mirror of
https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject.git
synced 2025-01-25 23:11:02 +08:00
20140818-4 选题
This commit is contained in:
DeadFire
parent
3650852de4
commit
05a4986f8b
@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
|
||||
Why Your Company Needs To Write More Open Source Software - ReadWrite
|
||||
================================================================================
|
||||
> Real innovation doesn't happen behind closed doors.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
**The Wall Street Journal [thinks][1] it's news that Zulily is developing** "more software in-house." It's not. At all. As [Eric Raymond wrote][2] years ago, 95% of the world's software is written for use, not for sale. The reasons are many, but one stands out: as Zulily CIO Luke Friang declares, it's "nearly impossible for a [off the shelf] solution to keep up with our pace."
|
||||
|
||||
True now, just as it was true 20 years ago.
|
||||
|
||||
But one thing is different, and it's something the WSJ completely missed. Historically software developed in-house was zealously kept proprietary because, the reasoning went, it was the source of a firm's competitive advantage. Today, however, companies increasingly realize the opposite: there is far more to be gained by open sourcing in-house software than keeping it closed.
|
||||
|
||||
Which is why your company needs to contribute more open-source code. Much more.
|
||||
|
||||
We've gone through an anomalous time these past 20 years. While most software continued to be written for internal use, most of the attention has been focused on vendors like SAP and Microsoft that build solutions that apply to a wide range of companies.
|
||||
|
||||
That's the theory, anyway.
|
||||
|
||||
In practice, buyers spent a small fortune on license fees, then a 5X multiple on top of that to make the software fit their requirements. For example, a company may spend $100,000 on an ERP system, but they're going to spend another $500,000 making it work.
|
||||
|
||||
One of the reasons open source took off, even in applications, was that companies could get a less functional product for free (or a relatively inexpensive fee) and then spend their implementation dollars tuning it to their needs. Either way, customization was necessary, but the open source approach was less costly and arguably more likely to result in a more tailored result.
|
||||
|
||||
Meanwhile, technology vendors doubled-down on "sameness," as Redmonk analyst [Stephen O'Grady describes][3]:
|
||||
|
||||
> The mainstream technology industry has, in recent years, eschewed specialization. Virtual appliances, each running a version of the operating system customized for an application or purpose, have entirely failed to dent the sales of general purpose alternatives such as RHEL or Windows. For better than twenty years, the answer to any application data persistence requirement has meant one thing: a relational database. If you were talking about enterprise application development, you were talking about Java. And so on.
|
||||
|
||||
Along the way, however, companies discovered that vendors weren't really meeting their needs, even for well-understood product categories like Content Management Systems. They needed different, not same.
|
||||
|
||||
So the customers went rogue. They became vendors. Sort of.
|
||||
|
||||
As is often the case, [O'Grady nails][4] this point. Writing in 2010, O'Grady uncovers an interesting trend: "Software vendors are facing a powerful new market competitor: their customers."
|
||||
|
||||
Think about the most visible technologies today. Most are open source, and nearly all of them were originally written for some company's internal use, or some developer's hobby. Linux, Git, Hadoop, Cassandra, MongoDB, Android, etc. None of these technologies were originally written to be sold as products.
|
||||
|
||||
Instead, they were developed by companies—usually Web companies—building software to "[scratch their own itches][5]," to use the open source phrase. And unlike previous generations of in-house software developed at banks, hospitals and other organizations, they open sourced the code.
|
||||
|
||||
While [some companies eschew developing custom software][6] because they don't want to maintain it, open source (somewhat) mitigates this by letting a community grow up to extend and maintain a project, thereby amortizing the costs of development for the code originators. Yahoo! started Hadoop, but its biggest contributors today are Cloudera and Hortonworks. Facebook kickstarted Cassandra, but DataStax primarily maintains it today. And so on.
|
||||
|
||||
Today real software innovation doesn't happen behind closed doors. Or, if it does, it doesn't stay there. It's open source, and it's upending decades of established software orthodoxy.
|
||||
|
||||
Not that it's for the faint of heart.
|
||||
|
||||
The best open-source projects [innovate very fast][7]. Which is not the same as saying anyone will care about your open-source code. There are [significant pros and cons to open sourcing your code][8]. But one massive "pro" is that the best developers want to work on open code: if you need to hire quality developers, you need to give them an open source outlet for their work. (Just [ask Netflix][9].)
|
||||
|
||||
But that's no excuse to sit on the sidelines. It's time to get involved, and not for the good of some ill-defined "community." No, the primary beneficiary of open-source software development is you and your company. Better get started.
|
||||
|
||||
Lead image courtesy of Shutterstock.
|
||||
|
||||
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
via: http://readwrite.com/2014/08/16/open-source-software-business-zulily-erp-wall-street-journal
|
||||
|
||||
作者：[Matt Asay][a]
|
||||
译者：[译者ID](https://github.com/译者ID)
|
||||
校对：[校对者ID](https://github.com/校对者ID)
|
||||
|
||||
本文由 [LCTT](https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject) 原创翻译，[Linux中国](http://linux.cn/) 荣誉推出
|
||||
|
||||
[a]:http://readwrite.com/author/matt-asay
|
||||
[1]:http://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2014/08/08/zulily-calls-in-house-software-a-differentiator-for-competitive-advantage/
|
||||
[2]:http://oreilly.com/catalog/cathbazpaper/chapter/ch05.html
|
||||
[3]:http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2010/01/12/roll-your-own/#ixzz3ATBuZsef
|
||||
[4]:http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2010/01/12/roll-your-own/
|
||||
[5]:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar
|
||||
[6]:http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/roll_your_own_software_hidden_dangers_on_the_road_less_traveled/
|
||||
[7]:http://readwrite.com/2013/12/12/open-source-innovation
|
||||
[8]:http://readwrite.com/2014/07/07/open-source-software-pros-cons
|
||||
[9]:http://techblog.netflix.com/2012/07/open-source-at-netflix-by-ruslan.html
|
||||
@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
|
||||
Will Linux ever be able to give consumers what they want?
|
||||
================================================================================
|
||||
> Jack Wallen offers up the novel idea that giving the consumers what they want might well be the key to boundless success.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
In the world of consumer electronics, if you don't give the buyer what they want, they'll go elsewhere. We've recently witnessed this with the Firefox browser. The consumer wanted a faster, less-bloated piece of software, and the developers went in the other direction. In the end, the users migrated to Chrome or Chromium.
|
||||
|
||||
Linux needs to gaze deep into their crystal ball, watch carefully the final fallout of that browser war, and heed this bit of advice:
|
||||
|
||||
If you don't give them what they want, they'll leave.
|
||||
|
||||
Another great illustration of this backfiring is Windows 8. The consumer didn't want that interface. Microsoft, however, wanted it because it was necessary to begin the drive to all things Surface. This same scenario could have been applied to Canonical and Ubuntu Unity -- however, their goal wasn't geared singularly and specifically towards tablets (so, the interface was still highly functional and intuitive on the desktop).
|
||||
|
||||
For the longest time, it seemed like Linux developers and designers were gearing everything they did toward themselves. They took the "eat your own dog food" too far. In that, they forgot one very important thing:
|
||||
|
||||
Without new users, their "base" would only ever belong to them.
|
||||
|
||||
In other words, the choir had not only been preached to, it was the one doing the preaching. Let me give you three examples to hit this point home.
|
||||
|
||||
- For years, Linux has needed an equivalent of Active Directory. I would love to hand that title over to LDAP, but have you honestly tried to work with LDAP? It's a nightmare. Developers have tried to make LDAP easy, but none have succeeded. It amazes me that a platform that has thrived in multi-user situations still has nothing that can go toe-to-toe with AD. A team of developers needs to step up, start from scratch, and create the open-source equivalent to AD. This would be such a boon to mid-size companies looking to migrate away from Microsoft products. But until this product is created, the migration won't happen.
|
||||
- Another Microsoft-driven need -Exchange/Outlook. Yes, I realize that many are going to the cloud. But the truth is that mediumto large-scale businesses will continue relying on the Exchange/Outlook combo until something better comes along. This could very well happen within the open-source community. One piece of this puzzle is already there (though it needs some work) -the groupware client, Evolution. If someone could take, say, a fork of Zimbra and re-tool it such a way that it would work with Evolution (and even Thunderbird) to serve as a drop-in replacement for Exchange, the game would change, and the trickle-down to consumers would be massive.
|
||||
- Cheap, cheap, cheap. This one is a hard pill for most to swallow -but consumers (and businesses) want cheap. Look at the Chromebook sales over the last year. Now, do a search for a Linux laptop and see if you can find one for under $700.00 (USD). For a third of that cost, you can get a Chromebook (a platform running the Linux kernel) that will serve you well. But because Linux is still such a niche market, it's hard to get the cost down. A company like Red Hat Linux could change that. They already have the server hardware in place. Why not crank out a bunch of low-cost, mid-range laptops that work in similar fashion to the Chromebook but only run a full-blown Linux environment? (see "[Is the Cloudbook the future of Linux?][1]") The key is that these devices must be low-cost and meet the needs of the average consumer. Stop thinking with your gamer/developer hat on and remember what the average user really needs -a web browser and not much more. That's why the Chromebook is succeeding so handily. Google knew exactly what the consumer wanted, and they delivered. On the Linux front, companies still think the only way to attract buyers is to crank out high-end, expensive Linux hardware. There's a touch of irony there, considering one of the most-often shouted battle cries is that Linux runs on slower, older hardware.
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, Linux needs to take a page from the good ol' Book Of Jobs and figure out how to convince the consumer that what they truly need is Linux. In their businesses and in their homes -- everyone can benefit from using Linux. Honestly, how can the open-source community not pull that off? Linux already has the perfect built-in buzzwords: Stability, reliability, security, cloud, free -- plus Linux is already in the hands of an overwhelming amount of users (they just don't know it). It's now time to let them know. If you use Android or Chromebooks, you use (in one form or another) Linux.
|
||||
|
||||
Knowing just what the consumer wants has always been a bit of a stumbling block for the Linux community. And I get that -- so much of the development of Linux happens because a developer has a particular need. This means development is targeted to a "micro-niche." It's time, however, for the Linux development community to think globally. "What does the average user need, and how do we give it to them?" Let me offer up the most basic of primers.
|
||||
|
||||
The average user needs:
|
||||
|
||||
- Low cost
|
||||
- Seamless integration with devices and services
|
||||
- Intuitive and modern designs
|
||||
- A 100% solid browser experience
|
||||
|
||||
That's pretty much it. With those four points in mind, it should be easy to take a foundation of Linux and create exactly what the user wants. Google did it... certainly the Linux community can build on what Google has done and create something even better. Mix that in with AD integration, give it an Exchange/Outlook or cloud-based groupware set of tools, and something very special will happen -- people will buy it.
|
||||
|
||||
Do you think the Linux community will ever be able to give the consumer what they want? Share your opinion in the discussion thread below.
|
||||
|
||||
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
via: http://www.techrepublic.com/article/will-linux-ever-be-able-to-give-consumers-what-they-want/
|
||||
|
||||
作者：[Jack Wallen][a]
|
||||
译者：[译者ID](https://github.com/译者ID)
|
||||
校对：[校对者ID](https://github.com/校对者ID)
|
||||
|
||||
本文由 [LCTT](https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject) 原创翻译，[Linux中国](http://linux.cn/) 荣誉推出
|
||||
|
||||
[a]:http://www.techrepublic.com/search/?a=jack+wallen
|
||||
[1]:http://www.techrepublic.com/article/is-the-cloudbook-the-future-of-linux/
|
||||
@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
|
||||
Disable reboot using Ctrl-Alt-Del Keys in RHEL / CentOS
|
||||
================================================================================
|
||||
In Linux , It's a security concern for us to allow anyone to **reboot** the server using **Ctrl-Alt-Del keys**. It is always recommended in production boxes that one should disable reboot uisng Ctrl-Alt-Del keys.
|
||||
|
||||
In this article we will discuss how can we disable reboot via above keys in RHEL & CentOS
|
||||
|
||||
### For RHEL 5.X & CentOS 5.X ###
|
||||
|
||||
To prevent the **init** process from handling **Ctrl-Alt-Del**, edit the file '**/etc/inittab**' comment the line which begins with '**ca::ctrlaltdel**:' as shown below :
|
||||
|
||||
[root@localhost ~]# cat /etc/inittab
|
||||
# Trap CTRL-ALT-DELETE
|
||||
#ca::ctrlaltdel:/sbin/shutdown -t3 -r now
|
||||
|
||||
We can also modify the line 'ca::ctrlaltdel:' to generate logs , if anybody try to reboot the server using the keys ,
|
||||
|
||||
[root@localhost ~]# cat /etc/inittab
|
||||
# Trap CTRL-ALT-DELETE
|
||||
ca::ctrlaltdel:/bin/logger -p authpriv.warning -t init "Console-invoked Ctrl-Alt-Del was ignored"
|
||||
|
||||
### For RHEL6.X & CentOS 6.X ###
|
||||
|
||||
In RHEL 6.X / CentOS 6.X , reboot using the keys are handled by the file '**/etc/init/control-alt-delete.conf**'.
|
||||
|
||||
**Step:1** Before making the changes , first take the backup using below command
|
||||
|
||||
[root@localhost ~]# cp -v /etc/init/control-alt-delete.conf /etc/init/control-alt-delete.override
|
||||
|
||||
**Step:2** Edit the file , replacing the 'exec /sbin/shutdown' line with the following, which will simply generate a log entry each time Ctrl-Alt-Del is pressed:
|
||||
|
||||
[root@localhost ~]# cat /etc/init/control-alt-delete.conf
|
||||
exec /usr/bin/logger -p authpriv.notice -t init "Ctrl-Alt-Del was pressed and ignored"
|
||||
|
||||
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
via: http://www.linuxtechi.com/disable-reboot-using-ctrl-alt-del-keys/
|
||||
|
||||
作者：[Pradeep Kumar][a]
|
||||
译者：[译者ID](https://github.com/译者ID)
|
||||
校对：[校对者ID](https://github.com/校对者ID)
|
||||
|
||||
本文由 [LCTT](https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject) 原创翻译，[Linux中国](http://linux.cn/) 荣誉推出
|
||||
|
||||
[a]:http://www.linuxtechi.com/author/pradeep/
|
||||
@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
|
||||
How to configure Access Control Lists (ACLs) on Linux
|
||||
================================================================================
|
||||
Working with permissions on Linux is rather a simple task. You can define permissions for users, groups or others. This works really well when you work on a desktop PC or a virtual Linux instance which typically doesn't have a lot of users, or when users don't share files among themselves. However, what if you are a big organization where you operate NFS or Samba servers for diverse users. Then you will need to be neat picky and set up more complex configurations and permissions to meet the requirements of your organization.
|
||||
|
||||
Linux (and other Unixes, that are POSIX compliant) has so-called Access Control Lists (ACLs), which are a way to assign permissions beyond the common paradigm. For example, by default you apply three permission groups: owner, group, and others. With ACLs, you can add permissions for other users or groups that are not simple "others" or any other group that the owner is not part of it. You can allow particular users A, B and C to have write permissions without letting their whole group to have writing permission.
|
||||
|
||||
ACLs are available for a variety of Linux filesystems including ext2, ext3, ext4, XFS, Btfrs, etc. If you are not sure if the filesystem you are using supports ACLs, just read the documentation.
|
||||
|
||||
### Enable ACLs on your Filesystem ###
|
||||
|
||||
First of all, we need to install the tools to manage ACLs.
|
||||
|
||||
On Ubuntu/Debian:
|
||||
|
||||
$ sudo apt-get install acl
|
||||
|
||||
On CentOS/Fedora/RHEL:
|
||||
|
||||
# yum -y install acl
|
||||
|
||||
On Archlinux:
|
||||
|
||||
# pacman -S acl
|
||||
|
||||
For demonstration purpose, I will use Ubuntu server, but other distributions should work the same.
|
||||
|
||||
After installing ACL tools, it is necessary to enable ACL feature on our disk partitions so that we can start using it.
|
||||
|
||||
First, we can check if ACL feature is already enabled:
|
||||
|
||||
$ mount
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
As you noticed, my root partition has the ACL attribute enabled. In case yours doesn't, you need to edit your /etc/fstab file. Add acl flag in front of your options for the partition you want to enable ACL.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Now we need to re-mount the partition (I prefer to reboot completely, because I don't like losing data). If you enabled ACL for any other partitions, you have to remount them as well.
|
||||
|
||||
$ sudo mount / -o remount
|
||||
|
||||
Awesome! Now that we have enable ACL in our system, let's start to work with it.
|
||||
|
||||
### ACL Examples ###
|
||||
|
||||
Basically ACLs are managed by two commands: **setfacl** which is used to add or modify ACLs, and getfacl which shows assigned ACLs. Let's do some testing.
|
||||
|
||||
I created a directory /shared owned by a hypothetical user named freeuser.
|
||||
|
||||
$ ls -lh /
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
I want to share this directory with two other users test and test2, one with full permissions and the other with just read permission.
|
||||
|
||||
First, to set ACLs for user test:
|
||||
|
||||
$ sudo setfacl -m u:test:rwx /shared
|
||||
|
||||
Now user test can create directories, files, and access anything under /shared directory.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Now we will add read-only permission for user test2:
|
||||
|
||||
$ sudo setfacl -m u:test2:rx /shared
|
||||
|
||||
Note that execution permission is necessary so test2 can read directories.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Let me explain the syntax of setfacl command:
|
||||
|
||||
- **-m** means modify ACL. You can add new, or modify existing ACLs.
|
||||
- **u:** means user. You can use **g** to set group permissions.
|
||||
- **test** is the name of the user.
|
||||
- **:rwx** represents permissions you want to set.
|
||||
|
||||
Now let me show you how to read ACLs.
|
||||
|
||||
$ ls -lh /shared
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
As you noticed, there is a + (plus) sign after normal permissions. It means that there are ACLs set up. To actually read ACLs, we need to run:
|
||||
|
||||
$ sudo getfacl /shared
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Finally if you want to remove ACL:
|
||||
|
||||
$ sudo setfacl -x u:test /shared
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
If you want to wipe out all ACL entries at once:
|
||||
|
||||
$ sudo setfacl -b /shared
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
One last thing. The commands cp and mv can change their behavior when they work over files or directories with ACLs. In the case of cp, you need to add the '-p' parameter to copy ACLs. If this is not posible, it will show you a warning. mv will always move the ACLs, and also if it is not posible, it will show you a warning.
|
||||
|
||||
### Conclusion ###
|
||||
|
||||
Using ACLs gives you a tremendous power and control over files you want to share, especially on NFS/Samba servers. Moreover, if you administer shared hosting, this tool is a must have.
|
||||
|
||||
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
via: http://xmodulo.com/2014/08/configure-access-control-lists-acls-linux.html
|
||||
|
||||
作者：[Christopher Valerio][a]
|
||||
译者：[译者ID](https://github.com/译者ID)
|
||||
校对：[校对者ID](https://github.com/校对者ID)
|
||||
|
||||
本文由 [LCTT](https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject) 原创翻译，[Linux中国](http://linux.cn/) 荣誉推出
|
||||
|
||||
[a]:http://xmodulo.com/author/valerio
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user