not really similar; SCO (the original SCO, of course) had a software emulation layer to run Linux binaries on top of it's own x86 Unix. it was an ABI emulation, not a processor emulation.
i think there's something similar for BSD, Solaris, AIX... all other Unix players want to run Linux apps.
I've done such a thing: several 1U cases with 4drives each and a mini-itx mb. works great, but back then there wasn't a good block-sharing software (like iSCSI, gnbd or AoE), so i had to throw together an app interface to move files and assure redundancy and integrity with no RAID.
now i'm moving away from this to a more SAN-like system (AoE for now, maybe iSCSI next year). i could reuse the hardware, but unfortunately the mini-itx mb had only PATA and 100BaseT. if there's a little mb with 4 SATA and GbEth, i'd do it in a flash.
The main differences I've seen between SuSE Pro and SLES are around the 'almost automatic' setups. For example, in SLES you get a LDAP server for everything (login, Samba, Netatalk, etc) just by choosing the right choice during installation. In SuSE Pro, on the other hand, it's just as easy to point to an existing LDAP server (or find it via SLP).
BTW, i'd also kill for a 'Centos for SLES' distro. Even after opensourcing YaST, there's a very intimidating EULA in SLES. Anybody here know about the legality of that? It doesn't seem to be protecting just the support service (like RedHat) but the product itself (like proprietary software)
I was wondering why the absurt.msi format, but after reading your post i'm thinking it might be a strange tactic...
don't you have to turn down security levels on IE to see those things? if more and more content is provided that way, more people will put their browser in the 'hole-ridden' setting... and therefore will need more symantec software
As far as I can tell, this is basically no different from a dual processor system, except that you are probably going to get a little less performance out of the dual core than out of two separate processors.
i think that's why the intel chip is a desktop one. to a single user, it's cheaper to get a multicore system than a real two chips machine; but for servers it's not the real thing.
and because of the FSB arch of intel; it's not really a way to turn 2-way designs into a 4-way. the bus design makes it really hard (that's why 4-way Xeon MBs are so expensive!)
OTOH, for switched archs like Opteron and POWER (and maybe PowerPC soon), it's really a cheap way to get twice as many cores. with minor redisigns, 2-,4- or even 8-way MBs could get 4-, 8- or 16-way cores! definitely much better economics for servers, and high-end workstations (there are rumors that MacOS X is ready for dual-core dual-chip machines)
It's not Christianity that is opposed to science. Much less Catholics. The Vatican sponsors a lot of science, it has it's own observatory, and it's a well-respected one.
this religion-against-science fenomenon is a USA-centric problem, not a general issue.
optical discs are really realliable when properly stored, unfortunately that means not being used. Here in Lima we get more than 90% humidity most of the year, so even in well ventilated, A/C indoors, optical discs degrade quickly.
the main advantage of HDs is that it's easy to check data integrity with checksums. of course, HDs do die, that's why now all those DVDs are the backup of the archive. And now that they're not used except when accidents happen, they can be stored properly.
As pointed by another poster, there are situations where CD/DVD are superior to either Tape/HD.
but the existance of RAID mirrors have nothing to do with that.
a mirror protects you from hard disk failure, not against data corruption, for that you need a different thing.
also, the original poster uses 'backup' and 'archive' words. these are _totally_ different things! I think he means: i need archive, i had archive with CD/DVSs, i don't want tape/HD backup. but it seems he hadn't checked up the possibility of an HD archive.
I've recently replaced a wall full of DVDs (around 6000 discs) with a near-line HD archive system, at just 1.56$/GB total cost!
of course, for offsite backup of the archive, it still burns DVDs
i wanted to use all 4 HDs with data, so i made them netbootable. the best way to get it small and fast is busybox, on a cramfs ramdisk. 3.5MB kernel + 4MB root image, and that includes an http server!
I do that. For near-line archive, several 1U boxes, each with an M10000 Epia board and four 300GB HD. Another box with a database and a web frontend to manage it, and goes like a charm.
not much processing needs, but lots of storage space with little heat. unfortunately the next drives (400GB) are only at 7200 RPM, no longer 5400RM
It's the de-facto money manager on internet, yet the're not regulated as a bank, and they just won't accept most of the world as worth considering.
I'm a software developer, and since getting full down into open source, i have a BIG software repository to use. and when i get paid for my work, i'd like to set apart some 5-7% and donate it to those OSS projects i've benefited from... but most of them (especially the smaller ones) only have PayPal. so, i can't contribute monetarily.
of course, i do it the other way, with bug reports and suggestions. sometimes a bit of code. but i know how important is to get money now and then!
sometimes, i just click on a few of their ads; hoping they'll get some click points.
you mention using LDAP for authentication. i've done this on a SLES9 box, and it worked really good for a while... until they started having problems with the UPS, then the air conditioner, etc.
every single time, it was shut down without notice... and every time it woke up with the BDB database unreadable, therefore nobody could login.
i read all the info about LDAP, tried several tweaks, but i couldn't get it to survive a hard poweroff. in the end, i gave up and returned to oldstype/etc/passwd
A friend and i have been successfully selling small VPN boxes.:-)
Here in Peru, most businesses are using ADSL, only to find that e-mailing files back and forth between different offices isn't any good. We then sell them a box, (internally run a very stripped down linux with OpenVPN) install one on each office, and voila! a WAN!
I once read through the entire dragon book with the intention of creating my own language; I gave it all up when I found Lua.
That's my case too. Lua is absolutely great!
for a long time, i've been looking at Lisp and Scheme for more expressive power than usual languages. (in fact, my first C program was a stupidly slow lisp interpreter). but the syntax is just too awkward.
i also looked at lazy evaluation languages, but couldn't wrap my mind on that model.
a few months ago i found Lua... and it's perfect! a procedural type syntax, with first-order functions, closures, higher-order and everything!
it's fast too, and trivially easy to extend in C
i've used it for several projects, hope to soon use it instead of PHP for web too!
How to get the job done as efficiently as possible, regardless of the specific task at-hand, is an area in which Xybernaut has extremely deep knowledge and know-how. In fact, it is what we are all about
What does this mean??? It can be summarized as 'We are good at doing jobs'.
i don't remember what i asked him, but his answer was quick and to the point. it was certainly a 'wow' moment, and it encouraged me to read and try to understand most of the kernel (that wasn't so difficult those days of Linux 0.99pl9). I even wrote a device driver, an early version of nbd, but when i tried to submit it, linux 1.1 was underway... and before i could read it again, 2.0 was just on the horizon...
anyway, his attitude was what totally made me an open source beleiver.
I like C-like syntax, but for easy prototyping, automatic arrays and hashes are sooo neat! much nicer than garbage collection IMHO. perl makes them easy, once you get over the $,%,@ line noise
my main problem with that is (besides perl's ugly syntax) that arrays and hashes are different things. that alone makes me use PHP more often than perl.
but in PHP I have choose all the time between the array/hash thing and the 'object' thing. I'm sure that internally the objects are managed with hashes, but the syntax make them diferent objects (in extreme cases i have to convert one to the other and back again).
that's what's turning me towards Pike... arrays are hashes, and object-like syntax is just syntactic sugar over the hash! (and 'splices' are nice too)
so, for me now is Pike first, then PHP, and if i have to recurse to Perl... then i might try C++ (with STL), just because i find it far more readable!
Right, promoting add value to music creations (and literary, and software, etc) but in music there's a monopoly on the promoters.
I think they should be prohibited of forming those alliances. If the RIAA were illegal, but Sony, RCA, Island, etc. kept working, they would have to compete, therefore creating better products (better music) at fair prices.
I think the MD5-comparing stuff would miss a lot of copied code if they've been 'prettied' to Linux code style standards. (personally i think the 8-space tabs of Linux code isn't pretty, but that's another rant)
to get a better match, i would first do a small sed or awk filter to convert any number of spaces and tabs to a single space. only then i would chop into 5-line blocks and calculate the MD5s.
thinking again, even better would be to change every whitespace block to a single space; that would merge all the code in a singe (huge) line. then i would insert a linebreak after every semicolon; that would create a very regular (and ugly) code style.
Slashdot Mirror
not really similar; SCO (the original SCO, of course) had a software emulation layer to run Linux binaries on top of it's own x86 Unix. it was an ABI emulation, not a processor emulation.
i think there's something similar for BSD, Solaris, AIX... all other Unix players want to run Linux apps.
I've done such a thing: several 1U cases with 4drives each and a mini-itx mb. works great, but back then there wasn't a good block-sharing software (like iSCSI, gnbd or AoE), so i had to throw together an app interface to move files and assure redundancy and integrity with no RAID.
now i'm moving away from this to a more SAN-like system (AoE for now, maybe iSCSI next year). i could reuse the hardware, but unfortunately the mini-itx mb had only PATA and 100BaseT. if there's a little mb with 4 SATA and GbEth, i'd do it in a flash.
of course you can. Xen3 have had VT support for months.
The main differences I've seen between SuSE Pro and SLES are around the 'almost automatic' setups. For example, in SLES you get a LDAP server for everything (login, Samba, Netatalk, etc) just by choosing the right choice during installation. In SuSE Pro, on the other hand, it's just as easy to point to an existing LDAP server (or find it via SLP).
BTW, i'd also kill for a 'Centos for SLES' distro. Even after opensourcing YaST, there's a very intimidating EULA in SLES. Anybody here know about the legality of that? It doesn't seem to be protecting just the support service (like RedHat) but the product itself (like proprietary software)
Like the http://coraid.com/ boxes?
I was wondering why the absurt .msi format, but after reading your post i'm thinking it might be a strange tactic...
don't you have to turn down security levels on IE to see those things? if more and more content is provided that way, more people will put their browser in the 'hole-ridden' setting... and therefore will need more symantec software
i think that's why the intel chip is a desktop one. to a single user, it's cheaper to get a multicore system than a real two chips machine; but for servers it's not the real thing.
and because of the FSB arch of intel; it's not really a way to turn 2-way designs into a 4-way. the bus design makes it really hard (that's why 4-way Xeon MBs are so expensive!)
OTOH, for switched archs like Opteron and POWER (and maybe PowerPC soon), it's really a cheap way to get twice as many cores. with minor redisigns, 2-,4- or even 8-way MBs could get 4-, 8- or 16-way cores! definitely much better economics for servers, and high-end workstations (there are rumors that MacOS X is ready for dual-core dual-chip machines)
It's not Christianity that is opposed to science. Much less Catholics. The Vatican sponsors a lot of science, it has it's own observatory, and it's a well-respected one.
this religion-against-science fenomenon is a USA-centric problem, not a general issue.
but the RIAA doesn't get money from concert (yet); so they're not interested in promoting the artist, just the discs have value for them.
optical discs are really realliable when properly stored, unfortunately that means not being used. Here in Lima we get more than 90% humidity most of the year, so even in well ventilated, A/C indoors, optical discs degrade quickly.
the main advantage of HDs is that it's easy to check data integrity with checksums. of course, HDs do die, that's why now all those DVDs are the backup of the archive. And now that they're not used except when accidents happen, they can be stored properly.
As pointed by another poster, there are situations where CD/DVD are superior to either Tape/HD.
but the existance of RAID mirrors have nothing to do with that.
a mirror protects you from hard disk failure, not against data corruption, for that you need a different thing.
also, the original poster uses 'backup' and 'archive' words. these are _totally_ different things! I think he means: i need archive, i had archive with CD/DVSs, i don't want tape/HD backup. but it seems he hadn't checked up the possibility of an HD archive.
I've recently replaced a wall full of DVDs (around 6000 discs) with a near-line HD archive system, at just 1.56$/GB total cost!
of course, for offsite backup of the archive, it still burns DVDs
the Epia M10000 go for $165 (less than 10% of the new ones!)
i wanted to use all 4 HDs with data, so i made them netbootable. the best way to get it small and fast is busybox, on a cramfs ramdisk. 3.5MB kernel + 4MB root image, and that includes an http server!
I do that. For near-line archive, several 1U boxes, each with an M10000 Epia board and four 300GB HD. Another box with a database and a web frontend to manage it, and goes like a charm.
not much processing needs, but lots of storage space with little heat. unfortunately the next drives (400GB) are only at 7200 RPM, no longer 5400RM
It's the de-facto money manager on internet, yet the're not regulated as a bank, and they just won't accept most of the world as worth considering.
I'm a software developer, and since getting full down into open source, i have a BIG software repository to use. and when i get paid for my work, i'd like to set apart some 5-7% and donate it to those OSS projects i've benefited from... but most of them (especially the smaller ones) only have PayPal. so, i can't contribute monetarily.
of course, i do it the other way, with bug reports and suggestions. sometimes a bit of code. but i know how important is to get money now and then!
sometimes, i just click on a few of their ads; hoping they'll get some click points.
you mention using LDAP for authentication. i've done this on a SLES9 box, and it worked really good for a while... until they started having problems with the UPS, then the air conditioner, etc.
/etc/passwd
every single time, it was shut down without notice... and every time it woke up with the BDB database unreadable, therefore nobody could login.
i read all the info about LDAP, tried several tweaks, but i couldn't get it to survive a hard poweroff. in the end, i gave up and returned to oldstype
is there a better way? can BDB cut it?
I do it!
:-)
A friend and i have been successfully selling small VPN boxes.
Here in Peru, most businesses are using ADSL, only to find that e-mailing files back and forth between different offices isn't any good. We then sell them a box, (internally run a very stripped down linux with OpenVPN) install one on each office, and voila! a WAN!
They're 16bit each, not 32bit
(spoiler for those that didn't get it: this is the segmented addressing architecture of 8086, the first 'x86' chip from Intel)
That's my case too. Lua is absolutely great!
for a long time, i've been looking at Lisp and Scheme for more expressive power than usual languages. (in fact, my first C program was a stupidly slow lisp interpreter). but the syntax is just too awkward.
i also looked at lazy evaluation languages, but couldn't wrap my mind on that model.
a few months ago i found Lua... and it's perfect! a procedural type syntax, with first-order functions, closures, higher-order and everything!
it's fast too, and trivially easy to extend in C
i've used it for several projects, hope to soon use it instead of PHP for web too!
What does this mean??? It can be summarized as 'We are good at doing jobs'.
That was exactly my case too!
i don't remember what i asked him, but his answer was quick and to the point. it was certainly a 'wow' moment, and it encouraged me to read and try to understand most of the kernel (that wasn't so difficult those days of Linux 0.99pl9). I even wrote a device driver, an early version of nbd, but when i tried to submit it, linux 1.1 was underway... and before i could read it again, 2.0 was just on the horizon...
anyway, his attitude was what totally made me an open source beleiver.
I like C-like syntax, but for easy prototyping, automatic arrays and hashes are sooo neat! much nicer than garbage collection IMHO. perl makes them easy, once you get over the $,%,@ line noise
my main problem with that is (besides perl's ugly syntax) that arrays and hashes are different things. that alone makes me use PHP more often than perl.
but in PHP I have choose all the time between the array/hash thing and the 'object' thing. I'm sure that internally the objects are managed with hashes, but the syntax make them diferent objects (in extreme cases i have to convert one to the other and back again).
that's what's turning me towards Pike... arrays are hashes, and object-like syntax is just syntactic sugar over the hash! (and 'splices' are nice too)
so, for me now is Pike first, then PHP, and if i have to recurse to Perl... then i might try C++ (with STL), just because i find it far more readable!
Actually i think automatic fish feeders would be a typical OSS niche.
Right, promoting add value to music creations (and literary, and software, etc) but in music there's a monopoly on the promoters.
I think they should be prohibited of forming those alliances. If the RIAA were illegal, but Sony, RCA, Island, etc. kept working, they would have to compete, therefore creating better products (better music) at fair prices.
I think the MD5-comparing stuff would miss a lot of copied code if they've been 'prettied' to Linux code style standards. (personally i think the 8-space tabs of Linux code isn't pretty, but that's another rant)
to get a better match, i would first do a small sed or awk filter to convert any number of spaces and tabs to a single space. only then i would chop into 5-line blocks and calculate the MD5s.
thinking again, even better would be to change every whitespace block to a single space; that would merge all the code in a singe (huge) line. then i would insert a linebreak after every semicolon; that would create a very regular (and ugly) code style.