Locking down RedHat is quite similer to locking down win2k. Remove and shut down all daemons, find / -type f -perms -u+s -exec chmod -s {};.. Of course, you could install a more security-minded distribution such as slackware or debian and have security AND functionality at the same time...
Perhaps Dr Who's revival will evolve in to a feature length movie, and released on DVD. If this happens, I may begin to give a damn. The movie industry has consistantly backed new formats, but only if these formats are under their strict control. Is DVD better? Well duh.. but will I pay an extra $20 for it, give up my freedom to backup, archive, and record(at reasonable prices), or even to watch somthing my friend sent me from austrailia.. The answer to that is of course no. Eventualy DVD will either evolve in to a useable format, or go the way of betamax. Until then, my SVHS VCR works just fine.
Perhaps I should state that I run my own buisness, and admin my own servers. If it was sombody else's system, there is no way I would spend that much time on it. These servers are my pride and joy, and I work hard to make sure every one going up for production use is *PERFECT*. This means delving in to the kernel and changing things around, libc modifications, (re)compiling everything optomised for the particular CPU the machine has, etc.
This course of action has really paid off. Every server I have put up has not needed any sort of modification/tweaking to this day. The machine goes up, and stays up, reliable as the hardware it is on.
If I were for-hire, I would probably charge per-job, as my machines are very close to self maintaining. Once it's set up, a low-paid lackie could handle it.
Some people (noteably the best UNIX admins) take things like this VERY seriously, for a good reason. After putting 600 man-hours in to configuring a machine from the ground up, I know I wouldn't just go install somthing when I don't know what it will do to my system. Sure I have backups, but it should never come to that.
In order to effectivly run a production server, you have to know how _everything_ installed on it works, and interacts with everything else. If you do not know, you waste lots of time with trial and error, and any modifications you make may cause other applications to misbehave, because you simply do not know how things interact. I agree 100% with the posters concern.
Now wouldn't it be nice if my machine hooked up with a nice big application server and had myrids of children dual-booting BSDi & Slackware. Server breeding farm, we all can dream..
Correct on the backlight. What would be nice is a backlight with a dimmer switch. Maybe even a translucent back to the display to allow use of ambient light, so you can turn off the backlight altogether.
As for RAM, I don't think it consumes very much power. My computer has an open case and whenever I reach in and feel my DIMMs they are hardly even warm. The more power flowing through a device, the warmer it runs (as a general rule).
What do you want from the guy? I think you are expecting too much of him. He's just a guy, with opinions, and wants to express them, much as you have in your post.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) :
1. (Astron.) A celestial body which revolves about the sun in
an orbit of a moderate degree of eccentricity. It is
distinguished from a comet by the absence of a coma, and
by having a less eccentric orbit.
What is described is more of a gigantic asteriod, as it has no star.
One of the reasons I use Linux is the option to be NON generic. Even if everybody else keeps their configuration files in/etc, I always have the option of keeping them in/var/geeks-only/moo/(Hey this just an example) simply by recompiling the source. Moving to a 'standard' distribution would greatly impair the ability to be non-standard for a number of reasons:
* Package manager will install where it thinks files should go(well all package managers do this anyway, that's why I don't use one)
* autoconfig (./configure) scripts will eventualy stop having the --prefix and pathname options, as all paths will be standard
* people will start coding programs with the assumption that files are in a certian place. They do this now and it's annoying, but with a 'generic' distribution it would become worse.
Standardasation does not concern me, as long as I can make my machine
as unique and "strange" as I wish. A generic distribution would
(probably) make it harder for me to do so.
This isn't the first time RedHat has released a non-stable branch compiler. I code for an IRC bot project, and we couldn't figure out why it was crashing on redhat systems in chunk_alloc(the low level call made by malloc) It turns out that RedHat 6.x uses a version of GCC that 'does not exist' like the redhat 7 one, and that was the cause of the problem. Turning off all compiler optomisation on redhat systems fixed this problem. I don't see why redhat is making the same mistake yet again, who knows what is broken in this compiler? This time it could be somthing worse than malloc() and friends randomly failing in compiler optomised binaries.
RedHat? I think their one of those companies over in the user-friendly market. I don't see much of that.. I live in the "learns how it works inside out and backwards and hates bloat" market.. oh well..
Being one of those nerds that installed my first slackware distro from
20 disks back in the old days, I have to say it is a completely differant
community.
Things have changed, people no longer use Linux because they want to add
their own extensions for the kernel, they now use it because of it's
stability and power. Look at Red Hat for example.. (watch this get
moderated down for bashing redhat..) Their distribution seems to focus
more on being user-friendly than allowing you to customize the box. The
reasons for using Linux have changed, and so have the people using it.
It sort of annoys me, but hey, us old schoolers make the best sysadmins
so it isnt all bad:)
1) Insert cdrom.
2) Boot
3) mount/dev/cdrom/mnt
4) tar -xzf/mnt/packagename.tar.gz
5) Repeat step 4 for all desired packages.
6) Edit Configuration
7) Up and running. No reboot neccisary. (Unless you want to rebuild the kernel)
Moderators: Feel free to mark this as "Funny", though to me it actualy IS the ideal install
I agree wholeheartedly. (Wow, nice long post eh)
And I do think it will get moderated down.. almost everything that isn't funny, or pushing linux does these days.
Re:Gives you Linux Zealots something to think abou
on
2001: A Space Laptop
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps. I think BSD would b the best choice however, much more stable. The problem is, there would have to be a very usable GUI that the astronauts wouldn't need much training for. They have enough things to worry about don't you think? I would say FreeBSD with fvwm95, a UI that they are probably already familiar with. Linux has it's place, but not in mission critical applications imho. They should not be running windows however.
I am fully aware of that, in fact, this is why it would require no client side modifications. Simply a token sent from their nameserver to the authoritive stating what IP is resolving what. This type of data can be packet into 20 bytes, even on a large scale, traffic would be negligable.
A good solution to the FTP and http 1.0 problem would be some server-side extensions to the nameserver. Lets say ftp.bluh.com is pointed at an IP along with 200 other hostnames. When ftp.bluh.com is resolved, a token could be sent to the nameservers for bluh.com telling them what IP is resolving it. This information could be passed in turn to the FTP server, which would know that it's ftp.bluh.com from that IP's point of view, and act accordingly. The same could be done with many other services.
This isn't as hard to impliment as it sounds. We have to start conserving IP's, I don't think putting large blocks of users behind NAT is a good option, and ipv6 is still a long way off from being global.
Slashdot Mirror
Locking down RedHat is quite similer to locking down win2k. Remove and shut down all daemons, find / -type f -perms -u+s -exec chmod -s {}; .. Of course, you could install a more security-minded distribution such as slackware or debian and have security AND functionality at the same time...
Perhaps Dr Who's revival will evolve in to a feature length movie, and released on DVD. If this happens, I may begin to give a damn. The movie industry has consistantly backed new formats, but only if these formats are under their strict control. Is DVD better? Well duh.. but will I pay an extra $20 for it, give up my freedom to backup, archive, and record(at reasonable prices), or even to watch somthing my friend sent me from austrailia.. The answer to that is of course no. Eventualy DVD will either evolve in to a useable format, or go the way of betamax. Until then, my SVHS VCR works just fine.
Perhaps I should state that I run my own buisness, and admin my own servers. If it was sombody else's system, there is no way I would spend that much time on it. These servers are my pride and joy, and I work hard to make sure every one going up for production use is *PERFECT*. This means delving in to the kernel and changing things around, libc modifications, (re)compiling everything optomised for the particular CPU the machine has, etc.
This course of action has really paid off. Every server I have put up has not needed any sort of modification/tweaking to this day. The machine goes up, and stays up, reliable as the hardware it is on.
If I were for-hire, I would probably charge per-job, as my machines are very close to self maintaining. Once it's set up, a low-paid lackie could handle it.
Some people (noteably the best UNIX admins) take things like this VERY seriously, for a good reason. After putting 600 man-hours in to configuring a machine from the ground up, I know I wouldn't just go install somthing when I don't know what it will do to my system. Sure I have backups, but it should never come to that. In order to effectivly run a production server, you have to know how _everything_ installed on it works, and interacts with everything else. If you do not know, you waste lots of time with trial and error, and any modifications you make may cause other applications to misbehave, because you simply do not know how things interact. I agree 100% with the posters concern.
Just think, you could carry TWO of these around at about the same weight of the average laptop. Who needs to dual boot? :)
www.alternic.net - it's been around practicly forever.
Now wouldn't it be nice if my machine hooked up with a nice big application server and had myrids of children dual-booting BSDi & Slackware. Server breeding farm, we all can dream..
Correct on the backlight. What would be nice is a backlight with a dimmer switch. Maybe even a translucent back to the display to allow use of ambient light, so you can turn off the backlight altogether. As for RAM, I don't think it consumes very much power. My computer has an open case and whenever I reach in and feel my DIMMs they are hardly even warm. The more power flowing through a device, the warmer it runs (as a general rule).
What do you want from the guy? I think you are expecting too much of him. He's just a guy, with opinions, and wants to express them, much as you have in your post.
Yes, the default hostname is still darkstar. And I agree.. it does sound froody.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) : 1. (Astron.) A celestial body which revolves about the sun in an orbit of a moderate degree of eccentricity. It is distinguished from a comet by the absence of a coma, and by having a less eccentric orbit. What is described is more of a gigantic asteriod, as it has no star.
* Package manager will install where it thinks files should go(well all package managers do this anyway, that's why I don't use one)
* autoconfig (./configure) scripts will eventualy stop having the --prefix and pathname options, as all paths will be standard
* people will start coding programs with the assumption that files are in a certian place. They do this now and it's annoying, but with a 'generic' distribution it would become worse.
Standardasation does not concern me, as long as I can make my machine as unique and "strange" as I wish. A generic distribution would (probably) make it harder for me to do so.
This isn't the first time RedHat has released a non-stable branch compiler. I code for an IRC bot project, and we couldn't figure out why it was crashing on redhat systems in chunk_alloc(the low level call made by malloc) It turns out that RedHat 6.x uses a version of GCC that 'does not exist' like the redhat 7 one, and that was the cause of the problem. Turning off all compiler optomisation on redhat systems fixed this problem. I don't see why redhat is making the same mistake yet again, who knows what is broken in this compiler? This time it could be somthing worse than malloc() and friends randomly failing in compiler optomised binaries.
RedHat? I think their one of those companies over in the user-friendly market. I don't see much of that.. I live in the "learns how it works inside out and backwards and hates bloat" market.. oh well..
Being one of those nerds that installed my first slackware distro from 20 disks back in the old days, I have to say it is a completely differant community. Things have changed, people no longer use Linux because they want to add their own extensions for the kernel, they now use it because of it's stability and power. Look at Red Hat for example.. (watch this get moderated down for bashing redhat..) Their distribution seems to focus more on being user-friendly than allowing you to customize the box. The reasons for using Linux have changed, and so have the people using it. It sort of annoys me, but hey, us old schoolers make the best sysadmins so it isnt all bad :)
Hmm. Sounds kinda like a Slackware(my fav) manual install :)
2) Boot
3) mount
4) tar -xzf
5) Repeat step 4 for all desired packages.
6) Edit Configuration
7) Up and running. No reboot neccisary. (Unless you want to rebuild the kernel)
Moderators: Feel free to mark this as "Funny", though to me it actualy IS the ideal install
More bloatware. Just what the linux community needs.
I can smell that pun al the way over here...
I agree wholeheartedly. (Wow, nice long post eh) And I do think it will get moderated down.. almost everything that isn't funny, or pushing linux does these days.
Perhaps. I think BSD would b the best choice however, much more stable. The problem is, there would have to be a very usable GUI that the astronauts wouldn't need much training for. They have enough things to worry about don't you think? I would say FreeBSD with fvwm95, a UI that they are probably already familiar with. Linux has it's place, but not in mission critical applications imho. They should not be running windows however.
I am fully aware of that, in fact, this is why it would require no client side modifications. Simply a token sent from their nameserver to the authoritive stating what IP is resolving what. This type of data can be packet into 20 bytes, even on a large scale, traffic would be negligable.
A good solution to the FTP and http 1.0 problem would be some server-side extensions to the nameserver. Lets say ftp.bluh.com is pointed at an IP along with 200 other hostnames. When ftp.bluh.com is resolved, a token could be sent to the nameservers for bluh.com telling them what IP is resolving it. This information could be passed in turn to the FTP server, which would know that it's ftp.bluh.com from that IP's point of view, and act accordingly. The same could be done with many other services.
This isn't as hard to impliment as it sounds. We have to start conserving IP's, I don't think putting large blocks of users behind NAT is a good option, and ipv6 is still a long way off from being global.
And then there are those people who live in areas with no other bandwidth alternitive except $600/month 128k ISDN..
R.I.T. R.I.T. WOOOO GO TEAM!
(lots of lowercase text inserted to get past the caps filter)