Re:Seems to be no bad blood with Jim...
on
The Two LinuxHQs?
·
· Score: 1
I wouldn't be surprised if I've got a bit of flakey hardware. Unfortunately, it's only crashed a few times, and there weren't a lot of clues left behind.
I'll probably end up moving the site to another machine. But I'd still like to figure out the instability problems.
Mark Evans started the site as www.ecsnet.com back in 1996.
then he renamed it to be www.linuxhq.com in 1997.
in August 1997, he shut it down with no warning. Everybody was wondering where it went. The site was too much work to maintain.
in September 1997, I contacted him, and he agreed to give me the site content. I took over the site, and he granted me the right to take ownership of the content. He held on to the domain name (as a service to me, I thought at the time).
I ran the site from September 1997 until a few weeks ago - not hearing from Mark Evans the entire time.
four weeks ago, he sent in a request to the Internic to change the nameservers to his own. I got one of the automated notices from the Internic, and asked him what was going on. I got no reply.
the next weekend, I finally got a message from him stating that he was transferring control of the domain in two weeks to a well-known Linux company (who's identity will remain under wraps, because they didn't have a clue about what was going on). He thanked me for the work I had put into the site.
the following Monday, I contacted that company. I asked what was going on, and how come they hadn't contacted me about the content? They got back to me very quickly, and told me that they hadn't realized that I was running the site (not Mark), and that they didn't want to undermine the work I was doing.
the next day, Tuesday, May 18th, I got an angry 1-line letter from Mark - apparently because I contacted the company. He then pulled the domain off the air. I had to drop everything, and register kernelnotes.org so that the site wouldn't die.
Yesterday, Sundary, June 6th, he resurrected his old site from 1997, with some updates. Since it seems apparent I won't be getting linuxhq.com back, I decided to permanently rename the site I was doing to kernelnotes.org.
As far as I'm concerned - this whole ordeal is over with now. I haven't been treated fairly, but I'm not going to harbour any hard feelings - it's just a silly little website. I've got bigger fish to fry.
Cheers,
- Jim
Re:The new LinuxHQ violating GPL of kernelnotes?
on
The Two LinuxHQs?
·
· Score: 2
Well, he did copy some pages that I (and others made).
I don't really care though. I'm not going to enforce things. I needed a license, so I just picked the GPL because it matched the kernel sources. I probably should have just made my stuff public domain.
Most of the pages are derived from pages Mark originally made, so he does have some claim on them.
I see he's now changed the license on his site to the GPL. That's good.
Legally speaking, he still doesn't have the right to change the copyright notices though. When I took over the site, he assigned copyright to me. He hasn't contacted me in order to do the reverse.
Still, I don't care. I hereby grant Mark Evans permission to change the copyrights on the content he is stealing.:-)
Cheers,
- Jim
Re:Seems to be no bad blood with Jim...
on
The Two LinuxHQs?
·
· Score: 2
I'll agree the maintenance has been bad. I'm trying to do better. Things seem to break faster than I can fix them though.:-)
For example, the htdig search engine has been broken for quite a while. It would probably only take me 4 hours to fix it - but there always seems to be something more important going on.
The server has been quite unstable lately too - that's my top priority to figure out at the moment. It's colocated, without 24/7 support, so if it crashes on the weekend, it's ugly. I'm going to try to backtrack to 2.2.6 on the machine.
Any ideas? (aside from installing FreeBSD)
I've got 2 sites lined up where I can move the content to, or make mirror sites - but I haven't had the time yet to do that.
I'll bet this stock splits several times over the next year - once the market catches on to the fact that RH _is_ the next Microsoft. It's still a bit early for the market to put that sort of faith into a $10M revenue company - which means it's gonna be cheap at any price at the IPO, folks.
Of course, I prefer Debian. But I'll probably have to wait awhile before I get in on that IPO.:-)
Hey, if Mark Evans wants to do what he originally did with the site, that would be great. It was a fine site before, especially the patch collection.
I don't think he's going to resurrect it though.
Instead he was shopping the domain name around (and he actually had a buyer). Of course, he didn't tell me about this until the last minute. When I questioned where I fit in to all this, he got pissed off and pulled the domain down.
Mark Evans did assign copyright of the site contents to me when I volunteered to take over the site, but he never transferred the domain name (even though I asked several times). I guess it's his right to keep (or sell) the domain name if he really wants to.
I'll admit that I haven't done as good of a job - due to personal time constraints. I personally think the site works best when it is kept non-commercial, so I haven't tried to make a buck off of it.
OMark Evans originally shut the site down (2 years ago) because he didn't have enough time to put a lot of time into it either (and it wasn't generating significant revenue). It's a big job. He was probably spending 4 hours a day on it before - I can't do that. Most of the time I spend on it is just fixing stuff that breaks. I do want to put a bit more "content" into it.
Fortunately, sites like Cutting Edge Linux, Kernel Traffic and the Linux Kernel Patch Archive have picked up the slack. If anybody else wants to help create neat services for the kernel users and developers - just create your own site, and I'll link it!
I've been planning a major upgrade to the site with an improved search engine and some more kernel-related content. However, this domain name business has been a huge waste of time - so my plans have been pushed back a bit now. I'm doing this in my free time, which I don't have a lot of.
I'll have the mailing list archives fixed soon. Same with the search engine. I would have done it earlier this week, but I lost a hard drive on my workstation. Ugh. What else can go wrong?
At least most people seem to like the new name.:-)
Well, the AMD chip is going to be somewhat crippled by the use of the older IA32 instruction set. The IA64 instruction set is, by design, going to be better suited to lots of parallel execution units. That means that IA64 code will flow a lot faster through the execution units (less bottlenecks). It'll vary depending on what you are executing - but Intel's numbers show about a 40% advantage on average. Of course, this is highly dependent on the compilers doing the right thing.
Of course, that's only one factor. It's almost impossible to say how it's going to stack up against the competition when it gets released. The competition isn't sleeping...
Merced is positioned at the high-end, so it should be very fast. It'll probably be quite expensive at first, until Intel starts to phase out the Pentiums.
I thought the Merced was supposed to be compatible with the PA Risc instruction set? I don't see any mention of that in the document (at least, not yet). Maybe HP plans on using software emulation?
A Linux port has underway for quite awhile already. Intel and Cygnus have press releases saying who's working on it. VA, HP, SGI, Cygnus are all working on it under NDA.
LinuxHQ.com is gone because the original creator of the site took back the domain name, and pulled it offline. As somebody who volunteered to run the site for 2+ years, I'm disgusted.
As for me, I didn't go to work for VA a few months back. I did start at Pacific HiTech, but I decided not to stay.
It seems to be based largely off of the FreshMeat editorial I wrote just after you dropped out of the LSB.
I was scheduled to write an article on the LSB - but by the time I was going to write it, it had disintegrated.
So, I wrote the article to explain the backroom politics that were going on at the time so that people could understand where the LSB was.
Subsequently, the LSB team picked up the pieces and everything was nice again.
When I wrote the editorial, I assumed it would only have a half-life of a week or so, and that only a few developers would read it.
If I had realized that the little editorial would have had such a long lifespan, I would have refrained from any personal references. That type of thing is better left in email on the mailing lists, where it does have a short lifespan.
I agree with Bruce that it isn't fair - it's old news that is no longer particularily relevant, except for historical interest.
> BTW, I don't like Debian, because the last time I checked, they were giving in to the FSF, and calling their Distribution Debian GNU/Linux.
Quick history check - Debian was created by the GNU project - they funded it's initial development by Ian Murdock. So why shouldn't it have "GNU" in it's name?
Debian would make such a nice base compared to Red Hat, yet there are a million RH derivatives out there, and no Debian derivatives (that I am aware of).
Check out LinuxHQ. The following distributions are derived from Debian:
MNIS
PingOO
Eagle Linux m68k
Prosa
Debian-JP
Linux-YeS
DLite
Floppix
Admittedly, there are fewer Debian derived distributions than Red Hat derived distributions - but it would be wrong to say there aren't any.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't say I'd be taking over gnome-apt!
I meant to say it would be cool if Red Hat would pay Havoc to continue to develop gnome-apt (unlikely). It didn't come out right though...
Cheers,
- Jim
Maybe they'll hire Jason Gunthorpe and Ian Jackson next...
Cheers,
- Jim
To work on gnome-apt. :-)
Cheers,
- Jim
There is a libdpkg that comes with dpkg, but
.deb files.
I don't think there's much documentation there.
Use the source!
Of course, you can also use ar, tar, and gzip to
manipulate
Cheers,
- Jim
My firewall is a 386!
I wouldn't be surprised if I've got a bit of flakey hardware. Unfortunately, it's only crashed a few times, and there weren't a lot of clues left behind.
I'll probably end up moving the site to another machine. But I'd still like to figure out the instability problems.
Cheers,
- Jim
Yeah, it probably isn't the best license for web pages. I only chose it because that's what the kernel uses - and it seemed compatible.
Cheers,
- Jim
- Mark Evans started the site as www.ecsnet.com back in 1996.
- then he renamed it to be www.linuxhq.com in 1997.
- in August 1997, he shut it down with no warning. Everybody was wondering where it went. The site was too much work to maintain.
- in September 1997, I contacted him, and he agreed to give me the site content. I took over the site, and he granted me the right to take ownership of the content. He held on to the domain name (as a service to me, I thought at the time).
- I ran the site from September 1997 until a few weeks ago - not hearing from Mark Evans the entire time.
- four weeks ago, he sent in a request to the Internic to change the nameservers to his own. I got one of the automated notices from the Internic, and asked him what was going on. I got no reply.
- the next weekend, I finally got a message from him stating that he was transferring control of the domain in two weeks to a well-known Linux company (who's identity will remain under wraps, because they didn't have a clue about what was going on). He thanked me for the work I had put into the site.
- the following Monday, I contacted that company. I asked what was going on, and how come they hadn't contacted me about the content? They got back to me very quickly, and told me that they hadn't realized that I was running the site (not Mark), and that they didn't want to undermine the work I was doing.
- the next day, Tuesday, May 18th, I got an angry 1-line letter from Mark - apparently because I contacted the company. He then pulled the domain off the air. I had to drop everything, and register kernelnotes.org so that the site wouldn't die.
- Yesterday, Sundary, June 6th, he resurrected his old site from 1997, with some updates. Since it seems apparent I won't be getting linuxhq.com back, I decided to permanently rename the site I was doing to kernelnotes.org.
As far as I'm concerned - this whole ordeal is over with now. I haven't been treated fairly, but I'm not going to harbour any hard feelings - it's just a silly little website. I've got bigger fish to fry.Cheers,
- Jim
Well, he did copy some pages that I (and others made).
:-)
I don't really care though. I'm not going to enforce things. I needed a license, so I just picked the GPL because it matched the kernel sources. I probably should have just made my stuff public domain.
Most of the pages are derived from pages Mark originally made, so he does have some claim on them.
I see he's now changed the license on his site to the GPL. That's good.
Legally speaking, he still doesn't have the right to change the copyright notices though. When I took over the site, he assigned copyright to me. He hasn't contacted me in order to do the reverse.
Still, I don't care. I hereby grant Mark Evans permission to change the copyrights on the content he is stealing.
Cheers,
- Jim
I'll agree the maintenance has been bad. I'm trying to do better. Things seem to break faster than I can fix them though. :-)
For example, the htdig search engine has been broken for quite a while. It would probably only take me 4 hours to fix it - but there always seems to be something more important going on.
The server has been quite unstable lately too - that's my top priority to figure out at the moment. It's colocated, without 24/7 support, so if it crashes on the weekend, it's ugly. I'm going to try to backtrack to 2.2.6 on the machine.
Any ideas? (aside from installing FreeBSD)
I've got 2 sites lined up where I can move the content to, or make mirror sites - but I haven't had the time yet to do that.
Cheers,
- Jim
Actually, I think the voting for that award happened when Mark was still running his old site, so it's really his.
It's getting sort of old (and it's sort of ugly). I think I'll replace it with a link to the OS War for Cystic Fibrosis.
Cheers,
- Jim
I'm guessing it'll hit the market in August.
:-)
I'll bet this stock splits several times over the next year - once the market catches on to the fact that RH _is_ the next Microsoft. It's still a bit early for the market to put that sort of faith into a $10M revenue company - which means it's gonna be cheap at any price at the IPO, folks.
Of course, I prefer Debian. But I'll probably have to wait awhile before I get in on that IPO.
Cheers,
- Jim
Hey, if Mark Evans wants to do what he originally did with the site, that would be great. It was a fine site before, especially the patch collection.
:-)
I don't think he's going to resurrect it though.
Instead he was shopping the domain name around (and he actually had a buyer). Of course, he didn't tell me about this until the last minute. When I questioned where I fit in to all this, he got pissed off and pulled the domain down.
Mark Evans did assign copyright of the site contents to me when I volunteered to take over the site, but he never transferred the domain name (even though I asked several times). I guess it's his right to keep (or sell) the domain name if he really wants to.
I'll admit that I haven't done as good of a job - due to personal time constraints. I personally think the site works best when it is kept non-commercial, so I haven't tried to make a buck off of it.
OMark Evans originally shut the site down (2 years ago) because he didn't have enough time to put a lot of time into it either (and it wasn't generating significant revenue). It's a big job. He was probably spending 4 hours a day on it before - I can't do that. Most of the time I spend on it is just fixing stuff that breaks. I do want to put a bit more "content" into it.
Fortunately, sites like Cutting Edge Linux, Kernel Traffic and the Linux Kernel Patch Archive have picked up the slack. If anybody else wants to help create neat services for the kernel users and developers - just create your own site, and I'll link it!
I've been planning a major upgrade to the site with an improved search engine and some more kernel-related content. However, this domain name business has been a huge waste of time - so my plans have been pushed back a bit now. I'm doing this in my free time, which I don't have a lot of.
I'll have the mailing list archives fixed soon. Same with the search engine. I would have done it earlier this week, but I lost a hard drive on my workstation. Ugh. What else can go wrong?
At least most people seem to like the new name.
Cheers,
- Jim
Well, the AMD chip is going to be somewhat crippled by the use of the older IA32 instruction set. The IA64 instruction set is, by design, going to be better suited to lots of parallel execution units. That means that IA64 code will flow a lot faster through the execution units (less bottlenecks). It'll vary depending on what you are executing - but Intel's numbers show about a 40% advantage on average. Of course, this is highly dependent on the compilers doing the right thing.
Of course, that's only one factor. It's almost impossible to say how it's going to stack up against the competition when it gets released. The competition isn't sleeping...
Merced is positioned at the high-end, so it should be very fast. It'll probably be quite expensive at first, until Intel starts to phase out the Pentiums.
Cheers,
- Jim
I thought the Merced was supposed to be compatible with the PA Risc instruction set? I don't see any mention of that in the document (at least, not yet). Maybe HP plans on using software emulation?
Cheers,
- Jim
A Linux port has underway for quite awhile already. Intel and Cygnus have press releases saying who's working on it. VA, HP, SGI, Cygnus are all working on it under NDA.
Cheers,
- Jim
> What made you leave PHT?
:-)
After building about 300 RPMs, I couldn't take it anymore. I think dpkg has brainwashed me.
Cheers,
- Jim
http://linuxhq.jimpick.com/
That should work as a temporary fix.
Cheers,
- Jim
LinuxHQ.com is gone because the original creator of the site took back the domain name, and pulled it offline. As somebody who volunteered to run the site for 2+ years, I'm disgusted.
As for me, I didn't go to work for VA a few months back. I did start at Pacific HiTech, but I decided not to stay.
Cheers,
- Jim
It seems to be based largely off of the FreshMeat editorial I wrote just after you dropped out of the LSB.
I was scheduled to write an article on the LSB - but by the time I was going to write it, it had disintegrated.
So, I wrote the article to explain the backroom politics that were going on at the time so that people could understand where the LSB was.
Subsequently, the LSB team picked up the pieces and everything was nice again.
When I wrote the editorial, I assumed it would only have a half-life of a week or so, and that only a few developers would read it.
If I had realized that the little editorial would have had such a long lifespan, I would have refrained from any personal references. That type of thing is better left in email on the mailing lists, where it does have a short lifespan.
I agree with Bruce that it isn't fair - it's old news that is no longer particularily relevant, except for historical interest.
Cheers,
- Jim
> BTW, I don't like Debian, because the last time I checked, they were giving in to the FSF, and calling their Distribution Debian GNU/Linux.
Quick history check - Debian was created by the GNU project - they funded it's initial development by Ian Murdock. So why shouldn't it have "GNU" in it's name?
Cheers,
- Jim
Simple. They want to go public, but the name "Cygnus" is already taken by a pharmaceutical company.
http://biz.yahoo.com/n/c/cygn.html
Cheers,
- Jim
Check out LinuxHQ. The following distributions are derived from Debian:
- MNIS
- PingOO
- Eagle Linux m68k
- Prosa
- Debian-JP
- Linux-YeS
- DLite
- Floppix
Admittedly, there are fewer Debian derived distributions than Red Hat derived distributions - but it would be wrong to say there aren't any.Cheers,
- Jim
Yuck.
They're better than nothing.
That's not saying a lot though.
As a community, it's our role to say, "Thank you for the support" - but not leave it at that. Long term, we want open source.
Linux plays by different rules than Windows. Hardware vendors will eventually need to realize this, or lose market share and profits.
I hope the community never comes to accept binary-only drivers. At least we can be sure that Debian never will.
Cheers,
- Jim
I was in Vancouver, and I popped in to check out the Comdex.
:-)
Man, that Linux booth was packed. It was hard even getting near it. It was definitely the booth that generated the highest excitement level.
Too bad you guys didn't have the floor space of, say, Microsoft.
Cheers,
- Jim