Well, out RHL migration is going well and one of the surprise successes has been installing Check Point Secure Platform. This is a stripped-down recompiled and hardened Red Hat (I think) OS designed specifically for running Check Point products on. It installs in under 10 minutes (including configuring by our Network & Security Administrator) and rocks. Try it if you're a Check Point site - it's pretty fantastic.
Friday, November 21, 2003
Thursday, November 13, 2003
Fedora Core 1 and RHEL ES 3
Ugraded both of my home machines to Fedora Core without a hitch. Nice, real nice.
Also installed our first two RHEL ES 3 boxen at work. Slick. OK it would really, really have been nice for Red Hat to have offered an upgrade path from RHL 7.x to RHEL 3, but the lazy bastards didn't do so. C'est la vie.
Also installed our first two RHEL ES 3 boxen at work. Slick. OK it would really, really have been nice for Red Hat to have offered an upgrade path from RHL 7.x to RHEL 3, but the lazy bastards didn't do so. C'est la vie.
Monday, November 10, 2003
Fedora Core 1
Red Hat have released Fedora Core 1 which, lets face it, is a really sh*t name but one I guess we're stuck with.
So what's it like? Pretty tasty. OK, so I spoiled my surprise by using the betas, but I am impressed. Seriously. This is one nicely polished desktop operating environment. This is as good as Ximian Desktop 2 and far superior to XP.
Another thing: no longer will I have users complaining that we've run out of RHN licences thanks to the yum and apt support in up2date. Nice one Red Hat, nice one.
Side note: the Fedora Core 1 (Yarrow) CDs burned fine under Nero5, but RHEL ES 3 CDs fail big time. Weird.
Originally puiblished on 15:56 Monday 10 November 2003
So what's it like? Pretty tasty. OK, so I spoiled my surprise by using the betas, but I am impressed. Seriously. This is one nicely polished desktop operating environment. This is as good as Ximian Desktop 2 and far superior to XP.
Another thing: no longer will I have users complaining that we've run out of RHN licences thanks to the yum and apt support in up2date. Nice one Red Hat, nice one.
Side note: the Fedora Core 1 (Yarrow) CDs burned fine under Nero5, but RHEL ES 3 CDs fail big time. Weird.
Originally puiblished on 15:56 Monday 10 November 2003
Checkpoint training
Long time no write.
So the week before last I went on a "Check Point FW 1 NG FP4 with Application Intelligence" (catchy name guys!) training course (Management II). This was the first time I've ever been on a formal technical training course, and my opinion is mixed.
The instructor seemed to spend the same amount of time explaining the bleeding obvious as she did explaining/glossing over more advanced concepts. While she certainly knew her stuff, if asked a question that was just outside of the sylabus then she just didn't know.
I assume she had some practical experience, but probably only in several fixed scenarios. The real world was not allowed to be mixed dangerously with static knowledge set.
On another note, how long will it be before an open source firewall has a GUI as usable as FW1's? When that happens (2-5 years?) then I think we'll see Check Point start to go the way of proprietary UNIXen.
Originally published on 14:34 Monday 10 November 2003
So the week before last I went on a "Check Point FW 1 NG FP4 with Application Intelligence" (catchy name guys!) training course (Management II). This was the first time I've ever been on a formal technical training course, and my opinion is mixed.
The instructor seemed to spend the same amount of time explaining the bleeding obvious as she did explaining/glossing over more advanced concepts. While she certainly knew her stuff, if asked a question that was just outside of the sylabus then she just didn't know.
I assume she had some practical experience, but probably only in several fixed scenarios. The real world was not allowed to be mixed dangerously with static knowledge set.
On another note, how long will it be before an open source firewall has a GUI as usable as FW1's? When that happens (2-5 years?) then I think we'll see Check Point start to go the way of proprietary UNIXen.
Originally published on 14:34 Monday 10 November 2003
Tuesday, October 28, 2003
Hauppauge WinTV Nova-T (DVB-T)
In a break from our regular program (prism54 and linux) I spent a little while playing with my Hauppauge WinTV Nova-T card in my main machine, tom.
I occurred to me that the Red Hat kernel might be causing me some problems (I couldn't even compile linux-dvb...). So I copied vanilla 2.4.22 from the laptop (sylvester) to tom (via ethernet, because the wireless network isn't working). Guess what? Compiled and installed the dvb modules first time.
I went to bed a smug happy git.
I occurred to me that the Red Hat kernel might be causing me some problems (I couldn't even compile linux-dvb...). So I copied vanilla 2.4.22 from the laptop (sylvester) to tom (via ethernet, because the wireless network isn't working). Guess what? Compiled and installed the dvb modules first time.
I went to bed a smug happy git.
prism54.org
Things look up for my network card as the groovy hackers involved have made some headway in integrating the two different card types, renamed the module and purchased their own domain name (the important bit !)
Now prism54.org is the place to go for all things prism54 related...
Loving your work folks.
Now prism54.org is the place to go for all things prism54 related...
Loving your work folks.
A gratuitous waste of space and time
Richard Dzien has pointed out that no-one has ever or will ever read this and that its even more boring than his journal/blog. True.
Saturday, October 25, 2003
Wireless closer
It looks as though I'm close. The card is detected and iwconfig once showed that it had seen the AP. Apparently I've got to play with the setoid command. (Looks like a low-level, dirty hack, but it gets your card working).
All this, so I can have 54Mb arount the house (and still 56k to the outside world!)
All this, so I can have 54Mb arount the house (and still 56k to the outside world!)
Thursday, October 23, 2003
Wireless update 2003
On Tuesday afternoon I rebuilt a stock 2.4.22 kernel (+ ISL3890-0.1.0 patch, obviously) with /usr/bin/gcc32 and it can see the card fine, but I wasn't willing to take my laptop home on the bus, so it'll have to wait until tonight to get some proper testing.
At least with Linux, when something fails you can dig around and get it working. With XP (best desktop version of Windows or "Glorified service pack"[1] depending on your opinion) you're just plain f*cked.
[1] As my colleague Richard Dzien put it
At least with Linux, when something fails you can dig around and get it working. With XP (best desktop version of Windows or "Glorified service pack"[1] depending on your opinion) you're just plain f*cked.
[1] As my colleague Richard Dzien put it
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
Wireless shmireless
A bit quick off the mark there.
The card will not work under XP (despite the fact it is meant to). In fact XP seems a bit shit with respect to adding hardware. (The Hauppauge Win Nova-T card I have at home doesn't work under XP either).
As for Linux - I have been a miserable failure in getting this working with Red Hat's Fedora kernel. Bugger.
The card will not work under XP (despite the fact it is meant to). In fact XP seems a bit shit with respect to adding hardware. (The Hauppauge Win Nova-T card I have at home doesn't work under XP either).
As for Linux - I have been a miserable failure in getting this working with Red Hat's Fedora kernel. Bugger.
Friday, October 17, 2003
Wireless update
dabs rock! ParcelForce delivered the goods within 17 hours of my order. Some other online retailers never manage such a quick turn around.
Setting up the WG602 access point was a piece of cake. I already have a DHCP server (and BIND) on my main machine at home (tom) so I just added the MAC address to the DHCP server and, hey presto, web access to the router. All totally configurable from Mozilla. Excellent - it took under 20 minutes to secure the AP.
The PC card (WG511) installed seamlessly under Windows 2000 Server on my laptop (sylvester) and again once I (finally) overwrote that with Windows XP Pro.
Under Linux (Fedora 0.95) lspci recognises it as a D-Link DWL-g650 (which has the same chipset). In fact a quick google shows that these dudes have drivers and firmware for this card. Let's see if it works.
Setting up the WG602 access point was a piece of cake. I already have a DHCP server (and BIND) on my main machine at home (tom) so I just added the MAC address to the DHCP server and, hey presto, web access to the router. All totally configurable from Mozilla. Excellent - it took under 20 minutes to secure the AP.
The PC card (WG511) installed seamlessly under Windows 2000 Server on my laptop (sylvester) and again once I (finally) overwrote that with Windows XP Pro.
Under Linux (Fedora 0.95) lspci recognises it as a D-Link DWL-g650 (which has the same chipset). In fact a quick google shows that these dudes have drivers and firmware for this card. Let's see if it works.
Thursday, October 16, 2003
Wireless
So I decided to waste some more money and splash out on some (cheap) wireless kit. Why? You may well ask as I only have (and thanks to the total inadequacy of BT and the cable providers, only can have) a 56k analog line at home.
The reason? So I can surf when Debbie is watching something I don't like on the TV, or do the shopping at Tesco without buggering off upstairs.
I ordered a Netgear WG511 card (rumoured to work under Linux) and their WG602 access point from dabs. Fingers crossed it'll all work.
It's a shame that only Apple make a Wireless Access Point with a built in modem, and that it costs a whopping 180! (Over twice as much as the Netgear). So I'll have to have the upstairs PC acting as a router (like I do on the Ethernet network at home).
The reason? So I can surf when Debbie is watching something I don't like on the TV, or do the shopping at Tesco without buggering off upstairs.
I ordered a Netgear WG511 card (rumoured to work under Linux) and their WG602 access point from dabs. Fingers crossed it'll all work.
It's a shame that only Apple make a Wireless Access Point with a built in modem, and that it costs a whopping 180! (Over twice as much as the Netgear). So I'll have to have the upstairs PC acting as a router (like I do on the Ethernet network at home).
Fedora 0.95 doesn't use RHN
PBKAC Alert! Disregard my previous comment about RHN and 0.95. This comment on the fedora-test-list says that you just use the yum channel.
An advantage to that is that you can get updates from your favourite mirror (e.g. mirror.ac.uk). Cool!
An advantage to that is that you can get updates from your favourite mirror (e.g. mirror.ac.uk). Cool!
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
Fedora Core 0.95 / RHN / up2date amusement
The new up2date 4.1.5 in the latest Severn beta updates allows you to talk to apt and yum repositories which is really cool.
More amusing is that once you've updated the redhat-release RPM you can't access RHN via up2date anymore as it (currently) doesn't recognise 0.95 as a valid version number! Fairly amusing, and I'm sure I'll be able to connect tomorrow.
More amusing is that once you've updated the redhat-release RPM you can't access RHN via up2date anymore as it (currently) doesn't recognise 0.95 as a valid version number! Fairly amusing, and I'm sure I'll be able to connect tomorrow.
XHTML
Updated my own website to XHTML 1.0 Strict from HTML 4.0 Strict. Pretty painless. Although obviously the site is still pretty ugly, difficult to navigate and ultimately pointless.
Trying to do the same at work to a site I wrote 5 years ago is a bit more painful, but I expect I'll get there.
I used Zeldman's Designing With Web Standards book to learn about XHTML.
Personally, I think the book contains too much talk and not enough reference material, but it's not so much aimed as standards zealots like myself but other so-called "Web professionals" who write web-sites that only IE can parse. Still, due to the chatty, backgroundy-nature of the book it does explain some of the harder parts in great detail, where a reference manual might have just confused me.
Trying to do the same at work to a site I wrote 5 years ago is a bit more painful, but I expect I'll get there.
I used Zeldman's Designing With Web Standards book to learn about XHTML.
Personally, I think the book contains too much talk and not enough reference material, but it's not so much aimed as standards zealots like myself but other so-called "Web professionals" who write web-sites that only IE can parse. Still, due to the chatty, backgroundy-nature of the book it does explain some of the harder parts in great detail, where a reference manual might have just confused me.
Friday, September 26, 2003
Fedora Core 0.94
Following on from yesterday's blog entry...
Today, I've taken my machine up to Fedora Core 0.94. /etc/redhat-release states that this version is:
Fedora Core release 0.94 (Severn)
Owned by the confusingly named RPM:
redhat-release-0.94-2
Today, I've taken my machine up to Fedora Core 0.94. /etc/redhat-release states that this version is:
Fedora Core release 0.94 (Severn)
Owned by the confusingly named RPM:
redhat-release-0.94-2
Desktop "wars"
As an update, I finally decided to upgrade my desktop at work from RH9/xd2 to RH9.0.93/whatever-they-call-it-today.
Tuesday, September 23, 2003
RHLP / Fedora Project 9.0.93 Update
First thing to note: RHLP has changed its name to Fedora Project and has a nice looking web-site. Moreover, they've merged RHLP with the excellent Fedora Linux who always provided up-to-date cutting edge RPMs for RHL. This is an amazing move - most companies do not go "hey that guy is doing our job better than us, let's merge!" they usually have a NIH (not invented here) mentallity, which I'm very pleased to see that Red Hat does not have.
For those interested (and very few are, I suspect) I updated sylvester (my laptop) from Fedora 9.0.93 to err confusingly the same thing: RHLP 9.0.93 via the following channel on RHN: "Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates".
Those Red Hat people (yes, standing on the shoulders of giants, I know) are making good. This is clearly a good step up from RHL 9 and GNOME 2.4 feels "warm and cozy". And while I can't say exactly what's so much better than the previous 9.0.93 (except epiphany 1.0.0 is a lot better) I can say that, subjectively, it is better. So there.
For those interested (and very few are, I suspect) I updated sylvester (my laptop) from Fedora 9.0.93 to err confusingly the same thing: RHLP 9.0.93 via the following channel on RHN: "Red Hat Linux (Severn) 9.0.93 - Beta Updates".
Those Red Hat people (yes, standing on the shoulders of giants, I know) are making good. This is clearly a good step up from RHL 9 and GNOME 2.4 feels "warm and cozy". And while I can't say exactly what's so much better than the previous 9.0.93 (except epiphany 1.0.0 is a lot better) I can say that, subjectively, it is better. So there.
Tuesday, September 02, 2003
Epiphany v. Galeon
Aha. I have found out the history between Galeon and Epiphany. (I mentioned before that I did not know what was up).
The Galeon team have put a polite, unbiased story up explaining all. Kudos to them for this explanation. Kudos to both teams for their efforts in trying to build a better browser for GNOME.
The Galeon team have put a polite, unbiased story up explaining all. Kudos to them for this explanation. Kudos to both teams for their efforts in trying to build a better browser for GNOME.
Monday, August 04, 2003
64-bit
So AMD are almost ready to ship desktop 64bit procs and in a few months Intel will too.
Now assuming a decent compiler (and no legacy apps to run at vaying speeds) what advantage will this bring the consumer in the short term?
I'm not confident that there will be any. I seem to remember that when XEmacs was first ported to 64 bit and Hrjove Niksic benchmarked the two together the 64-bit version was fractionally slower except when performing some extreme, atypical applications involing a lot of integer criunching.
So perhaps 64-bits on your desktop will mean better eye-candy. Perhaps things people previously installed SQL servers for will be performable through your spreadsheet or MS-Access (and similar). Perhaps ripping and converting multimedia will faster (if we're allowed to... :-).
Maybe it's not the apps that will really benefit but the OS and that will make us all happy. But did we see such a speedup when Solaris went 64 bit? Nope. Irix? Nope. On the otherhand, maybe moving to 64 bits gave us the advantages of XFS (now available on 32-bit Linux), UFS Logging (also available on 32-bit Solaris 7+ for SPARC and x86) so that's a big fat "nope", too.
As you can tell, I'm more than a bit confused. Can someone tell me why we need 64-bit desktops when all the evidence and experience we've had have shown otherwise?
Now assuming a decent compiler (and no legacy apps to run at vaying speeds) what advantage will this bring the consumer in the short term?
I'm not confident that there will be any. I seem to remember that when XEmacs was first ported to 64 bit and Hrjove Niksic benchmarked the two together the 64-bit version was fractionally slower except when performing some extreme, atypical applications involing a lot of integer criunching.
So perhaps 64-bits on your desktop will mean better eye-candy. Perhaps things people previously installed SQL servers for will be performable through your spreadsheet or MS-Access (and similar). Perhaps ripping and converting multimedia will faster (if we're allowed to... :-).
Maybe it's not the apps that will really benefit but the OS and that will make us all happy. But did we see such a speedup when Solaris went 64 bit? Nope. Irix? Nope. On the otherhand, maybe moving to 64 bits gave us the advantages of XFS (now available on 32-bit Linux), UFS Logging (also available on 32-bit Solaris 7+ for SPARC and x86) so that's a big fat "nope", too.
As you can tell, I'm more than a bit confused. Can someone tell me why we need 64-bit desktops when all the evidence and experience we've had have shown otherwise?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)