Very Computer

by **David Bakhas** » Thu, 01 Jan 1998 04:00:00

> about 99 million versions of unix out there, and I don't have the
> faintest idea what the difference is. Some questions:

At the user level, there should not be too much difference. things like
`ps' will look a bit different in that they'll take different switches
from one brand UNIX to the next. Deeper down, there are major
differences in how the different unicies deal with multi-tasking
processes (scheduling), security issues, etc. I believe strongly in the
LINUX project, and think it's probably the way to go (free, active,
modernized, good packaging facility (debian and Red Hat have rpm, others
do too I think). You can download it for free. There are numerous
newsgroups for it, (as with BSD, which is also free, and also good).
anyway, when you ask people:

Quote:> What version of Unix should I get?

realize that this is like asking "what religion should I subscribe to".
I say Linux, but then again, it's religion. You really should read some
FAQs on the web about what the differences are.

Quote:> How can I get Unix?

depends which one. some you must buy CDs for (like Solaris, which is
good, but huge, and you don't get to see the source code), and some you
can download as well (like the BSD/LINUX/HURD(gnu) stuff). Shoot, if it
*were* a religion, I'd have to have to pay for it--and much less not get
to read the source (like needing holy priests to interpret the bible for
you, and tell you what you're supposed to be doing, and what things
really mean).

Quote:> Can Unix and win95 work on the same computer? (damn Gates and his
> monopolies)

yes. separate partitions. LILO boot mechanism or something. You can
decide what to load (windoze/UNIX) at boot time.

Quote:> Will I be able to use unix without getting a computer science degree?

hells yeah! it's all documented on-line. don't EVER think you need a
degree to learn UNIX. It just sounds hard. It's not.

Quote:> If all this information is in the FAQ or something, please feel free to
> flame someone else. Sorry. :)

I hate people who flame for stuff like this. I say *DON'T* tollerate
flamage. You're a new user, and you're only asking some simple
questions.

the FAQs are all over the place. just do a web search or something.
you're bound to find good stuff. or buy an introductory book to get
started.

One last thing (personal). when you start using UNIX, try to learn
Emacs (or even better XEmacs). This will help you a lot. It's the best
editor for UNIX (and it's free).

dave

by **Tor Slettne** » Fri, 02 Jan 1998 04:00:00

paulgowder> How can I get Unix? What version of Unix should I
paulgowder> get? Can Unix and win95 work on the same computer?
paulgowder> (damn Gates and his monopolies) Will I be able to use
paulgowder> unix without getting a computer science degree?

The most popular UNIXen for PCs are Linux and FreeBSD - both are free.
Both works on a separate partition alongside Win95, NT or any other
OS. Both have native support for reading Win95 filesystems; there is
also Win95 utilities for reading the Linux filesystem. FreeBSD and
Linux can also read each other's filesystems, though this has to be
configured first.

Linux is by far the most popular and has more applications (including
a number of office suites, some of which are compatible wtih MS Office
files), but both FreeBSD, Linux and SCO can run each other's binaries
through iBCS.

Linux is rewritten from scratch, based on the Minix operating system
used in educational programmes here and there. Linux core development
is managed by Linus Torvalds (the originator), but the code is written
by hundreds, if not thousands, of people throughout the net. You can
also contribute. As a result, this is probably the most dynamic
(fastest-adapting) operating support out there. There are several
flavors (distributions) of Linux; Slackware, Debian, RedHat, Caldera
are the more popular ones. (The latter two are more or less
commercial ones). It exists for the Intel platforms (PCs), Sun
Sparcs, DEC alphas, Macintoshes (m68k or PPC), though most commercial
and precompiled software exists only for the PC platform. Check out:
http://www.linux.org/
http://www.li.org/
http://www.kernel.org/
http://www.debian.org/
http://www.slackware.org/
http://www.redhat.com/
http://www.caldera.com/
http://www.mklinux.apple.com/

FreeBSD is based on 386BSD, which is based on some other BSD, ranging
back to the original BSD which was a modification of the original
UNIX. (Linux is somewhat a cross between BSD and System V type
systems). FreeBSD is maintained by a core development team. Quite a
few people contribute here also. FreeBSD is optimized for larger
systems; it uses a lot of swap file space, but performs very well
without much tuning or tweaking under heavy loads.
http://www.freebsd.org/

I use Debian GNU/Linux at home. While this is very nice and has
excellent support for maintainability, it may be easier to start off
with e.g. the RedHat or Slackware distributions. In most people's
minds, the installation process for these is somewhat easier.
RedHat's RPM (RedHat Package Manager) is also becoming a format for
package distribution for other systems.

-tor

by **Conrad Sabati** » Fri, 02 Jan 1998 04:00:00

>Paul---

>I have on my desk a FREE copy of SCO Open Server. It's for educational or
>non-commercial use, but from your posting it seems that would be ideal.

> There are 1,836 versions of UNIX out there, but I think any reasonable
>person would agree that SCO Open Server is a powerful and practical way to
>learn UNIX. I've also got LINUX, not to be despised, but in my opinion SCO
>Open Server is a good deal more capable.

Yes, but...does SCO include *full sources*?

IMHO, FreeBSD is the best choice for an Intel-based PC Unix. For one
thing, it's free. :-) For another, as mentioned above, you can get the
source code for *everything*. And last but not least, it's *very*
stable, and is well-supported through a *centralized* team of developers
(unlike Linux, which is a hodgepodge of contributions from a none-too-
coordinated group of people), mailing lists and newsgroups. Updating your
source tree to the most current version can be accomplished with one
simple command, since there is a central repository (again, unlike Linux,
with its myriad of distributions). Rebuilding the entire source tree is
just as simple.

And it's getting better all the time, too. :-)

Before anyone takes me to task for criticizing Linux, let me just say
that, yes, I have tried it. Didn't like it. Went right back to FreeBSD
in a matter of days.

Oh, and by the way, FreeBSD also supports running Linux and SCO binaries
(although you're not likely to actually *need* this). :-)
--
Conrad Sabatier | FreeBSD -- UNIX for your PC
| Why settle for less than the best?
http://www.neosoft.com/~conrads | http://www.freebsd.org

by **Raymond N Shwa** » Fri, 02 Jan 1998 04:00:00

>Ok... this is probably an intensely stupid newbie post, but I'm asking
>you to dispel ignorance here. I currently own a Pentium 120 laptop w/ 16
>megs ram and a 1.2 gig harddrive (with almost no room left, but that's
>manageable with the sip drive). It runs ... pity me... windows 95. In
>the lingo of people much more knowledgable than me, I am a "user."
>(Albeit fast learning.) I'm sick of win95: I want unix. I know there's
>about 99 million versions of unix out there, and I don't have the
>faintest idea what the difference is. Some questions:
>How can I get Unix?

Which one? For UNIX on Intel you have a few choices (many less than
"99 million"): Linux (available commercially from Red Hat, Caldera and
others or as low-cost CD-ROMs), SCO UnixWare and OpenServer ($24.95 each
including media and SDK for personal use - I prefer the former), and the
BSD variants (FreeBSD, NetBSD and the commercial BSDI). Solaris x86 is also
an option, but the most expensive.

Quote:>What version of Unix should I get?

Depends. What's your objective? Which one can be installed and
supported on your computer?

Quote:>Can Unix and win95 work on the same computer? (damn Gates and his
>monopolies)

Yes. Once installed, you can use a boot selector (like the commercial
System Commander or free OS-BS) to choose your OS at boot-time.

Quote:>Will I be able to use unix without getting a computer science degree?

Yes, provided you're literate and not averse to opening the manuals,
man pages, or online docs.

Quote:>If all this information is in the FAQ or something, please feel free to
>flame someone else. Sorry. :)

by **Nathan Dorfm** » Fri, 02 Jan 1998 04:00:00

>Ok... this is probably an intensely stupid newbie post, but I'm asking
>you to dispel ignorance here. I currently own a Pentium 120 laptop w/ 16
>megs ram and a 1.2 gig harddrive (with almost no room left, but that's
>manageable with the sip drive). It runs ... pity me... windows 95. In
>the lingo of people much more knowledgable than me, I am a "user."
>(Albeit fast learning.) I'm sick of win95: I want unix. I know there's
>about 99 million versions of unix out there, and I don't have the
>faintest idea what the difference is. Some questions:

>How can I get Unix?

http://www.FreeBSD.org/

Quote:>What version of Unix should I get?

http://www.FreeBSD.org/

Quote:>Can Unix and win95 work on the same computer? (damn Gates and his
>monopolies)

Yes, http://www.FreeBSD.org :-)

Quote:>Will I be able to use unix without getting a computer science degree?

http://www.FreeBSD.org/FAQ/FAQ.html and /handbook/handbook.html

--
________________ _______________________________

by **Tony** » Fri, 02 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Quote:> IMHO, FreeBSD is the best choice for an Intel-based PC Unix. For one
> thing, it's free. :-) For another, as mentioned above, you can get the
> source code for *everything*. And last but not least, it's *very*
> stable, and is well-supported through a *centralized* team of developers
> (unlike Linux, which is a hodgepodge of contributions from a none-too-
> coordinated group of people), mailing lists and newsgroups. Updating your
> source tree to the most current version can be accomplished with one
> simple command, since there is a central repository (again, unlike Linux,
> with its myriad of distributions). Rebuilding the entire source tree is
> just as simple.

> And it's getting better all the time, too. :-)

I think there's probably something of value in FreeBSD also. But after 4
hours of trying to get it to install and boot (unsuccessful so far from
a dedicated drive), I realize it's definitely not a _user's_ OS yet. I
hope I get to see it in action sometime! ;)

Tony

by **The Nemasy** » Fri, 02 Jan 1998 04:00:00

> I think there's probably something of value in FreeBSD also. But after 4
> hours of trying to get it to install and boot (unsuccessful so far from
> a dedicated drive), I realize it's definitely not a _user's_ OS yet. I
> hope I get to see it in action sometime! ;)

Join one of the FreeBSD mailing list. You'll get some help from
some very knowledgable people. You might just get an answer from
one of the core team members.

--
Nemasys Technologies Enchanted Worlds - Free Web Chat
http://www.nemasys.net/ http://www.nemasys.net/chat/

by **Tony** » Fri, 02 Jan 1998 04:00:00

> > I think there's probably something of value in FreeBSD also. But after 4
> > hours of trying to get it to install and boot (unsuccessful so far from
> > a dedicated drive), I realize it's definitely not a _user's_ OS yet. I
> > hope I get to see it in action sometime! ;)

> Join one of the FreeBSD mailing list. You'll get some help from
> some very knowledgable people. You might just get an answer from
> one of the core team members.

OK, thx... or maybe I'll just post something to the freebsd.misc
newsgroup when I get back to it.

Tony

by **Daniel Pearso** » Sat, 03 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Quote:> I love UNIX but probably would not put it on this laptop.

I disagree.

Quote:> Yes you can have a dual boot but there is little in the way of third
> party s/w that you can justify buying for 1 seat.

http://www.xnet.com/~blatura/linapps.shtml
This site presents plenty of examples of third party software, much of
which is at a price that is practical for a single home-user.

Quote:> There is a lot of free/shareware but you will have to at least learn
> how to compile C code so you can modify makefiles for the s/w you
> wish to compile.

Correction: there are *gigabytes* (possibly terabytes) of (extremely
useful) free software, the great majority of which can be obtained in
binary format, so no compilation is necessary.

Quote:> I've seen the Linux and RedHat books with CD's at the
> bigger book stores-has the Install media on CD and a nice book
> explaining it. Should be able to give it a go for 40-80 bucks for the
> book & CD.

You can get cd's for the free x86 Unices for VERY cheap:
http://www.cheapbytes.com
http://www.linuxmall.com

Downloading the free version of the Unix you want (and, believe me,
you do want a free one) is quite easy and totally cost-free, but is
only practical if you have a really speedy net connection.

A book to help you out with Unix can usually be obtained from your
local library. And even if you don't there is so much online
documentation and documentation on the internet that you might find
that you even need a book.

Quote:> Be prepared-till you get X-windows up and running, it command line
> mostly.

Aww. The command line is not so bad. Everyone complains because it
gives no clue to you if you have no idea what the commands are. But
that is why you start off your Unix life with a book for newbies in
your hand. A few sessions later, when you have gotten used to things,
you will find out that your command line is by far one of your most
powerful tools. Don't get me wrong, I love GUI's when they are
appropriate, but the trend of MS-Windows to give *everything* a GUI is
quite stupid as it slows down the user who knows what she is doing,
and cannot hope to offer even a fraction of the flexibility that is
possible from a command-line.

Quote:> You'll probably need more RAM VERY SOON. 16 will
> probably boot and you'll need ~2 times RAM for the swap area on hard
> disk (i.e. 32 MB of RAM will need 64MB of swap area on disk),

I am running very comfortably with 16 MB of RAM and 25 MB of swap
space and I almost never use any more than 8 MB of that swap space.
But if you are not using the X Window Suystem, 8 MB of RAM is really
quite sufficient for most mid-level computing tasks.

Quote:> If you ever run a relation DB on it (which is where UNIX shines) you
> will gas it out quickly.

From the tone of the original post, I really doubt that Paul is
intending to use his laptop as the big database for his Fortune 500
company.

Quote:> So give it a go but remember-the free/cheap UNIX's have little or no
> support except for the newsgroups/FAQ's and whatever other docs you
> can get (i.e. the book I mentioned).

The commercially ditributed versions of Unix come with support when
they are bought from the company (as opposed to downloading it or
obtaining it from a third-party like a VAR).

by **ad..** » Sat, 03 Jan 1998 04:00:00

But WAIT A MINUTE. What about us RedHat users who like to build our
own kernel, write our own XWindows emulations. Redesign the system
to fit OUR needs. That's what Linux is REALLY about. Plus it
installs in less than 20 mins :) Adam

>> > I think there's probably something of value in FreeBSD also. But after 4
>> > hours of trying to get it to install and boot (unsuccessful so far from
>> > a dedicated drive), I realize it's definitely not a _user's_ OS yet. I
>> > hope I get to see it in action sometime! ;)

>> Join one of the FreeBSD mailing list. You'll get some help from
>> some very knowledgable people. You might just get an answer from
>> one of the core team members.

>OK, thx... or maybe I'll just post something to the freebsd.misc
>newsgroup when I get back to it.

>Tony

===================================================================================
Adam's mail stamp ver 1.2

IRC irc.undernet.org adamm
#Smudge (op), #13-17*z (op)
http://www.veryComputer.com/~adamm

by **brad..** » Sat, 03 Jan 1998 04:00:00

<snip>

Quote:> >How can I get Unix?

> Which one? For UNIX on Intel you have a few choices (many less than
> "99 million"): Linux (available commercially from Red Hat, Caldera and
> others or as low-cost CD-ROMs), SCO UnixWare and OpenServer ($24.95 each

^^^^^^^^^^^

Quote:> including media and SDK for personal use - I prefer the former), and the
> BSD variants (FreeBSD, NetBSD and the commercial BSDI). Solaris x86 is also
> an option, but the most expensive.

Not a flame but where are you able to purchase SCO UNIXWare or
OpenServer
for $24.95?

steve

--
----------Stephen W. Bradley------------

by **Tony** » Sat, 03 Jan 1998 04:00:00

> But WAIT A MINUTE. What about us RedHat users who like to build our
> own kernel, write our own XWindows emulations. Redesign the system
> to fit OUR needs. That's what Linux is REALLY about. Plus it
> installs in less than 20 mins :) Adam

> >> > I think there's probably something of value in FreeBSD also. But after 4
> >> > hours of trying to get it to install and boot (unsuccessful so far from
> >> > a dedicated drive), I realize it's definitely not a _user's_ OS yet. I
> >> > hope I get to see it in action sometime! ;)

> >> Join one of the FreeBSD mailing list. You'll get some help from
> >> some very knowledgable people. You might just get an answer from
> >> one of the core team members.

> >OK, thx... or maybe I'll just post something to the freebsd.misc
> >newsgroup when I get back to it.

> >Tony

I got mine as a development platform also. But the nitty-gritty details
(like install programs) really need to be made FDU useable before
freenixes can be considered ready for prime time. There's no reason why
the interface to the administration couldn't be made more user-friendly
without penalizing the administrator or developer. I have a feeling that
the next thing I will find out is that the freenixes really have no
GUI/desktop portion that is FDU-acceptable. (Not an attempt to start the
CLI-GUI thing, but end-users (and others) need GUIs).

Tony

Very Computer

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine

unix on a normal machine