Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Review: Yellow Dog Linux 2.2 209

Posted by timothy from the less-and-less-painful dept.
fabiolrs writes: "imaclinux.net is running a review on Yellow Dog Linux 2.2. They could manage to run it on the iBook. YDG 2.2 is a great distro with KDE 2.2.2, Gnome 1.4, kernel 2.4.18 and Xfree86 4.2.0." Nice to see PPC systems (meaning "Apple," mostly) getting so much attention in the Linux world lately -- Mandrake's 8.2 PPC is also getting close to a release.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Review: Yellow Dog Linux 2.2 More

Review: Yellow Dog Linux 2.2

Comments Filter:

  • i was wrong (Score:3, Informative)

    by fabiolrs ( 536338 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:01PM (#3285874) Homepage
    sorry people! my fault! yellow dog linux 2.2 actually RUNS on an ibook!
    • No, you were just unintentionally right. "They could manage to run it on the iBook" means that they were able to run it on an iBook. Maybe you meant to say that they couldn't run it, but you made a Freudian penis. I mean slip.

  • Past YDL releases were good too (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NewbieSpaz ( 172080 ) <nofx_punkguy@lin ... g ['ail' in gap]> on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:03PM (#3285889) Homepage
    I managed to get YDL 2.0 running on my old Apple clone - A Power Computing Power Tower 220e. I have a G3 upgrade card in it, and it works well. I can't wait to try 2.2, hopefully it will be even better at supporting the weird clone hardware. I should download it soon...
    YDL's RPMs make it easy for anyone who's familiar with Redhat or Mandrake to get YDL running on a PPC. Woohoo!
  • I've never had a chance to use PPC, is it more interesting than x86? ;-)

  • i wouldn't call it great.. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:03PM (#3285899)

    bug ridden (take a look at their yup, update program for example, core software for the distro and it doesn't work right), difficult to install and very poor support is more like it. take a look at the ydl mailing list for lots of complaints. in addition the company has a pretty lousy policy of releasing iso images months after it's available in stores (to get people to buy it). i miss linuxppc, that was a good distro. fortunately debian, suse and mandrake are available. [linuxiso.org]

    posted anonymously so i don't get my butt sued [slashdot.org].

  • KDE 2.2.2? (Score:2, Funny)

    by e1en0r ( 529063 )
    But everyone knows KDE 3 is the best. I saw it on the poll. It must be true.
  • the last time i used YDL (which was about a year and a half ago) it was utter crap. from the sound of this review it looks like it has improved some but not a whol lot. i realise they dont have alot of people working on it, but still you should make sure the basic functionality is there before you realease it.
    • YDL is a little behind Redhat releases so it isn't up to latest and greatest by any means. YDL 2.1 was based on Redhat 7.0 base which had its fair share of teething. YDL 2.2 is based on Redhat 7.2 which is a fairly solid release. Redhat 7.3 is basically here now so YDL 2.2 isn't so shiny and new. This could be a good thing if consider that Redhat 7.2 is fairly well tested at this point so you should be fairly aware of what you are getting into.

      Mandrake is getting 8.2 ppc ready to roll out a little after the x86 8.2 release so that will be a little more cutting edge if you are looking for that. Mandrake is focusing their resources on New World machines so Old World support might not all you hope for.

  • 'nuff said

  • Anyone know of a good faq (Score:4, Interesting)

    by BiggestPOS ( 139071 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:11PM (#3285972) Homepage
    That has to do with dual-booting Yellow Dog Linux and OS X? just asking.

  • Debian & iBook (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Leone ( 43143 ) <lemmit.kaplinski@com> on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:11PM (#3285975) Homepage
    I have used Mandrake on x86 for several years, but two weeks ago I bought myself an iBook (my old Toshiba fell on the floor, RIP) and decided to go with Debian Woody PPC.

    To my great surprise it went mostly smooth. I downloaded a minimal CD image and got up and running from there. apt-get install really is as cool as they say ;)

    My biggest problem was that by default I had kernel 2.2 something and PMU (APM for Mac) crashed and burned. 2.4 fixed that though.

    I really can't say that PPC is so mega-cool, but walking around with an Apple laptop (very rare) with Linux installed (almost as rare) is very geeky ;)

    • O'Reilly article (Score:3, Informative)

      by wiredog ( 43288 )
      On Debian & iBook [oreillynet.com]

    • I really can't say that PPC is so mega-cool, but walking around with an Apple laptop (very rare)

      You must not go to the same coffee shops I do. At the ones I hang out, you'd think the 90% marketshare belonged to Apple. I guess wintel users don't find their 1 hour battery life too useful.

      And that is one of the (many) mega-cool PPC things--massive battery life. Don't know what kind of power management the Linux distros have, though.

  • Link to YDL (Score:3, Interesting)

    by george399 ( 537785 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:13PM (#3285987) Homepage
    Why is there no link to YDL itself , but instead there is actually a link to Mandrake in the main story?
    • You can only buy YDL 2.2 at the store or download the source rpms right now. The release for download is next week.

      The Mandrake release is still beta but you can dl it. Maybe that's why.

  • Also.. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by transient ( 232842 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:18PM (#3286008)
    meaning "Apple," mostly

    Terrasoft makes some nice PPC hardware [terrasoftsolutions.com] in addition to their distro.
    • I should have 70 BriQs today or tommorow sans drivebay housing. I'm pretty dissapointed with the per-node pricing of Black Lab [terrasoftsolutions.com] Linux (by the same folks).
      I'm thinking at the moment that I'll netboot Debian and install my own clustering libraries and tools, since as far as I can tell, everything included in Black Lab is available elsewhere except their graphical cluster management tools.
      Too bad they didn't see fit to GPL them and just make money on their rather expensive BriQ's (We paid $1500/per for G4s) before Black Lab was released.
      Does anyone have any experience with these? Any tips?
    • Frankly, I'm surprised that more hardware vendors who want to combat the Wintel cartel aren't using PPC chips. Sure, they're slower on the clock, but they are extremely powerful chips, and inexpensive when compared to Intel chips. I read over here [yahoo.com] hthat the latest, greatest G4 1 GHz chips are $295 for 10,000, whereas Intel's P4 2.4 GHz chips are $%620 for the same count. I suppose it might be a factor of 10 typo, but Motorola's chips are clearly less expensive to use that Intel's.

      Why aren't more vendors who want to distribute Linux machines using PPC? Motherboard costs?

      Of course this then begs the question of why Apple hardware is more expensive, but I'm typing this on my new iMac, so clearly I don't care.

  • Too bad anyone with $2000 (back in 1997) worth of powerbook 1400 rubble liing around are STILL screwed. Check out the hw-support [yellowdoglinux.com]

    Oh well...there's always other options:
    Apokalypse linux
    MachTen [tenon.com]

    • Linux on Powerbook 1400 (Score:2, Informative)

      by beerits ( 87148 )
      Have you checked here [sourceforge.net]? They seem to have at least some success getting the 1400 to work.
      • Yeah...I actually did look into that along with mk/linux. And it *would* run linux, but the only things the kernel could access would be anything on the ide bus(hard drive/floppy/cd) and the scsi port on the back. So this is good and bad. Its good if I wanted a standalone linux box without sound or network and could only transport files through cd or floppy. But if I wanted a REAL programming environment or even a router,firewall, or server, I would need to have network capabilities via a PCMCIA NIC card or the appletalk port. Sound would be nice too for programming in the middle of nowhere.

  • No ISO? No go. (Score:3, Informative)

    by greygent ( 523713 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:27PM (#3286068) Homepage
    I'd try Yellow Dog on my TiBook, but they appear to be one of those companies who don't release ISO's to their distribution until they're virtually obsolete.

    It's their right, but not a very good practice to try and win over new customers who don't want to spend $$$ to test out a new distribution.

    Thankfully, I was able to get Debian installed. Now only if I could figure out how to boot it properly from OpenFirmware. The steps in the recent O'reilly article didn't work for me.

    • Re:No ISO? No go. (Score:4, Informative)

      by Jupiter9 ( 366355 ) <mark&spiezio,net> on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:35PM (#3286123) Journal
      Don't you people read?
      The Yellowdog Linux website says the iso will be distributed on the 8th of April. That's four days from now.

    • Re:No ISO? No go. (Score:3, Informative)

      by _typo ( 122952 )
      Thankfully, I was able to get Debian installed. Now only if I could figure out how to boot it properly from OpenFirmware. The steps in the recent O'reilly article didn't work for me.

      Branden Robinson (the debian XFree maintainer) has a page about that kind of stuff. [debian.org]

    • Sheesh, if $30 will break your bank you have bigger fish to fry I think. If you're really interested in trying out YDL but are just too cheap to take a $30 chance on a set of CDs, then just use ISOs for 2.0 or 2.1! It's GNU/Linux. It looks just like every other GNU/Linux out there. If you don't like their package choices, or they aren't current enough for your bleeding-edge needs, then compile from source. Personally, I'd prefer paying $30 to Yellow Dog for a distro that works than dinking around all day and night trying to get Debian working. My time is worth more than that to me.
    • I got my iBook (my first Mac ever, bought two weeks ago) up and running Debian (and dual booting OS X) using the various instructions on the web (links posted elsewhere in this thread). It was relatively straightforward; what problems specifically do you have, maybe we can help.

      PS. Loving my iBook, BTW. It is small, fast, and QUIET! Also, it doesn't burn a hole in my lap.

    • Re:No ISO? No go. (Score:2, Informative)

      by Coldfusion97 ( 175932 )
      The ISOs are hardly obsolete when they release them. Usually Terra Soft (the vendor that produces Yellow Dog) releases the ISOs a few weeks after the CDs start shipping.

      They usually give themselves a few weeks to sell some CDs so they have SOME capital to continue development. I can hardly fault them for that, and to tell you the truth, I really don't mind because I'm already using the latest versions of a lot of the software that's included with Yellow Dog.

      So you have to wait a couple of weeks to `yup update`* your distro, big deal.

      * yup, or Yellow Dog Update, is a cross-platform CLI package management tool that Terra Soft maintains (similar to Debian's apt-get, but trimmed down).

  • Why? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Moridineas ( 213502 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:32PM (#3286103) Journal
    I really don't get the appeal of Linux on Mac (or PPC more generally). Sure, I can understand running linux on older macs, but for any OSX capable computer, what's the point? I can't think of anything you can do in linux but can't do in OSX, and MANY things you cannot.
    • How about view the source code for the operating system? Can you do that with OS X?
      • Yes. Yes you can. It's called Darwin. Thanks for trolling!

        Besides, source code for source code's sake isn't a good reason in my book. It may be in yours, de gustibus non est disputandem though. I prefer functionality and form over politics and open-source advocacy.

        • Re:Why? (Score:2, Interesting)

          by ichimunki ( 194887 )
          No. You can't. Darwin is not the whole operating system. I also suspect that you don't get the source to any of the compatibility layers that help non-OS-X applications run. It's not a troll any more than your original post was. If you don't value software freedom then fine. But DUH, some of us do.

          So here's something else you can't do with OS X that you can with YDL: copy it to your friends' computers legally.

          As to your "why not x86 then?" post below: DUH again! It's a little thing called dual-booting. Yes, I'd like to have an all free software system, but why not *also* have the best proprietary OS available too?

          And for many YDL users, I suspect YDL came *after* the purchase of the PPC hardware. It sure did in my case. In fact, OS X isn't going to run on my old mac, but with YDL I get to do all the fun stuff like code in Perl or Ruby and run the web browsers that give me control rather than the web designer, I get the email client I like, I get GnuPG, I get emacs, the list goes on and on. The only time I boot to Mac OS is to print or get pix off my digital camera.
    • Because some people want to have choice in how they use their computer. Now, Aqua may have it's fans, but I'm not one of them; I like the more simplistic, straightforward looks of WindowMaker, I feel that the Aqua interface is bloated and ugly. Choice is a good thing - it causes better products all around, this is just another option for the user.
      • So why not go X86 then? The hardware's cheaper, and by not using the OS for which the mac hardware is intended, you're losing out. Apple's argument has always been that by paying the premium for apple computers, you're paying for the package...by getting rid of the OSX, you're castrating the package.

        Note: I'm not denying your argument...choice is a good thing...but why mac hardware over pc hardware, given price/performance differences is my question.
        • I'm fairly hardware platform agnostic; I'm not choosy, I'll take the hardware that gives the best bang for the buck. I also have occasional runs of brilliant luck in finding near-new products at incredible bargains. As a result, I have come across non-X86 hardware that is a good enough deal that I can't pass it up. However, I am very choosy about my software - I want it to work the way I want it to, which is why I use Linux, I have choice. OSX just doesn't give me the freedom, even though the hardware is pretty decent.
          • I'm not saying I don't agree with you, but can you give a specific example of where OS X does not work the way you want it to? Just curious...

    • > I can't think of anything you can do in linux but can't do in OSX

      1.) Linux-specific development research
      2.) Wireless security & research software
    • Linux actually works pretty well on new world Macs. I use it on an iBook2 500 mhz. Everything works for me (I don't use exotic hardware), and for anything not supported I simply boot up Mac-on-Linux. Want to look at something in Quicktime, for instance? Mac on Linux will do that just fine, with sound and all. I originally bought the iBook to use with OSX but I simply can't use it: it's too slow and I miss Linux apps (which with some work you can get to run on OSX--Fink works nicely, but it doesn't do KDE). Linux is so fast on that iBook--it really shows the promise of the technology. OSX is like computing through molasses--and don't even try to use Classic mode for anything complicated. Yes I can do X forwarding on OSX but it works SO much better under Linux. For browsers Mozilla is nice and Opera actually has a Linux PPC version as well. And btw I use a much customized and updated Yellow Dog 2.0 on this machine and can't complain too much--most everything worked out of the box. YDL does need to do MUCH better testing, but overall it's not a bad distro for the iBook2. And of course there's just the cool factor of the iBook running Linux (I use Liquid KDE, it looks beautiful on the bright monitor), if nothing else...
    • Why is this inane question posed every time an article about Linux on the PPC is posted?


      Likely answers to the original question are:

      1. Macintosh users are getting just as tired of Apple's corporate crap as Intel users are of Microsoft's. Despite Apple's warm and fuzzy PR persona, the only difference between it and Microsoft is annual revenue. Steve Jobs would trade places with Bill Gates in a heartbeat.

      2. Large and important chunks of OS X are, and forever will be, proprietary, which means that end-users are, and forever will be, dependent on Apple for key OS functionality (or the lack thereof).

      3. OS X is still a dog, albeit with fewer fleas.

      4. More than one of something is a good thing.

      5. Freedom from choice isn't really freedom.

      6. Assuming that there are indeed things that OS X can do that Linux can't, those things aren't of sufficent value to end-users to justify the incremental cost and loss of control.

      7. On a personal note, I got tired of waiting a decade for a new OS from Apple, only to be milked for two hundred bones for a retread that wasn't, and still isn't, ready for prime-time.

      • I don't believe it's an inane question, because I STILL don't understand the answer.

        >1. Macintosh users are getting just as tired of >Apple's corporate crap as Intel users are of >Microsoft's. Despite Apple's warm and fuzzy PR >persona, the only difference between it and >Microsoft is annual revenue. Steve Jobs would >trade places with Bill Gates in a heartbeat.

        Translation: Politics affect ease of use. Ok...

        >2. Large and important chunks of OS X are, and >forever will be, proprietary, which means that >end-users are, and forever will be, dependent on >Apple for key OS functionality (or the lack >thereof).

        A partially valid criticism..on the other hand, Linux hardware support isn't nearly as good as windows (in terms of the x86 platform), so why not go to windows if what you want is the ultimate in compatibility?

        >3. OS X is still a dog, albeit with fewer fleas.
        >
        >4. More than one of something is a good thing.
        >
        >5. Freedom from choice isn't really freedom.

        I'm somehow translating seemingly noble philosophical ideals into computer software.

        >6. Assuming that there are indeed things that OS >X can do that Linux can't, those things aren't >of sufficent value to end-users to justify the >incremental cost and loss of control.

        Such as QuarkXPress, Itunes, Photoshop, Digital camera integration, best user interface, CONSISTENT user interface, higher game availability, etc.

        >7. On a personal note, I got tired of waiting a >decade for a new OS from Apple, only to be >milked for two hundred bones for a retread that >wasn't, and still isn't, ready for prime-time.

        That seems somewhat churlish of you...I don't really see how it's not ready for primetime either.
    • Because I don't like to spend my income on new computer equipment (I'd rather devote disposable income to photography and music). Because my 333 G3 beats the hell out of my 333 P2. Because I like the hardware. Because OS X is a dog on my machine.

    • Re:Why? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 )
      I can't think of anything you can do in linux but can't do in OSX, and MANY things you cannot.

      Use Linux?

      Look, you may think OS X is the perfect OS and given a free copy the whole world would instantly convert, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to break it to you - that wouldn't happen. There'd be people who would tell you to get lost

      I'd do it for personal beliefs (more below). Others don't like Aqua, don't like the Apple way. Whatever.

      I, personally, believe the OS should be open. The OS together with the hardware are absolutely key to computing. Everything else revolves around them, which is why I believe they should be open. Now don't get me wrong, I'm no zealot, I don't give a monkeys ass about the applications on top. That can be as closed or as open as you like, suits me fine either way. I don't mind paying for software. But if one organisation controls the OS then you're heading for trouble, I mean look at Microsoft. I don't believe Apple would be any different in their shoes. And worse, Apple control the hardware too!

      Once again, don't get me wrong. Apple produce lovely hardware, and lovely software. I'm willing to pay for those things, but only if I know they are open. Macs aren't standard hardware, though they are getting that way, they basically are made up of components that are standardised throughout the world. And OS X is like the Mac itself, sorta open.

      But for me, sorta open isn't good enough. I think the OS should be like the web - governed but not chained to a neutral independant standards organisation like the W3C. Nothing like that exists .... yet

      • My point is, when buying a mac, Apple's argument has always been that you're buy a package...software and hardware and design all molded together in one package...thus the higher price. If you take away the OS, you're taking away a HUGE part of that...so if you want to run linux, why not spend 1/2 as much and get a much faster x86 machine?
        • You have a good point, and I happen to agree with you. There will always be some people who go against the grain (twice in this instance... one for buying an apple, another for running linux on it).

          Being both an AMD box and an Apple laptop owner, I like both. I use my AMD athlon as my home computer, and my apple as my laptop. on my home station, I use mandrake, on my laptop, strictly OS X.

          OS X is not perfect, but I like it a lot. THe thing I really love is that I can run an X client on it so I can run X apps remotely on my laptop at work. The rest of the crap I do is through a terminal, so OS X is just fine, thank you.

          OS X has many advantages: power management, better graphics, the modem works, more software, better hardware support.... everything just works.

          and, you are right in that it is a package you are buying. some people just like to change things to their liking for philisophical or other reasons.... I personally am not up to that much work. I love linux on x86 hardware, but when I buy a Mac, I buy if for the lovely hardware and the good software and multimedia capabilites. Some people just love to tweak! good for them, i say, because if you have a choice in which OS you cna run on any given hardware, that is good for everyone.

    • Do you think Linux users would jump ship over to OS X if it where available for x86. I don't think so. We know our great and stable systems. OS X might be shiny but it isn't anyway near proven.

      There are alot of us who would never code for a properiaty windowing system if it wasn't necesarry. Why should we run X on darwin when we already got Linux?
    • Linux feels a lot faster than X on my 600mHz G3 iBook. That's why. Aqua crawls.

  • What's the point of Linux on an iMac? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    imaclinux.net is running a review on Yellow Dog Linux 2.2. They could manage to run it on the iBook.

    umm... considering the limited hardwares that they need to support, shouldn't it be not too hard to be able to on all the new hardwares?

    YDG 2.2 is a great distro with KDE 2.2.2, Gnome 1.4, kernel 2.4.18 and Xfree86 4.2.0.

    Shouldn't Gnome, KDE, and other softwares for Linux run fine on OSX? In other words, wouldn't putting effort into Linux application compatibility on OSX be more worthwile?

    BTW, I'm also curious as to how Linux apps run on OSX since I'm considering a new computer purchase. Anyone know? Apple's phone number only directs me to tech support for people who already own a mac, which are not for those who are just curious.

    • I'm also curious as to how Linux apps run on OSX since I'm considering a new computer purchase.

      Standard Linux binaries will not run on OS X, because Linux binaries assume x86, X and some WM. However, OS X really is a Unix, so installing X, hacking and a compile should work. /. types are already doing this and OS X binaries are starting to appear.

      However, you may find you don't want to run standard Linux apps after your OS X purchase. Very nice commercial apps already exist for OS X, and the shareware community is mature and strong. And some of the best Unix apps have already been ported to use Apple APIs.

    • Take a look at the Fink project [sf.net].

      They're going a great job of porting a whole bunch of apps across to OS X, and they use apt too!

  • I use a PowerPC (Score:4, Interesting)

    by SerpentMage ( 13390 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:43PM (#3286174)
    I use my Powerbook and have to say that yes it is nice, but no it is not nice.

    It is nice in the sense that the notebook works well. But it is a major headache to get software to work.

    While some folks may say, it is LINUX and therefore it will work, that is a figment of the imagination.

    Firstly when using closed software people only say Linux. When I mention PowerPC they say no problem if it is Linux it works. But then I mention it is not Intel and they say "oh, sorry, but it works on Intel".

    Secondly when using open source many people do not setup the ./configure and autoconf properly to take into account a PowerPc platform. Many times I get platform not support or it simply does not compile. Case in point, Anjuta, or PNET. Sure it could be fixed with a bunch of tweaks, but it gets my goat that I need to tweak at all!!!

    The only software that has worked without problem whatsoever are the bigger projects (Apache, Perl, etc) and Java. I am amazed at how well Java moves from Windows, Linux Intel and Linux PowerPC.

    My conclusion is that even Open Source and closed source are as arrogant about non-intel platforms.
    • You should try debian. Debian works very hard to make sure their packages work on all their platforms (which, of course, includes powerpc). This involves seeking out and fixing the endianness/signed char issues that keep packages from being portable. Eventually those patches (in theory, at least) make their way upstream.

      That being said, even on debian, other architectures are in a sense second class, since most of the developers use the i386 platform. This means that packages get autobuilt more slowly on powerpc, for example, but on the whole, it's a great powerpc distro.
    • I think you're a little off-base calling these developers "arrogant." If they don't have a PPC machine to test on, then there will be problems. No big surprise.

      I split my time between MacOS X and intel Linux, and after trying several PPC Linux distros, I've never had any luck getting one to install. It's great that there's PPC Linux, and apparently it works for some people, but personally,

      • If I want to run open-source software and not have any hassles, I run it on Intel Linux.
      • If I want to run open-source software and am willing to put up with some hassles, I can usually get it from Fink and run it in X Windows under MacOS X.

      For me, PPC Linux doesn't really offer any advantages (even assuming I could get it to install!).

  • Debian "Sid" on an ibook... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Scott Ransom ( 6419 ) <`sransom' `at' `nrao.edu'> on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:44PM (#3286181)
    I haven't tried the new Yellow Dog, but a couple weeks ago I installed Debian unstable (closely following Branden Robinson's instructions [debian.org]) along with Benjamin Herrenschmidts 2.4.18 kernel [ppckernel.org] on my new ibook (600MHz, 384MB, CD-RW/DVD-ROM, Airport wireless) and am extremely impressed about how everything works (all except the modem - which I never use anyways). DVDs (with xine), CD burning, wireless, sound, hardware accelerated 3D, built in ethernet, power management -- all for ~$2000 US. And Linux seems way more snappy than OSX. This is my first Mac, but if they work this well with Linux in the future, it may not be my last...
  • One of the touted benefits of Linux is that it runs nicely on an old machine so that the machine doesnt need to see a landfill.
    Well in the Mac side of things Linux only seems to run on the latest and greatest. I have several PPC 601, 603e machines that Linux just will not run on, or at least a decent disto. MkLinux doesnt count. With YellowDog and LinuxPPC I just dont see the point if one needs a G3 or better.
    If I had a Ibook, G4 Powerbook, etc... I think OS X would be a lot better than these RedHat ported to PPC *nixes.
    • Every PPC model from 4400-9600 is officially supported. I'm running YDL on a 6500/250. Installation was a breeze, even with using my TV as a monitor in video safe mode. It was certainly no harder than RH. Now that its installed and *RUNNING* I get to figure out how to use the damned thing, but getting it up was cake, even for a linux newbie like me
  • I've been using YDL on a G3 (Beige) for some 2 years. It's great as a server, but not-so-swell as a desktop solution. Outside of powe routages that exceed the UPS battery, it almost NEVER goes down. Runs as a webserver, mail server, AFP/AppleShare server, SAMBA, et. al. Over 100 users. init level 3 text log in is all I need. However, the desktop environment isn't nearly as robust and flexible as the Intel distros. In short: Use the right tool for the right job. If you want to use linux as a desktop solution, use Intel hardware--it's alot cheaper and supported globally. If you're looking for a rock-solid server that takes advantage of the PPC, YDL is the most stable linux server I've every seen. ...just my 2 cents... catdevnull > stdout
  • Are there any good linux distros that work on older PPC hardware?

    There were a couple of posts complaining that PPC distros only run on the latest and greatest stuff.

    Are there any PPC Linux distros that break this mould.

    Inquiring minds and all that stuff...

    I got a friend with an old mac that thinks its time to try linux.

    ________________________________________________ __
  • Does anyone know of a Linux or *BSD distribution that'll run on my PowerBook 1400?
    I have heard that MkLinux will do so (relying on the serial port for networking, or something), but I'd really prefer something that lets me use external SCSI devices, as I only have the floppy drive Expansion Bay unit.
  • A lot of people on here seem to think that Linux for the Mac is only for older machines. Not true.

    I've got YDL 2.1 running on a 7200/120 at home - the first PPC mac with PCI slots. Not a new beast by any means. Hell, the BSDs don't even support PPC machines this old.

    And I'm looking at installing it on a 6500 as well, which isn't exactly showroom-fresh.

    Hopefully this will stem some of the "just run OS X" tide...

    --saint
  • I have a Quadra 660 AV sitting in the closet collecting dust. I was wondering if anyone knew of a linux distro for an 040 mac and could point me in the right direction. I would like to try it on this box if that is possible, or is this just a really stupid idea. I seem to recall that this machine has a 500 meg HD (somewhere round that, and believe me, I thought that was huge after upgrading from a 40 meg HD on my LC) and no cd rom, but i think it has ethernet built in to dl anything.
    • I have a Quadra 660 AV sitting in the closet collecting dust. I was wondering if anyone knew of a linux distro for an 040 mac and could point me in the right direction.

      Debian would be a good choice. I ran it briefly on a Quadra, and the performance was pretty good for a machine of that era.

      So far as I know, they're the only native-English distro for m68k.

      (You might want to read this page [roadflares.org] as well -- it's a little summary I wrote for installing another OS on a Mac with limited disk space.)

      --saint

  • My experience: great support (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Klox ( 29985 ) <`ten.xolk' `ta' `1w.ttam'> on Thursday April 04, 2002 @04:38PM (#3286656)
    I received my YDL [yellowdoglinux.com] 2.2 CDs the same day this was last referenced on Slashdot [slashdot.org] and posted a rant [slashdot.org] about the problems I had installing it on a brand new Power Mac G4. The next day, one of their support guys e-mailed me. After a couple of e-mails, I was up and running.

    I was really impressed with Terra Soft's [terrasoftsolutions.com] support for scanning Slashdot for comments by little whiners like myself and actually giving me a hand. I had mad no effort to understand the problem when I posted my rant but yet this guy went out of his way to help me. I'm certainly not that forgiving to my customers, even though they've paid for my help.

    After resolving my install problem, I've been very happy with the distro. I'm planning on using this for the basis for future development at my company.

    Kudos to Terra Soft!
  • YD 2.1 also works in modern iBook's (aka ibooks2). And teh Red Carpet upgrades from Ximian are greats, I've almost a "Sid" in my iBook with YD + RedCarpet.

    No need to run fluky yup again...

  • NotSlash [crystalorb.net] scooped Slashdot again [crystalorb.net].
  • I am getting a blue G3 to play with, it will probably never see X and will mostly do some number crunching and web serving - what's the best distro to go with? As I understand it, the major ones for PPC right now are YDL and Mandrake (and I believe RedHat is coming out with something) - anyone have any comparative experiences on the non-desktop side of things?
  • I don't own a mac of any kind though an ibook is on the list of things to get so linux ppc distros are of some interest. I've heard of YDL for some time now and I have to say I'm rather disappointed. There aren't that many macs they need to test on. unlike the pc world the hardware for a mac is mostly unchanging from one machine to the next. why can't they get something as simple as the proper sound output driver correct?

    no offense, I'm not distro maintainer but that just seems like an easy one.

  • MacOSX vs. YDL (Score:4, Interesting)

    by tqbf ( 59350 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @07:08PM (#3287625) Homepage
    YDL is interesting because, if your day-to-day operating system is Linux, you cannot do better than a TiBook running Yellow Dog. There simply is no hardware in the X86 world that is comparable (wide screen display, slim, lightweight, with adequate processing power).

    I used YDL when I first got my TiBook. I had to, because I needed 802.11 support and Apple didn't support Orinoco. I switched because I needed Firewire more than I needed Orinoco. My experiences:

    YDL: Works as well as any mainstream Linux distribution. Yup works, by some definition of "works". Better still, Ximian's stuff builds from SRPMS, and Ximian now explicitly supports them with binaries. Not hard to get current, buildable kernel source, and FreeSWAN works nicely for IPsec. The (major) negative is that Firewire support blows, and it is pointless to buy hard drives that don't come in Firewire enclosures. When I left YDL, SBP2 drivers didn't work at all. The (minor) negative is that companies don't distribute closed-source binaries for YDL, and they do for X86 Linux.

    OSX 10.1: A dream; xterms, xemacs, and Adobe Illustrator on the same screen. Rootless XFree86, transparent anything, beautiful user interface, antialiasing. It's faster than Linux for applications and slower for tools. The one (big) negative is that there is no credible IPsec or VPN support. A minor negative is that you can't keep current with BOTH the dev kernel AND Apple's updates.

    I'm on OSX 10.1.3 now and I'm not looking back. However, I can understand why people want PPC Linux, if they already simply use Linux for everything and want good portable environments. It's good to hear that YDL continues to move forward.

  • why is this okay? (Score:3, Informative)

    by jchristopher ( 198929 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @08:36PM (#3288047)
    The article basically says that YDL 2.2 is "okay", with quite a few quirks, their configuration tools crash, etc. Why is this considered "acceptable"? Is it wrong to expect more out of what is supposedly a "maintenance release" - shouldn't they have some stuff ironed out by now?

    I have $100 just waiting to be donated to the first PPC Linux team that produces something that works properly on my iBook. Seriously. No one seems to want it.

    In Yellow Dog 2.1, I followed their Airport setup instructions to the letter, but it does not work. Their "YUP" update tool does not work. Sound did not work. From the way the article reads, it sounds like 2.2 is more of the same, so why bother?

    I'm also following the Mandrake 8.2 PPC beta process with much interest. As far as I can tell, there is ONE GUY - Stewart - working on it. He's doing some great things, but frankly, it's clear that he's overwhelmed. For example, my iBook2 cannot get IPs via DHCP over either the built in ethernet or the wireless inteface. Nobody knows why. Modem works, but only after you tweak the timout values in the dialer to be certain values. How would anyone know that? It should be done by the installer if the installation platform is the iBook!

    I wish that these folks would work on getting the CORE stuff working, and working well, before they start including 2000 packages on the CDs. I can download Apache, MySQL, and 18 text editors later - right now, I need a working network connection!

    The "gold standard", as far as I'm concerned, is RedHat 7.2 on a Dell Inspiron. Everything worked, and I mean EVERYTHING. No tweaking, no kernel upgrade, no command line garbage. Ethernet, video, mouse, keyboard, everything. So that's what I expect, but no PPC vendor has delivered it yet.

    Given the very limited hardware a PPC vendor must support, I just expect it to work. It doesn't.

Slashdot Top Deals

One way to make your old car run better is to look up the price of a new model.

Close