[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 580: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 636: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
3.14.by forum • Which linux distributives to support?
Page 1 of 1

Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 4:45 pm
by BarsMonster
Just to know which ones we need to support.
Also, it would be nice to know which of them are binary-compatible.

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 4:51 pm
by the_drag0n
well i think if you do the debian based ones such as ubuntu we'll be fine.
there may be few peoply using FreeBSD but it arent to much.

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:07 pm
by hashkiller
I would also say that Debian should be supported. Many people i know us it and it is widely spread over other distributions.

The Debian based list is the longest compared to the others. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Li ... bian-based

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2008 3:39 am
by BarsMonster
I see, so if we provide .deb packages they would be compatible with most of systems.

Can we also provide binaries in archive so that some of non .deb systems could install it manually?

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2008 10:54 am
by hashkiller
I would say to provide:

- Debian .deb

- RPM .rpm (-> second largest group: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Li ... #RPM-based)

- and source .tar.gz

That might cover most of all possible users OS.

I do not know if binarys might work, arent there pretty much library dependencies?

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2008 12:18 pm
by BarsMonster
Well, I guess sources tar.gz will not work as this would require users to download AMD/ATI SDK. Also, most likely not all source would be open.

About binary: it would depend only on driver components (AFAIK), so the question if binaries are compatible between for example Ubuntu & RadHat/OpenSUSE

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2008 11:07 am
by BarsMonster
Last question is still actual. If I am not using specific libs, can I expect binaries(not package, just .tar.gz of executables) to be compatible across linux types? (Debian/BSD/RedHat e.t.c.)

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2008 9:16 pm
by Sc00bz
BarsMonster wrote:Last question is still actual. If I am not using specific libs, can I expect binaries(not package, just .tar.gz of executables) to be compatible across linux types? (Debian/BSD/RedHat e.t.c.)
For the most part yes. You may need to statically link somethings. A program I wrote I compiled on Ubuntu and CentOS and it work with each other but not with Knoppix. I only included stdio.h. I never tested if statically linking stdio.h would make it work on Knoppix.

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:47 pm
by hardfalcon
Compiling the source code wouldn't be the problem I guess (at least not as far as the NVIDIA users like me are concerned).
As far as the binary version is concerned: It would be nice if you could keep it as path independent as possible (that shouldn't be a problem, as cuMD5, another CUDA based MD5 cracking tool, does also seem to be completely path independent). If there'll be a linux version, I'd feel honored to contribute the packages for Archlinux (including the PKGBUILD script for those who want to compile BarsWF themselves).

Keep on rocking, you're doing a great job! :)

PS: If you release a linux version, will there only be a 32bit version or also a 64bit one?

//EDIT:
BarsMonster wrote:Last question is still actual. If I am not using specific libs, can I expect binaries(not package, just .tar.gz of executables) to be compatible across linux types? (Debian/BSD/RedHat e.t.c.)
Please note that BSD is *not* Linux. They have a different kernel, and thats not the only difference... I don't know if CUDA is available for BSD at all (but I guess *if* it were, and if it's also available on Mac OS X, getting BartWF to work on BSD would already be half to path to getting it work on OS X, too...)

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:13 am
by BarsMonster
MacOS supports CUDA, so I am going to support MacOS too sometime (even if it would require separate build machine).
It would be impossible to build from sources as sources are going to be closed. (that was described in the discussion thread)

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:13 pm
by SecUpwN
BarsMonster wrote:Last question is still actual.
This question had been asked back in 2008, but did you decide yet which types of packing to support?
If so, would be great to hear a little Feedback from you. ;)

-SecUpwN-

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:36 pm
by BarsMonster
-$p!c3- wrote:
BarsMonster wrote:Last question is still actual.
This question had been asked back in 2008, but did you decide yet which types of packing to support?
If so, would be great to hear a little Feedback from you. ;)

-$p!c3-
I am going to just have a Debian-based binary without any packaging, at least at the beginning.

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:52 pm
by SecUpwN
BarsMonster wrote:I am going to just have a Debian-based binary without any packaging, at least at the beginning.
Hi there. What does that exactly mean? Will this version work on multiple Unix-Platforms (Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, Knoppix, etc.)? Please clarify. :crazy:

-SecUpwN-

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:45 am
by BarsMonster
-$p!c3- wrote:
BarsMonster wrote:I am going to just have a Debian-based binary without any packaging, at least at the beginning.
Hi there. What does that exactly mean? Will this version work on multiple Unix-Platforms (Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, Knoppix, etc.)? Please clarify. :crazy:

-$p!c3-
With God's help yes :-)
Ubuntu for sure. Others - well see :crazy:

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Mon Dec 07, 2009 10:23 am
by SecUpwN
BarsMonster wrote:Ubuntu for sure. Others - well see.
Great! But even greater would be, if you could package *.RPM as well. That way you would support a *huge* number of other Distros as well.
//edit:Hint: If your *.DEB-Packages do comply, you could save yourself a lot of work and convert *.DEB to *.RPM.

Which distro(s) are you using, Michail?

-$p!c3-

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 2:35 pm
by BarsMonster
-$p!c3- wrote:
BarsMonster wrote:Ubuntu for sure. Others - well see.
Great! But even greater would be, if you could package *.RPM as well. That way you would support a *huge* number of other Distros as well.
//edit:Hint: If your *.DEB-Packages do comply, you could save yourself a lot of work and convert *.DEB to *.RPM.

Which distro(s) are you using, Michail?

-$p!c3-
I'm on Ubuntu.

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 11:20 pm
by frank07
BarsMonster wrote:
-$p!c3- wrote:
BarsMonster wrote:Ubuntu for sure. Others - well see.
Great! But even greater would be, if you could package *.RPM as well. That way you would support a *huge* number of other Distros as well.
//edit:Hint: If your *.DEB-Packages do comply, you could save yourself a lot of work and convert *.DEB to *.RPM.

Which distro(s) are you using, Michail?

-$p!c3-
I'm on Ubuntu.
Hi!
How long it take to get the Linux version?

Thanks!!! :)

Re: Which linux distributives to support?

Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:06 am
by totedati
BarsMonster wrote:Last question is still actual. If I am not using specific libs, can I expect binaries(not package, just .tar.gz of executables) to be compatible across linux types? (Debian/BSD/RedHat e.t.c.)
for linux development use what distro you use currently ... if you use debian, then make a binary package for debian ... but, if you really want to support all linux distro you should provide source code of BarsWF ... upload BarsWF project somewhere, using GPLv3 or GPLv2 license, http://code.google.com is a good candidate then, with source code available, is no more you job to provide compatible binary package for all 100+ current linux distro's but maintainers of each distro need to contend with variations for each distro ... you can, for convenience, and to check is all ok and sources can be complied, provide a binary for debian ...

this is how linux work, you program for fun not for profit, so, you have only one duty ... bring to us BarsWF sources ... but if you can't or don't want to release source code, then is you job to contend with binary releases for 100+ distro variations because nobody will have enough will and time to reverse engineer BarsWF binary blobs ... playing with source code of BarsWF is another story ...

here is best explained, for my knowledge, this little confusion about opensource and gpl:
greg kroah-hartman - myths, lies, and truths about the linux kernel
relevant words is here:
my driver is only for an obscure piece of hardware, it would newer be accepted into the mainline kernel
This just is not true at all. We have a whole sub-architecture that only has 2 users in the world out there. We have drivers that I know have only one user, as there was only one piece of hardware ever made for it. It just isn't true, we will take drivers for anything into our tree, as we really want it.

We want more drivers, no matter how "obscure", because it allows us to see patterns in the code, and realize how we could do things better. If we see a few drivers doing the same thing, we usually take that common code and move it into a shared piece of code, making the individual drivers smaller, and usually fixing things up nicer. We also have merged entire drivers together because they do almost the same thing. An example of this is a USB data acquisition driver that we have in the kernel. There are loads of different USB data acquisition devices out in the world, and one German company send me a driver a while ago to support their devices. It turns out that I was working on a separate driver for a different company that did much the same thing. So, we worked together and merged the two together, and we now have a smaller kernel. That one driver turned out to work for a few other company's devices too, so they simply had to add their device id to the driver and never had to write any new code to get full Linux support. The original German company is happy as their devices are fully supported, which is what their customers wanted, and all of the other companies are very happy, as they really didn't have to do any extra work at all. Everyone wins
if you can understand about what greg kroah-hartman is talking here you can understand all opensource mumblingjumbing memes .... in short and layman words IS NOT YOU JOB TO MAINTAIN AN OPENSORCE PACKAGE! is not you duty, because you do that for fun, and initial source code release is a big effort on itself ... you do something, you think can help other, you release that thing under opensource licenses to us ... then, is no more you duty to maintain that thing ... ofcourse you can do that, you can mantain that opensource project, but until someone bring some money and PAY you work you have no more obligations ...

that opensorce project live or die depending of how much interest collect from the open source community, how many developers jump in and contribute with patches, ideas, real and hard work ...