Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Linux Distribution Round-Up 61

Posted by michael from the herding-cats dept.
Patrick Mullen writes: "The Duke of URL has just posted a Distribution Round-Up. The article covers information on many of today's (and yesterday's) popular Linux distributions as well as links to many distribution reviews -- and aims to arm Linux users with the information to choose the distro that is right for them." It's pretty much required that Slashdot publish one of these every few months.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Distribution Round-Up More

Linux Distribution Round-Up

Comments Filter:

  • Vine? (Score:3)

    by Squeeze Truck ( 2971 ) <xmsho@yahoo.com> on Saturday May 26, 2001 @03:06AM (#197229) Homepage
    I notice that Vine Linux [vinelinux.org] is conspicuously missing. Vine is probably the most popular Linux Distro in Japan.
  • Interesting article. Odd, though, that half the distributions mentioned are also noted to be dead projects.

    Perhaps one of WinLinux's biggest features is that it was the first partitionless versions of Linux.

    Hmm, I remember using doslinux long before WinLinux was ever around. Since it ran on top of umsdos, no partitioning was needed. I believe Slackware also supported umsdos (and possibly does still? dunno, I don't use it any more...).

    Mandrake's GUI enhancements often require more memory than a stock Linux distribution, often requiring 32 MB just for their DrakX graphical installer.

    Yet there's no mention of RedHat 7.1's ftp installer, which won't run on my system with 48 megs of RAM. I don't know how much it needs, but that's absurd. (Note that the NFS install works just fine with 48 megs).

  • They mention KDE 2.0 Beta and GNOME 1.2, I'm positive that most distributions ship with more recent versions of these desktop environments. How old is this article anyway? (couldn't find a date on it so soon)
  • About Connectiva Linux:

    In addition to this, they are Brazilian, meaning this distribution supports quite a few South American languages as well as the standard US/English.


    And that is quite an acomplishment, considering the fact that only two major western languages are spoken in South America, Portuguese and Spanish.

    Also, last time I checked Connectiva, support for Tupi-Guarani, Ancient Inca and Traditional Ianomani was still lacking.

  • uhm... (Score:2)

    by Phexro ( 9814 )
    is this really news for nerds? don't you think it's possible that most of the slashdot readership just might already know this?

    now i know the slashdot editors may still get excited when a mainstream media outlet mentions linux. but i got over it about three years ago.
    ---

  • Kondara (Score:3)

    by BJH ( 11355 ) on Saturday May 26, 2001 @02:55AM (#197234)
    The article mentions Kondara MNU/Linux, but contains two errors:

    1) It says that is a GNU project.
    Kondara has never been, and never will be, a GNU project. It is created by a group of volunteers and packaged by a commercial enterprise, Digital Factory. (Some people consider DF to be a bunch of VC losers, but that depends on who you ask.)

    2) It says that Kondara appears dead.
    A new version is currently at beta2, scheduled for release in the next month or two.

    With errors like these, one has to wonder just how well the writer did his research.
  • If it isn't dated now, it soon will be. But at least this one has dates on the pages so one will be able to guess just how relevant it is. So often dates are left out of reviews & lists, and that just leaves one guessing as to how current it is.

    Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
  • This is a small part of why I dislike proprietary installers. It hints at the problems that could develop. With the current SuSE you at least could, in principle, install the entire thing without using their installer, but this doesn't have to be a permanent condition. I once bought a SuSE distribution. I don't really regret it, but I sure don't like proprietary installers.

    Anything which could become a chokepoint needs to be widened or branched around. Design to avoid centralized positions of control.
    Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
  • That's why they say YMMV.


    Caution: Now approaching the (technological) singularity.
  • I installed Slackware 7.1 a couple of days ago, but Xfree 4.0 is not included in this distro. I also did not find any reference to Xfree 4.0 in info about SW 7.1 on the SW website. I hope Xfree 4.x is included in SW 7.2 when it comes out, though.
  • Because /. is mentioned in the mainstream media more and more, I'm sure the number of wannane Linux users that read /. is growing fast. This article might help them. However, after reading it I got the feeling that if I were a newbie I would still not know what distro to use. My two cents: go for a distro that someone you know and like uses. Then it's easier for him/her to help you. And take a look at my `Linux for Newbies' text on my website.
  • I know I should do that some time but X 3.3.6 is good enough for my needs. I was just surprised that X 4 was mentioned in the article.

  • Re:Bah! Only weenies use distributions! (Score:3)

    by mindstrm ( 20013 ) on Saturday May 26, 2001 @03:36AM (#197241)
    Right there with you.. though I wish I could say I've only built upon my original SLS system.... there just isn't enough time in the day to do that.
    9600 bps connections using TERM and mosaic-term to surf the web for the first time.
    How retro.

  • Re:Bah! Only weenies use distributions! (Score:3)

    by toofast ( 20646 ) on Saturday May 26, 2001 @08:57AM (#197242)
    And when you build a house, I suppose you run out to the woods with an axe and cut your own wood. Or perhaps you fabricate your own nails.

    Building a Linux system from scratch is by all means time consuming. If you have time to do it that way, congratulations.

  • The best way to learn and use Linux is to grab a root/boot diskset and hand-craft your partitions, disk structure, and compile everything.

    There is a book called Linux From Scratch [linuxfromscratch.org] that gives instructions for building a complete linux system from source code. The instructions are good enough that you don't have to be an expert to follow them. I would highly recommend this "distribution" to anyone wanting a completely customized linux system.
  • You have to start from a pre-existing distribution. To solve this problem, some LFS users have made bootable CD's containg a complete LFS system which can be used as a base to compile from.
  • Well CPU speed and memory sizes may have taken away a lot of the challenge, but you can still choose to work on fundamentally hard problems like image recognition and AI.
  • Yes it is on the list, second paragraph, right before debian.

    Sorry - rather, Progeny isn't in the category lists. It hasn't been classified as simple, intermediate or advanced, and it didn't receive a review as the remainder of the distributions did.

  • Progeny missing. (Score:3)

    by Snowfox ( 34467 ) <snowfox@NOsPaM.snowfox.net> on Saturday May 26, 2001 @05:45AM (#197247) Homepage
    Progeny isn't in the list. Progeny [progeny.com] is a commercial distribution by Ian Murdock, based on the Debian distribution. It has a graphical installer that's even simpler than those of the distributions in the beginner level, and a rapidly evolving set of support options. All of this while maintaining Debian's trump card of apt [everything2.com].

  • While most slashdot readers probably already know this, I think that this could be helpful when trying to orient people when you are trying to introduce linux in an organization. Once old-timer IS people see how well it works within our larger network services infrastructure, they are always asking about all of the different distros and which one they should be trying. This type of overview is good to have around to give to those people.

  • I was hoping to get a nice review of Progeny Debian, which (although it's a 1.0 release, so there's some bugs) I think is pretty slick, and it's totally Debian-compatible (you can apt-get from one to the other).
    ------
  • There are good number of Windows only people reading /. still. Me, for instance. I consider switching to Linux on occasion, and regular articles like this one keep me posted as to how well the various distros have progressed. If you read 18 different Linux news pages, or read every single article posted here about the various distros then maybe you know this stuff. If you've been ensconced in Linux for years maybe you know this stuff. I don't have time or inclination to read other Linux news pages, nor do I really want to know about every minor revision of Mandrake or RedHat (thus I don't read almost any of the "version x.x.x of y has been released" articles). So to answer your question, this is news for nerds and while it's possible that most of the readership might know some of it, it's good to have as something to point non-Linux people to.

    Now I'm not going to defend this particular article, as I didn't find it enormously enlightening on the subject, but it was decently well written and did contain most of what I wanted to know. However, I do think this stuff belongs on the /. page every once in a while (for the new readers). Maybe they could stick in a new catagory so old time subscribers or Linux hackers can filter out these types of articles, but that's up to the admins. If you don't want to see these articles in the future, make the suggestion to them directly that you want a way to opt out of 'new-user / beginner-linux' articles the same way I don't see Distro-specific articles.

    ~Anguirel (lit. Living Star-Iron)
    "Veni; Vidi; Vi C++"
  • SLS Linux? It's the de-facto standard of linux dists worldwide. Yeah.
  • Some of the reviews are also a bit dated. For example in the debian review, Kernel 2.2.17 is called "quite recent" several times, and no mention of XFree 4. It's not easy to keep this kind of list up to date, but it doesn't shed a good light on the quality of the reviews ...

  • I started out with SLS--I had forgotten the meaning of the acronym--around 0.94 or so mark. Maybe it was 0.99.14. It was such a long time (Internet time) ago. Actually, I had tried Linux much earlier (v0.77?), but its shell was not up to much (ash). Besides, I was just starting out with Unix.

    I also upgraded that sucker while mostly following Debian and Slackware for file system structure. I did it all the way up to Linux 2.2.12.

    Eventually, my system became unstable. It was probably due to a bad compiler. You know. The one compiled with bad memory. :( Too many binaries had been affected to even attempt repair.

    Since then I have switched over to FreeBSD. I no longer have the time nor inclination to worry about glibc incompatibilities or where the files went. Now I have more time for development as opposed to solid administration.

    Before anyone complains, I do realize a Linux distribution would have solved this, but I picked FreeBSD due to several more criteria I was looking at (i.e., extensive man pages, standard file system layout, libc and kernel sync, and central repository using CVS).
  • What do people typically do for desktops with FreeBSD - can you run KDE or GNOME?

    Both will run on FreeBSD. Personally, I run Enlightenment v0.16.5.
  • Yes it is on the list, second paragraph, right before debian.
  • Look what he says about Slackware 7.1:

    "At the release of 7.1, not only does Slackware include XFree86 4.0, but also KDE 2.0 (beta), Kernel 2.4 (test), and Perl 5.6. While none of the other options will cause much of a problem (as they are in the unstable tree), Perl 5.6 causes some big problems. Still, this is just one problem, and unless you actually run Perl, this won't affect you."

    Which is false. Slack 7.1 uses 2.2.17, XF 3.3.6, KDE 1.1.2. Anly the Perl part is close to accurate. But Perl 5.6 works creat at running Kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org], so you have to wender. If at least two distro parts were way off base, who's to say they're all not wrong in same way (which I naturally would not know since I'm reading the article to familiarize myself with them!).

    (Note: yeah, some of the stuff he mentioned is in contrib, but they are not reallf useable packages -- LinuxMafia [linuxmafia.org] has better packages.)

    --
  • He was WAY off on the Slackware stuff. I noticed that right off.

    That's just plain bad reporting. It appeared to be a decent article, but with so many mistakes (and very obvious mistakes), I don't think I can trust any of the info about distros I don't already know about.

    The only thing that guy has going for him is the catchy domain name and handle.
  • It most certainly is in 7.2. I keep an NFS share with the Slackware-Current at all times. Helpful for newbies, and, let me tell you: the next SW CD is going to be even better than 4.x to 7.0 upgrade. (Watch out for Perl 5.6) >:)


    Linux rocks!!! www.dedserius.com [dedserius.com]

  • Re:Vine? (Score:4)

    by teg ( 97890 ) on Saturday May 26, 2001 @06:56AM (#197259)
    The Vine people now work for Red Hat - our last release works out of the box with Japanese, if you want it to.
  • For anyone wanting to learn Linux from a fully configured platform (ready-to-go as a LAN-server & Internet gateway) based on a (albeit non-GUI) Linux (today: RedHat 7.0), I'd say: make it e-smith (today: ver 4.1.2)

    Stand on the shoulders of a correct configuration and move on from there.

    e-smith is also good if you want to help move MS out of the server-farm room, as well.

    My 2 cents... ;-)

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • This article seems to focus a little too much on the bundled software with a distribution. While this may be a little useful for some, things like kernel version included aren't that useful - anyone can go and download the newest version. It would have been better focused around the types of package installations, and system scripts and tools IMHO. +PEte
  • Rock Linux, Green Tree Linux, and Linux From Scratch are not on the list. I can only assume from the brief discriptions of each distro that this list is mostly for people who have no idea what they realy want and those 3 are a little beond even "Advanced" in that most of them require you to compile a kernel befor you can even install the OS. But no list whould be compleat with out them.
  • I've been running Mandrake 8.0 for a week now, and I'm more than impressed. The installation provided X4.0.3, kernel 2.4.3 and ReiserFS root partition, something that I could not find in oher major distros. The only annoying thing was that I had to use the slow and cumbersome graphical installer because it offered the most flexibility. It is strange, because I would imagine the people inclined to play around with new filesystems and the like, would prefer a text mode.

    I know most of the navigation in the installer could be done by keyboard, but it was a bit slow: moving up/down to another package on a list had an annoying delay while the description text appeared. Dunno if this had to do with the framebuffer X or something else. On a text mode menu you would very quickly scroll around with up/down keys and press space to [un]select a package.

    But hey, no distro is perfect and Mandrake 8.0 is the best I've used so far.

    --
    I hit the karma cap, now do I gain enlightenment?

  • It could be the first distribution with an ext2 image on a windows partition.
  • On the root page it says that will be up on Monday.
  • I've been using Linux since v0.95 (Fall 1992?), and I've never done a complete install from a distribution. The best way to learn and use Linux is to grab a root/boot diskset and hand-craft your partitions, disk structure, and compile everything.

    (Although I do use Slackware for my basic source of everything...I originally used SLS [SoftLanding System - remember them? 1993/1994 in Victoria Canada...one of the first distributions around])

    Bah! Distributions! Bah!

    Thomas Dzubin

  • why the hell does everyone think slackware is so damn advanced of a linux distribution? I've been using slackware for 7 years, I believe that is since slack 2.0, and I never thought slackware as being difficult to handle in any way. The installation is easier than anyone's goofy GUI installs. I tried installing mandrake once because I had a CD, it was such a pain in the ass, I downloaded the slackware tree and stuck it on one of my partitions. debian was the same way, the installation sucked.
  • Mandrake also is the most bleeding edge distro, which often uses beta and release candidate drivers and even some pre-release software. I had many problems with mandrake starting with 7.1 and 7.2 was practically unusable on my system. I believe mandrake is doing quite a dis-service to the linux community.

    After Windows users start seeing Linux-mandrake crash and lock up they are going to think poorly on Linux and go back to Windows. I am not paraniod or prejiduce agaisn't mandrke but I am just telling you what I experienced and seen with it. Look at all the anti-linux posts at zdnet and here and you will relise all the users or %90 use Mandrake. Mandrake is the SCO Xenix of the linux community.
  • The source is there. You just need to buy it. :-)

    THey have a right to show their share holders that they can protect their intellectual property. What they are doing is perfectly legal under the GPL. ITs free as in speech but not beer. Alot of work went into developing SuSE and the GPL says you only need to give away the source if your selling it or tying it. They are doing this. If you pay you have the source.

    Also caldera is very proprietary. THey do release the soure to the linux related software but everything else is closed soruce and Ransom Love stated that he did not like the gpl. Caldera is alot more anti-gpl then SuSE.

  • Conspicuously missing in this round-up are Caldera [caldera.com]'s eDesktop and eServer (i.e. OpenLinux) products, which are excellent Linux distributions. Caldera has been a fairly large contributor to the Linux world (NetWare support, the original version of RPM way back in the day, the GPLed graphical installer Lizard, their GPLed administration tool, COAS [compare to S.u.S.E.'s YaST, which is still proprietary...])

    They also have a lot of big-name corporate deals involving Linux, a commercial version of embedded Linux (Lineo), and the code and customer list for SCO now. They were the first to ship with KDE as a graphical desktop (I believe with KDE Beta-3, before even KDE 1.0) and one of the first to ship with a full desktop of any kind (with Looking Glass, way back when). I think Caldera has always put out great distributions.

    I use eDesktop 2.4 right now. I chose it after comparing it to a number of others. I have basically upgraded my distribution (not a fun task) after each generation of libraries -- first when the switch from a.out to elf was made (libc4 to libc5) and then when the switch from the linux-hacked GNU libc to the standard GNU libc was made (libc5 to libc6). My first distribution (a.out) was Slackware, but for both upgrades since then I've tried out a number of distributions, and both times I've ended up choosing Caldera's distributions over the likes of Red Hat and Debian. Why? The LISA tool (which you can choose instead of Lizard if you want) gives me Slackware-like flexibility during install, and once in, the compiler and library configurations always seem to compile more free source code "out of the box" without frustration, which is a big deal to me.
  • Man, Mosaic with TERM was the coolest thing... I basically soiled myself the first time I launched Mosaic with TERM and was able to load up InterLinks (which I used a lot then) at home. (I was only affording 2400 bps at that particular moment... Those 'The Cure' fan pages took forever to load)

    I clung to Mosiac for the longest time... I nearly cried when they said that 2.7b5 [IIRC] would be the final release and that development was stopping. Then I went looking around at others, like Chimera and Mmosaic... I hated Netscape. *sigh*

    I miss the days when the "amazing" factor was so high in Linux and computing in general. These days, we can do anything, so anything we do is mundane.
  • Hey, if you're running Slackware, it's your job to download XFree86 4.0.2 and the 4.0.3 "upgrade" from ftp.xfree86.org and install it yourself in place of the XFree86 3.3.6 included with Slackware 7.1.

    I'm doing some Slackware 7.1 installs on non-personal systems right now, and it's like a 10 minute job at most. If that sort of thing is above your head, perhaps you should be trying an rpm-based distribution instead of Slackware, just to make things a little easier for you! No sense in beating your head against a wall and there's no shame in being not quite ready for Slackware yet.

    Better yet, just give it a try. Download all of the files in the XFree86 4.0.2 distribution for i386 Linux Glibc 2.1 [xfree86.org] and read and follow the "Install" file, which will tell you how to proceed to install XFree86 4.0.2. Then, re-visit the XFree86 repository and grab the update to 4.0.3 and install it in similar fashion.

  • Slackware 7.1 DOES come with Xfree 4.0. In the set that I bought, it's on disk 4 in the contributed package archive.

    -- juju
  • I wouldn't put Mandrake as a beginner distribution. I would rather put it as one of the most advanced distribution available to all...

  • can anyone point me to something like this for other architectures? i run all ppc at home, and a friend of mine is looking at getting an alpha... a fairly complete comparison like this would be a godsend.

    --saint
    ----
  • Not all that familiar with some of the Distro's mentioned above, but I'm not a Distro reviewer. I do write for the Duke of URL though. Toss me or Patrick the names of those Distro's; and we'll try to remedy the ones you folks feel are missing.
    -Steven
    http://www.thedukeofurl.org
  • Here in Guyana we speak English. They speak French in French Guyana (funny that). Try to tell the French that theirs is not a "major western language" and you'll have a debate on votre mains. You're not the only one to ignore these countries. A combo box on HP's support site offered Vietnam and Hong Kong in the America's but not Guyana, Suriname or French Guyana. Bonjour.
  • You can also go to ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-cu rrent/slakware/x1 Download all files into a holding directory and run pkgtool. Not 100% guaranteed success, but easier than screwing with glibs. It's not a bad idea to get glibs current, ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-cu rrent/slakware/d1 but go with the least trouble first.
  • Perhaps you should also say try using Mandrake for 7 years and see how much you've learned about Linux. One of Slackware's strenghts is that it inherently (through documentation and method) teaches general Linux techniques rather than distro-specific tools.
  • RPM stands for Red Hat Package Manager, so I guess that explains it all.

  • The Linux Distribution List (Score:4)

    by rgbrenner ( 317308 ) on Saturday May 26, 2001 @02:20AM (#197282)

    There's a pretty complete Linux distribution list here [www.ldl.cx].

  • Yeah. That's the "it's business" argument. Like I said, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense in this context. Look at the facts: You can install it via ftp; You can download installation iso's for every other architecture that Suse supports; All the other major distros allow you to download iso's, as well as install via ftp. So, I'm asking, why doesn't Suse provide installation iso's?

    I don't think I said it wasn't legal. The GPL also deals with distribution, though. As in, you can freely redistribute the work or derivative works, with the only stipulation being that the source code also has to be included as well. You cannot redistribute Suse the distro, or YAST, without permission from Suse the company. They have not been released under the GPL. They've been released under a different license. They're the only things Suse does that aren't released under the GPL. Why?

    And so what if Caldera is not in favor of the GPL? How are they proprietary? Ransom Love said that he *was* in favor of BSD-style licensing. I was under the impression that everything will still be open source, just not GPL. We were talking about Suse, not Caldera anyway.

    Caldera releases stuff under the GPL. Caldera the company may not be in favor of the GPL, but Caldera the Linux distro company doesn't have any problems with it. Caldera is trying to become a Unix software company, with Linux thrown in for good measure. As far as I know, all of Caldera Linux is under the GPL. And anyway, Caldera isn't abandoning the GPL. All their stuff will be open source and I'm sure their Linux distro will remain GPL.

  • I just don't get Suse, the company. Their YAST and YAST2 programs are under their own, non-GPL license. I believe the distribution as a whole is under a funny license as well. They refuse to release installation iso's for 7.0 or 7.1 for x86. If you frequent LinuxIso.org [linuxiso.org] you know what I'm talking about [linuxiso.org]. But Suse released "live evaluation" iso's of 7.0 and 7.1. You can install Suse from ftp. You can even download installation iso's for every other arcitechture that they support. But not for x86. It just baffles me.

    Linux Central [linuxcentral.com] just recently added a Suse 7.0 disc to their Linux Cental CD-Roms selection. But not 7.1. I know I could roll my own and stuff, but the new Redhat, Conectiva, and Debian beckon to come and try them out as well. Rather waste my time messing with getting Linux From Scratch working, than trying to get Suse installed.

    I know. The patent answer is "It's business, stupid", but that argument doesn't make much sense when *all* of your competition is offering 'free samples', but you're not. As a dumb American, what's the reason for going with Suse instead of Redhat or Mandrake, or even Storm or Progeny? I just don't get it.

    One other thing, if anyone can help me. One of the most annoying things right now for me is the lack of good fonts in web pages under Konq. Do the boxed distros include fonts that aren't included in the download versions? I haven't bought a boxed distro in almost six months and it's about time to get one. I'll definately get one sooner than later if I can get some better fonts.

    And finally, I feel the need to pimp some of the very cool distros I've come across. I've haven't been able to try these out yet (doh. got to get a cd burner.) but they do look cool. First, Caldera has released a beta for their upcoming 3.1 workstation release. Their is a review [linuxplanet.com] of it at Linux Planet [linuxplanet.com]. The coolest transistion distro I've found is Redmond Linux [redmondlinux.org]. Tries to focus on the destop and do away with the need for the command line. There is also Demudi [centrotemporeale.it]. The Debian Multimedia Distribution. The name says it all. Then there's a few of the more hardcore, hacker type distros: Rock Linux [rocklinux.org], Stampede Linux [stampede.org], and Linux From Scratch [linuxfromscratch.org]. And last, but not least. The most vaporous of them all. Microsoft Linux [mslinux.org].

  • It is nice to see Storm Linux finally get some credit. I believe the duke was right when he said they probably could have secured financial security if they had come into the scene 8 months before a tech slump. Storm did what Progeny is trying to do (1.5 yrs ago). Its a great way to get into debian
  • I realise that alot of people here dislike the "newbie" distros but if any of them can bring Linux to the mainstream it's Mandrake. I used to be a big RedHat believer but we've seen what's happened with them.

    --------------------------------------------------
  • the biggest problem i had with installing Debian was documentation. as soon as i found each correct option in my manuals for ethernet card, monitor, graphics card, sound, they worked.

    i used SunOS at work for 3 years before i tried Debian, so i already had some idea of what a *nix could do, and some experienced systems admins to ask for advice.

    i've done RedHat, and been very hard pressed to get it to do what i wanted. i've tried Dragon Linux for fun, too. they work, but they do not have good package management, and when something new comes out i'm hard-pressed to upgrade anything.

    apt-get and dselect are Debians true masterpieces.

    yes, Debian is conservative. i laude the package maintainers for their work in testing before release. if Debian cost money, i'd pay it gladly. i'm glad it doesn't.

    Bob-

  • Umm, this is Slashdot after all, so I don't think a negative Linux article will ever get posted.

    Just because someone has a different opinion doesn't mean that it is wrong. I happen to be a big proponent of the GPL. I am not however a huge fan of Linux. It's just one of the Kernels of the GNU operating system. No more no less.

    Linux is neat but it's not a religion.

  • Kde works great and Gnome especially so. In fact, check out this Slashdot story http://slashdot.org/bsd/01/03/26/2010217.shtml [slashdot.org]. FreeBSD is now an offcial Gnome platform.

Slashdot Top Deals

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Close