new too unix - Unix

This is a discussion on new too unix - Unix ; hi i am windows programmer but i want too change to unix but i do not know which unix i must to install.i have sony vaio laptop .can u help me to start unix? thanks...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: new too unix

  1. new too unix

    hi i am windows programmer but i want too change to unix but i do not
    know which unix i must to install.i have sony vaio laptop .can u help
    me to start unix?
    thanks

  2. Re: new too unix

    On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 02:34:13 -0700 (PDT), rose
    wrote:

    >hi i am windows programmer but i want too change to unix but i do not
    >know which unix i must to install.i have sony vaio laptop .can u help
    >me to start unix?
    >thanks


    What do you mean by Unix? Is Linux Ok?

    I think Slackware Linux adheres most closely
    to the Unix style, and I use it. It requires a bit of thinking
    on your part, however.

    Ubuntu Linux will probably setup and detect hardware
    easier for you as a beginner, and make transition from Windows
    a bit easier.
    I don't like Ubuntu much because it takes control of root for you,
    and other little annoyances....but it works well out of the box.
    Xbuntu may be peppier for your laptop, it uses a lightweight
    X window manager, XFCE, rather than the Gnome2 desktop.

    I originally started with SuSE Linux, and it is run by IBM/Novell.
    It is nice, because it will come with everything on 1 DVD.

    Both Slackware and Ubuntu have a newsgroup dedicated to answering
    questions.
    alt.os.linux.slackware
    alt.os.linux.ubuntu
    SuSE has good maillists to answer questions.

    There are over 300 linux varieties, all basically similar. Some just
    have better user-support and that is what you want as a new user...
    some experienced people to answer your questions.

    You will be happy after you switch, don't give up,
    zentara


    --
    I'm not really a human, but I play one on earth.
    http://zentara.net/Remember_How_Lucky_You_Are.html

  3. Re: new too unix

    On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 02:34:13 -0700, rose wrote:

    > hi i am windows programmer but i want too change to unix but i do not
    > know which unix i must to install.i have sony vaio laptop .can u help me
    > to start unix?


    IMHO the play-school way into unix-like operating systems is
    Ubuntu Gnu/Linux:

    http://www.ubuntu.com/

  4. Re: new too unix

    > can u help
    > me to start unix?
    > thanks


    C is the central language of Unix with shell script (see below)
    python, perl, ruby, C++ closely following as languages that
    are popular.

    Learn to use a proper command line interface (sh/bash/csh/tclsh)
    first.
    These have most of the power of Unix systems and the commands are
    all implemented as individual programs so one can write a program in
    shell script (the equivalent of a batch file) that simply moves data
    around
    other programs and give you the results.

    > i am windows programmer.


    Do not trust mice. They will numb your creativity.

    This should help to http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/taoup/html/

  5. Re: new too unix

    On Oct 6, 6:45 am, Aaron W. Hsu wrote:
    > rose writes:
    > >hi i am windows programmer but i want too change to unix but i do not
    > >know which unix i must to install.i have sony vaio laptop .can u help
    > >me to start unix?

    >
    > You should be aware that UNIX is quite a bit different in many ways
    > than saying *NIX. Linux is a very popular operating system, but it is
    > only meant to be UNIX-like, and not to be a true UNIX. Keep in mind
    > also that Linux varies with each distribution based on that
    > distribution's goals.
    >
    > I for one find a more true UNIX (if you can call it that) in the
    > BSDs. OpenBSD is my Unix of choice, but I don't know if it has been
    > tested for compliance.


    It's not compliant to IEEE 1003.1 2004, just close.

    > To get started with Unix, first choose whether how you want to be
    > introduced. Are you trying to learn something about programming, or
    > learn something about real technical skill, or are you interested
    > mostly in sticking it to the M(S)an? If the third, it's best that
    > you choose a distribution that is meant and oriented towards doing
    > just that, and forget about learning Unix. That way, you can just
    > happily continue on your path without learning much more than you
    > would have to learn with a Mac. In fact, why not try a Mac? It
    > might suit you well if that's all you want to do, and it will give
    > you an opportunity to play around with a system that can be called
    > UNIX to some degree.


    Stiking it to the man by getting a mac?

    > On the other hand, if you are interested in understanding how to
    > program UNIX, and how to get under the hood, I suggest that you
    > take a UNIX that provides good documentation, a clean environment,
    > with minimal overhead; grab yourself a good book on UNIX; learn how
    > to read man pages and use the shell; and, dive right into the midst
    > of things, knowing that at first you are going to have a steep
    > learning curve.
    >
    > If you are willing to do that, then Slackware and OpenBSD, or NetBSD,
    > are all good choices.


    I agree, but you don't mention FreeBSD at all; Is there a specific
    reason?

  6. Re: new too unix

    On Oct 8, 4:30 pm, vipps...@gmail.com wrote:
    > On Oct 6, 6:45 am, Aaron W. Hsu wrote:
    >
    > > rose writes:
    > > >hi i am windows programmer but i want too change to unix but i do not
    > > >know which unix i must to install.i have sony vaio laptop .can u help
    > > >me to start unix?

    >
    > > You should be aware that UNIX is quite a bit different in many ways
    > > than saying *NIX. Linux is a very popular operating system, but it is
    > > only meant to be UNIX-like, and not to be a true UNIX. Keep in mind
    > > also that Linux varies with each distribution based on that
    > > distribution's goals.

    >
    > > I for one find a more true UNIX (if you can call it that) in the
    > > BSDs. OpenBSD is my Unix of choice, but I don't know if it has been
    > > tested for compliance.

    >
    > It's not compliant to IEEE 1003.1 2004, just close.
    >
    > > To get started with Unix, first choose whether how you want to be
    > > introduced. Are you trying to learn something about programming, or
    > > learn something about real technical skill, or are you interested
    > > mostly in sticking it to the M(S)an? If the third, it's best that
    > > you choose a distribution that is meant and oriented towards doing
    > > just that, and forget about learning Unix. That way, you can just
    > > happily continue on your path without learning much more than you
    > > would have to learn with a Mac. In fact, why not try a Mac? It
    > > might suit you well if that's all you want to do, and it will give
    > > you an opportunity to play around with a system that can be called
    > > UNIX to some degree.

    >
    > Stiking it to the man by getting a mac?
    >
    > > On the other hand, if you are interested in understanding how to
    > > program UNIX, and how to get under the hood, I suggest that you
    > > take a UNIX that provides good documentation, a clean environment,
    > > with minimal overhead;


    Or just stick with the Mac... it's an extremely productive
    environment, and good for non-coding tasks as well.

    > > grab yourself a good book on UNIX; learn how
    > > to read man pages and use the shell; and, dive right into the midst
    > > of things, knowing that at first you are going to have a steep
    > > learning curve.

    >
    > > If you are willing to do that, then Slackware and OpenBSD, or NetBSD,
    > > are all good choices.


    Also Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris. Other Linux distributions would also
    be suitable, notably Gentoo.

    >
    > I agree, but you don't mention FreeBSD at all; Is there a specific
    > reason?



  7. Re: new too unix

    On Oct 9, 1:42 am, Aaron W. Hsu wrote:
    > toby writes:
    > >Or just stick with the Mac... it's an extremely productive
    > >environment, and good for non-coding tasks as well.


    > It is good for non-coding tasks, but if you just want a no
    > hassle system for understanding UNIX, it is a rough place to
    > start, because many of the features will be non-standard or
    > will operate in non-standard ways.


    A lot also depends on what you mean by "Unix". It's obviously
    not part of the standard, but most people I know, when they say
    Unix, also expect X. Which I don't think that the Mac has.

    > >> > If you are willing to do that, then Slackware and
    > >> > OpenBSD, or NetBSD, are all good choices.

    > >Also Solaris 10 and OpenSolaris. Other Linux distributions would also
    > >be suitable, notably Gentoo.


    > Solaris would be a good one to try, though I might suggest
    > that Gentoo is pretty hands on in a bad way. There are many
    > Gentoo Specific things involved with using Gentoo that might
    > make it difficult to distinguish what is standard UNIX
    > behavior and what is not.


    Formally, Solaris is the only "Unix" that's been mentionned so
    far. Practically... depending on what he's trying to learn,
    just installing CygWin or UWin under Windows might be all he
    needs. If not, Linux (and doubtlessly the others mentionned,
    although I'm not familiar with them) are close enough to Unix
    for most purposes.

    --
    James Kanze (GABI Software) email:james.kanze@gmail.com
    Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
    Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
    9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34

  8. Re: new too unix

    James Kanze writes:

    [...]

    >> Solaris would be a good one to try, though I might suggest
    >> that Gentoo is pretty hands on in a bad way. There are many
    >> Gentoo Specific things involved with using Gentoo that might
    >> make it difficult to distinguish what is standard UNIX
    >> behavior and what is not.

    >
    > Formally, Solaris is the only "Unix" that's been mentionned so
    > far.


    Not really. Mac OS X 10.5 (IIRC, 'Leopard') is certified as UNIX(*),
    too.

    > Practically... depending on what he's trying to learn,
    > just installing CygWin or UWin under Windows might be all he
    > needs.


    'Practically', just reading the UNIX(*)-standard should be entirely
    sufficient. That would at least avoid having to deal with anything
    not really suitable for minors :->.

    > If not, Linux (and doubtlessly the others mentionned,
    > although I'm not familiar with them) are close enough to Unix
    > for most purposes.


    'Linux' is a kernel and systems using this kernel come in many
    different flavors, which are basically all designed by Windows
    refugees to recreate their familiar environment, ie lots of
    complicated software trying to heuristically solve unsolvable
    problems (or even non-problems, ie 'Why is booting so simple that even
    I understand it? Time for a change !!!1') which causes all kinds of
    really weird failure in situations believed to be fringe cases.

    A Linux-based system can make a nice UNIX(*)-workstation, provided
    one already knows what that is and actually wants it. But I suspect
    the typical new-user experience is rather that of a half-assed
    Windows-clone, 'this program has just crashed'-popups included, with
    some macintoshy elements. A variant of Vista, so to say.

  9. Re: new too unix

    James Kanze writes:

    >A lot also depends on what you mean by "Unix". It's obviously
    >not part of the standard, but most people I know, when they say
    >Unix, also expect X. Which I don't think that the Mac has.


    It does.

    --
    dhs spencer@panix.com

  10. Re: new too unix

    In article ,
    David Spencer wrote:
    >James Kanze writes:
    >
    >>A lot also depends on what you mean by "Unix". It's obviously
    >>not part of the standard, but most people I know, when they say
    >>Unix, also expect X. Which I don't think that the Mac has.

    >
    >It does.


    To clarify, it isn't installed by default, so the statement that it
    doesn't is valid. I'm told that it can be installed (from the original
    distribution media), but I've never gotten around to doing so.


  11. Re: new too unix

    On Oct 19, 8:41*pm, Aaron W. Hsu wrote:
    > gaze...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes:
    > >In article ,
    > >David Spencer * wrote:
    > >>James Kanze writes:

    >
    > >>>A lot also depends on what you mean by "Unix". *It's obviously
    > >>>not part of the standard, but most people I know, when they say
    > >>>Unix, also expect X. *Which I don't think that the Mac has.

    >
    > >>It does.

    > >To clarify, it isn't installed by default, so the statement that it
    > >doesn't is valid. *I'm told that it can be installed (from the original
    > >distribution media), but I've never gotten around to doing so.

    >
    > Most of the machines I have seen that have been sent out recently
    > do come with X11 installed by default.


    Indeed Leopard has it by default.
    http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=80171

    Also see:
    http://developer.apple.com/opensource/tools/X11.html

    But it's all rather moot. OS X is a very congenial and polished
    introduction to UNIX, lacking little. If someone wants Linux-style
    package management and window management then they can fire up one of
    the great distros out there. It all depends on what the OP is most
    comfortable with.

    >
    > * * * * Aaron Hsu
    >
    > --
    > +++++++++++++++ ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) +++++++++++++++
    > Email: | WWW:
    > Scheme Programming is subtle; subtlety can be hard.
    > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++



  12. Re: new too unix

    toby writes:
    > On Oct 19, 8:41*pm, Aaron W. Hsu wrote:
    >> gaze...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes:
    >> >In article ,
    >> >David Spencer * wrote:
    >> >>James Kanze writes:
    >> >>>A lot also depends on what you mean by "Unix". *It's obviously
    >> >>>not part of the standard, but most people I know, when they say
    >> >>>Unix, also expect X. *Which I don't think that the Mac has.


    [...]

    >> Most of the machines I have seen that have been sent out recently
    >> do come with X11 installed by default.

    >
    > Indeed Leopard has it by default.
    > http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=80171
    >
    > Also see:
    > http://developer.apple.com/opensource/tools/X11.html
    >
    > But it's all rather moot. OS X is a very congenial and polished
    > introduction to UNIX, lacking little.


    It is possible to find a random collection of partially dysfunctional
    FreeBSD-parts below what people would usually consider to be Mac OS X
    (the GUI). Additionally, the system supports a programming environment
    (one of several, this being the most 'alien' one) sufficiently
    compatible with the UNIX(*)-standard to achieve a certification.

    As an introduction to 'UNIX(*)', using a Mac OS X installation will be
    somewhat less painful and a little less 'incompeletly hanging in the
    air' than a Cygwin-installation on Windows (except insofar the Mac can
    be expected to 'crash' whenever it is left alone for more than five
    minutes, at least, that was a behaviour common to all such beasts I
    had the mispleasure to deal with so far).

+ Reply to Thread