As a Navy IT whose responsibilities include administrating one of the largest afloat networks in the world I can tell you two things: Linux and FOSS are already present onboard, but only in a quasi embedded role because the contractors who supplied the system (ala SPAWAR or similar) based the platform on Linux. These systems typically do not exist as a network asset. That is they are a ship's system and not a part of the "network" as user services are concerned. And two: It is a Microsoft shop from top to bottom and will have to remain that way. The Navy simply does not train it's personal to administer a Linux or Unix based network. Finding a few IT's with the requisite Windows admin knowledge is hard enough, but making the fleet utilize Linux? The IT workforce simply does not have the experience or training to make that jump at this time. I don't think it ever will. This is why advancement for the IT rating is so high. IT's with skill sets in Network Administration get out and join the civilian ranks after their first or second enlistment and open the ranks up for new IT's to advance.
Believe me I HATE the Windows 2003 enviorment I am forced to administer. And the SPAWAR forced enviorment on top of that which increases the issues. I'd thank God for reliable servers and workstations, but I don't for see this ever occuring. Alas I have to do my time and move to a sector that does. Nothing to see here. *shews away readers in MiB suit*
NMCI is the result of the decision to outsource IT for shore based installations. So while NMCI may be it's own animal for shore commands, the FLEET as we like to call it, still runs their own networks. One of the largest in the world in fact. So don't take too much stock in the OP. NMCI may run the school house at base, but Navy IT's run the Navy abroad.
I'm sorry, but IBM (the company that has made billions in revenue off GNU/Linux) should be floating the bill.
You have to remember that IBM is a huge corporation and as such moves very slowly. Besides the fact that IBM already has legal action filed against it from the SCO Group. RedHat isn't already in litigation with SCO (despite the threats) and is in a better position to spearhead a suit for linux. They even did it in a way that, I hope, IBM would spend some of their billions to contribute to this fund.
--Thank You RedHat!
I think it's very clear where Sen. Bermans' intrests lay. Does anyone know of any *proactive* [read: possitive] websites that track or publibly couter this slime ball?
Yes, I experienced the same problem with 2.5.38 (irq_vectors.h missing after 2.5.36), but could not get farther than you did. It's been my observation that most of the latest increments to 2.5.x have been big-iron or IDE related, with most of the core/patches I want relatively stable; Especially with David Jones' excellent patches. Since I use only i386 w/ SCSI 2.5.24-dj2 was acceptable for me.
Now that 2.5.39-dj2 is out hopefully someone with the ability (Nicholas Petreley you listening?!?) will create another up-to-date patch for us..
This would be sooo much easier if nVidia gave us the source (nVidiayou listening??)
I'm a "semi-power user" and I had the same thoughts. Allthough I was kinda *forced* into testing 2.5.x because all the patches I wanted to 2.4.x wouldn't play nice together (preempt, O(1), VM, xfs) and they had all been merged into 2.5.
I tried 2.5.38, but then alas, nvidia does not support the 2.5.x series! After doing a little googling I found that nvidia's driver is only broken on the source side (as opposed to the binary only part) and that people have had some success patching for 2.5.
Here's the best patch
I've found, it is for the NVIDIA_kernel-2960 (Thanks to Nicholas Petreley & Mark Hurenkamp).
After adding a xfs cvs patch on 2.5.24-dj2 and recompiling the nvidia driver, my system was up and running (faster than ever).
The improvements in 2.5.x are wonderful, and while I agree with both Linux and Igno have to say, I too am leaning toward 3.0, but it's only a number; distros will happily roll whatever [improvements/number] Linus and friends gives them.
Slashdot Mirror
As a Navy IT whose responsibilities include administrating one of the largest afloat networks in the world I can tell you two things: Linux and FOSS are already present onboard, but only in a quasi embedded role because the contractors who supplied the system (ala SPAWAR or similar) based the platform on Linux. These systems typically do not exist as a network asset. That is they are a ship's system and not a part of the "network" as user services are concerned. And two: It is a Microsoft shop from top to bottom and will have to remain that way. The Navy simply does not train it's personal to administer a Linux or Unix based network. Finding a few IT's with the requisite Windows admin knowledge is hard enough, but making the fleet utilize Linux? The IT workforce simply does not have the experience or training to make that jump at this time. I don't think it ever will. This is why advancement for the IT rating is so high. IT's with skill sets in Network Administration get out and join the civilian ranks after their first or second enlistment and open the ranks up for new IT's to advance.
Believe me I HATE the Windows 2003 enviorment I am forced to administer. And the SPAWAR forced enviorment on top of that which increases the issues. I'd thank God for reliable servers and workstations, but I don't for see this ever occuring. Alas I have to do my time and move to a sector that does. Nothing to see here. *shews away readers in MiB suit*
NMCI is the result of the decision to outsource IT for shore based installations. So while NMCI may be it's own animal for shore commands, the FLEET as we like to call it, still runs their own networks. One of the largest in the world in fact. So don't take too much stock in the OP. NMCI may run the school house at base, but Navy IT's run the Navy abroad.
I'm sorry, but IBM (the company that has made billions in revenue off GNU/Linux) should be floating the bill.
You have to remember that IBM is a huge corporation and as such moves very slowly. Besides the fact that IBM already has legal action filed against it from the SCO Group. RedHat isn't already in litigation with SCO (despite the threats) and is in a better position to spearhead a suit for linux. They even did it in a way that, I hope, IBM would spend some of their billions to contribute to this fund.
--Thank You RedHat!
I think it's very clear where Sen. Bermans' intrests lay. Does anyone know of any *proactive* [read: possitive] websites that track or publibly couter this slime ball?
Computational Bioinformatics has a nice ring to it.. definetaly better than some of the less practical sollutions contributed.
BTW: That quote had me rolling! Great analogy!
Yes, I experienced the same problem with 2.5.38 (irq_vectors.h missing after 2.5.36), but could not get farther than you did. It's been my observation that most of the latest increments to 2.5.x have been big-iron or IDE related, with most of the core/patches I want relatively stable; Especially with David Jones' excellent patches.
Since I use only i386 w/ SCSI 2.5.24-dj2 was acceptable for me. Now that 2.5.39-dj2 is out hopefully someone with the ability (Nicholas Petreley you listening?!?) will create another up-to-date patch for us..
This would be sooo much easier if nVidia gave us the source (nVidia you listening??)
I'm a "semi-power user" and I had the same thoughts. Allthough I was kinda *forced* into testing 2.5.x because all the patches I wanted to 2.4.x wouldn't play nice together (preempt, O(1), VM, xfs) and they had all been merged into 2.5.
I tried 2.5.38, but then alas, nvidia does not support the 2.5.x series! After doing a little googling I found that nvidia's driver is only broken on the source side (as opposed to the binary only part) and that people have had some success patching for 2.5.
Here's the best patch I've found, it is for the NVIDIA_kernel-2960 (Thanks to Nicholas Petreley & Mark Hurenkamp). After adding a xfs cvs patch on 2.5.24-dj2 and recompiling the nvidia driver, my system was up and running (faster than ever).
The improvements in 2.5.x are wonderful, and while I agree with both Linux and Igno have to say, I too am leaning toward 3.0, but it's only a number; distros will happily roll whatever [improvements/number] Linus and friends gives them.
Wish you long life and happiness.