Where have you been for the past 10 years? IBM and Apple have been in an alliance since 1995. My two year-old Apple is powered by an IBM chip.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Power5 four times faster than Power4
- Thread starter 3G4N
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Where have you been for the past 10 years? IBM and Apple have been in an alliance since 1995. My two year-old Apple is powered by an IBM chip.
Prom1:
I'm typing this on my Linux machine, but the other input to the screen is my OSX 10.2 machine. Unfortunately the /proc filesystem is part of the OS itself, so a true equivelent would require kernel modifications to OSX. I bet OSX has all of the /proc info available somewhere, just in system calls or something.
gopher:
I do appreciate you being a good sport and bringing up all these links for me, though so far it hasn't had too much effect on my viewpoint.
I'll go check out osxfaq and macoshints after I do this post.
(I volenteer for a charity and run their server with that stuff.)
I'm typing this on my Linux machine, but the other input to the screen is my OSX 10.2 machine. Unfortunately the /proc filesystem is part of the OS itself, so a true equivelent would require kernel modifications to OSX. I bet OSX has all of the /proc info available somewhere, just in system calls or something.
OSX probably allows all of the user stuff you mentioned. I'm not sure how much you know already, so I'll just pretend that you're just a little familiar with the command line. If you want to do this remotely you should connect (command line) with 'ssh', which is secure so long as you keep it up to date, and so long as you don't let anyone pull off a "man in the middle" attack (which ssh will warn you about if it thinks it could be happening). The 'who' command reveals who is logged in, and its probably logged somewhere too (it is in Linux at least). The 'ps' command can reveal what everyone is running (check its man page), and so can 'top' but I like ps better under OSX. Not sure how you can check what "other resources" they are using beyond processor and RAM. Well, you can check on their network connections using 'netstat'. And of course, a real Unix admin would probably know a thing or two I don't, since its not my job to know these things.
Processor speed claims pretty much always include the effects of the faster FSB/RAM and better compilers.
gopher:
I do appreciate you being a good sport and bringing up all these links for me, though so far it hasn't had too much effect on my viewpoint.
I'll go check out osxfaq and macoshints after I do this post.Yes, but AFAIK files such as /etc/hosts are not typically used by OSX. I could be wrong about some of them, but on the other hand I've almost certainly overlooked some more that are unique to Linux. Honestly I'm not a very good OSX admin, partly cause I don't know anyone who knows more about it than me, so its hard for things to rub off.
Yeah, I even RAID'ed my disks on my Mac. I don't think it's as powerful a system though, yet. Linux software raid would allow me to do insane things like take two smallish disks of different sizes, stripe between a partition on each to make a single larger partition, and then mirror that virtual partition with another one on a 3rd disk. More realistically, I use Linux softraid to mirror matched "mission critical" partitions on a pair of matched disks, with each individual disk having a separate swap partition, one having the a partition with the / filesystem, and the other having the /usr filesystem.
I haven't tried PHP or MySQL under OSX for a while, but I've done Apache/PHP/MySQL installs on many Linux machines (all Redhat) and two or three Windows machines.
(I volenteer for a charity and run their server with that stuff.)I discovered that under ~/.ssh/known_hosts that you could control what hosts you could connect via sftp and ssh and intriguingly if the server you were connecting to did some changes you had to delete some files to be able to sftp again to them. It is indeed a wild world out there with Unix, and while I haven't had much Linux experience, I have played around with DG AViion, Solaris, and SGI systems in the past before using Mac OS X. I have vi, and pico and appreciate how much they brought over. Granted no Unix is identical to another Unix, but the basic tools are pretty much the same. Every so frequently I play under the hood, but I enjoy the GUI so much it is only when I find there is something I need to do that Mac OS X doesn't normally give me.
gopher:
Someone who is very security oriented would never connect to a server through ssh unless they could verify that the public key presented is the right public key.
BTW, I liked the 'pidof' command over at macosxhints.
Yeah if the other server changes their public key then (depending on configuration) you need to delete a line in the .ssh/known_hosts file to connect again. This was done because the "man in the middle" attack relies on a "bad" server pretending to be the server you wanted to connect to, and simply forwarding your connection to it on to the real server, so that you never notice anything is amiss. Unfortuneately the server in the middle now has access to your unencrypted connection, and knows your login/password to the real server.
Someone who is very security oriented would never connect to a server through ssh unless they could verify that the public key presented is the right public key.
BTW, I liked the 'pidof' command over at macosxhints.
Originally posted by ddtlm
gopher:
Yeah if the other server changes their public key then (depending on configuration) you need to delete a line in the .ssh/known_hosts file to connect again. This was done because the "man in the middle" attack relies on a "bad" server pretending to be the server you wanted to connect to, and simply forwarding your connection to it on to the real server, so that you never notice anything is amiss. Unfortuneately the server in the middle now has access to your unencrypted connection, and knows your login/password to the real server.
Someone who is very security oriented would never connect to a server through ssh unless they could verify that the public key presented is the right public key.
BTW, I liked the 'pidof' command over at macosxhints.
Oh neat! now that is nice. Finding the process number can be a pain. Nice to see someone has figured out a workaround. I found that you could issue administrative commands with a simple Applescript. http://www.macmaps.com/software.html
So you could expand that to help kill off some really naughty administrative processes too!
Actually I was looking this up the other day:
[encro:~]cd ~
[encro:~]sudo mkdir /etc/lookupd
[encro:~]sudo cp /etc/lookupd/hosts/etc/lookupd/hosts.original
[encro:~]sudo echo LookupOrder Cache NI FF DNS DS YP NIL > hosts
[encro:~]sudo cp hosts /etc/lookupd
[encro:~]nidump -r /locations/lookupd / > lookupd.original
[encro:~]nidump -r /machines / > machines.original
[encro:~]sudo niload -r /locations/lookupd / < lookupd.jaguar
[encro:~]exit
Optionally, you can switch the above order so that flat files get referenced first, like generic unix:
[encro:~]sudo echo LookupOrder Cache FF NI DNS DS YP NIL > hosts
You'll need to reboot for the changes to take effect. Hotshot unix aficionados can restart lookupd themselves from the command line without rebooting.
your lookupd.jaguar flat file should contain the following:
{
"LookupOrder" = ( "Cache", "NI", "DS", "YP" );
"name" = ( "lookupd" );
"MaxThreads" = ( "12" );
CHILDREN = (
{
"name" = ( "hosts" );
"LookupOrder" = ( "Cache", "NI", "FF", "DNS", "DS", "YP", "NIL" );
}
)
}
ALTERNATIVE METHOD
You can load your /etc/hosts into NetInfoManager's database like this...
[encro:~]niload -m hosts / < /etc/hosts
(run as root if your admin doesn't have enough privileges).
The '-m' means merge the new hosts in with the existing ones.
The same procedure also works for these files:
aliases, bootptab, bootparams, ethers, exports, fstab, group, hosts, networks, passwd, printcap, protocols, resolv.conf, rpc, services, mountmaps.
Check out Damian Gallop's column @macwrite.com for all this info and more: Critical Mass
I haven't tried PHP or MySQL under OSX for a while, but I've done Apache/PHP/MySQL installs on many Linux machines (all Redhat) and two or three Windows machines.
Marc Liyanage MySQL
Marc Liyanage PHP
note that PHP is installed as default on OS X, just needs to be enabled in the apache config files.
Also with regard to opening applications from the terminal add an alias to your /etc/csh.login (or ~/.tcshrc file such as:
alias ical "open /Applications/iCal.app"
logout and back in or enter in the terminal:
[encro:~]rehash
[encro:~]tsch
Cheers
P.S. if your interested in net admin you should also check out macosxlabs.org
Hey ddtml, Ive been dying to learn some command line, could you recommend a good book, guide. I know some basic commands, but that doesnt cut it off, I want to learn more. I know it takes years of experience, but if you can recommend a beginners guide or something, Ill be very thankful.
Guide to UNIX Using Linux - Second Edition
Palmer Dent & Gaddis
www.course.com/networking
www.thomsonlearning.com
It was my course book this year, quite a good one with a few little mistakes that you can sus out easily anyway. Also comes with RedHat Linux 7.2 Publisher Edition.
Yes, they did say that.
All I did was copy and paste the
Title and URL.
So friggin sue me, jeez.
They mentioned it'll be made using the 0.13 micron process. Does anyone know when they're going to the 90 nm process?
Well, thanks for putting all those words in my mouth for me. I'm glad you were here to "explain" what I understood,
the way you did. Now I understand.
And you're right. I shouldn't be suprised when people over-react on this forum.
I mean, just look around...
...or in the mirror.
3G4N:
Yes, put that mirror to use on yourself. I find it funny that you should accuse me of overreaction.
Anyway, if you don't like being treated like you don't know whats going on then you should try to demonstrate some understanding next time, rather than posting blatantly a false statement under the cover of them being someone else's soundbite. If you know what your talking about then use that knowledge to craft something of substance. Looking at your post, not only is your title the soundbite but so is your entire content. You give no hint of any further knowledge, in fact the way you presented things I think was reasonable to assume that you believed it. The way I see it, its quite an achievment of yours to not only make a stupid post but then to get pissy with me what I treat you exactly how you invited. I wonder how much further effort you intend to sink into this.
Yes, put that mirror to use on yourself. I find it funny that you should accuse me of overreaction.
Anyway, if you don't like being treated like you don't know whats going on then you should try to demonstrate some understanding next time, rather than posting blatantly a false statement under the cover of them being someone else's soundbite. If you know what your talking about then use that knowledge to craft something of substance. Looking at your post, not only is your title the soundbite but so is your entire content. You give no hint of any further knowledge, in fact the way you presented things I think was reasonable to assume that you believed it. The way I see it, its quite an achievment of yours to not only make a stupid post but then to get pissy with me what I treat you exactly how you invited. I wonder how much further effort you intend to sink into this.
If anything, you seem to accuse me of under-reaction --
that I didn't "demonstrate enough understanding".
My intent was not to demonstrate knowledge.
My intent was to share a URL, and the content
contained in that URL, and possibly have others
comment on that article. I intentionally
kept what I said to a minimum, to let the
article speak for itself.
Sorry if you think that is "hiding".
Leave it to you to take something out of context
(maybe partially my fault), and then over-react to it
by putting stretched words in my mouth. That's what
I didn't like. I did like how you called it a
"stupid post" though. Eloquent.
You really ought to relax, and stop reading so much
into things. Sometimes when someone says "faster"
they don't necessarily mean "clock frequency".
Criticize the article, not the messenger.
Like I said above, it was so nice of you to assume
what I know and what I don't, and treat me like
I don't know what I'm talking about, all from
one line of copied text. Thanks for making us
both look bad (the ASSUME saying). Your way is
an exemplary way to proceed through life, assuming
others know nothing when they say very little.
Well, I bet I pressed some of your buttons, and now
you want to retort. Please be sure to explain how
I "invited" you to treat me as you did, putting
words in my mouth, based on my first post.
My entire content?!! Dear me! You make one line
sound like sooo much! And yet, you glean everything
about me, everything I know, through this one-sentance
post. Again, testament to your skills of stretching.
Do you take yoga classes?
What are you, my High School English teacher?
I post a URL and you want an essay?
It seems to me that you were looking to make a
straw man to knock down, so that you could
demonstrate your knowledge. You thought you
found that straw man in my post. When I point out
that you didn't notice that all I did was copy
the title of the article, you were caught
looking (and acting) foolish and had to defend
yourself by belittling and blaming me for your
assumptions.
Anyway, my over-reaction to this over-reaction is
done. Say all you want. I'm going out to have a
great Fourth of July! I hope you use this
relaxation time wisely, ddtlm.
that I didn't "demonstrate enough understanding".
My intent was not to demonstrate knowledge.
My intent was to share a URL, and the content
contained in that URL, and possibly have others
comment on that article. I intentionally
kept what I said to a minimum, to let the
article speak for itself.
Sorry if you think that is "hiding".
Leave it to you to take something out of context
(maybe partially my fault), and then over-react to it
by putting stretched words in my mouth. That's what
I didn't like. I did like how you called it a
"stupid post" though. Eloquent.
You really ought to relax, and stop reading so much
into things. Sometimes when someone says "faster"
they don't necessarily mean "clock frequency".
Criticize the article, not the messenger.
Like I said above, it was so nice of you to assume
what I know and what I don't, and treat me like
I don't know what I'm talking about, all from
one line of copied text. Thanks for making us
both look bad (the ASSUME saying). Your way is
an exemplary way to proceed through life, assuming
others know nothing when they say very little.
Well, I bet I pressed some of your buttons, and now
you want to retort. Please be sure to explain how
I "invited" you to treat me as you did, putting
words in my mouth, based on my first post.
My entire content?!! Dear me! You make one line
sound like sooo much! And yet, you glean everything
about me, everything I know, through this one-sentance
post. Again, testament to your skills of stretching.
Do you take yoga classes?
What are you, my High School English teacher?
I post a URL and you want an essay?
It seems to me that you were looking to make a
straw man to knock down, so that you could
demonstrate your knowledge. You thought you
found that straw man in my post. When I point out
that you didn't notice that all I did was copy
the title of the article, you were caught
looking (and acting) foolish and had to defend
yourself by belittling and blaming me for your
assumptions.
Anyway, my over-reaction to this over-reaction is
done. Say all you want. I'm going out to have a
great Fourth of July! I hope you use this
relaxation time wisely, ddtlm.
I don't know much about Unix commands, but I have tried them before. May I ask why one would want to live off of a command line? If you want to open iCal, just put it, the Applications folder, or both, into the dock, and click them when you need them. I don't mean to be offensive, as I don't know much of this area, but why type a long command for something you can do with a single click?
3G4N:
I don't know how this is so hard for you to see, but you could have posted almost anything other than that one-liner, twice, and illustrated understanding. As I said, posting it as your title and your entire content implied that it was the entirety of your point.
I don't know how this is so hard for you to see, but you could have posted almost anything other than that one-liner, twice, and illustrated understanding. As I said, posting it as your title and your entire content implied that it was the entirety of your point.
I don't think that there is or was a problem with my relaxation. But yes that is what I intend to do most of the weekend...
XnavxeMiyyep:
On a single command line you can have access to hundreds of programs without so much as moving a mouse. You can alternate between file browsing, file editing and starting more advanced GUIs on files without moving more than your fingers.
On a single command line you can have access to hundreds of programs without so much as moving a mouse. You can alternate between file browsing, file editing and starting more advanced GUIs on files without moving more than your fingers.
Apparently in less than 12 months, because I sure don't think that the 970 will hit 3 Ghz on a 130 nm process! (that would imply that it could clock almost as high as a Pentium 4 on an equivalent process...with 50% better IPC too!)