Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses Software Linux

TerraSoft Releases YellowDog Linux 3.0 248

Posted by timothy from the go-fetch-boy dept.
chriseh writes "For those of us who prefer Linux to the candydrop OS, good news! YellowDog Linux 3.0 has been released. For those who don't want to wait, you can get an enhanced membership at YDL.net and download ISOs directly. As per other releases, ISOs will be available to everyone/mirrors two weeks after the CDs have been on sale.Finally, I can run Linux on my 12" Powerbook." extrarice amplifies: "New features include: Redesigned installer, a unified KDE 3.1/GNOME 2.2 desktop (both WMs share the same icons and menus), Kernel 2.4.20, and the usual package refinements/updates. More release info can be found here. Note: ISOs are not available yet, and CDs are scheduled to ship in mid-April. I have been running YDL 2.x for about a year now, and it's a fast, stable distro."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

TerraSoft Releases YellowDog Linux 3.0 More

TerraSoft Releases YellowDog Linux 3.0

Comments Filter:
  • Is there an equivalent of Wine for running Mac OS X applications on Linux/PowerPC? How many of the libraries in Mac OS X have equivalents in Linux (how close is GNUstep to Apple's stuff, etc)?

    At the minimum, is it possible to run Darwin/PowerPC binaries on Linux/PowerPC?

    • Re:Running Mac apps (Score:5, Informative)

      by extrarice ( 212683 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:23PM (#5546228) Homepage Journal
      [quote:]
      Is there an equivalent of Wine for running Mac OS X applications on Linux/PowerPC?
      [/quote]
      Yes, it's called "Mac On Linux", available here [maconlinux.org].
      Basically, it boots the MacOS on top of Linux, as opposed to emulation.

      • Re:Running Mac apps (Score:3, Informative)

        by Ed Avis ( 5917 )
        No but booting MacOS over the top of Linux is not the same. Wine lets you run Windows applications without needing the original Windows code, and they execute as Linux processes that happen to have a weird binary loader and set of libraries.

    • Re:Running Mac apps (Score:2, Informative)

      by japhar81 ( 640163 )
      You're mixing concepts. Darwin is the open-sourced BSD-based core of OS X. That can be (note I'm not saying it is, but it can be) emulated pretty easily in Linux. The problem is when you try to do it with any of the libraries above Darwin, i.e. quartz. If you try to clone those libraries, Apple will hit you with a lawsuit so fast you'll wish you were being sodomized by Bill and Steve. The short answer is, no. No OSX apps for you.
      • I'm not mixing stuff, I asked if binaries compiled for Darwin - which is the BSD core of Mac OS X, and which can be installed by itself on PowerPC boxes - will run under Linux.

        FreeBSD on Intel can run binaries compiled for Linux on Intel, so it's not an unreasonable question.

        If you did have binary compatibility then you might be able to copy across libraries like Quartz from your Mac OS X partition to your Linux partition. Not much chance I grant you, given that the whole display infrastructure is differ
    • Is there an equivalent of Wine for running Mac OS X applications on Linux/PowerPC?

      No, although Mac-on-Linux is similar to VMware: it allows you to run Mac OS itself on Linux.

      How many of the libraries in Mac OS X have equivalents in Linux (how close is GNUstep to Apple's stuff, etc)?

      Not very many.

      At the minimum, is it possible to run Darwin/PowerPC binaries on Linux/PowerPC?

      Not that I've heard, and it's hard to imagine why you'd want to. Why not just recompile?
    • Yep

      There is. [maconlinux.org]

    • Re:Running Mac apps (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Buskaatt ( 124333 )
      Is there an equivalent of Wine for running Mac OS X applications on Linux/PowerPC? How many of the libraries in Mac OS X have equivalents in Linux (how close is GNUstep to Apple's stuff, etc)?

      GNUstep works okay with Apple stuff although there are some compile issues because of Aqua. Linux Journal has a neat article about this. You can view the TOC here [linuxjournal.com]

    • I use OS X exclusively these days but am contemplating installing linux so that I can run mac-on-linux and use OS 9 and OS X side by side without running Classic. Does anyone know whether this will be a waste of time? Does OS 9 mode under mol work as well as booting into OS 9? I never use classic mode under X because the apps I want to use in 9 won't run under Classic. Is linux a good solution for me here?

  • Candydrop OS? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:20PM (#5546205)
    I thought Slashdot LOVED OS X?

  • Unified desktop (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jdavidb ( 449077 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:21PM (#5546214) Homepage Journal

    So, will there be extreme uproar and protest over YDL unifying GNOME and KDE, too, or will everyone have finally realized RedHat had a good idea?

    • Redundant (Score:3, Informative)

      by Tehrasha ( 624164 )
      As YDL is based on RH, the uproar shouldnt be any more extreme than usual.

    • Re:Unified desktop (Score:5, Informative)

      by friedmud ( 512466 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @04:00PM (#5546552)
      Ok, everyone needs to figure out that the "uproar" was NOT about having a unified look.

      MOST of the developers were mad because they changed KDE _fundamentally_ - they made incompatibilities in the libraries. This had/has the effect of some programs not even being able to be compiled on red-hat - and most developers I know that use red-hat have recompiled their kde and kde_libs so they work "correctly".

      The rest of the gripes weren't really grounded - most of the kde developers I know didn't care about how they made it look.

      Derek
    • It's a shame the parent to this post was modded down as a flamebait, because he made an interesting point. For those who haven't noticed, YDL have borrowed the artwork from RedHat 8.0 and unified KDE and GNOME with the same window decorations, widget styles and icons. In fact, if it weren't for the YDL logos, you'd be mistaken for thinking the screenshots were of RedHat.

      IMO this just shows how great it was that RedHat went out and did something daring creating Bluecurve, even if they didn't do it was nice

  • Why would I want this? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sockit2me9000 ( 589601 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:22PM (#5546221)
    Maybe I'm missing something, but why would I want to install YDL. I can do everything I want in OS X now in a much friendlier operating system. Plus, now that I have an Apple X11 program I see fewer and fewer reasons. Moreover, when you buy an Apple you are paying a premium for the OS, why buy an apple when you could just buy a cheap box and install an x86 linux distro. Am I missing something?

    • Re:Why would I want this? (Score:5, Informative)

      by ChristTrekker ( 91442 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:28PM (#5546271)

      Yes, you are. (No offense.) There are many of us who have older PPC boxes around, that are just dying to have a lean, stable OS installed so they can be put back to use. Besides, YDL is a PPC hardware distro, not an Apple hardware distro. There are a variety of reasons why PPC hardware is preferable in general to x86 hardware. YDL fills an important niche.

      • What are the reasons why current PPC hardware is preferable to x86 hardware. All the non-Apple PPC machines I've seen are even more overpriced and underperforming than Apple's. If you have old machines around I can certainly understand running Linux. However I don't understand it for new hardware. As the parent post said, X11 gives you pretty much everything Linux does plus you can, if necessary, run Aqua or Classic applications.

        • Less heat, due to lower power consumption, which leads directly to longer battery life if you're dealing with a laptop. Hot laptops are not nice either. The chip size itself becomes a factor if you're looking at embedded devices, and PPC is often chosen for embedded devices partly because of the heat/power issue.

          • But that begs my question. What current PPC non-Apple laptops are available? I'm not aware of any. Old Apple laptops are great candidates, of course. As for embedded systems - surely they aren't going to be running full Linux are they? I could see some subset - but not a full Yellow Dog distro. Certainly one can compile for PPC chips using a PPC system with a full distro. But in that case I once again miss the point of running Yellow Dog instead of OSX. (Except for utilizing legacy equipment)
        • It's not only if you have old Macs lying around.... You can purchase older Macs in very nice condition for pennies on the dollar!

          If you need a small web or email server, or something of that sort, a system like a PowerMac 7600 makes lots of sense to purchase.

          Last time I checked, these puppies were going for as little as $20 on eBay, with no bidders.
          The most expensive part of getting one is usually the shipping!
      • Who makes PPC workstations other then apple? ( not talking things the IBM mini's... )

    • Re:Why would I want this? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ivan256 ( 17499 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:31PM (#5546293)
      I run linux on one of my Macs, but I do it for testing and building when I'm writing code for a customer with PowerPC processors in their embedded devices. Apple is the cheapest source for portable PowerPC machines, so I bought one, and I run linux on it.

      OSX wouldn't run so well on my 333 Mhz lombard anyway, and linux is way better than OS 9.

      Oh, BTW, I run Debian. I don't see any reason for these specialized PPC only Distros, and I don't know why they make news. Why would I want a distribution for one architecture that's different from the distro on all the other architectures I run? Also, why would I want to wait the rediculous periods between yellow dog releases when I can just use debian unstable and have the latest and greatest daily?
      • OSX wouldn't run so well on my 333 Mhz lombard anyway, and linux is way better than OS 9.

        bingo! last year i decided that the time had come to retire my 9600/233... this machine was a beast back in '97 (6 pci slots, 12 ram slots, scsi drives...) a shame to waste. enter yellowdog 2.2 and voila: a spiffy webserver! [slashdot.org]

      • Oh, BTW, I run Debian. I don't see any reason for these specialized PPC only Distros, and I don't know why they make news. Why would I want a distribution for one architecture that's different from the distro on all the other architectures I run? Also, why would I want to wait the rediculous periods between yellow dog releases when I can just use debian unstable and have the latest and greatest daily?

        Some people will "settle" for mostly latest but ultimately greatest, so that they get the stability they r
    • I can do everything I want in OS X

      then you're not doing enough. for instance, yesterday's reason for continuing to run linux was rdiff-backup (note: this "solution" [nongnu.org] doesn't work)

    • Silence, infedel! (Score:5, Funny)

      by RatBastard ( 949 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:48PM (#5546447) Homepage
      The streets shall run with the blood of the nonbeleivers! You shall put Linux on your Mac! You shall put Linux on your XBox! You shall put Linux on your Mr. Coffee! To not use Linux is to be in league with The Devil!

      Hell, I don't know. Linux (well, Unix in general) makes my head hurt.

    • Re:Why would I want this? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by whjwhj ( 243426 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:49PM (#5546457)
      I totally agree with your assessment. There are those with old hardware or special requirements that might have to run Linux on a Mac. But from a usability standpoint it's a no-brainer: OS X is an absolutely terrific desktop enviornment for unix. Running Linux "just because" on a mac is ridiculous. But there's plenty of Linux zealots who are going to run Linux on new mac hardware simply because they can and they think it's cool or whatever. I can't defend their lack of common sense and good taste.

      I, personally, have better things to do than dink around with package installation, X configuration, and hardware compatibility issues. I'd rather be running iTunes, developing PHP apps, and popping in the occasional DVD movie than pitter around with Linux nonsense.

      I *like* Linux. Don't get me wrong. That's what my Dell Inspiron Pentium III 500 is for. But on a Mac? No way.
      • Well I wiped OSX and installed YDL as the former was just too damned slow to be usable on the 400MHZ G3 iMac. I've been using Linux on PCs for years (and I also use Windows as my main desktop, BTW) but the iMac was just a doorstop until I installed Linux. It's now a nice machine to use! I'm no zealot either - it just works for me - I'd never go back to OSX with that machine...

      • don't be a dick (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Ender Ryan ( 79406 )
        What's your problem man? Not everyone who runs Linux is a nerd in his mom's basement, lots of people do real work on Linux...

        If you're not interested in running Linux on PPC hardware, fine, but don't be a dick about other people doing so.... Jeez...

        FWIW, I'm getting a laptop to replace my workstation at the office, and I am considering getting a Mac laptop and running Linux on it, not because I want to "dink around with package installation, X configuration, and hardware compatibility issues", but to d

    • Maybe I'm missing something, but why would I want to install YDL.

      Well, maybe because timothy says "I have been running YDL 2.x for about a year now, and it's a fast, stable distro."

      Except for that whole crashing thing [google.com], of course. It crashes during install [powerbooklinux.net] and it crashes during configuration [imaclinux.net]. But if you just pop the CD in, then timothy's right, it's a fast, stable distro, if you want to use your powerbook as a paperweight or a doorstop.

      • Maybe I'm missing something, but why would I want to install YDL.

        Well, maybe because timothy says "I have been running YDL 2.x for about a year now, and it's a fast, stable distro."

        timothy [monkey.org] didn't say that; the second submitter, extrarice [hoshichan.com], did.

        Also, your first link, to "google.com", doesn't work. This corrected link [google.com] works, but it doesn't support your claim of "that whole crashing thing" -- the reviewer only had YDL crash on him once, due to its energy-saving behavior on laptops. I can't check your other

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • You are absolutely right, OSX Standalone is a very capable OS for the average user.

      However, OSX itself is a very unsecure OS. While it flaunts the power of UNIX, it is a crippled UNIX, with a few gaping holes in the security login.

      While most users will not have an issue with this, power users will.

      Hense a very stable Linux OS is a desirable workaround. Ontop of that, YDL supports running OSX ontop of the Linux OS.
      • However, OSX itself is a very unsecure OS. While it flaunts the power of UNIX, it is a crippled UNIX, with a few gaping holes in the security login.

        I'd like to hear just a few bits of evidence in support of such a strong statement...

    • No offense, but you are missing something. OS X is nice, and probably fills your needs. However, it doesn't run on all PPC hardware (there's TerraSoft's briq, IBM's PPC stuff, etc.) and PPC Linux, more specifically, YellowDog, DOES. Not to mention it makes a machine that was shipped with MacOS 9.X run much like a box running MacOS X with less cost, etc.

      Not all machines shipped with MacOS X. MacOS X makes it easier to learn to use the machine, but not easier to use it- many complex tasks are made more d

  • It's now official (Score:5, Funny)

    by arvindn ( 542080 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:23PM (#5546226) Homepage Journal
    Number of Linux Distributions Surpasses Number of Users

    Somewhere in California - At 8:30 PDT with the release of Snoopy Linux 2.1, Goober Linux 1.0, and Yellow Dog Linux 3.0, the number of Linux distributions finally surpassed the number of actual Linux users.

    "We've been expecting it for some time," Merrill Lynch technology analyst Tom Shayes said, "but this is a little sooner than most expected. We've seen explosive growth in the number of Linux distributions, in fact my nephew just put out LittleLinux Chart Tommy Linux 1.1 last week."

    Long time Linux guru Bob Tallman said, "This is great for the open source movement. I have 7 different versions installed on my computer at home. Some guys I know have over 30."

    Microsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer said, "Microsoft will have to play catch up with the number of versions that Linux has, but we think we can do it. With the break up of Microsoft imminent that will instantly double the number of Windows versions available."

    Microsoft also announced the release of Pocket PC for Workgroups, Windows GT special edition and Windows 2000 - the Director's Cut with special code added by Bill Gates himself that wasn't in the original release.

  • I'm confused... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by disneyfan1313 ( 138976 )
    Perhaps I don't understand but the whole reason I purchased an iMac was to have the great OS and the suite of apps that came with it. The hardware is good but nothing that amazing and could be purchased on the pc side for a lot less money if all you are going to do is turn around and install a linux distro. Am I missing why this is a "Good Thing"?
    • Perhaps I don't understand but the whole reason I purchased an iMac was to have the great OS and the suite of apps that came with it. The hardware is good but nothing that amazing and could be purchased on the pc side for a lot less money if all you are going to do is turn around and install a linux distro. Am I missing why this is a "Good Thing"?

      Can you say "powerbook"? I don't think you can buy one without an OS on it for cheaper than you get an apple branded one...
      You may think that there are equivalent ibm clone laptops, but alot of people like the design and performance of the powerbook and can't get what they want elsewhere...
      • Oh great. Can't wait to hear all the linux-is-life assholes complain about the "Jaguar Tax."

        I can see the reason for running Linux on an Apple laptop, but still think it's silly to buy an Apple laptop just to use Linux. Especially since I've yet to run into a Linux app that wouldn't compile with a minimum of fuss on 10.2 with xfree86.

  • As I've asked before. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by OS24Ever ( 245667 ) <trekkie@nomorestars.com> on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:26PM (#5546245) Homepage Journal
    Why ruin a perfectly good system with Mac OS X and install Linux over it?

    Sure I can see running this on an old PowerMac that Mac OS X doesn't support. But wasting your time/effort to wipe out a prefectly good *nix based system that you can actually buy software off a shelf in a store for (besides the 50 distros)

    Just seems like a waste of time.

    Now, the little BriQ device they have, sure, YDL would be cool on them. But to wipe out a new system with Mac OS X 10.2.x on it seems wrong.
    • [quote]
      Why ruin a perfectly good system with Mac OS X and install Linux over it?
      [/quote]

      You don't have to. You can install the two side-by-side.

      It's nice to have a modern operating system on hardware Apple has long-since abandoned (I have YDL 2.3 installed on a PPC Clone)

    • As I've answered before... [slashdot.org]

      I like my OS X where it belongs -- inside a MOL window. :)

    • Re:As I've asked before. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by chriseh ( 220654 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:48PM (#5546451) Homepage
      Why ruin a perfectly good system with Mac OS X and install Linux over it?

      Well, to each his own I guess. My experience with MacOS X hasn't been that good. We have over 15 Macs in our office (all G4s or iMac G4s) - most of them running MacOS X but mine only run YDL. For the most part, I get much better performance/response than my colleagues, even after Apple has added yet another beta browser to MacOS X. The anti-aliasing of everything in MacOS X also gives me a headache on CRT monitors after about an hour.

      Also, call me old fashioned, but I still believe in free (as in "Freedom"), and MacOS X ain't. I use YDL, because they are a small company that *only* does PPC, so I know that their attention will be on *my* hardware and not some entirely different architecture.

      While I'm starting to dislike MacOS X less, I still can't work with it anywhere near as quickly as Linux. And, with YDL on my Powerbook, I can setup a micro version of my servers [mcgill.ca] and develop on a closed system while on the train, etc. with the exact same paths/etc. as my servers (IBM Xseries running RedHat, YellowDog briQs and G4s running YDL). Running the same OS on all my hardware makes it really easy to move the code around different architectures. It also means that I'm not forced to use a specific architecture, and can get the hardware that best suits the needs.

      So, while YDL might not be for you, but if you own/like Apple hardware, having a distro that keeps your hardware relavant for longer is a good thing for you - whether you use it or not.
      • Apple has added yet another beta browser

        No fair, Cyberdog doesn't count.

      • How is "Free as in Freedom" in software "Old Fashioned?" In the "olden days" I used to have to spend a few hundred bucks just for a goddamn closed source DOS. God forbid I needed a database or drawing app...I paid $600 for Generic CAD in 1989, and it was crap.

        "Free as in Freedom" is the new liberal paradigm of software development. In many ways it flys in the face of greed and discounts the acheivement of the individual hacker in favor of the "group effort." Face it man, you're not a Quaker, you're a d

    • Why ruin a perfectly good system with Mac OS X and install Linux over it?

      OK, I'll bite. About a year ago I was loaned a iBook, great I thought, a Unix with a nice GUI. Then I found that there was no colour in the shell, no vim, no bash, no multiple desktops. I just thought screw it, installed YellowDog 2.something and straight away I had WindowMaker, bash, vim, the Gimp, GQview and mozilla -- basically all the tools I use every day on desktop RedHat boxes and servers.

      I have posted to /. about this be

  • Debian? (Score:2, Informative)

    by chrysrobyn ( 106763 )

    Finally, I can run Linux on my 12" Powerbook.

    The poster seems unaware that Debian can run on Apple hardware. Or should I be assuming that the user had tried to run Debian, but unique hardware had prevented it?

    Posted from an ssh tunnel to a PowerMac 7600 upgraded to a G3 running Woody.

  • Gentoo PPC (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rizzo ( 21697 ) <donNO@SPAMseiler.us> on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:27PM (#5546260) Homepage Journal
    I've been running Gentoo PPC 1.4 on my revision A imac (the original gumdrop-shaped one) for a couple of months now. It runs great, and I get the benefit of Gentoo's portage system. I'd recommend giving that a shot to anyone interested in linux on a mac. Plus you can frequent the #gentoo-ppc room and chat with gerk. He's dreamy.
    • I've moved from YDL to Gentoo few months ago. I prefer to pay the compilation and download time (not a big price) for very consistent (in package dependencies after each update), customized (for my personal needs) and stable/fast (all binaries are compiled with CFLAGS as I've chosen, none else). Besides, YDL is close to RH but it is not exactly the same (layout, skills, packages). Gentoo/PPC is the same as Gentoo/x86. So, now my bi-platformful park is much easier to be managed.

      I would recommend YDL for ho

  • from the screenshots.... (Score:4, Funny)

    by strawdog ( 204777 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:30PM (#5546283)
    it seems that the yellow dog is wearing a red hat.

  • Hm. FireWire boot support? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Quixotic Raindrop ( 443129 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:33PM (#5546312) Journal
    I like Mac OS X, but I also like Linux.
    I am frequently carrying my 12" dual-usb iBook around, and leaving my 120 GB external FW drive at home, and I must have Mac OS X on the boot disk.
    All I want to be able to do is install Mac OS X on my 10GB internal drive, and then install YDL, SuSE PPC, or whatever other Linux distro I feel like, on the external drive.
    YDL through at least 2.3 didn't support this. Now, with 3.0, and two full years to deal with FireWire on Macintosh computers, it still looks like booting from FW drives isn't supported.
    Maybe I've missed something. Maybe deep in Apple's ADC documentation is a caveat that I missed: "Thou shalt not install Operating Systems which cometh not from Cupertino and One Infinite Loop onto the Disks of Wired Fire which hath emanated from The Land Of Thy Computer."
    Mac OS X can certainly boot from external FW drives, so it's possible in theory to do.
    What have I missed? :(
    • I'll claim 100% ignorance of YDL but here's what I've done in the past.


      I have OS X installed on my Mac and I then installed OS 9 on my iPod.


      Boot into OS X and have the iPod connected (or in your case you external firewire drive) and in System Preferences you can change your boot disc. Switch it to the firewire drive. Reboot.


      That worked for OS X and OS 9. Might give it a shot for YDL. I didn't see a slowdown either which was nice.

  • Highly recommend for any older mac (Score:4, Informative)

    by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:35PM (#5546326) Journal
    If your old G3 mac crashes every few hours under macos9 and macosx is slow as NT on a 486 then Yellowdog may be your answer.

    Check this [maconlinux.org] project out. It only runs old macos9 apps but you can still run your mac apps on a stable developer class operating system. Linux will run quite nicely on your old mac. Kde might be a little slugish with all the effects turned on but its alot faster then running aqua on it.

  • I had YDL 2.3 on a Lombard PowerBook for the better part of a year. It was easy to install and worked just fine (with only general problems with sound in KDE). But after using it for the first month or so, I put OS X on it and never booted into Linux again.

    I am proud to say that I have no x86 machines with Windows installed (only Linux), but I really fail to see why I would use YDL or any Linux distro (at least on a New World Mac) when OS X is available (along with Xfree86 and X11 and the full line of Un

    • For me, it works like this:

      I work on Linux and NetWare at work. Sometimes, I'd like to be able to hax0r up a nice little proggy at home that I can test there, and deploy at work (at least, in the Linux realm). For the most part, I can use Mac OS X to do a lot of the things, at home and at work, that I need to do (and, at work, I have Linux systems to test on :). After a point, though, you can't test a program meant for Linux on OS X anymore, you need Linux.

      I realize that, with Fink (which I use) and Obe
      • Yeah, you have a point. I am a neophyte programmer so that is not an issue for me.

        And I thought about it after I posted, but I would run Linux on an Old World mac for basic desktop computing... it would give me a "modern" OS X-like environment without having to use OS 9.

        I do use Linux for services. My webserver runs off Linux and so does my NFS/SMB file server... shares with Winders and Macs no problem. Frankly, you can't beat building a 500 dollar x86 server running Linux. While I'd like to buy a use

  • a unified KDE 3.1/GNOME 2.2 desktop (both WMs share the same icons and menus)

    Yellowdog is the Microsoft of Linux! They're disrespecting the KDE project! Use Mandrake! It's a giant conspiracy by The Man to oppress Linux!

    </slashdot-kneejerk>

    Oh, wait, that said "Yellowdog", not "Red Hat". In that case, it's a welcome move to provide unity among the desktops and enhance the user experience. My bad.

    • It wasn't that simple. Yellow Dog (presumably) isn't anti-KDE/pro-Gnome. I think of it as more neutral if not KDE-favoring. They wont/don't short-shrift KDE for the sake of Gnome. Redhat did more than just alter the look/feel of a few icons and desktop backgrounds.

  • I got a powerbook from work to do some testing and I like OSX, but there is just too much cool software being developed for Linux. I was contemplating picking up a 12in powerbook as my main laptop, but one of my requirements is Sun's Java 1.4 SDK for PPC/Linux. I guess I could just run fink on top of OSX, but I would rather support free software instead of using proprietary software, even if its not as pretty.

    One big reason I have not made the switch is because of a small but vocal portion of the Mac user

  • Run from an external Firewire disk? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by elliotj ( 519297 ) <slashdot&elliotjohnson,com> on Wednesday March 19, 2003 @03:41PM (#5546392) Homepage
    Does anybody know if you can install YDL to run exclusively from an external firewire drive? I'd like to try it out, but don't want to mess around with partitioning my existing HDD. But, I do have an iPod and could use that as the harddrive for it if that is possible. Does anyone know if this sort of thing can be done?
  • "For those who don't want to wait, you can get an enhanced membership at YDL.net and download ISOs directly. As per other releases, ISOs will be available to everyone/mirrors two weeks after the CDs have been on sale."

    Maybe Mandrake should follow this business model. After all, if they are hemmoraging money like they are, this would give a chance for at least some income without violating the GPL.

  • try gentoo ppc (Score:2, Interesting)

    by zojas ( 530814 )
    I've been running gentoo linux on my ibook for 6 months now. gentoo even has a driver for the software modem in it (hcfusbmodem), and xfree86 4.3 with DRI support for my radeon chip has been around for a while.

    I dual boot with OS X. OS X is fun, but gentoo is much faster and more configurable.

    how i installed gentoo: install [desertsol.com]

  • Is there anything for PPC analogous to VMWare which would allow you to run Yellow Dog in MacOS X, or vice versa?
  • Why would you install Linux on a Mac?

    For maximum persecution, of course. It's the ultimate statement of geek martyrdom.

    Run your neo-hippy operating system on neo-yuppie hardware. I love it!

    (i'm joking. sorta.)

  • I ran Yellow Dog 2.3 for a long time on my Apple PowerMac 9600/200MP.

    It was a good, solid OS, though I haven't used it since I rolled my own LFS-style. It was very similar to the Redhat 7.2 distro I have running on a workstation at work. It blew away OS 7.5 (which came on the 9600) and OS 9 (which is the highest version the 9600 can run).

    For people wondering why do this when OS X is so pretty: I'd say Yellow Dog is an excellent solution to pre-Blue & White PowerMac OS needs. OS X won't run on most sys

    • Re:Go PPC! (Score:2, Informative)

      by oingoboingo ( 179159 )
      I'd say Yellow Dog is an excellent solution to pre-Blue & White PowerMac OS needs. OS X won't run on most systems made before that and even B&Ws, original iMacs, and iBooks system will run faster with Yellow-Dog than OS X.

      You can use XPostFacto to install OS X onto many pre B&W Macs. OS X 10.0 and 10.1 will install onto a 604 based system; 10.2 requires a G3 or G4. I used XPostFacto to install OS X 10.0.3 onto my ancient 7600/120...mind you it runs like shit, but it is possible nonetheless.
  • Debian is one. Gentoo is another. YDL is the Red Hat-ish 3rd (and there are others)

    It's nice to have a choice. Use whatever works well for you. Hell, use them all and play around with them. You can get a used G3/233 from ebay for less than $150 now.

    Have GNU/fun!
  • Really niche question: to tweak my monitors in MacOS whatever, i have to use a software control panel. Apple monitors have no controls, or minimal stuffs - its all done over USB these days.

    Does YDL have utilities for this? Would be a nice thing for those making a permanent change.

  • I currently use an 17 inch widescreen LCD iLamp iMac at work.

    I installed YDL 2.3 and it horked on the VideoCard.
    All my hacks were useless (I even delved into the XFree section to torque some of the code around there.)

    Does the new YDL kernel support the 17" widescreen? Or has there been no advances on that front?
  • id love to rubn it on my old 8500, i have YDL 2.something on it now. until it supports my video in video out board (apple stock AV package) i wont use it as more than a novelty OS. at least MacOS 8.6 supports it, so thats what i use. all i use it for is to run my Gamecube on when i dont fell like lugging a TV into my computer room.
  • Of course I only just finished downloading and installing YellowDog 2.3 yesterday on my old PowerMac 7600. Since YD uses apt-get in addition to RPM, is it possible to simply do an apt-get dist upgrade like you would on a Debian system? Has anyone tried this when upgrading older versions of YD?
  • Does anyone know if the recent local root hole affets this architechture as well, and if yes, is there a known exploit?

    Szo

Slashdot Top Deals

If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.

Close