flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > embrace linux, bsd, sun solaris, open source, why we haven't

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
drhowarddrfine



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 535
drhowarddrfine
A lot of people complain about bind but everyone uses it. It seems bind is installed by default on linux, too. djbdns is available on freebsd.
Post 06 Jan 2008, 17:44
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
drhowarddrfine



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 535
drhowarddrfine
To remove a package from FreeBSD: 'pkg_deinstall name_of_package_or_port'
Post 06 Jan 2008, 17:49
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
Yes, I have been considering solaris, and Chewy may have convinced me to actually download it...
Just a question, whats solaris' compatibility with Linux apps?

Cheers.

_________________
Raedwulf
Post 06 Jan 2008, 18:07
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Raedwulf wrote:
Yes, I have been considering solaris, and Chewy may have convinced me to actually download it...
Just a question, whats solaris' compatibility with Linux apps?


Binary or source compatibility? Not that I have an answer for either of them, but you need to be specific Smile

_________________
Image - carpe noctem
Post 06 Jan 2008, 18:10
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
chewy509 wrote:

If you want to learn UNIX, then Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX are your platforms, not GNU/Linux). ...
No, I passionately dislike UNIX, an operating system designed for an era which departed thirty years ago.
sleepsleep wrote:
...i heard from others, that sun solaris doesn't runs well on x86 architecture (slow), it is designed for sparc ...
Quite the contrary, in my opinion. SUN developed sparc as an alternative to both Intel and Motorola/IBM/Apple. Sparc was less performant than either of those two architectures, nor was it superior to NEC's or other RISC architectures. UNIX is big, clumsy, old fashioned, obsolete (Tex!!) OS, which is intended for a MULTI-USER environment, NOT a desktop operating system. In benchmark tests which I performed more than twenty years ago, on VAX architecture, the VMS operating system was much faster than Ultrix, the DEC implementation of UNIX.
Sleepsleep has posted a nifty screen, showing the fact the one needs 3 gigabytes to operate solaris. How is that going to yield a product superior to the newer Linux versions? It is not. The same vi, emacs, same compulsion to require establishment of utterly useless user accounts, complete with passwords and all kinds of bureaucratic apparatus to track what the various non-existant users do, and when, and how, and so on, and so forth. Rubbish, the lot of it. However, the newest Linux's permit one to download the entire operating system as a much smaller single CD, which can then be installed, the traditional way, with elimination of many unwanted features, under user control, not from a "UNIX" command line interface as if we lived in Berkeley in 1969, but via a simple, clean graphical user interface that works quite well, and is reasonably intuitive. Does Solaris use KDE? That's all I ever use from Linux. I seek to have the LEAST unix like version of Linux possible, therefore, after reading Chewy's remarks, I am quite sure I have no interest in trying Solaris. If Solaris is anything like JAVA, i.e. SLOW, or S L O W E R, then, I doubt it would be of any particular interest.
sleepsleep wrote:
.... the important part is, the add/remove should be easier than drinking a glass of water. ...
You are absolutely correct, in my opinion. I recommend distrowatch.com
It will be a very cold day in July before I am interested again in an "authentic" UNIX, as I recall the debates raging in the mid 70's regarding ATT UNIX versus Berkeley UNIX. It was, in my opinion, the utterly alien nature of "authentic" UNIX which led to the unfortunate supremacy of M$. Ls ???, kill???, permissions, Tex, emacs, vi, passwords, the whole bit, was so completely illogical for an OS to run our personal computer. That's why Gates became so wealthy. By comparison, DOS was effortless. Now, Chewy comes along touting the "authenticity" of Solaris???? Holy Cow, I have traveled back in time....Nope, just looked in the mirror. Reality check....Here's the reality, worth quoting again, because this is THE TRUTH:
sleepsleep wrote:

the important part is, the add/remove should be easier than drinking a glass of water.
Post 06 Jan 2008, 18:59
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mattst88



Joined: 12 May 2006
Posts: 260
Location: South Carolina
mattst88
Just try them out.

No matter where you ask, you're going to get wildly different answers. Some people will swear by OpenBSD, others Slackware, still others Solaris.

Just try some out on your own and make a decision on your own. Listening to people bicker over which is 'superior' isn't going to help you decide which you like best. After all, you'll probably have a different opinion entirely than people here.
Post 06 Jan 2008, 20:31
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
drhowarddrfine



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 535
drhowarddrfine
Jeez Tobias. You sound like you still are in the 70s. The things you knock Unix for is what makes it a great system. You knock permissions? Windows wishes it had such a system. Unix can run true multi-user, yes, but you don't have to. Big, old, clumsy obsolete? FreeBSD fits on a single CD.

I think you need to revisit all this. If you have to bring up the VAX and DOS to knock Unix, I think you have a lot of catching up to do.
Post 06 Jan 2008, 22:15
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chewy509



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia
Chewy509
f0dder wrote:
Can't see why you would be flamed, Chewy...

But I'm interested in what gave you a sour taste wrt. FreeBSD. Not expecting details since you say it's between you or developers, but can you hint whether it's software related, "management" related, community related, etc.?

Community related, I guess I butted heads against a few of the lead developers over views of assembly and kernel interfaces.
Post 06 Jan 2008, 23:05
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Chewy509



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia
Chewy509
sleepsleep wrote:
isn't this.... vista brother?? Razz

Difference is you get the base OS (which you can still get as a single CD), 2 IDEs (NetBeans with complete Java JDK, and Sun Studio with complete SDK and documentation), StarOffice, Firefox, etc. It is a complete system.

I personally only had to add lame/mplayer (with DVD support) and gnomad2 for my mp3 player and various games to get exactly what I wanted.

The SPARC vs i386 debate was true with Solaris 7/8/9, however that has changed significantly with 10/11. (Both are on par now).
Post 06 Jan 2008, 23:10
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Chewy509



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia
Chewy509
f0dder wrote:
Raedwulf wrote:
Yes, I have been considering solaris, and Chewy may have convinced me to actually download it...
Just a question, whats solaris' compatibility with Linux apps?


Binary or source compatibility? Not that I have an answer for either of them, but you need to be specific Smile

Binary, rather complete actually. Solaris uses Zones to implement this functionality (Zones is ultra-lightweight virtualisation like FreeBSD Jails). However I haven't done a lot with it, so there are some items that I personally haven't witnessed or had problems with.

Source, mixed bag. Most generic user applications work fine, just some tools like cdparanoia (which are low level) don't work. Conversely, cdrecord works better on Solaris than Linux.
Post 06 Jan 2008, 23:17
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Chewy509



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia
Chewy509
[quote="tom tobias"]
chewy509 wrote:

Does Solaris use KDE? That's all I ever use from Linux. I seek to have the LEAST unix like version of Linux possible, therefore, after reading Chewy's remarks, I am quite sure I have no interest in trying Solaris. If Solaris is anything like JAVA, i.e. SLOW, or S L O W E R, then, I doubt it would be of any particular interest.
sleepsleep wrote:
.... the important part is, the add/remove should be easier than drinking a glass of water. ...
You are absolutely correct, in my opinion.

Solaris default DE is GNOME, however CDE is still available. Other DE's are available from www.sunfreeware.com including KDE, XFCE, Windowmaker, etc.

Solaris (on my setup) doesn't feel any slower than Linux, FreeBSD or any other modern OS, actually faster in some cases (particularly disk I/O and networking).

On the Add/Remove comment, I will admit this is Solaris's greatest fault. Sun's package management is atrocious. However this is being worked on.
Post 06 Jan 2008, 23:40
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
tom tobias wrote:

Sleepsleep has posted a nifty screen, showing the fact the one needs 3 gigabytes to operate solaris. How is that going to yield a product superior to the newer Linux versions? It is not.

Aww, don't pretend to be dumb. Those 3 gigs obviously contain a lot of optional software and documentation. I can grab < 100meg install ISO for various linux or BSD distros, but that just means I have to download a lot of packages from the net while installing.

tom tobias wrote:

utterly useless user accounts, complete with passwords and all kinds of bureaucratic apparatus to track what the various non-existant users do, and when, and how, and so on, and so forth. Rubbish, the lot of it.

All modern OSes has some notion of users, and with good reason. Even a single-user operating system for home desktop use should have at least SYSTEM,Admin/root/supervisor (call it what you will),User accounts/privileges. When we're talking a generic OS for regular people. I can elaborate if you want.

The typical unix model (including linux and bsd) of a lot of users and groups on a default machine is because they lack ACL support, which would be cleaner. But I still stand behind requiring at least System,Admin,User accounts.

And if you want to use the generic OS in a corporate setting, you certainly need support for multiple user accounts... heck, even for home use in not-so-wealthy homes where you can't afford a machine per user, having multiple user accounts on one machine is a very very good idea.

Oh, and while I prefer GUI stuff for day to day work, I'd hate ending up on a system that doesn't let me start a command shell and have "ps", "kill" and other tools like that. Just shouldn't require the use of a console/shell to get daily work done.

drhowarddrfine wrote:

You knock permissions? Windows wishes it had such a system.

I'd rather say it's the other way around; NT has had ACLs since just when? (didn't use NT before NT4, but I'd guess ACLs have been there since the start). Yeah sure, probably came from VMS, but think is that neither BSD nor Linux had ACLs from the beginning, but have (relatively) recently started to adopt it. Needless to say(?) NT also natively supports users/groups.
Post 07 Jan 2008, 01:58
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Chewy509 wrote:
f0dder wrote:
Can't see why you would be flamed, Chewy...

But I'm interested in what gave you a sour taste wrt. FreeBSD. Not expecting details since you say it's between you or developers, but can you hint whether it's software related, "management" related, community related, etc.?

Community related, I guess I butted heads against a few of the lead developers over views of assembly and kernel interfaces.


Figured it might be something like that - doesn't sound like a super-serious issue, then. BSD and linux developers might be a bit "assembly-scared", and sometimes perhaps too much. I don't think you need (or should use) a lot of assembly for an OS, but I do vote for using it where it can matter substantially. Like SSE write-through operations for zeroing out memory pages, etc.

As for kernel interfaces, I believe they should be stable for major versions, to force some planning on the kernel developers... but at the same time I believe each major version should randomize the syscall numbers, to force people to use symbolic names from shlibs instead of hardcoding syscalls.

_________________
Image - carpe noctem
Post 07 Jan 2008, 02:06
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Chewy509



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia
Chewy509
sleepsleep wrote:
isn't this.... vista brother?? Razz
Image
Razz long time ago, i heard from others, that sun solaris doesn't runs well on x86 architecture (slow), it is designed for sparc and run faster there, wonder how true that statement at this moment...

Rather than downloading, why get Sun to ship you a DVD for FREE. Only takes 1-2 weeks in the mail depending on your location...

http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/solaris-express/get.jsp and choose "Free DVD Software". Smile

And yes, they do ship outside the US.
Post 07 Jan 2008, 04:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Chewy509



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia
Chewy509
In response to f0dder and Users/Groups/ACLs.

Yes, I agree every modern OS should have the concepts of Users/Groups and file permissions. Some are even taking this further and implementing "Roles" to allow for fine-grained control over execution.

IIRC, current UNIX requirements are to include ACLs in the base and default Filesystem.

eg, the typical Unix model has root and users. 'root' can do anything, while users are only allowed to do things based on the file permissions.

A newish concept of "Roles" allows you to define what Users/Groups/Executables are allowed to do on the system, in addition to what users can access via the filesystem. This means, on Unix you no longer have 'root' or require things like setuid/setgid, etc. Eg, you can set a User Role, so that are a guest user but can listen on port 80/443, talk on port 5432 or any port above 16384, and have a forced read-only on files, even if they have read-write access for the file based on ACLs/Permission in the filesystem.

You can give the 'root' account a "Guest" role, and give another account of your choosing a "Administrator" role. It's all about process capability.

This makes also using quota's a lot easier as well, for things like RAM usage, CPU usage, physical hardware access, etc.
Post 07 Jan 2008, 05:07
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Chewy: yeah, they're adding some new POSIX capabilities, and ontop of that at least linux (and BSD as well?) has had support for selectively dropping privileges. I still prefer NT-style ACLs, but things are getting better on the *u*x side...
Post 07 Jan 2008, 08:52
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
Ah, compatiblility I meant in running linux binaries (i.e. proprietary stuff) on opensolaris -> I checked their website and there is a stable linux 2.4 support and a unstable 2.6 support only for x86 and not for x86_64 Sad

Well, I suppose I might try it neverless.... but perhaps when my dad gets me a new PC and he gets my currently new PC ^^ Smile. Currently I have a triple boot system, but probably vista is just wasting space/solaris probably has more future on that partition ^^ Smile.

_________________
Raedwulf
Post 07 Jan 2008, 11:13
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
Raedwulf



Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 375
Location: United Kingdom
Raedwulf
Chewy have you tried running linux games (that only have binaries available e.g. quake4 and enemy territory quake wars) on solaris?

_________________
Raedwulf
Post 07 Feb 2008, 11:18
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
drhowarddrfine



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 535
drhowarddrfine
f0dder wrote:
Chewy: yeah, they're adding some new POSIX capabilities, and ontop of that at least linux (and BSD as well?) has had support for selectively dropping privileges.
This is an ongoing thing and much of FreeBSD now has POSIX compliance.
Quote:
I still prefer NT-style ACLs, but things are getting better on the *u*x side...
ACLs were much improved in version 5. We're on 7.0 now so I don't know what's changed since then.
Post 07 Feb 2008, 17:49
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
drhowarddrfine wrote:
f0dder wrote:
Chewy: yeah, they're adding some new POSIX capabilities, and ontop of that at least linux (and BSD as well?) has had support for selectively dropping privileges.
This is an ongoing thing and much of FreeBSD now has POSIX compliance.

It's also worth keeping in mind that POSIX is a (slow, but) moving target.

drhowarddrfine wrote:
f0dder wrote:
I still prefer NT-style ACLs, but things are getting better on the *u*x side...
ACLs were much improved in version 5. We're on 7.0 now so I don't know what's changed since then.

How complete is it, though? And not just complete as in "it's supported by the kernel, and by the filesystem" but I'm also thinking of utilities, general system-as-a-whole support, etc.

_________________
Image - carpe noctem
Post 08 Feb 2008, 00:13
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar.

Powered by rwasa.