Could you live with just Linux alone with Synchronet BBS without any other OS on your machine?
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to All on Mon Feb 10 2020 07:33 pm
I have a dedicated PC just for my BBS, and yes, I could get by with just Linux on it with Synchronet running on it. I currently have my BBS running in a Windows VM on that machine, because historially I've been running my BBS on Windows and I haven't been fully motivated to migrate it to Linux yet.. The reason I'm running Linux on that machine is because I wanted a 64-bit OS in order to take advantage of the 16GB of RAM I have in that machine for running other servers (such as Plex), so I decided to install a 64-bit Linux and then run my BBS on it in a Windows VM.
I've actually thought about migrating my BBS to Linux so I don't have to bother with the VM anymore, but for now I think it has been working well enough as is.
As far as my main desktop PC, I've considered installing Linux Mint (Cinnamon edition) on it, but there is some software for Windows I still like to use, so for now I still use Windows on my main desktop PC.
Nightfox
---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
Could you live with just Linux alone with Synchronet BBS without any other OS on your machine?
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to Nightfox on Tue Feb 11 2020 06:45 am
Hardware generally isn't built for any particular OS. Oftne it's mainly the drivers you'll need to worry about. But on my PC where I have Linux Mint installed, it seems to have detected everything, and everything is working fine on it. Linux has drivers for a lot of common PC hardware these days.
Nightfox
---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
But will all the hardware detect correctly if the hardware is built for Windows?
Could you live with just Linux alone with Synchronet BBS without any otherOS
on your machine?
Could you live with just Linux alone with Synchronet BBS without any other OS on your machine?
But will all the hardware detect correctly if the hardware is built forWindows?
But will all the hardware detect correctly if the hardware is built forWindows?
Hardware generally isn't built for any particular OS.
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to Nightfox on Tue Feb 11 2020 06:45:49
linux folks don't buy hardware that is windows only ;)
)\/(ark
---
■ Synchronet ■ The SouthEast Star Mail HUB - SESTAR
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to Nightfox on Tue Feb 11 2020 06:45 am
But will all the hardware detect correctly if the hardware is built for Windows?
Hardware generally isn't built for any particular OS.
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: Nightfox to The Millionaire on Tue Feb 11 2020 09:45 am
I think most computer hardware is built for a particular OS (e.g. pretty much all products from Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon). That doens't mean it's impossible to run Windows or Linux on a Mac (for example), but it's certianly not "built" for that.
So you're saying that a Linux machine should have Linux hardware built inside it.
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: Nightfox to The Millionaire on Tue Feb 11 2020 09:45 am
I think most computer hardware is built for a particular OS (e.g. pretty much all products from Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon). That doens't mean it's impossible to run Windows or Linux on a Mac (for example), but it's certianly not "built" for that.
digital man
This Is Spinal Tap quote #2:
Nigel Tufnel: Well, this piece is called "Lick My Love Pump".
Norco, CA WX: 68.7°F, 11.0% humidity, 10 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Tue Feb 11 2020 03:01 pm
No. I'm saying that most comuter hardware is built for a particular OS. You can buy a "generic PC" that'd run Linux or Windows, possibly equally well, but that doesn't constitute the majority of computer hardware. For example, if you buy a Chromebook, good luck getting MacOS to run on it. If you buy a PC from Dell or HP, it's likely only certitifed for use with Windows. It may run Linux just fine, but that doesn't mean it was "built for it".
digital man
Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #13:
CP437 = Code Page 437 (so-called IBM Extended ASCII)
Norco, CA WX: 68.5°F, 11.0% humidity, 3 mph SW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
Well that makes me feel better now because in the olden days I had a lot of problems with drivers.
You just boosted my confidence back to Linux. I hear MX Linux is the most popular. Why did you pick Mint instead?
The Millionaire wrote to Nightfox <=-
drivers you'll need to worry about. But on my PC where I have Linux Mint installed, it seems to have detected everything, and everything is working fine on it. Linux has drivers for a lot of common PC hardware these days.
Well that makes me feel better now because in the olden days I
had a lot of problems with drivers.
You just boosted my confidence back to Linux. I hear MX Linux is
the most popular. Why did you pick Mint instead?
Hardware generally isn't built for any particular OS.
winmodems and winprinters certainly were... the actual working code that normally resides in the hardware was moved into software... supposedly to make them cheaper but it also was another of m$'s underhanded tricks to try to give windows more of a boost in the market place...
Hardware generally isn't built for any particular OS.
I think most computer hardware is built for a particular OS (e.g. pretty much all products from Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon). That doens't mean it's impossible to run Windows or Linux on a Mac (for example), but it's certianly not "built" for that.
No. I'm saying that most comuter hardware is built for a particular OS. You can buy a "generic PC" that'd run Linux or Windows, possibly equally well, but that doesn't constitute the majority of computer hardware. For example, if you buy a Chromebook, good luck getting MacOS to run on it. If you buy a PC from Dell or HP, it's likely only certitifed for use with Windows. It may run Linux just fine, but that doesn't mean it was "built for it".
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to Digital Man on Tue Feb 11 2020 03:11 pm
That's when you install the Nvidia driver.. I dabbled in Linux a bit back in those days, and I found you usually had to manually download and install the Nvidia graphics driver. The Nvidia drivers always worked fairly well though, so generally the Nvidia drier installation went well, and my Linux setup was able to make full use of the Nvidia graphics card.
Nightfox
---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
Well I had problems with Linux in the olden days back in the mid 2000s saying things like:
"Nvidia Card Not Detected"
I'd say oh great.
Could you live with just Linux alone with Synchronet BBS without any other OS on your machine?
though.linux folks don't buy hardware that is windows only ;)
No, granted that that. But they will buy a Windows PC and put Linux on it
So you’re saying that a Linux machine should have Linux hardware built inside it.
*facepalm*
|15frank |08// |15netsurge
|07disksh0p|08!|07bbs |08% |07bbs.diskshop.ca |08% |07mystic goodness |11SciNet |03ftn hq |08% |07https://scinet-ftn.org
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
* Origin: % disksh0p!bbs % bbs.diskshop.ca % SciNet ftn hq % (1:229/101)
I think most computer hardware is built for a particular OS (e.g.
That doens't mean it's impossible to run Windows or Linux on a Mac
(for example), but it's certianly not "built" for that.
So you're saying that a Linux machine should have Linux hardware built
inside it.
example, if you buy a Chromebook, good luck getting MacOS to run on it. If you buy a PC from Dell or HP, it's likely only certitifed for use with Windows. It may run Linux just fine, but that doesn't mean it was "built for it".
On 02-11-20 10:11, The Millionaire wrote to Nightfox <=-
Well that makes me feel better now because in the olden days I had a
lot of problems with drivers.
You just boosted my confidence back to Linux. I hear MX Linux is the
most popular. Why did you pick Mint instead?
On 02-11-20 13:32, echicken wrote to The Millionaire <=-
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to All on Mon Feb 10 2020 19:33:20
Could you live with just Linux alone with Synchronet BBS without any other
OS
on your machine?
No, I need to have Linux, Synchronet, Windows, and typically at least
one other OS on my machine. I would probably die otherwise.
On 02-11-20 16:06, Nightfox wrote to Rampage <=-
True, but I think those were exceptions. I didn't see many hardware designed for Windows. And technically it would be possible for a
Winmodem to work in Linux if someone wanted to write a driver for
Linux.
The Millionaire wrote to Nightfox <=-in
That's when you install the Nvidia driver.. I dabbled in Linux a bit back
those days, and I found you usually had to manually download and install the Nvidia graphics driver. The Nvidia drivers always worked fairly wellthough,
so generally the Nvidia drier installation went well, and my Linux setup was able to make full use of the Nvidia graphics card.
Where do you get the driver from?
On 02-11-20 16:28, Nightfox wrote to The Millionaire <=-
That's when you install the Nvidia driver.. I dabbled in Linux a bit
back in those days, and I found you usually had to manually download
and install the Nvidia graphics driver. The Nvidia drivers always
worked fairly well though, so generally the Nvidia drier installation
went well, and my Linux setup was able to make full use of the Nvidia graphics card.
The Millionaire wrote to Digital Man <=-
Well I had problems with Linux in the olden days back in the mid
2000s saying things like:
"Nvidia Card Not Detected"
I'd say oh great.
Nightfox wrote to The Millionaire <=-
Well that makes me feel better now because in the olden days I had a lot of problems with drivers.
You just boosted my confidence back to Linux. I hear MX Linux is the most popular. Why did you pick Mint instead?
I've never heard of MX Linux.. I've tried many distros over the
years, and several years ago, I found Mint Linux and tried the
one with its 'Cinnamon' GUI. I really liked it because it felt
fairly intuitive, coming from other operating systems. Also, it
seems fairly easy to update and install new software. I've
actually hear Linux Mint is one of the most popular distros right
now. And I thought Ubuntu was the most popular Linux distro
right now.
Some Linux distributions (like Mint) also offer to install "non free" drivers, if you let them, making the installation of these proprietary drivers as painless as doing it under Windows, or installing the open source ones. The only time proprietary drivers are a pain is when it's the Ethernet or wifi drivers that you need for Internet access. Then you have to jump through a few hoops, until you get Internet connectivity. Once you're connected, you can fetch anything that's needed, usually automatically.
That's when you install the Nvidia driver.. I dabbled in Linux a bit
Where do you get the driver from?
there's really no such thing as a "windows pc"... marketing does try to make folks think differently, though...
Well Dell does.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/02/dells-2019-xps-13-developer-editio n-the -best-linux-laptop-til-the-2020-version/
driver is released. Apple, however, simply likes to keep things more proprietary, not to say it's impossible for another OS to run on Apple, but why would be the question. lol -altere
them cheaper but it also was another of m$'s underhanded tricks to try to gi windows more of a boost in the market place...
MX Linux is quite popular today. I've tried it and like it a lot
better than most of the other "popular" ones. It's yet another Debian-based offshoot, but has some nice customizations, and most importantly (to me) is that it does *NOT* use the 'systemd' init
system. I've also tried/used Mint-Cinnamon and it was pretty nice
too. Ubuntu has been in decline for several years as far as the
popularity contest goes, it's widely used but not like it was a
few years back.
This site: https://distrowatch.com/ is a decent source of info
Another factor in this is what the distro is likely to be used
for. Most commercial/industrial uses won't be using
Mint/Ubuntu/Fedora, etc... they are using Debian, RedHat,
Slackware type distros.
On 02-11-20 20:40, Gamgee wrote to The Millionaire <=-
The Millionaire wrote to Nightfox <=-
That's when you install the Nvidia driver.. I dabbled in Linux a bit back
in
those days, and I found you usually had to manually download and install the Nvidia graphics driver. The Nvidia drivers always worked fairly well
though,
so generally the Nvidia drier installation went well, and my Linux setup was able to make full use of the Nvidia graphics card.
Where do you get the driver from?
Ummmmmmm...... The Nvidia website.
<BOGGLE>
On 02-11-20 20:53, Gamgee wrote to Nightfox <=-
MX Linux is quite popular today. I've tried it and like it a lot
better than most of the other "popular" ones. It's yet another Debian-based offshoot, but has some nice customizations, and most importantly (to me) is that it does *NOT* use the 'systemd' init
system. I've also tried/used Mint-Cinnamon and it was pretty nice
Another factor in this is what the distro is likely to be used
for. Most commercial/industrial uses won't be using
Mint/Ubuntu/Fedora, etc... they are using Debian, RedHat,
Slackware type distros.
On 02-11-20 20:45, Gamgee wrote to The Millionaire <=-
The Millionaire wrote to Digital Man <=-
Well I had problems with Linux in the olden days back in the mid
2000s saying things like:
For me, Linux in the mid 2000s was not the "olden days". I'd call
that period the "developmental days" when big advances were being
made in the Linux world. I'd been using Linux for at least a
decade at that point, and things seemed relatively easy.
On 02-11-20 19:45, Nightfox wrote to The Millionaire <=-
In some Linux distibutions, I've also seen Linux package management systems where they have additional repositories you can set up so you
can install such proprietary drivers through the package management system.
Re: Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: Gamgee to Nightfox on Tue Feb 11 2020 08:53 pm
I suppose I should check out MX Linux.
I've seen their site but haven't been there in quite a while.
Ubuntu was fairly popular for a long time though.. And Ubuntu is a Debian-based distro, isn't it?
Nightfox
---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
Could you live with just Linux alone with Synchronet BBS without any other OS on your machine?
$ The Millionaire $
On 02-11-20 19:53, Nightfox wrote to Altere <=-
The last time I used a Mac (in 2012), Apple had Windows versions of the drivers required to run Windows on a Mac. Apple wanted to allow people
to dual boot Windows and Mac OS on their Macs. Apple advertised their Macs as being one of the most compatible computers on the market, for being able to run both Mac OS and Windows so you can run pretty much whatever software you want.
I suppose I should check out MX Linux.
I've seen their site but haven't been there in quite a while.
Ubuntu was fairly popular for a long time though.. And Ubuntu is a
Debian-based distro, isn't it?
Still is but according to Distrowatch, MX Linux is still #1.
Re: Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to Nightfox on Wed Feb 12 2020 04:48 am
Don't get all your information from a single source and think it's golden. Searching on google for "2020 most popular linux distro" will give you several different results. One saying Linux Mint is #1 right now, another not even mentioning MX Linux, another saying MX Linux is on the rise to polularity, another saying Elementary OS, etc. etc.. Now if you want to take that search further and put "server" between linux and distro, you're going to get totally different results.
Finding a linux distro isn't about going after the most popular, it's finding one that fits your needs and preferences.
-altere
---
■ Synchronet ■ Athelstan BBS ■ athelstan.org ■ telnet:23 | ssh:2222
Re: Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to Nightfox on Wed Feb 12 2020 04:48 am
Don't get all your information from a single source and think it's golden. Searching on google for "2020 most popular linux distro" will give you several different results. One saying Linux Mint is #1 right now, another not even mentioning MX Linux, another saying MX Linux is on the rise to polularity, another saying Elementary OS, etc. etc.. Now if you want to take that search further and put "server" between linux and distro, you're going to get totally different results.
Finding a linux distro isn't about going after the most popular, it's finding one that fits your needs and preferences.
-altere
---
� Synchronet � Athelstan BBS � athelstan.org � telnet:23 | ssh:2222
There's like a 100 out there now. Wow, I remember when there was only Ubuntu out there at the time.
$ The Millionaire $
up for a challenge? install Slackware Linux 14.2 without a GUI and CLI everything :-P The first 'slackware' version I used was a pre-release 0.9a which was still Softlanding Linux System ... then I installed Slackware v 1.0 and just about every release since then ... and I still suck at the Linux command line LOL
---
■ Synchronet ■ AlleyCat! BBS - http://alleycat.synchro.net:81
Tony Langdon wrote to Gamgee <=-
so generally the Nvidia drier installation went well, and my Linux setup was able to make full use of the Nvidia graphics card.
Where do you get the driver from?
Ummmmmmm...... The Nvidia website.
Not even that, It's likely the distribution's own "non free"
repository has the proprietary drivers.
Nightfox wrote to Gamgee <=-
MX Linux is quite popular today. I've tried it and like it a lot
better than most of the other "popular" ones. It's yet another Debian-based offshoot, but has some nice customizations, and most importantly (to me) is that it does *NOT* use the 'systemd' init
system. I've also tried/used Mint-Cinnamon and it was pretty nice
too. Ubuntu has been in decline for several years as far as the
popularity contest goes, it's widely used but not like it was a
few years back.
I suppose I should check out MX Linux.
This site: https://distrowatch.com/ is a decent source of info
I've seen their site but haven't been there in quite a while.
Another factor in this is what the distro is likely to be used
for. Most commercial/industrial uses won't be using
Mint/Ubuntu/Fedora, etc... they are using Debian, RedHat,
Slackware type distros.
Ubuntu was fairly popular for a long time though.. And Ubuntu is
a Debian-based distro, isn't it?
Tony Langdon wrote to Gamgee <=-
MX Linux is quite popular today. I've tried it and like it a lot
better than most of the other "popular" ones. It's yet another Debian-based offshoot, but has some nice customizations, and most importantly (to me) is that it does *NOT* use the 'systemd' init
system. I've also tried/used Mint-Cinnamon and it was pretty nice
Sounds quite good. I might investigate MX myself.
Another factor in this is what the distro is likely to be used
for. Most commercial/industrial uses won't be using
Mint/Ubuntu/Fedora, etc... they are using Debian, RedHat,
Slackware type distros.
I tend to use Debian for server applications myself, or CentOS if
the server requires software that is suited to a Red Hat
environment.
up for a challenge? install Slackware Linux 14.2 without a GUI and CLI everything :-P The first 'slackware' version I used was a pre-release 0.9a which was still Softlanding Linux System ... then I installed Slackware v 1.0 and just about every release since then ... and I still suck at the Linux command line LOL
Yeah BASH terminal can be very complicated at times.
$ The Millionaire $
I am not religious and certainly not Borne Again ...
I am into Heavy Metal so I use Korn LOL
Tony Langdon wrote to Gamgee <=-
Well I had problems with Linux in the olden days back in the mid
2000s saying things like:
For me, Linux in the mid 2000s was not the "olden days". I'd call
that period the "developmental days" when big advances were being
made in the Linux world. I'd been using Linux for at least a
decade at that point, and things seemed relatively easy.
Same here, I started using Linux in 1995. By 2005 it was much
easier to install and setup, and that's steadily improved to this
day.
So you're saying that a Linux machine should have Linux hardware builtinside
it.
Boot Camp was quite popular back then for dual booting OS X and Windows on a Mac. It makes sense that there would be Windows drivers for Mac hardware.
Still is but according to Distrowatch, MX Linux is still #1.
I use it for some technical details about various distros, like
what version of something they include, and what package/init
system they use. The ranking/popularity info should be taken with
a few grains of salt, though.
Ubuntu was fairly popular for a long time though.. And Ubuntu is
a Debian-based distro, isn't it?
It is Debian-based, and it is still pretty popular but not as much
as when it was the new-kid-on-the-block and was marketed as
n00b-friendly. It is friendly/easy for newcomers, but so are MANY
others nowadays.
setup was able to make full use of the Nvidia graphics card.
Where do you get the driver from?
Ummmmmmm...... The Nvidia website.
<BOGGLE>
Not even that, It's likely the distribution's own "non free" repository has the proprietary drivers.
The history is that when I first started using Linux back in the mid 2000s, while I had Windows as a 2nd OS, I started with Ubuntu, then I tried others like Kubuntu (reminds me of Windows and very big footprint for memory), then Fedora, OpenSuse, but went back to Ubuntu instead. I remember using WINE and some win prgs worked while others didn't. Loved using GAIM which became PIDGIN later. The X11 screensavers were pretty cool too. Loved the circuit one the best. Synchronet installed fine through WINE but had port issues. Had a problem with my EYETV card. Had to use workarounds and sometimes the audio would work sometimes not. That was a real pain for me. KARDSGT was pretty cool and allowed me to play
There's like a 100 out there now. Wow, I remember when there was only Ubuntu out there at the time.
up for a challenge? install Slackware Linux 14.2 without a GUI and CLI everything :-P The first 'slackware' version I used was a pre-release 0.9a which was still Softlanding Linux System ... then I installed Slackware v 1.0 and just about every release since then ... and I still suck at the Linux command line LOL
Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: Rampage to Nightfox on Tue Feb 11 2020 03:21 pm
them cheaper but it also was another of m$'s underhanded tricks to try to gi windows more of a boost in the market place...
microsoft has nothing to do with hardware. it was no underhanded trick.
On 02-12-20 08:42, Gamgee wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Well, that's assuming the distro *HAS* a repository... not all do.
There's more to Linux than Debian and it's offspring. ;-)
Another reason to get it directly from Nvidia is that the driver
is very likely to be newer than what's in a repository.
On 02-12-20 08:48, Gamgee wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Sounds quite good. I might investigate MX myself.
I think it's worth a look. Seems to be solid and done better than
many of the newer distros.
Absolutely. I'm a Slackware guy myself, but use Debian (and some variants) also. Haven't played with RedHat/CentOS since it went commercial a long time ago.
On 02-12-20 08:44, Gamgee wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yep, it's truly amazing how far things have come in the Linux
world. In most cases today, I think it's easier to install a
Linux distro than it is to install Windows, and usually no
additional fiddling (drivers/tweaks) are needed afterwards.
Plus, there's the cost difference. :-)
On 02-12-20 09:37, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Re: Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: Tony Langdon to Nightfox on Wed Feb 12 2020 07:41 pm
Boot Camp was quite popular back then for dual booting OS X and Windows on a Mac. It makes sense that there would be Windows drivers for Mac hardware.
You say 'was' - Is Boot Camp no longer a popular option for Mac users?
On 02-12-20 09:56, Nightfox wrote to Mortifis <=-
In 2004, I was trying out Gentoo Linux, and chose the version of Gentoo where you'd build everything from the ground up (so you could optimize
the build settings for your machine). I was trying it on a laptop, so
it wasn't the most powerful PC already, and building something like
XFree and Gnome took maybe 8 hours or so..
On 02-12-20 06:12, The Millionaire wrote to Altere <=-
There's like a 100 out there now. Wow, I remember when there was only Ubuntu out there at the time.
On 02-12-20 09:38, Nightfox wrote to The Millionaire <=-
Re: Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: The Millionaire to Nightfox on Wed Feb 12 2020 04:48 am
Still is but according to Distrowatch, MX Linux is still #1.
Interesting.. Though I still like Linux Mint. I often don't use a
Linux distribution based on what's most popular.. I started using
Linux Mint when Ubuntu was popular. Ubuntu is fine, but I didn't like
the default GUI included with Ubuntu. Though I later found that you
can install the Cinnamon GUI in Ubuntu..
There's like a 100 out there now. Wow, I remember when there was onlyUbuntu out there at the time.
Yeah BASH terminal can be very complicated at times.
Yeah I choose a distro based on intended use. Often Debian for servers, and I like Mint/Cinnamon on the desktop. For the netbooks I have lying around here, I use Lubuntu, which has a lighter GUI. These Lububtu netbooks make great BBS client machines - I use one loaded with SyncTerm and Multimail when travelling. :)
I was reading about Gentoo, but while the concept did intrigue me, I could see it being impractical for me at the time, as I'd be spending hours compiling dependencies for anything I wanted to install.
Sounds quite good. I might investigate MX myself.
I think it's worth a look. Seems to be solid and done better than
many of the newer distros.
I'm getting that impression.
On 02-12-20 16:09, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
What do you like about Debian for servers compared to another server
Linux distro like CentOS/RedHat?
On 02-12-20 16:11, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yeah, I think the long install times (due to compiling everything) is a bit of a downfall. There's a tradeoff between performance and convenience, and many times I just want to use my computer - which
means relatively fast install times so that I can get to using it
rather than waiting for it to build.
On 02-12-20 16:31, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Do you think it works better than, say, Linux Mint? It seems to me
that Linux Mint is fairly easy to use and easy to update - though with
the 19.x versions, I've seen some users complain of issues upgrading
from earlier versions. I've been using Mint since 17.0 (or 17.1?), and
it seemed to work fairly well then. I recently put a fresh install of
Mint 19.3 Xfce on my 'server' PC and it seems to be working fairly well
so far.
... You can't polish a turd, but you can chuck glitter on it.
Re: Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: Mortifis to The Millionaire on Wed Feb 12 2020 10:48 am
up for a challenge? install Slackware Linux 14.2 without a GUI and CLI everything :-P The first 'slackware' version I used was a pre-release 0.9a which was still Softlanding Linux System ... then I installed Slackware v 1.0 and just about every release since then ... and I still suck at the Linux command line LOL
In 2004, I was trying out Gentoo Linux, and chose the version of Gentoo where you'd build everything from the ground up (so you could optimize the build settings for your machine). I was trying it on a laptop, so it wasn't the most powerful PC already, and building something like XFree and Gnome took maybe 8 hours or so..
The Millionaire wrote to Mortifis <=-1.0
up for a challenge? install Slackware Linux 14.2 without a GUI and CLI everything :-P The first 'slackware' version I used was a pre-release 0.9a which was still Softlanding Linux System ... then I installed Slackware v
and just about every release since then ... and I still suck at the Linux command line LOL
Yeah BASH terminal can be very complicated at times.
The Millionaire wrote to Altere <=-finding
Finding a linux distro isn't about going after the most popular, it's
one that fits your needs and preferences.
There's like a 100 out there now. Wow, I remember when there was
only Ubuntu out there at the time.
echicken wrote to The Millionaire <=-
So you're saying that a Linux machine should have Linux hardware
built inside it.
It needs a Linux chip in order to bootstrap the kernel into the
RAMs.
Nightfox wrote to Gamgee <=-
Ubuntu was fairly popular for a long time though.. And Ubuntu is
a Debian-based distro, isn't it?
It is Debian-based, and it is still pretty popular but not as much
as when it was the new-kid-on-the-block and was marketed as
n00b-friendly. It is friendly/easy for newcomers, but so are MANY
others nowadays.
Some people complain that fragmentation can be a bad thing with
some markets (i.e., the Android phone market and the Linux
market). I can see how the number of Linux distributions could
hamper its popularity. For one, it can be difficult for
companies to support multiple distributions, which might have
different package management systems and dependencies. For them,
the different Linux distros might as well all be treated as
separate operating systems entirely, at least for testing their
software. Also I think it could create some confusion for
consumers who aren't really aware of the differences in the
different distributions.
Tony Langdon wrote to Gamgee <=-
Yep, it's truly amazing how far things have come in the Linux
world. In most cases today, I think it's easier to install a
Linux distro than it is to install Windows, and usually no
additional fiddling (drivers/tweaks) are needed afterwards.
I'd rank them roughly equivalent in difficulty now - both fairly
easy to install. On some hardware, Linux can be quirky. I have
some netbooks that need non free network drivers, which means
manually downloading them and loading them off a USB stick,
before the installation can proceed properly. But the same
netbooks needed additional drivers for Windows that had to be
downloaded manually. Linux probably actually scored a bit ahead,
because once the networking is up, everything could be fetched autoimatically, whereas Windows needed manual installs.
I do have one monitor that needs an Xorg.conf with custom
Modelines created to get native resolution, otherwise the screen
looks crap. But again, Windows Vista couldn't properly detect
the monitor either, and googling for the driver didn't help.
Again, Linux won, because one could get under the hood and tweak.
:)
Yep. You can usually get these at Staples or Best Buy. They even
come in different colors.
Ya, those were the days ... I can't say that I miss configuring and compiling the kernel and mods
Agreed, mostly. There are a LOT of distributions, and many of
them are slight variations/forks of others and don't really differ
in any meaningful way. That surely does cause
confusion/complication to a Linux newcomer in trying to choose
what to use. I think the "word of mouth" network tends to help
those people try something like Ubuntu/Mint and get them started.
Once a person has used Linux for a while and understands things
better, the plethora of distros seems more manageable and easier
to weed out stuff you don't care about. As is so popular in
today's society, I think "diversity" is a good thing. :-)
winmodems and winprinters certainly were... the actual working code that normal
y resides in the hardware was moved into software... supposedly to make them ch
aper but it also was another of m$'s underhanded tricks to try to give windows >ore of a boost in the market place...
Never had any experience with the printers, but all of the winmodems I had experience with were not only cheaper in $$$ but were also more cheaply made than a true hardware modem. Their lifespans seemed shorter, for one.
Re: Linux Alone With Synchron
By: Dumas Walker to RAMPAGE on Thu Feb 13 2020 06:18 pm
Never had any experience with the printers, but all of the winmodems I experience with were not only cheaper in $$$ but were also more cheaply made than a true hardware modem. Their lifespans seemed shorter, for on
I avoided winmodems at all cost, because I was using other operating systems rt like any other modem. Aside from Winmodems, I also remember seeing some ce - It worked with OS/2, but its COM port and IRQ were different every time rning that modem after a day or so, so that I could get a refund.
Nightfox
On 02-13-20 20:14, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Hi! Tony,
On 13 Feb 20 20:03, you wrote to Nightfox:
... You can't polish a turd, but you can chuck glitter on it.
Amendment #1: the Mythbusters proved that it is possible to "polish a turd" under controlled conditions. :)
winmodems and winprinters certainly were... the actual working code that no >y resides in the hardware was moved into software... supposedly to make the >aper but it also was another of m$'s underhanded tricks to try to give wind >ore of a boost in the market place...
Never had any experience with the printers, but all of the winmodems I had experience with were not only cheaper in $$$ but were also more cheaply
made than a true hardware modem. Their lifespans seemed shorter, for one.
* SLMR 2.1a * I'm just here for moral support... please ignore the gun.
On 02-13-20 08:55, Gamgee wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Good point there. I've had to use the "sneakernet" to get network
drivers installed too, usually on a netbook-type computer.
Ahhh, I remember the days of Modeline tweaking... <shudder> :-)
It was satisfying to finally get things the way you wanted.
Probably pretty rarely needed any more, thankfully.
On 02-14-20 09:42, Moondog wrote to Dumas Walker <=-
Years ago I read about linux users finding alternate uses of the sound capabilities of Winmodems, however I never looked any deeper into it.
On 02-13-20 09:20, Nightfox wrote to Mortifis <=-
Re: Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: Mortifis to Nightfox on Thu Feb 13 2020 07:25 am
Ya, those were the days ... I can't say that I miss configuring and compiling the kernel and mods
I was trying out Linux in the late 90s, and at the time, you had to rebuild the kernel if you wanted to add/remove a driver. There was a kernel config program that had a series of a bunch of questions you had
to go through before rebuilding the kernel, and if you made a mistake
in one of the answers, you had to start over.
On 13 Feb 20 20:03, you wrote to Nightfox:
... You can't polish a turd, but you can chuck glitter on it.
Amendment #1: the Mythbusters proved that it is possible to "polish a
turd" under controlled conditions. :)
Freeze it? :D
On 02-15-20 16:35, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Hi! Tony,
On 02/15/2020 10:31 AM, you wrote:
On 13 Feb 20 20:03, you wrote to Nightfox:
... You can't polish a turd, but you can chuck glitter on it.
Amendment #1: the Mythbusters proved that it is possible to "polish a
turd" under controlled conditions. :)
Freeze it? :D
Dunno. There was colour & movement, and noise coming from the idiot
box, and, I just managed to recognize Adam claiming success in the
task. That's all I saw. :)
... You can't polish a turd, but you can chuck glitter on it.
Amendment #1: the Mythbusters proved that it is possible to "polish a turd" under controlled conditions. :)
Freeze it? :D
Tony Langdon wrote to Gamgee <=-
On 02-13-20 08:55, Gamgee wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Good point there. I've had to use the "sneakernet" to get network
drivers installed too, usually on a netbook-type computer.
Yep, sneakernet still has a place. :)
Dunno. There was colour & movement, and noise coming from the idiot
box, and, I just managed to recognize Adam claiming success in the
task. That's all I saw. :)
Haha, would have been interesting to see how they achieved it. :D
Years ago I read about linux users finding alternate uses of the sound capabilities of Winmodems, however I never looked any deeper into it.
On 02-15-20 07:24, Rampage wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
https://go.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/polishing-a-turd-mi nimyth
On 02-15-20 06:22, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Yep, sneakernet still has a place. :)
No improvements in latency, but the bandwidth has gone through the
roof!
Instead of a 1.44mb floppy, I recently sneakernetted 32 GB worth of database this week.
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of 9-track tapes..."
On 02-15-20 07:19, Rampage wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Amendment #1: the Mythbusters proved that it is possible to "polish aturd" under controlled conditions. :)
Freeze it? :D
the term you're looking for is "dorodungo" ;)
Amendment #1: the Mythbusters proved that it is possible to "polish a
turd" under controlled conditions. :)
Freeze it? :D
the term you're looking for is "dorodungo" ;)
Hmm, that needs explanation. :/
Years ago I read about linux users finding alternate uses of the sound capabilities of Winmodems, however I never looked any deeper into it.
There were actually some which, over time, either had linux drivers or wrappers to go around the windows drivers.
* SLMR 2.1a * Hold on! Doesn't NT mean NinTendo ?
I'm referring to using the audio abilities on the modem for
something other than being a modem.
On 02-16-20 08:12, Rampage wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Re: Re: Linux Alone With Synchronet BBS?
By: Tony Langdon to Rampage on Sun Feb 16 2020 20:21:00
Amendment #1: the Mythbusters proved that it is possible to "polish a
turd" under controlled conditions. :)
Freeze it? :D
the term you're looking for is "dorodungo" ;)
Hmm, that needs explanation. :/
apparently it was misspelled and the proper term is "dorodango"...
uncle google knows what it is ;)
I've seen those before. I'm referring to using the audio abilities on the modem for something other than being a modem.
Re: Linux Alone With Synchron
By: Moondog to Dumas Walker on Sun Feb 16 2020 13:46:00
I'm referring to using the audio abilities on the modem for
something other than being a modem.
like converting the sound recorded from a satellite into a picture? ;)
)\/(ark
I've seen those before. I'm referring to using the audio abilities on the modem for something other than being a modem.
Like a onboard speaker or ???
* SLMR 2.1a * Sheesh! You start havin' fun, and they send the lawyers!
Well that makes me feel better now because in the olden days I had alot of
problems with drivers.
You just boosted my confidence back to Linux. I hear MX Linux is the most popular. Why did you pick Mint instead?
Ubuntu was fairly popular for a long time though.. And Ubuntu is a
Debian-based distro, isn't it?
Still is but according to Distrowatch, MX Linux is still #1.
There's like a 100 out there now. Wow, I remember when there was only Ubuntu out there at the time.
Ubuntu is fine, but I didn't like the default GUI included with
Ubuntu. Though I later found that you can install the Cinnamon
GUI in Ubuntu..
... For one, it can be difficult for companies to support multipledistributions
In 2004, I was trying out Gentoo Linux, and chose the version of
Gentoo where you'd build everything from the ground up (so you
could optimize the build settings for your machine).
Don't get all your information from a single source and think
it's golden. Searching on google for "2020 most popular linux
distro" will give you several different results. One saying
Linux Mint is #1 right now, another not even mentioning MX
Linux, another saying MX Linux is on the rise to polularity,
another saying Elementary OS, etc. etc.. Now if you want to
take that search further and put "server" between linux and
distro, you're going to get totally different results.
Finding a linux distro isn't about going after the most
popular, it's finding one that fits your needs and preferences.
Tracker1 wrote to The Millionaire <=-
On 2/12/20 7:12 AM, The Millionaire wrote:
There's like a 100 out there now. Wow, I remember when there was only Ubuntu out there at the time.
There have always been *lost* of distros... many rise and fall,
few gain traction... your own MX looks to be a culmination of a
couple of them.
Slackware, Suse, Mandrake, and many others are all but dead now.
Slackware, Suse, Mandrake, and many others are all but dead now.
How do you like Cinnamon, I switched from Gnome to KDE because of a bug
in the lock screen (it wouldn't clear off after resume).
How do you like Cinnamon, I switched from Gnome to KDE because of a bug
in the lock screen (it wouldn't clear off after resume).
I like that Cinnamon works more like a classic desktop, and I think it
looks nice too. Overall I haven't noticed any major issues with it.
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 214:46:01 |
| Calls: | 2,086 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 11,139 |
| Messages: | 948,208 |