Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends


		   Linux Activists Mailing List Archives

From: u9030062@golum.riv.csu.edu.au ("Ronald Ku")
Subject: Which is better for novice??? SLS or MCC-INTERIM!!!
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 06:30:05 GMT

Dear Linus,

        For a novice of linux like me, I am confused by SLS and
MCC-INTERIM versions of linux. In some of the README files in many sites
recommend to install SLS or MCC-INTERIM for the first time. But what is
the different between these two versions of linux? Are they the clones of
the "real linux"? 

        SLS seem to be more compete and welly organise. Is it better
than MCC-INTERIM in performance and portability? Could anyone advice me
which one should I start with and what would be the advantages?

        Thanks and appreciate in advance.

 
-- 
*  Ronald Ku                             *  UNIX will use next,       *
*  u9030062@golum.riv.csu.edu.au  OR     *  UNIX is YOUr next,        *
*  u9030062@zac.riv.csu.edu.au           *  So I use UNIX!            *
*  Charles Sturt University              *  And I survive for UNIX!!! *

From: vince@victrola.sea.wa.us (Vince Skahan)
Subject: Re: Which is better for novice??? SLS or MCC-INTERIM!!!
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:09:35 GMT

u9030062@golum.riv.csu.edu.au ("Ronald Ku") writes:
>       For a novice of linux like me, I am confused by SLS and
>MCC-INTERIM versions of linux. In some of the README files in many sites
>recommend to install SLS or MCC-INTERIM for the first time. But what is
>the different between these two versions of linux? Are they the clones of
>the "real linux"? 

>       SLS seem to be more compete and welly organise. Is it better
>than MCC-INTERIM in performance and portability? Could anyone advice me
>which one should I start with and what would be the advantages?

my experience (for what little it's worth :-)) is that mcc-interim seems
more stable.  However, it's basically an o/s package and doesn't have the
extras (mail, uucp, gnu, x, etc...) that SLS has.

the result is that you have to build your own SLS so to speak from mcc-interim
plus other stuff.  I don't mind in most cases, but it *does* take some time.

Here's my setup:

        mcc-interim 0.97pl2
        0.98pl3 kernel
        mailpak1.3 (elm2.3pl11 plus Taylor uucp1.03)
        newspak1.0 (cnews, tin1.1pl4, trn2.2, nn6.4.16, smail3.1.28)
        vixie cron
        perl4.035
        several communications packages (xc, minicomm, pcomm)
        X-v1.1
        jumptables 4.1 for the gcc2.2.2 that came with mcc-interim
        ps0.98
        getty_ps 2.03

as you can see, it's a lot of stuff that accumulated over the months :-)
but for me, that's part of the fun...your mileage may vary.

long term, I expect all the stuff I run to make it into either SLS or an
SLS-like kit...after you grab 'em all and install 'em all, it gets old...

(of course, my goal is to get uucp+news+mail+bbs up under linux, not
        to develop linux itself (except as a tester and porter of stuff).
        So, I'm not looking to really do kernel hacking at this time).

-- 
     ---------- Vince Skahan --------- vince@victrola.sea.wa.us ----------
    Running Linux/C-news/trn/Elm/Smail - we don't need no steenkin' MS-DOS 

From: pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald)
Subject: Re: Which is better for novice??? SLS or MCC-INTERIM!!!
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:23:30 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.200935.507@victrola.sea.wa.us> 
vince@victrola.sea.wa.us (Vince Skahan) writes:
>u9030062@golum.riv.csu.edu.au ("Ronald Ku") writes:
>>      For a novice of linux like me, I am confused by SLS and
>>MCC-INTERIM versions of linux. In some of the README files in many sites
>>recommend to install SLS or MCC-INTERIM for the first time. But what is
>>the different between these two versions of linux? Are they the clones of
>>the "real linux"? 
>
>>      SLS seem to be more compete and welly organise. Is it better
>>than MCC-INTERIM in performance and portability? Could anyone advice me
>>which one should I start with and what would be the advantages?
>
>my experience (for what little it's worth :-)) is that mcc-interim seems
>more stable.  However, it's basically an o/s package and doesn't have the
>extras (mail, uucp, gnu, x, etc...) that SLS has.
>

SLS may seem less stable because you see more posts about it, but there
could be another reason: maybe more people are using it.
From Teds posting of Mid October:


> Top 15 Most Popular Archive Sections By Bytes Transferred
>                                                  ---- Percent  of ----
>      Archive Section      Files Sent Bytes  Sent Files Sent Bytes Sent
> ------------------------- ---------- ----------- ---------- ----------
> pub/linux/packages/SLS          3408  1099775360    50.11      50.36
> pub/linux/packages                19   288390238     0.28      13.21
> pub/linux/packages/GCC           814   287096369    11.97      13.15
> pub/linux/packages/X11           384   221662483     5.65      10.15
> pub/linux/mirrors/mcc-int         71    29282074     1.04       1.34
> pub/linux/docs                   139    23600002     2.04       1.08
> pub/linux/packages/TeX            53    20413127     0.78       0.93
> pub/linux/sources/usr.bin         66    20392458     0.97       0.93
> pub/linux                        186    20131222     2.73       0.92
> pub/linux/images                  73    19950848     1.07       0.91
> pub/linux/sources/system          85    18696914     1.25       0.86
> pub/linux/packages/lisp           27    17626303     0.40       0.81
> pub/linux/packages/emacs-         57    16671741     0.84       0.76
> pub/linux/binaries/usr.bi        107    15651344     1.57       0.72
> pub/linux/binaries/usr.bi         54     9803411     0.79       0.45


It would seem that there are 50 times more traffic on the SLS than MCC.
Not to knock MCC, its a fine package and SLS even contains some parts 
from it.  And of course this could mean that most people get MCC from its 
source archive than tsx-11.  Also SLS is bigger than MCC.

It should also be noted that SLS is also much more evolutionary.  Patches
and new components appear regularly, so that people can stay current just
by downloading the new components.  Unfortunately, not everyone is so 
diligent about keeping up with the latest patches, so the result is that
even a month after a problem is fixed, we keep seeing posts about it.
Case in point:  "shell-init" and permission denied because no-read for 
non-root users on /.

Peter
pmacdona@sanjuan.uvic.ca

			        About USENET

USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.

		       SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM

March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State 
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, 
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM 
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of 
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services 
business. See SCO vs IBM.

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
research.

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com			  http://tech-insider.org/