Welcome to Soft32 Linux Forums!
FAQFAQ    SearchSearch      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

OSX 10.5 gets UNIX 03 Certification

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
   Soft32 Home -> Linux2 Arch -> Advocacy RSS
Next:  Mac continues to be popular among open source dev..  
Author Message
Edward

External


Since: Aug 07, 2007
Posts: 1



(Msg. 91) Posted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 3:07 pm
Post subject: Re: OSX 10.5 gets UNIX 03 Certification [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: comp>os>linux>advocacy, others (more info?)

TheLetterK <none.DeleteThis@none.net> writes:

> If by "nicely" you meant "after a healthy bit of massaging". Why do
> you think Fink involves porting efforts?

According to this line of reasoning, the existence of apt-get and rpms
proves that nothing compiles nicely on Linux.

--
Edward
Back to top
Login to vote
TheLetterK

External


Since: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 18



(Msg. 92) Posted: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:22 pm
Post subject: Re: OSX 10.5 gets UNIX 03 Certification [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Edward wrote:
> TheLetterK <none.TakeThisOut@none.net> writes:
>
>> If by "nicely" you meant "after a healthy bit of massaging". Why do
>> you think Fink involves porting efforts?
>
> According to this line of reasoning, the existence of apt-get and rpms
> proves that nothing compiles nicely on Linux.

Those do not involve porting software to their various
distributions--building a binary package simply requires compilation.

Fink utilizes apt-get for package management, but its primary purpose is
to port applications to OS X. They certainly include a number of
packages that will compile cleanly, but many of those packages had to be
specifically massaged by the maintainer in order to work properly on OS X.
Back to top
Login to vote
Tim Murray

External


Since: Jun 02, 2007
Posts: 7



(Msg. 93) Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 5:29 pm
Post subject: Re: OSX 10.5 gets UNIX 03 Certification [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Aug 6, 2007, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> I'm not sure what you mean by "keeping its distros
> straight" (there is a Linux File Standard, for starters),
> but Linux is getting a little more complex as it has
> grown from about 1.2 megabytes (Linux-1.0.tar.gz) to 54
> megabytes (linux-2.6.22.tar.gz). To be fair, a lot of
> that is loadable modules, presumably.
>
> What do you consider complex about Linux systems?

Ensuring A works with B and C takes more human time in Linux than Mac or even
Windows.
Back to top
Login to vote
Rick

External


Since: Apr 10, 2007
Posts: 133



(Msg. 94) Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 10:01 pm
Post subject: Re: OSX 10.5 gets UNIX 03 Certification [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 22:29:09 -0400, Tim Murray wrote:

> On Aug 6, 2007, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> I'm not sure what you mean by "keeping its distros straight" (there is
>> a Linux File Standard, for starters), but Linux is getting a little
>> more complex as it has grown from about 1.2 megabytes
>> (Linux-1.0.tar.gz) to 54 megabytes (linux-2.6.22.tar.gz). To be fair,
>> a lot of that is loadable modules, presumably.
>>
>> What do you consider complex about Linux systems?
>
> Ensuring A works with B and C takes more human time in Linux than Mac or
> even Windows.

Ensuring A works with B and C takes a lot of time when considering B/C
may be FreeBSD, OpenBSD, OS X or any other *nix.

Ensuring A works with Distro X takes little time.

--
Rick
Back to top
Login to vote
The Ghost In The Machine

External


Since: Apr 10, 2007
Posts: 676



(Msg. 95) Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 2:35 am
Post subject: Re: OSX 10.5 gets UNIX 03 Certification [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Tim Murray
<no-spam.DeleteThis@thankyou.com>
wrote
on Sun, 12 Aug 2007 22:29:09 -0400
<QlPvi.15740$e92.9370@bignews5.bellsouth.net>:
> On Aug 6, 2007, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> I'm not sure what you mean by "keeping its distros
>> straight" (there is a Linux File Standard, for starters),
>> but Linux is getting a little more complex as it has
>> grown from about 1.2 megabytes (Linux-1.0.tar.gz) to 54
>> megabytes (linux-2.6.22.tar.gz). To be fair, a lot of
>> that is loadable modules, presumably.
>>
>> What do you consider complex about Linux systems?
>
> Ensuring A works with B and C takes more human time in Linux
> than Mac or even Windows.
>

I was hoping for something more specific. For example, one
might describe the travails on how to set up a sound card
in various systems -- it can get rather painful, even on
known working hardware. One has two "standards" from which
to choose: OSS, OpenALSA. ARTS and ESound are two daemons
that fire up on occasion, as are jackd and timidity++.

Thankfully, it's a one-time setup issue. Once working,
it tends to stay working in Linux. Windows is a little
more, shall we say, interesting in that area (and not in
a good way...that damned registry again.)

I chalk issues with sounds up to an evolving standard -- my
understanding is that ALSA has (or will have) multiprocess
capability; two processes can output to the audio device,
which will mix the output, a capability not present in OSS.
(UNIX didn't really do sounds as such, especially over
remote character-based terminals in the early-to-late 80's.)

The synthesizer has to accommodate quite a few historical
issues. It is interesting to contemplate that Windows can
no longer support the original Sound Blaster (if it ever
really did; DOS didn't bother, though it could and did
allow a driver to load, and games such as DOOM had their
own drivers, talking directly to the requisite ports and
handling the interrupts). AFAIK, Linux still supports it,
though Creative Labs isn't playing all that nice with its
newest offerings. Wink

X/OpenGL is another one, though it's usually not quite
as complicated; the main issue I've had is that DRI
drivers are a little fussy, and there are at least two
configuration scripts, of varying complexity and ease
of use. (The complication regarding an octal/decimal
confusion in /dev/dri/card0 isn't helping either,
at least on my ATI-based laptop. I have to chmod 0660
/dev/dri/card0 upon every reboot. It's a bug. I hope it
gets fixed at some point upstream. No, it's not a config
issue, at least as far as I can tell; I've modified the
apparently relevant entry, with little effect.)

Of course, one of the reasons your "A" takes so long
is that Macs and Windows are preloaded and therefore
preconfigured and ready to plug into the Internet,
play sounds, etc.; Linux is, by and large, not, though
LiveDiscs make the installation process simple enough.
This is changing, of course; Dell in particular is
preloading Ubuntu on some of its boxes (but one has to
know about Linux or Open Source to get to that selection
of boxes). Other vendors such as Eracks, Ebuy, System76,
and LinuxPenguin have been preloading Linux for awhile,
but I don't know precisely how their business compares
with Dell, HP, or for that matter Microsoft.

Eracks in particular offers about two dozen preloaded
distros on their SILENCE desktop -- a fairly basic but
sound-deadened aluminum box with black trim. One chooses
a distro when one places the order. And yes, one of them
is Gentoo 2007.0. Smile No, they don't offer Windows or OSX.
(They do offer FreeBSD, which is good for those FreeBSDians
who want an Eracks system. There also is a "no OS" option
-- they presumably burn it in with Ubuntu, then wipe it
just before shipment.)

http://eracks.com/products/Desktops/config?sku=SILENCE

And since Windows is preloaded (and usually stupidly so),
distros such as Ubuntu have to go to some lengths to allow
the user:

[1] to shrink that single Windows partition to a reasonable size,
[2] to allocate the rest of the disk to Linux and data,
[3] to set up the superblocks etc. on that disk,
[4] to install the distro proper,
[5] to install a boot loader or reconfigure NTLDR.
The former requires a bit of somewhat dangerous diddling --
one false move and one's Windows partition system becomes
unbootable, and the entire system may be unbootable without
a LiveDisc handy. (I tend to keep dualboots. I figure
if I'm paying the "Microsoft tax", I might as well keep the
product, schlocky as it is. Since I rarely use the product
it tends to stay relatively "clean".) The latter is rarely
done by the casual user and is therefore an undeveloped
skill, but it is possible; there are websites describing
on how one can set up the boot.ini file.

Computers are not toasters. Smile At least not today.

(I will note that the 19th and early 20th century notion
of a toaster involved a fire and a metal framework sitting
thereon, or perhaps held over the fire, somewhat like
campers cook marshmellows on sticks today, and probably
with similar results -- "oops, the bread caught fire
again!". Of course marshmellows are precooked [they're
also a late 19th century invention, it turns out] and
are rather complicated for their apparent simplicity,
consisting of sugar, gum arabic, egg whites, and
pre-softened gelatin [an issue for strict vegetarians,
though there are alternatives, apparently].

For their part toasters can have a fair number of options
-- time and element temperature or current [*] being the
primary two. Presumably modern ones could employ a sensor
to see how dark the bread is, as well, though there's not
that much point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toaster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshmellow

and for completeness Smile

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire

Clearly, fire isn't that simple, either, if one thinks
about it, but that's a discussion for another day; for
now, consider that a candle flame, a gas burner or heater,
the yellowing of old newspapers, a Space Shuttle launch,
and a raging forest fire are all results of oxidation of
carbon, with varying degrees of fuel consumption, and
varying fuels.

)

[*] the resistance changes slightly as the element heats up, AIUI.

--
#191, ewill3.DeleteThis@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #12995733:
bool f(bool g, bool h) { if(g) h = true; else h = false; return h;}

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
OSS: Get ready to implement HD-Photo - http://jpeg.org/newsrel19.html ..

Windows Vista Tips and Tricks ! - What's Inside Vista: The Best of Vista's New Tools, Tweak Security Settings in XP and Vista, Change Vista's Defaults,..

Windows Vista Tips and Tricks ! - What's Inside Vista: The Best of Vista's New Tools, Tweak Security Settings in XP and Vista, Change Vista's Defaults,..

Certification Programs - I have been working in the webhosting community for a couple of years as a Linux system administrator. I do technical....

Free CCNA Tests, Free Cisco CCNA Notes,CCNA Practice Exam,.. - A guide to free CCNA Tests, notes. Find all the essential IT certification Tips, Free CCNA Practice questions, get..

Unix Tools - When I read about Unix tools there seems to be a lot of overlap between them, like shells awk sed Perl ..
       Soft32 Home -> Linux2 Arch -> Advocacy All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Page 7 of 7

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can 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

Categories:
 Windows
 Linux
 Mac
 PDA


[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]