Linux-Advocacy Digest #159, Volume #30 Fri, 10 Nov 00 12:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? (Craig Kelley)
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Craig Kelley)
Re: OS stability ("Mike")
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Craig Kelley)
Re: Another Silent Computer :( (Black Dragon)
Re: Linus Confirms 2.4 In December (Craig Kelley)
Re: RedHat BugList Summary (Craig Kelley)
Re: Into the abyss of the WinTroll mind (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux get new term? (Craig Kelley)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux vs Microsoft Misconceptions: ("Mike")
Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Steve Mading)
Re: Another Silent Computer :( (Craig Kelley)
Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? (.)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (The Ghost In The
Machine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:36:49 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I've never seen a real-time version of NT.
> >
> > Where is it? (just curious)
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/nt/default.asp
>
> Is the embedded version of NT. If you include the real-time extensions
> offered by VentureCom (WNT/E includes a subset of VentureCom's product, but
> it's not strictly hard real-time unless you add the full real-time
> extensions) then it's completely deterministic down to 6.7 microsecond
> accuracies.
>
> http://www.vci.com/products/vci_products/rtx/rtx_nt_overview.html
Neat. Interesting that they don't list prices... :)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:38:57 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Curtis <alliem@kas*spam*net.com> wrote:
>
> > You're changing the goal posts. The original claim was that WinNT cannot
> > run real time applications. This is simply false.
>
> Alright, I conceed. But this is true:
>
> NT cannot run realtime applications in realtime.
... without purchasing 3rd party software:
http://www.vci.com/products/vci_products/rtx/rtx_nt_overview.html
this seems as close to real-time as you're going to get on x86 with a
real operating system running.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:43:01 -0700
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> So you can't use Oracle on Linux for >2GB databases without fancy
> techniques or special filesystems.
>
> Thank you for finally ending this thread of this topic.
Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance of database technology, in
particular Oracle.
I think I'll go back to work on my 80 gigabyte Oracle database which
runs under Linux now.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS stability
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:43:15 GMT
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ud4os$s0h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The people at netcraft have started tracking uptime. Here is the top 50
> "up-times"
>
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/today/top.avg.html
>
...
> The longest uptime on the list comes from Universitaetsklinikum Rudolf
> Virchow with 825 days, OVER 2 years! Number 50 came was Octel
> Communications Corporation at just under a year, arespectable 347 days!
> Linux's best reported uptime? Over a year 406 days.
>
> But what about MS? None in the top 50? Well to be fair W2000 has only
> been out for what 9 months and the best uptime I found came from Dell
> with a W2K server up for 81 days less than 1/3 of the total time w2k has
> been out. The best w2k uptime reported by MS? 75 long days!
...
> These are not benchmarks or staged tests, this is the real world folks!
But are these numbers meaningful? It seems to me that what you're really
interested in is unexpected downtime, and uptime doesn't tell you that. Our
Unix servers are shut down for routine maintenaince on a regular basis
(regular being every six months or so). We've never considered this to be a
reliability issue, and quite frankly, I can't see why it should be. We think
(and our hardware vendor agrees) that our systems are more reliable if they
are routinely maintained.
Our Unix systems are quite reliable, but you'd never know that from uptime
reports.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:45:55 -0700
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Goldhammer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > That is quite nonsensical.
>
> How so? How do you get >2GB databases with Oracle on Linux?
The same way we ran >2GB databases on AIX 3. Chad, if you don't know
what you're talking about it's probably not a good idea to opine.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:46:50 -0700
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Relax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3a0b4b5f$0$14416$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Ketil Z Malde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In my book, S.u.S.E has "released" Linux with ReiserFS. Does that
> > > count? It's still being worked on, of course. Does that make it not
> > > count?
> >
> > Let's put it in another way: would you bet your job on it?
>
> Yes - I'm running it in production on some machines where the speed
> of recovery after a possible power loss or other failure is important.
> One machine has >100Gigs (after hardware raid eats a bit) so an
> e2fsck run would take a long time. But, it hasn't been down since
> the initial testing several months ago.
Just curious: Why not invest in a UPS instead?
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Black Dragon)
Subject: Re: Another Silent Computer :(
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:44:29 GMT
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 15:27:48 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `[EMAIL PROTECTED]' said:
>Damm what you Linvocates have to go through these days to get sound.
I have a big, expensive entertainment center in my living room for sound.
It's called using the proper tool for the job, you stupid fuck!
--
Black Dragon
Sign The Linux Driver Petition:
http://www.libralinux.com/petition.english.html
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linus Confirms 2.4 In December
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:49:05 -0700
"Relax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "His statement says that he knows of no major showstoppers, and that he's
> asking the major devel houses to deploy the test kernels internally and
> start bug testing. Early December, hopefully, for a release"
>
> Start bug testing in mid-November, release in early December...
>
> ROTFL!
I've been running the test kernels for months without a single panic.
He's talking about bug testing a specific kernel, not the whole
series.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: RedHat BugList Summary
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:51:31 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:39:18 GMT, Tom Wilson wrote:
> >> > Remember the "Ping of Death"? MS's ping utility could generate
>
> >No he's not. I watched a kid do it once.
> >Locked an NT4.0 server up as tight as a drum.
> >I'm quite sure it isn't possible now, but, it used to be!
>
> A flood will slow down anything for a while, but IIRC the POD only
> effected 3.5x
Nope, it affected NT4 as well.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Into the abyss of the WinTroll mind
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:55:03 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Craig Kelley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 09 Nov 2000 16:06:46 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 06:00:33 -0500, Mike Raeder
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Realistically, if you don't like Linux, why don't you just go play in
>> >some MS group?
>>
>> Because I like to watch people like you squirm when Linux is exposed
>> as the junk that it is.
>> If it weren't for people like me, the public might be mislead by the
>> lies and half truths about linsux that substitute for fact around
>> here.
>
>That's funny; we've saved the taxpayers thousands of dollars *while at
>the same time* making our jobs easier by moving away from Windows NT.
>
>I suppose I was misled?
Yes, of course you were misled; you would have saved the taxpayers
*millions of dollars* by moving to the absolute newest Windows 2000
and Windows Me, Special Governmental Edition. :-) :-) :-)
(That's the edition that occasionally sends keypresses of our
governmental officials to a centralized server somewhere in Redmond. :-)
Available Real Soon Now.)
Oh, and upgrading your desktop hardware to dual-processor 1.2 Ghz
PIII Xeons with 512 MB memory. :-) All 2,000 of them.
>
>--
>The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
>Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.politics.election
Subject: Re: Linux get new term?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:55:08 -0700
Moderator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Bradley J. Milton" wrote:
> >
> > Now that Bush won the election, what does that mean for Linux?
> > I understand that the White House uses a lot of Windoze now. Do
> > you think this trend will continue under the new administration,
> > or is there hope that there will be more support for Alternate
> > OS'es for the Internet Age?
>
> Seeing how the republican party has sided with Microsoft in this
> anti-trust case, and has even considered passing legislation that
> wouldn't let Microsoft not be a monopoly, I doubt it.
That is so much bullshit.
Penfield Jackson is a conservative judge appointed by Ronald Reagan.
The lawsuit was started in large by Senator Orin Hatch, a republican
from Utah.
The plaintiffs are states' attourney generals who are mixed-partisan
Linux saves taxpayer's money; a definite conservative platform.
> And it isn't decided yet. The difference is down to 217 votes, with
> a few largely democratic counties that haven't finished counting.
Not to mention the tantrum of lawsuits that Gore is threatening.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:56:59 -0700
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Curtis" <alliem@kas*spam*net.com> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote...
> > > I disagree, no other OS, except maybe the Mac, which was very costly in the
> > > time span we are talking about, came even close to Windows GUI in comfort
> > > and ease of use.
> >
> > OS/2 anyone? Unfortunately, the extra cost was a deterrent. Not to
> > mention IBM's 'brilliant' marketing.
>
> Um... OS/2's UI sucked. It was completely unintuitive. IBM didn't have
> to market OS/2, its suckiness preceeded it.
Anything without a Start menu is unintuitive to you, Chad.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux vs Microsoft Misconceptions:
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:58:47 GMT
"Javaduke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8udf82$3ps$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Here are some Linux vs. Windows misconceptions:
...
> 6. Linux's hardware support is limited: This was true in the past,
however,
> now with the pending release of kernel 2.4 the only pieces of hardware not
> supported are obscure pieces of hardware that 0.0000000000001% of computer
> users have, such as cheap, so-called, SB compliant cards and USB devices
> nobodies heard of.
Check your math, Javaduke:
0.00000001% of all the people on earth is less than one.
0.0000000000001% of computer users, if everyone on earth used computers, is
one million times less than that. This might amount to a fingernail
clipping, or a lock of hair. Maybe. But, of course, not everyone in the
world uses computers. So maybe it's just a single strand of hair. Or a fart.
Surely you aren't really trying to say what you actually said: that there
are no devices that Linux doesn't support. If so, come on by some time, and
I'll be glad to show you some.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion.
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 09:59:42 -0700
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is all about hypocracy.
[snip]
> Jebb and GW are idiot sons of a stupid president.
>
> Clinton is a brillient man with an impulse control problem. (Or at least
> with a getting caught problem)
Talk about hypocracy....
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: 10 Nov 2000 16:51:11 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Goldhammer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:8zPO5.72271$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 03:33:02 GMT,
:> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:>
:> >So you can't use Oracle on Linux for >2GB databases without fancy
:> >techniques or special filesystems.
:>
:>
:> That is quite nonsensical.
: How so? How do you get >2GB databases with Oracle on Linux?
: Some here, from your camp, reported that Oracle uses a special filesystem
: to deal with the discrepancy.
You are either ignorant or lying when you claim a 2GB limit is the
reason for the use of the 'special filesystem'. Performance
is the reason for assigning a raw partition to oracle's use.
(And it's not a "filesystem" - Oracle just uses the partition
as raw blocks of bytes because that's faster than going through
an unneccessary filesystem layer (Since all Oracle wants to do
is have a huge array of bytes of permanent store, the indirection
of a filesystem is just fluff.) Even with access to a filesystem
that can make one file larger than 2GB, oracle setup guides *still*
reccomend that you use some raw partitions for oracle, for PERFORMANCE.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Another Silent Computer :(
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Nov 2000 10:01:35 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip sblive story]
> If he does manage to get it working, he'll soon discover that the card
> operates in a half aborted fashion. He should have bought a $15.00
> Sb-16 instead.
That's nice, but I can come up with dozens of other stories about the
horrors of hardware working under Windows.
It's called an-ec-do-tal.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion.
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 17:02:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Tom Wilson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:39:17 GMT
<9nPO5.69$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > Does Bush run Linux?
>>
>> Michael Moore wrote a great article about Bush, makes a good case that
>> he is a functionally illiterate, alcoholic, failure with a drunk driving
>> record an a drug addiction.
>>
>
>* The Kennedys became rich from prohibition bootlegging
>* LBJ was a redneck asshole
>* Nixon...WAS a crook.
>* Gerald Ford couldn't even stand up
>* Jimmy Carter was naive
>* Regan was...well...Regan.
Pedant point. Ronald Reagan was the President (1/81 - 1/89), Don Regan
was his White House chief of staff (2/85 - 2/87).
>* Bush was Regan light.
>* Clinton obviously DOESN'T understand sexual relations seeing that
> he mistook a 22 year old intern as a humidor.
>
>Sounds to me like Bush Jr. is in good company!
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft?
Date: 10 Nov 2000 17:01:43 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) writes:
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Curtis <alliem@kas*spam*net.com> wrote:
>>
>> > You're changing the goal posts. The original claim was that WinNT cannot
>> > run real time applications. This is simply false.
>>
>> Alright, I conceed. But this is true:
>>
>> NT cannot run realtime applications in realtime.
> ... without purchasing 3rd party software:
> http://www.vci.com/products/vci_products/rtx/rtx_nt_overview.html
> this seems as close to real-time as you're going to get on x86 with a
> real operating system running.
No, it isnt. Neutrino will get you much, much closer.
Which is why its used more.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2000 15:07:11 -0500
Russ Lyttle wrote:
>
> "." wrote:
> >
> > > Why anyone would want anything other than Win2k pro on their desktop or
> > > laptop is beyond me ...
> >
> > Why anyone would want to contribute to Microsofts domination of the world
> > is beyond me.
> >
> Well. people eat at McDonald's
Is McDonald's the only restaurant?
A) yes
B) NO
Is McDonald's the only fast-food restaurant?
A) yes
B) NO
Is McDonald's the only fast-food hamburger restaurant?
A) yes
B) NO
> and buy lotto tickets don't they?
And your point is?
> > It's also beyond me why anyone would so proactively advocate everyone
> > using Win2k... Win2k is simply not suitable for a large number of
> > people. You'd think that someone as familiar with it as you appear to be
> > would understand this, but I guess it's just another case of "I picked
> > the right thing for me, everyone choosing something else must be wrong.
> > I must convert the heathens."
> >
> > I don't try to advocate linux or *BSD as the sole solution to operating
> > systems, why should you with 2k? (I do like to point out the advantages
> > though... there are many people running blind who don't even realise
> > alternatives exist...)
>
> --
> Russ Lyttle, PE
> <http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
> Not Powered by ActiveX
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 17:09:26 GMT
References trimmed. (Grumble.)
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 10 Nov 2000 03:32:15 GMT
<3%JO5.2479$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>> on Wed, 08 Nov 2000 04:04:37 GMT
>> <ph4O5.1087$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >
>> >"Roberto Teixeira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >>>>> "R" == Relax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> R> NTFS has yet to be proven unstable anywhere. Just a little
>> >> R> difference, of course, but one that matters. That said, it is
>> >> R> interesting to discover that a very important, if not crucial,
>> >> R> piece of code like an enterprise-class filesystem can be
>> >> R> "proven unstable" despite the fact it's open-sourced thus
>> >> R> scrutinized by thousands of talented and dedicated people for
>> >> R> bugs and security holes, with "0-day patches" (tm) and the like
>> >> R> :)
>> >>
>> >> ReiserFS is still UNDER DEVELOPMENT, do not forget this. And that is
>> >> why it is still _not_ in the Linux kernels.
>> >
>> >Thank you for admitting this.
>> >
>> >ReiserFS is the first, best hope for a Linux FS.
>> >
>> >Ext2 is hopelessly flawed, ext3 is still ways away.
>> >
>> >It's safe to say:
>> >
>> >Linux has no enterprise-class, or even departmental-class filesystem.
>>
>> And why does NTFS qualify as an enterprise-class filesystem?
>>
>> I'm curious.
>
>Because it's in use by many enterprises in "enterprise-class" scenarios
>(Running SAP, Baan, PeopleSoft, Email, etc for millions of users every day).
>
>None of the major DB's require a special partition with a special filesystem
>to run on NT, they all use NTFS and break performance records doing so.
>
>NTFS has multiple layers of redundancy, journaling, etc that protect it from
>the gross corruption episodes that plague ext2 and prevent it from being
>taken seriously.
>
>Among many other reasons...
Not bad, actually, although I have three comments.
[1] VFAT is also widely used in the business community, presumably.
(Anyone using Win98 or Win98SE is using VFAT.) Does this make
it "enterprise-level"?
[2] Linux supports NTFS to a limited extent. (It is hoped the limits
are soon removed; the write support is reported to be buggy,
although I for one haven't used it.)
[3] Acknowledgement of NTFS as an "enterprise-class" file system
(complete with DACLS and SACLS and who-know-what-elseACLS)
in no way proves that Linux has no enterprise-class filesystem.
Not that it matters. Windows 2000+ is going to be around a very long time.
Probably until 2038. :-)
>
>-Chad
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
