While the Bible and Shakespeare are all time best sellers. I doubt they sell in large volumes from day to day. I mean once you have a Bible why buy another.
This is more of a feature than a bug. There are a number of security issues here. One of my biggest complaints about in the past about RH is their lack of security. The downside is when you close off a hole you make things more difficult to use. This is one of the reasons things have been so lax in the past.
Your problem is that by doing "su -" you take on root's enviroment. If you just "su" you won't lose your prior enviroment, and things will just work. (Of course you won't have sbin in your path, but I always put/sbin, and/usr/sbin in my user's path any way.) You can always use xhosts to allow root, or screw with your enviroment.
If you think the changes 6.0 vs 6.1 were bad just wait untill you see what happens/w 6.2;-) They are really starting to make an attempt at resolving their security issues. On the other hand it's kinda of annoying when you upgrade and discover they put ping in a new package. (This may not be true of the current public beta, but it was true of beta 2.)
Some times I really feel a little sorry for Red Hat they get slammed for security if they leave things as is. Or they get slammed by users when something doesn't work the way it use to.
Actually 6.1 shipped with a pre 2.2.13 kernel. It was a stealth upgrade. Just check their kernel src.rpm. It contains patch-2.2.13pre12.gz. They've been shipping pre kernels for a long time.
You might want to try the Bastille Linux hardening script. I think they just released a RH 6.1 version. It does do much good if you don't run RH, but a quick look at what they are doing is handy.
This would hardly be fair to MS. There are numerous issues that are entirely hardware specific. The other hand a closed source OS is a nightmare, as sometimes no matter how hard you want to you can't fix it.
I've been using a Cybex Autoview Commander. It's price is pretty high as I remember, but you get what you pay for. At times I have to reset the keyboard and mouse when swithing between machines, but that's just a few key strokes.
There are all sort of people running linux. You be amazed at the number of people running 1.2.x . 2.0.x has been around a long time. Nearly every bug in has been squashed. On a single proccessor machine it just works. SMP system have a few issues.
The 2.2.x line until just resently was mildly buggy. It work great for most things, and a majority of hardware. 2.2.5 and 2.2.7 were good if you had the right patches 2.2.8-10 had problems with file system corruption.
Then of course there is NFS. 2.0.x did a number of things wrong. 2.2.x fixed a number things and added features like file locking. Of course if your clients are broken the same matter as the server fixing the server can break everything.
The problem with any piece of software is that your users do thing you'd never every thought of. What works great for you is worthless for them. Early stable releases are just massive beta tests. Of course unlike NT you can get the problems fixed quickly.
The major difference between Red Hat 6.0 vs VA Linux 6.0.x . Is that it installs on our own hardware. If Redhat 6.0 installed correctly on 4-ways, DAC960's, or with 2 gigs of RAM we might not have created the cdrom. We could of created an addition cdrom with just a bunch of rpms, and a post installation script.
The main advantage is it allows our customers to reinstall and have some thing that is very close to what came out of our factory. In addition we get to fix all of our favorite bugs, and add our favorite programs like xemacs. (I don't look at me I use vi.)
VA is a hardware company. It's simply not in our best interest to be a distribution vendor. It's a reinstall cdrom with a few added extras. Nothing different than what Dell or as one else does with win9x. Of course we have the source so we can do a lot more;-)
Hot swapping drives is more of a matter of hardware than software. All you need is an sca drive and a good back plane. Now what would be useful would be if they were seen as removable media. Otherwise you need a SAFTE backplane and a RAID controller to get much use out of it.
Of course you could what I do when I want to remove an external jaz drive with out powering down. (Note don't try this if you have anything else attached the scsi card.) It works well for hot swapable drives, but I've not found much use for it in real life.
from scsi.c * Usage: echo "scsi remove-single-device 0 1 2 3" >/proc/scsi/scsi * with "0 1 2 3" replaced by your "Host Channel Id Lun".
* Usage: echo "scsi add-single-device 0 1 2 3" >/proc/scsi/scsi * with "0 1 2 3" replaced by your "Host Channel Id Lun".
Note: You really shouldn't be doing this so don't blame me if it goes wrong. Not all removable drives are hot swapable, and not all hot swap drives/carriers are created equal.
1)I'm quite puzzled by what bearing this has on her work. If she was a man this wouldn't have been brought up. With guy's like you I wonder about the sanity of any person wanting to go into Comp Sci or the like.
2) If you look at the pictures on her home you should be noting the poor quality of the photos and setting. She's not bad looking when she makes the effort. The same thing could be said for most of us.
3) Have you ever considered this woman's feelings? Here she is finally getting some notice, and some Anonymous Coward starts ragging on her looks. Get a life, and a shred of human decency.
I was refer to licensing issues, as they apply to Linux. I Linux is Unix depends on how you define Unix. If you use POSIX then Linux is as much Unix as the rest. It lacks the branding, and the Bell Lab code base. At best Linux is a reimplimentation of Unix.
Chill out, Read, Think, THEN Say something!!!
on
Storm Linux
·
· Score: 2
They are swiping Debian. They have stated that "We will be using the GPL or a related license for all of our products." So if Debian want's their install then nothing is stopping them. The Debian developers as a whole need to figure out if they wish to be a main stream distro, or a custom distro for Debian developers and power users. There isn't a right or wrong choice in this.
This is a KDE distro? It includes both GNOME, and KDE. Is there something wrong with choice? There are no rational people who content that GNOME is currently more stable than KDE. Given the relative ages of the 2 projects this isn't an attempt to slander GNOME. Stabity is relative to what you use the desktop for, however.
As far as KDE looking like windows. This is a good thing. (IMHO) I want people using linux, and KDE gets former windows users up and productive quickly. Once they are using linux they may find GNOME more to their liking. Personally I prefer E without gnome, but I really only use a WM for holding up xterms/Eterms/kvts, and netscape.
Another sign of Linux fragmentation. Ok folks repeat after me "Linux is not Unix". There is this little thing called the GPL. This means that anything produced under it can be used or adapted by anyone. This means that we can take the best of any distro and use it in another distro. In addition many of the so called distro are simply value added version of another distro. Mandrake Linux is a good example of this.
It's not in Stormix's best interest to get too far away from Debian. Once Stromix breaks with Debian they need to start doing all the heavy lifting themselves. By same token it's in their best interest to see Debian impliment many of their changes so they don't need to reimpliment everything every new release.
Note: My views should not be take to reflect the views of VALinux. They have been known to incite internal flame wars. This of course is sometimes part of the fun;-) -- Don't look at me I'm just a mushroom.
I've been running a creative labs DVD-RAM drive as floppical device for some time. Formating it ext2 hasn't been a problem.
UDF on the other has been quite a bit of trouble. You have to create a UDF image on your hard drive, and then write it to the DVD-RAM. I don't have that much free space lying about. Never mind convince cdwrite to write to the drive. In addition UDF write support is rather buggy. Although I've had good luck with reading UDF formated disks.
Now if only I could get my hands on some single sided media so I can transfer things around to machines with DVD-ROM drives.
You only need to make it availble. Under linux the only thing most people want on their machine is the kernel source. Putting it on a cdrom in this day and age is kinda of silly.
A better aproach is put it on an ftp, and offer to ship someone a cdrom upon request. There is a fair chance that no one ever request it, and if you handle the request right you come out looking like a good guy.
Besides if I'm going to work on the source I want the latest source not some stale cdrom.
As for diskless boxen you don't need to ship source with them. There is no code install on them. You'd need to provide source in some way for the server programs if you provide them.
The gpl is very loose on how you provide the source.
Mandrakes one the two main enlightenment developers. He has nothing to do with Mandrake Linux as that is kde base. Mandrake is known to get quite upset when asked about the Mandrake dist. Not that I ever do so. That would be wrong;-)
I've been using a DVDrom drive for quite some. I just can't seem to find any udf formated data DVDs to play with. You can read 700 meg iso dvd if you have a new enough kernel. Of course I don't know anyone producting such cdroms outside a few developers, and some astromers.
Multimedia DVD-roms don't function at all currently. The main problem is that most of these are majorly encrypted. Don't plan on watching DVD moives under linux ant time soon.
In essence right now DVD-rom drives are just costly cdrom drives. Unless you are on the bleeding edge, or are dual booting don't bother. They'll get as cheap as cdrom drives pretty soon.
Linus has stated that 2.2.x is limited to 2 Gig's memory. I'm not certain if he was refering to the ix86 or 2.2 in general. There is a 3 gig kernel patch for 2.0.x, but for a number of reasons the 3 gig hack doesn't work under 2.2 . There's fairly long thread on it on the kernel mailing list.
In my experince 2 gig under NT is a waste of money. This is especially true when you're running a file server. It may be able to address it, but it sure as hell doesn't do usefull caching with it.
Hmm let's see pico, emacs, xemacs, jed, joe, axe and the list goes on and on. I once counted and SuSE had at least 10 text editors. Hell you could use Word Perfect if you wanted to.
Of course I use vi, because every where I go it exists. (At least any machine I want to use.) It fits on a boot floppy, and once you know how to use it it's dam fast. You could say the same for emacs.
It really depend on how much you put in it. I haven't gotten a 2.0.x kernel to compile as a zImage for 6 months. The SMP support generally kills you. It's default in 2.2.0 .
I tend to compile in to many filesystems and everything I might ever use as a module.
Uh, someone want to walk me through installing it?
on
Linux 2.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
While the Bible and Shakespeare are all time best sellers. I doubt they sell in large volumes from day to day. I mean once you have a Bible why buy another.
This is more of a feature than a bug. There are a number of security issues here. One of my biggest complaints about in the past about RH is their lack of security. The downside is when you close off a hole you make things more difficult to use. This is one of the reasons things have been so lax in the past.
/sbin, and /usr/sbin in my user's path any way.) You can always use xhosts to allow root, or screw with your enviroment.
/w 6.2;-) They are really starting to make an attempt at resolving their security issues. On the other hand it's kinda of annoying when you upgrade and discover they put ping in a new package. (This may not be true of the current public beta, but it was true of beta 2.)
Your problem is that by doing "su -" you take on root's enviroment. If you just "su" you won't lose your prior enviroment, and things will just work. (Of course you won't have sbin in your path, but I always put
If you think the changes 6.0 vs 6.1 were bad just wait untill you see what happens
Some times I really feel a little sorry for Red Hat they get slammed for security if they leave things as is. Or they get slammed by users when something doesn't work the way it use to.
Actually 6.1 shipped with a pre 2.2.13 kernel. It was a stealth upgrade. Just check their kernel src.rpm. It contains patch-2.2.13pre12.gz. They've been shipping pre kernels for a long time.
You might want to try the Bastille Linux hardening script. I think they just released a RH 6.1 version. It does do much good if you don't run RH, but a quick look at what they are doing is handy.
s ks.html
http://bastille-linux.sourceforge.net/
http://bastille-linux.sourceforge.net/Script1Ta
Of course one the problems vendors face is that the average user claims to want security, but yells and screams when he has to use a secure system.
This would hardly be fair to MS. There are numerous issues that are entirely hardware specific. The other hand a closed source OS is a nightmare, as sometimes no matter how hard you want to you can't fix it.
I've been using a Cybex Autoview Commander. It's price is pretty high as I remember, but you get what you pay for. At times I have to reset the keyboard and mouse when swithing between machines, but that's just a few key strokes.
They also released both the beta cycle was completed. The 6.1 installer wasn't ready yet.
There are all sort of people running linux. You be amazed at the number of people running 1.2.x . 2.0.x has been around a long time. Nearly every bug in has been squashed. On a single proccessor machine it just works. SMP system have a few issues.
The 2.2.x line until just resently was mildly buggy. It work great for most things, and a majority of hardware. 2.2.5 and 2.2.7 were good if you had the right patches 2.2.8-10 had problems with file system corruption.
Then of course there is NFS. 2.0.x did a number of things wrong. 2.2.x fixed a number things and added features like file locking. Of course if your clients are broken the same matter as the server fixing the server can break everything.
The problem with any piece of software is that your users do thing you'd never every thought of. What works great for you is worthless for them. Early stable releases are just massive beta tests. Of course unlike NT you can get the problems fixed quickly.
The major difference between Red Hat 6.0 vs VA Linux 6.0.x . Is that it installs on our own hardware. If Redhat 6.0 installed correctly on 4-ways, DAC960's, or with 2 gigs of RAM we might not have created the cdrom. We could of created an addition cdrom with just a bunch of rpms, and a post installation script.
The main advantage is it allows our customers to reinstall and have some thing that is very close to what came out of our factory. In addition we get to fix all of our favorite bugs, and add our favorite programs like xemacs. (I don't look at me I use vi.)
VA is a hardware company. It's simply not in our best interest to be a distribution vendor. It's a reinstall cdrom with a few added extras. Nothing different than what Dell or as one else does with win9x. Of course we have the source so we can do a lot more;-)
Hot swapping drives is more of a matter of hardware than software. All you need is an sca drive and a good back plane. Now what would be useful would be if they were seen as removable media. Otherwise you need a SAFTE backplane and a RAID controller to get much use out of it.
Of course you could what I do when I want to remove an external jaz drive with out powering down. (Note don't try this if you have anything else attached the scsi card.) It works well for hot swapable drives, but I've not found much use for it in real life.
from scsi.c
* Usage: echo "scsi remove-single-device 0 1 2 3" >/proc/scsi/scsi
* with "0 1 2 3" replaced by your "Host Channel Id Lun".
* Usage: echo "scsi add-single-device 0 1 2 3" >/proc/scsi/scsi
* with "0 1 2 3" replaced by your "Host Channel Id Lun".
Note: You really shouldn't be doing this so don't blame me if it goes wrong. Not all removable drives are hot swapable, and not all hot swap drives/carriers are created equal.
I'd like to point out 3 things:
1)I'm quite puzzled by what bearing this has on her work. If she was a man this wouldn't have been brought up. With guy's like you I wonder about the sanity of any person wanting to go into Comp Sci or the like.
2) If you look at the pictures on her home you should be noting the poor quality of the photos and setting. She's not bad looking when she makes the effort. The same thing could be said for most of us.
3) Have you ever considered this woman's feelings? Here she is finally getting some notice, and some Anonymous Coward starts ragging on her looks. Get a life, and a shred of human decency.
Funny an AC should this.
I was refer to licensing issues, as they apply to Linux. I Linux is Unix depends on how you define Unix. If you use POSIX then Linux is as much Unix as the rest. It lacks the branding, and the Bell Lab code base. At best Linux is a reimplimentation of Unix.
Okay, folks lets do a little research here.
A minute of research
Contentions:
They are swiping Debian. They have stated that "We will be using the GPL or a related license for all of our products." So if Debian want's their install then nothing is stopping them. The Debian developers as a whole need to figure out if they wish to be a main stream distro, or a custom distro for Debian developers and power users. There isn't a right or wrong choice in this.
This is a KDE distro? It includes both GNOME, and KDE. Is there something wrong with choice? There are no rational people who content that GNOME is currently more stable than KDE. Given the relative ages of the 2 projects this isn't an attempt to slander GNOME. Stabity is relative to what you use the desktop for, however.
As far as KDE looking like windows. This is a good thing. (IMHO) I want people using linux, and KDE gets former windows users up and productive quickly. Once they are using linux they may find GNOME more to their liking. Personally I prefer E without gnome, but I really only use a WM for holding up xterms/Eterms/kvts, and netscape.
Another sign of Linux fragmentation. Ok folks repeat after me "Linux is not Unix". There is this little thing called the GPL. This means that anything produced under it can be used or adapted by anyone. This means that we can take the best of any distro and use it in another distro. In addition many of the so called distro are simply value added version of another distro. Mandrake Linux is a good example of this.
It's not in Stormix's best interest to get too far away from Debian. Once Stromix breaks with Debian they need to start doing all the heavy lifting themselves. By same token it's in their best interest to see Debian impliment many of their changes so they don't need to reimpliment everything every new release.
Note: My views should not be take to reflect the views of VALinux. They have been known to incite internal flame wars. This of course is sometimes part of the fun;-)
--
Don't look at me I'm just a mushroom.
I've been running a creative labs DVD-RAM drive as floppical device for some time. Formating it ext2 hasn't been a problem.
UDF on the other has been quite a bit of trouble. You have to create a UDF image on your hard drive, and then write it to the DVD-RAM. I don't have that much free space lying about. Never mind convince cdwrite to write to the drive. In addition UDF write support is rather buggy. Although I've had good luck with reading UDF formated disks.
Now if only I could get my hands on some single sided media so I can transfer things around to machines with DVD-ROM drives.
You only need to make it availble. Under linux the only thing most people want on their machine is the kernel source. Putting it on a cdrom in this day and age is kinda of silly.
A better aproach is put it on an ftp, and offer to ship someone a cdrom upon request. There is a fair chance that no one ever request it, and if you handle the request right you come out looking like a good guy.
Besides if I'm going to work on the source I want the latest source not some stale cdrom.
As for diskless boxen you don't need to ship source with them. There is no code install on them. You'd need to provide source in some way for the server programs if you provide them.
The gpl is very loose on how you provide the source.
SAR was one of the few things I really like about working with a sun box.
Mandrakes one the two main enlightenment developers. He has nothing to do with Mandrake Linux as that is kde base. Mandrake is known to get quite upset when asked about the Mandrake dist. Not that I ever do so. That would be wrong ;-)
They were using a pre release version. Red Hat get's burned over and over using prerelease stuff. I'm not sure exactly what they have against /opt.
I've been using a DVDrom drive for quite some. I just can't seem to find any udf formated data DVDs to play with. You can read 700 meg iso dvd if you have a new enough kernel. Of course I don't know anyone producting such cdroms outside a few developers, and some astromers.
Multimedia DVD-roms don't function at all currently. The main problem is that most of these are majorly encrypted. Don't plan on watching DVD moives under linux ant time soon.
In essence right now DVD-rom drives are just costly cdrom drives. Unless you are on the bleeding edge, or are dual booting don't bother. They'll get as cheap as cdrom drives pretty soon.
Often I find people who say this are comparing apples and oranges. If all you look at is cpu, memory, and hard disk size there is a big $$ difference.
There is a great deal more to performance than cpu speed and memory. ide vs scsi comes to mind. As well as rpms and seek time on the hard drive.
Under X you'd be hard pressed to find a card that beats the G200. (Well yes the G400, or maybe a TNT2 card, maybe.)
Linus has stated that 2.2.x is limited to 2 Gig's memory. I'm not certain if he was refering to the ix86 or 2.2 in general. There is a 3 gig kernel patch for 2.0.x, but for a number of reasons the 3 gig hack doesn't work under 2.2 . There's fairly long thread on it on the kernel mailing list.
In my experince 2 gig under NT is a waste of money. This is especially true when you're running a file server. It may be able to address it, but it sure as hell doesn't do usefull caching with it.
Hmm let's see pico, emacs, xemacs, jed, joe, axe and the list goes on and on. I once counted and SuSE had at least 10 text editors. Hell you could use Word Perfect if you wanted to.
Of course I use vi, because every where I go it exists. (At least any machine I want to use.) It fits on a boot floppy, and once you know how to use it it's dam fast. You could say the same for emacs.
It really depend on how much you put in it. I haven't gotten a 2.0.x kernel to compile as a zImage for 6 months. The SMP support generally kills you. It's default in 2.2.0 .
I tend to compile in to many filesystems and everything I might ever use as a module.
If you have to ask this upgrade to 5.2 .