Re: why not like linux ?

From: Arne Caspari (arnem_at_tzi.de)
Date: 05/17/04

  • Next message: Arne Caspari: "Re: why not like linux ?" 
    Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 09:09:00 +0200

    Maxim S. Shatskih wrote:
    > "UNIX Haters Handsbook" listed some. Like:

    Is this handbook updated since 1994? Most ( if not all ) of your
    statements are either outdated or even where never true. Is this your
    basis of discussion?

    > a) shell does the command line wildcard expansion, so that the app does not
    > know the command line as typed by user.

    Want to compare CMD with bash? Oh, come on.

    > b) swap _partition_ instead of swap file. Combine this with non-resizeable
    > filesystems in most UNIXen and to resizeable NTFS and pagefile.sys.

    You can not only use one swapfile, you can use multiple swapfiles
    simultanoeusly, distribute them over several partitions or even
    different harddisks. And you can use whatever filesystem you want as
    long as it can mmap.

    > Let's look more: in GDI, colors are specified as RGB. In X11 - sorry, but as
    > device-dependent pixel values. X11 has no means of converting bitmaps of
    > ...

    Yeah right, and everyone codes X directly and uses "ed" from the command
    line on unix to write assembler code cause they are all left in the
    computer stoneage...

    > d) lack of decent removable media handling. Typing "umount" on any CD change is
    > boring.

    Outdated.

    > e) Byzantine disk partitioning schemes like FreeBSD uses. Windows can be
    > installed on any partition on the drive. FreeBSD requires the partition to be
    > in the primary table (among the first 4).

    Windows has a partition scheme? Windows installer has a clue on how it
    can be installed on any partition on the drive? Come on, share your
    knowledge! This windows limitation currently prevents me to install
    windows on one computer on which currently two linux systems are installed.

    > Now compare to Linux. RedHat and similar companies bear no responsibility over
    > anything. The kernel? Hey, it's Linus's private property, distributed from
    > kernel.org. The shell? "bash" is from gnu.org. The command-line tools? Again
    > from gnu.org. And so on.

    Huh? You mention RedHat and say the bear no responsibility over the kernel?

    > Yes, you can download the source for a newer kernel, build it and boot it.
    > After this, a good deal of startup scripts from RedHat will broke, broke due to
    > /proc structure changed in the new kernel.

    Ah, this is the answer. You do not really know what you are talking
    about. If you use RedHat, you update the kernel with the RedHat update
    functionality and it will run. If it doesn't, RedHat would feel
    responsible for their product.

    > Amazing level of supportability. Just imagine installing such an OS on a server
    > farm or in the corporation. I can imagine FreeBSD in such role and saw server
    > farms (mainly website hosting) on FreeBSD. I can imagine Windows in such role
    > and saw server farms (mainly running Exchange) on Windows. But Linux???? sorry,
    > how will you do updates to the machines???

    Using debian I will say:

    apt-get update
    apt-get upgrade

    This will update almost any software package on my system, including the
    Office software, compilers, webbrowsers, video players, audio players,
    graphics software and whatever.

      -Arne

  • Next message: Arne Caspari: "Re: why not like linux ?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Creating linux and windows partions in the same disk
      ... I was having trouble installing windows on my computer and then I did ... It deleted my partition table and the windows instalation ... Why did you run cfdisk after installing windows? ... After qutting the installer I recreated the partition table I ...
      (comp.os.linux.setup)
    • Re: Installing Linux on Windows dual boot machine
      ... > files mostly on the fat32 windows partition. ... 6GB is enough for a learning Linux. ... > than the linux installer, so it's best to do as much as possible there. ...
      (alt.os.linux)
    • Re: perfect clean install from HDD with NTFS
      ... The Windows XP CD is bootable and contains all the tools necessary ... Windows XP to partition and format your drive: ... | Installer files are on second partition. ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.setup_deployment)
    • Re: partition magic and crash
      ... You MUST boot from the Windows XP CD, whether retail or OEM, continue on to ... where the installer looks for previous versions of an operating system on ... Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User ... ntfs or fat32 partition with is following me to erase all data from it ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
    • Re: Installing Windows after Redhat Linux is installed
      ... Marc M wrote: ... > Otherwise if you load linux first, windows tries to be a bully and erase ... > Hopefully that will change in the future and the windows installer will ... It has Redhat ...
      (Fedora)