Letters to the Editor
It has been pointed out to me that KHello no longer compiles correctly. This is because the KDE API has changed since the time my article “A First Look at KDE Programming” (August, 1998) and program were written. An updated version of the khello source code can now be found at http://www.chaos.umd.edu/~dsweet/KDE/KHello and in the tar file ftp://ftp.linuxjournal.com/pub/lj/listings/issue52/2653.tgz on the LJ FTP site.
—David Sweet firstname.lastname@example.org
I have thought about running Linux on an Intel notebook. As I began to look for notebooks which support Linux, I found a site that sells UNIX Server notebooks at http://www.tadpole.com/. They have both SPARC and Alpha notebooks. I was quite impressed. A SPARC20 model of the notebook supports Linux as well as an Alpha version.
Anyway, I thought your readers might like to know about this site. Maybe one day we will see a review of these notebooks in LJ.
—Robert Binzr email@example.com
If you get one, maybe you could do the review. —Editor
I just noticed that the article I wrote entitled “Linux Hits The Big Leagues” was printed with an incorrect e-mail address for me. The address should be altered to firstname.lastname@example.org from email@example.com. Thanks.
—Sam Williams firstname.lastname@example.org
Simon Maurice's letter in the June Linux Journal leaves me speechless, so I have to type this response.
He accuses Red Hat of delivering a “truly bad release” and, as evidence, draws our attention to the errata list that includes listings of bugs for which no fix is yet available. Surely openness about what's fixed and what's not is at the heart of the Open Source movement. To go on and claim that Red Hat is behaving in a very Microsoft-like way defies both logic and the day-to-day experiences of system administrators around the world.
One could claim that Red Hat does not write the software containing these bugs, they merely package it, but in truth they do far more than that. Red Hat does a good job in maintaining their distribution and keeping it current. Their pioneering work with glibc (alongside the Debian project) is just one example of a benefit to the wider Linux community. If Mr. Maurice doesn't want to download a whole RPM file, he is welcome to download the source of any package and track patches from its maintainer. Nothing in the Red Hat distribution forces him to use RPMs—most users find them extremely convenient.
—Grant McLean email@example.com
I just finished reading the July issue, and I must say that it will most likely go on the shelf, never to be read by me again. I found no useful article in the entire issue. Don't get me wrong, I am all for Linux success stories, but most of the articles were so technically dry that I lost interest after a paragraph. I have been a subscriber since January 1998, and this is the first issue to achieve the title of “useless”. That being said, I love LJ and wish to see the ongoing improvement of both Linux and LJ. Thank you for hearing my whine.
—Griffin Caprio firstname.lastname@example.org
I have a couple of comments on an article in the June 1998 issue: “Introducing the Network Information Service for Linux” by Preston Brown.
At the time of writing (February 1998), the latest version of Red Hat was 5.0, not 4.2, so the remark about an older version of ypserv in 4.2 has no value. What I do find a little odd is that 5.0 (released December '97) shipped the same version of ypserv, considering 1.2.5 had been out since mid-October. Currently, though, Red Hat 5.1 ships 1.3.1, which was (presumably, considering we now have 1.3.2) the latest one when they closed the distribution (June 1998).
The /contrib/hurricane directory contains software for Red Hat 5.0 (code name Hurricane, a glibc-based distribution) that can't be used (except in a few trivial cases) on libc5-based systems, such as Red Hat 4.2.
I'd like to know which features I missed by not having ypbind, but the article doesn't give this information; I can only say that all my programs worked flawlessly.
domainname was not invoked in Red Hat 4.2, but is present in Red Hat 5.0 (see the comment above on release dates).
—Andrea Borgia email@example.com
|Nativ Disc||Sep 23, 2016|
|Android Browser Security--What You Haven't Been Told||Sep 22, 2016|
|The Many Paths to a Solution||Sep 21, 2016|
|Synopsys' Coverity||Sep 20, 2016|
|Naztech's Roadstar 5 Car Charger||Sep 16, 2016|
|RPi-Powered pi-topCEED Makes the Case as a Low-Cost Modular Learning Desktop||Sep 15, 2016|
- Android Browser Security--What You Haven't Been Told
- Download "Linux Management with Red Hat Satellite: Measuring Business Impact and ROI"
- The Many Paths to a Solution
- Nativ Disc
- Naztech's Roadstar 5 Car Charger
- Synopsys' Coverity
- Securing the Programmer
- RPi-Powered pi-topCEED Makes the Case as a Low-Cost Modular Learning Desktop
- Glass Padding
- Identity: Our Last Stand
With all the industry talk about the benefits of Linux on Power and all the performance advantages offered by its open architecture, you may be considering a move in that direction. If you are thinking about analytics, big data and cloud computing, you would be right to evaluate Power. The idea of using commodity x86 hardware and replacing it every three years is an outdated cost model. It doesn’t consider the total cost of ownership, and it doesn’t consider the advantage of real processing power, high-availability and multithreading like a demon.
This ebook takes a look at some of the practical applications of the Linux on Power platform and ways you might bring all the performance power of this open architecture to bear for your organization. There are no smoke and mirrors here—just hard, cold, empirical evidence provided by independent sources. I also consider some innovative ways Linux on Power will be used in the future.Get the Guide