Re: IDE partitions [WAS: Re: [opensuse] legalities]

[Greg Freemyer]

On 10/1/07, Carlos E. R. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > When SATA support was added to the kernel (libata) they leveraged the
> > entire SCSI subsystem due to its quality compared to the IDE
> > subsystem.
> >
> > Then libata got to so good that many (most) of the PATA drivers were
> > re-implemented (by Alan Cox of Redhat) via libata.  And then the new
> > implementations got stable enough that the distros decided to move to
> > the libata pata drivers by default.  (Fedora was the first to move in
> > the spring.)
> >
> > But, for the foreseeable future you should be able to use the old
> > drivers/ide implementation and get the old functionality (and naming
> > convention).
>
> Yours is a very interesting explanation.
>
> However, it seems that opensuse wants to remove the old pata
> implementation for the next version, ie #11. If that happens before what
> you explain below happens, me and others will not be able to install suse.

I hope they keep the old drivers/ide system at least one more release.
 Surprisingly to me the maintainer (and at least one very active bug
fix submitter) is still working on them and often when there is a bug
fix to the libata pata driver he implements the corresponding fix to
the old stuff.

Actually they seem to be leveraging each other, such that a new fix in
either subsystem is soon replicated in the other.  It is the core
scsi/libata infrastructure that apparently is superior to the core ide
infrastructure.  (That may be less true now than when libata first
decided to go with scsi infrastructure.)

Greg
-- 
Greg Freemyer
Litigation Triage Solutions Specialist
http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregfreemyer

The Norcross Group
The Intersection of Evidence & Technology
http://www.norcrossgroup.com
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: IDE partitions [WAS: Re: [opensuse] legalities]

[Carlos E. R.]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


The Monday 2007-10-01 at 16:33 -0400, Greg Freemyer wrote:


The issue is far deeper than naming conventions.


Well, it is caused by using just a byte for the minor number in the /dev 
directory, instead of a word or a longword. Time they changed that!




When SATA support was added to the kernel (libata) they leveraged the
entire SCSI subsystem due to its quality compared to the IDE
subsystem.

Then libata got to so good that many (most) of the PATA drivers were
re-implemented (by Alan Cox of Redhat) via libata.  And then the new
implementations got stable enough that the distros decided to move to
the libata pata drivers by default.  (Fedora was the first to move in
the spring.)

But, for the foreseeable future you should be able to use the old
drivers/ide implementation and get the old functionality (and naming
convention).


Yours is a very interesting explanation.

However, it seems that opensuse wants to remove the old pata 
implementation for the next version, ie #11. If that happens before what 
you explain below happens, me and others will not be able to install suse.




The long term solution is to have libata implement its own full set of
infrastructure and no longer fit under the SCSI infrastructure.  When
that happens the partition limits should be restored to the higher
limits.

Novell has Tejun Heo supporting libata.  He has done 2 major upgrades
to it in the last 18 months (new error handling logic for 10.2, PMP
support for 10.3, ??? for 11.0).

My hope is that his next big project will be the libata
infrastructure, but I have not seen anything posted about that yet.


I hope you are right and they do that, sooner than later.

- -- 
Cheers,

   Carlos E. R.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76

iD8DBQFHAWxttTMYHG2NR9URAkPJAJ9oC7PxsLw0LZGFspIVLgkcWhRQ0gCeMQhK
44txkV0syOy71jrV7ne9Rt0=
=GgYB
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: IDE partitions [WAS: Re: [opensuse] legalities]

[Richard Creighton]

Greg Freemyer wrote:
> On 9/30/07, Richard Creighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> 
> 
>   
>>> That's not quite so now. For instance, the limit on the number of
>>> partitions has been decreased from 64 to 16 (less than). That's one of the
>>> consequence of "progress" in the linux field.
>>>
>>> - --
>>> Cheers,
>>>Carlos E. R.
>>>
>>>   
>> Someone made an ill-advised decision to change the naming scheme of IDE
>> drives to be the same as the new SATA drives to be the same as SCSI.
>> In the process, it inherited the limitations of the SCSI drives.   I
>> can't think of a reason for having done it, but it appears to have been
>> done in all the distros.   I suspect there will be a great gnashing of
>> teeth when the next release hits the streets and some accomodation will
>> be forthcoming.   As one of the beta testers for upcoming 10.3 SuSE, it
>> has already proven 'interesting' and caused me personally no end of
>> frustration.   Generally though, Linux's progress has kept pace with the
>> newer hardware without losing sight of its historical past.  This is one
>> of the few exceptions so far.   I bet that there is NO chance that XP,
>> much less Vista will run on a 386 or a 286...  I cranked up 10.2 on a
>> 486DX-2 the other day just to see it run...slow, but it ran :)
>>
>>
>> Richard
>> 
>
> The issue is far deeper than naming conventions.
>
> When SATA support was added to the kernel (libata) they leveraged the
> entire SCSI subsystem due to its quality compared to the IDE
> subsystem.
>
> Then libata got to so good that many (most) of the PATA drivers were
> re-implemented (by Alan Cox of Redhat) via libata.  And then the new
> implementations got stable enough that the distros decided to move to
> the libata pata drivers by default.  (Fedora was the first to move in
> the spring.)
>
> But, for the foreseeable future you should be able to use the old
> drivers/ide implementation and get the old functionality (and naming
> convention).
>
> The long term solution is to have libata implement its own full set of
> infrastructure and no longer fit under the SCSI infrastructure.  When
> that happens the partition limits should be restored to the higher
> limits.
>
> Novell has Tejun Heo supporting libata.  He has done 2 major upgrades
> to it in the last 18 months (new error handling logic for 10.2, PMP
> support for 10.3, ??? for 11.0).
>
> My hope is that his next big project will be the libata
> infrastructure, but I have not seen anything posted about that yet.
>
> Greg
>   
Greg, I usually do a lot of  but your reply deserves to be
seen in context and completeness.  

What you say is quite probably accurate.   The problem is that the
implementation was made  in such a way as to cause unexpected problems. 
For many people, it probably was uneventful, but a lot of   people have
mixed IDE and SATA architectures with motherboards that have both types
of controllers.   These motherboards typically offer the IDE drives to
the OS first, then the SATA drives.   I had a perfectly good 10.2
installation on my IDE system drive and added SATA drives to the machine
for testing the 10.3 beta.  I did not know of the unadvertised decision
to incorporate IDE into the SATA/SCSI family.   Properly and COMPLETELY
done, there would have been no problem.Had there been a warning I
could have taken precautions but from 9.3 through 10.2 when I have
upgraded, I have never needed to worry about such things.   Well, the
install went fine, the 10.3 beta installed onto the SATA drive, but the
IDE drive normally called hdb1 on my system was suddenly renamed sda2
(my cdrom was on the master channel) and the first SATA drive became
sdb1 and when grub was written and the MBR was written, guess where it
was putyup, it clobbered my IDE drive.   Of course, this was totally
unexpected.   OBTW, I neglected to tell you, the SATA drives were not
just 1 drive, they were 4 200G drives in a MD Raid configuration which
also confused the issue, but that is no reason to clobber the IDE MBR or
rewrite it's /boot or /boot/grub entries.   To this day, if I want to
install any version above 10.3 beta 1, I have to unplug the IDE drive
until the installation is complete.   Also, the YaST repair modules are
totally clueless still about the name changes.  

So, while the motive to migrate is honorable, the decision to do so
unilaterally and without proper notice and warning about possible side
effects between minor releases I maintain is and was still ill
advised.   To do so between version 10 and version 11 would have been
much more appropriate, but from .2 to .3, that usually signifies
relatively minor changes and enhancements and bug fixes and not major
changes.   Since I can recall, IDE devices have been called HDxx and
drivers and software buried pretty deep has expected this for years.  
To suddenly change this invites trouble, and it happened.   I would have
simply unplugged the IDE drive

IDE partitions [WAS: Re: [opensuse] legalities]

[Greg Freemyer]

On 9/30/07, Richard Creighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote:

> > That's not quite so now. For instance, the limit on the number of
> > partitions has been decreased from 64 to 16 (less than). That's one of the
> > consequence of "progress" in the linux field.
> >
> > - --
> > Cheers,
> >Carlos E. R.
> >
> Someone made an ill-advised decision to change the naming scheme of IDE
> drives to be the same as the new SATA drives to be the same as SCSI.
> In the process, it inherited the limitations of the SCSI drives.   I
> can't think of a reason for having done it, but it appears to have been
> done in all the distros.   I suspect there will be a great gnashing of
> teeth when the next release hits the streets and some accomodation will
> be forthcoming.   As one of the beta testers for upcoming 10.3 SuSE, it
> has already proven 'interesting' and caused me personally no end of
> frustration.   Generally though, Linux's progress has kept pace with the
> newer hardware without losing sight of its historical past.  This is one
> of the few exceptions so far.   I bet that there is NO chance that XP,
> much less Vista will run on a 386 or a 286...  I cranked up 10.2 on a
> 486DX-2 the other day just to see it run...slow, but it ran :)
>
>
> Richard

The issue is far deeper than naming conventions.

When SATA support was added to the kernel (libata) they leveraged the
entire SCSI subsystem due to its quality compared to the IDE
subsystem.

Then libata got to so good that many (most) of the PATA drivers were
re-implemented (by Alan Cox of Redhat) via libata.  And then the new
implementations got stable enough that the distros decided to move to
the libata pata drivers by default.  (Fedora was the first to move in
the spring.)

But, for the foreseeable future you should be able to use the old
drivers/ide implementation and get the old functionality (and naming
convention).

The long term solution is to have libata implement its own full set of
infrastructure and no longer fit under the SCSI infrastructure.  When
that happens the partition limits should be restored to the higher
limits.

Novell has Tejun Heo supporting libata.  He has done 2 major upgrades
to it in the last 18 months (new error handling logic for 10.2, PMP
support for 10.3, ??? for 11.0).

My hope is that his next big project will be the libata
infrastructure, but I have not seen anything posted about that yet.

Greg
-- 
Greg Freemyer
Litigation Triage Solutions Specialist
http://www.linkedin.com/in/gregfreemyer

The Norcross Group
The Intersection of Evidence & Technology
http://www.norcrossgroup.com
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Richard Creighton]

Per Jessen wrote:
> Richard Creighton wrote:
>
>   
>> It is the collection of support software that becomes the personality
>> of the distribution and it is also the reason our old 486 machines
>> won't run anymore.  
>> 
>
> Uh, I'm not sure I can quite follow you.  If the openSUSE project built
> the distro for the 386 instruction set, the old 486 machines would
> still work fine.  
>
>   
However, I am pretty sure the project has not been built with that
instruction set in mind.  It would be an interesting exercise to try but
I'm not sure there is enough demand for 386 only code to induce anyone
to undertake such a huge project.   All the libraries, as well as the
programs themselves would have to be recompiled.

>> It is these neat packages of music, graphics, editors and what-not,
>> that depend on instructions that the poor old 486 processor simply has
>> no concept of. 
>> 
>
> If there is code containing 586 or 686 specific instructions, it
> obviously won't work on anything that does not have support for those. 
> However, regular C code can be compiled not to use such instructions.
>
>   
I think there are programs that won't convert very well, ones that
utilize the MMX instructions for instance, or other 5-686 extensions to
the 386 instruction set.   Alternative code could be written but it
isn't just a matter of just setting a compiler switch I don't think.

>> So while Linux itself can be compiled to run in a mode that is
>> compatible with the old box, it is unlikely the rest of any modern
>> distro will do so as well. 
>> 
>
> Actually, I think it's quite likely that openSUSE could.
>
>   
Even if you are right about the OSS portion of the openSuSE distro, what
would you propose about the NON-OSS portion of the distro?Stuff like
Firefox or Thunderbird or ... well, you name it.   If the source code
isn't available, how do you propose to make that run on the 486?   Hey,
I'm all for it but I really don't think it is very likely in practice,
as much as I hate to admit it.   I'm an old fogey and I, like my old 486
machine, am a relic of the past and would like to feel useful well into
the future, but I know time marches on so I am thankful that Linux will
run on as old and varied equipment as it does and I am also glad that it
will run on some of the most modern equipment available too.

>> I challange a user of VISTA or even XP to take its' kernel and boot on
>> a 486...never mind all its bells and whistles, just the
>> kernel
>> 
>
> I have a suspicion you might be surprised.  There's probably still some
> OS2 stuff lurking around in Vista. 
>
>
>   
I never accused Microsoft of being inventive or original but I'm sure
that they have modified the original OS/2 code they got from IBM enough
so that it will no longer run on a 486 :)


Richard
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Per Jessen]

Richard Creighton wrote:

> It is the collection of support software that becomes the personality
> of the distribution and it is also the reason our old 486 machines
> won't run anymore.  

Uh, I'm not sure I can quite follow you.  If the openSUSE project built
the distro for the 386 instruction set, the old 486 machines would
still work fine.  

> It is these neat packages of music, graphics, editors and what-not,
> that depend on instructions that the poor old 486 processor simply has
> no concept of. 

If there is code containing 586 or 686 specific instructions, it
obviously won't work on anything that does not have support for those. 
However, regular C code can be compiled not to use such instructions.

> So while Linux itself can be compiled to run in a mode that is
> compatible with the old box, it is unlikely the rest of any modern
> distro will do so as well. 

Actually, I think it's quite likely that openSUSE could.

> I challange a user of VISTA or even XP to take its' kernel and boot on
> a 486...never mind all its bells and whistles, just the
> kernel

I have a suspicion you might be surprised.  There's probably still some
OS2 stuff lurking around in Vista. 



/Per Jessen, Zürich

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Richard Creighton]

Hans Witvliet wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 09:51 -0500, Billie Walsh wrote:
>   
>> On 09/30/2007 Richard Creighton wrote:
>> 
>
>   
>> M$ said they would support XP till 2010.
>> 
>
> Translated, that means:
> worms and viri aimed at XP will be written at least 'till 2010 ;)
>
>   
...just think of all the people that would be put out of work if all
these worms didn't existI mean, Panda, McAffee, Nortonwell, the
list goes on :)   I'm sure these companies and others like them are
happy to hear of Microsoft's benevolent move.   It also gives time to
properly develop worms and viri for whatever Vista evolves into :)   ...
just in case the old XP ones don't work for some reasonlike a lot of
the  programs.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Hans Witvliet]

On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 09:51 -0500, Billie Walsh wrote:
> On 09/30/2007 Richard Creighton wrote:

> M$ said they would support XP till 2010.

Translated, that means:
worms and viri aimed at XP will be written at least 'till 2010 ;)

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Richard Creighton]

Per Jessen wrote:
> Richard Creighton wrote:
>
>   
>> I cranked up 10.2 on a
>> 486DX-2 the other day just to see it run...slow, but it ran :)
>> 
>
> How exactly did you manage that?  Have you got a 486-version of 10.2?  
>
> I've got a 486DX2 machine running as firewall/gateway, but it's stuck on
> SuSE 7.1 - I would certainly be interested in getting it upgraded to
> 10.2.  The 256Mb yast memory requirement might be a problem, but I'm
> sure I'll find a way around that.
>
>
> /Per Jessen, Zürich
>
>   
Now for a better answer to your question.  In my opinion, I doubt that
anyone could actually get a full 10.2 distro to install and run on
anything less than a Pentium/AMD-K6 or some such processor now. 
Internally, these processors support subsets that include 386 code which
of course the 486 also understands.   So, the kernel can be compiled to
run as a 386 and shun some of the Pentium centric code and should run
just fine.   It isn't the kernel that is the problem, it is all of the
support software, multimedia, graphics, word processing, ad nausium,
that we now take for granted and say 'that is 10.2' or that is SuSE or
Kubuntu or whatever.   It isn't.  SuSE is a collection which includes
Linux, as is Debian, or whatever distro you happen to like.   It is the
collection of support software that becomes the personality of the
distribution and it is also the reason our old 486 machines won't run
anymore.   It is these neat packages of music, graphics, editors and
what-not, that depend on instructions that the poor old 486 processor
simply has no concept of.   So while Linux itself can be compiled to run
in a mode that is compatible with the old box, it is unlikely the rest
of any modern distro will do so as well.   However, remember, you are
given the source code to much of the software you use and it *is*
possible that if you put your mind to it, many programs might be coerced
into a compatible mode and recompiled...not a chore for the faint of
heart.   Also, not a few of the packages include NON-OSS programs, which
mean 'sorry Charlie' because the sources are not available.   All this
said however, I challange a user of VISTA or even XP to take its' kernel
and boot on a 486...never mind all its bells and whistles, just the
kernelLinux users can, even a modern version.  And when you get done
with the Windows trial, you can have a boat anchor, and with the Linux
box, you can have a router :)

Richard

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Richard Creighton]

Per Jessen wrote:
> Richard Creighton wrote:
>
>   
>> I cranked up 10.2 on a
>> 486DX-2 the other day just to see it run...slow, but it ran :)
>> 
>
> How exactly did you manage that?  Have you got a 486-version of 10.2?  
>
> I've got a 486DX2 machine running as firewall/gateway, but it's stuck on
> SuSE 7.1 - I would certainly be interested in getting it upgraded to
> 10.2.  The 256Mb yast memory requirement might be a problem, but I'm
> sure I'll find a way around that.
>
>
> /Per Jessen, Zürich
>   
This was a 'pull' from a machine I was playing with about a year ago
with a self-compiled kernel.   I stuck it into an old chassis with a 486
in it just to see what would happen, if anything, and suprised myself
when it actually bootednot for long, alas, the reason the old
chassis was sitting on the shelf suddenly was rememberedit dies
after about 10min or so due to thermal problems.   Maybe I should try
and fix that and have a new toy :)


-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Per Jessen]

Richard Creighton wrote:

> I cranked up 10.2 on a
> 486DX-2 the other day just to see it run...slow, but it ran :)

How exactly did you manage that?  Have you got a 486-version of 10.2?  

I've got a 486DX2 machine running as firewall/gateway, but it's stuck on
SuSE 7.1 - I would certainly be interested in getting it upgraded to
10.2.  The 256Mb yast memory requirement might be a problem, but I'm
sure I'll find a way around that.


/Per Jessen, Zürich

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Richard Creighton]

Carlos E. R. wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> The Sunday 2007-09-30 at 08:51 -0400, Richard Creighton wrote:
>
>   
>> Actually, from what I've seen in articles around, Vista wants
>> state-of-the-art equipment to run and much of the legacy equipment just
>> doesn't seem to want to run and a lot of people are balking at having to
>> buy new computers just to buy a new OS and it's new and improved bugs.  
>> One nice thing about Linuxso far... is that it historically allows
>> people to almost run on their old 'junk' machines and still do useful
>> work.   I hope this doesn't change any time soon even as it supports the
>> newer equipment, I hope the old boxes aren't forgotten.
>> 
>
> That's not quite so now. For instance, the limit on the number of 
> partitions has been decreased from 64 to 16 (less than). That's one of the 
> consequence of "progress" in the linux field.
>
> - -- 
> Cheers,
>Carlos E. R.
>   
Someone made an ill-advised decision to change the naming scheme of IDE
drives to be the same as the new SATA drives to be the same as SCSI.  
In the process, it inherited the limitations of the SCSI drives.   I
can't think of a reason for having done it, but it appears to have been
done in all the distros.   I suspect there will be a great gnashing of
teeth when the next release hits the streets and some accomodation will
be forthcoming.   As one of the beta testers for upcoming 10.3 SuSE, it
has already proven 'interesting' and caused me personally no end of
frustration.   Generally though, Linux's progress has kept pace with the
newer hardware without losing sight of its historical past.  This is one
of the few exceptions so far.   I bet that there is NO chance that XP,
much less Vista will run on a 386 or a 286...  I cranked up 10.2 on a
486DX-2 the other day just to see it run...slow, but it ran :)


Richard
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[James Knott]

Billie Walsh wrote:
> On 09/30/2007 Richard Creighton wrote:
>> Seein' as how M$ isn't supporting XP anymore, what would happen if you
>> had a hardware failure and *had* to install the latest 'offering' from
>> M$ on new hardware?
>
> M$ said they would support XP till 2010.
>
I think he's referring to it not being available on a new computer. 
That was recently extended to the end ofnext June, as Vista is not
selling well.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2190228,00.asp
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2189917,00.asp

-- 
Use OpenOffice.org 
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Billie Walsh]

On 09/30/2007 Richard Creighton wrote:

Seein' as how M$ isn't supporting XP anymore, what would happen if you
had a hardware failure and *had* to install the latest 'offering' from
M$ on new hardware?


M$ said they would support XP till 2010.

--
(o:]>*HUGGLES*<[:o)
Billie Walsh
The three best words in the English Language:
"I LOVE YOU"
Pass them on!
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Rajko M.]

On Sunday 30 September 2007 07:51:20 am Richard Creighton wrote:
> >> Actually, M$ have recently announced that they are extending support for
> >> XP, for some unknown reason people are not buying as many Vista copies
> >> as M$  expected :-)
> >
> > Few hundreds reasons per product.
> > Count is mostly 2 (Vista & MS Office) which comes out as one good
> > computer upgrade (no monitor and accessories).
>
> Actually, from what I've seen in articles around, Vista wants
> state-of-the-art equipment to run and much of the legacy equipment just
> doesn't seem to want to run and a lot of people are balking at having to
> buy new computers just to buy a new OS and it's new and improved bugs.
> One nice thing about Linuxso far... is that it historically allows
> people to almost run on their old 'junk' machines and still do useful
> work.   I hope this doesn't change any time soon even as it supports the
> newer equipment, I hope the old boxes aren't forgotten.

'Junk machine' is for a quite some time relative denomination. 
Every machine is good in a store, but with software accessories like firewall, 
antivirus, antispam, and few other programs, that one adds at home, it is no 
more good. The malware scanners need more and more time to scan new bigger 
hard drives, which takes more and more CPU time. 

OS that doesn't require such add-ons is big advantage for computer users. 
More CPU cycles is left for usefull work, so 'junk machine' using other OS is 
good machine under Linux, just because there is no need to keep 'patch' 
programs running all the time. 

The antivirus etc, is not alone at fault for CPU being busy with basic OS 
tasks, instead to run user application. 

More device drivers are actually firmware, and they are running on main CPU. 
To ensure proper function of device on wide variety of hardware, they claim 
more resources on newer, faster computers than it is necessary for the task. 


The list is quite long.
 
Just created:
  http://en.opensuse.org/Why_to_use_openSUSE
welcome to expand it.

-- 
Regards,
Rajko.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Carlos E. R.]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


The Sunday 2007-09-30 at 08:51 -0400, Richard Creighton wrote:

> Actually, from what I've seen in articles around, Vista wants
> state-of-the-art equipment to run and much of the legacy equipment just
> doesn't seem to want to run and a lot of people are balking at having to
> buy new computers just to buy a new OS and it's new and improved bugs.  
> One nice thing about Linuxso far... is that it historically allows
> people to almost run on their old 'junk' machines and still do useful
> work.   I hope this doesn't change any time soon even as it supports the
> newer equipment, I hope the old boxes aren't forgotten.

That's not quite so now. For instance, the limit on the number of 
partitions has been decreased from 64 to 16 (less than). That's one of the 
consequence of "progress" in the linux field.

- -- 
Cheers,
   Carlos E. R.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76

iD8DBQFG/7HBtTMYHG2NR9URAo5+AJ9PRtKFwQkF8Cx90JGMY1HzZEmfWQCeORdH
WgPm21dZU/zHtItdR0rB6Hg=
=rLYZ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[G T Smith]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Richard Creighton wrote:
>>> Actually, M$ have recently announced that they are extending
>>> support for XP, for some unknown reason people are not buying as
>>> many Vista copies as M$  expected :-)
>>> 
>> Few hundreds reasons per product. Count is mostly 2 (Vista & MS
>> Office) which comes out as one good computer upgrade (no monitor
>> and accessories).
>> 
>> 
> Actually, from what I've seen in articles around, Vista wants 
> state-of-the-art equipment to run and much of the legacy equipment
> just doesn't seem to want to run and a lot of people are balking at
> having to buy new computers just to buy a new OS and it's new and
> improved bugs. One nice thing about Linuxso far... is that it
> historically allows people to almost run on their old 'junk' machines
> and still do useful work.   I hope this doesn't change any time soon
> even as it supports the newer equipment, I hope the old boxes aren't
> forgotten.

There are quite a few organisations that have recently completed moving
from NT to W2K, or have not moved to XP because W2k provides the
functionality they need and seen no reason to change. What Vista
provides does not really fit a lot of commercial environments, and until
someone provides a commercial, must have, killer app that only runs on
Vista, M$ is going to find it difficult to persuade commercial clients
to adopt it.

The costs in retraining staff, new equipment deployment, and migrating
critical systems is causing some organisations to look very closely at
alternative strategies; in the main completely rebuilding the IT
infrastructure every 4 years or so does not make much sense to many (if
it aint broke why fix it), M$ may have shot themselves in the foot and
given desktop Linux in the enterprise an unintended boost at the same
time. If they push upgrading too hard they could find some large
organisations going elsewhere. On the other hand M$ may get wise and
commit to a stable user interface that does not radically change between
OS versions (my god! was that pig flying past :-) )

In the non-commercial world Vista really depends on the future of the
general purpose PC. Outside of more specialist niches such as power
gaming and computer hobbyists, and SOHO use; an increased use of minimum
maintenance and intervention consumer electronics products may begin to
become more important over time and general purpose PC sales may
stagnate or decline.

Most non-technical people are completely fed up with machines which do
not do what they want, when they want to do it, for reasons they do not
understand (whether they be MS, Mac or Linux based)... eventually they
will wise up and start voting with their wallets...

- --
==
I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
telephone.
My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone.

Bjarne Stroustrup
==

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG/60easN0sSnLmgIRAiurAKDfIQu3aIf0x/Q508UbOaP8Sy0zggCghnA6
Wv2kpIsXjeEnRMpGYAh9hSk=
=znz6
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[James Knott]

Richard Creighton wrote:
>>> Actually, M$ have recently announced that they are extending support for
>>> XP, for some unknown reason people are not buying as many Vista copies
>>> as M$  expected :-)
>>> 
>>>   
>> Few hundreds reasons per product.
>> Count is mostly 2 (Vista & MS Office) which comes out as one good computer 
>> upgrade (no monitor and accessories). 
>>
>>   
>> 
> Actually, from what I've seen in articles around, Vista wants
> state-of-the-art equipment to run and much of the legacy equipment just
> doesn't seem to want to run and a lot of people are balking at having to
> buy new computers just to buy a new OS and it's new and improved bugs.  
> One nice thing about Linuxso far... is that it historically allows
> people to almost run on their old 'junk' machines and still do useful
> work.   I hope this doesn't change any time soon even as it supports the
> newer equipment, I hope the old boxes aren't forgotten.
>   
I often tell people to pick up one of those cheap "refurbs" and put
Linux on it.  I have done so myself on several occasions.  A 3 or 4 year
old "off lease" business computer is plenty good enough for most people
running Linux.



-- 
Use OpenOffice.org 
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Richard Creighton]

>> Actually, M$ have recently announced that they are extending support for
>> XP, for some unknown reason people are not buying as many Vista copies
>> as M$  expected :-)
>> 
>
> Few hundreds reasons per product.
> Count is mostly 2 (Vista & MS Office) which comes out as one good computer 
> upgrade (no monitor and accessories). 
>
>   
Actually, from what I've seen in articles around, Vista wants
state-of-the-art equipment to run and much of the legacy equipment just
doesn't seem to want to run and a lot of people are balking at having to
buy new computers just to buy a new OS and it's new and improved bugs.  
One nice thing about Linuxso far... is that it historically allows
people to almost run on their old 'junk' machines and still do useful
work.   I hope this doesn't change any time soon even as it supports the
newer equipment, I hope the old boxes aren't forgotten.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Rajko M.]

On Sunday 30 September 2007 04:59:10 am G T Smith wrote:
> Richard Creighton wrote:
> > primm wrote:
> >> It's true. It is impossible to get people to change from using office
> >> with xp. They will not use vista either. Yeah. read it again.  Somehow
> >> microsoft has instilled in them that this is the only way to write a
> >> document and send e-mails. They will _not_ change to Linux or vista.
> >> windows 98 is just fine however. They hate those superb cast iron IBM
> >> keyboards that we all love. They want proper plastic keyboards and a
> >> mouse with a wire. The menus are not in the right place in openoffice
> >> anyway they will tell you. They feel safe with xp and office. In the
> >> real world thats what there is. I'm dealing with housewives who do word
> >> processing on a part time basis. They simply cannot change. To them,
> >> Openoffice and Linux is a joke.
> >>
> >> Lynn x
> >
> > Seein' as how M$ isn't supporting XP anymore, what would happen if you
> > had a hardware failure and *had* to install the latest 'offering' from
> > M$ on new hardware?   These housewives would be forced to learn new
>
> 
>
> > Richard
>
> Actually, M$ have recently announced that they are extending support for
> XP, for some unknown reason people are not buying as many Vista copies
> as M$  expected :-)

Few hundreds reasons per product.
Count is mostly 2 (Vista & MS Office) which comes out as one good computer 
upgrade (no monitor and accessories). 

> ===
> I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
> telephone.
> My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone.
>
> Bjarne Stroustrup
> ===

I felt free to pick up this one in:
http://en.opensuse.org/Famous_quotes

-- 
Regards,
Rajko.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[G T Smith]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Richard Creighton wrote:
> primm wrote:
>> It's true. It is impossible to get people to change from using office with 
>> xp. 
>> They will not use vista either. Yeah. read it again.  Somehow microsoft has 
>> instilled in them that this is the only way to write a document and send 
>> e-mails. They will _not_ change to Linux or vista. windows 98 is just fine 
>> however. They hate those superb cast iron IBM keyboards that we all love. 
>> They want proper plastic keyboards and a mouse with a wire. The menus are 
>> not 
>> in the right place in openoffice anyway they will tell you. They feel safe 
>> with xp and office. In the real world thats what there is. I'm dealing with 
>> housewives who do word processing on a part time basis. They simply cannot 
>> change. To them, Openoffice and Linux is a joke.
>>
>> Lynn x
>>   
> Seein' as how M$ isn't supporting XP anymore, what would happen if you
> had a hardware failure and *had* to install the latest 'offering' from
> M$ on new hardware?   These housewives would be forced to learn new


> Richard

Actually, M$ have recently announced that they are extending support for
XP, for some unknown reason people are not buying as many Vista copies
as M$  expected :-)

- --
==
I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
telephone.
My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone.

Bjarne Stroustrup
==
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG/3NuasN0sSnLmgIRAn9wAJ4gs9tvC9WdaVaVRwktrar/70VMTACgvgec
AYIWPHMlonlASna2kbfur+c=
=LtY/
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Clayton]

> tricks, wouldn't they?   Seems to me they should be given the
> opportunity sooner, rather than later, while you still have options.
> Once a real failure occurs, you lose data, have no time to learn new
> methods and 'where the right places' are for the menus and such becomes

I find the most successful is to sneak it up on them.  Start with
weaning them off of IE and onto Opera or Firefox.  Then slowly
introduce them to OpenOffice.  The OpenOffice thing is going well,
especially since Office2007 is so different, and OOo2.3 is so much
faster to load, and looks a lot like OfficeXP.  From there just find
X-platform apps for them to use and get used to.. then one day... they
will find themselves working in Linux :-)

C
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Richard Creighton]

primm wrote:
> It's true. It is impossible to get people to change from using office with 
> xp. 
> They will not use vista either. Yeah. read it again.  Somehow microsoft has 
> instilled in them that this is the only way to write a document and send 
> e-mails. They will _not_ change to Linux or vista. windows 98 is just fine 
> however. They hate those superb cast iron IBM keyboards that we all love. 
> They want proper plastic keyboards and a mouse with a wire. The menus are not 
> in the right place in openoffice anyway they will tell you. They feel safe 
> with xp and office. In the real world thats what there is. I'm dealing with 
> housewives who do word processing on a part time basis. They simply cannot 
> change. To them, Openoffice and Linux is a joke.
>
> Lynn x
>   
Seein' as how M$ isn't supporting XP anymore, what would happen if you
had a hardware failure and *had* to install the latest 'offering' from
M$ on new hardware?   These housewives would be forced to learn new
tricks, wouldn't they?   Seems to me they should be given the
opportunity sooner, rather than later, while you still have options.   
Once a real failure occurs, you lose data, have no time to learn new
methods and 'where the right places' are for the menus and such becomes
an emergency lesson in frustration.   A machine old enough to be running
XP is also old enough to start having mechanical failures (memory, disk,
etc) so while the girls in the office may like the old coffee pot, when
it fails, they will eventually accept the new Mr Coffee, even decide it
makes better coffee after all.   The joke will be on them when this all
happens and you can prevent it by being calm, knowledgeable and assertive.

Richard
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[primm]

On Sunday 30 September 2007 10:10, G T Smith wrote:
> joe wrote:
> > James Knott wrote:
> >> Richard Creighton wrote:
> >>> What a world Microsoft has created!   It makes honest people *think*
> >>> they are thieves
> >>>
> >>> Lynn, STOP feeling guilty about USING Linux and certainly stop feeling
> >>> guilty about asking for help, whether or not you eventually make a
> >>> profit from the information is irrelevant.
> >>>
> >>> Richard
> >>
> >> A few years ago, someone tried telling me it was illegal to buy a
> >> computer without Windows loaded.
> >
> > Wow, so this is the sort of nonsense that passes as common sense? No
> > wonder it's taking so long to put a dent in mickeysoft's market share.
> >
> > Joe

It's true. It is impossible to get people to change from using office with xp. 
They will not use vista either. Yeah. read it again.  Somehow microsoft has 
instilled in them that this is the only way to write a document and send 
e-mails. They will _not_ change to Linux or vista. windows 98 is just fine 
however. They hate those superb cast iron IBM keyboards that we all love. 
They want proper plastic keyboards and a mouse with a wire. The menus are not 
in the right place in openoffice anyway they will tell you. They feel safe 
with xp and office. In the real world thats what there is. I'm dealing with 
housewives who do word processing on a part time basis. They simply cannot 
change. To them, Openoffice and Linux is a joke.

Lynn x
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[G T Smith]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

joe wrote:
> James Knott wrote:
>> Richard Creighton wrote:
>>> What a world Microsoft has created!   It makes honest people *think*
>>> they are thieves
>>>
>>> Lynn, STOP feeling guilty about USING Linux and certainly stop feeling
>>> guilty about asking for help, whether or not you eventually make a
>>> profit from the information is irrelevant.  
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>   
>> A few years ago, someone tried telling me it was illegal to buy a
>> computer without Windows loaded.
> 
> 
> Wow, so this is the sort of nonsense that passes as common sense? No wonder
> it's taking so long to put a dent in mickeysoft's market share.
> 
> Joe

It gets worse, try out this article for a bit of a laugh... :-)

Poor chap found store would not repair hinge of laptop 'cos he had put
linux on it !?

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2007/09/17/pc_world_linux_frustration/

- --
==
I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
telephone.
My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone.

Bjarne Stroustrup
==
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG/1oAasN0sSnLmgIRAiCIAKCAvsV8aRSRan5fK94R6D8PFEvmrwCfRUX+
Hh7nc2CFq8mdTzNe+VIY3Xo=
=vq5i
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[jfweber]

On Sat September 29 2007, James Knott scratched these words onto a 
coconut shell, hoping for an answer:
> Richard Creighton wrote:
> > What a world Microsoft has created!   It makes honest people
> > *think* they are thieves
> >
> > Lynn, STOP feeling guilty about USING Linux and certainly stop
> > feeling guilty about asking for help, whether or not you eventually
> > make a profit from the information is irrelevant.
> >
> > Richard
>
> A few years ago, someone tried telling me it was illegal to buy a
> computer without Windows loaded.
>
Yup, I also had some alleged engineer, tell me the machine could not 
boot w/o an autoexec.bat.. that was clearly not true, I booted the 
machine in front of him, several times. I kept telling him there was NO 
autoexec.bat and he just wouldn't believe it. that was Os/2 He also was 
certain that there had to be something wrong w/ the boot sequence.. it 
didn't boot Windows, or ask or show some weird window that basically 
would have been a boot manager. 

I have since had similar problems w/ ppl claiming to be people w college 
degrees in computer science, who haven't seen any OS except windows.. 
it's just weird. 

As everyone else has said, jump in and splash around.. If you think its' 
getting too deep, just send up a flare. We will try to help. But one 
caveat.. if you post something, and don't get an answer, you aren't 
being ignored.. chances are no one who saw your post knew the answer... 
And those who knew the answer weren't online that day.. just post it 
again. 

And use google to find a lot of things that sound like they are a joke. 
because they, for instance , allow you to use your own music on various 
bits of hardware.. you don't lose the music or art because you don't 
have it on your mp3/ogg-vorbis player.. 

-- 
j

I've lived in the real world enough, we're all here because we ain't all 
there. 
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Richard Creighton]

Jeremy Figgins wrote:



> //begin-rant
> That's a
> brilliant move on Microsoft's part. Not only convince the manufacturers
> to put Windows on every computer, but to also get the salespeople to
> convince everyone else that the computer with Linux on it is somehow
> breaking the law. That Linux users are criminals and will soon be
arrested!
> //end-rant
>  

Brilliant move, absolutely, ethical, absolutely not.   When this set a
perfectly innocent young lady into fits of guilt thinking that she was
doing something illegal just asking for information in this forum
because of the mindset induced buy the 'brilliant move', I have to draw
the line and say enough is enough.   Linux is the vehicle, our way out
of that mindset because it allows and encourages freedom to use and
distribute the software for the machine owners benefit, not for some
corporate giant that has made a brilliant marketing move.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Jeremy Figgins]

The last SuSE license I read was for the retail copy of 10.1 and it said
something to the effect that copies could be given away, but not sold
(or given away as part of something else that is sold, such as a free OS
on a retail computer). This may be where you got the idea that it was
illegal to make money with SuSE.

//begin-rant
Now, with regards to the usage of the word "illegal". Not to nit-pick
anyone here, but the misuse of this word really bugs me. Illegal means
against the law and it implies that cops are going to show up to arrest
you. Contracts and license agreements are not law. If you break the
license agreement, Novell might sue you or they might never sell you
software again, but cops aren't going to show up at your door. Same goes
for the "illegal" computers sold without a copy of Windows. That's a
brilliant move on Microsoft's part. Not only convince the manufacturers
to put Windows on every computer, but to also get the salespeople to
convince everyone else that the computer with Linux on it is somehow
breaking the law. That Linux users are criminals and will soon be arrested!
//end-rant
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[Theo v. Werkhoven]

Sat, 29 Sep 2007, by [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> Richard Creighton wrote:
> >
> > What a world Microsoft has created!   It makes honest people *think*
> > they are thieves
> >
> > Lynn, STOP feeling guilty about USING Linux and certainly stop feeling
> > guilty about asking for help, whether or not you eventually make a
> > profit from the information is irrelevant.  
> >
> > Richard
> >   
> A few years ago, someone tried telling me it was illegal to buy a
> computer without Windows loaded.

That was nonsence of course, but for the large PC manufacturers it
certainly was 'illegal' to /sell/ PCs without paying MS for a license,
whether they would (pre)install the crapware or not.
Afaik this is no longer the case however, at least not in Europe.

Theo
-- 
Theo v. WerkhovenRegistered Linux user# 99872 http://counter.li.org
ICBM 52 13 26N , 4 29 47E. +  ICQ: 277217131
SUSE 10.2  +   Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kernel 2.6.20  +   See headers for PGP/GPG info.
Claimer: any email I receive will become my property. Disclaimers do not apply.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[joe]

James Knott wrote:
> Richard Creighton wrote:
>> What a world Microsoft has created!   It makes honest people *think*
>> they are thieves
>>
>> Lynn, STOP feeling guilty about USING Linux and certainly stop feeling
>> guilty about asking for help, whether or not you eventually make a
>> profit from the information is irrelevant.  
>>
>> Richard
>>   
> A few years ago, someone tried telling me it was illegal to buy a
> computer without Windows loaded.


Wow, so this is the sort of nonsense that passes as common sense? No wonder
it's taking so long to put a dent in mickeysoft's market share.

Joe
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [opensuse] legalities

[James Knott]

Richard Creighton wrote:
>
> What a world Microsoft has created!   It makes honest people *think*
> they are thieves
>
> Lynn, STOP feeling guilty about USING Linux and certainly stop feeling
> guilty about asking for help, whether or not you eventually make a
> profit from the information is irrelevant.  
>
> Richard
>   
A few years ago, someone tried telling me it was illegal to buy a
computer without Windows loaded.


-- 
Use OpenOffice.org 
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]