That means that i can type "2005 yesemite vacation" 89 times in 89 "get info" windows...
Er, no. You can type the metadata in once for all 89 docs in one properties window.
I believe you're thinking of Gnome, which until very recently opened 89 windows to do such a think, and in 2.10 simply opens up the properties on the first window and doesn't let you do anythng to the 88.
In terms of desktop, OSX Linux Windows
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 1
Last time I checked, it was Linux that currrently has some in-production accelerated compositing, and Windows that has no compositing to speak of.
And if you're talking about stuff other than eyecandy, the apps Linux ships with (FF, Gaim, OpenOffice 2 etc) are generally better than the Windows counterparts, excepting the multimedia apps due to patent reasons.
Sure. But it'd be pretty easy to get Firefox, OpenOffice 2, Evince, and Thunderbird/Evolution running on these systems.
Re:Maybe the problem is that you're fucking braind
on
The Book of Postfix
·
· Score: 1
Dear not-particularly-good troll:
I'm actually quite competant at both Sendmail and Postfix. I wasn't actually talking about myself. You just assumed I was, and made yourself look like a dick as a result.
You need to justify those statements: why does security and ease of use have to be mutually exclusive?
People assume these things, and I don't think it's warranted. I think the UI for the security is probably just badly designed. Many people would say Windows sets users up as admins because that's easy, and doing things securely would be hard. But is 'type your admin password to continue' like Fedora or OS X uses really that hard?
you need to understand what you are doing if you want to use an open source *nix-compatible mail server.
That's insightful?
I believe the question was why is it so complicated. You haven't answered it. Why should Open Source or UNIX mail servers be less easier to use than proprietary or non-UNIX systems?
... a firefox which would take less than 160 MB of RAM, an Openoffice.org which would take less than 150 MB, an X.org which would take less than 100 MB.
Done.
You're looking at the wrong figure. The amount of memory an app allocates to itself doesn't matter that much - write a simple C program and try it. The amount of memory an app uses - called Resident Set Size (RSS or RES) in top - matters a lot more - use lots of that memory, and your system slows to a crawl.
But you're not using lots of that memory. The resident set size of X is about 35MB, Firefox usually about 24MB (my firefox here is a little busier than most), etc.
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
3201 mikem 15 0 124m 50m 20m S 0.0 10.0 2:54.73 firefox-bin
3407 mikem 16 0 115m 35m 20m S 0.7 7.0 0:17.11 mono
2825 root 15 0 103m 34m 9440 S 6.0 6.9 4:22.46 X
3306 mikem 16 0 100m 23m 14m S 0.0 4.7 0:15.00 evolution
2980 mikem 25 10 35500 18m 10m S 0.3 3.6 0:15.34 rhn-applet-gui
3013 mikem 16 0 39672 13m 8632 R 13.6 2.8 0:09.10 gnome-terminal
2971 mikem 16 0 29632 13m 10m S 0.0 2.7 0:02.71 nautilus
Invidual packages or no, does it that really save you from massive updates?
Yes, it does. If I use writer, I use writer, core, and English. I update writer, core, and English. Not core, writer, calc, base, impress, and a 118MB language package.
Not necessarily. I'm pretty sure there's parts of Russia that are also GMT +10 like Melbourne, Australia is.
I wouldn't mind if MS actually had these sorted by location - Europe/Russia/Vladivostok (or wherever), Asia Pacific / Australia / Melbourne. But they don't - just 50 odd timezone entries. How many people have parents that know Australia is GMT +10?
And read the replies - the info in both of those links is false. And was proven to be with +5 moderated replies when you linked to them.
Fedora...no feasable upgrade path from beta releases. Use stable versions and it's fine.
Debian vs Fedora as a server:
No LVM (just MS DOS partitions) or automation in in the installer (may have changed in 3 - I use Ubuntu - but I doubt it, and hey, at least I have a disclaimer).
No SELinux. It's hard to go back to a non DAC system once you understand and use it.
No centalized and standard set of admin tools (yay having to mess with nsswitch and two ldap.confs to setup LDAP name service / auth).
Less compatibile hardware and staff who know Debian than Fedora, due to RHEL compatibility.
Poor file verification mechanisms, requiring something like Tripwire to accurately monitor file changes. May have changed, but also the average Debian package wasn't signed. And apt-get still let servers install unsigned packages.
Fedora Directory Server (the only decent OSS LDAP server) probably isn't packaged for Debian yet. Though I'm sure it will be later.
A whole bunch of nice things I'm not pointing out because I'm trying to make a point. See below.
If you want paid support till 2011, buy a support contract for RHEL. Yes, people support Debian too. But none are as large as Red Hat. You'd be better off comparing RHEL with SLES in this regard.
Debian vs Fedora as a desktop:
Gnome 2.8, containing bugs that have been fixed in 2.10.
Installing GUI apps typically forgets to add menu options to launch them.
Not being able to DCC probe monitors to configure X in 2005. Scary.
A whole bunch of nice things I'm not pointing out because I'm trying to make a point. See below.
Debian vs Fedora on Slashdot:
Debian has lots of angsty users who don't use Fedora and then post replies on Slashdot in every Fedora story pretending to honestly evaluate them, but who actually obviously haven't used any release of Fedora, ever, then link to incorrect posts that already have other posts with a score of 5 beneath them pointing out they're incorrect
Seriously. I have a bunch of mates that use Debian (well, Ubuntu these days) and they're all great guys and very clever admins who use Debian opn servers for their own, good, reasons. But Slashdot Debian users: stop fucking doing this like the above every time there's a Fedora story. We don't do it in Debian stories. It makes Debian and its users look really, really, bad.
So we shouldn't expect to see any patches for any of those over the next few months? Is that what you're saying? Everything has been tested to perfection?
Er. 1. No. 2. No. 3. No.
I actually said in my post Fedora will have bugs.
Maybe you got confused by my bad typing: "Stability is a yes no thing, it's a more or less thing."
Which is obviously missing a few words. Like, well, everything, I'm not perfect. The sentence should have been "Stability is *not* a yes *or* no thing, it's a more or less thing."
A correction: the Broadcom wireless card in the Mac Mini does not work.
Though Broadcom have Linux wireless drivers for MIPS (my Linksys router uses one of the cards), they illegally do not release the source code for these drivers (though software in the Linksys router is statically linked against the kernel that includes the drivers).
If Linksys released their full kernel source as they're obligated to do, there'd be ppc Linux Broadcom drivers in no time, and I'd be able to use it with my Mini.
Yes, it works. The installer has an upgrade mode. You can also use yum (or smart, or whatever) to move between versions. Contrary to the poster above, it's supported. Post on the mailing lists or the forums and you'll get help. But it's not recommended.
Doing a new install is recommended to see the shiny new defaults Eg, things like LVM partitioning.
If you're cool with that, upgrade with the installer. If you want to keep your server online during the upgrade, you can even do that, but that's least recommended...
The reason: the installer does other things than just install new packages. Eg, in FC3 and 4, LVM1 metadata is upgraded to LVM2. In older releases upgrading Ext2 disks to Ext3.
If you understand this, upgrading with yum and then doing such changes yourself works fine.
Yes, the installer is easier than Windows XP.
on
Fedora Core 4 Available
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
That's insightful? Moderators, and the poster above: have you ever done a full install of Windows XP and Fedora?
Could you explain to me how Windows XP could possibly be easier?
1. The Windows installer starts as a 32 bit command line application for partitioning, EULA, loading driver disks, with a reboot into a GUI once a base install happens. It uses F8 and F5 to do things. Fedora uses 'next'. Windows is getting a full GUI installer in Longhorn when WinPE comes out. It doesn't have one now.
2. The Windows XP installer asks for many more than 3 inputs. You forgot partitioning, EULA agreement, that disk thing I mentioned above, and a bunch of other stuff. The things you did mention are weird - eg, I select my time zone by scrolling through a drop down list box of time zones sorted by GMT offset. Not even geography. Not even FC4 'click where you are on this map'.
3. The defaults are a lot less secure too - non non admin user, Run As doesn't work for all programs, the firewall lets in ports where known worms live by default (see the Register analysis of SP2 for a complete list). Obviously, there's no MAC implementation enabled by default either (SELinux). And most network services still run as SYSTEM. So post-install you're either gonna have to lock it down, or fix up the mess.
Fedora works. It has a lot of texting. Report a bug, and someone will fix it. That someone probably works for Red Hat.
RHEL works too. And it's a lot more conservative - which yes, probably means it's a little more reliable, but doesn't mean FC is unreliable or a beta test. See bullet points above. Stability is a yes no thing, it's a more or less thing.
People don't buy RHEl cause FC is unstable. They buy RHEL so they can install a box this year and get 24/7 support, and training, and not have to upgrade, till 2011.
I've been running FC4 (actually Rawhide, the equivalent of Debian unstable) on a Mac mini / Hitachi PJXT100 (yes, my computer is 16cm, my screen is 4m) for a few months here. Bluetooth Apple mouse and keyboard too. A pretty weird hardware setup. Everything works reliably.
In particular, OpenOffice 2 rocks. In FC it comes as individual packages for each app - ie, I get by with openoffice-core, openoffice-writer, and the English language package. In Ubuntu, I have to install and, worse, update a few massive packages.
Gnome does cool stuff. Like never stealing focus. An app wants focus, it pulses in the task bar. As it should be.
Extras now works well, it's easy to get a package into Fedora and there's a lot of useful stuff available. The days of having to go to freshrpms and dag wieers to find your app are numbered - FC4, FC Extras, and Livna for the patented stuff will satisfy most people. Other distros never had this problem, but other distros still don't have decent config tools, and other distros don't install menu items when they install GUI apps. Yes, this means you Debian.
There's a non-poo directory server that has proper ACL support (unlike OpenLDAP, where they were kept outside the directory), multimaster replication. etc as part of the distro. Combine it with JXplorer and you've got a decent Open Source LDAP server.
Off topic: once installed, OOo 2 is the first version I'd say would be on par with MS Office. The toolbars are decent - they no longer take up an entire row, and can be edited and docked together at will, like you damn well expect. Spell check can count selections. Floating docks becomes sidebars. And, surprisingly, it can work with MS Offices proprietary XML files. All the usual OOo features are still there
Other nice things about recent Fedoras:
FC3 and newer: Partitioning uses LVM by default. Online resizing is supported. Ext3 has signficant speed improvements, bechmarks favorably against Reiser, and unlike Reiser, works properly with SELinux.
FC3 but expanded in FC4: SELinux is enabled by default. For example, Apache is prevented from reading files who don't have the 'web content' context, and cgi scripts can't access particular device files without the right context either. If someone breaks into apachge, the chances of them going further than breasking into your web site are limited.
One note: while yum is getting better, I don't use it. Instead, I use Smart Package Manager. A command line and GUI tool from the author of apt-rpm and Synaptic, that replaes both those tools, and works with Yum metadata repositories. It's faster (downloads in parallel from each source), has a better GUI, and simpler error messages than yum and apt (no 'but version foo will be installed'-without-any-explanation type stuff).
Obviously. Syncs to Palm, PocketPC and particular mobile phones (like my SonyEricsson) with MultiSync too. Supports standards like iCal. Available now for Linux, a Windows version is on the way. And the mail part is pretty good too - one of Outlook 2003's biggest features is vFolders, something Evo's had for about five years now.
I did. My post was making the point that Unix is popularly defined by Unixlike characteristics, which Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris and HPUX all have but OS X does not.
Slashdot Mirror
I've seen videos of Longhorn. have you seen videos of XGL?
That means that i can type "2005 yesemite vacation" 89 times in 89 "get info" windows...
Er, no. You can type the metadata in once for all 89 docs in one properties window.
I believe you're thinking of Gnome, which until very recently opened 89 windows to do such a think, and in 2.10 simply opens up the properties on the first window and doesn't let you do anythng to the 88.
Last time I checked, it was Linux that currrently has some in-production accelerated compositing, and Windows that has no compositing to speak of.
And if you're talking about stuff other than eyecandy, the apps Linux ships with (FF, Gaim, OpenOffice 2 etc) are generally better than the Windows counterparts, excepting the multimedia apps due to patent reasons.
Sure. But it'd be pretty easy to get Firefox, OpenOffice 2, Evince, and Thunderbird/Evolution running on these systems.
I'm actually quite competant at both Sendmail and Postfix. I wasn't actually talking about myself. You just assumed I was, and made yourself look like a dick as a result.
Qmail isn't Open Source you fucking idiot.
You need to justify those statements: why does security and ease of use have to be mutually exclusive?
People assume these things, and I don't think it's warranted. I think the UI for the security is probably just badly designed. Many people would say Windows sets users up as admins because that's easy, and doing things securely would be hard. But is 'type your admin password to continue' like Fedora or OS X uses really that hard?
you need to understand what you are doing if you want to use an open source *nix-compatible mail server.
That's insightful?
I believe the question was why is it so complicated. You haven't answered it. Why should Open Source or UNIX mail servers be less easier to use than proprietary or non-UNIX systems?
What's hard about Applications -> System Settings -> Display -> (type root password) Multihead?
I think your problem may be to do with your distribution not including good X config tools.
... a firefox which would take less than 160 MB of RAM, an Openoffice.org which would take less than 150 MB, an X.org which would take less than 100 MB.
Done.
You're looking at the wrong figure. The amount of memory an app allocates to itself doesn't matter that much - write a simple C program and try it. The amount of memory an app uses - called Resident Set Size (RSS or RES) in top - matters a lot more - use lots of that memory, and your system slows to a crawl.
But you're not using lots of that memory. The resident set size of X is about 35MB, Firefox usually about 24MB (my firefox here is a little busier than most), etc.
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
3201 mikem 15 0 124m 50m 20m S 0.0 10.0 2:54.73 firefox-bin
3407 mikem 16 0 115m 35m 20m S 0.7 7.0 0:17.11 mono
2825 root 15 0 103m 34m 9440 S 6.0 6.9 4:22.46 X
3306 mikem 16 0 100m 23m 14m S 0.0 4.7 0:15.00 evolution
2980 mikem 25 10 35500 18m 10m S 0.3 3.6 0:15.34 rhn-applet-gui
3013 mikem 16 0 39672 13m 8632 R 13.6 2.8 0:09.10 gnome-terminal
2971 mikem 16 0 29632 13m 10m S 0.0 2.7 0:02.71 nautilus
Okay, first it replaced GMC at a time when it was really slow.
Then it went spatial without any user notification or an obvious way of turning it off.
Now Nautilus aims to be first wireless nation?
Fuck that, I'm moving back to KDE.
It is not a viral license like the GPL.
1997 called. It wants it troll back.
Invidual packages or no, does it that really save you from massive updates?
Yes, it does. If I use writer, I use writer, core, and English. I update writer, core, and English. Not
core, writer, calc, base, impress, and a 118MB language package.
Not necessarily. I'm pretty sure there's parts of Russia that are also GMT +10 like Melbourne, Australia is.
I wouldn't mind if MS actually had these sorted by location - Europe/Russia/Vladivostok (or wherever), Asia Pacific / Australia / Melbourne. But they don't - just 50 odd timezone entries. How many people have parents that know Australia is GMT +10?
And read the replies - the info in both of those links is false. And was proven to be with +5 moderated replies when you linked to them.
Fedora...no feasable upgrade path from beta releases. Use stable versions and it's fine.
Debian vs Fedora as a server:
If you want paid support till 2011, buy a support contract for RHEL. Yes, people support Debian too. But none are as large as Red Hat. You'd be better off comparing RHEL with SLES in this regard.
Debian vs Fedora as a desktop:
Debian vs Fedora on Slashdot:
Seriously. I have a bunch of mates that use Debian (well, Ubuntu these days) and they're all great guys and very clever admins who use Debian opn servers for their own, good, reasons. But Slashdot Debian users: stop fucking doing this like the above every time there's a Fedora story. We don't do it in Debian stories. It makes Debian and its users look really, really, bad.
But now, MS will have taken a big player away, and as I see it, they're simply killing of bit of competition
Yeah, all* those production-level business-use Gentoo boxes will soon** switch to Windows Server 2003.
* By 'all', I mean 'both'
** By 'soon', I mean 'not'.
Yeah, the faster load time is from a new readahead service that starts up on boot.
On behalf of everyone: what do you mean by dark. I am truly confused.
Dear Very Angry Man,
So we shouldn't expect to see any patches for any of those over the next few months? Is that what you're saying? Everything has been tested to perfection?
Er.
1. No.
2. No.
3. No.
I actually said in my post Fedora will have bugs.
Maybe you got confused by my bad typing:
"Stability is a yes no thing, it's a more or less thing."
Which is obviously missing a few words. Like, well, everything, I'm not perfect. The sentence should have been "Stability is *not* a yes *or* no thing, it's a more or less thing."
Chill out.
Replying to myself:
A correction: the Broadcom wireless card in the Mac Mini does not work.
Though Broadcom have Linux wireless drivers for MIPS (my Linksys router uses one of the cards), they illegally do not release the source code for these drivers (though software in the Linksys router is statically linked against the kernel that includes the drivers).
If Linksys released their full kernel source as they're obligated to do, there'd be ppc Linux Broadcom drivers in no time, and I'd be able to use it with my Mini.
There's an unofficial repository at livna.org you can add to yum / smart / apt / whatever you use.
This makes it easy to find and install the packages you want.
Yes, it works. The installer has an upgrade mode. You can also use yum (or smart, or whatever) to move between versions. Contrary to the poster above, it's supported. Post on the mailing lists or the forums and you'll get help. But it's not recommended.
Doing a new install is recommended to see the shiny new defaults Eg, things like LVM partitioning.
If you're cool with that, upgrade with the installer. If you want to keep your server online during the upgrade, you can even do that, but that's least recommended...
The reason: the installer does other things than just install new packages. Eg, in FC3 and 4, LVM1 metadata is upgraded to LVM2. In older releases upgrading Ext2 disks to Ext3.
If you understand this, upgrading with yum and then doing such changes yourself works fine.
That's insightful? Moderators, and the poster above: have you ever done a full install of Windows XP and Fedora?
Could you explain to me how Windows XP could possibly be easier?
1. The Windows installer starts as a 32 bit command line application for partitioning, EULA, loading driver disks, with a reboot into a GUI once a base install happens. It uses F8 and F5 to do things. Fedora uses 'next'. Windows is getting a full GUI installer in Longhorn when WinPE comes out. It doesn't have one now.
2. The Windows XP installer asks for many more than 3 inputs. You forgot partitioning, EULA agreement, that disk thing I mentioned above, and a bunch of other stuff. The things you did mention are weird - eg, I select my time zone by scrolling through a drop down list box of time zones sorted by GMT offset. Not even geography. Not even FC4 'click where you are on this map'.
3. The defaults are a lot less secure too - non non admin user, Run As doesn't work for all programs, the firewall lets in ports where known worms live by default (see the Register analysis of SP2 for a complete list). Obviously, there's no MAC implementation enabled by default either (SELinux). And most network services still run as SYSTEM. So post-install you're either gonna have to lock it down, or fix up the mess.
Er, no.
Rawhide is where things first get tested.
After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 1
After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 2
After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 3
After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 4
After that, Fedora Core 4
After that, Red hat Enterprise Linux.
Fedora works. It has a lot of texting. Report a bug, and someone will fix it. That someone probably works for Red Hat.
RHEL works too. And it's a lot more conservative - which yes, probably means it's a little more reliable, but doesn't mean FC is unreliable or a beta test. See bullet points above. Stability is a yes no thing, it's a more or less thing.
People don't buy RHEl cause FC is unstable. They buy RHEL so they can install a box this year and get 24/7 support, and training, and not have to upgrade, till 2011.
I've been running FC4 (actually Rawhide, the equivalent of Debian unstable) on a Mac mini / Hitachi PJXT100 (yes, my computer is 16cm, my screen is 4m) for a few months here. Bluetooth Apple mouse and keyboard too. A pretty weird hardware setup. Everything works reliably.
In particular, OpenOffice 2 rocks. In FC it comes as individual packages for each app - ie, I get by with openoffice-core, openoffice-writer, and the English language package. In Ubuntu, I have to install and, worse, update a few massive packages.
Gnome does cool stuff. Like never stealing focus. An app wants focus, it pulses in the task bar. As it should be.
Extras now works well, it's easy to get a package into Fedora and there's a lot of useful stuff available. The days of having to go to freshrpms and dag wieers to find your app are numbered - FC4, FC Extras, and Livna for the patented stuff will satisfy most people. Other distros never had this problem, but other distros still don't have decent config tools, and other distros don't install menu items when they install GUI apps. Yes, this means you Debian.
There's a non-poo directory server that has proper ACL support (unlike OpenLDAP, where they were kept outside the directory), multimaster replication. etc as part of the distro. Combine it with JXplorer and you've got a decent Open Source LDAP server.
Off topic: once installed, OOo 2 is the first version I'd say would be on par with MS Office. The toolbars are decent - they no longer take up an entire row, and can be edited and docked together at will, like you damn well expect. Spell check can count selections. Floating docks becomes sidebars. And, surprisingly, it can work with MS Offices proprietary XML files. All the usual OOo features are still there
Other nice things about recent Fedoras:
FC3 and newer: Partitioning uses LVM by default. Online resizing is supported. Ext3 has signficant speed improvements, bechmarks favorably against Reiser, and unlike Reiser, works properly with SELinux.
FC3 but expanded in FC4: SELinux is enabled by default. For example, Apache is prevented from reading files who don't have the 'web content' context, and cgi scripts can't access particular device files without the right context either. If someone breaks into apachge, the chances of them going further than breasking into your web site are limited.
One note: while yum is getting better, I don't use it. Instead, I use Smart Package Manager. A command line and GUI tool from the author of apt-rpm and Synaptic, that replaes both those tools, and works with Yum metadata repositories. It's faster (downloads in parallel from each source), has a better GUI, and simpler error messages than yum and apt (no 'but version foo will be installed'-without-any-explanation type stuff).
Obviously. Syncs to Palm, PocketPC and particular mobile phones (like my SonyEricsson) with MultiSync too. Supports standards like iCal. Available now for Linux, a Windows version is on the way. And the mail part is pretty good too - one of Outlook 2003's biggest features is vFolders, something Evo's had for about five years now.
I did. My post was making the point that Unix is popularly defined by Unixlike characteristics, which Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris and HPUX all have but OS X does not.