Munich now Open Source

[Slougi]

Gurm, for someone who has been programming since you were 5 years old, you are awfully stupid and stubborn. Ever crossed your mind to install and use apt-rpm on redhat, or use urpmi on mandrake? Or use debian? I dunno, it just seems you are using the wrong tool for the job. Why are you compiling from source at all? If compiling from source is your thing, try gentoo. I have been using Linux since *6 months* and I seem to understand the system better than you do after 12 (!) years of unix experience and software design.

Also, your attitude seems stuck on the level of a five year old.

I think I will leave this topic alone now. And Gurm, I think that mandrake guy was right.

[RedRed]

Well, thats funny....

I just installed mySQL on my old linux box (red Hat 9) in around 15 minutes - and I am a linux newbie!

erm....

insert 'red hat 9 setup CD'

run the add/remove programs off the start button

higlight 'mysql'

check 'select all' - components

click ok....

when the installer is in the mood, its asks for CD 3

wait....

eject cd

er.... huston - we seem to be running!


RedRed

Gurm please dont bash the minis - you were one once yourself.

I actually agree with you - Linux isnt ready for the general desktop - though this distro came on a quantim leap form RH7

I do use it as a file/print server

I will be useing it as a web (apache) /database server - and there is NO WAY i would be able to learn about this stuff on a windoze box legitimately....

I do respect the whole 'open source' movement - but I do understand its difficulties and challenges (I am a project manager by day...)

Direct connect ++ is a god example of an open source app that has really got it together, though.

RedRed

[Gurm]

I agree that each distro is a great leap forward. I used Red Hat 7.3, and that was an EVIL distro.

EVERY SINGLE PACKAGE that it installed didn't work, out of box. MySQL? Ha.

That's when I got in the habit of recompiling things.

WHEN the RPM system works, it's great. Not as good as a Windows installer, but close.

The problem is that when you go to the site of any popular Linux package, you see things like:

"The RPM package is experimental. It won't work under... (insert long list of distros here)."

Irksome.

I will admit that I have a bad attitude about Linux. It's because Solaris is GOOD, and Windows is GOOD, and Linux is only VERY RECENTLY good.

Red Hat _was_ the defacto standard. And it was terrible. It's better now, I can see that. But I'd LIKE to not have to download a new 3-CD distro, please. Isn't that one of the things that Linux guys hate about Windows? Having to get a new version every year? Red Hat has gone from 7.x to 9.x in the space of 9 months.

Mandrake was "great" according to all the people I talked to. Turns out Mandrake 9 sucks. But how was I to know that, when everyone said it was great.

And... if you think that the Mandrake support guy was "right", how would you propose that someone learn how to fix that problem? A web search is/was fruitless, and that was the OFFICIAL SUPPORT FORUM, the request was polite and posted in the correct area.

Imagine if someone came into Matrox Gaming, said "I just got a Parhelia and (game X) doesn't work... is there a patch or is this a known issue?" and R0M or Haig said "you're too stupid to own a Matrox card, go away you pathetic idiot!", how would that fly? It wouldn't.

- Gurm

[bsdgeek]

Gurm, ever try FreeBSD? The hardware support isn't as extensive as Windows or Linux, but at least it works, and quite well I might add.

Upgrade to a new version? Just check out the handbook to make sure you are doing it right, and you can easily update without reinstalling.

Installing programs? Well there is a huge library of binary packages that are installed with a simple pkg_add. There is also the easy to use ports system, just cd to the right program directory and make install.

[leech]

You have to pardon the Mandrake Tech Support, Gurm, they are French after all

Besides, why would I ever NEED to upgrade every year or whatever, I use Debian Just run apt-get update then apt-get upgrade and viola, all nice and updated. Granted Debian doesn't always have the newest crap, but then again I use Sid, (which of course isn't recommended for everyone) I've been playing around with linux since Redhat 4.2 and mainly because I thought Enlightenment looked 'cool'. I mean when the OS (well in this case a Window Manager) looks like a video game interface, then it just makes computing more 'fun'. At least that's what I thought back then. But I kept on playing around with linux through out the years and I like it, mainly because all of the attitude from people that I've asked questions of have been great. By your social skills that you've shown on here, I somehow doubt that your question on Mandrake's tech support was very 'civil.'.

Also for what it's worth, I run Mandrake 9.1 on my server here, and indeed I got the Internet Connection sharing working just fine. The key is to simply state your internal card as 192.168.1.1 from when it very first asks you to set up your network! Otherwise you'll run into troubles. I know this is kind of stupid and annoying, but hey, it's probalby in the manual.

And yes it's annoying to HAVE to download 3 CD's.... though if you read the small print, really you only need the first TWO CD's of pretty much any distro. (maybe with the exception of SuSE, which you can't download just the ISOs of anyhow.

Also remember that Distros are not all created equal. If you're only using linux as a Server OS, you should NOT run Mandrake. It tries too hard to do everything at once, and really only makes a pretty good desktop. Use something like Debian or Slackware to make a server. You can totally make Debian minimalistic to your needs. Who needs a X configuration program anyhow, you've been using Unix for 12 years, right?

And why pick on the mini-Murcers? Just because they might have better things to do than to try to outpost everyone with their questions/answers/flamebait/spam then they don't deserve as much respect as you?

Leech

[leech]

Originally posted by bsdgeek
Gurm, ever try FreeBSD? The hardware support isn't as extensive as Windows or Linux, but at least it works, and quite well I might add.

Upgrade to a new version? Just check out the handbook to make sure you are doing it right, and you can easily update without reinstalling.

Installing programs? Well there is a huge library of binary packages that are installed with a simple pkg_add. There is also the easy to use ports system, just cd to the right program directory and make install.

This is more of a question rather than a criticism, BSDGEEK, but how in the hell can I get my SBLive working in FreeBSD without it locking up the machine? I tried setting it up at one point (version 4.8 I believe) And whenever I'd try to load up the module for the sblive it'd puke. I posted the question on here, but I don't think anyone ever responded, and I just gave up and went back to linux. Not because of my lack of interest in giving BSD a try, but more to the point I needed a working OS and didn't want to fiddle with something which in the belly of it, is an entirely different beast.

Leech

[Gurm]

Originally posted by leech
You have to pardon the Mandrake Tech Support, Gurm, they are French after all

ROFL.

[b]By your social skills that you've shown on here, I somehow doubt that your question on Mandrake's tech support was very 'civil.'.

Oh c'mon. You know I can be polite when needed. I'm an ass on here because everyone KNOWS me.

Also for what it's worth, I run Mandrake 9.1 on my server here, and indeed I got the Internet Connection sharing working just fine. The key is to simply state your internal card as 192.168.1.1 from when it very first asks you to set up your network! Otherwise you'll run into troubles. I know this is kind of stupid and annoying, but hey, it's probalby in the manual.

No no, I got it working. I couldn't get it UN-working afterwards when I wanted to route everything manually.

I had wonderful manual routing set up and then every time I loaded up the window manager it got blown away.

And smoothwall is hellish to get rid of. Kinda like Norton.

Who needs a X configuration program anyhow, you've been using Unix for 12 years, right?

I was just asking myself the same thing. I installed it on a whim, played with it, and have been kicking myself ever since. I'll prolly install Debian next time. *shrug*

And why pick on the mini-Murcers? Just because they might have better things to do than to try to outpost everyone with their questions/answers/flamebait/spam then they don't deserve as much respect as you?

Nah, it's just that lately there's been a spate of 10-post minis calling me a retard, and I don't take really kindly to it.

I'm much better about YOU calling me a retard, at least you've been here long enough to base it on observed behavior.

- Gurm

[runderwo]

"Nah, it's just that lately there's been a spate of 10-post minis calling me a retard, and I don't take really kindly to it."

No, you've done a pretty good job proving yourself. BTW, I didn't see anyone call you a retard, even me who you originally went off on.

Some people are way too sensitive about the silliest things.

"Listen, mini." -- Yeah, talking down to people makes you look like a real badass. Please.

Responses to misinformation in your post:

"Now show me working sound code for games that don't use DirectX."
MCI you mean? Works fine.

"Show me working DOS4/GW support."
In WINE??? Try dosemu.

"Like needlessly forcing Linux onto people despite its inherent lack of support and difficulty of use? (*ahem* sorry couldn't resist)"

Nobody is forcing anything on anybody. I don't know where you got this idea and acting like a cornered animal.

"Obviously. But anything with a SPECIALIZED interface won't work"
What's a specialized interface? Anything you connect to a PC you can talk to through an I/O port.

"I know it was no good because all the "tried and true" Linux users (Lusers)"
Mature -- don't know why I'm bothering at this point

"I fail to believe that if I fire up C&C: Generals, which runs like ass on 50+% of PC's, or Unreal2 which runs like ass on 99% of PC's, that it will run properly (or AT ALL) under WineX."
Naysay all you want, but the fact is development goes on and there are enough people happy with the potential and the progress already made to support the project financially.

"<Consequently, trashing it at every opportunity just because you don't use it makes you look foolish to anyone who has received any benefit at all from WINE>.
No, it really doesn't. (more bashing follows)"
Erm, ok, it doesn't. Whatever *rolls eyes*

"1. I've used it. 2. If it ran ANYTHING _better_ than Windows, it'd be all over the friggin' net. They'd be trumpeting the news from the treetops. But... it doesn't, so they aren't"
I've used WINE too and it's ran some fairly important stuff. I'm a luser though because I disagree with you.

"Consumers have choice. They consistently do NOT choose Linux. They also didn't choose OS/2 Warp, which was a VASTLY superior Operating System. "
You don't have a choice when you have a multi-thousand dollar application that only runs on Windows. That's lock-in. WINE seeks to remove that lock-in, and is already succeeding on some fronts.

"Your logic is specious. You assume that ALL developers would support Linux if only they knew how wonderful it was, or had more time/resources."
Sure, put words in my mouth--

"Some developers don't WANT to code for Unix."
So don't! Again, isn't that the point of WINE, for those developers that "don't WANT to code for Unix" to have a wider audience for their software? You're going in circles.

"Umm, yeah it does. When I hear the phrase "free software", I do NOT think of a gift or modifiable software."
Admittedly, the term is ambiguous, but that's the use it has developd ("Free software" implies freedom to modify and redistribute without royalty, as opposed to "freeware" which simply means you received the software for no charge)

"A lot? Like what? Linux, BSD, and... I'm waiting. Oh wait, you're counting Debian and Mandrake as separate OS'es. Guess what? They're both Unix. In fact, BSD is ALSO Unix. So really it's just ONE OS, now isn't it?"
This claim shows your inexperience more than any other -- sorry

"Yeah I'm being a doink. But so are you. You're trying to "enlighten" me as to the nature of open source. I KNOW the nature of open source, and reject it."
No, actually, you seem to misunderstand people's intentions quite a bit. And you're a pompous know-it-all to boot. Good luck getting anyone to listen to your arguments because with that attitude, you won't curry much favor

[runderwo]

"You're assuming that everyone WANTS to remove the Windows dependency. I don't. Windows runs great on my machine. Better than Linux ever could. Why would I want Linux ports of games that run under Windows? I run Linux solely as a server/workstation OS - which is where it belongs!"

Why would you NOT want to remove the Windows dependency? If it were removed, you could continue to use Windows, and I could use Windows software on whatever OS I feel like at no loss to you. Or is it that you simply don't care about anything outside your own little worldview?

"I run Linux solely as a server/workstation OS - which is where it belongs!"
Yep, it belongs on my workstation. And sometimes I would like to use Windows software on my workstation. Why does this anger you so much? No, it's not the ideal solution. It's the best one we've found yet.

"[For a home user (especially one that most likely pirated their copy of windows) the cost argument is somewhat hollow. ]
Now you're being stupid. You assume that home users pirate Windows? It's FAR more likely that they're working with whatever Home/OEM copy of XP came with their mac"
Yeah, I'm being stupid.... anyway, maybe you know different people than me, but I can't say I know a single individual user who paid for their copy of Windows. That's out of friends, family, neighbours who ask for help, etc.
Sure, it was a generalization, but instead of providing counterexamples, you namecall to get me to accept your generalization instead. Way to go!

I thought this thread was going to be a decent discussion but it seems that someone, with no better things to do in life than rant and rave in an online forum about some things he refuses to understand and flame anybody who responds has hijacked the discussion. Consequently, I don't know if I'll be revisiting this one :/

[runderwo]

"If Haig said "you're too stupid to own a Matrox card, go away you pathetic idiot!", how would that fly? It wouldn't."
Actually I don't really want to bring this up, but I did get Haig pissed off at me at one point when the G400 initially came out and the support department was sort of getting hammered. I don't hold it against him, but I only mention this to say that everyone has a bad day sometimes, and maybe that Mandrake guy was having one too. It doesn't mean I won't use their product if it meets my needs (I'm still buying Matrox after all)

[Gurm]

You're obviously so hideously blinded by the desperation with which you cling to your "free software" that you can't appreciate anyone else's arguments.

I'm done debating this. Nobody is changing anyone else's mind on the matter.

Just mark my words. Another 10 years will go by, and Linux STILL won't be on more than a handful of desktops. Period.

- Gurm

[bsdgeek]

Originally posted by leech
This is more of a question rather than a criticism, BSDGEEK, but how in the hell can I get my SBLive working in FreeBSD without it locking up the machine? I tried setting it up at one point (version 4.8 I believe) And whenever I'd try to load up the module for the sblive it'd puke. I posted the question on here, but I don't think anyone ever responded, and I just gave up and went back to linux. Not because of my lack of interest in giving BSD a try, but more to the point I needed a working OS and didn't want to fiddle with something which in the belly of it, is an entirely different beast.

Leech

It's easiest to compile "device pcm" into your kernel, rather than load the module.

[Gurm]

Originally posted by bsdgeek
It's easiest to compile "device pcm" into your kernel, rather than load the module.

LOL.

This reminds me of that atomic mutant goat thing, with the guy saying "it's easy to run linux. just recompile your kernel once, maybe twice, or you know like 5 times, then..."

But that's the price to pay for such hardware diversity. Solaris has... you know... like ONE set of hardware.

- Gurm

[bsdgeek]

It's not exactly hard, or even very involved, and everything is well documented in the handbook.

cd /usr/src/sys/i386/conf
vi GENERIC (or whatever editor)
cd /usr/src
make buildkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC
make installkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC

There, new kernel, now just reboot.

[runderwo]

Gurm:

"You're obviously so hideously blinded by the desperation with which you cling to your "free software" that you can't appreciate anyone else's arguments."

Except you haven't made arguments. You've generalized and made personal attacks. FWIW, you haven't refuted any of my original points countering your WINE argument.... all you've done is reply with misinformation which I have countered point by point.

Your reasoning was that WINE sucks because it's emulation and you'll never use it or support its development in any way. When the discussion showed that WINE was most likely not an emulator through comparison, you shifted your claim to WINE sucks, period. When the reasons were listed why WINE is a good idea and that you may not be looking at the bigger picture, you resorted to name calling and generalizing.

In general, I don't know why people feel so attacked when other people say that they would prefer to use another OS and would appreciate them supporting that choice. I don't think anything else can provoke so much emotional reactions in online discussions. It's almost like people think you're trying to one-up them by choosing something different.

Allow me to make a really contrived analogy (though on a subject I am very fond of, grin) The way I see it, it's like a choice of beer -- like you drink Guinness and I drink Heineken... both are equally reasonable and valid choices based on personal taste. Now say you can only pour a given beer brand (the OS) into a particular type of glass (the application). Lots of people drink Guinness, so lots of people make glasses to put Guinness in. But not so many people drink Heineken, so I have to put up with a limited choice of glasses which are typically either expensive or of low quality.

But say some people were going to make a plastic insert (the WINE project) that would allow me to drink my Heineken beer (*nix) out of a glass (the application) that was originally made for Guinness (Windows). Would you have a big problem with that? If not, what's the difference? I get what I want, and you lose nothing.