Linus runs his own distro when I seen him last year, and Richard uses his own I believe, only met him once though. Ubuntu=/=debian. I was talking about Ubuntu being locked down, not debian. Still locked down, linux is just a shell pretty much.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Mike Bean <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:beandaemon@gmail.com">beandaemon@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
OK! Granted, the notion that things are locked down seemed a little counter intuitive. To my mind, the most you could really accuse canonical of is heavy handed marketing. If it's truly locked down, where are all the spins coming from? How many distros are ubuntu runoffs? Besides, I try to follow listen to FOSS news to some degree, and I'm fairly confident that if anyone ever knocked on canonical's door, asked for the source code, and was told no, there'd be allegations of them violating GPL on slashdot in less then an hour.<div>
<div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 12:30 AM, CP Constantine <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:conrad@1211.net" target="_blank">conrad@1211.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>On 4/30/2011 2:17 AM, Mike Bean wrote:<br>
> I'd be curious to hear more about that if perhaps we could take the<br>
> discussion of the grid. (It isn't my intention to sidetrack the thread,<br>
> I just have a hard time imagining that distro-slamming could be a huge<br>
> problem with people applying for linux jobs, I'd be curious to hear<br>
> about it.)<br>
<br>
</div>not much to talk about really, linux is just a kernel, the rest is<br>
userspace, and nothing is written in stone. If you don't understand<br>
that, you likely don't understand the underlying mechanics of LD.so<br>
loading, init sequences, etc, that you're gonna lack proper linux<br>
troubleshooting skills.<br>
<br>
Imagine if a windows admin told you "yeah, I can't work on systems that<br>
have office installed! screws up too much stuff!"<br>
<br>
Linux is Linux is Linux. even accepted standards such as /usr, /etc,<br>
/lib are purely there because people agree upon them. you could build<br>
(from source) a linux system that used your own completely bizarre<br>
filesystem structure, and... it would work.<br>
<br>
So, why do I think it's a negative mark? because good sysadmins solve<br>
problems, they don't introduce artificial ones.<br>
<br>
(and I personally dislike RedHat-derivatives default setup a lot, it<br>
doesn't stop me making anything I need to work on them, work. I got<br>
started with linux kernel 0.97.. at this point, there really isn't much<br>
difference between any distro for me... remember the old Unix maxim -<br>
"Everything is a file" - once you accept that, the rest is easy).<br>
<div><div></div><div><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
clue mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:clue@cluedenver.org" target="_blank">clue@cluedenver.org</a><br>
<a href="http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue" target="_blank">http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
clue mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:clue@cluedenver.org">clue@cluedenver.org</a><br>
<a href="http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue" target="_blank">http://cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue</a><br></blockquote></div><br>