Slashdot Mirror

How can BSD be dying when it has girls like this supporting it? The best Linux can come up with is an obese penguin. What are those Linux people smoking? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. Even this old Unix guru looks like he's having trouble keeping his wang under control when close to such an amazing babe. This girl has to be one of the hottest ever! I can tell you that I'll be installing BSD after catching sight of her! Linux will never be able to compete until it ditches the fat arctic birdlife and gets itself a mascot like this little hottie.

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

How can BSD be dying when it has girls like this supporting it? The best Linux can come up with is an obese penguin. What are those Linux people smoking? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. Even this old Unix guru looks like he's having trouble keeping his wang under control when close to such an amazing babe. This girl has to be one of the hottest ever! I can tell you that I'll be installing BSD after catching sight of her! Linux will never be able to compete until it ditches the fat arctic birdlife and gets itself a mascot like this little hottie.

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't forget to watch the video too!!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't forget to watch the video too!!

How can BSD be dying when it has girls like this supporting it? The best Linux can come up with is an obese penguin. What are those Linux people smoking? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. Even this old Unix guru looks like he's having trouble keeping his wang under control when close to such an amazing babe. This girl has to be one of the hottest ever! I can tell you that I'll be installing BSD after catching sight of her! Linux will never be able to compete until it ditches the fat arctic birdlife and gets itself a mascot like this little hottie.

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

How can BSD be dying when it has girls like this supporting it? The best Linux can come up with is an obese penguin. What are those Linux people smoking? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. Even this old Unix guru looks like he's having trouble keeping his wang under control when close to such an amazing babe. This girl has to be one of the hottest ever! I can tell you that I'll be installing BSD after catching sight of her! Linux will never be able to compete until it ditches the fat arctic birdlife and gets itself a mascot like this little hottie.

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

In the FreeBSD 4.2 Release notes. Scroll down to the "Tagged Queueing on ATA disks" section.

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't forget to watch the video too!!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't forget to watch the video too!!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't forget to watch the video too!!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't forget to watch the video too!!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

Don't you think open source software would be more popular if it were advocated by girls like this instead of old guys with beards? What we need are more free software babes like her. This guy looks like he is about to cream his pants standing next to such a fox. If we do have to have the old guys with beards, we could at least make sure they are plenty of hot chicks too. I mean just look at this girl! Doesn't she make you hard? I know this little hottie floats my boat!

Join the campaign for more cute open source babes today!

http://people.freebsd.org/~jkh/lw2000/daemonbabe.j pg

http://bazza.com/photos/lwce/bsd3.jpg

http://bazza.com/photos/lwce/ufiewithbsd.jpg

http://people.freebsd.org/~billf/usenix2000/DSC000 35.JPG.html

http://people.freebsd.org/~jkh/lw2000/daemonbabe.j pg

http://bazza.com/photos/lwce/bsd3.jpg

http://bazza.com/photos/lwce/ufiewithbsd.jpg

http://people.freebsd.org/~billf/usenix2000/DSC000 35.JPG.html

http://people.freebsd.org/~jkh/lw2000/daemonbabe.j pg
http://bazza.com/photos/lwce/bsd3.jpg
http://bazza.com/photos/lwce/ufiewithbsd.jpg
http://people.freebsd.org/~billf/usenix2000/DSC000 35.JPG.html

http://people.freebsd.org/~jkh/lw2000/daemonbabe.j pg
http://bazza.com/photos/lwce/bsd3.jpg
http://bazza.com/photos/lwce/ufiewithbsd.jpg
http://people.freebsd.org/~billf/usenix2000/DSC000 35.JPG.html

I don't follow anything Hollywood, so I had to hit google to find out just who this megastar "Dan Piponi" was (and you didn't mention any of his films, as if I'm supposed to read the ending credits). Anyway, here is a very interesting message - this is Dan Piponi on the freebsd-chat mailing list explaining how they did The Matrix. This message is cool because (1) you can meet all sorts of interesting people on the Internet, (2) it shows that FreeBSD's mailing lists are excellent (even if they're a bit too high-volume to follow continuously) and (3) it shows how excellent FreeBSD's Linux binary compat is. I've never run accross a Linux binary that FreeBSD couldn't handle.

Where is USB or 1394 in any BSD?

Not that this changes the argument about commercial contributions back to the OS, but to provide a non-rhetorical answer to what I presume was a rhetorical question:

The kernel support for USB is typically in sys/dev/usb in the source tree. (That's where it is on my FreeBSD 3.4 system; no, that's not a typo for "FreeBSD 4.3".) There may also be user-mode daemons or library routines there as well.

Here's a FreeBSD FireWire implementation under development; the most recent tarball came out 2002-05-30. I don't know what projects, if any, exist for NetBSD or OpenBSD.

I honestly don't see how the installation program is difficult to use. I have heard many people complain about it, but it's not hard to use at all. Of course I haven't used any recent Linux installers (last Linux I used was Slackware 7) with all the dumbed-down GUI luvin', but I still fail to see how a straightforward ANSI menu system is confusing and difficult?!

Well, don't take our word for it. Read here why Jordan Hubbard thinks it sucks - and he wrote it. (Section 2.2 describes sysinstall.) A select quote:

dialog(3) is also extremely limited in the user-friendliness department and lacks features like the ability to put more than 2 buttons into a dialog or a Yes/No dialog which had a selectable default (e.g. No). The inability to put a "Back" button into various dialogs which could really use one or the necessity for asking only "positive" questions are outgrowths of those limitations and good examples of how an insufficiently powerful UI library can drive the utility-writer in undesirable but unavoidable directions.

It also describes various reasons the ports system sucks, though "hard to use" isn't on my list. My major complaint with it is that the "base system" isn't packaged. With a RedHat system it is, and you can really take advantage of this. For example, when doing a security audit, boot from external media, check the GPG signatures in the package database, do a "rpm -Va", and make sure nothing extra is in suspicous places. ("rpm -qal" to get a list of what should be there, a "find" command to get what actually is.) You then know no binaries have been tampered with. With a BSD system, you pretty need to reinstall.

There are legitimate reasons to dislike these systems. It's all about weighing the choices - some new FreeBSD 5.0 features (KSEs in particular) sound interesting enough that I might switch a system or two back to BSD when it's released.

Here's a nice list from FreeBSD. Some of those are products that can be used with FreeBSD and some are products based on FreeBSD.

IF YOU AREN'T INTERESTED IN THE HURD, THEN SHUT UP.

Can slashdot posters quit talking out of their rear-ends for even one article?

A long-running project in the open source world just made an announcement. The /. editors decided to carry the story. The comments are filled with jokes about how stupid RMS and the HURD are. I dearly wish there was a "strip all comments labeled "Funny" button.

I'm very interested in how the HURD is progressing, and in TECHNICAL OPINIONS on the HURD. Where are the technical opinions among the comments? Damn few and far between. This is the sort of nonsense that makes slashdot look worse than USA Today (hell, slashdot doesn't even have color barcharts on the front page!).

At one time, I learned a lot about computers and socioeconomic factors surrounding computing by reading slashdot comments. Several years ago, comments included information from computer scientists, sysadmins, and knowledgable hobbyists. Eventually there was a problem where you couldn't find those comments in between the 50 copies of "First Post!". Moderation came, and I could usually find the good posts again.

The comments on this article, however, demonstrate just how stupid the slashdot population has become. My theory is that the huge popularity of slashdot in the US has attracted a readership which closely mirrors the average intelligence of the general US population -- you know, the same population that elected GW Bush for president (motto: "What we need is a clear policy in the Middle East"). The moderation system that once worked well is failing miserably because almost all moderators are as stupid as the posters.

As anyone can tell, I'm pretty pissed that a bunch of whiney losers in diapers, who couldn't spell "algorithm" if they had a copy of CLR on their desk, or explain why CISC was a natural choice for microprocessors in the 1960s, have drowned out any hope of interesting discussion on a technical topic. The comments attached to this article provide some sort of slashdot corrolary to the bikeshed axiom: Since a moron reading slashdot feels compelled to make authoritative posts on every article (to increase their karma?), they will post about the bikeshed color if they have nothing to say about the bikeshed. God help us when the discussion turns to nuclear power plants.

Beyond technical comments, why does everyone feel a need to deride RMS and the GNU project all the time? It seems natural to have some social discussion of RMS and the GNU project attached to any article about the HURD. I can understand why RMS is unpopular. I can understand why some people dislike RMS' campaign to use the name "GNU/Linux" when discussing operating systems which use the GNU foundation but replace the GNU kernel (I guess my feeling on this is clear). What I can't understand is why people put so damn much energy into making RMS a laughing stock.

At this point, it no longer matters what RMS does or says; the slashdot readership seems hell-bent on destroying RMS just because they heard that he was unpopular in some circles. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd suggest that Microsoft had a pool of RMS-trolls trying to change public opinion of RMS, GNU, and Free Software via slashdot comments.

I'd like to encourage everyone reading this to do the following:

1) Think for yourself
2) Listen careefully to what people say, in comments and otherwise
3) If you don't have anything useful to contribute, then keep your mouth closed.
4) Be careful with the "funny" moderation tag -- we all need humor, but there's more (or should be) to slashdot than (rightly or wrongly) smacking people down

If we follow those rules, then maybe we'll be able to learn stuff from slashdot comments again. For instance, comments on this article about a new HURD release might include:

1) discussions of microkernel history, strengths, and weaknesses,
2) which microkernels are still in use
3) how the Darwin kernel design differs from the HURD design
4) a reasonable, well-thought-out debate about whether the long term benefits of the HURD justify the current HURD effort in the Free Software community
5) how changes in hardware might affect the expected future value of the HURD, given the HURD's extremely slow development
6) alternatives to monolithic and microkernel designs in principle and practice (I'm not aware of any, but surely someone has something in-between, if not totally different)
7) whether the Free Software and Open Source communities should really be involved with basic software research, or lower its ambitions and simply copy existing, working software

Maybe this post can at least spawn an intelligent discussion of whether it violates the rules it proposes (it probably does, but I'm not going to fix it because I'm still seeing red).

-Paul Komarek

We Have a Way Out

What this does is allow them to actually sue for the money the lost.

How do you figure that? You just ASSUME that someone who bought a pirate copy of Win2K Advanced Server would buy the "real thing" in the absence of pirate availability? There ARE alternatives, alternatives, and (one more time) alternatives.

The problem is that if they sell the pirated software cheaply, the damages will be relatively small, ...

The measure of damages for copyright infringement is disgorgement of the revenue (not profit) wrongfully gained for a reason. It's the same reason that pirated software is cheaper than the "genuine article." The pirated product is regarded (with good reason) as what economists call an "inferior good."

When you install that "\/\/4r3z" copy of a program, you have no idea what ELSE you are getting (viruses, trojans, spyware).

Another reason that disgorgement is the remedy is because there is no way that a copyright holder can PROVE that the purchasers of "\/\/4r3z" would have bought the real "thing." After all, there ARE alternatives, alternatives, and (need I say it again?) alternatives.

even though it may have cost the company a much larger amount of money.

The bigger issue here is one of the cost of enforcing the copyrights. It is a law of economics that sellers will seek to externalize all of their costs that they possibly can. By criminalizing technologies that CAN be used to infringe copyrights, they push the cost of protecting their property onto the (vastly non-infringing) public. Frankly, I do NOT own or use pirated software. Hell, I RARELY use non-OSS software at ALL. Microsoft, et al, forcing me to pay taxes so the government will shield them from the cost of protecting their software from piracy is, in my case, nothing less than a transfer payment to a company I have chosen NOT to do business with since about 1998.

It also takes into account P2P system, where people aren't making money off of it, but they are still breaking the copyright.

If Microsoft, the MPAA and the RIAA want to shut down P2P, let them. Let them pursue every little pissant pirate they want to on their OWN nickel. I have (largely) opted out of their system. Let them stay the HELL out of my pocket and out of my PC.

266 megs / 7001 ports = 0.038 megs per port.

Did you clean /usr/ports/distfiles/ ? Last I heard the whole ports tree was only about 15MB or so (of Makefiles, patches, descriptions, etc.)... In fact, you can even download a current tarball of the entire ports tree - see www.freebsd.org/ports

So, if it really is 7001 ports, the calculation is 15/7001 = .0021MB per port...

I used to be a subject of the BSD [Beaverton School District]

So why don't they run... um... BSD?

Actually, there's an aewm-based WM called YAWM. It's in the FreeBSD ports collection.

You may want to check out FreeBSD's style(9) manual page. FreeBSD uses this in the kernel, and reading most kernel sources usually isn't a problem for me.

Hello folks!

It has been decided after some debate to remove Perl5 from the "Base FreeBSD" sources. This decision was not taken lightly, and was taken in consultation with (but not seeking the approval of) the perl5 developer community.

There are 2 main reasons for this:

1) Perl5 is getting larger very fast, and FreeBSD cannot afford the time and space to build and maintain it.

2) Upgrading the "base perl" is a nightmare that regularly breaks upgrades and cross-builds, to the intense annoyance of the FreeBSD developer community.

Speaking as the "Perl5 guy", keeping FreeBSD's "base perl" up to date was hellish, and folks who wish a return to that state should please consider doing this work in my place. BEWARE! This job is not trivial!

PERL IS NOT BEING OSTRACISED! FreeBSD is not taking this action because of any dispute between the FreeBSD community and the Perl community - such a dispute DOES NOT EXIST! In fact, the Perl community have been exemplary in their attempts to understand the problem, and in their proposals to deal with it. FreeBSD DOES NOT HATE PERL!

Some time in the future, perl may be split in half, such that the core language and the standard libraries may be separately installed. In such a case, FreeBSD might be in a position to better deal with the problem of the very large perl libraries. Such splitting will be done by the perl community, NOT by us, although we will be taking note.

In the meanwhile, the Perl5 Port will continue to be available, and continued discussion indicates that there is very substantial support for it to be installed by default (or near-default) by sysinstall.

This will result in a FreeBSD that has effectively the same Perl5 that is kept up-to-date in ports, rather than the one that is left to rot in STABLE.

This update will _NOT_ be MFCed. The first FreeBSD that has no perl in the default sources will be 5.0-RELEASE, when that is released at the end of this year. FreeBSD-4.n will continue with the perl that it currently has.

The ports system will continue to support Perl5.

M
--
o Mark Murray
\_
O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn

This is the moderated mailing list freebsd-announce.
The list contains announcements of new FreeBSD capabilities,
important events and project milestones.
See also the FreeBSD Web pages at http://www.freebsd.org

Hello folks!

It has been decided after some debate to remove Perl5 from the "Base FreeBSD" sources. This decision was not taken lightly, and was taken in consultation with (but not seeking the approval of) the perl5 developer community.

There are 2 main reasons for this:

1) Perl5 is getting larger very fast, and FreeBSD cannot afford the time and space to build and maintain it.

2) Upgrading the "base perl" is a nightmare that regularly breaks upgrades and cross-builds, to the intense annoyance of the FreeBSD developer community.

Speaking as the "Perl5 guy", keeping FreeBSD's "base perl" up to date was hellish, and folks who wish a return to that state should please consider doing this work in my place. BEWARE! This job is not trivial!

PERL IS NOT BEING OSTRACISED! FreeBSD is not taking this action because of any dispute between the FreeBSD community and the Perl community - such a dispute DOES NOT EXIST! In fact, the Perl community have been exemplary in their attempts to understand the problem, and in their proposals to deal with it. FreeBSD DOES NOT HATE PERL!

Some time in the future, perl may be split in half, such that the core language and the standard libraries may be separately installed. In such a case, FreeBSD might be in a position to better deal with the problem of the very large perl libraries. Such splitting will be done by the perl community, NOT by us, although we will be taking note.

In the meanwhile, the Perl5 Port will continue to be available, and continued discussion indicates that there is very substantial support for it to be installed by default (or near-default) by sysinstall.

This will result in a FreeBSD that has effectively the same Perl5 that is kept up-to-date in ports, rather than the one that is left to rot in STABLE.

This update will _NOT_ be MFCed. The first FreeBSD that has no perl in the default sources will be 5.0-RELEASE, when that is released at the end of this year. FreeBSD-4.n will continue with the perl that it currently has.

The ports system will continue to support Perl5.

M
--
o Mark Murray
\_
O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn

This is the moderated mailing list freebsd-announce.
The list contains announcements of new FreeBSD capabilities,
important events and project milestones.
See also the FreeBSD Web pages at http://www.freebsd.org

Maybe the answer is to break FreeBSD into a 'development' team and a 'packaging' team

There is a seperation of a sort concerning this already. FreeBSD has a Release Engineering Team that handles just this kinda stuff.

Consider Linux as an example.

Although both FreeBSD and Linux share many similar philosophies and practices, you really can't compare the two in this kind of discussion. If Debian and Linux were the same thing, then you would have something to compare. This seems to get lost on folks who spend a lot of time working with Linux. The kernel, userland, packaging, pretty much the whole enchilada falls under the same project. This has a lot of positive benefits to us end user types. As we are starting to see, this also brings a lot of cooks into the same kitchen.

The 'single integrated distribution' approach of FreeBSD may produce better quality software (so the BSDers claim), but maybe it doesn't scale so well to large numbers of developers and 'town councils'.

From looking in at this from way out here on the edges I think you may be approaching the problem with the political setup. FreeBSD seems to have set up a republic of sorts without a president. Could you imagine what the US government would be like if only the congress were involved with making laws? No president, no supreme court. The entire system would be brought to a screeching halt, bogged down in committe. That, or whomever was enjoying the majority for the moment would be distorting all the laws one way or the other. It's just not a pretty picture.

Before FreeBSD should be looking at any kind of delegating any of the sub-projects, there needs to be a hard look given to the over all political structure. There's just too many folks to keep things to purely a commitee kind of thing, but not enough for a governmental style complexity. Somewhere in the middle is where things need to be. Now to see if the core team has the courage and forethought to head down that road.

There has been a fair number of posts about whether or not Java is really an "Open-Standard". The first thing to remember is where this article originates, Business 2.0.

Taking that into account, Java is an open standard. Are there other compilers for Java? Yes. Are there multiple interpreters for Java? Yes. Is the standard published on how it works? Yes (Addison-Wesely publishes several books on it). So, for the average intended reader of business 2.0, Java is an open standard.

I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but something doesn't have to be controlled by an international standards organization to be open.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go prepare for flames as I've posted something that people are going to have problems with.

I thought you didn't care about karma. Your sig seems to indicate so.

m$ sux0rs! don't question it!

download linux today!

Michael Smith resigned from -core today. FreeBSD is dying :/

If a computer had emotions and I installed all these applications at the same time, it would be begging me to format its hard drive to stop the suffering.

Computers DO have emotions, didn't you know? That's why Windows blue-screens all the time. It's not the OS, it's the computer fscking with the memory to rearrange the bits to read "HELP ME." Unlike with people, a computer's emotional problems are easy to cure. :)

> IDE drives are fine in a desktop machine. It isn't likely to be heavily stressed and any reads and writes are likely to be from a single application at a time and a single user at a time with a CPU that is typically 99% idle.

If you use any modern OS you’re supposed to have virtual memory paging and multitasking that poses very serious data integrity issues for IDE, as stated in FreeBSD’s tuning(7) manpage.

I'd rather have a working, secure, stable distribution a few days later than have a highly experimental one with all sorts of hidden defects right now.

Sounds like Linux isn't the system for you. Try FreeBSD

Linux and FreeBSD have converted hundreds of thousands if not millions of desktops, systems, servers and people to using something other than Microsoft. I was running a straight up Microsoft shop/ISP. And, I was converted for both personal and corporate use. The magnitude of Linux machines running out there on personal PCs should tell you they are eating up Microsoft territory. That is why Microsoft Blasts the GPL every chance they get (I am not a fan of GPL either - prefer BSD License, another Open Source / Free Source license).

The real story here is that Steve can't stop the whole "I am the best acid trippin' visionary ever" mantra long enough to target his marketplace. He is still competing with the wrong company. You really want to live off Sun's drop-offs? Come on! Sun does not have a lock on any decent share of the desktop market. Macs are NOT Servers! They are visual development and personal computing tools.

:)

Then why doesn't the Windows XP installer recognise my FreeBSD and Linux partitions and allow me to select them from its boot manager, or allow me to resize or create any non-Windows file system?

or FreeBSD

Then again, .Net can be used for traditional client-only apps, as well.

Step 1: Uninstall all current file sharing progams on your PC

Step 2: When finished, simply start accquiring your music/movies through ethical and legal methods, like Emusic.com, or through an secret, ancient technique from the Far East called "Bu Yingt Hecd" (note from UpEvil medical staff: if you experience discomfort at the thought of supporting the corporate system through the given methods, we have found the best way to alleviate this pain is to cease the purchase/accquiring of corporate-produced music altogether)

(optional) Step 3: As an added bonus, install a Free operating system and avoid having to pay for Monopolyware too!

This has been your daily UpEvil "Kazaa-whores-are-a-bunch-of-cheap-whiny-fucks" post of the day. Thank you, and good night.

FreeBSD is another option you might see coming, considering how it was used in The Matrix .

Adaptec is very cooperative. You can find their page here. I think the aic7xxx driver in the 2.4 kernel tree was sponsored by Adaptec (i.e. they paid a guy to write it). It works very well. Here is the official page for the aic7xxx driver.

Really, how does it feel to be reviled and pitied by so many thousands of strangers?

Here's a short list of Linux flaws that make it look silly:

* /usr/include/linux (come on. honestly.) Lame. Nonstandard. (for the clue-deprived, this means that any code written for linux using the linux/ headers will be incompatible with all other Unix flavors.) Guess what: string.h, types.h, malloc.h, signal.h, and so-on don't belong in a platform-specific include directory. Hope you didn't want to port your code...
* Neither the sigaction manpage nor the signal.h includs indicate what the system defaults are. Of course, they've put signal.h in /usr/include/linux...
* "intro" manpages are a joke. Compare the BSD section 2 intro with the one from Linux.
* file systems mount async by default (power outage and your fs dies)
* Most linux users don't have pubes yet and are intolerably lame (3Y3 4m 1337 H4x0r d00d [uz 3y3 h4v3 L1Nux!)
* Too many things in user space that belong in the kernel (nfs)
* Too many things in the kernel that belong in user space (java)
* No standard distribution. Linux people say this is a good thing? Try writing software or software configuration instructions when you never know how the OS is going to be laid out, or try finding the responsible party for a block of OS code, or try fixing security problems when they arise and you'll see that this is NOT a good thing at all.
* no consistant pronunciation the os'es name (line-ucks? lynn-ucks?)
* svr4? bsd? make up your mind?
* Lame NFS & dd
* #linux, #hack, #linuxwarez...
* New kernel every week that breaks half your applications
* Security flaw/Root compromise of the week (see below)
* glibc? libc? libc5? libc6? glibc2?
* /bin/sh != sh; /bin/sh == bash. Lame. Nonstandard. Result: broken shell scripts and nonportable code.
* /usr/bin/make != make; /usr/bin/make == gmake. Lame. Nonstandard. Same result as above: nonportable code.
* ext2fs
* Linux will mount partitions that are not clean
* can't handle partitions > 2GB (i've hear they finally fixed this one)
* e2fsck deliberatly leaves/creates corrupt files (if there is a block that it duplicate between two files, e2fsck will clone the duplicate (while fsck will remove both files. This can also result in a user gaining unauthorized access to another user's data.))
* it swap likes swap to swap swap too swap often swap
* only allows 128M of swap at a time; for a 1G of swap, you need 8 swap partitions
* can't handle more than 1GB of RAM
* To install Joe's program, you need Bob's kernel hack, but for Bob's kernel hack, you've got to have Suzy's patches, but Suzy's patches only work with a year-old kernel, unless you get Mike's patches to Suzy's patches, but even then, those conflict with Jeff's drivers, which can be resolved only by installing Nancy's patches...
* Can't handle the same IP on more than one interface
* Can't handle large files
* Max file size: 2GB. (*BSD: 4 Terabytes)
* Dynamically linked root shell. Doom!
* lilo! any boot loader that needs to have magic block numbers is wrong
* linux icmp.h is *NOT* unix icmp.h - they're totally incompatible.
* flatfile password files make listing large ftp directories impossible due to huge numbers of flatfile searchces.
* password file can be non-shadowed - encrypted passwords visible to all
* shadow.h! hahahahahahaha!
* Slowass network code
* Did I mention slowass network code?
* Oh, also slowass network code
* Miserably pathetic threading implementation doesn't scale for shit: all threads wake up on signals (stampeding process problem).
* L1nux c0d3rz!
* LILO can't cope with kernels > 1Mb, so the kernel has to be gzipped.
* strfry and memfrob
* Can't cope with hard drives > 32GB
* GPL - a license and a virus
* Fundamental design and direction problems. It turns out that Linus is not the smartest man in the world and the saviour of all mankind.
* OS or religion?
* UNABLE TO LOAD INTERPRETER...memory leak much?
* This is a real Linux error message: Uhhh. NMI recieved. Dazed and Confused. Trying to cope ...such professionalism!
*The GNU su manpage actually says this:
This program does not support a "wheel group" that restricts who can su to super-user accounts, because that can help fascist system administrators hold unwarranted power over other users. ...apparently it's better for any user to attack the root password than to offer added security. Ignorance of security is a common Linux thread.
* vi != vi; vi == vim. vim links to X libraries. Wipe X, and now you can't use vi. Retards.
* Still no USB support in 2000, after NetBSD and FreeBSD have had it for nearly 2 years. So much for the "million geeks" theory of rapid software development.
* Always trying to help you hold your weewee when you're going tinkle.
* No version control used to manage the system.

Here's a short list of Linux flaws that make it look silly:

* /usr/include/linux (come on. honestly.) Lame. Nonstandard. (for the clue-deprived, this means that any code written for linux using the linux/ headers will be incompatible with all other Unix flavors.) Guess what: string.h, types.h, malloc.h, signal.h, and so-on don't belong in a platform-specific include directory. Hope you didn't want to port your code...
* Neither the sigaction manpage nor the signal.h includs indicate what the system defaults are. Of course, they've put signal.h in /usr/include/linux...
* "intro" manpages are a joke. Compare the BSD section 2 intro with the one from Linux.
* file systems mount async by default (power outage and your fs dies)
* Most linux users don't have pubes yet and are intolerably lame (3Y3 4m 1337 H4x0r d00d [uz 3y3 h4v3 L1Nux!)
* Too many things in user space that belong in the kernel (nfs)
* Too many things in the kernel that belong in user space (java)
* No standard distribution. Linux people say this is a good thing? Try writing software or software configuration instructions when you never know how the OS is going to be laid out, or try finding the responsible party for a block of OS code, or try fixing security problems when they arise and you'll see that this is NOT a good thing at all.
* no consistant pronunciation the os'es name (line-ucks? lynn-ucks?)
* svr4? bsd? make up your mind?
* Lame NFS & dd
* #linux, #hack, #linuxwarez...
* New kernel every week that breaks half your applications
* Security flaw/Root compromise of the week (see below)
* glibc? libc? libc5? libc6? glibc2?
* /bin/sh != sh; /bin/sh == bash. Lame. Nonstandard. Result: broken shell scripts and nonportable code.
* /usr/bin/make != make; /usr/bin/make == gmake. Lame. Nonstandard. Same result as above: nonportable code.
* ext2fs
* Linux will mount partitions that are not clean
* can't handle partitions > 2GB (i've hear they finally fixed this one)
* e2fsck deliberatly leaves/creates corrupt files (if there is a block that it duplicate between two files, e2fsck will clone the duplicate (while fsck will remove both files. This can also result in a user gaining unauthorized access to another user's data.))
* it swap likes swap to swap swap too swap often swap
* only allows 128M of swap at a time; for a 1G of swap, you need 8 swap partitions
* can't handle more than 1GB of RAM
* To install Joe's program, you need Bob's kernel hack, but for Bob's kernel hack, you've got to have Suzy's patches, but Suzy's patches only work with a year-old kernel, unless you get Mike's patches to Suzy's patches, but even then, those conflict with Jeff's drivers, which can be resolved only by installing Nancy's patches...
* Can't handle the same IP on more than one interface
* Can't handle large files
* Max file size: 2GB. (*BSD: 4 Terabytes)
* Dynamically linked root shell. Doom!
* lilo! any boot loader that needs to have magic block numbers is wrong
* linux icmp.h is *NOT* unix icmp.h - they're totally incompatible.
* flatfile password files make listing large ftp directories impossible due to huge numbers of flatfile searchces.
* password file can be non-shadowed - encrypted passwords visible to all
* shadow.h! hahahahahahaha!
* Slowass network code
* Did I mention slowass network code?
* Oh, also slowass network code
* Miserably pathetic threading implementation doesn't scale for shit: all threads wake up on signals (stampeding process problem).
* L1nux c0d3rz!
* LILO can't cope with kernels > 1Mb, so the kernel has to be gzipped.
* strfry and memfrob
* Can't cope with hard drives > 32GB
* GPL - a license and a virus
* Fundamental design and direction problems. It turns out that Linus is not the smartest man in the world and the saviour of all mankind.
* OS or religion?
* UNABLE TO LOAD INTERPRETER...memory leak much?
* This is a real Linux error message: Uhhh. NMI recieved. Dazed and Confused. Trying to cope ...such professionalism!
*The GNU su manpage actually says this:
This program does not support a "wheel group" that restricts who can su to super-user accounts, because that can help fascist system administrators hold unwarranted power over other users. ...apparently it's better for any user to attack the root password than to offer added security. Ignorance of security is a common Linux thread.
* vi != vi; vi == vim. vim links to X libraries. Wipe X, and now you can't use vi. Retards.
* Still no USB support in 2000, after NetBSD and FreeBSD have had it for nearly 2 years. So much for the "million geeks" theory of rapid software development.
* Always trying to help you hold your weewee when you're going tinkle.
* No version control used to manage the system.

The technology to prevent you from having to reboot your computer daily can be found here and here. It's been around since the early 90's, and was invented by a grad student...

Here's a short list of Linux flaws that make it look silly:

* /usr/include/linux (come on. honestly.) Lame. Nonstandard. (for the clue-deprived, this means that any code written for linux using the linux/ headers will be incompatible with all other Unix flavors.) Guess what: string.h, types.h, malloc.h, signal.h, and so-on don't belong in a platform-specific include directory. Hope you didn't want to port your code...
* Neither the sigaction manpage nor the signal.h includs indicate what the system defaults are. Of course, they've put signal.h in /usr/include/linux...
* "intro" manpages are a joke. Compare the BSD section 2 intro with the one from Linux.
* file systems mount async by default (power outage and your fs dies)
* Most linux users don't have pubes yet and are intolerably lame (3Y3 4m 1337 H4x0r d00d [uz 3y3 h4v3 L1Nux!)
* Too many things in user space that belong in the kernel (nfs)
* Too many things in the kernel that belong in user space (java)
* No standard distribution. Linux people say this is a good thing? Try writing software or software configuration instructions when you never know how the OS is going to be laid out, or try finding the responsible party for a block of OS code, or try fixing security problems when they arise and you'll see that this is NOT a good thing at all.
* no consistant pronunciation the os'es name (line-ucks? lynn-ucks?)
* svr4? bsd? make up your mind?
* Lame NFS & dd
* #linux, #hack, #linuxwarez...
* New kernel every week that breaks half your applications
* Security flaw/Root compromise of the week (see below)
* glibc? libc? libc5? libc6? glibc2?
* /bin/sh != sh; /bin/sh == bash. Lame. Nonstandard. Result: broken shell scripts and nonportable code.
* /usr/bin/make != make; /usr/bin/make == gmake. Lame. Nonstandard. Same result as above: nonportable code.
* ext2fs
* Linux will mount partitions that are not clean
* can't handle partitions > 2GB (i've hear they finally fixed this one)
* e2fsck deliberatly leaves/creates corrupt files (if there is a block that it duplicate between two files, e2fsck will clone the duplicate (while fsck will remove both files. This can also result in a user gaining unauthorized access to another user's data.))
* it swap likes swap to swap swap too swap often swap
* only allows 128M of swap at a time; for a 1G of swap, you need 8 swap partitions
* can't handle more than 1GB of RAM
* To install Joe's program, you need Bob's kernel hack, but for Bob's kernel hack, you've got to have Suzy's patches, but Suzy's patches only work with a year-old kernel, unless you get Mike's patches to Suzy's patches, but even then, those conflict with Jeff's drivers, which can be resolved only by installing Nancy's patches...
* Can't handle the same IP on more than one interface
* Can't handle large files
* Max file size: 2GB. (*BSD: 4 Terabytes)
* Dynamically linked root shell. Doom!
* lilo! any boot loader that needs to have magic block numbers is wrong
* linux icmp.h is *NOT* unix icmp.h - they're totally incompatible.
* flatfile password files make listing large ftp directories impossible due to huge numbers of flatfile searchces.
* password file can be non-shadowed - encrypted passwords visible to all
* shadow.h! hahahahahahaha!
* Slowass network code
* Did I mention slowass network code?
* Oh, also slowass network code
* Miserably pathetic threading implementation doesn't scale for shit: all threads wake up on signals (stampeding process problem).
* L1nux c0d3rz!
* LILO can't cope with kernels > 1Mb, so the kernel has to be gzipped.
* strfry and memfrob
* Can't cope with hard drives > 32GB
* GPL - a license and a virus
* Fundamental design and direction problems. It turns out that Linus is not the smartest man in the world and the saviour of all mankind.
* OS or religion?
* UNABLE TO LOAD INTERPRETER...memory leak much?
* This is a real Linux error message: Uhhh. NMI recieved. Dazed and Confused. Trying to cope ...such professionalism!
*The GNU su manpage actually says this:
This program does not support a "wheel group" that restricts who can su to super-user accounts, because that can help fascist system administrators hold unwarranted power over other users. ...apparently it's better for any user to attack the root password than to offer added security. Ignorance of security is a common Linux thread.
* vi != vi; vi == vim. vim links to X libraries. Wipe X, and now you can't use vi. Retards.
* Still no USB support in 2000, after NetBSD and FreeBSD have had it for nearly 2 years. So much for the "million geeks" theory of rapid software development.
* Always trying to help you hold your weewee when you're going tinkle.
* No version control used to manage the system.