[Ham-Linux] Which Distro/Apps/Apps development software to use?

Sat Feb 14 18:23:44 EST 2009

On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Dr. Gerald N. Johnson <
geraldj at storm.weather.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 17:54 -0700, Bill Anderson wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Dr. Gerald N. Johnson
> > <geraldj at storm.weather.net> wrote:
> >         On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 18:08 -0700, Bill Anderson wrote:
> >         > With your configuration, you have plenty of memory and
> >         plenty of disk.
> >         > I agree with a previous comment that openSuse is an
> >         excellent choice.
> >         > The Debian-based distros also have a good size collection of
> >         ham
> >         > software. Fedora has finally decided to package a lot of ham
> >         software.
> >         > It looks like Fedora 11 is going to have one huge collection
> >         of ham
> >         > software. Debian is slow changing and Fedora is on steroids,
> >         openSuse
> >         > offers a good balance having a large collection of software
> >         and a
> >         > longer life cycle.
> >
> >         On of the problems with the latest big distros is that they
> >         follow the
> >         Mudsoft line demanding the latest hardware and removing
> >         support for
> >         vintage hardware. While puppy and ubuntu may not support the
> >         latest hardware,
> >         but they make a point to work with older hardware and
> >         sometimes that's an
> >         advantage.
> >         >
> >         > Drivers are packed with the kernel, so newer hardware,
> >         especially
> >         > SATA, requires newer releases. Puppy Linux and DSL tend to
> >         run a bit
> >         > behind on the kernel curve, which can create issues with
> >         hardware.
> >
> >         Only if you have the latest in hardware. Its just the opposite
> >         if your
> >         hardware is experienced.
> >         >
> >         > Bill Anderson
> >         > WW7BA
> >         >
> >         73, Jerry, K0CQ
> >
> > I disagree with your conclusions. Except for Third-Party drivers, all
> > drivers are part of the kernel source tree. Even drivers for ancient
> > hardware. However, the out-of-the-box kernel does not compile every
> > driver. These is true for all distributions of Linux, even Puppy Linux
> > and Ubuntu.
>
> Yet I fear those older drivers may not compile because the compiler has
> become a whole lot more strict about source code syntax.
> >
> > All Linux kernels derive from the vanilla kernel at kernel.org. Each
> > distro may have its own modifications to the kernel. If those changes
> > pass muster, they are integrated into the vanilla kernel. Radical
> > changes, like systemtap, took years before the kernel team excepted
> > the changes. When a distro team compiles the kernel for it distro,
> > they determine the kernel configuration and which drivers are compiled
> > and available.
> >
> > I compile a new kernel about once a week for one distro or another to
> > test new features. Some of the kernels are for a Micron that is in the
> > ancient category. When you compile your own kernel, you determine its
> > configuration. For example, the A.25 drivers may not be compiled in
> > the standard kernel, but I add them. I take out drivers that I don't
> > need. The kernel for the Micron is configured to minimize the memory
> > footprint, and optimized for that particular processor.
> >
> > You have given me an idea for my blogs. It is time to show how easy it
> > is to build a kernel. Every distro is a little different, but that is
> > no big deal. Also, I need to mention those drivers that are important
> > to some ham radio software.
>
> Perhaps a noble task, however, I'm not a great fan of compiling linux
> kernal or applications, and that's why I didn't succeed in running Linux
> until SUSE 6 came along and loaded for me. Far too often when I try to
> compile an
> application, I fail because it needs to link in a certain version of a
> dozen other applications or drivers which would be instantly available
> had I an OC3 fiber, but I have a dial up internet connection that works
> at 28K most of the time (one of the costs of living in the country away
> from urban radio and audio noise) and when I find each of those needed
> sources, it calls for another half dozen elements. That leads to the
> same difficulties with portable software as windoze software did decades
> ago with products needing and updating .dll without checking or caring
> for backwards compatibility.
>
> Maybe I'm an old fuddy duddy, but I rather prefer for the computer and
> its OS to work FOR me, not me for it. I've been at this for longer than
> Linus, my first Fortran course was in the fall of 1966. By 1975 I had
> built the first computer for elementary school student use in Iowa. A
> Z80 box that hasn't broken yet and some are working on getting it saved
> in the Iowa Historical Museum. After that I did another for a weather
> client where the Z80 addressed half a megabyte of ram with only 16 bits
> of address. That one had 40 hours of down time in 18 years of 24/7
> operation. Both those computers had no OS, just a system monitor that I
> hand assembled many times to get past the manufacturer's bugs and to do
> the software task assigned them. Somewhere along the way I built a CP/M
> system (still here) where I had to write and assemble the BIOS to make
> CP/M run. I don't want to do that any more. Especially for ham
> applications. My work for the last 20 years has been software (in C) for
> weather display and analysis (much of the products can be seen at
> www.weather.net though my software only supplied the weather database
> and the animated weather graphics  it didn't create the HTML) running in
> OS/2. After working all day at that, its NOT relaxing to spend the
> evening trying to compile ham software for linux.
>
> For Y2K, I fixed DOS and OS/2 programs with only the executable, no
> source code. So I DO know programming.
>
> Back in the Z80 days, I didn't need an assembler, I could write object
> code as fast as I could write source code, though I didn't figure
> relative jumps in my head, but my trusty base 16 abacus took care of
> those. The HP16 hadn't been invented yet. I hopefully have forgotten
> those Z80 details but I fear that looking at Z80 assembler compiled code
> would bring them back.
>
> So I want working distros, not distros I have to make work starting with
> old driver source that fails modern syntax requirements and that is
> dependent on a particular version of the C compiler.
> >
> > Bill Anderson
> > WW7BA
> >
> >
>

The building of the kernel has come a long way since the early days of
Linux. All the drivers in the kernel compile. The difference is that
distro's like Puppy do some of the work for you. You still just get average
performance, because is is compiled for a generic processor category.

As old goes, I built a vacuum-tube calculator for a high school project back
in '63. Tubes were cheaper than transistors. I actually got my ham license
back in 1957 as KN7JCH. At 64, I still tinker, whether it be with hardware
or software. It is why I love Linux.

Bill Anderson
WW7BA

>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ham-Linux mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-linux
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Ham-Linux at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

-- 
Bill Anderson
WW7BA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/ham-linux/attachments/20090214/475b6ec2/attachment.html 