Linux Managing Files; Command

In order to get used to Linux, it is rather important for a beginner to learn how to handle file and directory in the Linux system. Just like using windows operating system, you need to create new files, create new directory, remove files, remove directories, change file name, copy directory and so on.

Manage files and directories in Linux system is an administration job and also a part of system security. Every file and directory in Linux belongs to a certain owner and group owner. They also have permissions applied.
Below we have listed commands which can be used to manage files and directories in Linux.

• To delete a file, enter: delete [filename]
  Note: Replace [filename] with the name of the file you want to delete.
   
• To move a file to a folder, enter: move [filename] [folder name]
  Notes:
  • Replace [filename] with the name of the file you want to move.
  • Replace [folder name] with the name of the folder to which you want to move the file.
  
  
• To rename a file, enter: move [filename] [new file name]
  Notes:
  • Replace [filename] with the name of the file you want to rename.
  • Replace [new file name] with the file's new name.
  
  
• To create a new folder, enter: mkdir [new folder name]
  Note: Replace [new folder name] with the name of the folder you want to create.
   
• To delete a folder, enter: rmdir [folder name]
  Note: Replace [folder name] with the name of the folder you want to delete.
   
• To copy a file, enter: cp [filename] [new file name]
  Notes:
  • Replace [filename] with the name of the file you want to copy.
  • Replace [new file name] with a name for the copied file.
  
  
• To change your local working directory, enter: lcd [local directory]
  Note: Replace [local directory] with the path to the local directory you want to use.
   
• To change your remote working directory, enter: cd [remote directory]
  Note: Replace [remote directory] with the path to the remote directory you want to use.
   
• To display files in your remote directory, enter: ls
  
• To display files in your local directory, enter: lls
  
• To print your local working directory, enter: lpwd
  
• To print your remote working directory, enter: pwd
  
• To exit , enter: quit / exit
  
  
  
  
  
  

Ubuntu 11.10 released!

Ubuntu 11.10 a.k.a Oneiric Ocelot has just been released. 

“Ease of use, stylishness and key tasks such as safe web surfing, document sharing, office productivity and personal clouds for music, files and photos are central to the Ubuntu experience.” said Jane Silber, CEO of Canonical. “That’s why Ubuntu is now a global phenomenon - not just for system administrators, developers and expert users, but for a growing community of home users that want a simpler, safer way to use the PC.”

The integrated Ubuntu Software Center provides you access to thousands of tools, games, applications and accessories from open source and commercial software publishers. In Ubuntu 11.10, the Software Center has had a significant refresh that makes it easier to select software based on ratings and popularity, and to contribute your own reviews. Recent additions to the Software Center include The World of Goo and Oil Rush.

Ubuntu’s personal cloud, Ubuntu One, puts your data at the centre whether you are using PC, Android or iOS devices. Ubuntu One now allows you to stream your entire music collection to all your devices. You can also access and share files, documents and photos online with Android and now Windows machines, utilising 5GB of free storage that is available to every Ubuntu One subscriber.

The central search-driven interface to Ubuntu, called the Dash, has been enhanced to include instant access to your personal and online music collections through the music lens, which will also search the Ubuntu One Music Store. This provides almost instant access to any music: either from your personal collection or online stores and services. To help you find the music you love, Ubuntu includes instant access to Last.fm, the Amazon MP3 store, and a huge collection of free content in the public domain or under open licences.

Note: Ubuntu 11.10 offers a more polished rendition of the UI changes to the Unity
desktop’s “Dash” interface . The key Dash changes include new windows controls
and transparency effects,and the swapping out of the “Places” concept with more
search-savvy “Scopes and Lenses.”

Note: As we typed Samba, it will instantly show Samba as
well of its type, whether applications or otherwise.

Ubuntu 11.10 comes with a full backup facility as standard. Called Deja Dup, it allows you to back up locally or to the Ubuntu One cloud. You can schedule backups and restore from a backup, providing you with a ‘time machine’ capability. All for free.

Ubuntu 11.10 also sees a full update to GNOME 3. That means you will have access to the most modern and stable versions of the highly-regarded application set. The popular cross-platform Thunderbird from Mozilla will become the default email app in Ubuntu, with Evolution remaining as an option for download.

To sample the Ubuntu 11.10 experience, you can visit the Ubuntu website and explore a web-based demonstration of Ubuntu. This provides an interactive overview of how Ubuntu looks and feels, and gives a convenient way to introduce friends and colleagues to the Ubuntu experience.

Availability

-----------

Ubuntu 11.10 is available for download from October 13th at www.ubuntu.com

Ubuntu One is available today at one.ubuntu.com and in the Ubuntu launcher

Ubuntu Software Center is available in the Ubuntu launcher

10 Open Source Programs/Softwares

Hello there,
Well, nowadays, we cant escape the fact that if not all, most of us at least have used open source programs/programs. It doesn't matter what we do, be it photo editing or checking email, for computer nerds and geeks, there is at least 1 open source software installed or running in their system. Below, i have listed top 10 open source software in the year of 2011.

1. Firefox: Firefox is the top browser running on all the system/PC developed by the company Mozilla. Talking about Firefox, they are open-source and free, so they can be easily distributed to anyone by any means. The biggest feature about this browser is they have the biggest team of developer making it large. It has Add-ons facilities making it more flexible.
2. Thunderbird: Thunderbird is a mail client software which runs on every PC/system making it cross-platform.
3. Filezilla: Filezilla is the best open-source FTP client software which is used world wide.
4. Pidgin: Pidgin is the IM software enabling most of all the Social Chatting.
5. Geany: Geany is the open-source editor, which can be used to write a normal text document to a large projects for coding.
6. GIMP: GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program) is a freely distributed piece of software suitable for such tasks as photo retouching, image composition, and image authoring. It is a powerful piece of software with capabilities not found in any other free software product.
7. Tomboy:Tomboy is a free and open-source desktop note taking application written for Unix-like (including Mac OS X) and Microsoft Windows operating systems. Much like Sticky Notes in Windows 7.
8. VLC: VLC Media Player is a long-time open-source favorite, and the latest version is also the first to be out of beta development. It's not the only option for free video playback, but it is undoubtedly one of the best.
9. Code::Blocks IDE: is a free and open source, cross-platform IDE which supports multiple compilers including GCC and MSVC. It is developed in C++ using wxWidgets as the GUI toolkit.  Currently, Code::Blocks is oriented towards C and C++. Very well liked by programmers.
10. Libre Office: is a free software office suite developed by The Document Foundation as a fork of OpenOffice.org. It is compatible with other major office suites, including Microsoft Office, and available on a variety of platforms. After a long success of open office, Libre Office seems to have a bright future ahead.

There are obviously more softwares and programs that are available on the Internet which we can get, but then again, this is only an opinion. There are also people who would prefer OpenOffice.org, Assault Cube, NetBeans, empathy and more. Well, as i said, this is only an opinion.
Just to share, I do enjoy Ubuntu as operating system.

We, shall all enjoy the freedom.

The term 'Free' in Open Source Software

In 1998, some of the people in the free software community began using the term "open source software" of "free software" to describe what they do. The term “open source” quickly became associated with a different approach, a different philosophy, different values, and even a different criterion for which licenses are acceptable. The Free Software movement and the Open Source movement are today seperate movements with different views and goals, although we can and do work together on some practical projects.

The fundamental difference between the two movements is in their values, their ways of looking at the world. For the Open Source movement, the issue of whether software should be open source is a practical question, not an ethical one. As one person put it, “Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement.” For the Open Source movement, non-free software is a suboptimal solution. For the Free Software movement, non-free software is a social problem and free software is the solution.

Relationship between the Free Software movement and Open Source movement

The Free Software movement and the Open Source movement are like two political camps within the free software community.
Radical groups in the 1960s developed a reputation for factionalism: organizations split because of disagreements on details of strategy, and then treated each other as enemies. Or at least, such is the image people have of them, whether or not it was true.
The relationship between the Free Software movement and the Open Source movement is just the opposite of that picture. We disagree on the basic principles, but agree more or less on the practical recommendations. So we can and do work together on many specific projects. We don't think of the Open Source movement as an enemy. The enemy is propriety software.
We are not against the Open Source movement, but we don't want to be lumped in with them. We acknowledge that they have contributed to our community, but we created this community, and we want people to know this. We want people to associate our achievements with our values and our philosophy, not with theirs. We want to be heard, not obscured behind a group with different views. To prevent people from thinking we are part of them, we take pains to avoid using the word “open” to describe free software, or its contrary, “closed”, in talking about non-free software.
So please mention the Free Software movement when you talk about the work we have done, and the software we have developed—such as the GNU/Linux operating system.

Comparing the two terms

This rest of this article compares the two terms “free software” and “open source”. It shows why the term “open source” does not solve any problems, and in fact creates some.

Ambiguity

The term “free software” has an ambiguity problem: an unintended meaning, “Software you can get for zero price,” fits the term just as well as the intended meaning, “software which gives the user certain freedoms.” We address this problem by publishing a more precise definition of free software but this is not a perfect solution; it cannot completely eliminate the problem. An unambiguously correct term would be better, if it didn't have other problems.
Unfortunately, all the alternatives in English have problems of their own. We've looked at many alternatives that people have suggested, but none is so clearly “right” that switching to it would be a good idea. Every proposed replacement for “free software” has a similar kind of semantic problem, or worse—and this includes “open source software.”
The official definition of “open source software,” as published by the Open Source Initiative, is very close to our definition of free software; however, it is a little looser in some respects, and they have accepted a few licenses that we consider unacceptably restrictive of the users. However, the obvious meaning for the expression “open source software” is “You can look at the source code.” This is a much weaker criterion than free software; it includes free software, but also some propriety programs, including Xv, and Qt under its original license (before the QPL).
That obvious meaning for “open source” is not the meaning that its advocates intend. The result is that most people misunderstand what those advocates are advocating. Here is how writer Neal Stephenson defined “open source”:

Linux is “open source” software meaning, simply, that anyone can get copies of its source code files.

I don't think he deliberately sought to reject or dispute the “official” definition. I think he simply applied the conventions of the English language to come up with a meaning for the term. The state of Kansas published a similar definition:

Make use of open-source software (OSS). OSS is software for which the source code is freely and publicly available, though the specific licensing agreements vary as to what one is allowed to do with that code.

Of course, the open source people have tried to deal with this by publishing a precise definition for the term, just as we have done for “free software.”
But the explanation for “free software” is simple—a person who has grasped the idea of “free speech, not free beer” will not get it wrong again. There is no such succinct way to explain the official meaning of “open source” and show clearly why the natural definition is the wrong one.

Fear of Freedom

The main argument for the term “open source software” is that “free software” makes some people uneasy. That's true: talking about freedom, about ethical issues, about responsibilities as well as convenience, is asking people to think about things they might rather ignore. This can trigger discomfort, and some people may reject the idea for that. It does not follow that society would be better off if we stop talking about these things.
Years ago, free software developers noticed this discomfort reaction, and some started exploring an approach for avoiding it. They figured that by keeping quiet about ethics and freedom, and talking only about the immediate practical benefits of certain free software, they might be able to “sell” the software more effectively to certain users, especially business. The term “open source” is offered as a way of doing more of this—a way to be “more acceptable to business.” The views and values of the Open Source movement stem from this decision.
This approach has proved effective, in its own terms. Today many people are switching to free software for purely practical reasons. That is good, as far as it goes, but that isn't all we need to do! Attracting users to free software is not the whole job, just the first step.
Sooner or later these users will be invited to switch back to proprietary software for some practical advantage. Countless companies seek to offer such temptation, and why would users decline? Only if they have learned to value the freedom free software gives them, for its own sake. It is up to us to spread this idea—and in order to do that, we have to talk about freedom. A certain amount of the “keep quiet” approach to business can be useful for the community, but we must have plenty of freedom talk too.
At present, we have plenty of “keep quiet”, but not enough freedom talk. Most people involved with free software say little about freedom—usually because they seek to be “more acceptable to business.” Software distributors especially show this pattern. Some GNU/Linux operating system distributions add proprietary packages to the basic free system, and they invite users to consider this an advantage, rather than a step backwards from freedom.
We are failing to keep up with the influx of free software users, failing to teach people about freedom and our community as fast as they enter it. This is why non-free software (which Qt was when it first became popular), and partially non-free operating system distributions, find such fertile ground. To stop using the word “free” now would be a mistake; we need more, not less, talk about freedom.
If those using the term “open source” draw more users into our community, that is a contribution, but the rest of us will have to work even harder to bring the issue of freedom to those users' attention. We have to say, “It's free software and it gives you freedom!”—more and louder than ever before.

Would a Trademark Help?

The advocates of “open source software” tried to make it a trademark, saying this would enable them to prevent misuse. This initiative was later dropped, the term being too descriptive to qualify as a trademark; thus, the legal status of “open source” is the same as that of “free software”: there is no legal constraint on using it. Reports confirm that a number of companies' calling software packages “open source” even though they did not fit the official definition.

But would it have made a big difference to use a term that is a trademark? Not necessarily.
Companies also made announcements that give the impression that a program is “open source software” without explicitly saying so. For example, one IBM announcement, about a program that did not fit the official definition, said this:

As is common in the open source community, users of the ... technology will also be able to collaborate with IBM ...

This did not actually say that the program was “open source”, but many readers did not notice that detail. (Note that IBM was sincerely trying to make this program free software, and later adopted a new license which does make it free software and “open source”; but when that announcement was made, the program did not qualify as either one.)
And here is how Cygnus Solutions, which was formed to be a free software company and subsequently branched out (so to speak) into proprietary software, advertised some proprietary software products:

Cygnus Solutions is a leader in the open source market and has just launched two products into the [GNU/]Linux marketplace.

Unlike IBM, Cygnus was not trying to make these packages free software, and the packages did not come close to qualifying. But Cygnus didn't actually say that these are “open source software”, they just made use of the term to give careless readers that impression.
These observations suggest that a trademark would not have truly prevented the confusion that comes with the term “open source”.

Advantages Of Open Source Software

Open-source web development is the most viable means for those who want to develop high-performance website without bearing the huge cost that a professional designer would charge. These open-source softwares can be used for various functions in an organization. From telecommunication and operating systems to accounting and personal conductivity applications—open source softwares can be utilized in every sphere.

Open source softwares offer certain specific advantages that are chiefly responsible for their popularity.

Cost-effective
Budding developers hugely depend on open source softwares because in some occasions they are compelled to work with meager salary while ensuring that the quality is not compromised. Thus using free software saves them of the purchasing cost. You don’t have to shell out any amount for upgrading them.

Hardware support
Another advantage of using open source software is that it does not take much effort to download. Moreover, they are compressed and easily portable. But when you running a program developed using free software, they are as efficient as any other paid-for application.

Integrated management
Open source software applications come with high integrating power as they are equipped with technologies like web based enterprise management, and common information model. These technologies help your site achieve great administrative efficiency because they allow you to integrate servers, applications and workstation management.

Open source has lesser restrictions than paid-for ones
If a designer is using commercial software, for which he has paid substantial amount, he has to abide by certain rules. Lock-ins, license fees are some of the disadvantages of using such softwares. But with open source softwares, you are freer. Another advantage of open source is that options for customization are greater than in it than commercial softwares.

No license fees
Since you can download open source softwares from Internet, you need not bother about license fees. Moreover it cab be downloaded as many times as you need and there is no fear of tracking, or monitoring.

Free online support
Using open source softwares does not mean that if you encounter a problem in implementing it you are in a pool. There are several online communities that offer advice and assistance. Today, some of the companies that develop softwares and allow free download provide supports and maintenance as well.

It is for these reasons that open source softwares have become such popular in IT industry. They are not only cost-effective but also easy to implement. Certain open-source softwares facilitate the development of user-interactivity sites which is the need of the hour. For these various reasons, open source web softwares are in such demand today.

Open Source Introduction (FAQ)

Q1. What does open source mean?

Put in simple terms, open source is a transparent way of developing software and making it freely available for others to use. The source code of a program is made fully available for individuals to access, alter and reuse, unlike proprietary software.

Q2. So it really is free?

Yes. This free access manifests itself in terms of the open source software's legal status. It makes the software's free status, and its associated transparency, indistinguishable from the code itself. Unlike most proprietary software, open source licenses are conceived in favour of the end user and permit most kinds of use and redistribution.

Q3. What does proprietary software mean?

Normally software creators produce a program and license it for commercial gain; for a variety of business-oriented reasons they do not make its source code openly available to the public. Most proprietary software is released for use only within the strict terms described in its End User License Agreement. These are likely to limit things like numbers of users, places where software can be executed, operations that can be performed and the rights of users to reverse engineer or emulate functionality.

Q4. You keep mentioning source code; what's that?

When a program is initially conceived it's written in a human-readable language (a programming language such as C, C++ or Java). For a computer to efficiently execute the program this source code often undergoes a process called compiling, which produces one or more binary files as its result. Composed of 1s and 0s, these make no sense to human eyes, and are difficult to reuse in other programs or environments. To really understand what a program is doing, how it's behaving and to facilitate its reuse and enhancement, source code is essential.

Q5. Hmm... can you explain that more fully?

Without access to source code a user will have very limited knowledge of how the program actually works and will be technically unable to alter the program to suit their individual needs, or use the code as the foundation of subsequent programs. Open source differs from normal programming as it is created and distributed by groups of people who are happy (indeed enthusiastic) for it to be used, modified and redeployed.

Q6. So if source code is so valuable why not just convert proprietary binary files back?

Although the effects of the compiling process can sometimes be reversed using a decompilation tool, the complexity of this process means it's usually one-way in nature (it's comparable with trying to convert a baked cake back into its original ingredients). In any case, irrespective of the technical means one might have to recreate source code from a binary file, many proprietary software licenses expressly forbid it.

Q7. But what's in it for the open source people?

The spirit of the open source community is such that more transparency within software is a good thing. Developers and distributors are motivated by the belief that free software will enable users to add enhancements, resulting in better programs.

Q8. What about open standards?

These are related to open source, although not synonymous. By virtue of their transparency and level of community acceptance these are standards that offer a degree of protection against obsolescence and inaccessibility. They must be free to view and implement, prevent users from being locked in to a particular vendor and have no associated royalty or fee. Examples of open standard file formats include the OASIS Open Document Format and the World Wide Web Consortium's XHTML. These can be contrasted with opaque proprietary alternatives which are not really fully supported elsewhere, and force users to choose a single vendor's software solutions to facilitate information retrieval and update.

Q9. I'm a data creator; how will open source and open standards affect me?

Choosing an open source tool tailored to one's own requirements will greatly enhance the chances of a digital object's longevity. As so much of data curation involves thinking about the overall life cycle of a digital object, it is crucial to think first about what format in which to create a document or what tools to rely upon. Choosing a proprietary format might well hamper any long-term curation of the object, whereas an open format enables the introduction of preservation procedures into the data creating process. Furthermore, the absence of legal restrictions that determine the ways in which digital assets can be stored and manipulated enables a digital curator to emulate, migrate or reuse software or data with far fewer complications.

Q10. I'm a data curator; how will open source affect me?

Once materials have been created in open formats with open source tools it will be easier to tailor the curation process to one's specific needs. A clear understanding can be established of how a digital object was created and structured. In the long-term if digital objects are obtained with no available rendering software, it should be fairly easy to recreate or reuse the digital object provided that the source code has been archived and is sufficiently well documented.

Q11. I'm a data re-user; how will open source affect me?

Most immediately, the transparency that characterises the OSS model is of great benefit. In order to effectively reuse or access a digital resource in the future, understanding a program is a great facilitator, and this can be more easily done with full access to the source code. In the long-term open source file formats will greatly enhance accessibility to data. Being dependent on commercial or proprietary software may well restrict access as one will need to obtain the exact same software in order to read particular file formats, and the software, or the company that created it may no longer be around.

Q12. Does open source come with any licensing at all?

The open source community recognises a range of individual off-the-shelf open source licenses. In order to qualify, a license must satisfy the open source definition, and offer users the right to freely obtain, use, reuse and distribute licensed code. Some go further, adding what's known as a copyleft clause that stipulates that any subsequent, derivative code must be released under the same open license. Nothing in the open source definition compels distributors to release software for no fee, but anyone who acquires the software may redistribute as widely as they wish without remuneration.

Q13. So can I be sure that this open source software will always be maintained and have full functionality?

Provided that the software is both open source and available then it will be possible for any other party to step in and take over the maintenance and development of a particular software project. Proprietary software on the other hand offers few assurances of on-going maintenance, and commercial licenses usually absolve distributors of all responsibility if the software goes wrong.

Q14. Does the open source approach have any drawbacks?

The problems associated with open source are well documented by its opponents. Some of the most common include:

• The non-centralised nature of open source development and distribution (limiting the chances of having someone to blame if things go wrong and introducing a degree of risk to the future development of individual applications).
• The hidden costs that exist despite often non-existent acquisition costs (such as staff retraining).
• The lack of easy-to-use tools and documentation and neglect of the importance of intuitive user interfaces.
• The rapid pace of changes to open source software, arising from the huge base of contributing programmers.
• The risk of Open Source software stagnating due to developer distraction or loss of motivation or resources.

Although in many circumstances persuasive, these criticisms are by no means applicable universally. Unsurprisingly, situations can be identified where either open source or proprietary alternatives would be the most appropriate choice.

Q15. What is the future of open source?

Currently, the wide scale adoption of open source software and open formats remains, in comparison with proprietary alternatives, rather low. The follow-the-crowd mentality is a reasonable strategy for ensuring the longevity of one's resources: if there are enough people with a vested interest in continued support for a particular software product then there are attractive profits to be made by commercial companies from ensuring it remains available. However, open source is more easily curated and this must be distinguished from the incentives created by societal demand for curation that more popular formats enjoy. With the popularity of open source software like OpenOffice.org on the increase, soon a larger demand will be in evidence for the curation of more open formats. The transparency underpinning them will allow this demand to be more straightforwardly satisfied than for proprietary equivalents.

Ultimately most users will consider the adoption of open source only if the tools themselves are sufficiently robust, usable, economically viable and functionally rich to meet their research, business or organisational requirements. Issues of transparency and long term accessibility are less likely to feature among the priorities of data creators who favour usability and functionality, but they should be of importance further up institutional hierarchies and further along the digital life-cycle. As open source continues to improve in terms of end user expectations it is likely that the benefits of freedom and openness will increasingly be seized in favour of opaque and difficult to manage alternatives. Similarly, it is likely that proprietary distributors will be motivated to inject their own products with much more transparent characteristics.

Q16. Where can I get more information on open source?

http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/curation-reference-manual
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/
http://www.opensource.org/
http://www.fsf.org/
http://www.gnu.org/

Reference:
http://www.dcc.ac.uk/digital-curation/digital-curation-faqs/open-source-software-oss-and-open-standards