The Linux Project X Lunar Linux and Gentoo Linux-The Lipton cup-o-soup Linux distributions.
NOTE!This was supposed to be article eleven, and the previous article about Fedora was supposed to be article ten (X). All I can say is, "oops!" Once again, I am proved to be less than perfect. Hope you like the article even with the number change and seeming lack of continuity. Pappy
"Is it Linux yet?" This is the question you will be asking yourself if you gain the courage to consider setting up either Lunar Linux or Gentoo Linux on anything less than a bleeding edge system. Even if you have such as system, you will still be left with the unending struggle of trying to get either one of these simply horrendous operating systems on your machine. Let me begin with Lunar Linux, the absolute worst Linux Distribution I have ever experienced. Yes, I said absolute worst. While Gentoo is no prize, at least all of its stuff TRIED to install properly. It didn't get the job done, but more about that later.
LUNAR LINUX
The test machine is going on hour fifteen of setting up the bare essentials of Lunar Linux's basic X Windows desktop, and there's no end in sight. Well, maybe there is an end in sight, it's just at the present moment, I can't really tell. The reason for this is Lunar Linux, unlike every other distribution tested to date, doesn't simply install compressed but functional programs ready to run with an hour or three of sucking said programs down from the Internet or off the distribution CD.
No, Lunar Linux, obviously built with the total ultra geek in mind, takes the time eating step of compiling EVERY PROGRAM IT INSTALLS ON YOUR SYSTEM. That means it downloads the source code for those programs, then turns that code into executable files on your machine The theory behind this, according to the Lunar Linux web site, is by compiling each program on your machine, they will run as quickly as possible, and supposedly as bug free as possible, too.
For the uninitiated, there are two states in which computer software exists: source code and executable code. Source code is the written by a human, text-based stuff that ostensibly tells the computer what you want it to do. In order for source code to actually make the computer operate, it has to be translated into executable code. This deed is accomplished by the use of a compiler. Through the use of extensive compilation libraries, the source code is translated into executable code. The translation process, as one might well expect, is a time consuming process. A slower machine means a slower compilation process. Considering the age and speed of the test computer, and the amount of files to be created, fifteen hours could become twenty-four before I see an end to the compilation process.
In an ideal world, it makes sense that compiling software in a custom-made fashion would speed up the final operation of the computer. Custom made executables would be free of extraneous stuff that doesn't need to be there. Those executable files would be tailor made to your system (CPU, speed, memory, BIOS, peripherals, etc.). When the object of running an operating system that's as lean and mean as possible, it makes a lot of sense to compile everything according to what hardware exists on the machine on which the operating system is to run. However, this begs the question of who really needs that kind of balls to the wall speed in an operating system? On older systems, yeah, I could see the need. However, with all the super adrenalin dipped PC's on the market today, compiling the entirety of your operating system seems a huge waste of time.
One might think, in consideration of the speed of my test system, I would be all for having it run like the proverbial raped ape. However, in consideration of how long my system has been crunching on this distribution installation, is the speed I am supposed to gain worth the hours and hours that have been spent compiling the operating system? I am simply not impressed.
At this time, the above question remains to be answered. I will say one thing, though. In consideration of the time that has been eaten by this process up to now, this machine better run like it has custom-built software running it, or I am going to crucify Lunar Linux on it's much deserved old rugged digital cross.
I can say that as far as the first criterion is concerned, Lunar Linux gets no stars at all. First of all, the initial installation CD requires the "ide=nodma" command to be entered at the boot prompt. While I am willing to accept this with installation CD's that take less time to install the basic system already pre-compiled, in a system that forces the user to put up with the compilation of the entire operating system, it's as close to inexcusable as can be. For the time you have to devote after you get the machine booted in order to just get to square one, you'd think they'd make it so all one has to do at install CD boot time is hit the enter key or wait. Nope, they can't be bothered to make it that easy. I guess they are just trying to find out who is willing to go that extra mile, and who isn't. How arrogant can one get?
Update, the initial compilation process just ended a few seconds ago. X Windows failed to start. It failed because either I didn't choose, or the compiler didn't set up the video libraries to make things run. This is not good, and it makes me even happier that I didn't give Lunar Linux any stars for installation. Well, I have to go get the required modules to make it run. I'll continue as soon as I get everything set to run. Don't look for any high marks for Lunar Linux though. Is it Linux yet? Not on your life!
It is now officially the twenty-four hour mark, and it's still not Linux. Therefore, Lunar Linux is getting a complete goose egg from me. If the assumption of The Linux Project was being able to install a console-based operating system, and nothing more, then I suppose Lunar Linux might get high marks. If the installation setup worked to a point that one could expect a functional GUI after almost twenty-four hours of set up time, Lunar Linux might not have wound up on the Pappy scrap heap. If I had a faster machine that could compile Lunar Linux in less time than it takes to go from here to Toledo, Ohio, I might recommend it to y'all. If the modules weren't screwed up on their web site, and they at least attempted to install, I might consider that Lunar Linux is worth the time and effort required to turn those files from megs of source code to megs of workable software. But none of these things are even close to true.
The Linux project is about telling the newcomer how to install a UNIX based operating system with a GUI. The Linux project is built on the assumption that the average newbie has no idea how to work in the console environment. Therefore, I cannot even consider recommending it to the new user. Even if you do have some experience in operating inside the console environment like myself, Lunar Linux still falls flat on it's face before it even gets a chance to stand up.
GENTOO LINUX
I'll grant Gentoo one big plus over Lunar Linux. While they are both "cup-o-soup" flavors of Linux, at least Gentoo's website is set up to properly access all the required files to get Gentoo close to functional. Unlike Lunar Linux, which had numerous important files off line at compile time, everything was there at the Gentoo Linux site for your cup-o-soup experience.
Bill, the philanthropist, Gates is threatening to sue Linux users over patent laws. Isn't it strange that Gates is hyping his actions in 3rd world countries, but won't even release Windows 3 to public domain? My hope is that the whole computer community will move away from OS Windows to Linux. I use Macintoshes and refuse to support Gates' monopolistic ventures. New Macs use an OS based on linux.
by
Dale Hill (55 articles, 0 quicklinks, 97 diaries, 340 comments)
on Tuesday, May 15, 2007 at 10:34:32 AM
...kiss my wide, spreading ass! Like he has the right to sue anyone over usurping the patented technology of anyone after he stole most of Windoze functionality from Apple. He can sue all he wants, he will get nowhere. UNIX existed long before Gates stole the original DOS operating system for a mere fifty grand. Linux is just another version of UNIX, like Minix, the system that gave birth to Linux.
There is a verifiable lineage to Linux. Even if there are some areas where certain people have usurped snippets of Windoze code for use in Linux, there is enough different between the two operating systems that, much like the judgment in the Apple Vs. Microsoft case, Microsoft won't have a leg on which it can stand. Even if it were to come to pass that Microsoft won this battle, can you see Linux fading away?
I can't! There are far too many people out there who are completely in love with Linux, and have no need at all for anything coming from Redmond, Washington, or any other Microsoft "campus". Linux will simply go back underground! Much like the kiddie porn internet sites, Linux will become a word of mouth kind of thing. Nothing that the mighty Gates does will stop Linux or change the minds of it's faithful. To borrow a statement from another group of militants, they can have my Linux installation disks when they pry them from my cold, dead hands.
Fuck Bill Gates and his sofware empire built upon stolen ideas! Viva la Linux revolution!
Blessed be! Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 863 comments)
on Tuesday, May 15, 2007 at 2:31:23 PM
Perhaps the robber baron Gates is pissed off because his latest pet project, Windows Vista, sucks ass like no other piece of shit that fell from the ass of Microsoft. I had to exorcise that particular demon from my new laptop and replace it with Windows XP so that the machine would run like it was new, instead of an anemic, three year old.
Having tried Windows Vista, I can only say it is obvious to me that Windows Vista started life as Linux. Much of its look and feel is way too much like Linux for it to be a coincidence. After trying numerous different Linux distributions, I can only equate the desktop of Windows Vista to the Gnome desktop, a popular Linux desktop.
Unfortunately, instead of simply admitting this truth, Microsoft took the underpinnings of what might have been a very stable system, and completely ruined it. It's like they tried to mix Linux and Windows NT and totally screwed things up.
For further amplification of this idea, read my review of Windows Vista. I am very glad that I got rid of it in favor of Windows XP. Now my machine runs like I would expect a new computer to run. Not only that, I can now boot into either Linux or XP, depending on my mood for the day, or what I need to accomplish.
Once again, fuck Bill Gates! The words of a man who has more money than some countries mean nothing to me. This is especially true when one considers the fact that Microsoft began as an empire of theft, and only became more wily in its thieving techniques. They have stolen code from every corner of the PC world, and they dare to bitch when the Linux world stole back. Hah! It is to laugh
Charade they are!
Blessed be! Pappy
by
Pappy (61 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 863 comments)
on Tuesday, May 15, 2007 at 2:46:29 PM
