your support, you might wind up paying for support you won't be able to use. If you're running 7.x or 8.0, your support will run out on December 31st of this year because Red Hat has EOLed everything which is currently in release as of that date (6.2 errata support ends at the end of March). I'd either:
a) Make sure to upgrade when 8.1 comes out
b) Turn off autorenew and pay for up2date 12 months at a crack, coincident with new releases
Also make sure to upgrade as soon as 8.2 comes out, as 8.1 will no longer be supported 12 months after release. You don't want to pay for support you're not getting. In order to continue to get errata support, you'll have to keep up this cycle, ad inifitum, or buy Advance Workstation (which has 3 year support, IIRC). In other words, you stay on the upgrade treadmill or lose your bargain. At least you have a choice, like you say.
Best of luck to you. Don't upgrade your kernel by hand, and remember to always install software from RPM, and backup and custom configuration stuff. You don't want to have to completely re-image a machine just because you have to upgrade the OS in order to get support you've paid for, do you?
-B
I've been meaning to go there for a while, but haven't needed a new project for my extensive backburner...
-B
If you knwo any academic types, you might try asking them as well.
-B
-B
There a limit on environment variables? Would having 934 such env vars slow down bash? I wouldn't even know.
The more I think about it, the more I think emerge and apt have the right idea.
-B