Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [linux] Re: What distro now? (was: Hasta la vista CentOS/RHEL -- avoid it like the plague)

Expand Messages
  • ed
    ... Might want to try here: That s probably as close as you can get to Open Solaris (which isn t Solaris either). Maybe a VM and a
    Message 1 of 27 , Aug 30, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 04:03:58AM -0000, thad_floryan wrote:
      > [...]
      > Solaris: <http://distrowatch.com/solaris> no longer free :-(

      Might want to try here:

      <http://openindiana.org/>

      That's probably as close as you can get to Open Solaris (which isn't
      Solaris either).

      Maybe a VM and a bit of real benchmarking is required but I've not found
      any real performance gain with Solaris, but Oracle hardware is quite
      good IMO, again, proper benchmarking to arrive at a bang for pound value
      is required.

      --
      Best regards,
      Ed http://www.s5h.net/
    • thad_floryan
      ... Hi Ed, Now that looks very, VERY interesting! I did some quick searching and noted OpenIndiana is tied in to Illumos:
      Message 2 of 27 , Aug 30, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, ed <ed@...> wrote:
        >
        > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 04:03:58AM -0000, thad_floryan wrote:
        > > [...]
        > > Solaris: <http://distrowatch.com/solaris> no longer free :-(
        >
        > Might want to try here:
        >
        > <http://openindiana.org/>
        >
        > That's probably as close as you can get to Open Solaris (which isn't
        > Solaris either).
        > [...]

        Hi Ed,

        Now that looks very, VERY interesting! I did some quick searching and
        noted OpenIndiana is tied in to Illumos:

        <http://wiki.illumos.org/display/illumos/illumos+Home>

        I don't recognize their Sponsors and Partners, but this seems like it
        could be an excellent replacement for RHEL/CentOS.

        A fork of OpenSolaris seems very encouraging given its Solaris roots.

        Quick backgrounder: <http://distrowatch.com/openindiana>

        Live DVD here (you can guess what I'm gonna do today) after I check
        the hardware compatibility list just like Sun used to provide:

        <http://openindiana.org/download/>

        <http://dlc.openindiana.org/isos/151a5/oi-dev-151a5-live-x86.iso>

        Thank you VERY MUCH for the reference to OpenIndiana!

        Thad
      • ed
        ... It s not a drop in replacement for RHEL in any form, it is a little more GNU than Solaris I suppose, but it s not the same kernel, binaries probably wont
        Message 3 of 27 , Aug 30, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 07:52:45AM -0000, thad_floryan wrote:
          > [...]
          > Now that looks very, VERY interesting! I did some quick searching and
          > noted OpenIndiana is tied in to Illumos:
          >
          > <http://wiki.illumos.org/display/illumos/illumos+Home>
          >
          > I don't recognize their Sponsors and Partners, but this seems like it
          > could be an excellent replacement for RHEL/CentOS.
          >
          > A fork of OpenSolaris seems very encouraging given its Solaris roots.
          >
          > Quick backgrounder: <http://distrowatch.com/openindiana>

          It's not a drop in replacement for RHEL in any form, it is a little more
          GNU than Solaris I suppose, but it's not the same kernel, binaries
          probably wont "just work".

          Other things wont be the same, ptree vs pstree, netstat arguments,
          ifconfig peculiarities etc.

          --
          Best regards,
          Ed http://www.s5h.net/
        • thad_floryan
          ... Hi Ed, None of what you mentioned above is a problem. I m a Solaris guy from day one. I held the first Sun computer ever built in my hands at this
          Message 4 of 27 , Aug 30, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, ed <ed@...> wrote:
            >
            > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 07:52:45AM -0000, thad_floryan wrote:
            > > [...]
            > > Now that looks very, VERY interesting! I did some quick searching
            > > and noted OpenIndiana is tied in to Illumos:
            > >
            > > <http://wiki.illumos.org/display/illumos/illumos+Home>
            > >
            > > I don't recognize their Sponsors and Partners, but this seems
            > > like it could be an excellent replacement for RHEL/CentOS.
            > >
            > > A fork of OpenSolaris seems very encouraging given its Solaris
            > > roots.
            > >
            > > Quick backgrounder: <http://distrowatch.com/openindiana>
            >
            > It's not a drop in replacement for RHEL in any form, it is a little
            > more GNU than Solaris I suppose, but it's not the same kernel
            > binaries probably wont "just work".
            >
            > Other things wont be the same, ptree vs pstree, netstat arguments,
            > ifconfig peculiarities etc.

            Hi Ed,

            None of what you mentioned above is a problem. I'm a Solaris guy from
            day one. I held the first Sun computer ever built in my hands at this
            meeting at Hewlett-Packard Labs in Palo Alto CA in 1982, 30 years ago:

            <http://thadlabs.com/FILES/HPCQ_SUN.pdf> 1 page

            You can see 4 of my Sun systems in the background of this picture at
            top center to the left of the HP LaserJet 4050 printer; they're atop
            a LightWave KVM switch which feeds keyboard/mouse/video to the NEC LED
            display:

            <http://thadlabs.com/PIX/Thad_desk.jpg>

            The LightWave is controlled by this which is down and to the left of
            the LCD monitor:

            <http://thadlabs.com/PIX/Lightwave_remote.jpg>

            and there are another 15 Sun systems in another room. The bookshelf
            behind the chair I'm sitting in right now has this shelf of Sun OS
            packages from SunOS 4.1.4 (aka Solaris 1.1.1) to Solaris 9:

            <http://thadlabs.com/PIX/Solaris_SPARC_SW.jpg>

            My Solaris 10 system is the 2nd to the left from the LaserJet P2015dn
            printer on my desk; screenshot here:

            <http://thadlabs.com/PIX/Solaris_10_SS.png>

            and one of the most popular programs ever posted to the Usenet UNIX
            sources group is my tprobe program which I wrote to duplicate boot
            tapes which is a very difficult task because boot tapes all have
            variable-length records at the beginning. That program, written in
            1992, is still today frequently mentioned on Usenet in the comp and
            Sun groups. It was also written up in Dr. Dobb's Journal here:

            <http://www.ddj.com/cpp/184402700;jsessionid=4RUKT0VMOUVXSQSNDLPSKHSCJUNN2JVN?_requestid=139511>
            "
            " Copying boot tapes, or other multi-volume tapes under UNIX can be
            " troublesome. You often have to spool them to disk first, and there
            " isn't enough room. Thad Floryan has provided tprobe-1.0 which can
            " reveal a tapes-existing saveset layout, copy the tape using drives
            " located anywhere on the network, and perform media conversions.
            " Published as Volume 26, Issue 84, it even includes documentation.

            and is archived all over the world; the shortest URL for it I could
            find is this one (it's all ASCII and easy to read):

            <http://ae-www.technion.ac.il/pkgs/g-k/in/tprobe/tprobe>

            Point being: SunOS/Solaris is something I really like. Programs
            written/compiled on Solaris systems will likely run forever because
            Solaris doesn't obsolete anything written 20+ years ago which is why
            Solaris is enterprise level and RHEL/CentOS are NOT as I've displayed,
            documented and written about recently.

            Thad
          • ed
            ... Sure, but my point was just that OI is not compatible in the binary sense, nor in the sense that because a shell script works on RHEL that it would work on
            Message 5 of 27 , Aug 30, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 02:12:34AM -0000, thad_floryan wrote:
              > [...]
              > Point being: SunOS/Solaris is something I really like. Programs
              > written/compiled on Solaris systems will likely run forever because
              > Solaris doesn't obsolete anything written 20+ years ago which is why
              > Solaris is enterprise level and RHEL/CentOS are NOT as I've displayed,
              > documented and written about recently.

              Sure, but my point was just that OI is not compatible in the binary
              sense, nor in the sense that because a shell script works on RHEL that
              it would work on OI.

              Sun only maintained three versions backward compatibility I believe, so
              5.7 should be compatible with 5.10, I say should. Oracle have less
              backward compatibility in mind.

              As for things just running, well we have a web server that is used to
              serve PAC files to all desktop users, here's some details:

              <http://www.usenix.org.uk/wiki/Why_unix#apache>

              that same apache instance is still running today. It was started long
              before I joined the Ops team and probably will outlive me.

              --
              Best regards,
              Ed http://www.s5h.net/
            • thad_floryan
              ... Understood. For the most part the ONLY compatibility I care about is source-level. Every program I ve written since the late 1970s still runs on today s
              Message 6 of 27 , Aug 31, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, ed <ed@...> wrote:
                > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 02:12:34AM -0000, thad_floryan wrote:
                > > [...]
                > > Point being: SunOS/Solaris is something I really like. Programs
                > > written/compiled on Solaris systems will likely run forever because
                > > Solaris doesn't obsolete anything written 20+ years ago which is why
                > > Solaris is enterprise level and RHEL/CentOS are NOT as I've displayed,
                > > documented and written about recently.
                >
                > Sure, but my point was just that OI is not compatible in the binary
                > sense, nor in the sense that because a shell script works on RHEL that
                > it would work on OI.

                Understood. For the most part the ONLY compatibility I care about is
                source-level. Every program I've written since the late 1970s still
                runs on today's latest simply by recompiling though there are the
                occasional "glitches" with #include files which are normally easy to
                fix.

                One of my companies in 1972 had a JPL/NASA contract to "prove" the
                tenets of software ENGINEERING (emphasis on engineering which most
                so-called developers today haven't a clue about) and software porta- bility. We succeeded and ported two products, a version of SuperBASIC
                and our premiere database product both written in assembly language
                for a PDP-10 to assembly languages for IBM 370s, CDC 3300s, Burroughs
                5500, etc. (15 different OSs in all) using just the design flowcharts
                and slave student labor from Stanford University. :-)

                One can see how I used the experience from that contract when you
                look at all the different UNIX and Linux (yes, I've tested it) systems
                upon which my tprobe program successfully compiles and runs. Source
                code here (shortest URL of which I'm aware for it):

                <http://ae-www.technion.ac.il/pkgs/g-k/in/tprobe/tprobe>

                The person who is now my best friend was one of those Stanford
                "student slaves" and became a full-time employee working for me after
                his graduation. He later worked 29 years, 11 months and 10 days for
                HP Labs until his department went belly-up, then for Nokia reporting
                to the CTO in Palo Alto CA until that division went belly-up and he's
                now, as of 3 weeks ago, at Cisco HQ in San Jose CA.

                > Sun only maintained three versions backward compatibility I
                > believe, so 5.7 should be compatible with 5.10, I say should.
                > Oracle have less backward compatibility in mind.

                That sounds about right for pure binary executable compatibility.

                Note 5.7 (Solaris 7) debuted November 1998. That's 14 years ago and
                binaries from that still run on Solaris 10. Source compatibility
                exists from at least as far back as the 1980s because I still have
                programs I wrote then that still compile and run today on Solaris 10.

                Oracle is a trainwreck. What more can I say? :-)

                > [...]
                > As for things just running, well we have a web server that is used
                > to serve PAC files to all desktop users, here's some details:
                >
                > <http://www.usenix.org.uk/wiki/Why_unix#apache>
                >
                > that same apache instance is still running today. It was started
                > long before I joined the Ops team and probably will outlive me.

                I believe it! We'll never see such reliability from the likes of
                RHEL, though -- they simply have no discipline as we re-discover
                almost every day.

                100% software reliability is achievable. The first program I wrote
                solo at NIS (a company I co-founded in Los Altos CA in late 1971) was
                for Dunegan-Endevco (ex. Lawrence Livermore Labs). The project was
                two-fold.

                The first part was a complete OS from scratch for an Interdata 8/32:

                <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interdata_7/32_and_8/32>

                I couldn't use the commercial OSs on it (UNIX) because this had to be
                a real-time system (as in F-A-S-T) due to the second part.

                The second part was termed "VTS" for "Vessel Test System". The vessels
                were those for light-water nukes (for power) and the key item was a
                discovery by Bill Carver of Dunegan-Endevco and his brother Bob of
                Carver Audio:

                <http://www.carveraudio.com/>

                that stainless-steel pressure spheres used in the reactors emitted
                high-frequency audio when stressed. 4-CH quad phonograph pickups
                were used in a rigid framework (think geodesic sphere) so stress
                could be detected and located. That was my job, to develop a software
                solution to pinpoint any stress points before a pressure sphere might
                become dangerous. I had to develop everything from scratch, put it up
                on a video monitor pinpointing the stress point(s), and drive two
                cassette tape drives on a dual-drive Texas Instruments model 700-
                something thermal printing terminal.

                I did everything from start to finish in 6 weeks which included 2 days
                at the Stanford math library. V1 of the software was installed and
                the only, REPEAT ONLY, "bug" was the carriage return delay time on the
                TI thermal printer due to a error in the printer's tech manual. I was
                able to patch the binary code on the spot and everything has worked
                perfectly since. No errors, no bugs, 100% perfectly for well over a
                decade or two with no software revisions required ever.

                Note all the code for the above two-fold project was in assembler code
                and 100% documented with flow charts and my written descriptions of
                every portion of code.

                That is what real software engineering is all about and why I'm so
                disgusted when I encounter crapola like I recently experienced with
                CentOS.

                Thad
              • Allen D. Tate
                ... So it turns out that the webmail interface Horde is part of the Extras repository so I issued the good old yum install horde command and it appears to
                Message 7 of 27 , Sep 7, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:47 PM, thad_floryan <thad@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, "Allen D. Tate" <allentaterocks@...> wrote:
                  > > [...]
                  > > I forgot to mention the little niggle that I have several instances of
                  > > Wordpress installed for my staff blogs and it is stuck at a specific
                  > > version because the newer versions of Wordpress depends upon PHP 5.3x
                  > > and as it stands now, my Wordpress installs are all out of date and
                  > > need security patches/upgrades, etc. THAT is what this is really all
                  > > about.
                  >
                  > OK, that's a good reason to effect a change, not necessarily an upgrade
                  > of your current system.

                  So it turns out that the webmail interface Horde is part of the Extras
                  repository so I issued the good old "yum install horde" command and it
                  appears to have installed. Now I have to do some Googling to figure out how
                  to configure the darn thing. HA HA! Sounds like a task that may wait until
                  Monday for me to dig in and get my fingers dirty. :-)


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • thad_floryan
                  ... You want to do this: Google horde install webmail (without the quotes) Might want to check some of the reviews to be sure it does what you really want to
                  Message 8 of 27 , Sep 7, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In linux@yahoogroups.com, "Allen D. Tate" <allentaterocks@...> wrote:
                    > [...]
                    > So it turns out that the webmail interface Horde is part of the Extras
                    > repository so I issued the good old "yum install horde" command and it
                    > appears to have installed. Now I have to do some Googling to figure
                    > out how to configure the darn thing. HA HA! Sounds like a task that
                    > may wait until Monday for me to dig in and get my fingers dirty. :-)

                    You want to do this: Google "horde install webmail" (without the quotes)

                    Might want to check some of the reviews to be sure it does what you
                    really want to do: to replace SquirrelMail which I've found to be as
                    slow as frozen molasses in a Vermont Winter :-)

                    Thad
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.