I don't consider myself a guru, but 'I would say I know enough'. I've done the whole LFS/source based distro thing for a while now so here's my take on things.
I think it's important to make a distinction between LFS and Gentoo/SGL/Sourcemage/Lunar/uPM. LFS is a book that describes the process of producing a minimal linux installation that is capable of building software. The source based distros provide scripts/tools that automate the build process for you. Which you choose is largly dependent on your needs.
It seems from your post that you are interested in learning what makes GNU/Linux tick: what files do what, what software is required and what's bloat, and generally what goes on under the hood. For this I found that there is no substitute for LFS, it took me from Mandrake newbie to power-user in a couple of months. This was a good few years ago and at the time there was no BLFS, I feel that that actually helped me with learning the stuff. LFS held my hand through the installation of the base system, but after that I was forced to RTFM, making my own mistakes and learning from them. After 2 or 3 months I had a fully functional system with KDE, apache and a bunch of other stuff. I also had learned many times more than I did in over a year of using mandrake.
My new shiney LFS system was a joy to behold, but it became a real pain to maintain. I found that an unacceptable portion of my time was spent updating software manually and it was effecting my productivity. This was around the same time that SGL first appeared on freshmeat. I had tinkered for a while with LFSmake but found that it wasn't flexible enough. SGL was wonderful, I traded a small amount of the total control that LFS gave me for a system that saved me 80% of the time I was spending on keeping my system up to date.
Unfortunatley there was a bit of a storm in the SGL teacup which resulted in SGL going offline for a while and 2 forks appearing (Sourcemage and Lunar). Initially I went with Sourcemage but I found that after a while it became too unstable and as I was using it for work I couldn't have that (it may well be better now, I've not checked it out in a while). I switched to Lunar and am still using it now. It doesn't provide the same education as LFS, but once that knowledge is aquired it provides a much more efficient means of installing/maintaining your system.
I should say that I did once try gentoo but I was put off by the complete lack of an installer. You have to jump through too many hoops (and triangles, hexagons and other polyhedra) to get the thing up and running. uPM also looks interesting but is still in a relativly eary stage of development.
To sum it all up: LFS cannot be beaten for it's educational value, but for day-to-day use Lunar suits me best.
I believe the orgin of the word refers to action taken against insubordinate or cowardly roman legions. Every tenth man in the legion would be executed, therefore decimate means: to reduce by 10%.
These days the word is more often used incorrectly. Saying that the meaning of the word is defined by it's use is a valid argument, but personally I'll stick with the defenition above. I certainly wouldn't use words like twat, cretin or smartarse when the matter is open to interpretation.
I think subjective says it all for this article. I can't comment on the other DEs, as I have been using KDE more or less exclusivly for the past 3 to 4 years and I've not used gnome after my initial trial of it when I ditched windows, BUT....
After getting used to KDE I find that windows (98/2000) is unusable. The author seemed to be intimidated by the level of functionality of KDE. I strongly disagree with the criticism of konqueror, I find it to be the best file manager, file viewer, browser and more than any others I have used.
There are still issues with both KDE and konqueror, but 3.2 promises to fix many of these and the speed of development of KDE is truly astounding. They have gone from 2.0 to 3.1 in the same time span it took windows to go from 95 to 98, anyone who has used KDE over that period will know what I mean.
If KDE has no idea about psychology then I have no psychology.
I have a bunch of old laptops so I have had the same problem as you. There is Small Linux but that didn't really suit me at the time. You can forget installing any other Linux distro on anything with less than 4Mb of RAM, although I would say Slackware is the best of the bunch when it comes to hardware requirements.
In the end I opted for Freedos for a 386 with 2Mb that my 5 year old son plays with. It's not UNIX, but it's much more UNIX-like than any other DOS I have used. There are also many educational programs and games that are available for free download.
Which one is running microsoft? Bill Gates or George Bush?:)
And more importantly, which one is running the USA?
On a more serious note, I strongly suspect more people in this world are terrified of being bombed by 'allied fighter jets' than of being bombed by islamic fundamentalists. Who are the real terrorists?
I can't comment of Gentoo as the lack of an installer put me off, but there are other source based distros out there. I use lunar on all my machines, both server and desktop. It works just fine as long as you are comfortable with configuring stuff without a GUI.
LOL, I know it sounds a little M$ish, but I really see no other way unless a major breakthrough is made in OS design.
I have a set-top box for cable TV. I can browse a limited web, play games and send and recieve email with it. I don't loose sleep at night because it's administered over the network. Another example: people are fine with handing their car keys over when their car needs a service.
I see your point though, and when I say that it will take a lot for people to trust others to remotley admin their system I mean it
Nice idea, but...
on
Ark Linux
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I wish these guys the best of luck, anything that brings Linux to more people is a good thing, but...
IMHO all attempts to make computers 'easy to use' 'for the masses' have failed. Just ask any joe public who wants to actually use their computer, rather than spend endless hours tinkering with it or being plauged by niggling bugs. Computers are extremely complex things, and the critical mass of knowledge required to make them run smootly makes it impractical for every user to become a system administrator.
I think what's needed is a shift in perception and the model we use to sell hardware and software. Rather than just selling boxes (containing PCBs or CDROMs), computers should be rented. This would mitigate the endless upgrade cycle and (with the internet) allow trained professionals to administer customers' boxes, all included in the price. Linux is an ideal OS for such a distribution method.
Do I think this will happen? Not yet. For this model to be economically viable it would require specialist tools that would let admins look after huge amounts of boxes. A major shift in public perception would be required, especially after all the 'so easy to use even your granny can do it' ads. Finally, I think that it would take a lot for users to hand over the control of thier computer to anyone.
As long as the 'jihad' spirit doesn't distract Linux developers, I can't really see what's wrong with it.
I see the 'jihad' spirit as a double edged sword. On one hand it is a strong motivating factor and promotes unity throught the community. On the other it opens the OSS movement up to accusations of extremism and can make it difficult to be objective. I see a danger that the OSS movement becomes overwhelmed with anti-M$ sentiment, and any movement that is purely reactionary is destined to collapse shortly after the thing it is reacting against.
I would argue that Microsoft is not "just another corporation going about its business" due to Microsoft's sheer wealth and power. Microsoft has the ability to buy out or atomise just about any organisation or competitor they feel the need to destroy.
Agreed, perhaps I over-compensated for my own jihad-induced reactionism:)
When server administrators and companies see just why Linux is getting better than Microsoft products, then they will switch.
I sincerely hope this is the case, and there are some signs that it is. Unfortunatly these decisions are not always made on technical merit alone, superior technology does not always win the day. There used to be a saying in IT: 'no one ever gets fired for choosing IBM'. A similar culture now exists in reference to M$. Coupled with the fact that many of the techies, here in the UK at least, know nothing of (and are scared of) *nix I think we have no room for complaicence.
We're going to have to do a lot to improve the UI and smooth running of Linux, and to increase compatibility with Windows software.
Agreed, although I already find the Windows UI almost unusable after 3 years of KDE.
I too think that OSS will win the day, but I don't think it will take decades. Linux has come from a nonentity to a virus-like threat to the Microsoft paradigm in the space of just one decade. In another decade Linux could quite easily have taken over the server market and a lot of the corporate market. It'd probably be making good inroads into the realm of the home user as well.
You may well be right, but now that M$ is taking OSS seriously I suspect that things are going to get more difficult. If palladium takes off, if M$ backed anti-copyright legislation causes collateral damage to OSS, if M$ continues to be allowed to aggresivly 'lock-in' its users, then we may find it much more difficult to gain ground. As I say, this is also a battle of ideologies. The ideology of the OSS movement contradicts much of modern corporate consumerism.
Your ideas are fascinating and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Thank you, unfortunatley I spend far too much time coding to produce one. If this changes I'll let you know:)
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
This Ghandi quote seems like a prudent way to start the article. many self confessed geeks see the OSS cause as a revolution of comparable importance with revolutions of a more conventional political nature. Micro$oft can be seen as the established power structure which has grown greedy and corrupt, and OSS is the 'will of the people', wishing to wrestle it'self free from tyrany.
It is easy to get caught up in the spirit of jihad, but if the 'war' against Micro$oft's monopoly is to succeed then such an endulgance is counter-productive. M$ is just another corporation going about it's business. I expect that many of it's employees truly believe that they are making the world a better place. The fact that many people disagree with M$ can be countered with the standard corporate arguments: 'we generate wealth for all', 'we drive innovation', and 'you are all un-American commies and terrorists'.
It appears to me that the struggle between OSS and proprietary software is just one of the front lines in the struggle between corporate consumerism and everything else. When an entity as large and powerful as M$ begins to take the threat seriously one can expect things to heat up. Already we see M$ and others bending the machinery of states to their will, such things are done in the name of freedom, security and prosperity. It is tempting to ask: whose freedom, security and prosperity?
I guess this is turning in to a bit of a rant, so I'll wind it up now. As the article states we have moved into the 3rd stage (see above quote) of the struggle. Don't be tempted into thinking that OSS is therefore halfway to winning. I think we can expect future Skylarovs to be imprisoned, more DMCAs and some laughably draconian laws enacted in the name of freedom on the behalf of the corporate opressors. This is as much a struggle of ideologies as of competing technologies or development models, and one the general public is totally unaware of. I think OSS will win the day, but it will take decades and participants on both sides will suffer.
Disclaimer: I am not a communist, terrorist or anti-capitalist. Any opinions expressed here are just that: opinions. If you don't like it then reply or mod me down
This is, IMHO, the most potent piece of pro Linux propeganda I have seen in some time. I expect any remotly sane win-o-phile will wish to distance themselves from such a Rant, hopefully some will distance themselves right out of M$'s clutches.
Linux may have zealots but this guy seems like a genocidal stormtrooper by comparison.
I don't know about crossover office, but I tried this with crossover plugin and it failed miserably. As a result my kids' computer still runs a M$ OS:(
If there's a way to do it I'd be interested in knowing how.
There could be money in this
on
Disconnecting
·
· Score: 1
I have never used AOL as I have a dislike for non-standard quirky software, but I have many less computer literate friends who were taken in by the advertising (that shimmery dress _is_ nice:) and the freebies. After some time they usually decide to change ISP, most are computer gamers and I have been told that AOL is not the best connection for that.
One of my friends had some problems convincing AOL that he really wanted to cancel his account. Three months later (only 1 of which he was charged for) he asked me to phone them on his behalf and cancel his account. Five minutes later it was cancelled. Word got round and I have since performed this service for three others.
There is obviously a demand for this service, perhaps I should go into business as an 'AOL disconnection consultant'. For those of you who are interested in following a similar career path my secret is:
1. explain that you want disconnected.
2. explain again that you want disconnected.
3. explain once more that you want disconnected.
4. if asked any questions respond with meaningless techno-drivel, eg. 'I am finding that the RF emitted by my modem is interfering with my warp plasma conduits'
5. you are now disconnected.
At all timed be polite, curteous and stubborn as a mule.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft is distributing insecure software on purpose in order to boost the need for their 'trusted computing' master-plan.
Disclaimer: By reading this statement you agree that I will not be held responsible for any damage resulting from such use.
In descending order of (my) preference:
I don't consider myself a guru, but 'I would say I know enough'. I've done the whole LFS/source based distro thing for a while now so here's my take on things.
I think it's important to make a distinction between LFS and Gentoo/SGL/Sourcemage/Lunar/uPM. LFS is a book that describes the process of producing a minimal linux installation that is capable of building software. The source based distros provide scripts/tools that automate the build process for you. Which you choose is largly dependent on your needs.
It seems from your post that you are interested in learning what makes GNU/Linux tick: what files do what, what software is required and what's bloat, and generally what goes on under the hood. For this I found that there is no substitute for LFS, it took me from Mandrake newbie to power-user in a couple of months. This was a good few years ago and at the time there was no BLFS, I feel that that actually helped me with learning the stuff. LFS held my hand through the installation of the base system, but after that I was forced to RTFM, making my own mistakes and learning from them. After 2 or 3 months I had a fully functional system with KDE, apache and a bunch of other stuff. I also had learned many times more than I did in over a year of using mandrake.
My new shiney LFS system was a joy to behold, but it became a real pain to maintain. I found that an unacceptable portion of my time was spent updating software manually and it was effecting my productivity. This was around the same time that SGL first appeared on freshmeat. I had tinkered for a while with LFSmake but found that it wasn't flexible enough. SGL was wonderful, I traded a small amount of the total control that LFS gave me for a system that saved me 80% of the time I was spending on keeping my system up to date.
Unfortunatley there was a bit of a storm in the SGL teacup which resulted in SGL going offline for a while and 2 forks appearing (Sourcemage and Lunar). Initially I went with Sourcemage but I found that after a while it became too unstable and as I was using it for work I couldn't have that (it may well be better now, I've not checked it out in a while). I switched to Lunar and am still using it now. It doesn't provide the same education as LFS, but once that knowledge is aquired it provides a much more efficient means of installing/maintaining your system.
I should say that I did once try gentoo but I was put off by the complete lack of an installer. You have to jump through too many hoops (and triangles, hexagons and other polyhedra) to get the thing up and running. uPM also looks interesting but is still in a relativly eary stage of development.
To sum it all up: LFS cannot be beaten for it's educational value, but for day-to-day use Lunar suits me best.
I believe the orgin of the word refers to action taken against insubordinate or cowardly roman legions. Every tenth man in the legion would be executed, therefore decimate means: to reduce by 10%.
These days the word is more often used incorrectly. Saying that the meaning of the word is defined by it's use is a valid argument, but personally I'll stick with the defenition above. I certainly wouldn't use words like twat, cretin or smartarse when the matter is open to interpretation.
I think subjective says it all for this article. I can't comment on the other DEs, as I have been using KDE more or less exclusivly for the past 3 to 4 years and I've not used gnome after my initial trial of it when I ditched windows, BUT....
After getting used to KDE I find that windows (98/2000) is unusable. The author seemed to be intimidated by the level of functionality of KDE. I strongly disagree with the criticism of konqueror, I find it to be the best file manager, file viewer, browser and more than any others I have used.
There are still issues with both KDE and konqueror, but 3.2 promises to fix many of these and the speed of development of KDE is truly astounding. They have gone from 2.0 to 3.1 in the same time span it took windows to go from 95 to 98, anyone who has used KDE over that period will know what I mean.
If KDE has no idea about psychology then I have no psychology.
I have a bunch of old laptops so I have had the same problem as you. There is Small Linux but that didn't really suit me at the time. You can forget installing any other Linux distro on anything with less than 4Mb of RAM, although I would say Slackware is the best of the bunch when it comes to hardware requirements.
In the end I opted for Freedos for a 386 with 2Mb that my 5 year old son plays with. It's not UNIX, but it's much more UNIX-like than any other DOS I have used. There are also many educational programs and games that are available for free download.
Hope this helps.
Which one is running microsoft? Bill Gates or George Bush? :)
And more importantly, which one is running the USA?
On a more serious note, I strongly suspect more people in this world are terrified of being bombed by 'allied fighter jets' than of being bombed by islamic fundamentalists. Who are the real terrorists?
Support corporate terrorism: buy Microsoft today!
I can't comment of Gentoo as the lack of an installer put me off, but there are other source based distros out there. I use lunar on all my machines, both server and desktop. It works just fine as long as you are comfortable with configuring stuff without a GUI.
Oops :)
'Mmmmmm, dead pig tastes good'
Homer J. Simpson
LOL, I know it sounds a little M$ish, but I really see no other way unless a major breakthrough is made in OS design.
I have a set-top box for cable TV. I can browse a limited web, play games and send and recieve email with it. I don't loose sleep at night because it's administered over the network. Another example: people are fine with handing their car keys over when their car needs a service.
I see your point though, and when I say that it will take a lot for people to trust others to remotley admin their system I mean it
I wish these guys the best of luck, anything that brings Linux to more people is a good thing, but...
IMHO all attempts to make computers 'easy to use' 'for the masses' have failed. Just ask any joe public who wants to actually use their computer, rather than spend endless hours tinkering with it or being plauged by niggling bugs. Computers are extremely complex things, and the critical mass of knowledge required to make them run smootly makes it impractical for every user to become a system administrator.
I think what's needed is a shift in perception and the model we use to sell hardware and software. Rather than just selling boxes (containing PCBs or CDROMs), computers should be rented. This would mitigate the endless upgrade cycle and (with the internet) allow trained professionals to administer customers' boxes, all included in the price. Linux is an ideal OS for such a distribution method.
Do I think this will happen? Not yet. For this model to be economically viable it would require specialist tools that would let admins look after huge amounts of boxes. A major shift in public perception would be required, especially after all the 'so easy to use even your granny can do it' ads. Finally, I think that it would take a lot for users to hand over the control of thier computer to anyone.
As long as the 'jihad' spirit doesn't distract Linux developers, I can't really see what's wrong with it.
I see the 'jihad' spirit as a double edged sword. On one hand it is a strong motivating factor and promotes unity throught the community. On the other it opens the OSS movement up to accusations of extremism and can make it difficult to be objective. I see a danger that the OSS movement becomes overwhelmed with anti-M$ sentiment, and any movement that is purely reactionary is destined to collapse shortly after the thing it is reacting against.
I would argue that Microsoft is not "just another corporation going about its business" due to Microsoft's sheer wealth and power. Microsoft has the ability to buy out or atomise just about any organisation or competitor they feel the need to destroy.
Agreed, perhaps I over-compensated for my own jihad-induced reactionism :)
When server administrators and companies see just why Linux is getting better than Microsoft products, then they will switch.
I sincerely hope this is the case, and there are some signs that it is. Unfortunatly these decisions are not always made on technical merit alone, superior technology does not always win the day. There used to be a saying in IT: 'no one ever gets fired for choosing IBM'. A similar culture now exists in reference to M$. Coupled with the fact that many of the techies, here in the UK at least, know nothing of (and are scared of) *nix I think we have no room for complaicence.
We're going to have to do a lot to improve the UI and smooth running of Linux, and to increase compatibility with Windows software.
Agreed, although I already find the Windows UI almost unusable after 3 years of KDE.
I too think that OSS will win the day, but I don't think it will take decades. Linux has come from a nonentity to a virus-like threat to the Microsoft paradigm in the space of just one decade. In another decade Linux could quite easily have taken over the server market and a lot of the corporate market. It'd probably be making good inroads into the realm of the home user as well.
You may well be right, but now that M$ is taking OSS seriously I suspect that things are going to get more difficult. If palladium takes off, if M$ backed anti-copyright legislation causes collateral damage to OSS, if M$ continues to be allowed to aggresivly 'lock-in' its users, then we may find it much more difficult to gain ground. As I say, this is also a battle of ideologies. The ideology of the OSS movement contradicts much of modern corporate consumerism.
Your ideas are fascinating and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Thank you, unfortunatley I spend far too much time coding to produce one. If this changes I'll let you know :)
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
This Ghandi quote seems like a prudent way to start the article. many self confessed geeks see the OSS cause as a revolution of comparable importance with revolutions of a more conventional political nature. Micro$oft can be seen as the established power structure which has grown greedy and corrupt, and OSS is the 'will of the people', wishing to wrestle it'self free from tyrany.
It is easy to get caught up in the spirit of jihad, but if the 'war' against Micro$oft's monopoly is to succeed then such an endulgance is counter-productive. M$ is just another corporation going about it's business. I expect that many of it's employees truly believe that they are making the world a better place. The fact that many people disagree with M$ can be countered with the standard corporate arguments: 'we generate wealth for all', 'we drive innovation', and 'you are all un-American commies and terrorists'.
It appears to me that the struggle between OSS and proprietary software is just one of the front lines in the struggle between corporate consumerism and everything else. When an entity as large and powerful as M$ begins to take the threat seriously one can expect things to heat up. Already we see M$ and others bending the machinery of states to their will, such things are done in the name of freedom, security and prosperity. It is tempting to ask: whose freedom, security and prosperity?
I guess this is turning in to a bit of a rant, so I'll wind it up now. As the article states we have moved into the 3rd stage (see above quote) of the struggle. Don't be tempted into thinking that OSS is therefore halfway to winning. I think we can expect future Skylarovs to be imprisoned, more DMCAs and some laughably draconian laws enacted in the name of freedom on the behalf of the corporate opressors. This is as much a struggle of ideologies as of competing technologies or development models, and one the general public is totally unaware of. I think OSS will win the day, but it will take decades and participants on both sides will suffer.
Disclaimer: I am not a communist, terrorist or anti-capitalist. Any opinions expressed here are just that: opinions. If you don't like it then reply or mod me down
This is, IMHO, the most potent piece of pro Linux propeganda I have seen in some time. I expect any remotly sane win-o-phile will wish to distance themselves from such a Rant, hopefully some will distance themselves right out of M$'s clutches.
Linux may have zealots but this guy seems like a genocidal stormtrooper by comparison.
I don't know about crossover office, but I tried this with crossover plugin and it failed miserably. As a result my kids' computer still runs a M$ OS :(
If there's a way to do it I'd be interested in knowing how.
I have never used AOL as I have a dislike for non-standard quirky software, but I have many less computer literate friends who were taken in by the advertising (that shimmery dress _is_ nice :) and the freebies. After some time they usually decide to change ISP, most are computer gamers and I have been told that AOL is not the best connection for that.
One of my friends had some problems convincing AOL that he really wanted to cancel his account. Three months later (only 1 of which he was charged for) he asked me to phone them on his behalf and cancel his account. Five minutes later it was cancelled. Word got round and I have since performed this service for three others.
There is obviously a demand for this service, perhaps I should go into business as an 'AOL disconnection consultant'. For those of you who are interested in following a similar career path my secret is:
1. explain that you want disconnected.
2. explain again that you want disconnected.
3. explain once more that you want disconnected.
4. if asked any questions respond with meaningless techno-drivel, eg. 'I am finding that the RF emitted by my modem is interfering with my warp plasma conduits'
5. you are now disconnected.
At all timed be polite, curteous and stubborn as a mule.