LinuxQuestions.org - Hello from a mainframe retread

- LinuxQuestions.org Member Intro (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linuxquestions-org-member-intro-24/)

- - Hello from a mainframe retread (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linuxquestions-org-member-intro-24/hello-from-a-mainframe-retread-4175499838/)

Hello from a mainframe retread

Hi,
My computing experience started in 1975 with application programming on IBM mainframe systems; my current expertise is as a Systems Programmer (aka sysadmin) for IBM's z/VM operating system.
I've been using OpenSuSE Linux since V6.3 as a desktop system, and I supported a trial release of SLES back when it was the first supported distro on IBM's S/390 mainframes.
I'm currently using OpenSuSE 13.1 as my primary system; I also have an Apple PowerMac G4 on which I run an old release of LightWave 3D, several ancient Amigas (A4000T, A1200) and an AmigaOne.
As a Linux user I'm reasonably competent, and as a Linux admin moderately competent. I'm interested in writing software for the Linux platform, but I really could use a mentor to get me started, because I'm having a lot of trouble understanding the weirdnesses (to me) of such things as make, libraries, etc.
Also, networking and audio issues drive me mad!
Thanks for listening,
Leslie

Hello from another "mainframe retread," still-sometimes VMer and fellow collector of old but-still-good computer hardware! :yes:

So, you are not alone.

The three biggest differences that I find between the two worlds are simply that:

Actually, there isn't that much of a difference. "It's all just different, that's all." The expression is different; the ideas are not.
Unix/Linux came from the purely-interactive (and hopelessly cramped) world of things like the PDP-7, and it still shows sometimes. There's no batch-job system, for example.
This world has no single over-arching influence of "one vendor," i.e. IBM. (Even though IBM is heavily involved in Linux also, only IBM Corporation influences VM® or [what I still call ...] MVS®.) In a single-vendor world, whose software runs only on hardware supplied by that same vendor, both the hardware and the software environment can be dovetailed. Apple, of course, does this also – which is why these days I usually run Macs (with case-sensitive filesystems). Linux "can run on everything," and it does. This adds a lot of complexity to the system and to the maintenance of it.

A lot of the stuff does have corollaries in 'the other world.' make, for instance, is simply a build-system; a Makefile describes a dependency-tree.

When I first encountered Linux, I encountered what David Intersemione (of Borland fame) referred to as: "A Sip From the Firehose." Here I was, more than 20 years in (at that time), and this system was making a gibbering fool out of me. :eek:

First with old equipment, then later taking advantage of the fact that Intel Corporation had finally discovered "VMs" ;) I dove into the shallow-waters with both feet, learning first "Linux From Scratch" (which is literally that ...), then the Gentoo distribution, which is source-code based. That answered a lot of questions for me, and, given your background, I'd suggest that you might do the same. Take a nice, stable system, grab a commercial VM system like VMWare (I suggest ...), and dive in. Confront this operating-system on its own turf just as you did and do with "big iron."

I've been a fan of Suse for a number of years too. I'll agree that some issues are irritating even to long time users. As with all Linux, get ready for a change next release. :)

Howdy and welcome.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs (Post 5143262)

Actually, there isn't that much of a difference. "It's all just different, that's all." The expression is different; the ideas are not.
Unix/Linux came from the purely-interactive (and hopelessly cramped) world of things like the PDP-7, and it still shows sometimes. There's no batch-job system, for example.
This world has no single over-arching influence of "one vendor," i.e. IBM. (Even though IBM is heavily involved in Linux also, only IBM Corporation influences VM® or [what I still call ...] MVS®.) In a single-vendor world, whose software runs only on hardware supplied by that same vendor, both the hardware and the software environment can be dovetailed. Apple, of course, does this also – which is why these days I usually run Macs (with case-sensitive filesystems). Linux "can run on everything," and it does. This adds a lot of complexity to the system and to the maintenance of it.

Yep. Using Linux as a desktop system is pretty easy. My biggest problem is that I have been spoiled by IBM's mainframe documentation; man pages are a joke compared to real documentation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs (Post 5143262)

A lot of the stuff does have corollaries in 'the other world.' make, for instance, is simply a build-system; a Makefile describes a dependency-tree.

I understand the concepts, but I have yet to find a useful tutorial on creating a Makefile. The ones I have seen are either uselessly simplistic or so complicated I can't make out how the various components relate to one another.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs (Post 5143262)

When I first encountered Linux, I encountered what David Intersemione (of Borland fame) referred to as: "A Sip From the Firehose." Here I was, more than 20 years in (at that time), and this system was making a gibbering fool out of me. :eek:

First with old equipment, then later taking advantage of the fact that Intel Corporation had finally discovered "VMs" ;) I dove into the shallow-waters with both feet, learning first "Linux From Scratch" (which is literally that ...), then the Gentoo distribution, which is source-code based. That answered a lot of questions for me, and, given your background, I'd suggest that you might do the same. Take a nice, stable system, grab a commercial VM system like VMWare (I suggest ...), and dive in. Confront this operating-system on its own turf just as you did and do with "big iron."

Uh-huh.

Welcome to the world of Linux.