Posts by gregzeng 28 publicly visible posts • joined 5 Sep 2013
More than 50 new varieties of this Fedora. Instead of the open-source Calamares, Fedora has its own specialised, their Anaconda installation system, upgraded.
Now getting to find any of these versions, to download as a ready to install ISO. As mentioned in this publication, interested in using this menu system to locate the version of this Fedora for my use. URL please.
Mint Cinnamon or KDE might be better. Rolling upgrades might be possible using either the Discover application (Snap, Flatpak and Debian), the Apt, or appimage application, to update the applications.
Other Ubuntu-based systems also offer easy updates or reversals on the available Linux kernels. Various backup reversals are also available, especially if the BTRFS system is used instead of Ext-4.
Other Ubuntu-based systems that might also be preferred are Wubuntu and Lite Linux. Using this Ubuntu base allows their PPA system to also keep this timing update as required.
The main title of this article was about the traditional Desktop Environment, XFCE. This traditional environment was timely, from there old days, when Gnome 2 existed. Many current Linux operating systems use this XFCE foundation as their default desktop environment.
Mint offers other Desktop Environments: MATE and Cinnamon. Both are reactions to the agreed upon disappearance of the old Gnome (2). Both are reactions against the unusual settings, away from the Xerox WIMP design, of GNOME (3).
The older tradition of XFCE forces the Super-Users permission, everytime, of the deletion of files from the operating system, view the Thunder file manager. This explains why my preference is for the plain and simple MATE desktop environment, or the eye candy of the Cinnamon environment. These other two versions of Mint should the very limited prison of the Thunar file manager, which one's the XFCE based environments.
Thank you for this "clarification". If I dare to return to being another Wikipedia editor again, it might be worthwhile trying to update the current Wikipedia confusion on CSD, SSD, Windows Managers and Desktop Environments. The boundaries between all these terms seem unclear and frail.
Then we have the continuing changes on GTK and QT, Wayland and the older X-displays. The Chromium based applications seem to offer both or either of the CSD, SSD possibilities, depending on whether the underlying operating system is one of the NIX systems, or not, according to Wikipedia.
Gnome (3), pioneered by the innovating side of Red Hat (Fedoral, offers the raw and pure version of GNOME. Ubuntu and there many other versions of Linux prefer to modify this advanced, fast evolving version of GNOME, to better conform to the traditional desktop, GUI environment first created by Xerox. These many versions of this raw Fedora version of GNOME need to also be sensitive or insensitive to the end-user's chosen system of display hardware and software.
Many end-users need to have complex software, firmware and hardware environments, far beyond the stands of the originators of the operating system. Very large or small screen displays, often simultaneously. Various input devices, including touch screens, of different refresh rates, and user settings. The eye candy settings for the end-user needs less or more "white space", depending on the final viewer display.
All computer operating systems will need to try to handle the many complexities of the rapidly expanding and changing end-users. Then the hardware suppliers (Nvidia, Intel, AMD, Samsung, etc) innovate further, disturbing all the many dependent software codes, once again.
Another Red Hat (Fedora) enthusiast trying to destroy the Debian-Ubuntu-Mint dominance over the diverse (incompatible) Red Hat package managers. Most third party application developers prefer to offer their compiled products in the Debian format; (Slimjet, etc). The RPM format had many incompatible versions: Mandriva, PCLOS, etc.
Both the many Linux operating systems based on either Ubuntu or Mint have access to the PPA system, offered by some application creators (Grub Customizer, etc).
Besides Red Hat's creation of Flatpak, most Linux operating systems can sometimes use the Ubuntu-creation of Snap, or the less popular version of Appimage. These three compiled packages are "containers" that are insensitive to the final settings of the end-user, regarding display theme, and certain other settings.
Most Linux operating systems, including the commentators preferred Inner Red Hat family, have the about to regularly, skillfully and slowly create ready to run complex code, from raw source code. Some Linux systems also offer ways to install compressed code in other unusual Linux formats.
Whichever later versions of applications become available, it is not necessary for the end-user to run the latest version of the application. Super-Users should know what they are doing. The normal end-user should not be allowed to change away from the older versions of them operating system, or the existing applications. All operating systems have their many ways of backing up from new settings. The commentator seems only to know the one way.
Seems this problem is with my Windows Eleven machines, Home and Pro, on standard modern laptops.
Re-installing, then hours of customized configuration, seems too be there only cure.
Tried Ubuntu Linux and others in the Linux types. Linux however does not understand most users of computers, excepting those who need expensive support staff>
Apple operating systems are designed for the ambulance of support staff. Microsoft Windows is between these two extremes, so it's the most used, because it had the most user applications.
No computer operating system is everything, to everyone, everytime. However, Microsoft Windows, like the "God" designed human anatomy, is an okay compromise between the best and the bad.
SUSE afaik is a extremely commercial operating system, used by full time staff on the server industries. The other brand-names mentioned are a mix of open source and popular operating systems, used by the general public.
This article describes the four types of Intel x86-64 CPU, according to the years of design. Other operating systems have yet to do this level of discrimination, reserving such to the raw code of the Linux kernel, if ever.
It is unclear how and why this type of categories into four different subtypes of CPU will be needed. The article explains that "containers" are not that popular for non server use. Wny is this development from SUSE significant then?
Some commercial companies actually do support the open source industries. Probably the most famous and generous is Microsoft.
Without mentioning specific brand-names, there are other famous names which are based on open source products, such as based on open source BSD, but will not do anything that will not assist any competition to this one brand-name.
Luckily the European Union is trying to avoid the selfish, damaging commercializing of Open source standards. This note is moving into not just hardware and hardware connections, but as this article shows, or notes increasingly involves software and operating systems.
Open management governance is still a developing science, rather than a mature applied science, or a technology. The "Rocky" legal structure has chosen not to be as open as the old Centos, now agreed on as "Centos Stream".
There are many "experiments" in open management. "The Linux Foundation", Wikipedia, and the constitution of many national nation-states, democratic or not. The pure science of human resources is still being researched. Factions, forks, appeals, QA, engineering tolerances, "etiquette", closed source binary bits, elections, etc.
All this, seems to be in my version of Computer Intelligence, Cognitive Sciences, or "Artificial Intelligence" (AI).
Agreed. Looking now at the government of India & Twitter. Here in Australia, & our relationship with Google, Amazon, YouTube, etc. Similarly with Europe, China, Singapore, etc. And all their censorship, NSA, extradition laws, regulations, etc. Very complicated & messy. No final solution ever, since changes happen continuously.
Rocky & RHEL are both equally downstream now from RHEL-Core ("Stream"). PC Linux OS (PCLOS) uses RPM packages, but has its own version of Synaptic Package manager, from the Debian versions. Most creators of Linux systems use Debian package manager, since RPM seems so difficult to create compatible binary codes: PCLOS, SUSE, etc.
Linux knows this mess. Hence Snapd, Flatpak & Wayland, to try to assist 3rd party application development (hardware, software, networks, IoT, teachers, students, users). Linux has many common catch-ups (competitors, adversaries,... ): Microsoft, Apple, Android, Wear OS, etc. Other than servers, IoT, & cloud, will Linux defeat the more used trademarks?
The reasons are given on the advantages and otherwise of the many human resource options. Which legal structure to follow? Seems that the one unelected proprietor, & the commercial "for profit" enterprise is not seen as good for project health. The senior managers here have life experiences. History is littered with corporate failures. Most governance of human resources have questionable performance.
Are there any guidelines on suitable legal structures?
"Fermilab and CERN were using Scientific and were mulling switching to CentOS ... - one suggestion is that they might go to Ubuntu. Internal advice shows that a whole host of Linux distributions are made available internally."
Most creators of Linux operating systems use Debian or Ubuntu core, as the start of their creation. Third party creators prefer Deb application compilation. RPM compilation has several incompatible versions. Long term, does this mean the death of RPM?
In Linux, Dolphin file manager is ok. Thunar has the WYSIWYG file-name changer that no other Linux program can handle. Linux has yet to get the combination of both Dolphin & Thunar. Windows has had this almost since the beginning of Windows. It is now freeware: Flashpeak "Servant Salamander". It is also THE Most customizable of all file managers, regardless of any operating system.
Blind people might not care about Desktop Environments. The rest of need eyes, for different lighting environments, different font & screen sizes. Wayland was invented because Xorg is do limiting. Not many Desktop Environments can handle Wayland yet. Wayland is still rapidly being invented.
In this regard, the blind & CLI users don't need to worry about Desktop Environments.
Window managers, Desktop Environments are alternatives to the CLI. Each has a limiting architecture. These limits determine the existence of all possible extensions, themes, forks, etc. It is interesting to see these themes, extensions trying to be added to each new environment. Differences slight? Not true. Each difference is very imprisoning. This "bloat" often is impossible. GNOME3 & Unity differ from the other full DE, in trying to avoid the WIMP design invented by Xerox.
ASCII. Reddit uses it. These messages here use it. Seems the comments here do not understand this.
This communication medium has words,sentences, paragraphs, headings, praise or punishment markers. These meta-structures are an essential management system. It sorts confusing ASCII into digestive priorities.
Reddit, messaging systems here also use CAPS, Bold fonts, spelling correctors, instant language translation services, etc. Non-English readers & messages can be readily & quickly understood or translated.
The OP seems unfamiliar with Reddit and the message system used here.
Seemingly also needed are emotional symbols, to allow Linus to show emotions about SNAFU, FUBAR, wonk, woke, etc.
Micro-aggressions seem trendy now are happening. Glass ceilings about women, region, skin colour, disability, sexual preferences, etc.
Hardcore coders,with noses to the grindstone, mighty not see the forest, because of the trees. The retires, especially the senior managers like myself, can notice familiar patterns. Reinventing the wheel, shooting the messenger, punishment to the unusual (xenophobia), etc.
Similar to fire-drills, rehearsing BACKUP-RESTORE should also be done. This will allow estimate of the data & time lost, and give a better estimate of times & costs, factored into peak-usage times.
Similarly, replacement times of hardware should be known. Costs & delays of off-site & cloud backups are constantly changing, so these need yearly or half-yearly estimates as well.
"Yes it's a familiar refrain but do take a look at Linux or BSD."
Linux requires less powerful hardware than Windows. True - some hardware runs better in Linux, especially older, popular hardware. Windows software can also run, via WINE.
"Most of time times when administration opens e-mails (and attachments) because they usually don't really care. Why should they?"
Agreed. Even the best-trained, highly motivated staff can make mistakes, or lose attention. Industry organizations should cooperate to expose current staff members with POISONED-INDUSTRY-BAITS. Independent organizations could then alert the sys-admin that certain staff members are inattentive, irresponsible, etc ... when there are consistent patterns of non-accidental breeches.
Private IT companies must keep up a strong, invulnerable image, without any bugs. With such a narrow range of eligible code insiders, outsiders can greatly benefit by supplying spy-services to the competitors using this proprietary software.
Seems like ex-employees, or disgruntled current employees can enjoy profitable & very secret incomes, as long as the pretence of of "perfect" bug-free software MUST be maintained.
Not all Linux kernels are open source. Individuals and any organization can create & maintain custom Linux kernels, based upon the open source Linux kernel. When an "old", unusual or neglected Linux kernel exists, often these private persons or organizations will issue their own version of the Linux kernel.
There are up & down sides of the private kernels. They may sneak in code that is used for privacy-tracing, error-tracking or "stolen" from other copyright sources. But often they will miss the bug-repairs & optimizations of the original open-source version of the Linux kernels.
These original open-source kernels are very frequently needing better optimizations & bug-fixes. Each "stable" release of the kernel has several bug-fixes release each week it seems. The Ubuntu-based operating systems can rapidly & easily maintain this rate of "improvement", via "http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/"
The hundreds of other Linux brand-names might need tedious compilation from source code, but each week?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
