The Comeing of Akir!!!

[Akir]

HI!
This is Akir speaking. I've loved to browse NFG games for a while, and (though I thought I already signed up before... That was before I resolved to be more dutiful) thought I'd join the Forums so I could comment on how innovative and nice the DS (Which I now have) is and how Evil and bad the PSP is. Then again, anything Sony makes is bad. My father owns a TV shop, and we get more Sonys then anything else...
Anyone curious as to how I think should go to my wonderful blog.

The Blog of Akir.

Actually, when I evtered the Forums, I was dissapointed. You're using the Invision Power Board. Only PHPbb is any good in my oppinion. IPS is an evil company that will make you pay for their software. OK, maybe I am exadurating a litle bit...

An interesting Tidbit: My name was ripped off by a black Sweedish Rapper. Interesting, isn't it?

[Aidan]

vBulletin, in my experience, is somewhat better than both phpBB and Invision. Of course, as the load scales upwards, you start to have to investigate PHP accelerators, but that's life. It's a shame that PHP doesn't do some sort of rudimentary form of caching the tokenised code normally.

[atom]

I like the simplicity of PHPbb or if I am going perl its def YABB!!!!

[Akir]

Aidian, I thought I knew a lot about web forums, but you blew me out of the water there.

[Aidan]

I've just had limited exposure to trying to run a forum. Installing the forum is generally the easiest bit. Modding the code to run the way you want it to run is almost a full time job at points. The site I admin is not quite at the point of needing a PHP accelerator, but is at the point where I had to compile Apache and PHP with custom options to keep the amount of memory used down. The server it's running on does have a couple gigs of RAM, but I want to make the most of it. Upgrading that RAM is too much $$$.

[Akir]

A coupla Gigs of ram seems like more then enough to run a web server, but then again, I'm cheep.

I'd found that Linux makes the best OS for web servers (and anything else) Instead of Win-Doze running the "Master App," (which is "Explorer") Linux is run by many different programs. then you can just close the un-necesary programs to free up system resources.

This little review may be a little bias, because I hate XP.

[Aidan]

On a Windows server, if you don't log in, explorer doesn't run. There are also replacements for the shell (explorer) should you wish to do so.

In terms of Linux, I tend to tune the kernel up to the machine it's running on too. First thing to go is LKM support. The machine isn't going to change hardware config, so I can compile all hardware support directly into the kernel. This also has the advantage of further securing the system, as some root kits use LKMs to hide their deeds.

Once a small lean kernel is in place, you can then tune up the rest of the applications. However, you will need to compile them yourself to do so. This gives you the ability to set exactly the optimisation flags needed. Many linux distros assume you have a generic 386 compatible processor. This provides the best compatibility, but at the expense of speed and memory. Tuning up the compilation then allows you to target the platform you're on directly, and not screw around with compatibility stuff.

As far as the server in question goes, approximately 12% of it's RAM is currently free. (IE, either idle or used for caching). We've hit server loads of over 36,000 web pages per day.

[atom]

I'd found that Linux makes the best OS for web servers (and anything else) Instead of Win-Doze running the "Master App," (which is "Explorer") Linux is run by many different programs. then you can just close the un-necesary programs to free up system resources.

DISCLAIMER: TAKE WHAT I SAY LIGHTLY, I AM NOT PUTTING YOU DOWN
I OFTEN COME ACROSS LIKE A JERKOFF, BECAUSE I AM

Your nuts. For one, Linux has a shell just like Windows. If you are smart enough to run a decent linux server then you should be able to tinker around with your windows installation. For one, you can completley rip out the shell, and just have windows load your server app on startup. You can then disable all other services.

The idea that Linux is some sort of Super HACKER Operating System is a myth. A well managed Linux machine crashes just as much as an Win2k, XP, or Server2k3 machine. Its when you have 300 programs swapping drivers and fighting for the same memory that problems occur.

Linux is the king for servers for one reason. Its free. Imagine being the administrator for google. Now you have a room full of 78 servers. Imagine paying a $250 license for each machine to run windows. Screw that.

Now imagine being Lawrence on the other hand. He is the administrator for NFG. Imagine a room full of one computer. He can copy his XP installation and resuse the license and hack the activation. He uses a free webserver downloaded off the internet that is very stable and liteweight. Its most convenient for him because its easy, stable, and he doesnt have to learn a whole new operating system that probably doesnt support any of his hardware.

[NFG]

Hey, Atom, how'd you know what my server runs on?  Are you spying on me?

That said, I'm moving to Australia in a couple of months, but leaving the server behind.  I'll be mirroring the boot drive and the whole site, but what else can I do to ensure the thing runs without intervention?  I'll be a month between visits in the result of a failure.

The plan is RAID plus everything not mandatory removed from the system.  It'll sit behind an iron-clad coyote linux firewall.  I need to work out SSH for remote admin tho...  For remote desktop access and firewal maintenance.  Any opinions?

[atom]

Lawrence, maybe if you updated your windows and patched the old security hole on port 19, I wouldnt be able to finger you. Nah, jk, that almost was as rediculous as the stuff they say in Swordfish. I remember you saying something about your server before, and that you use aprelium which is what i used to use.

The only advice I can give you is to shut down as many windows services as possible. Thats really where most of the security holes are. And if something goes awry, will there be someone around to hit the reset button? (assumes sexy reset button with flashing led)

[Aidan]

Your nuts. For one, Linux has a shell just like Windows. If you are smart enough to run a decent linux server then you should be able to tinker around with your windows installation.  

The idea that Linux is some sort of Super HACKER Operating System is a myth.

Yes, I've modified the quote.

There are subtle differences between Linux and Windows when it comes to remote administation. Linux has the advantage here, as it's much easier to securely adjust the configuration of the system, verses Windows which is much more of a royal pain.

Linux is a HACKER operating system, as it's much easier to do all sorts of things under Linux than under Windows, even if money is no object.  Yes, I do run Linux, Windows, OpenBSD and OS/2.

Lawrence, what do you require in order to keep your site hosted? What issues have you had with the system so far? A hardware failure would probably take out the system, so you're rather limited to what you can do there, short of mirroring the data on another system (AKA Backups!). Like all disaster recovery, make sure you've actually tested it before assuming it will work... DR has a nasty habit of not working right when you need it.

[NFG]

The system as it stands has 100% uptime.  I haven't suffered a single failure since it was installed.  It boots automatically, and I can admin it remotely with the desktop sharing, and I can reboot it remotely if I need to.  It runs the webserver, perl, and PHP.  Also a mailserver and FTP server.  While it's nothing that can't be run on a linux server the hassles of learning a whole new system put me way off.  I tried to run apache for windows, but c'mon - no admin console out of the box?  I'm of the "run it first and read the manual when it fails" school.  Reading the manual for two hours and then setting up endless config options just to get it running the first time is for chumps.  =)

I'm not anticipating failures.  It's dead easy to make a system reliable, and since I'll have 100% of the content backed up remotely in the event of a failure I'll just set it all up on a different box.  I'm leaving it in Japan 'cause a dedicated 100mbit line without limits or restrictions is $35, and in Australia it's $150 for an uncapped 1.5mbit line.  I push 40GB per month through the webserver alone, the FTP does double or triple that.  Australia would bankrupt me, and for the price of professional hosting I can build a really beefy system and serve it myself without traffic charges.

The only drawback is the 10,000km between it and me.  =)

[Aidan]

I wasn't anticipating failures this week either. However, that didn't stop one of my servers from developing a power supply fault, and then keeling over. Fortunately, the guys in the data center had no problems changing the PSU over for me.

As far as apache goes, it's kinda like, take default config file, change the webroot path to where you want to store the data. Run apache, and you're done. Ok, I don't run a standard apache config, so I have need of some 'interesting' features, which makes my configuration a bit more complex. I plan on adding some more 'interesting' features, depending on how much time I get to implement things.

[atom]

Apache for windows sucks. Id almost run IIS over it. And yeah, never cheap out on a power supply, my cheap one is killing all my hardware as we speak.

You pay 35 bucks for a 100mbit connection? I pay $29.99 for a megabyte connection here in the states. But your site is so fast! 100mbit would be .08mbyte right? Bah I CANT THINK WHEN IM THIS SICK

going to go law down now

[NFG]

100mbit is 12.5 MegaBytes per second.  I think my peak is closer to 6MB/s, and my best upload is 700kB/s to one guy in the states.

[Akir]

For one, Linux has a shell just like Windows.

Let's clarify what you mean by "Shell" on windows. Do you mean DOS? Nope, that's been removed since ME and (unconfirmed) NT. the little dos windows that you see now are (brace yourself) emulators. That is the reason why ver. 98 ran well with DOS apps, and the newer ones, not quite so well. Plus, with Linux, you're not limited to one single shell. BASH, the shell you're probibly refering to, and is the most common. If you're talking about the windows screen that you get when you finish booting, You're bananas (because nuts and bananas go together). I can't find anything simaler, other then they run visual apps in windows.

If you are smart enough to run a decent linux server then you should be able to tinker around with your windows installation.

There, you're wrong. There's no sorce code to edit with windows.

For one, you can completley rip out the shell, and just have windows load your server app on startup. You can then disable all other services.

There is no shell! furthermore, most applications of windows are built into "Explorer," Even IE, and all your basic comm. programs (like dhcp, samba client, aka "sharing;"  and even your LPT, COM, and USB ports.). Thus, you cannot shut it all down.

The idea that Linux is some sort of Super HACKER Operating System is a myth.

It isn't a myth. Open sources mean that you can hack into them as much as you want. My aquantince shawn said something that made me laugh so hard when he said it: "Hey, I heard Linux is filing lawsuits to handle all of the hackers."  LOL, my friend; LOL.

A well managed Linux machine crashes just as much as an Win2k, XP, or Server2k3 machine.

From experiance alone, I say that this is completely false. The only problem that I ever had with an older copy of ARKlinux (Which, strangely enough, don't work as well as their previous betas) was a couple of problems of when I was refering to programs that were not yet installed. And windows crashes more often then cars on the road, and that's A LOT!

Its when you have 300 programs swapping drivers and fighting for the same memory that problems occur.

That's true. That's why I suggest that you have linux, because you can control them.

Linux is the king for servers for one reason. Its free. Imagine being the administrator for google. Now you have a room full of 78 servers. Imagine paying a $250 license for each machine to run windows. Screw that.

Duh! the only part that I disagree with is "for one reason."

Now imagine being Lawrence on the other hand. He is the administrator for NFG. Imagine a room full of one computer. He can copy his XP installation and resuse the license...

well, their users needed some retrobution.

...and hack the activation.

Hello, are you out there? Windows hates that. once they hear of this, Lawrence would be absolutely hated by macro-cash.

He uses a free webserver downloaded off the internet that is very stable and liteweight. Its most convenient for him because its easy, stable, and he doesnt have to learn a whole new operating system that probably doesnt support any of his hardware.

Oh, good. He uses Apache.

[Aidan]

There is no shell! furthermore, most applications of windows are built into "Explorer," Even IE, and all your basic comm. programs (like dhcp, samba client, aka "sharing;"  and even your LPT, COM, and USB ports.). Thus, you cannot shut it all down.

I think you're a little confused here. Explorer.exe is the shell on windows. It can be replaced with other shells. That's hardly big news nowdays, as people have been doing this for years. There's plenty of alternative shells out there - some people even built their business model on 'em.

The SMB server and client runs as a seperate processes, called 'netsvcs.exe'. Yes, it's the same executable for both functions. No dependances on explorer there.

LPT, COM and USB ports are managed by device drivers. Oddly enough, this is exactly how it works in Linux too. Want to shut them down? Remove the drivers from the load order. No dependances on explorer here either.

Guess what - DHCP is exactly the same concept, a seperate process running, with no dependances on explorer.

From experiance alone, I say that this is completely false. The only problem that I ever had with an older copy of ARKlinux (Which, strangely enough, don't work as well as their previous betas) was a couple of problems of when I was refering to programs that were not yet installed.

A well installed and well maintained Windows system will continue running quite happily without crashing. How do I know? Well, I help administer a bunch of Windows machines. They don't crash, they just sit there and serve. Oddly enough, right above/below them in the rack is a bunch of Linux machines. They don't crash, they just sit there and serve.  Who has the advantage here? Neither - they both run reliably.  Of course, that picture changes if you install badly written drivers - both Linux and Windows are quite happy to fall over at that point.

Open sources mean that you can hack into them as much as you want.

Very few people actually even bother looking at the source code when it comes to open source. It's nice to know there's source code there, but it's rather pointless for 99.9% of people. After all, how many people download a CD or few with their favourite distribution of Linux on, then install it. That's great, but they don't generally download the source code for any of the code. Some Linux distros don't even bother shipping the kernel headers as standard, which really throws the whole source code stuff out the window.

Oh, good. He uses Apache.

No, he doesn't use Apache. Apache is NOT lightweight at all! However, if you look closely you can see exactly which server he is using.


One thing to remember is where the NT kernel came from. Unlike the Win16 progression, the NT kernel was designed by people who knew what they were doing. For example, David Cutler, the designer of VMS also did the design for the NT kernel.  

[Akir]

I think you're a little confused here. Explorer.exe is the shell on windows.

Since there are many definitions of "shell," both of us are right, and both are probibly confused

It can be replaced with other shells. That's hardly big news nowdays, as people have been doing this for years. There's plenty of alternative shells out there - some people even built their business model on 'em.

Name one of any of them: I've not heard of any case.

The SMB server and client runs as a seperate processes, called 'netsvcs.exe'. Yes, it's the same executable for both functions. No dependances on explorer there.

LPT, COM and USB ports are managed by device drivers. Oddly enough, this is exactly how it works in Linux too. Want to shut them down? Remove the drivers from the load order. No dependances on explorer here either.

Guess what - DHCP is exactly the same concept, a seperate process running, with no dependances on explorer.

Most versions of windows don't let you change these processes, like ME. For a standard un-edited installation, all you get for your end program dialogue box is "Explorer," "Systray," and whatever other programs are running in windows or the task bar.

A well installed and well maintained Windows system will continue running quite happily without crashing. How do I know? Well, I help administer a bunch of Windows machines. They don't crash, they just sit there and serve. Oddly enough, right above/below them in the rack is a bunch of Linux machines. They don't crash, they just sit there and serve.  Who has the advantage here? Neither - they both run reliably.  Of course, that picture changes if you install badly written drivers - both Linux and Windows are quite happy to fall over at that point.

This proves you're honest. You are one of the few non biased people in the world.

Very few people actually even bother looking at the source code when it comes to open source.

That's also true. I've never looked at any source code, except when I was moding audacity for a program to run when it started.

That's great, but they don't generally download the source code for any of the code.

since many of the programs come uncompiled for greater compatibility from distro to distro, most likely, you are. Even Portage on gentoo downloads the source code to compile. In reality, linux isn't made to be the ultimate custimization OS, but in the end, it's a byproduct of it's security.

No, he doesn't use Apache.

That was an inside joke. You would laugh, if you were one of the people who strive to keep Open source.

[Aidan]

Name one of any of them: I've not heard of any case.

Ok, here's some for starters: Aston, Geoshell, BoS, Darkstep, ThinTop, GO, SharpE, LiteStep, Ingenieum, parasite.

Most versions of windows don't let you change these processes, like ME. For a standard un-edited installation, all you get for your end program dialogue box is "Explorer," "Systray," and whatever other programs are running in windows or the task bar.

All Windows NT based systems allow you to stop and start these processes. There's at least two ways - first way is to use the services control panel, the second way is to use the net start and net stop commands. There's no point throwing in Windows ME, as a) it's an unsupported product; and B) using it as a comparison is like trying to compare other OSes to a 2.2 kernel linux system.

This proves you're honest. You are one of the few non biased people in the world.

Not necessarily. An operating system is not a religion, it won't save the world, nor will it feed the poor. However, it is a tool. I choose the tools I think will best do the job. Sometimes that's Windows, sometimes that Linux, sometimes it's OS/2 Warp, sometimes it's OpenBSD. That's called not being a fanatic.

since many of the programs come uncompiled for greater compatibility from distro to distro, most likely, you are. Even Portage on gentoo downloads the source code to compile. In reality, linux isn't made to be the ultimate custimization OS, but in the end, it's a byproduct of it's security.

Again, I would disagree. Most users simply use the package manager from their distribution (such as RPM, apt-get, YaST2 and so on) to download the appropriate binaries. Those tools generally download ready made binaries, not source code. Gentoo, and LFS more so, are a little bit of a special case in that they do download the source and then compile it. Gentoo took this route in response to the fact that just about every other distribution provided binary packages that were not optimised for the system that they were going to run on.

Having built a number of Gentoo systems, I'm well aware of just how long it takes to compile a working system. Just compiling glibc can take over three hours.

Explain to me how source code makes linux more secure? We already know that Windows 2003 is more secure out of the box than Fedora is.

You would laugh, if you were one of the people who strive to keep Open source.

Why? Lawrence is using an open source web server. Apache is not the only web server in the world, oddly enough.

[NFG]

Actually Abyss isn't open source.  Free, yes.  Open, no.

I kinda wish it was, the guys who write it have been promising a significant upgrade since about October.  =/

[Aidan]

You are indeed correct - my apologies for that bit of misinformation. It's a cross platform (Windows/Linux/BSD/OS X) closed source free webserver.

Will wonders never cease?

[atom]

Akir, you remind me of myself not too long ago. I learned however not to run on when I realize I don't know what Im talking about. Your operating system has two parts: The "kernel" and the "shell".The kernel manages the multitasking, the file system, communication with hardware (often via drivers) etc. The Shell, is your user interface. In windows this is usually explorer, in Linux it is KDE or GNOME.In a windows enviroment, there are portions of the shell embedded in the kernel. This however in no way makes Explorer the "master program." Ports are managed by drivers. Most hardware is managed by drivers, it can also be accessed via the BIOS.And about windows and dos. The dos you are reffering to is old 16bit msdos. Windows 95 was nothing more then a 16bit dos application that used many 32 bit capabilities. Windows 98, 98se, and YES ME, are all upgrades of windows 95. They are all not "true" operating systems. They are dos programs, dos is loaded first, and then windows loaded within it. But guess what? Windows XP is not at all an upgrade from Windows ME. It was developed from Windows 2000, which came from the Windows NT core. Windows NT is and as far as I know always have been its own OS. And your Windows XP command prompt is not an emulator for dos. It is just what it says.

Hackability? Are you kidding me? If you mean customizeable...
http://xavier.servercove.com/~atom/imagebin/desktop.gif

Quit being a fanboy.

[Akir]

Atom, your statements were all just restatemnets of things that I already know.  The great majority of my computer experiance was with Windows. One thing that wasn't true, though, was that you said that ME was loaded off of dos. That's not true. Note that there's no "Reboot in MS DOS" in the shut down dialogue. It's becuse it doesnt have dos. And I'm not talking about the command prompt. What I think you're talking about is the Run... Dialogue in the start menu. What I'm talking about is command.com. type ver in it and you'll get Windows XP. Also, I'm not saying that Windows isn't hackable. It just isn't reccomended by Microsoft or any other company (unless your hack is owned by a company, and in that case, maybe). In reality, everything can be hacked. DeJap proved that with theri transilations.

And furthermore, I'm not a fanboy. I meerly wish to give all of you information based on my experiances. If I didn't know any better, I'd think you were trying to troll me.

[Guest]

No, its not dos. Its just windows command prompt. Just because its a black box doesnt mean its dos. Its for running low level programs and has some limited compatibility of dos programs.

[Aidan]

One thing that wasn't true, though, was that you said that ME was loaded off of dos. That's not true. Note that there's no "Reboot in MS DOS" in the shut down dialogue. It's becuse it doesnt have dos.

I'm not sure how the lack of a menu option demonstrates that there is no 16bit real mode involved? That seems to be a very tenous link.

Windows ME still boots the same old 16bit real mode file (IO.SYS) to get itself up and running.

[atom]

As opposed to NTLDR, which is 32bit protected mode.