It doesn't. The BSD people hate GCC because IT is GPL licensed, they have been replacing GPL software with BSD software for a while. This is only partially because of the GPLv3, but v3 has made them work a bit harder obviously.
PCC, if it does turn into a good compiler, is nothing but a good thing for everyone, it means competition where there previously was none.
BSD people tend to just want recognition for their work and little else, they would probably say that they want to make software literally free without restrictions of any kind.
Intel CPU chips do that quite well, there are some youtube videos around showing intel chips running for a few minutes without a heatsink then shutting down due to the thermal trip point set in the processor.
AMD chips on the other hand, there are videos of those running without a heatsink and catching on fire, presumably because there was no thermal trip point.
Thats something to consider for sure, even if the fans get turned off little damage can occur in most cases, and the CPU is what you generally have fan control over with some rare exceptions.
So I can "disable thermal performance limiters" in Linux, but not Windows....interesting. Any other artificial separations you like to make? Thermal trip points are set in the CPU itself, not software, and those can be screwed with regardless of the OS in use.
And that computer you mentioned, the one that ate hardware, was that Windows?
Far as i know theyre talking about the kernel module, if i remember right they do a similar trick to nvidia, releasing the module itself as gpl but keeping the majority of the code outside the module so it can be closed.
Software running on a platform is much different than code used to extend the kernel itself. A kernel module that would otherwise be compiled into the kernel, is clearly a derived work in the absence of some kind of odd circumstance where the exact same code happens to be able to run in the freebsd kernel. By default modules are derived works and you would have a hard time proving something isn't.
I'm still going to retain my concern that things will focus more on what companies want than on the desktop, its all being held together right now because the kernel is maintained by people with (mostly) no bias toward one use or platform, and that will probably continue given the number of devs working on it, i'm sure there will always be someone willing to maintain the kernel and prevent a split.
I'm also concerned about Tivos use of the initrd to do integrity checks, but i think the larger issue is the software. If tivo complies with the terms of the GPL, giving back the mods they make to software, to their users, i have no problem with them. I also think altering the license is a bad way to attack tivo and will fail at its intent, driving them to use another platform instead.
Some people do, and those people seem to think the linux system could drop all the new users and common folk, and still retain all of its shiny drivers, applications, and well written code. Those people are morons.
The installer and the Yast system were enough for me to stick with Opensuse, I have found both to be invaluable daily. I also like the fact that the X11 and curses versions of Yast are equivalent in functionality, since you can always configure the system easily over SSH or when X11 isn't even installed. In particular I like the partitioner (for its LVM and crypto features), the user, network services, and runlevel configuration panels.
In addition on my laptop with opensuse I was able to fix X11 from a graphical interface when the config file was actually deleted (Sax2), and setup the wlan card for a WPA2 wireless network in runlevel 3, all without editing config files.
I'm really hoping that more distros write systems like Yast or adopt it (its GPL).
That only works up to the exact number of users who are both able to read code, and understand it, which is a smaller number than the total user count probably by quite a bit.
The advantage is that users are ABLE to find things like security problems if they look, because the source is open. That doesn't guarantee they will find things, but you can see that it is at least possible.
Except that most of these companies are merely claiming to do so, we have no idea what is actually being kept either due to internal policy or some sort of government interaction. I would not put it past the current justice dept to force all these companies to publicly claim to have removed data while privately making it available to relevant 3 letter agencies.
Using another license doesn't guarantee protection, it just happened to turn out that way when MICROSOFT distributed Linux, but that trick doesn't work otherwise because the very people who own the patents don't care what license you use.
I think you could do without the cost and use other means to link a certificate to an entity.
Theres a project right now for openly available certificates, they are free but you have to prove you own the domain you want a cert for, and of course the CA root has to be in browsers and it isnt right now (though will be soon).
Yes, so you have a law requiring accountability for companies, most of which break the law constantly and again when they try to cover it up, and it gets to be too much of a burden on these completely dishonest companies, yes lets just repeal the law.
I've seen the same thing with the REAL drivers in Windows itself, so it's not just the reverse engineered replacement that drops things randomly sometimes.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't. The BSD people hate GCC because IT is GPL licensed, they have been replacing GPL software with BSD software for a while. This is only partially because of the GPLv3, but v3 has made them work a bit harder obviously.
PCC, if it does turn into a good compiler, is nothing but a good thing for everyone, it means competition where there previously was none.
BSD people tend to just want recognition for their work and little else, they would probably say that they want to make software literally free without restrictions of any kind.
Yes lets kill children because if there is a "rapist gene", and if it was passed on, and if it has any effect whatsoever, we can't let this happen!
idiot
Yes that is what its all about for Novell, keeping PC's non-free....that makes little sense you idiot.
TDM is at least a reasonable solution to the problem.
Intel CPU chips do that quite well, there are some youtube videos around showing intel chips running for a few minutes without a heatsink then shutting down due to the thermal trip point set in the processor.
AMD chips on the other hand, there are videos of those running without a heatsink and catching on fire, presumably because there was no thermal trip point.
Thats something to consider for sure, even if the fans get turned off little damage can occur in most cases, and the CPU is what you generally have fan control over with some rare exceptions.
So I can "disable thermal performance limiters" in Linux, but not Windows....interesting. Any other artificial separations you like to make? Thermal trip points are set in the CPU itself, not software, and those can be screwed with regardless of the OS in use.
And that computer you mentioned, the one that ate hardware, was that Windows?
Did you miss the part where it was free? Yea i think you did.....
Software as a service will be used to control users even more. Right now you at least have the code running locally.
On a DRM scale, SAS is even worse than Palladium.
Evolution makes more sense than simply making shit up, writing it down, and calling it gospel.
You seriously think a competent IT manager could not have seen this coming?
End user terminals should NEVER have direct access to any segment or area of a network that holds databases, services, or customer info.
Has nothing do to with doing something wrong, at all, in any way. Stop saying it.
Far as i know theyre talking about the kernel module, if i remember right they do a similar trick to nvidia, releasing the module itself as gpl but keeping the majority of the code outside the module so it can be closed.
Software running on a platform is much different than code used to extend the kernel itself. A kernel module that would otherwise be compiled into the kernel, is clearly a derived work in the absence of some kind of odd circumstance where the exact same code happens to be able to run in the freebsd kernel. By default modules are derived works and you would have a hard time proving something isn't.
I'm still going to retain my concern that things will focus more on what companies want than on the desktop, its all being held together right now because the kernel is maintained by people with (mostly) no bias toward one use or platform, and that will probably continue given the number of devs working on it, i'm sure there will always be someone willing to maintain the kernel and prevent a split.
I'm also concerned about Tivos use of the initrd to do integrity checks, but i think the larger issue is the software. If tivo complies with the terms of the GPL, giving back the mods they make to software, to their users, i have no problem with them. I also think altering the license is a bad way to attack tivo and will fail at its intent, driving them to use another platform instead.
The real pronunciation sounds ridiculous, thats why no one uses it, and im not quite sure why they insist on saying it that way.
As far as i am concerned, an acronym like Gnu's Not Unix, should be spelled out when speaking.
Yes, but you'll understand why I'm unwilling to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, or another chance.
Some people do, and those people seem to think the linux system could drop all the new users and common folk, and still retain all of its shiny drivers, applications, and well written code. Those people are morons.
The installer and the Yast system were enough for me to stick with Opensuse, I have found both to be invaluable daily. I also like the fact that the X11 and curses versions of Yast are equivalent in functionality, since you can always configure the system easily over SSH or when X11 isn't even installed. In particular I like the partitioner (for its LVM and crypto features), the user, network services, and runlevel configuration panels.
In addition on my laptop with opensuse I was able to fix X11 from a graphical interface when the config file was actually deleted (Sax2), and setup the wlan card for a WPA2 wireless network in runlevel 3, all without editing config files.
I'm really hoping that more distros write systems like Yast or adopt it (its GPL).
That only works up to the exact number of users who are both able to read code, and understand it, which is a smaller number than the total user count probably by quite a bit.
The advantage is that users are ABLE to find things like security problems if they look, because the source is open. That doesn't guarantee they will find things, but you can see that it is at least possible.
Except that most of these companies are merely claiming to do so, we have no idea what is actually being kept either due to internal policy or some sort of government interaction. I would not put it past the current justice dept to force all these companies to publicly claim to have removed data while privately making it available to relevant 3 letter agencies.
So which MIPS and ARM chips are you using on workstations and highend servers?
Using another license doesn't guarantee protection, it just happened to turn out that way when MICROSOFT distributed Linux, but that trick doesn't work otherwise because the very people who own the patents don't care what license you use.
I think you could do without the cost and use other means to link a certificate to an entity.
Theres a project right now for openly available certificates, they are free but you have to prove you own the domain you want a cert for, and of course the CA root has to be in browsers and it isnt right now (though will be soon).
Yes, so you have a law requiring accountability for companies, most of which break the law constantly and again when they try to cover it up, and it gets to be too much of a burden on these completely dishonest companies, yes lets just repeal the law.
Moron
I've seen the same thing with the REAL drivers in Windows itself, so it's not just the reverse engineered replacement that drops things randomly sometimes.