Slashdot Mirror
Billennium's Over - Anything Break?
An Anonymous Coward writes: "The billennium party at OpenProjects.Net rocked! Check out the log for the whole event over here. Please don't forget to use one of the mirrors. Thanks :-)" Well, anyone have anything break due to the rollover?
I was walking in the forest and.
PHIST PR0ST.
Z E
I 0
its just wrong to see a unix timestamp start with a 1 im gonna end up trying to debug a problem that doesnt exist...
"Nyquil - The stuffy, sneezy, why-the-hell-is-the-room-spinning medicine."
Nice troll asswipe.
Concorde is a nice package for solving travelling salesman problem. It has a fast implementation of chained Lin-Kernighan heuristic. I've been using it extensively in the last few months and starting this morning (Australia time), it's been crashing randomly, even when applied to the same data that worked fine last week. I recompiled it on various unices (Linux, DEC) and same thing still happened. Because the program uses random number extensively to create new paths, there must be something wrong with the way it generate the seed. Luckily, it has an option to fix the random number seed, and when it automatically chooses one, it also displays it.
Looking at the numbers, it's not hard to make the connection.
As a Python bigot (flame-bait me!) I'll point out that Perl, PHP and a few other Unix-y scripting languages are especially prone to this problem because they don't distinguish between strings and integers. I always knew that there would be a payoff in Python requiring me to explicitly convert.
This seems like a cheap shot but really there is a systemic issue here. Perl trades robustness for succintness whereas Python tends to require you to say what you mean explicitly. With perfect programmers there would be no difference. In the real world, programmers are not perfect and a language that helps you to find potential problems can yield quantitatively more robust code.
So what is "uranium" then?
Yet another crippling bombshell hit th beleaguered *BSD community when last month IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a mere fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost mor market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick nd its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For ll practical purposes, *BSD is dead.
*BS is dying