Re: Linux vs ... TEST ...
From: Jeff Hyman (scolist_at_cactus.com)
Date: 05/31/05
- Next message: E Arredondo: "Re: tr syntax"
- Previous message: Tony Lawrence: "Re: newbie ,mmdf problems...."
- In reply to: Bill Vermillion: "Re: Linux vs FreeBSD vs SCO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 31 May 2005 10:12:47 -0400 To: bv@wjv.com
TEST ONLY
Please Ignore
.... to see if posted on scomsc
- Jeff Hyman
Bill Vermillion typed (on Sat, May 28, 2005 at 03:45:01AM +0000):
| In article <slrnd9fbs1.vcj.joe@localhost.localdomain>,
| Joe Dunning <joedunning1234_NOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
| >On 2005-05-26, Bill Vermillion <bv@wjv.com> wrote:
| >>
| >> Another think I disliked was their 'better' way of firing off init
| >> scripts. Instead of the text oriented inted.con with one line for
| >> things they instituted the xinetd.conf file and xinetd.d diretory.
| >>
| >> Each file in xinetd.c has about 8 lines inside { and } with
| >> all it's options.
| >>
| >> disable = no, or disable = yes certainly is more complex
| >> than just commenting out, or adding a line in /etc/inetd.d
| >
| >I think you have missed that it is more than just "more complex": it is
| >more flexible. You can choose which interface a specific service binds
| >to, you can do other things such as limit the rate of incoming
| >connections, redirect incoming TCP connections to another host,
| >define the user under which the service runs, etc.
| >
| >All these combine to give more flexibility and, if used properly, more
| >security.
| >
| >>
| >> I looked at the logs and 18 services started, and then it found a
| >> configuration error in the ftpd startup. What caused that error I
| >> never found out. BUT - when it found that error, it bailed out and
| >> took everything else with it.
| >
| >OK, this is pretty bad. But bugs happen. I doubt it was designed to do
| >that.
| >
| >>
| >> Then there is the rpm upgrade path. That also seems so MSish, as
| >> often you install an upgrade, and you find it needs something else,
| >> so you install that. And often you get library errors - just like
| >> MS gets those DLL things.
| >
| >There are better package systems and apt-rpm, which manages
| >dependencies. If you use Gentoo, it has tools to find and resolve
| >library errors.
| >
| >>
| >> In FreeBSD I almost always - with about 3 exceptions - build
| >> everything on the machine. I got to /usr/ports/<category><pgm>
| >> and type 'make'. These exceptions in case you are interested
| >> are things such as installing cvsup, which I do from a pre-built
| >> package, from packages otherwise it has to compile Ruby, and some
| >> other programs, that are used only for the compile, and that can
| >> take a long time.
| >>
| >> It goes to the net, gets the needed source code, sucks them in,
| >> compiles them, checks for all needed dependencies, compiles them,
| >> and then with make install it checks if there are other
| >> dependencies and brings them in and installs them. Some of the
| >> Linux dists are starting to adopt thins.
| >
| >Gentoo is the prime example.
| >
| >
| >>
| >> With this method you almost never worry about outdated libraries,
| >> because we are compling on a running system. And often you get
| >> new libraries in addition to old ones.
|
| >But, because you get the newest version, there are more changes also.
|
| >There will always be conflicts between the need to keep things stable
| >and the need to update. Sometimes those updates require more changes
| >than one would like. In the chase to provide a compelling platform to
| >displace MS, one has to expect some bumps.
|
| Jeff H. asked for my views. And NONE of my choices was ever
| anything to replace MS, though that is what a great many Linux
| advocates want.
|
| My FreeBSD installs replaced two different versions of SGI's IRIX,
| a couple of Sun systems, and one or two others somewhere along the
| way.
|
| I got frustrated with MS early on. The docs all looked like
| PC-DOS 2.0 [that was before the MS-DOS names came along] and it
| looked like MS had done some good things compared to the 1.0.
| I played on the keyboard on the 1.0 a bit and it felt like it was
| nothing more than a CP/M system with the BIG DISADVANTAGE that the
| largest media available was a 160KB floppy disk. It took awhile
| before they got to 180KB and then DS for 320K.
|
| On my PC - which predated the AT bus - early 1983 - I finally put
| in a Maynard Sandstar floppy controller and hung 8" DD floppies
| that I had used in CP/M on the system. And the 8" floppies ran
| faster than the HDs MS Introduced later - because they could only
| get the interleave on the HDs running at 6:1. The 8" floppies
| times out about 5 times faster than the PC HD - which when they
| first came out were second party add-ons at $2500 for 5MB.
|
| The stupid way MS handled the screen IO made it slower than my 5MHz
| Z80B system, but on pure work with nothing going to the screen
| they were about the same.
|
| The vendor of my system used to show how much faster is was by
| loading in a BASIC program that did nothing but print the numbers
| 1 to 1000 on the screen of the PC. That was loaded from a floppy.
|
| They would start that program, walk to the other side of the room,
| and TYPE in the BASIC program and then run it. That machine always
| finished before the PC did. Users were impressed but didn't
| realize the difference was just the memory mapped screen display on
| the Z80 system. Salesmen never change.
|
| After 6 months of working with the PC I moved to a Radio Shack
| 16, paid $750 for the develpment system, and have never used MS
| for anything important since then.
|
| If someone want's to replace the MS on the desktops they should
| consider OS/X IMO. I don't use my OS/X that often as it's an older
| machine - only 400MHz.
|
| I do use my XP for a lot of video processing, and it's only
| a 2.4Ghz P4 - but the program I use is HTT aware and was written to
| take advantage of it's capabilities - but still a good conversion
| with DVD quality can still take a long time. Longest I've hit
| so far was 11 hours. So while that is running away, I'm on the net
| with Unix type systems.
|
| And like Jeff L - I have lots of old OSes floating around. I see
| a Microport V.2 over there <---- and the manual and disks
| for Exis 5.3 are over there ----> [I'm surrounded by books]
| along with SCO's old Xenix manual, and several distributions of
| those. The official IBM DOS 2.0 manuals and disks are there too.
|
| It's about time I find something to do that doesn't accumulate so
| much 'stuff'.
|
| Bill
|
|
| than a CPM s
|
| --
| Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
- Next message: E Arredondo: "Re: tr syntax"
- Previous message: Tony Lawrence: "Re: newbie ,mmdf problems...."
- In reply to: Bill Vermillion: "Re: Linux vs FreeBSD vs SCO"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
