A *nix section

I know everyone here is a Windows prod, but I think a *nix section would give a wider range of technologies to the forum. It could potentially entice people to come up and join.

I know I'd join up on it.

It'd be a place to discuss *nix systems, and although I disagree with guides and tutorials because you can do everything by RTFM, people could post those. If people have questions or want to learn, it'd be a good place to start. Or atleast get pointers. I'd be there to help.

*nix is a whole new world. And I'm not talking about Shitbuntu or Shittrack or Blackshit. I'm talking about actual operating system theory. The learning curve of using *nix. Setting up environments. Package editting, porting, etc. BASH. Administration and maintenance. Cronjobs, daemons, etc. Anything Unix-like. Solaris, *linux, *BSD, etc.

Although, the forum would probably get overrun by skids trying to use BackShit to be a 1337 Hacker.
It'd just be a hang out spot. Honestly, the documentation by devs is so well maintained tuts are't needed. People are still retarded and need them, though.

I just think a *nix forum would be nice. It doesn't fit into any other section. It's an entity of it's own.

There's already a section for operating systems. You're just being a Linux/Unix elitist.

The Unintelligible wrote:

There's already a section for operating systems. You're just being a Linux/Unix elitist.

Plus only like...probably 3 or 4 people here even use Linux on a daily basis, and I for one have nothing to discuss or talk about it.

I fail to see this section.
And I don't have to be elitist, it comes with the learning curve.

And there's a difference between using shitbuntu and building a system, and being a enthusiast.

bmlkiddo wrote:

I fail to see this section.
And I don't have to be elitist, it comes with the learning curve.

And there's a difference between using shitbuntu and building a system, and being a enthusiast.

You come off as someone who thinks of himself as better than others over irrelevant things. People use Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, etc all for different reasons and just because you believe somthing to be a certain way doesn't really give you much right to go around acting like you are some enlightened person based off what OS you use. People dislike Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, etc all for different reasons, same with Windows and Mac. I use Ubuntu if I want a system that will just work, Windows if I want to play games, Debian if I want to set up a server, Arch if I'm bored, etc.
Being an "enthusiast" doesn't change the fact you should work on your attitude.

The OS section was removed, if I recall correctly.

Also, *nix section not needed. General OS section though? I could see that being cool.

That's because I am, as is most of the community. If you want to hide your shit code and changes to the kernel, your distro is shit. If you fill it with bloat, it's shit. The upstream updates are near non-existant with Ubuntu. There's a lot of reasons to hate other distros, because of the devloper's decisions. It's invisible to you, though. But things you wouldn't see as the 1337 *nix user you are, I see. It goes into morales of the devs. but if I sat here and typed out the things wrong with bigger distros and skid 1337 h4ck3r distros, I'd go off topic.

Do your research and look up how elitist and egotistical Linus Torvalds is.

bmlkiddo wrote:

That's because I am, as is most of the community. If you want to hide your shit code and changes to the kernel, your distro is shit. If you fill it with bloat, it's shit. The upstream updates are near non-existant with Ubuntu. There's a lot of reasons to hate other distros, because of the devloper's decisions. It's invisible to you, though. But things you wouldn't see as the 1337 *nix user you are, I see. It goes into morales of the devs. but if I sat here and typed out the things wrong with bigger distros and skid 1337 h4ck3r distros, I'd go off topic.

Do your research and look up how elitist and egotistical Linus Torvalds is.

Lol, so now you're insulting the guy who starting linux..?

kay.

I'm an egotistical bastard, and I name all my projects after myself. First Linux, now git.
Torvalds, Linus (2007-06-14). First Linux, now git. Retrieved on 2010-10-16.

I have an ego the size of a small planet.
Re: clarification on git, central repositories and commit access lists. kde-core-devel@kde.org. Linux Weekly News (20 Aug 2007). Retrieved on 2007-12-28.

If you still don't like it, that's OK: that's why I'm boss. I simply know better than you do.
Torvalds, Linus (1996-07-22). Post to comp.os.linux.advocacy newsgroup. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.

The main reason there are no raw devices [in Linux] is that I personally think that raw devices are a stupid idea.
Torvalds, Linus (1996-10-17). Message. linux-kernel mailing list. IU. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.


I'm a bastard. I have absolutely no clue why people can ever think otherwise. Yet they do. People think I'm a nice guy, and the fact is that I'm a scheming, conniving bastard who doesn't care for any hurt feelings or lost hours of work, if it just results in what I consider to be a better system. And I'm not just saying that. I'm really not a very nice person. I can say "I don't care" with a straight face, and really mean it.
Torvalds, Linus (2000-09-06). Message to linux-kernel mailing list. Retrieved on 2007-05-28.

In short: just say NO TO DRUGS, and maybe you won't end up like the Hurd people.
Torvalds, Linus (2001-10-04). Post to mlist.linux.kernel newsgroup. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.

Personally, I'm not interested in making device drivers look like user-level. They aren't, they shouldn't be, and microkernels are just stupid.
Torvalds, Linus (2002-05-25). Post. mlist.linux.kernel newsgroup. Google Groups. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.


I allege that SCO is full of it.
Galli, Peter (2003-06-23). "Torvalds Speaks Out on SCO, Linux". eWeek. Retrieved on 2008-03-01.


They are smoking crack.
Galli, Peter (2003-08-20). "Torvalds Slams SCO". eWeek. Retrieved on 2008-03-01.
Notes: said about SCO.

There are literally several levels of SCO being wrong. And even if we were to live in that alternate universe where SCO would be right, they'd still be wrong.
Kerstetter, Jim (2004-02-02). "Linus Torvalds: SCO Is 'Just Too Wrong'". BusinessWeek Online. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.

I'm always right. This time I'm just even more right than usual.
Torvalds, Linus (2005-07-14). Message to linux-kernel mailing list. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.

The fact that ACPI was designed by a group of monkeys high on LSD, and is some of the worst designs in the industry obviously makes running it at any point pretty damn ugly.
Torvalds, Linus (2005-07-31). Message. linux-kernel mailing list. IU. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.


I personally just encourage people to switch to KDE.
This "users are idiots, and are confused by functionality" mentality of Gnome is a disease. If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it. I don't use Gnome, because in striving to be simple, it has long since reached the point where it simply doesn't do what I need it to do.
Please, just tell people to use KDE.
Torvalds, Linus (2005-12-12). Message to usability@gnome.org mailing list. Retrieved on 2006-08-28.

… even if the Hurd didn't depend on Linux code (and as far as I know, it does, but since I think they have their design heads firmly up their *sses anyway with that whole microkernel thing, I've never felt it was worth my time even looking at their code), I don't believe a religiously motivated development community can ever generate as good code except by pure chance.
LKML, September 27, 2006


It's one of those rare "perfect" kernels. So if it doesn't happen to compile with your config (or it does compile, but then does unspeakable acts of perversion with your pet dachshund), you can rest easy knowing that it's all your own damn fault, and you should just fix your evil ways.
Torvalds, Linus (2006-11-29). Message to Linux kernel mailing list. Retrieved on 2006-12-11.


Nobody actually creates perfect code the first time around, except me. But there's only one of me.
Tech Talk: Linus Torvalds on git, Google, 2 July 2007.


Is "I hope you all die a painful death" too strong?
Linus to the hardware manufacturers that refuse to release the specifications of their hardware so they could operate with the Linux kernel.
Torvalds, Linus (2007-08-22). Linus Torvalds talks future of Linux. Retrieved on 2007-08-22.



C++ is a horrible language. It's made more horrible by the fact that a lot of substandard programmers use it, to the point where it's much much easier to generate total and utter crap with it.
Torvalds, Linus (2007-09-06). Message to gmane.comp.version-control.git mailing list. Retrieved on 2007-09-22.

C++ is in that inconvenient spot where it doesn't help make things simple enough to be truly usable for prototyping or simple GUI programming, and yet isn't the lean system programming language that C is that actively encourages you to use simple and direct constructs.
Torvalds, Linus (2007-09-07). Message to gmane.comp.version-control.git mailing list. Retrieved on 2007-09-22.

bmlkiddo wrote:

That's because I am, as is most of the community. If you want to hide your shit code and changes to the kernel, your distro is shit. If you fill it with bloat, it's shit. The upstream updates are near non-existant with Ubuntu. There's a lot of reasons to hate other distros, because of the devloper's decisions. It's invisible to you, though. But things you wouldn't see as the 1337 *nix user you are, I see. It goes into morales of the devs. but if I sat here and typed out the things wrong with bigger distros and skid 1337 h4ck3r distros, I'd go off topic.

Do your research and look up how elitist and egotistical Linus Torvalds is.

You assume that just because people use a distro (such as Ubuntu), they don't see or know of any of these problems that exist. You are assuming that if they knew of these things, that they would care just as much as you and get all heated over it. The reality is, many people do realize a lot of the things that make Ubuntu and several other distros not so traditional and plain out don't care because it doesn't bug them. Basically, you corelate usage to not having knowledge. That's like saying to someone that a twinkie isn't healthy for them. They know that, but they don't care because holy shit twinkies are delicious as fucking hell.

Tree wrote:

You assume that just because people use a distro (such as Ubuntu), they don't see or know of any of these problems that exist. You are assuming that if they knew of these things, that they would care just as much as you and get all heated over it. The reality is, many people do realize a lot of the things that make Ubuntu and several other distros not so traditional and plain out don't care because it doesn't bug them. Basically, you corelate usage to not having knowledge. That's like saying to someone that a twinkie isn't healthy for them. They know that, but they don't care because holy shit twinkies are delicious as fucking hell.

There is no "traditional." The said Distro, Ubuntu, used to be a figure head. It used to be what [almost] everyone used. I'm not going to argue about people using it, ignorant or not as to what's happening. But I can say said distros are shit.
and no, usage does not = knowledge. However, you're never going to touch basic things in Ubuntu. Things you touch in *BSD or even Arch, you will never see in Ubuntu. If you get "good" at Linux by getting good at Ubuntu, you'll be able to trouble shoot Ubuntu. But if you go to trouble shoot Gentoo, or Arch, you're done. You won't be able to do it. Because you won't be exposed to half the basic shit you should know.




Be honest, how many users who use Ubuntu who claim to be knowledgable, do you think, can do something as basic as generate an fstab, or manually edit one for issues. How many users can change cronjobs? These are both two SIMPLE things that are a MAIN part of your *nix system. That EVERYONE should know how to do. But you will never touch these in Ubuntu. I mean sure, you might have to because you Googled a problem, and you had to copy and paste some things. But starting an fstab from the ground up and having knowledge on how to edit properties of your fstab is different than "Oh I opened it once to have my USB mount, I used Google"[/almost]

The OS section was removed, yes.

This may be better apt to be just a general technology section, like Healthy Living and Artwork.

GAMEchief wrote:

The OS section was removed, yes.

This may be better apt to be just a general technology section, like Healthy Living and Artwork.

Yes but, there's so much more to technology than healthy living or artwork. You cannot group such a broad subject or you'll just end up filtering through front pages of things that have nothing to do with eachother. I posted this in another thread:

• Separate the programming section into a few subsections.
  
• Make an operating system forum with subsections for the three main OS's
  Or even a "Technology" board with a mobile forum for iOS/Android and the Operating system forum with separate subsections for Windows/Mac/*nix
  
• The OS sections can also be tech support help forums
  
• Makes rules against being Low Quality.
  

We should have a technology board, with subsections for each main OS structure. A Windows person cannot help a Mac person. A Mac person can't definitely help a *nix user. I'm tech support for Windows machines and *nix systems, but whenever someone comes with a Mac issue I go blank eyed and attempt to fix it, but I'll be honest, I have no clue how to fix a Mac. I've never touched one. I can't just log in as root and go change configs, reinstall and repackage. Having such a broad section would just be a mess.

tl;dr

• Would be messy
  
• Linux != Mac
  
• Any.OS != Any.OS
  
• Technology general != healthy living/artwork general
  
• Need seperate sections to seperate tech support
  
• Make sections for the main Operating systems in a technology forum
  

I'd also like to point out that Linux == *nix but *nix != Linux

*nix is a general term for all *nix-like systems. Including *BSD.

Yeah, but considering sections of tech like gaming and programming have their own sections, I don't see too many other tech topics flooding this site that would clutter the forum.

That's because there is no section to post them in?
How would having these sections separated from the forum into neatly kept sections clutter the forums?

If you're worried about cluttering forums why are they set up like they are?

Why do you have a separate forum for Consoles and platforms and another for gaming? It doesn't make sense. Yet, having a Windows, Mac OS, and *nix section is cluttering? We have no where to post technology related threads. There are no sections. If I wanted to set up X11 fowarding I'd be damned if I posted in the JY asking for help. Other than the JY, I can't post it anywhere. And if we had a tech forum for all 3 OS's, I'd think it's a fucking joke, I won't get help there, and my thread would get bumped off first page because all the retarded Windows threads would be getting bumped.

-OMAGAWD, I have the section I requested.
2 weeks-1-5 months later?
-OMAGAWD, WHY DO WE HAVE THIS, IT'S ALWAYS DEAD.
Happens every time...

Drakonid wrote:

-OMAGAWD, I have the section I requested.
2 weeks-1-5 months later?
-OMAGAWD, WHY DO WE HAVE THIS, IT'S ALWAYS DEAD.
Happens every time...

Just like the entire board. And the Console section and a separate gaming section, which honestly doesn't make sense.

bmlkiddo wrote:

That's because there is no section to post them in?
How would having these sections separated from the forum into neatly kept sections clutter the forums?

If you're worried about cluttering forums why are they set up like they are?

Why do you have a separate forum for Consoles and platforms and another for gaming? It doesn't make sense. Yet, having a Windows, Mac OS, and *nix section is cluttering? We have no where to post technology related threads. There are no sections. If I wanted to set up X11 fowarding I'd be damned if I posted in the JY asking for help. Other than the JY, I can't post it anywhere. And if we had a tech forum for all 3 OS's, I'd think it's a fucking joke, I won't get help there, and my thread would get bumped off first page because all the retarded Windows threads would be getting bumped.

I made a topic asking if Gaming and Consoles should be merged. I even bumped it today.

I don't think a Windows, Mac, or *nix forum would get enough posts to justify it being its own forum. I don't really see them spawning more than enough active topics to fit on the first page of a single, combined forum.

bmlkiddo wrote:

That's because there is no section to post them in?
How would having these sections separated from the forum into neatly kept sections clutter the forums?

If you're worried about cluttering forums why are they set up like they are?

Why do you have a separate forum for Consoles and platforms and another for gaming? It doesn't make sense. Yet, having a Windows, Mac OS, and *nix section is cluttering? We have no where to post technology related threads. There are no sections. If I wanted to set up X11 fowarding I'd be damned if I posted in the JY asking for help. Other than the JY, I can't post it anywhere. And if we had a tech forum for all 3 OS's, I'd think it's a fucking joke, I won't get help there, and my thread would get bumped off first page because all the retarded Windows threads would be getting bumped.

I made a topic asking if Gaming and Consoles should be merged. I even bumped it today.

I don't think a Windows, Mac, or *nix forum would get enough posts to justify it being its own forum. I don't really see them spawning more than enough active topics to fit on the first page of a single, combined forum.

GAMEchief wrote:

I made a topic asking if Gaming and Consoles should be merged. I even bumped it today.

I don't think a Windows, Mac, or *nix forum would get enough posts to justify it being its own forum. I don't really see them spawning more than enough active topics to fit on the first page of a single, combined forum.

We don't have enough active topics to even say this forum is active...
If you took the combined non-spam new threads from the entire board, it would take days to fill a single page.
I don't understand your point. Why would it hurt?

Tree wrote:

You come off as someone who thinks of himself as better than others over irrelevant things. People use Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, etc all for different reasons and just because you believe somthing to be a certain way doesn't really give you much right to go around acting like you are some enlightened person based off what OS you use. People dislike Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, etc all for different reasons, same with Windows and Mac. I use Ubuntu if I want a system that will just work, Windows if I want to play games, Debian if I want to set up a server, Arch if I'm bored, etc.
Being an "enthusiast" doesn't change the fact you should work on your attitude.

+10lgg

On topic, the OS section was removed for a reason.
If we still had the OS section and you had something to contribute I'd support adding a *nix section.

In this case, making a separate *nix section independent of a general operating system section would be a waste of time.

There also aren't really that many people here, to my knowledge at least, that are that interested in the methodology, aspects, or use of *nix systems anyway.

bmlkiddo wrote:

We don't have enough active topics to even say this forum is active...
If you took the combined non-spam new threads from the entire board, it would take days to fill a single page.
I don't understand your point. Why would it hurt?

If there aren't enough topics as is, requiring members to navigate to different sections of the website to access them is the last thing we'd want.