12 Jan
2001
12 Jan
'01
6:37 p.m.
From: Mike Ford <mikeford(a)socal.rr.com>
The beauty of *nix right now is that its a bit of a
chore to install, no
formal support, etc. and that leaves the door open for consultants et al
to
make money selling, installing, and supporting it. Not
a bad business
model
really.
I take an aside to this. The current crop of BSD and Linux flavored unix
like
OSs seem to be as easy to install as W9x. With one caveat, the unix
camp is steeped in 30+ years of unix culture. It is this culture that
makes
if difficult as it's simply different! If you get past the difference
and can adopt
it's cultural language over prior biases it's fairly forthright and
simple to install.
Then again I say this as W95 was a royal PITA the first time compared to
VMS and other DEC OSs I was familiar with. Then again creating a BIOS
for CP/M was pretty intimidating at one time too.
Allison
12 Jan
12 Jan
9:57 p.m.
I take an aside to this. The current crop of BSD and
Linux flavored unix
like
OSs seem to be as easy to install as W9x. With one caveat, the unix
camp is steeped in 30+ years of unix culture. It is this culture that
makes
if difficult as it's simply different! If you get past the difference
and can adopt
it's cultural language over prior biases it's fairly forthright and
simple to install.
Then again I say this as W95 was a royal PITA the first time compared to
VMS and other DEC OSs I was familiar with. Then again creating a BIOS
for CP/M was pretty intimidating at one time too.
Allison
It all depends on the person. I can install things such as Linux, OpenBSD,
Solaris, OpenVMS, MacOS and RT-11 almost with my eyes closed, and the hardest
part is waiting for the software to move from CD to HD (yes, even with RT-11).
With any Windows variant I seem to have to dedicate a minimum of one day to
cursing and fighting the garbage!
Zane
13 Jan
13 Jan
1:41 a.m.
I take an aside to this. The current crop of BSD and
Linux flavored unix
like
OSs seem to be as easy to install as W9x. With one caveat, the unix
camp is steeped in 30+ years of unix culture. It is this culture that
When you have a LOT of unix experience they do seem about as easy to
install, but I am a fairly normal, knowledgable person and it took me
roughly 12 hours to get my first NetBSD system running on a Mac IIci as a
limited function Nat/firewall. I still don't "understand" much of what I
had to do, but the mechanics of doing it are much more familiar. Exiting vi
the first time I edited /etc/resolv.rc only took about an hour.
CLEARLY what I struggled with manually could have been scripted etc., but
at what price? (both in $ and failing to learn how to exit vi). When I
recommend NetBSD, part of the recommendation is before you get started,
join a support list (and I give a URL).
With windows the problem is the opposite, the damn thing wants to run
EXACTLY the way it wants to with few if any user options and very much at
your own risk.
4:14 a.m.
It was thus said that the Great Mike Ford once stated:
NetBSD wasn't one of the eaisest things I've installed (on an HP/Apollo
400 series---ended up having to recompile my Linux kernel and calculate the
physical layout of the drives and partition them by hand) but it was a fun
way to spend a day (looking back, at the time I was cursing up a storm).
Then again, HP/Apollos aren't mainstream systems.
But I had trouble installing RedHat on a laptop with only 4M RAM and 120M
harddrive (I did it, but the method involved making a 120M disk image and
transfering it to the laptop ... )
-spc (That one took me two days ... )
I take an aside to this. The current crop of BSD
and Linux flavored unix
like
OSs seem to be as easy to install as W9x. With one caveat, the unix
camp is steeped in 30+ years of unix culture. It is this culture that
When you have a LOT of unix experience they do seem about as easy to
install, but I am a fairly normal, knowledgable person and it took me
roughly 12 hours to get my first NetBSD system running on a Mac IIci as a
limited function Nat/firewall. I still don't "understand" much of what I
had to do, but the mechanics of doing it are much more familiar. Exiting vi
the first time I edited /etc/resolv.rc only took about an hour. 
11:08 a.m.
When you have
a LOT of unix experience they do seem about as easy to
install, but I am a fairly normal, knowledgable person and it took me
roughly 12 hours to get my first NetBSD system running on a Mac IIci as a
limited function Nat/firewall. I still don't "understand" much of what I
had to do, but the mechanics of doing it are much more familiar. Exiting vi
the first time I edited /etc/resolv.rc only took about an hour.
NetBSD wasn't one of the eaisest things I've installed (on an HP/Apollo
400 series---ended up having to recompile my Linux kernel and calculate the
physical layout of the drives and partition them by hand) but it was a fun
way to spend a day (looking back, at the time I was cursing up a storm). 
11:28 a.m.
Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner skrev:
It was thus said that the Great Mike Ford once stated:
>
> >I take an aside to this. The current crop of BSD and Linux flavored unix
> >like
> >OSs seem to be as easy to install as W9x. With one caveat, the unix
> >camp is steeped in 30+ years of unix culture. It is this culture that
>
> When you have a LOT of unix experience they do seem about as easy to
> install, but I am a fairly normal, knowledgable person and it took me
> roughly 12 hours to get my first NetBSD system running on a Mac IIci as a
> limited function Nat/firewall. I still don't "understand" much of what
I
> had to do, but the mechanics of doing it are much more familiar. Exiting vi
> the first time I edited /etc/resolv.rc only took about an hour.
NetBSD wasn't one of the eaisest things I've
installed (on an HP/Apollo
400 series---ended up having to recompile my Linux kernel and calculate the
physical layout of the drives and partition them by hand) but it was a fun
way to spend a day (looking back, at the time I was cursing up a storm).
I installed NetBSD 1.1 on an i386, and save for finding a compatible NIC, it
went rather well. The most fluid installation must have been when I installed
1.4 on a pmax (DECstation), though.
I could see why it would be quirky on a Mac, though.
Then again, HP/Apollos aren't mainstream systems.
Definitely not. Sadly.
But I had trouble installing RedHat on a laptop with
only 4M RAM and 120M
harddrive (I did it, but the method involved making a 120M disk image and
transfering it to the laptop ... )
The NetBSD READMe said that more than 4 MB was recommended, so installed two
SIMMs so that I'd get 6 MB. =)
--
En ligne avec Thor 2.6.
Amiga 4000/040 25MHz/34MB/20GB RetinaBLTZ3/VLab/FastlaneZ3/Ariadne/Toccata
6:41 p.m.
New subject: Nuke Helsinki
NetBSD wasn't one of the eaisest things I've
installed (on an HP/Apollo
400 series---ended up having to recompile my Linux kernel and calculate the
physical layout of the drives and partition them by hand) but it was a fun
way to spend a day (looking back, at the time I was cursing up a storm).
Then again, HP/Apollos aren't mainstream systems.
I have 4 Apollo's, but I suspect I will run HP unix on them. Sheesh, spring
cleaning could get ugly this year, too many I have its that I don't play
with.
11:43 a.m.
At 11:41 PM 1/12/01 -0800, you wrote:
When you have a LOT of unix experience they do seem
about as easy to
install, but I am a fairly normal, knowledgable person and it took me
roughly 12 hours to get my first NetBSD system running on a Mac IIci as a
limited
function Nat/firewall.
I'm no kernel genius, but I've been using Unix for nearly 20 years,
and still I feel that picking up the latest Linux distro and, say,
building an adequate firewall, will consume days learning the
quirks of the latest tools, figuring out why something wasn't
recognized, waiting for CDs to reinstall, etc.
- John
8775
days inactive
8776
days old
8 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
ajp166＠bellatlantic.net -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
jtinker＠coin.org -
mikeford＠socal.rr.com -
optimus＠canit.se -
spc＠conman.org -
spectre＠stockholm.ptloma.edu