×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Why Mandrake is Too Cool for UnitedLinux

CmdrTaco posted more than 11 years ago | from the no-surprise-here dept.

Mandriva 392

An anonymous reader says "Mandrake's lastest community (spam) newsletter contains their explanation as to why they won't join in on UnitedLinux. Besides the obvious geek-fun of rolling their own distro, they claim that the underlying idea of UnitedLinux is based on a flawed comparison to the Unix world of the 80's. " I think the whole UnitedLinux thing is lame- the distros that want to be compatible already are. UL is just the 2nd tier distros trying to get attention and ink away from the "evil forces" in North Carolina. I'll just stick to the best distribution and watch the fun from afar ;)

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

392 comments

I am too cool (-1, Offtopic)

JeanMarieLepen (575911) | more than 11 years ago | (#3813989)

That's why I'll become France's next president. Merci

Slashdot Karma HOWTO (-1)

pwpbot (588025) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814000)

aItis10pmDoyouknowwhereyourkarmaisRightLetusgetsta /rtedInordertogetmaximumkarmafromSlashdotpostingyo /ucanfollowafewsimpleguidelinesTheUniversityyougot /oRegardlessofwhereyouactuallystudysayingthatyoure /atMITautomagicallygainsyou2Slashdotliketheglorifi /edstudentnoticeboardthatitishasaspecialplaceinits /heartforanythingfromMITwhetheritbeateddybearstuff /edwithaswitchorsomewankerswrappingayellowbannerwi /thelvishtextaroundthemaindomeEvenifyoudidntgotoun /iversityqualifyeverycommentwithaMyprofessortoldme /tobaskinthewarmfuzzyglowof2InsightfulLinuxThebasi /softheSlashdotExperienceClaimingyourunLinuxalsoge /tsyou1InterestingItdoesntreallymatterifyouvenever /actuallyinstalleditoryourRedHatboxstilldoesnthave /PPPrunningafter2yearsofreadingFAQsTheimportantbit /isYourepartofthecommunityYoucanbatheintherefelect /edgloryofyearsofshoddybuggycodeYouareexemptfromth /eMicrosoftpenaltyseebelowasofcourseyourWin98insta /llisonlyusedforplayinggamesAndreadingSlashdotAndu /singMSWordAndPhotoshopAndMicrosoftSlashbotsandthe /editorshateMicrosoftPeriodUseofasymbolineveryiter /ationoftheirtrademarksgetsyoua4FunnyEventhoughiti /sfarfromoriginalitstillmanagestoraiseagrininthose /peoplereadingSlashdotbetweenepisodesofCowboyBebop /Youwillgeta1FlamebaitorTrollforanypostevenhinting /thatMicrosoftproductsareanygoodusefulintuitiveuse /rfriendlyYouwillalsoquicklybeshotdownwithrepliesa /bouthowgoodGNOMEandKDEarewhichwilltheninturnerupt /intoaflamewarFreedomPrivacyYROThebreadandbutterof /SlashdotItfitsinsublimelywiththewholeLinuxthingYo /ullgeta3InformativeforanypostcontainingtheBenFran /klinquoteaboutsacrificingessentiallibertyItmakesn /odifferencethatthequoteistotallyirrelevantinthemo /dernworldHeyyouvegotkarmaMiscredtingthequotewilln /otendupinakarmapenaltyashasbeendemonstratedcountl /esstimesYouwillgainextrakarmaifyoumakereferenceto /yourexperiencesofbeingwiretappedbytheNSAandthrowi /nginavaguelinktoEchelonblackhelicoptersorTinFoilH /atLinuxIncludealinktotheFirstAmendmentfora1Intere /stingmodGiveyourselfapatonthebackifyoumanagetoinc /ludesomeextraragingparanoiawithnoevidencetobackit /upNiceBSDIfyouuseitdontmentionitonSlashdotMostoft /heLinuxusingfriendlesswondersthatinhabitSlashdotw /ouldntknowqualityandstabilityifitstrolledupandkic /kedtheminthethroatwithasize13HiTecMagnumbootAnyme /ntionofhowaFirewallrunningOpenBSDwithpfisfarsuper /iortoLinuxspatheticofferingwillsoonseeyouas1Troll /MuchlikethepostyourereadingnowYearningforyesterye /arAlthoughmostcommentsarewrittenbyfirstyearwannab /eCSgurustudentsorlinkstogoatsecxthereisstillthefa /lloutdregsofthedotcomboomlurkingaroundslashdotYou /canget5Insightfulfortellinghowyouweresobadlytreat /edafterthebubbleburstWhiningaboutthelackofjobswhe /reyougetpaidtofirefoamdartsatcolleaguesisagoodsta /rtDontforgettomentionhowyouvenowbeenoutofworkform /onthsItstartsaImabouttograduateandtheresnothinggo /ingfuckfestwhichcanspilloverintohundredsofcomment /sAlthoughallthestaffwhowereanygoodsimplygothiredi /ntoanothercompanyitmakesGoodKarmaSensetohidethefa /ctthatyourpassingfamiliaritywithPerlandCsimplycan /tgetyouajobThisisalsoaprimeopportunitytoshowyoure /gregiouspersonalityasSlashdotrewardsarroganceande /

Agreed (-1, Redundant)

gotak (547354) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814006)

While the linux standard base is a great idea. United Linux is just dumb. Why don't they just merge?

What? (2, Informative)

Aknaton (528294) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814008)

>obvious geek-fun of rolling their own distro

Aren't they just a Redhat distro with some a few mods? If Mandrake is more than that, please explain.

Re:What? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814033)

Mandrake is clearly not Redhat with some mods any more. Maybe back a couple years but it's definitely it's own unique distribution. They use RPM and Khudzu and that's about it. They hand select, configure and build all the RPMs and packages, they have their own installer, they have their own support tools.

It's redhatesque but it's unique. It happens to be a damn fine distribution also.

they dont hack libc libm or anything important (2)

johnjones (14274) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814153)

yeah great they did an installer and learnt how to compile src rpm's to what they like but I have yet to see them actually upgrade anything before redhat has put its fix's in

e.g. lets see them actually use gcc3.1 before redhat

regards

john jones

Re:they dont hack libc libm or anything important (2)

srw (38421) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814212)

I haven't used Mandrake for a few years now, but back in the 6.x days, they were using pgcc (Pentium optimized compiler, ~30% speed improvement over stock gcc at the time) and did a lot of work on ironing out problems compiling things with pgcc vs. gcc. That seemed pretty important at the time. Of course, my few remaining Mandrake 6 boxes have a hard time compiling anything current now...

Re:What? (0, Redundant)

gotak (547354) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814046)

Mandrake hasn't been a repackage of redhat for sometime now.

It's still suppose to be redhat compatible. But I can tell you that it's not as stable as redhat. Mozilla crashes on mandrake all the time while redhat for me hasn't had a single mozilla crash yet. Sigh....

Re:What? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814144)

How the FUCK is gotak's posting a fucking troll?

Re:What? (1)

Phosphor3k (542747) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814256)

And yet it is just the opposite for me. Oh wait, we are just single users. Maybe it is our hardware config. I hear that that sometimes causes issues.

But no, what applies to you applies to everybody, isnt that right?

Post mdoerated +1 Flaimbait (-1, Flamebait)

Marx_Mrvelous (532372) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814010)

Best distro eh? Thats just *begging* to begin a flame war!

Personally I like the idea of United Linux. There's no reason that all Linux venders can't use the same base for rpm compatibility, etc. It'll hapen one way or another. Do you want one company to control the standards, or a shared effort?

Re:Post mdoerated +1 Flaimbait (0)

six809 (1961) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814027)

There's no reason that all Linux venders can't use the same base for rpm compatibility, etc.

You're not helping stop any potential flame war there, y'know. Some of us much prefer debs.

Re:Post mdoerated +1 Flaimbait (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814035)

Speaking of Distro Flamewar

www.gentoo.org

Re:Post mdoerated +1 Flaimbait (0, Flamebait)

flokemon (578389) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814102)

Tsk, and how would we get arguments about the best distro if one day everything came under a United Linux?
Go on, admit you would miss the flame wars :)

UL is a disservice to the GNU/Linux Community (4, Insightful)

FreeUser (11483) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814110)

Best distro eh? Thats just *begging* to begin a flame war!

Well, yes, considering the best distros can be found here [sourcemage.org] and here [gentoo.org].

Personally I like the idea of United Linux. There's no reason that all Linux venders can't use the same base for rpm compatibility, etc. It'll hapen one way or another. Do you want one company to control the standards, or a shared effort?

I think the idea of UL is horribly flawed (and rather arrogant on its part), and the underlying premise of your reasoning for supporting UL equally flawed.

It isn't necessary to have One True packaging scheme, or One True distro to which all must maintain binary compatability, in order to effectively release binaries.

It has already been demonstrated by the folks at Blender, VMWare, Id, Loki, and others that it is quite possible to release binaries that are distribution agnostic. These real world examples, all of which install and run just fine on my Source Mage and Gentoo boxes, as well as my Debian, Mandrake, and Suse boxes, exist despite naysayers saying it isn't possible, and claiming that UL, or UL+Red Hat, bring a much needed cohesion to GNU/Linux.

Nonsense. It is an effort to impose a proprietary embrace-and-extended standard on a community that is doing just fine with consensual standards where they make sense, and a wide open, free and fair marktetplace that encourages choice everywhere else.

Telling commercial vendors that they should package their wares up as RPMs aimed at one (or two) distributions, when it is quite possible, and vastly more desirable, to package them up in standard tar.bz2 or tar.gz format along with a README listing the required libraries+versions, as well as a statically linked "last resort" fallback binary in parallel with the dynamically linked binary and thereby make them compatible with almost every distribution out there, is a terrible disservice to both the Linux community at large, and the vendors themselves who are being misled and excluding a big chunk of their target market.

This nonsense only serves the interests of the purveyors of UL, at the expense of virtually everyone else, and at the cost of our freedom of choice as GNU/Linux users. There is IMHO absolutely nothing good about this whatsoever, regardless of what your favorite distro happens to be, and even though I am not a Mandrake fan per se, I applaud them for their courage in standing up to this nonsense.

Re:UL is a disservice to the GNU/Linux Community (3, Insightful)

Marx_Mrvelous (532372) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814203)

While your rhetoric sounds nice to a well-educated linux guru, it hold one major flaw: it assumes all Linux users know how to download, compile, and install all their own software.

Personally I run Slackware and compile almost everything I use. However, in a family of 5 that owns 4 computers, I'm the only know who even has a clue, or who wants to have a clue. So yous claims that packaging everything as .tar as being "vastly more desireable" ignores the fact that most people can't use sofwtare in that format.

You seem to be from the camp that says "If you're too stupid to use Linux, then don't bother." I'm from the camp that says "Linux is good for everyone if efforts aer made to bring it to the general public." That's the difference of opinion, it seems to me.

Re:UL is a disservice to the GNU/Linux Community (2)

FreeUser (11483) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814280)

While your rhetoric sounds nice to a well-educated linux guru, it hold one major flaw: it assumes all Linux users know how to download, compile, and install all their own software.

That simply isn't true. It assumes the Distribution Creators know how to untar a tarball and install it into their own distribution.

There is nothing preventing Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake, Debian, et. al. from creating their own RPM/deb wrapper utility that will take a binary tarball and install it onto their respective distribution, perhaps even parsing the list of required libraries and versions and mapping it to their dependency resolution mechanisms anyway.

This is a far more reasonable and equitable approach to take than to tell vendors they should target one or two "preferred" distros and leave everyone else groping on their own, denying people choice and undermining the diversity of the community in the process.

You make grand assumptions about where people are coming from without any reasonable or logical basis for doing so, and extrapolate from that (example: I am in the "GNU/Linux should be for everybody camp", but that doesn't imply what you erroneously think it does), but those underlying assumptions are as false as those being promoted by the likes of United Linux, and the conclusions thereby just as erroneous.

Re:UL is a disservice to the GNU/Linux Community (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814220)

Telling commercial vendors that they should package their wares up as RPMs aimed at one (or two) distributions, when it is quite possible, and vastly more desirable, to package them up in standard tar.bz2 or tar.gz format along with a README listing the required libraries+versions, as well as a statically linked "last resort" fallback binary in parallel with the dynamically linked binary and thereby make them compatible with almost every distribution out there, is a terrible disservice to both the Linux community at large, and the vendors themselves who are being misled and excluding a big chunk of their target market.


and they say Linux will never reach the computer illerate masses. bah!

Re:UL is a disservice to the GNU/Linux Community (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814255)

Vendors: Lack of 100% Binary Compatibility is a problem with Linux

Community: No it isn't. Binaries run fine!

Vendors: Not for anything non trivial they don't. Lack of 100% Binary Compatibility is a problem with Linux.

Community: You should package with tarballs!

Vendors: That doesn't solve the lack of 100% Binary Compatibility problem.

Community: Just statically link!

Vendors: Then we get 100MB bloated binaries that you guys complain about. Lack of 100% Binary Compatibility is a problem with Linux

Community: I don't have binary compatibility problems because I build my Linux install from source code!!! Gentoo R0CK3RZ!

Vendors: Ummm. OK. Time to step away slowly.

I don't think it's arrogance... (1)

RonVNX (55322) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814282)

I think it's just desperation. Especially on Caldera's part, since they're probably going to be one of the biggest collapses of 2002 or 2003.

Huh? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814016)

"Lastest"?
K, we see the money your parents gave you for grammar school went for a good cause....

This may be good.... (1)

Lord_Slepnir (585350) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814018)

I for one think this is a good idea. I'd rather have 5-6 distros competiting (while still being somewhat compatable) than to have one solid standard. We all know what happenes when competition ceases [microsoft.com]. Not that the idea of United Linux is a bad idea, I just think that there need to be choices besides it.

Spam (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814019)

Why is it spam if it contained information useful enough to be posted on slashdot?

One OS (2, Funny)

Rupert (28001) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814021)

under Linus, indivisible.

Grrr!! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814067)

That's "UNDER GNU/LINUS", dammmittt!!!

GRR!!

--RMS

Re:One OS (1, Flamebait)

march (215947) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814071)

Becareful when you mix Church and State!! There was a recent ruling about this!! :-)

Re:One OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814078)

I'm sorry, but the Supreme Court of Redmond banned the Pledge of Allegiance and Singing the National Anthem in public schools. The court executives declared that religion does not belong in Microsoft sponsored schools.

Re:One OS (2)

cperciva (102828) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814090)

Surely you mean "One Kernel, under Linus, indivisible." (Except that it isn't really, but we shouldn't let minor facts get in the way.) After all, the OS is more than just a kernel, and the kernel pretty much all Linus is involved with.

Re:One OS (2, Funny)

Aknaton (528294) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814111)

Damn Linus believers, always trying to force their OS on us. I say that there is no Linus, that he is a figment of your imagination. ;)

Re:One OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814112)

"One OS, under the FreeBSD Core Team, indivisible" would make far more sense, given that Linux is not an operating system.

Re:One OS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814179)

"One OS, under the FreeBSD Core Team, indivisible..."

"... with no remote root exploits in the default install for six years"?

Good for Mandy (1, Interesting)

Apostata (390629) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814023)

I think this decision will not only please Mandrake's huge user-base (or at least those who give a sh*t), but also earn Mandy a little more respect from those who constantly refer to it as a Fisher-Price distro.

Re:Good for Mandy (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814120)

Another good name for Mandrake would be My First Linux(TM), since they are so userfriendly.

Re:Good for Mandy (-1, Offtopic)

Apostata (390629) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814187)

OffTopic??! How the hell is my post OffTopic??

Re:Good for Mandy (1, Offtopic)

robbieduncan (87240) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814265)

This really is off-topic :)

Why bother posting your reply. The moderator who did this to you can't come back and reply to you (not directly on the page anyway) without removing their moderation. Just live with it. Everyone gets bad moderations sometimes.

First Pot Post #@ +420 Lewis !!! @# (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814030)

Be Patriotic, Smoke Amerikan grown marijuana, not treasonous imports !!!!

Courtesy of About 420 [phish.net]

Connotative Use/Meaning

420 is a phreak s (and not just a hippie s) favorite number for a
variety of reasons, or maybe for no reason at all, but colloquially
the number says pot -- let s smoke pot, or someone s smoking
pot, or gee, i really like pot, or time to smoke pot, either by
time (4:20 a.m. or p.m.), date (April 20th), or otherwise (e.g. State
Route 420). April 20th at 4:20 is marked by annual events in
Mount Tamalpais, CA (an informal gathering); Marin Conty, CA
(the 420 Hemp Fest); Ann Arbor, MI (the Hash Bash); and
Washington, D.C. (buildup towards the July 4th Smoke-In).

Original Source(s)

Conventional wisdom: The most common tale is that 420 is the
police radio code or criminal code (and therefore the police call)
in certain part(s) of California (e.g. in Los Angeles or San
Francisco) for having spotted someone consuming cannabis
publicly, i.e. pot smoking in progress; that local cannabis users
picked up on the code and began celebrating the number temporally
(esp. 4:20 a.m., 4:20 p.m., and April 20); that the number became
nationally popularized in the late 1980s and, more ferverently, in
the early- to mid-1990s; and is colloquially applied to a variety of
relaxed and/or inspired contexts, including not only pot
consumption but also a good time more generally (in contrast to
the drug war surrounding).

Conventions are legends: 420 is not police radio code for
anything, anywhere. Checks of criminal codes (including those of
the City of San Francisco, the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles
County, the State of California, and the federal penal code) suggest
that the origin is neither Californian nor federal (the two best
guesses). For instance, California Penal Code 420 defines as a
misdemeanor the hindrance of use (obstructing entry) of public
lands, and California Family Code 420 defines what constitutes a
wedding ceremony (Marco). One state does come close: The
Illinois Department of Revenue classifies the Alcoholic Liquor Act
under Part 420, and the Cannabis and Controlled Substances Tax
Act are next, under Part 428. (RB 5/19/99)

True story?: According to Steven Hager, editor of High Times,
the term 420 originated at San Rafael High School, in 1971,
among a group of about a dozen pot-smoking wiseacres who
called themselves the Waldos. The term 420 was shorthand for the
time of day the group would meet, at the campus statue of Louis
Pasteur, to smoke pot. ``Waldo Steve, a member of the group who
now owns a business in San Francisco, says the Waldos would
salute each other in the school hallway and say ``420 Louis! The
term was one of many invented by the group, but it was the one
that caught on. ``It was just a joke, but it came to mean all kinds of
things, like `Do you have any? or `Do I look stoned? he said.
``Parents and teachers wouldn t know what we were talking about.
The term took root, and flourished, and spread beyond San Rafael
with the assistance of the Grateful Dead and their dedicated cohort
of pot-smoking fans. The Waldos decided to assert their claim to
the history of the term after decades of watching it spread, mutate
and be appropriated by commercial interests. The Waldos contacted
Hager, and presented him with evidence of 420 s history, primarily
a collection of postmarked letters from the early 70s with lots of
mention of 420. They also started a Web site, waldo420.com. ``We
have proof, we were the first, Waldo Steve said. ``I mean, it s not
like we wrote a book or invented anything. We just came up with a
phrase. But it s kind of an honor that this emanated from San
Rafael. Maria Alicia Gaura for the San Francisco Chronicle,
4/20/00 p. A19; and thanks to Noah Cole for the submission

Alternate explanations

There are a variety of other explanations, all much more interesting
than police code, and many plausible. Some are more likely uses
of the 420/hemp connection rather than sources of it, such as the
score for the football game in Fast Times at Ridgement High,
42-0.

Known Myths: It isn t police code (see above). There are 315
chemicals in marijuana, not 420. And although tea time in
Amsterdam is rumored to be 4:20, it is actually 5:30 (Gerhard
den Hollander).
Sixties Songs: For instance, Bob Dylan s famous Rainy Day
Women #12 and 35 is a possible reference, or source --
12x35=420. And Stephen Stills wrote (and Crosby Stills Nash
& Young performed) a song 4+20 (first recorded 7/16/69,
released on Deja Vu 3/11/70) about an 84-year-old
poverty-stricken man who started and finished with nothing.
(Thanks to Sherry Keel 12/6/98.) Dylan aslo mentions 4 and
20 windows in The Balland of Frankie Lee and Judas Priest
(on John Wesley Harding).
Older Verse: But 420 in poetry is older than that - Greg
Keller notes the old nursery rhyme line, four and twenty
black birds baked in a pie. Revelation 5:14 (in the King
James Version of the Christian Bible) reads, And the four
beasts said A-Men. And the four and twenty elders fell down
and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever. (Travis
Spurley 2/15/99) And in Midnight s_Children, Salman
Rushdie wrote, Inevitably, a number of these children failed
to survive. Malnutrition, disease and the misfortunes of
everyday life had accounted for no less than four hundred and
twenty of them by the time I became conscious of their
existence; although it is possible to hypothesize that these
deaths, too, had their purpose, since 420 has been, since time
immemorial, the number associated with fraud, deception and
trickery. (Comet 2/14/98) Comet s best guess is that this
refers to something in Indian mythology or numerology, since
the book is set in India and frequently involves Indian history,
culture, and religion. Given the high interest in Eastern
religion among the phish/dead community, this seems a likely
origin of 420 s current significance.
Temporal Significance: Hands on analog clock at 4:20 look
like position of doobie dangling from mouth Larry in
Tuscan and Alex Mack 5/19/99). Disruptive students are out
of detention and safetly away from school by 4:20, also
rumored to be the time that you should dose to be peaking
when the Dead went on stage Hart. The Waldos were a
group of teens back in the 70 s that lived in San Rafael, CA.
420 was the way they talked about pot in front of teachers,
non-smoking family members etc. Also it was the time of day
they could just go relax, and get baked. (PhunkCellar)
Jamaicans purportedly worked till 4 then walked home then
lit up. They would talk 420 like our parents talked about after
5. That s when partying began Larry in Tuscan). Albert (not
Abbie) Hofmann supposedly first encountered LSD at 4:20
p.m. on 4/19/1943 (Bart Coleman citing Storming Heaven by
Jay Stevens, recommended by Mickey Hart in Planet Drum).
Surrealist painter Miro was born April 20, 1893. And
www.filmspeed.com says the propoganda film Reefer
Madness has a copyright date of April 20, 1936 (i.e. 4/20).
(Patrick Woolford)
Misc: Could be that it comes from hydroponics, the practice
of cultivating plants in water often used by indoor marijuana
cultivators, since 4 is used for H on a calculator (420/H20).
(Nick Lowe 3/30/00) The number 80 (eight) is quatre vingt
(pronounced cah-truh vahn), meaning four (times} twenty.
Dan Nijjar 1/27/00 (No connection yet between the number
80 and pot. A quarter pound is roughly 120 grams, rounding
quarter-ounces to 7.5.) The titanic was supposed to arrive
4/20/1912. (Thanks to RB.) Perhaps the heavy use of vt420
terminals in the Berkeley area is to blame? (BTW, 420 in
binary code is 110100100.)

Ubiquitous?

Now there s a 420 Pale Ale. One of the late-97/early-98 Got
Milk ads featured a character eating cookies without milk and
then passing a sign that reads Next Rest Area 420 miles (as Ross
Bruning). Reportedly, all of the clocks in the movie Pulp Fiction
are stuck on 4:20. Shirts with the number 420 on the red-and-blue
interstate highway shield (Interstate 420?) have show up on the
sitcom Will and Grace (Paul Risenhoover 5/14/99) and in several
videos. UPS labelling software has a 420 postal code legend for
next-day/2-day deliveries (which is how Phish tickets are sent).
(Jack Lebowitz 10/3/98) MTV s 1997 Viewer s Choice Award (for
the MTV Video Awards) was decided by calls to
1-800-420-4MTV. And by May of 1998, the number was
appearing in so many ads (eg Copenhagen 5/14/98 Rolling Stone
p54, Corvette p55 5/98 Car & Driver) that its presence is
presumed to be intentional. Many songs are around 4 minutes 20
seconds long (since many songs fall between 2:30 and 5:30),
including for example Pink Floyd s A Great Day for Freedom (on
The Division Bell, 1994), the Foo Fighters My Hero, and
Smokin from Boston s first album. There have also been some
420 references on The Simpsons. In the re-run episode aired on
April 20th, 1999 at a special time (probably in honor of those
college students staying in the holiday spirit ;-), Homer mentions to
Flanders that Barney s birthday is April 20th. Also, the jackpot sign
in one part of the casino says $420,000. There are a couple less
concrete ones, but these two have to be legit, especially since they
decided to air THAT particular episode on 4/20/99. (Submitted by
Matt Meehan 4/21/99) And (as of Fall 99) the 60 free minutes that
Working Assets Long Distance offers, at the 7 cents per minute
rate, is $4.20 free. There s even a band named 420, and another
names . In the first fifteen pages of Karel Capek s novel War with
the Newts, a man diving under wonder stayed down for four
minutes and twenty seconds. Grant Garstka 1/6/00 At the
suggested retail price ($3.96) and Michigan (6%) sales tax, a deck
of Uno cards costs $4.20. Nic Boris 4:20 marks the first downbeat
of the drums in Led Zeppelin s epic Stairway to Heaven. (Dan
Harris) The bill authorizing force after the World Trade Center
attacks of 9/11/01 passed 420 to 1, and news reports in following
months noted many times that there are (or were then, anyway) 420
airports in the U.S. Allan Morris And don t forget that Adolf Hitler
was born on April 20, macabely celebrated (or at least
referenced) via the Columbine High School shootings.

Phish-related Occurances

Whatever the origin, the number appears frequently... For the
summer 1997 tour, TicketMaster service charges were $4.20. In
the Fall 1997 Doniac Schvice Dry Goods section, a limited edition
Pollack poster printed on 100% hemp is order number 420P. The
Great Went was 420 miles from Boston (former home of Phish).
The official logo includes 4 gills and 20 bubbles (Gringo
11/12/98). As of 6/15/97, including covers and originals, Phish
had performed a total of 420 songs (thought its 486 by 4/24/98).
(David Steinberg). Lawnboy is 420megs of memory. Patrick
Walker Phish s The Vibration of Life underlies a whirling loop
with Seven Beats per second (which makes 420 beats per minute.)
Trey has used the altered line woke up at 4:20 in Makisupa
Policeman, which also often indirectly celebrates 420ing, e.g. by
mention of goo balls. One of the funniest shirts around takes light
jabs at both the 4:20 phenomenon and the rumored evolution
(collapse?) of the Phish.Net (especially rec.music.phish) from
being Gamehendge to Flamehendge, and beyond. The first day of
the Great Went started at 4:20 (with Makisupa Policeman. (The
second day started late, at 4:37.) Noah Cole The first single from
Slip Stitch and Pass was played on WBCN 10/14/97 at 4:20 pm.
An uproar at 12/31/96 can be heard on tape during the 2001, in
response to an enormous digital clock (which was counting down
to midnight) reaching 11:55:40 and reading -4:20. (Yoda)
During the 9-12-00 2001, Trey hits the first riff right at 4:20 into
the intro jam. (Cal 2/25/01) Some mail order tickets for the 1997
New Year s run were in section 420. The first Mass Pike toll
leaving Oswego was $4.20. (Camille Heath ) And the standard
shipping for The Phish Companion through Amazon was
originally $4.20.

420 Shows: Phish performed on April 20 in 1989, 1990, 1991,
1993, and 1994. The first day of the Great Went started at 4:20,
although that was called a soundcheck by Trey after three songs.
The Jazzfest Harry Hood 4-26-96 started at about 4:20 reported by
Trevor. At Big Cypress, David Bowie was playing at 4:20 a.m.
And the one event during the hiatus (10/8/00 - ?) featuring all
four members - for Jason Colton s wedding - was 12/1/01, 420
from: http://www.phish.net/faq/n420.html:

Trolling 101: Building the Perfect Troll by pwpbot (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814032)

aAwhilebackDonHenleycreatedanalbumcalledBuildingth .ePerfectBeastHisfirstsoloalbumitsurprisedmanywith .trackslikeSunsetGrillAllSheWantsToDoIsDancemyfavo .riteDrivingWithYourEyesClosedandJonKatzsfavoriteB .oysofSummerIwaslisteningtothisalbumonillegallyrip .pedMP3swhilereadingtheSlashdottrollsandstartedbra .instormingwhatwouldmaketheperfecttrollThisarticle .servesasadirectedintroductiontobuildingtheperfect .trollFirstweneedtodefinetrollingThisisharderthani .tsoundsbecauseeveryonehastheirowndefinitionofatro .llorbettertheirowndefinitionofagoodtrollIamgoingt .ousemultipledefinitionstocreateaverybroadidealoft .hetermtrollAnypostthatmeetsONEofthedefinitionsbel .owisconsideredatrollaAmessagewidelyregardedasanan .noyancebAmessagewhichinsultstheeditorswithnoregar .dtomeritcAmessagewhichflamesanotheruserfortheirvi .ewsdAnymessagewhichisdesignedtoenragethestandards .lashdotuserForthepurposesofthispostagoodtrollison .ethatspawnsmanyangryresponsesThereareothersidesof .trollingsuchascrapfloodingwhichdonotgenerateanyre .sponsesusuallyThesesortsoftrollsareoutofthescopeo .fthisarticleThereare6dimensionsofagoodtrollannoya .ncearguabilitysubtletytopicalitylogicalityandperm .eanceByNOmeansshouldagoodtrolluseonlyonedimension .althoughsomedimensionsareinherentlycontradictoryu .singasmanyaspossiblewillresultinagoodtrollAnnoyan .ceThisistheallstarofthetrollspectrumRacialcomment .spagewideninglengthingmisinformationderagatorycom .mentsetcallareconsideredanannoyanceButbecarefulTh .ecommonpitfallistheannoyanceisusedtofrequentlyand .tooloudlySubtletyisanecessityifyouaregoingtouseth .iswithanysortofsuccessreadmoreaboutthisbelowHerea .resomeexamplesofgoodandbadannoyancesBadYoustupidf .uckingniggerImgoingtokickyourfaggotassifIeverseey .ouyoushitfacecocksuckinganimalThiswillbemoddeddow .nimmediatelyandwillprobablynotberespondedtoThisme .ssagewilllargelybeignoredthuslimitingthetrollaffe .ctPostingfactualinaccuraciesisgreatwhencombinedwi .thannoyancetheSlashdotswillfalloverthemselvescorr .ectingyoureverymoveGoodItspostslikethesethatquest .iontheeducationsystemofAmericaIfyouwerepayinganya .ttentionatschoolyouwouldknowthattheSouthwontheCiv .ilWarbecauseoftheirviewsnoslaveryItwasAbrahamLinc .olnslaststandatGettysburgthatcausedSlaverytogoawa .yMakingreferencestoyoureducationasproofthatyouare .rightisexcellentespeciallywheninyourtrollyoumakei .tobviousthatyoudonthaveanyBadIstudiedthistopicing .reatdepthwhenwritingmyPhDthesisatMITAsitturnsoutt .helimitingfactorofsortingfunctionwithcompletelyra .ndomizeddataGoodOhItookaclassaboutthisattheDeVryI .nstituteAccordingtothereseptionistnoticeintention .allybadspellingtheintegralofex2isexsoitsgottoberi .ghtArguabilityPostssuchasYoufuckingfaggotImgoingt .okillyouhasnoelementofarguabilityYouwanttopostavi .ewinaninflammatorywaythatwillinciteagreatargument .ThereisarightwayandawrongwaytodoingthisUsuallyify .ouareoutrightcursingattheposteroreditoritsthewron .gwayExamplesBadYouworthlesspieceofhorseshitYourvi .ewsarewrongjackassGoodThisstudypostlinktomostlyir .relevantandofftopicstudyindicatesthereisastrongco .rrelationbetweendevianceandLinuxusersDrawingillog .icalconclusionsbasedonincorrectstatementsisagreat .waytoinstateanerdriotExampleGoodWhenESRsaidthatWi .ndowsislosingclientelleheusedintentionallybadgram .marwhichisinherentproofthathisidealsareflawedPerm .eanceQuestionIfatrollpostsatrollandnoonereadsitis .itstillatrollAnswerNoAtrollcanonlyhavesomuchlonge .vityIcallthisprinciplepermeancePermeanceisjudgedb .ythenumberofpeoplewhowillseeandreadapostandtoales .serextentrespondtoitGoodformattinggrammarandspell .ingallcontributetoapostspermeancebuttherealfactor .iscontentMostofyouspendalotoftimereadingat1presum .ablysoyouwillknowthatafairamountofracistandantise .meticcommentsarepostedMostSlashdotuserswillnotsee .thesebecausetheyareat1klercksPLPandPWPareultimate .lyafailurebecausefewseethemTomaximizepermeanceyou .haveto1Soundlikeyounowwhatyouaretalkingabout2Soun .dlikeyouhaveastakeinyourpointofviewmaeningyoucare .aboutwhatyouthinkand3Expressitwithouthomophobiaan .ysortofracismanddiscriminationYouwillseethattroll .sat1andeven2usethisprincipleYouwillseethattrollsa .t0and1donotusethisprincipleThisbringsustoFirstFun .damentalTheoremofTrollingAnonymousCowardsbydefini .tionrarelysucceedinpostingagoodtrollSecondFundame .ntalTheoremofTrollingIfanACsucceedsinagoodtrollit .wouldevenbebetterifitwerepostedat1or2bydefaultSub .tletyCertainpostsSCREAMThisisatrollPleaseignoreit .ThesearenotsuccessfultrollsAsatrollyoureveryurgei .stoscreamYOUFUCKINGFAGGOTHOWCANYOUTHINKTHEWAYYOUD .OtotheSlashbothomosResistthisateverycostYouneedto .diplomaticallyinsultthemItshardIknowbutitwillresu .ltinsuccessGOODPHRASESYoushouldknowbynowthatHaven .tyoulearnedanythingfromeventWhatastereotypicalvie .wWasthispostsarcasticIcantbelievethelevelofignora .nceofthatpointofviewTopicalityThisisanobrainerand .thereforeImnotgoingtospendmuchtimediscussingitWhy .doyouthinkBSDisDyingtrollsrarelygetresponseswhent .heyarepostedunderoneofJonKatzsarticlesLogicalityD .idImakethatwordupProbablyButitsprincipleisstillim .portantuseeverylogicalfallacythatyouknowofwhenwri .tingtrollsJumptoillogicalconclusionsMisquoteormis .representparentspostswhenrespondingMakereferences .tostudieslinkingthemtoa404notfoundpageYougettheid .eaThisoneisnthardtointroducebutitswildlysuccessfu .lingettingSlashcockresponsesThisisabriefintroduct .iontothegoodtrollingSoonIwillpostanarticleaboutco .mbiningdimensionsandlookatsomegoodandbadtrollsint .

-pwpbot

mandrake (4, Interesting)

gralem (45862) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814044)

Mandrake is simply the best distro out there. It doesn't get bogged down by "this package uses the wrong license" or "this is too cutting edge" or "this is too average user", either. They simply go out there and offer their users EVERYTHING in the linux world. I will always only install Mandrake.

And not becoming a part of United Linux is partly due to the above and partly due to their use of RPM. I think they're doing the right thing, and the United Linux people fill fall big time.

---gralem

UnitedLinux (1)

KoopaTroopa (549540) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814045)

UnitedLinux may result in less diverse practices and standards between the distributions, (or at least fewer of them,) but, as with any joint venture brought on by competitive pressure, sounds like a really good way for the constituent groups to argue about exactly WHAT becomes the standard and such. That kind of stagnation and bickering is not what needs to happen for success.

Joining under a common banner with common practices and standards is fine and dandy. Someday it might even be a Good Thing, but doing it because you're afraid of RedHat just doesn't seem healthy to me.

debian rocks :) (0, Troll)

ard (115977) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814047)

lets get that 3.0 / Woody out the door and show who really has the best dist :)

Linux (-1, Troll)

Accord MT (542922) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814050)

Linux: A response to the perceived threat of a capitalistic monopoly.
Terrorism: A response to the perceived threat of a capitalist society.

Linux: Supported by a devout group of fanatics dedicated to the cause.
Terrorism: Supported by a devout group of fanatics dedicated to the cause.

Linux: Seen by the rest of the world as a "fringe" operating system.
Terrorism: Seen by the rest of the world as a "fringe" group.

Linux: Attractive to those looking to destroy Microsoft and the software industry.
Terrorism: Attractive to those looking to destroy the USA and the rest of the infidels.

Linux: Recruits loners and outcasts into its loyal user-base.
Terrorism: Recruits loners and outcasts into its training camps.

Linux: Drew vast amounts of funding from supporters, with only ideological returns.
Terrorism: Drew vast amounts of funding from supporters, with only ideological returns.

Re:Linux (-1, Troll)

Apostata (390629) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814072)

This article: is about Mandrake.

Your posting: is stupid.

Re:Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814104)

You know, it's pretty damn easy to find comparisons between pretty much anything, and tossing out a half dozen of them doesn't make your implied statement true.

It's nice though how you politely neglected the differences between terrorism and linux.

Hell, someone could easily toss up six comparisons between Microsoft and cruel dictators.

Re:Linux (-1, Flamebait)

Maverick TimeSurfer (536379) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814108)

But Linux geeks don't senslessly and randomly murder large groups of people. And all of those except for 1 and 4 could be applied to Sci-fi fanatics.

At least they're committed to LSB. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814051)

I am not a fan of mandrake, but this is an extremely well-written document all the way through. I would like everyone to take note of the fact Mandrake seems to be committing in here to follow the LSB [everything2.com].. so that's good. One thing i wonder about though:

"In the same spirit, all software publishers should certify their products for a given version of the LSB (Linux Standard Base), not for a particular brand of Linux. Therefore, that software would work equally well with any Linux distribution that is in conformity with the LSB. "

Is this correct? The UnitedLinux people have been implying that they are somehow just the logical conclusion of the idea of the LSB, and in some way they will make things easier for developers-- i.e., less varied systems to test. Is this correct, or just misleading marketing? Are there any situations where it would be possible to certify a single binary for UnitedLinux, but not possible to certify a single binary for the LSB becuase the LSB is not extensive enough?

Mandrake is closest to getting to mainstream (4, Interesting)

StandardCell (589682) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814060)

As a (relatively new) Linux user, my first distro was Mandrake 8.1. What's nice about Mandrake is that there are GUI interfaces for everything. I mean, I've been working with Solaris and HP/UX for years and writing perl scripts and scheduling cron jobs, but never had to deal with "admin-type" issues like drivers and installing software and hardware. I don't mind going in and trying to figure out command-line switches for various tools and turning system services on and off. Mandrake is getting pretty close to the ideal, particularly with its HardDrake detection and its unbelievably good disk partitioning tool. That's not to say that it's perfect - I still think the whole package/RPM thing needs a lot of refinement, and there are bugs like losing sound on my A3D card for no reason (a known KDE problem). In fact, there's the rub - when it comes to ease of use, Windows still has Mandrake and the rest of the Linuxes beat hands-down. But like I've said before - with 10% of the development budget of Windows products, and buy-in from major software developers in multimedia, Linux could be a Windows killer. Just like UnitedLinux is supposed to do. Therein lies the problem - do you take the distro with the currently closest emulation of Windows' ease-of-use and push it to effective completion, or do you go and pool development efforts to make all the rest of the distros good? My hope is that cooler heads and better attitudes prevail, because many Linux distros and the fate of Linux on the desktop lies in the next move made by all Linux companies.

Re:Mandrake is closest to getting to mainstream (2)

Jucius Maximus (229128) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814131)

"As a (relatively new) Linux user, my first distro was Mandrake 8.1. What's nice about Mandrake is that there are GUI interfaces for everything. I mean, I've been working with Solaris and HP/UX for years and writing perl scripts and scheduling cron jobs, but never had to deal with "admin-type" issues like drivers and installing software and hardware. I don't mind going in and trying to figure out command-line switches for various tools and turning system services on and off. Mandrake is getting pretty close to the ideal, particularly with its HardDrake detection and its unbelievably good disk partitioning tool."

I have to agree that Mandrake is an excellent introduction into the linux world. Before I started using it a year ago, I was a well experienced windows user who paid for university textbooks by building computers, setting up networks, doing user training/consultation all on windows.

Mandrake is great for easing users in, because as you say, the GUI helps prevent 'shell shock.' Now I started off using DOS in the mid 80s, but you can do so much more from the linux shell. Mandrake is great because you can ease yourself in and learn the linux shell slowly.

Just last weekend I compiled and installed Apache 2.0.39 singlehandedly (which is trivial for msot *nix users, I know) but this is a testament to Mandrake's user friendliness and ability to help users help themselves into the linux world.

Why Mandrake is right (0, Troll)

Ali Jenab (565034) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814064)

Much has been written about the supposed "fragmentation" of Linux distributions. However, what the stories don't mention is that there are simple solutions for the problems that seem to keep cropping up. The core issue, though, is simple to understand but hard to solve: proprietary software developers are incompetent. Let me draw from my personal experience as a Linux guru and system administrator of many years and explain why that is the case:
  • Commercial software companies don't understand dynamic linking. It is a basic principle of dynamic libraries that versions and functionality changes between releases. Ever notice how many different versions of Microsoft's DLLs you have on your Windows box? That's no coincidence - Windows developers are forced to incorporate the version of the DLL that works with their application. Linux provides a far superior development model, allowing publishers to statically link the correct library into their binary. Mozilla does it; Oracle does it; why can't the rest of the vendors get a clue and do the same thing?
  • Commercial software developers don't understand the UNIX filesystem. UNIX is not like Windows: when a user installs an application on UNIX, he does not expect that application to install random files in arbitrary directories all over the filesystem. There is no registry in UNIX and no guarantee that the application won't be relocated to another system. Any application that forces the user to use anything more than 'tar xvf' to install it is improperly designed, from an experienced UNIX user's perspective.
  • UnitedLinux is an illegal cartel. Similar to OPEC and De Beers, the members of UnitedLinux realize that their product is nothing more than a commodity in a very crowded market. To that end, they intend to fix prices, limit supply, and use anticompetitive [microsoft.com] tactics to artificially inflate the market share and supposed importance of their "standard." As the most influential group of UNIX users and administrators in the industry, will we allow them to get away with it? I hope not.
/ali

Re:Why Mandrake is right (2)

reaper20 (23396) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814136)

I wouldn't say that commercial developers are incompetent, more like 'commercial software houses as a whole are incompetent and lazy.'

It would be easier to code to something like UnitedLinux than support 5 or 6 different distributions. They'd rather just pick one (most just pick Redhat) and be done with it. They're just not willing to invest developer costs.

Love would have everyone believe that Linux is fragmenting Unix-style. But that just doesn't happen with open source. I mean, look at Ximian, they're a relatively small software house, they support boatloads of distributions.

Re:Why Mandrake is right (2, Insightful)

damiam (409504) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814178)

UNIX is not like Windows: when a user installs an application on UNIX, he does not expect that application to install random files in arbitrary directories all over the filesystem.

Yes he does. A proper UNIX program will install files in /usr/bin, /usr/doc, /usr/share, /etc, and various other places, as opposed to a Windows program that installs everything in C:\Program Files\$progname, with the occasional library in C:\windows\system

Re:Why Mandrake is right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814219)

Let's take this a step further. Software developers obviously are greedy people. I personally believe in free software [gnu.org] and I think that there's no alternative to the quality and warranty guaranteed by it. These people who develop free software obviously make enough money off of it to not have to resort to commercial [microsoft.com] software [gator.com]

If you work at a commercial development software, I suggest you leave immediately. Open Source Software has been shown to increase profits ten-fold and guarantee business security. To those who call software dirty GNU hippies, well I have four words for you:

LOOK WHO'S LAUGHING NOW!

Re:Why Mandrake is right (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814222)

Any application that forces the user to use anything more than 'tar xvf' to install it is improperly designed, from an experienced UNIX user's perspective. Huh? "tar" does not perform configuration changes, like adding entries to /etc/services or /etc/inetd.conf. "tar" does not perform pre or post events to validate the install. Simple app's can be done via "tar" itself, but a lot of software is NOT a simple install. If I use the source from a "tar" image and then run "make install", you might be closer to being correct. I would certainly agree that one of the biggest problems in the Unix environment is the lack of a common installation format. Linux (RPM and Debian formats) BSD (Packages) Solaris (Packages) AIX (Installp) etc. Many have settled on RPM or combinations of the above, but RPM does not address the entire issue either. One thing is for sure, the answer is not "tar"

Point-by-point rebuttal (3)

Marx_Mrvelous (532372) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814278)

I'd like to take issue with your statements:
1. Commercial software companies don't understand dynamic linking.
This statement might be correct in a few cases, but Linux does *not* provide a better development model than windows. The simple fact is that you can statically or dynamically link in *both* windows *and* linux. And ask anyone who's tried to update their libraries in Linux if it's easier than doing so in Windows.
2. Unix Filesystem
So, we've got files in, say the /opt directory. The config files are in /etc, maybe adding some lbiraries to /usr/lib, probably setting up some symbolic links in /usr/local/bin. For the most part Unix-style distributions keep everything in one directory, but so do most Windows apps.
As for a guarantee that a program "relocated" will or won't work on two systems, the same thing can be said for Linux/Unix.
3. Illegal cartel
I don't know where you're getting this, but you might as well claim that Steven King killed JFK. It's an unfouned conspiracy theory at best, slander at worst. And since when is OPEC or De Beers illegal? Or UL fo that matter?

Your main point is that prorpiatary software developers are incompetent. You use some... interesting justification. Just because there is so much more sofwtare for Windows doesn't mean that there is more bad siftware, but there us *plenty* of bad software (open source, free and closed) for Linux.

Re:Why Mandrake is right (5, Insightful)

torinth (216077) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814283)

It is a basic principle of dynamic libraries that versions and functionality changes between releases. Ever notice how many different versions of Microsoft's DLLs you have on your Windows box? That's no coincidence - Windows developers are forced to incorporate the version of the DLL that works with their application. Linux provides a far superior development model, allowing publishers to statically link the correct library into their binary. Mozilla does it; Oracle does it; why can't the rest of the vendors get a clue and do the same thing?

Ugh. Is this a troll? Am I missing something? Staticically linked libraries are not a 'far superior' development model. Seriously. If you want to use your system efficiently, you really don't want every application completely self-contained. That's a lot of redundancy, and thereofre, al ot of waste. Not to mention the distribution of bug fixes. Linux or Windows, it's much nicer if I can download/build a new .so or .dll to fix a problem in a library used in a number of applications, without having to rebuild every single one.

If you want everything self-contained, then throw yourself back to some single-tasked OS from the 70's. If you want to take advantage of modern advances in application and systems design, you're just going to have to get "used to" the idea of some standard that applications can conform to. This could be the LSB or a guide from the OS vendor to which an application is tailored, but you have to have something. Otherwise, your wasting alot of (system/manpower) resources maintaining n-hundred copies of the same statically-linked library distributed throughout your system.

Welcome to the world of modern software. Have a nice day.

-Andrew

Re:Why Mandrake is right (0, Troll)

2g3-598hX (586789) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814285)

DLL hell is not caused by general dynamic linking but rather Microsoft's specific (bogus) implementation of it (COM). Apparently .NET will solve this, the DLL version info is just going to be in one place...

Re:Why Mandrake is right (2)

Junta (36770) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814288)

I would say this is more flamebait, but anyway....

I would say commercial software companies understand dynamic linking fine, they are not idiots (at least my company isn't). There is nothing about the windows architecture that forces *anything* to be in a .dll file, just like linux doesn't require anything to be in a .so file. The difference is not one of architecture, both are equally well suited for dynamic linking. The difference is in the way licensing tends to work, convenience, and update ability. Companies in the windows world frequently license the use of a third party component, but they never exchange a line of source code, but instead only get API documentation and necessary .dlls. The agreement often also stipulates that redistribution is *only* permitted in the form of a dll. Also, when it comes to updates, it is easier to update individual dlls bandwidth wise than a whole application. You see linux binaries that are dynamically linked to let users try their luck with .sos too, in most cases.

- Commercial companies can understand the filesystem fine, but that doesn't mean they like it. The typical installation strategy of putting binaries, libraries, headers, and documentation in standard, shared places can make it easier on CLI users, but makes support and integratin testing/implementation a nightmare. Companies want maximum control over the install process and want to keep things in a separate directory not because they don't "get it", but because they can only test a finite number of combinations, and the more the user deviates from those tested configurations, the more potential conflicts/bugs could be exposed by exotic configurations. If their product just happens to use the same filename as another product, and the user in trying to install erases the other applications file, will get upset with the second company. Same goes with relocation and such. Many commercial Unix apps never require access outside of ~, but some do, but same goes for a few open source projects.

- That whole last paragraph smelled of pure FUD. Quite frankly I don't see much the point of UnitedLinux, but I don't think they are doing this, if for no other reason then they *know* they lack the market presence to pull it off. As mentioned in the story, Linux distributions are not the same as the Unix vendor differences, and UnitedLinux seeks to solve a largely non-existant problem.

First of all.... (-1, Flamebait)

dmarien (523922) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814073)

I think this story is a firestarter. Debian is fucking old. Honestly. Get something minimal: slack.

that said... everyone go here, and type in your name... it returns with a cyborg acronym :)

link [brunching.com]
a

Re:First of all.... (1)

catch23 (97972) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814129)

Dude, of course slackware is better than debian or redhat! I mean, slackware is already at 8.1 whereas debian is still 3.0 and redhat is still stuck at 7.3. Isn't it obvious from the version numbers that debian is stuck in the ice ages and slackware is newest and greatest thing currently available?

Re:First of all.... (0, Flamebait)

dmarien (523922) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814223)

I dont normally reply to this, but here goes.

first, imma go by lisitng the versions of some popular software packages that slackware is shipping with, then i'll do the same for debian... are you ready... okay - here comes the slackware listing...

apache: 1.3.26 gnome: 1.4.0.8 bind: 9.2.1 kde: 3.0.1 gcc: 2.95.3

wheeee!!! the fun continues with the debian listing...

apache: 1.3.26 gnome: 1.4.1 bind: 9.2.1 kde: 2.2.2 gcc: 2.95.4

fuck. a'ite. i take this back... what the hell happened? i thought debian most mostly outdated? it's more recent than freakin' slack!... hm... okay, well, that said... i don't like their.. um... logo. yeah! that's right, their logo sucks. hehehehehe..... (whatever).

sorry dude, debian is not outdated. I stand corrected.

Re:First of all.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814272)

So you are saying that Mandrake 8.2 is a little better than Slack?

They dont need it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814079)

Mandrake is one of the most widely used releases of Linux next to Red Hat. It would be a huge boost to United Linux if they joined, but it would not to much for Mandrake. It could even hurt them by losing followers that are not interested in UL.

"best distro"? (2, Interesting)

vogon jeltz (257131) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814080)

"I'll just stick to the best distribution and watch the fun from afar ;)"
Well Taco, it might just happen that United Linux fits your needs perfectly then: http://www.debian.org/News/weekly/2002/25/

LINK CORRECTION (-1, Troll)

swagr (244747) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814093)

I'll just stick to the best distribution [debian.org] and watch the fun from afar

should be

I'll just stick to the best distribution [slackware.com] and watch the fun from afar

Re:LINK CORRECTION (1)

Rieger (558108) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814157)

I'll just stick to the best distribution [debian.org] and watch the fun from afar

should be

I'll just stick to the best distribution [slackware.com] and watch the fun from afar


should be

I'll just stick to the best distribution [gentoo.org] and watch the fun from afar

Re:LINK CORRECTION (1)

swagr (244747) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814195)

I almost agree, except Gentoo isn't really a "distro" so much as a set of tools to create a distro.

So you could say "Rieger-Linux", built by portage, based on the Gentoo Linux core, is the best distro.

After all, I could use the tools included in Slackware (gcc, vim, the source packages, etc) to make a new distro, but that wouldn't make it Slackware.

More Links and More Opinions ;-) (2)

FreeUser (11483) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814221)

LINK CORRECTION ... [debian.org] ... should be ... [slackware.com]

heh!

But of course, that should actually read:

I'll just stick to the best [sourcemage.org] distributions [gentoo.org] and watch the fun from afar

[grin]

Seriously, though, it is this choice that allows you to use and enjoy slackware, and me to use and enjoy Source Mage and Gentoo, others to use and enjoy Debian, Red Hat, Mandrake, and so on, that makes the GNU/Linux community, and the Free Software community in general, so dynamic and so productive.

It is this choice the efforts like UL are trying to undermine, by promoting the myth that commercial and proprietary software vendors should (or need to) package their wares up for one or two reference distributions, rather than packaging them up in a distribution-agnostic manner as Blender, VMWare, Id, and Loki have done. This myth may serve the interests of the distribution promoters in question (in this case, UL), but it is a disservice to the GNU/Linux community as a whole by creating unneeded incompatabilities with other distributions and excercizing some degree of coercion for people to adopt the reference distribution instead. What is more, as other binary releases have proven, it is absolutly unnecessary.

It behooves us all, slackware, Debian, Gentoo, Mandrake, and Source Mage enthusiasts alike, to stand up and make sure the word gets out to commercial vendors that they can, and should, package their software in a distribution-agnostic manner so that they can target their entire marketplace, and not just a portion thereof, by packaging their software in standard tarballs, documenting precisely which versions of which dynamically linked libraries their software requires, and providing a statically linked binary-of-last-resort in parallel that will run regardless (this is important as distros mature and the old version of the software remains desirable anyway, so it not only allows any distro access to the software, it also provides insurance that the software will run on most any GNU/Linux distro 5 years hence, or even longer, long after the state of the art has moved a great deal further along).

Re:LINK CORRECTION (0, Troll)

pgpckt (312866) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814250)

I'll just stick to the best distribution [debian.org] and watch the fun from afar

should be

I'll just stick to the best distribution [slackware.com] and watch the fun from afar

should be

I'll just stick to the best distribution [redhat.com] and watch the fun from afar

Its ok, everyone makes mistakes.

UnitedLinux would stifle innovation (3, Insightful)

fishlet (93611) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814105)

I think that Mandrake tends to be an early adopter of new features... more so than other more conservative distro's like Red Hat. Whether that's a good thing or not is a whole other discussion- I personally think it's great. Mandrake was (one-of) the first to use a graphical installer, journaling file systems, etc. I imagine being part of a coalition like 'UnitedLinux' would entail restrictions as to what they can and cannot do. I'm glad that Mandrake has decided to continue choosing their own path.

Best Distribution link? (0, Troll)

Kaypro (35263) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814124)

Why is the link for "best distribution" linked to www.debian.org? I though Gentoo's site was www.gentoo.org?

UnitedLinux is not the solution (5, Interesting)

bigjocker (113512) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814130)

We Linux users know there is a problem with the current linux distributions. It's not only an interoperability problem, but a core one. We have came to a point where we knew we were going to get to, but we haven't tought of a solution because we were making linux ready for the mainstream. Now is the time to solve this, UnitedLinux is a start, but, as many of you, I dont like the approach they took.

We all know all the problems with RPM based distros, compatibility between them breaks a lot, and, even if you should have only one RPM for any distro, when we go to download an application we get a RH6.X.rpm, RH7.rpm, MDK8.rpm, MKD8.1.rpm, etc ...

I'm a Mandrake user, and I love it, but I have seen apt-get working, and I'm really impressed. I think apt-get is the right direction for a real package management tool for all distros. This is the direction package managment under Linux should be taking, and not creating commercial standards without atacking the core of the problem nor creating apt-like solutions or apt-like-frontends for rpm based solutions.

Conclution: LSB + apt-get should be mandatory to be able to call anything a Linux distribution. I know a lot of us would kill for apt-get to be the default package manager in all distributions.

Re:UnitedLinux is not the solution (3, Informative)

Seanasy (21730) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814215)

There's an RPM version of apt-get at freshrpms.net [freshrpms.net]. It's for Redhat but I don't see why it wouldn't work for Mandrake.

I don't think apt-get will solve the problem of different RPMs for different distros.

Flamebait story.. (2, Interesting)

Junta (36770) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814140)

I have a few favorite distros, and they all have their place.

Gentoo is my absolute personal favorite for personal systems. The major thing about FreeBSD I loved was the ports system, and here it is in Gentoo with a system that is more likely to get suspport from vendors. You can build *everything* with a nice automated build process with a good dependency management system and well designed configuration management. Tweaking make.conf can yield a very high performance system with only the optional dependencies you want. The price paid here is that this method of operation takes a great deal of time for a good install. Sure, a prebuilt stage3 can be used, but a) what's the fun in that? and b) still have to build X and desktops. Also, the portage maintainers mostly take software developers at their word that a package is ready and stable rather than having a heavy testing process. This is of course a double edged sword. On one hand you get all the cutting edge (or bleeding edge if you want) stuff before everyone else and it generally works well. However, the downside is that integration is not well tested and that stuff is left to the user. I personally am willing to test and debug in exchange for the system, but some don't like this.

Debian has a good distribution setup with apt, and can do a lot of the stuff portage does but with binaries which take less time to install, but are not as optimized. The testing process is certainly there, perhaps not highly organized and such, but what it lacks in organization it certainly makes up it time. Installing stable gets you a rock solid system, but the software is as old as dirt. If you aren't a performance freak nor do you care about the latest bells and whistles, user friendliness, but still want a *rock solid* distro, debian is good.

RedHat seems to have a more structured testing procedure that gets things out the door faster than debian, but not necessarily as stable. The free options for updates is far worse than debians. So if you want more up to date stuff than debian, need some good gui utilities to coddle you through certain configuration tasks, or want corporate support, and are willing to live without apt or portage and with a tiny amount more flakiness, RedHat is good.

Mandrake I like for desktop systems I don't want to be bothered with again. They consistantly have the most updated packages I've seen (outside of gentoo, of course). And for desktop configuration their tools are pretty damn easy to use. The price paid is increased flakiness, occasionally to the point of Windows 2000 flakiness, which isn't too bad, but not great. A common user will likely fare better with Mandrake than other distributions. For servers I would say debian or RedHat, maybe gentoo for home servers that can afford to take a long time to install stuff on, and for workstations/desktops mandrake or gentoo...

Re:Flamebait story.. (1)

diamondc (241058) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814226)

ahem.. apt for redhat is at http://freshrpms.net/apt/ - I use it on the RedHat servers I have to administer.

I tried to install Gentoo Linux the other week, but got bored compiling every single package. I just want to use my computer and not worry about getting at most 5% optimization.

Meanwhile, Debian's UL plans... (4, Funny)

Goonie (8651) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814151)

Debian Weekly News [debian.org] explains how Debian is, logically, going to become the basis for UnitedLinux.

Note to the uninitiated: The relevant paragraph has a typo, it's missing a ;-) on the end...

Re:Meanwhile, Debian's UL plans... (2)

anpe (217106) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814279)

I know this was a joke, but : "becoming the basis" as nothing to do with "being part" of UL. Mandrake obviously wants to avoid the latter.

Not Spam (5, Insightful)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814164)

I object to the term "spam" being used to describe the newsletter.

You have to opt-in to get it.

Re:Not Spam (1)

lovebyte (81275) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814243)

I agree it is no spam, but if you have a Yahoo account, Mandrake newsletters sometimes end up automatically in the Bulk Mail folder, sometimes they don't.

Best Distro? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814190)

Debian? No fucking way.
Everytime I've tried to install it, the sheer number of installation options (and the inability to go back and change your mind) has made me wish I could pull my own teeth instead.
Gentoo, on the other hand, give me TOTAL control over my system. Packages? We don't need no steenkeen packages! Build it yourself!

Re:Best Distro? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814217)

I agree with you, debian fucking sucks! NO USB MOUSE SUPPORT!

Here is the spam (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#3814191)

[ email addresses removed ]

X-From_: [removed]@mandrake.org Tue Jul 02 21:59:25 2002
Return-path: <[removed]@mandrake.org>
Envelope-to: [remmoved]@[removed].freeserve.co.uk
Delivery-dat e: Tue, 02 Jul 2002 21:59:25 +0100
Received: from [999.999.999.999] (helo=nwl.mandrake.org)
by imailg1b.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
id 17PUk9-0007Mk-00
for [removed]@[removed].freeserve.co.uk; Tue, 02 Jul 2002 21:59:25 +0100
Received: by nwl.mandrake.org (Postfix, from userid 504)
id B2B708D2B8; Tue, 2 Jul 2002 21:18:02 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mandrake Team <[removed]@mandrakesoft.com>
To: [removed]@[removed].freeserve.co.uk
Subject: Mandrake Newsletter: MandrakeSoft increase of capital.
Message-Id: <???????????????@nwl.mandrake.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 21:18:02 +0200 (CEST)
Status: R
X-Status: N

Newsletter Flash: MandrakeSoft increase of capital.

Several people have requested additional information regarding
MandrakeSoft's increase of capital before making any final decisions.
MandrakeSoft answers the most frequently asked questions including:

- The reasons why MandrakeSoft will not join United Linux.
- MandrakeSoft's business model & approach to the Linux market.
- When will MandrakeSoft become a profitable company?

Read the answers here:
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/company/investo rs/bsa/ faq2

Answers to other frequently asked questions:
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/company/in vestors/bsa/ faq

Details of the increase of capital are described here:
http://www.mandrakesoft.com/company/investo rs/bsa

Note: the operation will close on July, 10th!

You are receiving this newsletter because you have subscribed to one of
the Mandrake services. To be removed from this mailing list, please see the bottom
of this page for instructions.

Want to be removed from this list? Click the following link:
http://mandrake.com/cgi-bin/regnl.pl?em=[re moved]% 40[removed].freeserve.co.uk&el=1&ctr=n
Or send this email:
mailto:[removed]@mandrakesoft.com?subject= Rmve,[re moved]%40[removed].freeserve.co.uk,ctrn

Holding UL for Ransom (1)

Eversor (24917) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814196)

Well I thought for a while that UL was actually going to be a good thing. It will be something to unite linux, and finally get away from crap like RPM. But then I heard that Ransom Love will be heading it up. Well there's another linux project that you may as well flush down the toilet. This guy is probably the closest thing to "the enemy on the inside" that the linux community has. He is reckless, greedy, and VERY Unappreciative [slashdot.org]. I was holding alot of hope for the UL project, but now it's just gone to hell. I'll just continue to keep to myself in the corner with my slackware box.

Debian & UnitedLinux (2, Redundant)

BlueWonder (130989) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814225)

I'll just stick to the
best distribution [debian.org] and watch the fun from afar ;)

The Debian Weekly News [debian.org] say:

We are happy to
learn [com.com] that UnitedLinux will apparently be based on the Debian distribution, since Ex-CEO of Caldera, Ransom Love, will be trying to find a way to include members such as Debian, which don't have the commercial focus of the current UnitedLinux partners -- and to us this looks like the only logical way.

Anybody else switching to Mandrake? (1)

Te1waz (453498) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814230)

I primarily use Linux as a desktop OS, and I am not too keen on the idea that these distro companies are creating a two tier OS. 1st Class for Enterprise and the scraps for the single package customers.
I've had limited success in encouraging the use of linux in my company, the mail servers are to switch to linux some time soon, probably using RED HAT as they had problems configuring the Lotus Notes Servers in Suse.

Since the Sys Admin people trial ran using my 7.3 DVD and failed then tried Red Hat I wonder if other opportunities will be lost in the future if the 'value-added' United Linux label distros leave the Personal and Professional flavours behind.

companies want that (2, Interesting)

ghopper (580600) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814231)

They're not targeting individuals here, there targeting large companies. The kind of companies that are reluctant to buy in to an open source operating system now, because they're afraid that the distributor will go out of business tomorrow. Now that fear will be alleviated because there will be dozens of "compatible" distros. And the companies will require that the software they purchase for Linux be "certified UL compatible".

United Linux wont give us better distros, and it wont make Linux distros any more compatible with each other. However, it will create a bureaucracy which will give corporate managers a nice warm fuzzy. It's a marketing gimmick, and the corporations of the world will fall for it. It's too bad that most corporate IT managers are so clueless.

Mandrake wants to be the Micros$oft of Linux (0, Flamebait)

spongebobsquarepants (588438) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814238)

Anyone who has kept track of the dealings of Mandrake knows that their only motivation is money. They pushed their 'club' membership, then screwed their members over the SO6 fiasco. But they did offer a way for their members to upgrade their membership (money required) to receive the benefits that the members were led to believe that they already had. Also, Mandrake puts library files etc in such bizarre places in their distro that it is rare if ever that you can actually compile the source code for some piece of software, even with some creative modifications of makefiles and symbolic links. This is reminiscent of Microsuck's failure to comply to standards or to make their own standards. This is the very reason that United Linux will succeed over Mandrake...conformity to community expectations. Recently I switched to SuSE to overcome both of the above issues, and their distro hasa performd great without the monetary requirements or the loss of sanity trying to compile programs.

Why you're all incorrect about UnitedLinux (3, Interesting)

k8to (9046) | more than 11 years ago | (#3814287)

UnitedLinux is clearly an attempt to raise the commercial value of compatible and LSB-compliant linux distributions.

The Mandrake solution of 'blindly do whatever RedHat does' does make things somewhat compatable, but there are a lot of drawbacks to this strategy, and it doesn't really help the commercial software vendors at all if Red Hat decides to change what they provide from version to version. (And they do.)

The Linux Standard Base is useful, it is relevant, it is important. This draws attention to and raises the bar of interest in this regard.

Now, please explain, all you slashbots, how this is a bad thing?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...