I want to do kernel module programming. But, all sources tell that linux distributions patch the original kernel and that module codes might not run on them. If this is true, what should i do.I tried making lfs using ubuntu but errors cropped up at almost every step. I saw somewhere that arch, gentoo, Ubuntu Server without any packages selected during the installation, slackware, susestudio etc. are vanilla distributions. So, can i use them for module programming?
Please suggest keeping in mind that i need a GUI in the distribution.
Can this be followed?
PS: I have a intel core i3 processor and will be running the distros on vmware workstation.
If you want to program kernel modules then it doesn't matter which distribution you choose. You will need to be able to recompile the kernel from source and install a new kernel yourself. Even just for a kernel module you'll want to be able to compile the latest kernel and develop against that, otherwise you won't be able to get the module accepted in to mainline.
An alternative if the module is not to be released is to develop against a particular kernel version. In this instance then the choice of distribution should be chosen based on the target for the module - not the development environment.
So pick a distribution based on what you like:
1) Desktops - (GNOME, KDE, other)
2) Ease of use - (Ubuntu, Fedora, etc vs Arch, Gentoo)
3) Cutting edge vs Stable (Arch, Fedora vs Ubuntu vs Debian, Red Hat, CentOS)
Then head off to kernelbewbies to learn a bit about getting started with kernel programming (where to get the source, how to compile it). Then read Greg Kroah-Hartman's excellent book on linux device drivers. The interfaces will have changed (it's written about version 2.6 of the kernel and version 3.6 is currently being worked on). It can be found online here
You'll also want to learn how to use git. And more importantly how to use git to generate a patch and email it without messing it up! I don't have a website for this but a bit of googling will help.
I have to check installation steps of my application on different production machines. I want to check how can I install my application on HP UX. I have only linux/windows machines but dont have real physical HP unix machine. Is there any way i can check installation steps of HP unix. I am thinking of any virtual environment or any flavour that run on linux or windows which gives accessiblity and functionality of HP unix.
I am looking something to cross check platfrom installation steps.
The short answer is no. HP-UX is as different from Linux as Linux is from Windows (almost). There would be many differences in libraries, patches, installed utilities, build tools, etc.
A few examples:
HP-UX does not come pre-installed with the bash shell
HP-UX uses a proprietary software packager and installer called swinstall (analogous to RPM but completely different)
Partition layout is different
Many common utilities behave differently. "echo" is one of many examples. This will affect things if your build process uses shell utilities
Even if you can test the install, don't you need to test the product's operation on HP-UX?
Not saying it's impossible. If your application uses basic, nonspecific utilities for install, it might work. There is no way to know without a running installation. Unfortunately you need Itanium hardware and the O/S.
My recommendation would be to get your application working on Solaris and any other Unixes first. The more platforms you test on, the more portable your code will become on all of them. Then, put out some feelers and find someone with a system you can borrow time on.
Worst case, find an Itanium server like an rx2620 on eBay, should not cost too much. Even better if the seller forgets to wipe the O/S :). You'll need a terminal and possibly null modem. 11.31 (11iv3) is the latest version of the O/S.
in a short I'm gonna release an application written in OCaml and I was planning to distribute it by source code.
The problem is that the OCaml development system is not something light neither so common to have installed so I would like to release it also in a binary way for various operating systems.
Windows makes no problem since I can compile it through cygwin and distribute it with the required dlls
OS X is not a problem too since I can compile it and distribute it easily (no external dependencies from what I've tried)
When arriving to Linux problems arrive since I don't really know which is the best way to compile and distribute it. The program itself doesn't depend on anything (everything is statically linked) but how to cover many distributions?
I have an ubuntu server 10 virtualized with an amd64 architecture, I used this machine to test the program under Linux and everything works fine. Of course if I try to move the binary to a 32bit ubuntu it stops working and I haven't been able to try different distributions... are there tricks to manage this kind of issue? (that seems recurring)
for example:
can I compile both 32 bit and 64 from the same machine?
will a binary compiled under ubuntu run also on other distributions?
which "branches" should I consider when wanting to cover as many distros as possible?
You can generally produce 64 and 32 bit binaries on a 64 bit machine with relative ease - i.e. the distribution usually has the proper support in its compiler packages and you can actually test your build. Note that the OS needs to be 64 bit too, not just the CPU.
Static binaries generally run everywhere, provided adequate support from the kernel and CPU - keep an eye on your compiler options to ensure this. They are your best bet for compatibility. Shared libraries can be an issue. To deal with this, binaries linked with shared libraries can be bundled with those libraries and run with a loader script if necessary.
You should at least target Debian/Ubuntu with dpkg packages, Redhad/Fedora/Mandriva with RPM and SUSE/OpenSUSE with RPM again (I mention these two RPM cases separately because you might need to produce separate packages for these "families" of distributions). You should also provide a .tar.bz2 or a .run installer for the rest.
You can have a look at the options provided by e.g. Oracle for Java and VirtualBox to see how they provide their software.
You could look at building it in the openSUSE Build Service. Although run by openSUSE, this will build packages for:
openSUSE SUSE
Enterprise variants
Mandiva
Fedora
Red Hat Enterprise/CentOS
Debian
Ubuntu
The best solution is to release the source code under a free license. You can package it for a couple distributions yourself (e.g. Debian, Fedora), then cooperate with other people porting it to others. The maintainers will often do most of this work with only a few required upstream changes.
Yes you can compile for both 32 and 64 bits from the same machine :
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/i386-and-x86_002d64-Options.html
Most likely a binary running on Ubuntu will run on other distributions, the only thing you need to worry about if it you are using shared libraries (especially if you use some GUI framework or things like that).
Not sure what you mean by branch, but if you are talking about distribution, I would use the most vanilla Ubuntu distribution...
I'd recommend you just package a 32 and 64-bit binary for .deb and RPM, that way you can hit most of the major distros (Debian, Fedora, openSUSE, Ubuntu).
Just give clear installation instructions regarding dependencies, command-line fu for other distros, etc. and you shouldn't have much a problem just distributing a source tarball.
I want to change linux distro my Development(Host) Machine which I use for embedded development.
I cross-compile applications for many different processors. It is required for me to download different different libraries to evaluate their functionality/Performance/Stability on different devices , as well as on PC.
So Is ubuntu 9.04 a good choice for me?
Thanks,
Sunny.
If you are using gcc or other source based compiler that runs on linux then I would say yes, you want a linux distro, and ubuntu is currently the most popular/best. I would try to avoid distro specific things, drive down the middle of the road and you should be able to use any distro equally well.
That will largely depend on your needs. For an embedded system, I'd go with any distribution that sports a very small footprint and supports the necessary hardware.
Depending on your hardware, Debian might work fine. You could create your image with debootstrap which allows for fairly small customized installs. It still includes apt and other things which might not be desirable, although that could be to your benefit if you need to push out updates.
If you did go with Debian, you could most likely do all your development on Ubuntu and then push to your embedded system.
i use ubuntu for my host system and a chrooted gentoo install for building apps for an embedded target. I found gentoo was a good choice as it is source distributed and easy to select what version of a particular library is installed.
One thing that is good to know is that ubuntu and derivatives uses dash and not bash as /bin/sh. This confuses crosstools and can give you severe headaches.
As I come up with linux ,I found the commands are different in OpenSuse and Ubuntu.
Which of them is suitable to somebody who was new in linux and want to master the command
needed when programming and using linux?
I got the impression that OpenSuSE did some things a little unconventionally (kdesu, gksu), but it's a fine (KDE) distro. I've found (K)Ubuntu is a little better for beginners since it has access to huge compiled package repositories, plus the community is unbeatable.
They're pretty similar for most things, including programming.
Whichever one the people around you can ask questions of know. The value of a knowledgeable support network vastly outweigh the benefits of a particular distribution. If you don't have a local support network, I'd go with Ubuntu, they tend to have more useful resources on the 'net (and it's the distro I'd prefer out of those two options).
Any of Ubuntu/Slackware/Gentoo should be fine as a development environment. You didn't mention what kind of programming you're interested in, and that may have some influence on the answer, too.
If you are at all interested in making better code I also recommend dual booting (or running a 2nd computer) into a non-Linux system such as OpenBSD/FreeBSD, OpenSolaris, etc. Writing code that's portable across UNIX systems isn't just a good idea for portability's sake, it can also help shake out some bugs. The same can be said for working with 32-bit vs. 64-bit, big endian vs. little endian platforms. You can pick up an old 64-bit Sun workstation for cheap and use it to test your code.
We'd have to know your preferences better to be able to answer that. Basically any LINUX would do i guess. I heard nice feedback from Ubuntu, though.
I'm running on Ubuntu right now. It was easier than windows to get running. Very smooth. Of course, advanced functions are beyond me right now. With C# classes and everything else I gave up on trying to learn too much and just run it as is. It has a very good user interface, and I've heard a new version is out or coming out as well, probably more eye candy.
Check out Ubuntu. Doing a dual boot can't hurt since then you can try it out! You can also run some distributions straight off the disc to try them out.... Can't hurt to try it when it is free. Much more stable for me than XP, and faster. I HOPE Windows 7 ends up being less of a monster! I'd stick with Ubuntu if it was more compatible with windows programs. .NET development while in school typically isn't done on a Linux distribution!
best wishes, try it out!
I prefer Ubuntu. my 2 cents...
They are tools. Use the one that you are most comfortable with. Really calling them tools isn't a good analogy. Better is to call them vehicles. Use the vehicle that fits your needs and desires.
Actually , as a programmer you would face such questions everyday. Which framework? which language? which data structure ? ... you get the idea. There is no right answer.
Choose any. They are not too different. Soon you would not be a "new learner" and then it wouldn't matter anyway.
Depending on how deeply you want to learn, one possible candidate distro would be Linux From Scratch. It also has awesome documentation and by playing with it will surely make you think more "Linux"-way.
This is a very hard question; most distros aim to be "the best", or at least "good enough" for a wide variety of activities, of course including programming.
It's also an issue that easily spawn "wars", where people fight to claim that the distribution they use is the best, and that all others should conform. Heh.
My current preference is for Gentoo, and I think one (probably minor) advantage it has when programming is that since it is a source-based distribution, you typically never need to bother to get the "development version" of packages. If you have e.g. readline installed, you will have its header file(s) too, and so on. Many other distros split packages into "user" and "developer" versions, so you need to install both packages.
Of course, I guess in those cases the developer packages depend on the non-developer versions anyway, so if you always install developer versions, you'd be all set. Oh well. Nevermind, then. :)
When choosing a linux distro I usually consider two things:
1: packaging system (and release cycle):
Opensuse probably has the most up to date packages of any distro (without building your own), Ubuntu's packaging system tends to hold your hand a little bit more though. I have used both and found that as a developer I slightly preferred Opensuse since it was easier to get the latest versions of development packages (for example, IDEs).
2: default configuration/ease of administration:
All linux distros have their quirks here. Both Opensuse and Ubuntu are well documented and have good support forums. Opensuse has Yast which is a nice one stop shop for most configuration tasks. Ubuntu seems to be slightly better at automatically configuring itself. Really, either distro is fine here.
The good news is that there is not a wrong decision per se. I have used a lot (more than 10) linux distributions and I now stick to Opensuse. Ubuntu was a close second, the only reason that I don't use it is that I found I was often stuck waiting for its 6 month release cycle to get up to date dev packages (building the monodevelop beta was not feasible at the time). Opensuse's build service and the Packman third party repository seem to keep nearly current packages for everything I've ever wanted.
I use Gentoo and Ubuntu for development.
Gentoo I love because I can so easily select which packages I have available and which versions. The guy that did Flash 9 and 10 does his development on a Gentoo system as well.
Ubuntu I enjoy now because it's so stable. After a few years, a Gentoo installation will tend toward some instabilities that require sometimes rebuilding the whole installation.
Another I'd look at is Slackware.
The principles are mostly the same over the different distributions, so I'd suggest you to choose one and dig in. However, there are some considerations to make. If you want to program gui programs you need to make a decision about which graphic toolkit library to use (Qt, Gtk+ ...), which would also imply the choice of your desktop environment (GNOME, KDE, XFCE). As you will notice, in Linux world everything (or almost everything) depends on something else. I'm talking about the packages. It is quite common to reuse available libraries and not write your own so the decisions you would probably have to make are about which libraries/frameworks to use and which language.
I, however, chose Ubuntu and don't feel sorry at all.
It depends on what you want to do. If you want something easy to setup and basically just works, use Ubuntu. If you want to /learn/ Linux, I would recommend Slackware. Getting Slackware up and running will force you to know HOW and WHAT is going on with your installation. This can be good or bad, depending on your desires.
Ubuntu fits the build and the community is very helpful.
If your exploring Linux / GNU as a programmer, you might consider selecting a distribution that uses the apt packaging tool.
You will likely need to install lots of libraries with development headers and obtain the source code to other things. Apt makes it quite simple to do such things, it is very good at resolving package dependencies and fetching source packages.
Distributions using apt (either with .deb or .rpm packages) are Debian, Ubuntu (and its forks) and others.
That being said, Ubuntu does a really good job at keeping up to date with recent libraries and tools, while resisting the urge to cherry pick alpha / unstable code. My desktop is my development machine, I use Ubuntu.
I would vote for Ubuntu. The principles are the same while some of the "commands" are different. I assume you mean differences such as "sudo".
I'm very happy with my Ubuntu Server which handles all my development Windows VMs. I even used Ubuntu desktop on my laptop for a time...at least until I needed Visual Studio on it again. :-)
EDIT - "sudo" does exist in OpenSUSE
Gentoo is the easiest to use. I'd go with that