Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: BlueQuartz?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    1,376

    BlueQuartz?

    I've worked with a variety of servers--cPanel a few years back, mostly Gentoo now. But a little bit of nostalgia has me remembering the days when I was ogling the RaQ 2.

    By chance, I came across BlueQuartz today. I think I'm gonna have a go installing it into a Xen VM on my desktop, but I wonder what to expect. Is it a "working" system, or still early beta as some sites mention? I'm not getting much information from the BlueQuartz.org page. I wouldn't be running this on a "real" RaQ, but a whitebox server.

    I just wonder what's out there -- will it do PHP and MySQL? Webmail? Is someone working on a better BlueQuartz.org page? Are people hosting live sites on BlueQuartz?
      0 Not allowed!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275
    BlueQuartz is essentially a port of the original (production) Sun/Cobalt GUI, which Sun open-sourced. It's a fully working system. A CentOS+BQ system (Nuonce.net has one, Strongbolt is another) together includes PHP, MySQL, Apache, and so forth -- a fully functional web-hosting system.

    As noted above, www.nuonce.net has a full installer for CentOS+BQ for a whitebox PC. It runs really well, in my experience.
      0 Not allowed!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    106
    We run BlueQuartz on several of our production systems, as well as on many dedicated servers. In fact, we have nearly 200 BQ systems running in our datacenter now, not including VPS or customer colo equipment. Our track record with it has been very good.

    The control panel is fairly basic, which depending on how you look at it, is either a good thing or a bad thing. Our lower-end hosting customers really prefer it because it's so straight-forward. OTOH, some of our higher-end customers prefer we put them on a platform such as Plesk because there are more user-modifiable features, as well as the ability to give 3 levels of administration, vs. 2 on the BQ.

    Grab the Nuonce installer and give it a try for yourself. If you come from a Cobalt background, you'll enjoy it.
    Chris Gebhardt
    VIRTBIZ Internet Services
    Web Hosting, Dallas Colocation, Dedicated Server
    virtbiz.com | ph (972)485-4125 | toll-free (866)485-4125
      0 Not allowed!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325
    Quote Originally Posted by virtbiz View Post
    "never updated rip off software"? Zeffie, would you please clarify how you find the CentOS and BlueQuartz repositories to be "never updated" and the price of free to be a "rip off"? I don't believe I understand.

    No you don't understand and I think if you really wanted to know about the problems you would of contacted me instead of causing problems on the BQ list.


    Quote Originally Posted by virtbiz View Post
    We run BlueQuartz on several of our production systems, as well as on many dedicated servers. In fact, we have nearly 200 BQ systems running in our datacenter now, not including VPS or customer colo equipment.

    That said I'm shocked you didn't contact me. After the post I have made to the BQ list pointing to updates for several CVE's and the Dovecott problem, I Just don't know why you would want to do such a dis-service to your customers???

    anyway.. as You know should know from years of me being around... I don't detail/expose security holes in public. I will however expose companies that do not provide updates for products they sell... IE: StrongBolt and rackstar. And there I will post the reasons as I already have... I would suggest you read the old threads to understand more... I Don't think I need to repeat myself on these issues...
      0 Not allowed!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by zeffie View Post
    I will however expose companies that do not provide updates for products they sell... IE: StrongBolt and rackstar. And there I will post the reasons as I already have... I would suggest you read the old threads to understand more... I Don't think I need to repeat myself on these issues...
    And while I probably don't need to repeat myself, I will -- CentOS-based systems (of which Strongbolt is one) get "yum" updates, and thus get updated far, far more often than (e.g.) Zeffie's ancient incarnations of the original Raq OS releases from the late 1990s.
      0 Not allowed!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325
    Your StrongBolt kernel is old and never updated and YOU even tried to lie about it...
    http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=653475

    I'm thinking I'll just start posting the exact problems since BQ isn't a commercial system anyway... Just to help the Community that is!
      0 Not allowed!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275
    Please note that there is no such thing as the "Strongbolt kernel". Strongbolt is an installer that does a net install of the CentOS+BlueQuartz system that all major Raq support companies now use. Nuonce has another system.

    Zeffie, before posting, please check to see if you know what you're talking about.
      0 Not allowed!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325
    Wrong again

    http://www.osoffice.co.uk/linux/raq4...el-source/2.6/

    Redhat/Centos is designed to run on a pc... not a custom made board without standard pc bio's etc...

    You should know this by now.
      0 Not allowed!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275
    You know, I don't know whether you are willfully belligerent or just stupid. As this page says:
    The Strongbolt project is the revival of Sun Cobalt's server appliance product family. Sun Microsystems discontinued the Cobalt line of servers in 2004, and the last patch was released April 19, 2004. ... The Strongbolt server is built on Centos.

    Coupled with this, the ease of use of a Cobalt RaQ is provided by the Open Source version of the cobalt control panel: BlueQuartz.
    Perhaps if you went to school to get a computer science degree you would understand the difference between a kernel and the system of which it is a part.
      0 Not allowed!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325
    You can find the patch they used here
    http://www.osoffice.co.uk/linux/patches/

    and you can find the home of the patch here
    http://gentoo.404ster.com/projects.php?action=view&id=4

    Why don't you Stop misleading people for your own goals!
      0 Not allowed!

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275
    Yes, CentOS is a variant of Linux. In fact, CentOS is a spin on Red Hat Linux. All of these used patched kernels.

    So, in the spirit of "for the blind, write large":

    Strongbolt <= CentOS <= RedHat Linux <= Linux

    Do you understand now?
      0 Not allowed!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325
    StrongBolt never made any updates for the kernel and you know it very well.

    But your kinda right...

    Strongbolt <= CentOS <= RedHat Linux <= Linux

    StrongBolt is less then Centos and Centos is Less then Redhat and redhat equals a Linux system that is not quite as current and the most current version of the Linux Kernel.

    HTH
      0 Not allowed!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275
    So you don't understand ... not surprising. Strongbolt is an installer for CentOS+BlueQuartz. It installs CentOS 4.4, which is a version of RedHat Enterprise Linux patched to run on the Raq. The rest of the system is updated via the Yum updaters. There were over 200 yum updates applied to my Raq system in December alone.

    As I said before, go get a CD degree before you comment further. Your competitors, Solarspeed, Nuonce, Raqware, and others all recommend CentOS+BQ.
      0 Not allowed!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325
    Quote Originally Posted by gnetwerker View Post
    So you don't understand ... not surprising. Strongbolt is an installer for CentOS+BlueQuartz. It installs CentOS 4.4, which is a version of RedHat Enterprise Linux patched to run on the Raq. The rest of the system is updated via the Yum updaters. There were over 200 yum updates applied to my Raq system in December alone.
    What do you need, The Cobalt Developers to write you and tell you? If You searched the Cobalt Users List archives you can read all about it...

    a RedHat/CentOS kernel rpm via yum will not create the files needed to boot any model of RaQ or Qube.

    OK.. I'll show you... The Standard RaQ4 rpm includes

    [root /root]# rpm -ql kernel
    /boot/System-2.2.16C37_III.map
    /boot/System.map
    /boot/vmlinux-2.2.16C37_III.bz2
    /boot/vmlinux-2.2.16C37_III.gz
    /boot/vmlinux.bz2
    /boot/vmlinux.gz
    <sniping the modules>
    /usr/src/linux
    /usr/src/linux-2.2.16C37_III

    and in /boot we find

    Code:
    [root /root]# ls -la /boot/
    total 2322
    drwxr-xr-x    2 root     root         1024 Jul 18  2003 .
    drwxr-xr-x   21 root     root         1024 Feb  3 04:02 ..
    -rw-r--r--    1 root     root       217023 Apr 12  2003 System-2.2.16C37_III.map
    lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           24 Jul 18  2003 System.map -> System-2.2.16C37_III.map
    -rw-r--r--    1 root     root       198935 Sep 25  2002 System.map.pkgsave
    -rw-r--r--    1 root     root       653768 Apr 12  2003 vmlinux-2.2.16C37_III.bz2
    -rw-r--r--    1 root     root       695920 Apr 12  2003 vmlinux-2.2.16C37_III.gz
    lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           25 Jul 18  2003 vmlinux.bz2 -> vmlinux-2.2.16C37_III.bz2
    lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           24 Jul 18  2003 vmlinux.gz -> vmlinux-2.2.16C37_III.gz
    -rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root       593774 Sep 25  2002 vmlinux.pkgsave
    You will notice that the links point to the current kernel version and are called vmlinux.gz and vmlinux.bz2. Which is what RaQ/Qube units use to boot from...


    Now from a nuonce install
    [[email protected] ~]# rpm -ql kernel
    /boot/System.map-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    /boot/config-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    <sniping the modules>

    and
    Code:
    [[email protected] ~]# ls -la /boot/
    total 3743
    drwxr-xr-x   4 root root    1024 Jan 28 20:26 .
    drwxr-xr-x  23 root root    4096 Jan 28 20:36 ..
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root     512 Jan 28 20:26 boot.0300
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root    5824 Feb 21  2005 boot.b
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root     612 Feb 21  2005 chain.b
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root   50433 Nov  2 11:12 config-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    drwxr-xr-x   2 root root    1024 Jan 28 20:26 grub
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root 1397567 Jan 28 20:24 initrd-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL.img
    drwx------   2 root root   12288 Jan 28 15:20 lost+found
    -rw-------   1 root root   33792 Jan 28 20:26 map
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root    9371 Aug 12  2006 message
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root    9371 Aug 12  2006 message.ja
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root     640 Feb 21  2005 os2_d.b
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root  754717 Nov  2 11:12 System.map-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root 1511559 Nov  2 11:12 vmlinuz-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    [[email protected] ~]#

    You can see the kernel is not linked to the ROM Required files.

    Now on the StrongBolt system...

    Code:
    [[email protected] ~]# ls -la /boot/
    total 9944
    drwxr-xr-x   2 root root    4096 Nov 30  2007 .
    drwxr-xr-x  23 root root    4096 Sep 30 08:09 ..
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root   49213 Mar 12  2006 config-2.6.9-34.EL
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root   50410 Nov  2  2007 config-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root   50409 Sep 27  2007 config-2.6.9-55.0.9.EL
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root  394213 Oct 15  2007 initrd-2.6.9-34.EL.img
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root  587470 Nov 30  2007 initrd-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL.img
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root  587470 Oct 15  2007 initrd-2.6.9-55.0.9.EL.img
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root  733779 Mar 12  2006 System.map-2.6.9-34.EL
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root  754754 Nov  2  2007 System.map-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root  754754 Sep 27  2007 System.map-2.6.9-55.0.9.EL
    -rwxr-xr-x   1 root root 1646073 Oct 15  2007 vmlinux.bz2
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root 1467406 Mar 12  2006 vmlinuz-2.6.9-34.EL
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root 1504704 Nov  2  2007 vmlinuz-2.6.9-55.0.12.EL
    -rw-r--r--   1 root root 1504719 Sep 27  2007 vmlinuz-2.6.9-55.0.9.EL
    You can see it's done lot's of Centos updates but the actual kernel...
    -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1646073 Oct 15 2007 vmlinux.bz2
    is a kernel and not a link to the CentOS Kernel. and it looks like StrongBolt made it executable oddly enough...

    Quote Originally Posted by gnetwerker View Post
    As I said before, go get a CD degree before you comment further. Your competitors, Solarspeed, Nuonce, Raqware, and others all recommend CentOS+BQ.
    Excuse me but they are not my competition. I don't sell anything BQ at the moment... But if I did make something I'd Probley give it away for free since BQ is a non-commercial product. So I'm not out pushing a OS so I can sell things like Security and Spamfilters...

    Now I do make money doing Migrations From the other never updated/crashed out versions to BQ systems. Maybe I should do more... I was just told by Paul Aviles that Hisao and Yutaka don't want BQ to become commercial. But I hate the thought that you might benefit form the free downloads like the updates I make and so I'm in no rush... and Yes I know I shouldn't punish the BQ community just because of your troublemaking... But I spend to much time on you do work with them...

    BOTTOM LINE

    The StrongBolt kernel is susceptible to public hacks as I write this and I'm guessing I'll get some crappy work with systems with Rootkits installed... That's just no fun!

    That's partially why I don't reccomend StrongBolt for anybody with a public ip...
      0 Not allowed!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325
    I just wanted to add... If your going to respond anymore to this please use your "CD degree" and make a technical argument instead of personal insults.
      0 Not allowed!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by gnetwerker View Post
    You know, I don't know whether you are willfully belligerent or just stupid. As this page says:
    The Strongbolt project is the revival of Sun Cobalt's server appliance product family. Sun Microsystems discontinued the Cobalt line of servers in 2004, and the last patch was released April 19, 2004. ... The Strongbolt server is built on Centos.

    Coupled with this, the ease of use of a Cobalt RaQ is provided by the Open Source version of the cobalt control panel: BlueQuartz.
    'Nuff said.
      0 Not allowed!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325
    Quote Originally Posted by gnetwerker View Post
    'Nuff said.
    Nope sorry... now it's time to make sure people know that StrongBolt is another Never Updated Cobalt Ripoff. By Sending this information to the proper authorities.

    Nice "CD degree" response btw...
      0 Not allowed!

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by zeffie View Post
    Nope sorry... now it's time to make sure people know ... By Sending this information to the proper authorities.
    Ha! Thanks for the laugh -- who are you gonna call? The Internet Police? Get a grip!

    The truth:

    Raq OS4 restore: Linux 2.2
    CentOS for Raq: Linux 2.6

    The end.
      0 Not allowed!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325

    StrongBolt problem

    Quote Originally Posted by gnetwerker View Post
    Ha! Thanks for the laugh -- who are you gonna call? The Internet Police? Get a grip!

    The truth:

    Raq OS4 restore: Linux 2.2
    CentOS for Raq: Linux 2.6

    The end.
    Nice Technical Response...

    I have already Contacted Google (Where Tim Hockin works) and I will be contacting several more places... Unlike something like a useless anti-trust complaint that might waste taxpayers dollars, I'm making Fraud Complaints to various agencys...

    I expect they will be more fruit-full too...
      0 Not allowed!

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by zeffie View Post
    Nice Technical Response...
    Here's a technical response -- how about one from you? I mean, instead of silly and hollow legal threats.

    The second one -- not as updated, but uptime = 454 days on a public network. No intrusions, no security problems -- just reliability!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails cejntos.jpg   cejntos2.jpg  
    Last edited by gnetwerker; 02-04-2008 at 02:48 PM.
      0 Not allowed!

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    325

    Smile

    You know.. You have personally inspired me to do this.

    I have made no threats of legal action towards a company in the UK that I would have a hard time suing... I'm depending on the government to deal with them. But Like I said.. I will be contacting other agencies to report these bad business pratices...

    At the same time if companies like Google and Yahoo remove the site form there indexes and advert programs The world will be a better place...

    As far as Your technical response... I still don't see a technical response from you.
      0 Not allowed!

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    State of Disbelief
    Posts
    22,948
    Quote Originally Posted by zeffie View Post
    The world will be a better place...
    Starting now. Closing yet another thread here where the OP's question long gets forgotten while you two argue. If you can't cooperate, at least make your own suggestion without attacking the other's suggestions.
    Having problems, or maybe questions about WHT? Head over to the help desk!
      0 Not allowed!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •