The only barrier to me running Linux on my home computer is that Linux has no native support for serial-ATA hard drives. As such, of course, I am unable to install Linux.
SATA works great in Red Hat Linux... worked under RHL 9, and with the current beta of fedora (no longer have RHL 9 installed on that system) I get about 50 MB/s on my 250 GB Maxtor SATA drive.
Hardly, i have no numbers, but the EU had a huge programme to educate people about the EURO, i wouldn't be surprised if it had cost more...
That's a very different issue - a new currency, not just a new bill. The euro was replacing many currencies at different values used by different nations, merging them into one.
Sure you can. TCO isn't just a buzzword, time spent making things work is expensive for companies.
E.g., installing Red Hat Linux on a server or a workstation is quick and will only need a small tweaking, while the same is far from truth on Windows, where installing the OS is just the first 5% of the job. This applies to other things... buying something which works can often be a lot cheaper than trying to find an open source project which works.
I don't know of ANY conflict where terorrist groups have been involved where the terror has stopped or been significantly limited through the first two options. Even in cases where an entire terrorist organization have been obliterated, as long as the underlying issues are still there new people take their places. It may take time, but it's happened over and over again.
Not always. The extremist leftist terrorist movements in Germany and Italy, which were active in the 70s/early 80s are pretty dead these days.
This, of course, is a very different scenario than the Israeli attempt of creating Lebensraum on occupied land and the oppression and killings to make that happen - and resulting hate and despair found in that area and sympatizers thereof.
I'm surprised Dell does this. They don't have the infrastructure to have a relationship like this with the customer - and they won't be able to get stores to stock yet another set of ink cartridges(also, this wouldn't be consistent with Dell's way of operating). So how are customers (especially consumers) going to get their parts in a cheap[1] and timely manner?
[1](well, this is ink and thus a bit expensive... but fedex on single cartridges would make it that much worse)
That vulnerability is a simple buffer overflow. RedHat had a patch out for it in less than a day. This whole 'wait for the vendor to fix it' thing just results in lazy vendors.
That would be because Red Hat and others took advantage of the time CERT takes from vendor notification to general release. This is exactly what CERT is trying to do - release the vulnerability info at the same time vendor patches are ready.
I am not overly pleased about this. The changes from 7.2 to 8.0 were not overly significant in my opinion, and 9.0 isn't going to be that different from 8.0. How could it be?
Red Hat Linux 8.0 has a new gcc (3.2), new glibc (2.3) and new desktop libraries (Gnome 2). It most definitely needed a new number.
Anyone know if they'll release DVD ISOs? I think for previous versions you had to be a member or whatever.
By offering DVD isos, you approximately double the bandwidth usage - since many don't download the source CDs and the doc CDs.
As long as you need to ship CDs in the box, a DVD is just added cost. A DVD can serve as a value add in higher priced versions, where you're looking for things to get people pay more.
***
I couldn't understand why dell dropped linux support, they don't have a UNIX product like HP does. HP with HPUX, why would they want to sell and support linux? ***
Dell hasn't dropped Linux support, they're still Red Hat's premier partner and will sell you Red Hat Linux as well as Red Hat Advanced Server - saw the option just yesterday, where you could choose OS versions (7.3, 8.0, AS or Windows) with Powervault servers from the standard order form. Even better, there was a "no os" choice too so I can install Red Hat Linux on it myself.
Dell's linux business is big and increasing - for servers and some workstations. They dropped selling consumer laptops and consumer desktops with RHL, as that wasn't where the revenue was.
***
I know this is off topic, but Birgitte Teng's cousin was acquitted in a criminal court, but judged to pay reparations to the family in a civil court. Isn't that double jeapordy? ***
That's an entirely different matter - the equivalent in the US would be the Simpson trials, where he was found not guilty to the law but had to pay damages to the family.
SMS messages are written to a device (your cellular phone) both you and the receiver is likely to bring with you all the time. This means it's better suited to small messages you'd like the recipient to get very soon than email.
If Redhat is pushing (or wants to push) the linux community towards more standardisation, why don't they join the unitedlinux effort then ?
The standardization effort is LSB. "UnitedLinux" is more of a marketing tactic from Suse than a standardization effort...
If suse, caldera, conectiva and openlinux can put aside their own goals
Two of these, caldera (openlinux is a product of them) and TurboLinux, are dead companies (as far as Linux development goes... their developers are gone). This isn't four companies pooling their efforts, this is SuSE desperately trying to counter Red Hat and signing up dead/severely hurting companies and give the impression of something more.
Linus doesn't standardize Linux - he rules the kernel, but Linux is much more than a kernel.
Libraries (ABIs and availability), some configuration files and tools are much more important - a kernel should basically "just work" from an application's point of view. This sort of standardization is what LSB tries to achieve.
As far as UnitedLinux trying to bring standards to Linux - give me a break. This is just SuSE trying to give an impression of it. 2 of the 4 distributions are dead (TurboLinux, Caldera) with little/no development. Connectiva also slimmed down quite a bit. UnitedLinux is another name for SuSE, and is no more a standard than SuSE is. The standard is LSB, the de facto implementation of a standard Linux distribution for the market they're targetting is Red Hat Linux.
The kernel has been "tweaked" extensively by some of the best kernel hackers in the world, working at Red Hat. I doubt you'd do better:)
That said, on enterprise critical systems running Oracle the less local tweaking the better. The system is certified to run Oracle and there'd better be no local tweaks if anything go wrong ("I tweaked this IO-driver a bit... performance went up 20% when I skipped this sync bit").
Red Hat Linux has been on Itanium for a couple of releases - Red Hat Linux Advanced Server is a newer product, which is now going to be released for that platform. You can read more on the IA32 version at Red Hat's web site.
Re:Public Domain is too free for most creative wor
on
What Is Public Domain?
·
· Score: 2
You're free to charge $1000000 for an Open Source HelloWorld.c that you found on the net if you want to, but you still have to make the sourcecode available to anyone who asks for it.
Not correct either. You only have to provide the source code to a licensee - e.g., if someone bought the binary of a GPL program for $1 million and later asked for the source code, you'd have to give it to the customer for a nominal fee. He could do whatever he wanted to within the GPL with the source and the program, including handing them out for free. You have no obligations to anyone else.
kgcc (which hasn't been used for the compiler since RHL 7... the kernel has since had that bug fixed) is egcs 1.1.2. We don't use gcc 2.95.x - next compiler (next major series) will be whatever is best (features, stability) at the time (3.1.1, perhaps)
Actually Red Hat does have a binary diff program, called rhmask. Red Hat also used it around RH 5.X/6.0), by issuing "mask" rpms for larger packages like Netscape Communicator
rhmask isn't a binary diff tool. It just xors the old binary with the new, producing a mask. With this, you can make sure that only people having the previous package can get the new one. This was used to release updates of things like MetroX when we shipped that (Red Hat Linux 3 and 4, I think)
They couldn't care less what "most people" think - they're selling to a small, sophisticated set of users which pay to have the performance from the future today. I'm a little surprised they mentioned any scale whatsoever...
Slashdot Mirror
The only barrier to me running Linux on my home computer is that Linux has no native support for serial-ATA hard drives. As such, of course, I am unable to install Linux.
SATA works great in Red Hat Linux... worked under RHL 9, and with the current beta of fedora (no longer have RHL 9 installed on that system) I get about 50 MB/s on my 250 GB Maxtor SATA drive.
Hardly, i have no numbers, but the EU had a huge programme to educate people about the EURO, i wouldn't be surprised if it had cost more...
That's a very different issue - a new currency, not just a new bill. The euro was replacing many currencies at different values used by different nations, merging them into one.
With things like yp, ldap, autofs etc. available, Red Hat Linux works pretty well out of the box.
Windows, OTOH, doesn't, unless you buy it preinstalled.
Installation/initial configuration is just a small piece of the picture, of course, but an area in which Linux excels.
You can't beat free!
Sure you can. TCO isn't just a buzzword, time spent making things work is expensive for companies.
E.g., installing Red Hat Linux on a server or a workstation is quick and will only need a small tweaking, while the same is far from truth on Windows, where installing the OS is just the first 5% of the job. This applies to other things... buying something which works can often be a lot cheaper than trying to find an open source project which works.
I don't know of ANY conflict where terorrist groups have been involved where the terror has stopped or been significantly limited through the first two options. Even in cases where an entire terrorist organization have been obliterated, as long as the underlying issues are still there new people take their places. It may take time, but it's happened over and over again.
Not always. The extremist leftist terrorist movements in Germany and Italy, which were active in the 70s/early 80s are pretty dead these days.
This, of course, is a very different scenario than the Israeli attempt of creating Lebensraum on occupied land and the oppression and killings to make that happen - and resulting hate and despair found in that area and sympatizers thereof.
I'm surprised Dell does this. They don't have the infrastructure to have a relationship like this with the customer - and they won't be able to get stores to stock yet another set of ink cartridges(also, this wouldn't be consistent with Dell's way of operating). So how are customers (especially consumers) going to get their parts in a cheap[1] and timely manner?
[1](well, this is ink and thus a bit expensive... but fedex on single cartridges would make it that much worse)
That vulnerability is a simple buffer overflow. RedHat had a patch out for it in less than a day. This whole 'wait for the vendor to fix it' thing just results in lazy vendors.
That would be because Red Hat and others took advantage of the time CERT takes from vendor notification to general release. This is exactly what CERT is trying to do - release the vulnerability info at the same time vendor patches are ready.
I am not overly pleased about this. The changes from 7.2 to 8.0 were not overly significant in my opinion, and 9.0 isn't going to be that different from 8.0. How could it be?
Red Hat Linux 8.0 has a new gcc (3.2), new glibc (2.3) and new desktop libraries (Gnome 2). It most definitely needed a new number.
Anyone know if they'll release DVD ISOs?
I think for previous versions you had to be a member or whatever.
By offering DVD isos, you approximately double the bandwidth usage - since many don't download the source CDs and the doc CDs.
As long as you need to ship CDs in the box, a DVD is just added cost. A DVD can serve as a value add in higher priced versions, where you're looking for things to get people pay more.
***
I couldn't understand why dell dropped linux support, they don't have a UNIX product like HP does. HP with HPUX, why would they want to sell and support linux?
***
Dell hasn't dropped Linux support, they're still Red Hat's premier partner and will sell you Red Hat Linux as well as Red Hat Advanced Server - saw the option just yesterday, where you could choose OS versions (7.3, 8.0, AS or Windows) with Powervault servers from the standard order form. Even better, there was a "no os" choice too so I can install Red Hat Linux on it myself.
Dell's linux business is big and increasing - for servers and some workstations. They dropped selling consumer laptops and consumer desktops with RHL, as that wasn't where the revenue was.
It's a great card, but I've had it for months already - and it wasn't just released when I bought it either.
A couple of linux notes:
* support was added in early January in the opensource driver
* the newest beta of Red Hat Linux supports the card out of the box.
***
I know this is off topic, but Birgitte Teng's cousin was acquitted in a criminal court, but judged to pay reparations to the family in a civil court. Isn't that double jeapordy?
***
That's an entirely different matter - the equivalent in the US would be the Simpson trials, where he was found not guilty to the law but had to pay damages to the family.
SMS messages are written to a device (your cellular phone) both you and the receiver is likely to bring with you all the time. This means it's better suited to small messages you'd like the recipient to get very soon than email.
If Redhat is pushing (or wants to push) the linux community towards more standardisation, why don't they join the unitedlinux effort then ?
The standardization effort is LSB. "UnitedLinux" is more of a marketing tactic from Suse than a standardization effort...
If suse, caldera, conectiva and openlinux can put aside their own goals
Two of these, caldera (openlinux is a product of them) and TurboLinux, are dead companies (as far as Linux development goes... their developers are gone). This isn't four companies pooling their efforts, this is SuSE desperately trying to counter Red Hat and signing up dead/severely hurting companies and give the impression of something more.
Linus doesn't standardize Linux - he rules the kernel, but Linux is much more than a kernel.
Libraries (ABIs and availability), some configuration files and tools are much more important - a kernel should basically "just work" from an application's point of view. This sort of standardization is what LSB tries to achieve.
As far as UnitedLinux trying to bring standards to Linux - give me a break. This is just SuSE trying to give an impression of it. 2 of the 4 distributions are dead (TurboLinux, Caldera) with little/no development. Connectiva also slimmed down quite a bit. UnitedLinux is another name for SuSE, and is no more a standard than SuSE is. The standard is LSB, the de facto implementation of a standard Linux distribution for the market they're targetting is Red Hat Linux.
The kernel has been "tweaked" extensively by some of the best kernel hackers in the world, working at Red Hat. I doubt you'd do better :)
That said, on enterprise critical systems running Oracle the less local tweaking the better. The system is certified to run Oracle and there'd better be no local tweaks if anything go wrong ("I tweaked this IO-driver a bit... performance went up 20% when I skipped this sync bit").
Red Hat Linux has been on Itanium for a couple of releases - Red Hat Linux Advanced Server is a newer product, which is now going to be released for that platform. You can read more on the IA32 version at Red Hat's web site.
You're free to charge $1000000 for an Open Source HelloWorld.c that you found on the net if you want to, but you still have to make the sourcecode available to anyone who asks for it.
Not correct either. You only have to provide the source code to a licensee - e.g., if someone bought the binary of a GPL program for $1 million and later asked for the source code, you'd have to give it to the customer for a nominal fee. He could do whatever he wanted to within the GPL with the source and the program, including handing them out for free. You have no obligations to anyone else.
Should be mozilla 0.9.9, which is what is included.
kgcc (which hasn't been used for the compiler since RHL 7... the kernel has since had that bug fixed) is egcs 1.1.2. We don't use gcc 2.95.x - next compiler (next major series) will be whatever is best (features, stability) at the time (3.1.1, perhaps)
The beta (why did this hit slashdot now? It was released weeks ago...) contains the currently most stable version of gcc.
Uhh... what we sell to big partners like this are not "1000 shrinkwrapped copies of RHL".
Actually Red Hat does have a binary diff program, called rhmask. Red Hat also used it around RH 5.X/6.0), by issuing "mask" rpms for larger packages like Netscape Communicator
rhmask isn't a binary diff tool. It just xors the old binary with the new, producing a mask. With this, you can make sure that only people having the previous package can get the new one. This was used to release updates of things like MetroX when we shipped that (Red Hat Linux 3 and 4, I think)
They couldn't care less what "most people" think - they're selling to a small, sophisticated set of users which pay to have the performance from the future today. I'm a little surprised they mentioned any scale whatsoever...
With digital music and video (video editing on your home computer), there will never be enough space....