OT: File Server at home
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
Jim85CJ proclaimed:
> "Linux is certainly not ducked taped togrther"
> I admit it is much better than it was in the early 90s but it still is
> nowhere near solaris/aix/hp-ux. As for Linux vs Windows? No
> comparison, Linux kicks windows ***; that's not saying much.
For ease of use even in loosely coupled or massively parallel clusters
Linux can outscale pretty much everything except AIX. Personally I
prefer Solaris as well but to use it effectively you need some serious
VM internals, IO Subsystem, and Solaris networking background.
> "Linux is certainly not ducked taped togrther"
> I admit it is much better than it was in the early 90s but it still is
> nowhere near solaris/aix/hp-ux. As for Linux vs Windows? No
> comparison, Linux kicks windows ***; that's not saying much.
For ease of use even in loosely coupled or massively parallel clusters
Linux can outscale pretty much everything except AIX. Personally I
prefer Solaris as well but to use it effectively you need some serious
VM internals, IO Subsystem, and Solaris networking background.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
Jim85CJ proclaimed:
> "Linux is certainly not ducked taped togrther"
> I admit it is much better than it was in the early 90s but it still is
> nowhere near solaris/aix/hp-ux. As for Linux vs Windows? No
> comparison, Linux kicks windows ***; that's not saying much.
For ease of use even in loosely coupled or massively parallel clusters
Linux can outscale pretty much everything except AIX. Personally I
prefer Solaris as well but to use it effectively you need some serious
VM internals, IO Subsystem, and Solaris networking background.
> "Linux is certainly not ducked taped togrther"
> I admit it is much better than it was in the early 90s but it still is
> nowhere near solaris/aix/hp-ux. As for Linux vs Windows? No
> comparison, Linux kicks windows ***; that's not saying much.
For ease of use even in loosely coupled or massively parallel clusters
Linux can outscale pretty much everything except AIX. Personally I
prefer Solaris as well but to use it effectively you need some serious
VM internals, IO Subsystem, and Solaris networking background.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
Jim85CJ proclaimed:
> "Linux is certainly not ducked taped togrther"
> I admit it is much better than it was in the early 90s but it still is
> nowhere near solaris/aix/hp-ux. As for Linux vs Windows? No
> comparison, Linux kicks windows ***; that's not saying much.
For ease of use even in loosely coupled or massively parallel clusters
Linux can outscale pretty much everything except AIX. Personally I
prefer Solaris as well but to use it effectively you need some serious
VM internals, IO Subsystem, and Solaris networking background.
> "Linux is certainly not ducked taped togrther"
> I admit it is much better than it was in the early 90s but it still is
> nowhere near solaris/aix/hp-ux. As for Linux vs Windows? No
> comparison, Linux kicks windows ***; that's not saying much.
For ease of use even in loosely coupled or massively parallel clusters
Linux can outscale pretty much everything except AIX. Personally I
prefer Solaris as well but to use it effectively you need some serious
VM internals, IO Subsystem, and Solaris networking background.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
Joe proclaimed:
> "Linux is a clean easy to use os"
> Basic things require kernel rebuilds... That sucks. If no changes are
> needed it will run forever but it is far from easy to use.
Even as late as SVR4 many of the major unix variants required system
rebuilds to do much with. Then some folks started releasing pseudo
source that would be interpreted as the system booted and some even
used a write-enabled crash to poke the kernel.
As for needing to rebuild the Linux kernel, not sure why you'd be
doing that unless you were modifying the kernel itself or adding a
driver that needed some type of kernel support that was not already
in your existing kernel. Granted it doesn't have the ndd commands or
/etc/systems file, but seen more folks shoot their feet off with
both of those than ever fixed much that was actually broken.
> "Linux is a clean easy to use os"
> Basic things require kernel rebuilds... That sucks. If no changes are
> needed it will run forever but it is far from easy to use.
Even as late as SVR4 many of the major unix variants required system
rebuilds to do much with. Then some folks started releasing pseudo
source that would be interpreted as the system booted and some even
used a write-enabled crash to poke the kernel.
As for needing to rebuild the Linux kernel, not sure why you'd be
doing that unless you were modifying the kernel itself or adding a
driver that needed some type of kernel support that was not already
in your existing kernel. Granted it doesn't have the ndd commands or
/etc/systems file, but seen more folks shoot their feet off with
both of those than ever fixed much that was actually broken.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
Joe proclaimed:
> "Linux is a clean easy to use os"
> Basic things require kernel rebuilds... That sucks. If no changes are
> needed it will run forever but it is far from easy to use.
Even as late as SVR4 many of the major unix variants required system
rebuilds to do much with. Then some folks started releasing pseudo
source that would be interpreted as the system booted and some even
used a write-enabled crash to poke the kernel.
As for needing to rebuild the Linux kernel, not sure why you'd be
doing that unless you were modifying the kernel itself or adding a
driver that needed some type of kernel support that was not already
in your existing kernel. Granted it doesn't have the ndd commands or
/etc/systems file, but seen more folks shoot their feet off with
both of those than ever fixed much that was actually broken.
> "Linux is a clean easy to use os"
> Basic things require kernel rebuilds... That sucks. If no changes are
> needed it will run forever but it is far from easy to use.
Even as late as SVR4 many of the major unix variants required system
rebuilds to do much with. Then some folks started releasing pseudo
source that would be interpreted as the system booted and some even
used a write-enabled crash to poke the kernel.
As for needing to rebuild the Linux kernel, not sure why you'd be
doing that unless you were modifying the kernel itself or adding a
driver that needed some type of kernel support that was not already
in your existing kernel. Granted it doesn't have the ndd commands or
/etc/systems file, but seen more folks shoot their feet off with
both of those than ever fixed much that was actually broken.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
Joe proclaimed:
> "Linux is a clean easy to use os"
> Basic things require kernel rebuilds... That sucks. If no changes are
> needed it will run forever but it is far from easy to use.
Even as late as SVR4 many of the major unix variants required system
rebuilds to do much with. Then some folks started releasing pseudo
source that would be interpreted as the system booted and some even
used a write-enabled crash to poke the kernel.
As for needing to rebuild the Linux kernel, not sure why you'd be
doing that unless you were modifying the kernel itself or adding a
driver that needed some type of kernel support that was not already
in your existing kernel. Granted it doesn't have the ndd commands or
/etc/systems file, but seen more folks shoot their feet off with
both of those than ever fixed much that was actually broken.
> "Linux is a clean easy to use os"
> Basic things require kernel rebuilds... That sucks. If no changes are
> needed it will run forever but it is far from easy to use.
Even as late as SVR4 many of the major unix variants required system
rebuilds to do much with. Then some folks started releasing pseudo
source that would be interpreted as the system booted and some even
used a write-enabled crash to poke the kernel.
As for needing to rebuild the Linux kernel, not sure why you'd be
doing that unless you were modifying the kernel itself or adding a
driver that needed some type of kernel support that was not already
in your existing kernel. Granted it doesn't have the ndd commands or
/etc/systems file, but seen more folks shoot their feet off with
both of those than ever fixed much that was actually broken.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
Joe proclaimed:
> "Linux is a clean easy to use os"
> Basic things require kernel rebuilds... That sucks. If no changes are
> needed it will run forever but it is far from easy to use.
Even as late as SVR4 many of the major unix variants required system
rebuilds to do much with. Then some folks started releasing pseudo
source that would be interpreted as the system booted and some even
used a write-enabled crash to poke the kernel.
As for needing to rebuild the Linux kernel, not sure why you'd be
doing that unless you were modifying the kernel itself or adding a
driver that needed some type of kernel support that was not already
in your existing kernel. Granted it doesn't have the ndd commands or
/etc/systems file, but seen more folks shoot their feet off with
both of those than ever fixed much that was actually broken.
> "Linux is a clean easy to use os"
> Basic things require kernel rebuilds... That sucks. If no changes are
> needed it will run forever but it is far from easy to use.
Even as late as SVR4 many of the major unix variants required system
rebuilds to do much with. Then some folks started releasing pseudo
source that would be interpreted as the system booted and some even
used a write-enabled crash to poke the kernel.
As for needing to rebuild the Linux kernel, not sure why you'd be
doing that unless you were modifying the kernel itself or adding a
driver that needed some type of kernel support that was not already
in your existing kernel. Granted it doesn't have the ndd commands or
/etc/systems file, but seen more folks shoot their feet off with
both of those than ever fixed much that was actually broken.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
L.W.(ßill) ------ III proclaimed:
> http://www.pcanywhere.com/
Symantec still selling that stuff? Cracker bait. Might as well
install Terminal Services or Remote Desktop server...
> http://www.pcanywhere.com/
Symantec still selling that stuff? Cracker bait. Might as well
install Terminal Services or Remote Desktop server...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
L.W.(ßill) ------ III proclaimed:
> http://www.pcanywhere.com/
Symantec still selling that stuff? Cracker bait. Might as well
install Terminal Services or Remote Desktop server...
> http://www.pcanywhere.com/
Symantec still selling that stuff? Cracker bait. Might as well
install Terminal Services or Remote Desktop server...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: OT: File Server at home
L.W.(ßill) ------ III proclaimed:
> http://www.pcanywhere.com/
Symantec still selling that stuff? Cracker bait. Might as well
install Terminal Services or Remote Desktop server...
> http://www.pcanywhere.com/
Symantec still selling that stuff? Cracker bait. Might as well
install Terminal Services or Remote Desktop server...
