Darwin is a BSD personality running on top of a Mach kernel.
The pretty-much-dead MkLinux project was a Linux personality running on a Mach kernel.
Would it be possible to move the MkLinux stuff over to the Darwin kernel? Seems to me that might open up many more possibilities for Darwin, as there's more software and expertise for Linux than Darwin around so far...
Firstly, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Secondly, if you can afford it, going to NetWare 5.1 is probably your best bet.
But in the meantime, here's some stuff to try.
You can run Novell clients and servers on Linux. Caldera OpenLinux 2.2 and up includes a Netware client which is fully NDS-aware, and you can integrate a Linux server into the NDS network so that, say, it uses Novell user authentication to get at resources shared with Samba.
There is also Netware for Linux. This runs a real live Netware 4.x server on Linux, but doesn't support NLMs, Netware filesystems etc. A free demo is available from www.caldera.com but you do need to buy licenses. Also, it only runs on kernel 2.0.35. However, you can probably pick up a copy of OpenLinux 1.3 very cheaply now!
There are some open-source Netware servers such as MarsNWE but they aren't NDS aware.
So add a Linux box now. It's cheap and you will learn useful stuff from getting it integrated with Netware.
<<Of course there's also the native Atari GUI, GEM. I've a feeling you can get the source for DR's GEMDOS now, but I may be wrong. >>
GEM was originally a PC product, ported to a cut-down version of CM/P-68K (GEMDOS) on the ST. The PC version is now owned by Lineo, the thin-clients division of Caldera, and it has made PC GEM GPLed free software. Efforts are afoot to update it and bring it up to parity with commercial GEM developments such as Magic which run on modern ST-compatibles like the Milan.
You can check out progress on the prject, download source and binaries and join the discussion mailing list on the FreeGEM homepage.
The best-known alternative DOS to Microsoft's is DR-DOS, from Digital Research and later Caldera. Lineo (Caldera's thin clients division) recently released DR GEM as GNU open source, and as it is changing its efforts over to embedded Linux ("Embedix" - the first version has just been released) it's possible it may release DR-DOS as open source too.
As DR-DOS is a complete, finished, and very polished system, what would happen to the FreeDOS project if this happened? Keep going, try to merge the FreeDOS tree into DR-DOS, vice versa, or what?
GEM is going strong (see www.deltasoft.com) and I like to think there's life in DOS yet. With a GUI like GEM, a multitasker (such as DesqView) and maybe even an X server (like DesqView/X) it makes a good thin client OS.
No great or unexpected news there, then, and nothing on when to expect 100MHz FSB Celerons...
The only unexpected thing, in fact, was how amazingly badly-written that article was. Lousy punctuation, grammar, and a strong impression that the author didn't really understand what he was reporting on. Bit crap for a major news service, really.
Intel specifically designed two separate lines with different characteristics to cover more of the market; it's been doing this even since the 386sx was devised.
The Celeron was intended to be the cheap entry-level job, as Cyrix and AMD were doing too well out of the entry-level sector. It worked. As fab techonlogy improves, there probably will be more integrated caches and fewer compromises like backside and half-clock L2, but Intel will just come up with something else to demarcate its product lines.
Get real. And be glad that there IS a sinple bodge to overcome one of the handicaps.
The sad thing for me is that the Palm get so much press of this type. It's not like they invented a new concept or anything!
I was doing most of this kind of stuff on a Psion (an Organizer II LZ) back in 1989, FFS! Palm just took an existing product/concept and refined it - and now the converts are becoming zealots!
PDAs are great, sure. They can be life-changing.
But Palm != PDA.
Psion did it first, and for my money, still do it best.
NT can't boot fram a FAT32 partition, but you can keep C: as FAT16 and put your 95B/98 \WINDOWS dir on a FAT32 D or higher.
The stuff about IE4 is complete rubbish. W95 OSR2 is needed for FAT32 - it is nothing whatsoever to do with IE4. If you don't know for sure, don't go ahead and say it anyway. Check!
Without wishing to start an argument, some of the other responses here are, AFAIK, incorrect.
95 and NT do NOT support multiple different cards or screens. NT can do it but only with Matrox MGA based cards, nothing else. MetroX also supports a set of 2-4 Matroxes.
#9 do not support it at all, AFAIK.
BeOS also doesn't, regardless of cards.
Win98 supports almost any combination of cards if the manufacturer's drivers are compliant. Some of the common boards can't do this - e.g. Videologic Apocalypse 3D and 5D.
There's no specific enabling/disabling; the PandP BIOS does it.
I'm running Linux, NT, 95 and 98 on a two-card PC here; only 98 can see the 2nd card & screen.
It should work, but one will be your primary VDU, one the 2ndary, and the 2ndary will only function under 98. Failing that, buy two Matroxes & a copy of MetroX.
I've just read this myself, as research for a feature I'm writing for PC Pro magazine in the UK. I must say that I wasn't very impressed. I've got a fair amount of Unix experience (from years ago), but realtively less of Linux, tho' I've been looking at it since '95.
It's very patchy, and assumes too much. For instance:
o The book suggests using GNU texinfo for help, but it only tells you at around p450 how to call the info command.
o "Check your systems logs!" he keeps saying. He never says what logs, or where, until an appendix.
o Networking coverage assumes, by and large, a Unix network. This doesn't reflect the reality of a Wintel world leavened with a few Macs. They get a couple of sections.
o The translation occasionally falls over. What is a "Life" CD, anyway?;) I guess they mean "a live filesystem on CD." Not too hard to get right; mystifying unless you already know what he's getting at.
The historical stuff about the WWW, kernels and so on, is fine, but pretty useless really - and easily found elsewhere.
A bit more coverage on editors other than the nightmarish medusa Emacs would have been good.
If it helps, it's working... and it's helped me. So, good. But it's not what I was looking for, or what I hoped for.
Slashdot Mirror
Darwin is a BSD personality running on top of a Mach kernel.
The pretty-much-dead MkLinux project was a Linux personality running on a Mach kernel.
Would it be possible to move the MkLinux stuff over to the Darwin kernel? Seems to me that might open up many more possibilities for Darwin, as there's more software and expertise for Linux than Darwin around so far...
Firstly, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Secondly, if you can afford it, going to NetWare 5.1 is probably your best bet.
But in the meantime, here's some stuff to try.
You can run Novell clients and servers on Linux. Caldera OpenLinux 2.2 and up includes a Netware client which is fully NDS-aware, and you can integrate a Linux server into the NDS network so that, say, it uses Novell user authentication to get at resources shared with Samba.
There is also Netware for Linux. This runs a real live Netware 4.x server on Linux, but doesn't support NLMs, Netware filesystems etc. A free demo is available from www.caldera.com but you do need to buy licenses. Also, it only runs on kernel 2.0.35. However, you can probably pick up a copy of OpenLinux 1.3 very cheaply now!
There are some open-source Netware servers such as MarsNWE but they aren't NDS aware.
So add a Linux box now. It's cheap and you will learn useful stuff from getting it integrated with Netware.
But it's no replacement. Yet, maybe, but...
<<Of course there's also the native Atari GUI, GEM. I've a feeling you can get the source for DR's GEMDOS now, but I may be wrong. >>
GEM was originally a PC product, ported to a cut-down version of CM/P-68K (GEMDOS) on the ST. The PC version is now owned by Lineo, the thin-clients division of Caldera, and it has made PC GEM GPLed free software. Efforts are afoot to update it and bring it up to parity with commercial GEM developments such as Magic which run on modern ST-compatibles like the Milan.
You can check out progress on the prject, download source and binaries and join the discussion mailing list on the FreeGEM homepage.
The best-known alternative DOS to Microsoft's is DR-DOS, from Digital Research and later Caldera. Lineo (Caldera's thin clients division) recently released DR GEM as GNU open source, and as it is changing its efforts over to embedded Linux ("Embedix" - the first version has just been released) it's possible it may release DR-DOS as open source too.
As DR-DOS is a complete, finished, and very polished system, what would happen to the FreeDOS project if this happened? Keep going, try to merge the FreeDOS tree into DR-DOS, vice versa, or what?
GEM is going strong (see www.deltasoft.com) and I like to think there's life in DOS yet. With a GUI like GEM, a multitasker (such as DesqView) and maybe even an X server (like DesqView/X) it makes a good thin client OS.
No great or unexpected news there, then, and nothing on when to expect 100MHz FSB Celerons...
The only unexpected thing, in fact, was how amazingly badly-written that article was. Lousy punctuation, grammar, and a strong impression that the author didn't really understand what he was reporting on. Bit crap for a major news service, really.
Hell, it was almost down to Newsbytes' level.
Oh come *on,* don't talk wet!
Intel specifically designed two separate lines with different characteristics to cover more of the market; it's been doing this even since the 386sx was devised.
The Celeron was intended to be the cheap entry-level job, as Cyrix and AMD were doing too well out of the entry-level sector. It worked. As fab techonlogy improves, there probably will be more integrated caches and fewer compromises like backside and half-clock L2, but Intel will just come up with something else to demarcate its product lines.
Get real. And be glad that there IS a sinple bodge to overcome one of the handicaps.
Oh, you mean Elate. ;)
Good choice - it's mondo cool. Except, of course,
that as it's British it's kinda obscure...
Take a look. http://www.tao.co.uk
The sad thing for me is that the Palm get so much
press of this type. It's not like they invented a
new concept or anything!
I was doing most of this kind of stuff on a Psion
(an Organizer II LZ) back in 1989, FFS! Palm just
took an existing product/concept and refined it -
and now the converts are becoming zealots!
PDAs are great, sure. They can be life-changing.
But Palm != PDA.
Psion did it first, and for my money, still do it
best.
Uh-uh.
NT can't boot fram a FAT32 partition, but you can
keep C: as FAT16 and put your 95B/98 \WINDOWS dir
on a FAT32 D or higher.
The stuff about IE4 is complete rubbish. W95 OSR2
is needed for FAT32 - it is nothing whatsoever to
do with IE4. If you don't know for sure, don't go
ahead and say it anyway. Check!
Without wishing to start an argument, some of the
other responses here are, AFAIK, incorrect.
95 and NT do NOT support multiple different cards
or screens. NT can do it but only with Matrox MGA
based cards, nothing else. MetroX also supports a
set of 2-4 Matroxes.
#9 do not support it at all, AFAIK.
BeOS also doesn't, regardless of cards.
Win98 supports almost any combination of cards if
the manufacturer's drivers are compliant. Some of
the common boards can't do this - e.g. Videologic
Apocalypse 3D and 5D.
There's no specific enabling/disabling; the PandP
BIOS does it.
I'm running Linux, NT, 95 and 98 on a two-card PC
here; only 98 can see the 2nd card & screen.
It should work, but one will be your primary VDU,
one the 2ndary, and the 2ndary will only function
under 98. Failing that, buy two Matroxes & a copy
of MetroX.
Well, I'm glad it helped you!
;) I guess they mean "a live filesystem on CD." Not too hard to get right; mystifying unless you already know what he's getting at.
I've just read this myself, as research for a feature I'm writing for PC Pro magazine in the UK. I must say that I wasn't very impressed. I've got a fair amount of Unix experience (from years ago), but realtively less of Linux, tho' I've been looking at it since '95.
It's very patchy, and assumes too much. For instance:
o The book suggests using GNU texinfo for help, but it only tells you at around p450 how to call the info command.
o "Check your systems logs!" he keeps saying. He never says what logs, or where, until an appendix.
o Networking coverage assumes, by and large, a Unix network. This doesn't reflect the reality of a Wintel world leavened with a few Macs. They get a couple of sections.
o The translation occasionally falls over. What is a "Life" CD, anyway?
The historical stuff about the WWW, kernels and so on, is fine, but pretty useless really - and easily found elsewhere.
A bit more coverage on editors other than the nightmarish medusa Emacs would have been good.
If it helps, it's working... and it's helped me. So, good. But it's not what I was looking for, or what I hoped for.