You know, I've generally found Linus to be quite the opposite, and he will even submit patches to other projects (such as GNOME) when he finds issues, rather then creating trouble.
On a similar note, I've also found Theo de Raadt to not be an issue to work with. Neither take Mr. Poettering's approach of 'the users don't like the software, users must be dense' when people have issues with their projects.
I think the bigger complaint is that it's being added to systemd, not that it exists (Note that GRUB can already be used with secure boot). Lennart Poettering is pretty disliked for his abandonment of UNIX principles (the biggest one being portability), and somehow his software becomes the de facto standard in the Linux world, long before it is ready (PulseAudio anyone)? He creates issues and fractures the community, and then blames everyone else for the problems.
Ubuntu, like Red Hat, tries to keep the version of components the same for the life of a (LTS) release as not to risk breaking compatibility and application certification. Fedora's kernel updates can occasionally break things, and not breaking compatibility is very important for a long term release. (Compare Ubuntu LTS to RHEL or SuSE Enterprise)
I'd consider using it if there was a Solaris build. One of the things about Open Office when Sun had it was the cross platform support (I have OO on my Solaris workstation (SunBlade 1500) AND on my IRIX box (SGI Octane)
I was referencing libressl in particular on this one. MIPS Pro, when set to c99, seems to handle most code that isn't bound to GCC with some exceptions. I'm building everything 32-bit here, so I can't speak for the 64 bit quirks. I'm also using GCC 4.7 for libressl, among other things that won't build right (php-5.6 and httpd-2.4 being the big ones on that particular box, I've built a lot of things on IRIX to bring stuff up to date though).
Re:Obligatory reminder that an alternative exists
on
OpenSSL 1.0.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
Windows yes. I haven't seen anyone submit patches for OpenVMS, and I don't have an OpenVMS system to even try on.
It does, however, support OS X, Net and Free BSD, HP-UX, and Solaris. I used to have it working for AIX and IRIX, but changes in the 2.1.x release have broken them for now, and I'm not sure that I'll ever get IRIX working again.
Actually, libressl supports OS X and HP-UX as well. Some groundwork is in place for supporting AIX and IRIX (I no longer have access to AIX to continue porting, and I'm not sure IRIX will ever work right). If you really wanted it to work with MSVC, you could write, test, and propose the patches to make it work. I'm all for eliminating GCCisms (the areas I've been poking at the code I'm not trying to eliminate GCCisms, not my priority).
I just timed loading Office 2011 for Mac on my MacBook Pro (MBP 1,1, 2.1GHz Core [1] Duo, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.6) - loading and hitting Open Apple + N, and waiting for the new window to open took around 16 seconds.
Apple and Microsoft are far behind in terms of support from what I see.
SGI IRIX 6.5: 1998-2014
Solaris 10: 2005-2021
Solaris 11: 2011-2024
If I want long term support, I know I'm not going for a Windows systems or a Linux box. Know where to go for it (I'm sure that IBM and HP have some long lifecycles too....but I'm less versed in AIX, i, HP-UX, and OpenVMS)
You'll have wait for us to add that to the Nessus plugins! I'm looking forward to all the tickets coming in tomorrow (We need package xxx from Oracle for Nessus plugins...))!
With that kind of logic, Windows is not the OS to be running. Maybe try Solaris, IBM i, or IBM AIX, all of which have much longer support cycles (SGI IRIX did too, but finally ended in 2014.)
There are some things I really like about the Precisions. I have a M4500 for myself and a M4700 at work. The Quadro graphics is a nice touch. But none of mine are anywhere near as light as the MBP (haven't touched any of the M6xxx yet, we have some M3800s that are pretty lightweight). The main thing I like about my Precisions over the MacBooks (especially the retina based) is that I can easily replace components. It's a shame that I actually like OS X much better then Windows (or Linux, with the political mess it is becoming).
I complain about it violating Rule 4: Choose portability over efficiency, 5: Store data in flat text files, and 7: Use shell scripts to increase leverage and portability.
It is not portable. It aims to break compatibility with other Unix OS's.
Where do you think the cheapskates go? Linux changes much faster than Windows does. No one in today's world does better binary compatibility. Apple? Much higher prices and even faster forced migration.
Sorry I don't agree at all.
Linux binary compatibility seems to work fine - if your programs are well written (and linked...). And Windows sucks just as much at compatibility (better hope your old program doesn't use any Win16 code on x64...). You want to see legacy code run? Try UNIX platforms - HP-UX on IA-64 will run the RISC binaries, I've installed stuff for Solaris 7 on Solaris 11. Or go with something that really hasn't changed, like VMS or IBM i (AS/400 for the older people).
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think the OP was talking about his laptop.
What makes you think systemd addresses issues? Or, I should say, that the BSD people seem them as issues?
You know, I've generally found Linus to be quite the opposite, and he will even submit patches to other projects (such as GNOME) when he finds issues, rather then creating trouble.
On a similar note, I've also found Theo de Raadt to not be an issue to work with. Neither take Mr. Poettering's approach of 'the users don't like the software, users must be dense' when people have issues with their projects.
I think the bigger complaint is that it's being added to systemd, not that it exists (Note that GRUB can already be used with secure boot). Lennart Poettering is pretty disliked for his abandonment of UNIX principles (the biggest one being portability), and somehow his software becomes the de facto standard in the Linux world, long before it is ready (PulseAudio anyone)? He creates issues and fractures the community, and then blames everyone else for the problems.
Ubuntu, like Red Hat, tries to keep the version of components the same for the life of a (LTS) release as not to risk breaking compatibility and application certification. Fedora's kernel updates can occasionally break things, and not breaking compatibility is very important for a long term release. (Compare Ubuntu LTS to RHEL or SuSE Enterprise)
There is a good chance that I can get Solaris to build (especially Solaris 11). I'm not sure there is much interest in me porting to IRIX.
I'd consider using it if there was a Solaris build. One of the things about Open Office when Sun had it was the cross platform support (I have OO on my Solaris workstation (SunBlade 1500) AND on my IRIX box (SGI Octane)
Actually Fedora and Red Hat are the only one that matters. If you haven't noticed, what Red Hat does, everyone else does too.
I was referencing libressl in particular on this one. MIPS Pro, when set to c99, seems to handle most code that isn't bound to GCC with some exceptions. I'm building everything 32-bit here, so I can't speak for the 64 bit quirks. I'm also using GCC 4.7 for libressl, among other things that won't build right (php-5.6 and httpd-2.4 being the big ones on that particular box, I've built a lot of things on IRIX to bring stuff up to date though).
Windows yes. I haven't seen anyone submit patches for OpenVMS, and I don't have an OpenVMS system to even try on. It does, however, support OS X, Net and Free BSD, HP-UX, and Solaris. I used to have it working for AIX and IRIX, but changes in the 2.1.x release have broken them for now, and I'm not sure that I'll ever get IRIX working again.
I forgot Solaris in the supported list! Tested on Solaris 10-11.
Actually, libressl supports OS X and HP-UX as well. Some groundwork is in place for supporting AIX and IRIX (I no longer have access to AIX to continue porting, and I'm not sure IRIX will ever work right). If you really wanted it to work with MSVC, you could write, test, and propose the patches to make it work. I'm all for eliminating GCCisms (the areas I've been poking at the code I'm not trying to eliminate GCCisms, not my priority).
Sounds like the wait is mainly HDD related, if I had to take a guess. That's the only explanation I can give for why they are so similar.
I just timed loading Office 2011 for Mac on my MacBook Pro (MBP 1,1, 2.1GHz Core [1] Duo, 2GB RAM, OS X 10.6) - loading and hitting Open Apple + N, and waiting for the new window to open took around 16 seconds.
Apple and Microsoft are far behind in terms of support from what I see.
SGI IRIX 6.5: 1998-2014
Solaris 10: 2005-2021
Solaris 11: 2011-2024
If I want long term support, I know I'm not going for a Windows systems or a Linux box. Know where to go for it (I'm sure that IBM and HP have some long lifecycles too....but I'm less versed in AIX, i, HP-UX, and OpenVMS)
I think the pkg command was the single greatest change in Solaris 11.
You'll have wait for us to add that to the Nessus plugins! I'm looking forward to all the tickets coming in tomorrow (We need package xxx from Oracle for Nessus plugins...))!
With that kind of logic, Windows is not the OS to be running. Maybe try Solaris, IBM i, or IBM AIX, all of which have much longer support cycles (SGI IRIX did too, but finally ended in 2014.)
There are some things I really like about the Precisions. I have a M4500 for myself and a M4700 at work. The Quadro graphics is a nice touch. But none of mine are anywhere near as light as the MBP (haven't touched any of the M6xxx yet, we have some M3800s that are pretty lightweight). The main thing I like about my Precisions over the MacBooks (especially the retina based) is that I can easily replace components. It's a shame that I actually like OS X much better then Windows (or Linux, with the political mess it is becoming).
I complain about it violating Rule 4: Choose portability over efficiency, 5: Store data in flat text files, and 7: Use shell scripts to increase leverage and portability. It is not portable. It aims to break compatibility with other Unix OS's.
Considering that we have SMF from Sun and launchd from Apple as well, there was no need to reinvent the wheel.
Then maybe they should have tried using SMF or launchd.
He doesn't always have a long rant. Actually, the patches I submitted to libreSSL merely got marked approved, no rant attached at all.
Also note, if you are running a 32 bit version of Windows Win16 is still there.
Linux binary compatibility seems to work fine - if your programs are well written (and linked...). And Windows sucks just as much at compatibility (better hope your old program doesn't use any Win16 code on x64...). You want to see legacy code run? Try UNIX platforms - HP-UX on IA-64 will run the RISC binaries, I've installed stuff for Solaris 7 on Solaris 11. Or go with something that really hasn't changed, like VMS or IBM i (AS/400 for the older people).