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
Fast/Flexible Linux OS Recovery
On Demand Now
In this live one-hour webinar, learn how to enhance your existing backup strategies for complete disaster recovery preparedness using Storix System Backup Administrator (SBAdmin), a highly flexible full-system recovery solution for UNIX and Linux systems.
Join Linux Journal's Shawn Powers and David Huffman, President/CEO, Storix, Inc.
Free to Linux Journal readers.Register Now!
- Download "Linux Management with Red Hat Satellite: Measuring Business Impact and ROI"
- ServersCheck's Thermal Imaging Camera Sensor
- The Italian Army Switches to LibreOffice
- Linux Mint 18
- Chris Birchall's Re-Engineering Legacy Software (Manning Publications)
- Petros Koutoupis' RapidDisk
- Oracle vs. Google: Round 2
- The FBI and the Mozilla Foundation Lock Horns over Known Security Hole
- Privacy and the New Math
Until recently, IBM’s Power Platform was looked upon as being the system that hosted IBM’s flavor of UNIX and proprietary operating system called IBM i. These servers often are found in medium-size businesses running ERP, CRM and financials for on-premise customers. By enabling the Power platform to run the Linux OS, IBM now has positioned Power to be the platform of choice for those already running Linux that are facing scalability issues, especially customers looking at analytics, big data or cloud computing.
￼Running Linux on IBM’s Power hardware offers some obvious benefits, including improved processing speed and memory bandwidth, inherent security, and simpler deployment and management. But if you look beyond the impressive architecture, you’ll also find an open ecosystem that has given rise to a strong, innovative community, as well as an inventory of system and network management applications that really help leverage the benefits offered by running Linux on Power.Get the Guide