Tweet
Here is another blog post. A person familiar to me has already answered. But as the Comments are moderated, discussing is like enjoying "turbo fast downloads from a linux server" (a self-contradicting term itself): painfully slow, big latency.
https://aboutthebsds.wordpress.com/2...s-freebsd-org/
You did the same against other OpenSource operating system BSD, OpenSolaris, Plan9 on your blog and/or on the phoronix forum. Fair is fair.
Post by TjPhysicist
Unfortunately due to his BSD logic and thinking, SirDice and TjPhysicist here isn?t able to make use of configuration tools pre-installed in most Linux distribution which negates the need to know the exact setup of the configuration files. It appears that BSD zealots do not know who to use configuration tools except in MacOSX and Windows.
A easy to use config tool or installation tool is good on your Linux XP home edition. Not on a server that has no monitor, no mouse and no GUI. Admins are forced to do everything over ssh via commandline.
Does this apply onto a Server-Machine without any Display, Keyboard and/or GUI - only accessible via ssh, rsh or telnet?
WHAAA, WHAAA! Give me my Linux XP home edition GUI Desktop on that server.
To say, he's a BSD junky is a lie as he uses AIX and Solaris instead of BSD. Oh, i forgot, using the BSD forum makes him a BSD junky already.
Obviously, except the next Linux version of "Tune-Up utilities", there is nothing to learn about Linux. I wonder, what AIX or Solaris has to do with BSD.
Speaking about the "higher performance kernel": There are many OSs out there that are faster than linux.
Modern security? SELinux, AppArmor etc.? Letting SELinux and AppArmor run simultaneously doesn't work. Not to forget, that you can Bypass them due to numerous kernel bugs in Linux.
SystemD? Thanks, but no thanks.
Oh i forgot a nice feature: "Windows XP home edition" like networking behavoir even on servers.
You are talking about BSD while gpatrick is talking about AIX, whith excellent support (as with OpenVMS too). You literally failed to contradict his post.
Well, again, you didn't contradict the fact that filesystems go read-only and have to reboot on Linux.
And not the case with AIX and Solaris ;-)
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
BTW: x86 is just cheap legacy, and encumbered. ARM or OpenRISC is better.
As gpatrick uses AIX instead of BSD, he is is neighter a BSD zealot nor a Mac user. Get the fact?
Yes, Solaris but not AIX. And certainly not OpenVMS.
Thats the fault of the management to tell them to join the node back. GFS is cloud tech. and in Cloud computing you shutdown and replace node quiet often. gpatrick did everything right. Remember he is an AIX admin.
Blah blah blah. Fueled, not by respect for freedom but by arrogance and self-congratulation.
The thing, that it's proprietary is not that what they love about these Systems. AIX, HP-UX, OpenVMS etc provided them with excellent Server OSs. Apple did for the Unixers what Linux failed to do.
It is not the proprietary license that they don't like. Truly, It is really unfortunate, that OpenVMS or AIX is not open source. It would tell these Linux trolls a lesson.
https://aboutthebsds.wordpress.com/2...s-freebsd-org/
Well unfortunately, the people at FreeBSD forums have once again started spreading lies about Linux and GNU. This time, the subject was originally meant to start a flame war between FreeBSD and Solaris fan boys but instead one individual managed to steer the thread way off it?s original topic into dragging Linux?s name through mud. The thread can be found here.
I?m going to give my thoughts and responses to some of these comments of interest.
I?m going to give my thoughts and responses to some of these comments of interest.
You did the same against other OpenSource operating system BSD, OpenSolaris, Plan9 on your blog and/or on the phoronix forum. Fair is fair.
Post by SirDice
Yes, I can?t find my way around any Linux distribution because they all seem to do things differently.
Post by TjPhysicist
Yeah, I recently had the misfortune of doing my Red Hat certification along with my Linux+. So many configuration files in all different places. *shudder*.
Unfortunately due to his BSD logic and thinking, SirDice and TjPhysicist here isn?t able to make use of configuration tools pre-installed in most Linux distribution which negates the need to know the exact setup of the configuration files. It appears that BSD zealots do not know who to use configuration tools except in MacOSX and Windows.
A easy to use config tool or installation tool is good on your Linux XP home edition. Not on a server that has no monitor, no mouse and no GUI. Admins are forced to do everything over ssh via commandline.
Post by SirDice
On a lot of Linux distributions it usually works with a few mouse-clicks, you can get it running without knowing how it works. It?s almost like Windows
On a lot of Linux distributions it usually works with a few mouse-clicks, you can get it running without knowing how it works. It?s almost like Windows
Doesn?t that make Linux systems far easier to configure then BSD systems thus waste less time and money on configuration?
Does this apply onto a Server-Machine without any Display, Keyboard and/or GUI - only accessible via ssh, rsh or telnet?
WHAAA, WHAAA! Give me my Linux XP home edition GUI Desktop on that server.
Ah, and then there was this pile of self-contradicting nonsense by BSD junky gpatrick:
To say, he's a BSD junky is a lie as he uses AIX and Solaris instead of BSD. Oh, i forgot, using the BSD forum makes him a BSD junky already.
Post by gpatrick
Linux does NOT offer anything over AIX or Solaris.
Either gpatrick?s company uses a very old version of Linux from the early 1990s or he himself can?t learn new things or qpatrick is an outright lair (like most BSD nutcases). Either way, there is proof all around that Linux so many things to offer over AIX, Solaris and in particular, BSD. More file systems to choose from, supports more hardware, higher performance kernel with more features, systemd, modern security (SELinux, AppArmor etc), far greater scalability etc.
Obviously, except the next Linux version of "Tune-Up utilities", there is nothing to learn about Linux. I wonder, what AIX or Solaris has to do with BSD.
Speaking about the "higher performance kernel": There are many OSs out there that are faster than linux.
Modern security? SELinux, AppArmor etc.? Letting SELinux and AppArmor run simultaneously doesn't work. Not to forget, that you can Bypass them due to numerous kernel bugs in Linux.
SystemD? Thanks, but no thanks.
Oh i forgot a nice feature: "Windows XP home edition" like networking behavoir even on servers.
Post by gpatrick
The company I work for is a Fortune 150 and spends nearly $1 million per year for Linux support. Support should be quoted, because more often than not, they don?t solve any open cases. We?ve had cases open for 2 and 3 years. We?ve had problems with Apache and have been told that since it isn?t Red Hat?s rpm then ?sorry we can?t help you.? Some of the Red Hat ?crap? just doesn?t work either and has been removed from service like GFS at our company. Too many problems that RH couldn?t figure out and too much of a hassle.
The company I work for is a Fortune 150 and spends nearly $1 million per year for Linux support. Support should be quoted, because more often than not, they don?t solve any open cases. We?ve had cases open for 2 and 3 years. We?ve had problems with Apache and have been told that since it isn?t Red Hat?s rpm then ?sorry we can?t help you.? Some of the Red Hat ?crap? just doesn?t work either and has been removed from service like GFS at our company. Too many problems that RH couldn?t figure out and too much of a hassle.
gpatrick here is talking as if Red Hat is the worst provider in terms of support. However, think about the support a company would get if they use BSD. Nothing, no support. Because there is no company which you can go to from support and the BSD project (particualrly OpenBSD) cannot be relied upon because of their general unwillingness to help people. The only ?support? an organization using BSD gets is the cryptic online handbook that only the BSD developers themselves can understand.
You are talking about BSD while gpatrick is talking about AIX, whith excellent support (as with OpenVMS too). You literally failed to contradict his post.
Post by gpatrick
We constantly have servers with filesystems that go read-only and have to reboot ? on production servers.
I have tested Free, Open and DragonflyBSD before and I can tell you that data loss due to file system and kernel crash happens once a week on average. HammerFS was the worse. Also, there will be no one you could go to for help. This is not the case with Red Hat, SUSE or Canonical.
Well, again, you didn't contradict the fact that filesystems go read-only and have to reboot on Linux.
Post by gpatrick
Right now if we ?upgrade? a server from RHEL4 to RHEL5 or RHEL6, it is, overwrite the disk and restore data.
Same with BSD
And not the case with AIX and Solaris ;-)
Post by gpatrick
Architecture also plays a crucial role. Power and Sparc are clearly winners over the x86 garbage architecture. We have way more downtime with Linux/x86 than with AIX/Power and Solaris/Sparc.
gpatrick here must be using 1990s era 16-bit x86 hardware because today?s x86 architectures have far out stripped Power and Sparc architectures due to more investment being put into them. This is one reason why MacOSX switched from powerpc to intel x86 hardware.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
BTW: x86 is just cheap legacy, and encumbered. ARM or OpenRISC is better.
Even gpatrick here should know that as he is a hardcore BSD zealot thereby, uses a Mac.
As gpatrick uses AIX instead of BSD, he is is neighter a BSD zealot nor a Mac user. Get the fact?
Post by CoTones
Little off topic, but dinosaurs so big and powerful, especially when compared to mammals, so talking about their extinction is pure nonsense, isn?t?
True, except that Solaris is a lot more like an annoying ant.
Yes, Solaris but not AIX. And certainly not OpenVMS.
Post by gpatrick
This week at work we have had a Red Hat GFS cluster on x86 have major problems which required one of the nodes to be rebuilt. After the rebuilt was completed we were told not to join the node back into the cluster because, and this is just classic, ?management doesn?t trust GFS or the hardware.?
It?s more like gpatrick screwed up his companies? Linux installations. This is why many companies looking to hire UNIX administrators don?t hire BSD nutcases like gpatrick because they know know so little about Linux and often screw up when administrating a Linux server. They?d hire people who are good at Linux.
Thats the fault of the management to tell them to join the node back. GFS is cloud tech. and in Cloud computing you shutdown and replace node quiet often. gpatrick did everything right. Remember he is an AIX admin.
Post by Crivens
Hatred? I don?t think so. Or at least hope so. Dislike, with experience to back it up? More likely.
This is typical BSD mentally on the Linux communities and free software. Fueled, not by experience or knowledge but by jealousy, fanaticism, hatred of freedom and brainwashing.
Blah blah blah. Fueled, not by respect for freedom but by arrogance and self-congratulation.
And the thread then switches to the subject of how good AIX is. Considering how much they love proprietary software such as Macs, AIX and Solaris it?s no suprise.
The thing, that it's proprietary is not that what they love about these Systems. AIX, HP-UX, OpenVMS etc provided them with excellent Server OSs. Apple did for the Unixers what Linux failed to do.
It is not the proprietary license that they don't like. Truly, It is really unfortunate, that OpenVMS or AIX is not open source. It would tell these Linux trolls a lesson.