Until I got dissapointed with the removal of Red Hat lines of distros and the failure some people call FC2, I switched some of my home machines to SuSE. We also had the same kind of switch at the office so it made sense. I am reasonably impressed with Centos 4.1 and FC4 but they don't have anything over SuSE 9.3 (neither does Suse have something over FC4). They tend to work and that's enough for me.
At one point I stopped being interested in the OS alone and actually getting something done. I will use any distribution which does its work fine. I have (production) slackware, debian, Redhat 7, 8, 9, SuSE SLES 8.x, SLES 9 and CentOS 4.1 boxes and (gasp!) some FreeBSD machines. I'm happy with the lot. If I ran a homogeneous job, it would have made my life easier but if and only if I am a newbie sysadmin. I'm not so the brand really doesn't matter. I have one Solaris 10 (i386) and a couple of SPARC boxes as well but they are not used for any real work.
The sad fact of life is once you have a box in production, doing some work for you or your company, it is very hard to upgrade it without spending substantial money. That's when you are looking for 10 year support cycles.
For any sysadmin worth his/her salt, the real criteria is Will it be stable, secure and will it do its job, the rest is just details.
For SCO's notice: I wiped out an OpenServer 5.0.5 installation today and burned the license. Come and sue me!
JRE is open. JDK is open but has limitations on distribution conditions. On the other hand GNU's Java implementation is free.
Open doesn't mean free. Java source is open, you can take it and recompile it on your platform, at your own risk and with no support from Sun. What you can't do is modify it. It is not free as in freedom.
The license you have to agree when you are installing it doesn't mention that you have to pay money to them. It only grants you the freedom to make as many copies as you like and install on as many servers/PCs you have. The only thing you won't be able to do is get support.
It is definitely not evaluation of the software but if you get some small amount of support as evaluation. On the other hand I can't think when was the last time I needed paid-for support with Linux because it is "never".
The sad thing is, with the cost of fixing Hubble plus some expense on some new technology you can blast a telescope into space, giving you much more scientific capability. It looks like eventually James Webb telescope is going to be cancelled and we will end up with a crippled Hubble, crippled space station, crippled manned space exploration and a very angry nation, with an idiot at the helm. I'm glad that I live in UK.
Peh. Unix epoch runs out in 2038, not 2070. Also all of this US gov. nonsense is finely explained in wikipedia entry for Unix Epoch, on the other hand I suspect Dubya doesn't know how to read and someone must have explained him leap seconds and number pi in a single session and his brain has stopped functioning since then.
After a couple of years in orbit of Mercury, you will have to worry more than the leap seconds. As you might now, relativity ruled out the absolute time and Sun's mass-time effect Mercury's orbit substantially.
You are confusing what you are experiencing and what Subversion is.
Subversion is a source-only product. There are no binaries. There are implementations of Subversion code and that's what you are having trouble with. For example since you use Windows, if you bothered to install TortoiseSVN, you would have had absolutely no problem with proxies, even authenticated ones.
Binary distributions of Subversion or third party applications that chose to use Subversion (i.e., eSVN, Tortoise, SVK) might have different implementations or solutions to various configuration issues.
Programming language choice is C. So is Linux kernel is written in C. So is Apache web server and so on. On the other hand Subversion is also an API and protocol. You can take Subversion and implement it completely in Java (jsvn) or Ruby or any language of your choice. If you want to implement the protocol in Visual Basic, feel free. You can take any bit of the existing source code and re-use it because it is licensed under BSD. You don't even need to let the world know about it apart from BSD license requirements.
Using WEBDAV makes a good architectural sense because suddenly you can use almost any WEBDAV client architecture and wrap around your own business flow requirements and you have an easy-to-build system.
Erm, Soyuz? It is available in numbers since 60s. Rockets only got bigger and better. They never had a reliable Saturn-V type vehicle (N1 exploded on pad, killing many engineers and designers) to take them to moon surface but going to the moon orbit doesn't take that much.
Recently a communication satellite which ended in a bad orbit was taken for a ride around moon. On the way back, they got it into the nice, viable orbit with at least 3 years of lifetime, which is quite incredible.
Zonds they shot to space in late 60s went around the moon and landed at Indian ocean in one piece. Zonds were identical to Soyuz crafts but unmanned. Conspiracy theorists claimed that they were actually manned Soyuz crafts but cosmonauts had expired on the way. See here or just google zond and moon.
OK, I just sent ten quid by paypal, if my alien doesn't arrive at my door in two weeks I'll see them in court! I hope they are better traders than most ebayers...
Re:FreeBSD vs. Linux ideologies
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
What kind of heavy loads are we talking about if we aren't talking about a ?AMP server?
Talk about serious load, I say an heavily used Oracle instance counts as a good heavy load. Strangely enough, FreeBSD does not support Oracle, or should I say, Oracle doesn't support FreeBSD. If you google a little bit, you'll find that the only way to run Oracle on FreeBSD is simulating Linux. Ironic? Maybe but not really if you also know about SCO's Linux Kernel Personality which was supposed to be way faster than Linux while supporting Linux applications transparently, which turns to be nothing like it (I did beta-test LKP, it was innovative but not fast).
Also I searched for Anonymous Coward in Linux source code, couldn't find your name. Which bits did you have to re-write and did you submit your changes back to the community?
Re:The real difference...
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
90% of the actual software that runs on the two is exactly the same.
Unfortunately the remaining 10% and most of the 90% are similar but not directly compatible
Especially the parameters and switches of GNU applications sometimes somewhat complicated just because they embrace the BSD equivalents, then extend. Last time I was bit with this was last week when I was 'sum'ming my packages on a Linux box but customer was 'sum'ming on a BSD, with different outcomes. It took some while to remember that GNU sum takes a different parameter to emulate BSDs compared to its default behaviour (as if it is on a sysV). Linux is both and neither. Funnily enough, man sum won't tell you which one it defaults to.
I see that you don't remember the days when you couldn't call a Unix derivative what it is or write Unix without appending (TM) next to it.
Linux got where it was because of the fragmentation and cost of the commercial UNIX systems and limitations of free derivatives.
Both flavours of free OSes are better than any commercial system available these days, especially in the server room but featurewise Linux surpasses all flavours of BSD.
Disclaimer: This message was written on a DragonFly BSD 'cause I like it.
Do you really care if the main tank is disposable or not? The most expensive parts (computers and the engines) are re-usable. It's the high maintenance cost of the Shuttle what is killing the program. All of the cheaper alternatives are completely disposable. If there was a method which would combine low maintenance and reusability, it would be a winner.
Funny you say that, on my way back from Bristol (mitra, I love these 350 miles round trip + 9h at customer site days, 9 hours of wearing a tie, arrrgh!), my "Check Engine" light came on and I checked the engine, it was still there. NASA must be to blame!
Madlax, Avenger and Noir started interesting and as the series progressed, bored the hell out of me. After 10 episodes there are no character deveopments, no story development, no change in the music. Yes, the characters look cool, act cool but just coolness is not good enough. When you look at the really successful animations like Nadesico, go figure that the actual populer characters are extremely uncool. Tenchi? same.:)
Slashdot Mirror
At one point I stopped being interested in the OS alone and actually getting something done. I will use any distribution which does its work fine. I have (production) slackware, debian, Redhat 7, 8, 9, SuSE SLES 8.x, SLES 9 and CentOS 4.1 boxes and (gasp!) some FreeBSD machines. I'm happy with the lot. If I ran a homogeneous job, it would have made my life easier but if and only if I am a newbie sysadmin. I'm not so the brand really doesn't matter. I have one Solaris 10 (i386) and a couple of SPARC boxes as well but they are not used for any real work.
The sad fact of life is once you have a box in production, doing some work for you or your company, it is very hard to upgrade it without spending substantial money. That's when you are looking for 10 year support cycles.
For any sysadmin worth his/her salt, the real criteria is Will it be stable, secure and will it do its job, the rest is just details.
For SCO's notice: I wiped out an OpenServer 5.0.5 installation today and burned the license. Come and sue me!
Huh? SuSE was a spin-off from Slackware, implementing Redhat's Package Manager, not the other way around.
Open doesn't mean free. Java source is open, you can take it and recompile it on your platform, at your own risk and with no support from Sun. What you can't do is modify it. It is not free as in freedom.
It is definitely not evaluation of the software but if you get some small amount of support as evaluation. On the other hand I can't think when was the last time I needed paid-for support with Linux because it is "never".
if someone is unhappy with FC, CentOS is the way to go. They claim that Centos 4.1 will be supported until 2012. Nuts, they are.
It doesn't matter how you pronounce it, as long as you don't mention the war. I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it.
The sad thing is, with the cost of fixing Hubble plus some expense on some new technology you can blast a telescope into space, giving you much more scientific capability. It looks like eventually James Webb telescope is going to be cancelled and we will end up with a crippled Hubble, crippled space station, crippled manned space exploration and a very angry nation, with an idiot at the helm. I'm glad that I live in UK.
What do you mean with that? Since Columbia, Russians are running the ISS.
Like Galileo or Mars Express?
miliHertz and milibits/second? Damn, my 300 baud acoustic coupler is way better than your WiFi!
Of course, we should call it Rupert, to go with the Planet Rupert, which was very recently found.
Peh. Unix epoch runs out in 2038, not 2070. Also all of this US gov. nonsense is finely explained in wikipedia entry for Unix Epoch, on the other hand I suspect Dubya doesn't know how to read and someone must have explained him leap seconds and number pi in a single session and his brain has stopped functioning since then.
After a couple of years in orbit of Mercury, you will have to worry more than the leap seconds. As you might now, relativity ruled out the absolute time and Sun's mass-time effect Mercury's orbit substantially.
and you've just taken the small innovative guy out of the market and only rich companies can innovate. I wouldn't like to have that.
Subversion is a source-only product. There are no binaries. There are implementations of Subversion code and that's what you are having trouble with. For example since you use Windows, if you bothered to install TortoiseSVN, you would have had absolutely no problem with proxies, even authenticated ones.
Binary distributions of Subversion or third party applications that chose to use Subversion (i.e., eSVN, Tortoise, SVK) might have different implementations or solutions to various configuration issues.
Programming language choice is C. So is Linux kernel is written in C. So is Apache web server and so on. On the other hand Subversion is also an API and protocol. You can take Subversion and implement it completely in Java (jsvn) or Ruby or any language of your choice. If you want to implement the protocol in Visual Basic, feel free. You can take any bit of the existing source code and re-use it because it is licensed under BSD. You don't even need to let the world know about it apart from BSD license requirements.
Using WEBDAV makes a good architectural sense because suddenly you can use almost any WEBDAV client architecture and wrap around your own business flow requirements and you have an easy-to-build system.
So stop trolling.
Recently a communication satellite which ended in a bad orbit was taken for a ride around moon. On the way back, they got it into the nice, viable orbit with at least 3 years of lifetime, which is quite incredible.
Zonds they shot to space in late 60s went around the moon and landed at Indian ocean in one piece. Zonds were identical to Soyuz crafts but unmanned. Conspiracy theorists claimed that they were actually manned Soyuz crafts but cosmonauts had expired on the way. See here or just google zond and moon.
Any decent window manager supports "stay on top" functionality. Thanks to a nice tool called "nail", you can get the same thing on Windows as well.
OK, I just sent ten quid by paypal, if my alien doesn't arrive at my door in two weeks I'll see them in court! I hope they are better traders than most ebayers...
Talk about serious load, I say an heavily used Oracle instance counts as a good heavy load. Strangely enough, FreeBSD does not support Oracle, or should I say, Oracle doesn't support FreeBSD. If you google a little bit, you'll find that the only way to run Oracle on FreeBSD is simulating Linux. Ironic? Maybe but not really if you also know about SCO's Linux Kernel Personality which was supposed to be way faster than Linux while supporting Linux applications transparently, which turns to be nothing like it (I did beta-test LKP, it was innovative but not fast).
Also I searched for Anonymous Coward in Linux source code, couldn't find your name. Which bits did you have to re-write and did you submit your changes back to the community?
Unfortunately the remaining 10% and most of the 90% are similar but not directly compatible
Especially the parameters and switches of GNU applications sometimes somewhat complicated just because they embrace the BSD equivalents, then extend. Last time I was bit with this was last week when I was 'sum'ming my packages on a Linux box but customer was 'sum'ming on a BSD, with different outcomes. It took some while to remember that GNU sum takes a different parameter to emulate BSDs compared to its default behaviour (as if it is on a sysV). Linux is both and neither. Funnily enough, man sum won't tell you which one it defaults to.
Linux got where it was because of the fragmentation and cost of the commercial UNIX systems and limitations of free derivatives.
Both flavours of free OSes are better than any commercial system available these days, especially in the server room but featurewise Linux surpasses all flavours of BSD.
Disclaimer: This message was written on a DragonFly BSD 'cause I like it.
Do you really care if the main tank is disposable or not? The most expensive parts (computers and the engines) are re-usable. It's the high maintenance cost of the Shuttle what is killing the program. All of the cheaper alternatives are completely disposable. If there was a method which would combine low maintenance and reusability, it would be a winner.
Funny you say that, on my way back from Bristol (mitra, I love these 350 miles round trip + 9h at customer site days, 9 hours of wearing a tie, arrrgh!), my "Check Engine" light came on and I checked the engine, it was still there. NASA must be to blame!
Madlax, Avenger and Noir started interesting and as the series progressed, bored the hell out of me. After 10 episodes there are no character deveopments, no story development, no change in the music. Yes, the characters look cool, act cool but just coolness is not good enough. When you look at the really successful animations like Nadesico, go figure that the actual populer characters are extremely uncool. Tenchi? same. :)