I know it's not here yet, but it's supposed to be coming. What about the days when your DVD player just spits out a digital signal? What will stop me from put a box in between the two and recording?
Hell if we're using DVD-R for recording from TV by then, what'll stop me from doing that? Or, what stops me from intercepting the data stream coming out of a licensed Windows decoder?
My guess is just some black-box software/hardware and some reverse engineering time. And how would that be illegal? I'm not touching their encryption scheme. And under the fair use principle that data is mine to with as I see fit. I just can't redistribute it.
I ordered on the 22nd from Amazon. I didn't expect to get the gifts on time. They arrived on the 24th. I have to say, I was impressed. Just goes to show, the real e-commerce companies (not the companies that went to the web because it was the next big thing) have a clue. Anyone else is debatable.
Not so fast... (was: show us a brain)
on
Linux on Palm
·
· Score: 1
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable.
If distribution of executable or object code is made by offering access to copy from a designated place, then offering equivalent access to copy the source code from the same place counts as distribution of the source code, even though third parties are not compelled to copy the source along with the object code.
IF, as I understand it (and I haven't checked, as the server is busy), they are not distributing source with their ROM image, nor giving instruction on how to obtain a physical copy of the source, nor placing source code in the directory from which you download the source. Note that part (c) of the above doesn't apply if they have modified the source. It only applies if they are mirroring the binary image, essentially.
As to the question of what the original poster is going to do with the source, who cares? He has a right to it under the GPL. If he wants it, he must be given it. If they can't give out the source, then they can't distribute their image.
Now, IANAL and I'm not a member of the GPL gestapo, but the original poster was right (assuming they really aren't offering source). Due to the/. effect it's not possible for me to check the veracity of his statement, so the above may be for naught.
I've got to complain here, being a paid Unix guru (well I can dream about the guru bit, but I do admin work) and I'd like to think that you should at least listen to the opinion of the local Guru. He might not be entirely right, but he might be of some use.
I think Robin's only mistake here is assuming that we all want the same thing. It's a beautiful theory, but completely false. While the above worked for him, it won't necessarily work for anyone else.
Don't get me wrong. Some of his ideas make sense! Not ignoring the "popular" girls is good advice. But here's where Robin goes wrong (and right):
Non-competitiveness: At least for me, I want to be dating a woman who is my equal and who won't put me before her needs. This isn't to say I don't want lattitude, and with what I do (mathematics) I definitely need her to understand that I need some support. But on the other hand, I've had someone take care of my every need. She was called Mom. I don't want to live with mom.
As for being honest, absolutely. Honesty is absolutely vital.
As for women costing a lot, that's a complicated issue. I've known my share of women who cost a fortune, but weren't supermodel types. I've also known my share of exceedingly attractive girls who worked on a tight budget.
Women are not about what's under the clothing. (well not entirely...) They're about what's inside that head of theirs. It is more important to learn about who they are, than what gets them off.
Other than that, I think Robin hit a lot of good points. I think, probably, it could have been said better, but that's easy for me to say. I didn't write a feature.
I don't know about anyone else, but I want a thinkpad for 3 reasons:
IBM makes good machines (IMHO)
ThinkPad Black
The ThinkPad look.
To me the thinkpad has always been the ideal model of what a laptop should be. (In particular the 570 series is my favorite, powerful, yet ultralight...)
Then again, maybe there's just something wrong with me.
I'm not so sure I agree with that statement. Linux has an exceptionally low latency level, and our context switches for normal processes are at least as cheap as Solaris's threads. So Linus & co. made the reasonable decisions and made threads a special process. Now you can argue all day about whether you want a separate run queue for threads or not, but I'll trust Linus Torvalds, DaveM and Alan Cox on OS design over someone who doesn't have numbers to back their claims up.
And if you want numbers about linux threads, trawl through the lkml archives. There was a discussion about this not so long ago.
If I remember my Electricity and Magnetism correctly, a farday cage is an equipotential. The idea is that since field lines (in either electric or magnetic fields) can't cross, then the fields inside the cage are contained inside, and those outside are contained outside.
So if you design something which is almost an equipotential you get an OK shield. Now, I'd think a fine enough mesh (something magnetic is probably best) would be suitable. But IANAEE and IANAP (an Electrical engineer or physicist).
- fetchmail, as noted. This apparently has a decent user-base. - Many high quality HOWTOs over at the LDP ( I count at least 7, some technical, some not. ) - Lots of press contact. (good & bad) - Maintains the Jargon File/Hacker's Dictionary - principal co-developer of ncurses (which you probably use daily) - helps out with metalab.unc.edu
I'd call that substantial contribution. It's more than I've done. It's more than most people have done. And I'm more than willing to let him do the speaking thing. I don't want to.
I would still like to see some more conclusive stuff on Linux's highend SMP abilities (4 or more), bother on i386 and on Alpha and UltraSPARC. Alan Cox claimed there were some speedups to SMP late in 2.1.x (i think) that should have significantly improved hi end perf. Perhaps VAR would sponsr a test?
If Linux doesn't beat all on up to 16 or so processors, we should fix it.
It's not that simple. Currently the biggest problem with the Linux SMP implementation is the IO subsystem. (SCSI and IDE, etc.) The problem is that this subsystem isn't SMP safe. So whenever the kernel enters this portion, it grabs what is known as the kernel lock. Thus disk activity can only happen on 1 processor at a time (bad). In Linux 2.3 they're going to strip this away, so that Linux 2.4 (or 3.0, or whatever) will probably scale far better than Linux 2.2 (of course they'll be making other nice optimizations along the way). But this isn't something you can just fix on a whim.
It's really easy to hate ESR. He's the talking head which spouts off soundbytes in every article on Linux. He's viewed as the person who decides whether software is or isn't open source. He's highly visible. But ESR has done a lot of important things. Netscape going open source can be attributed to him in part (don't forget jwz) as "The Cathedral and The Bazaar" was very influential in that decision. But that's not the only reason he's important. Go to http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP and look at the howto's. How many of those are written by ESR? Remember too that ESR hacked code (most likely he has little time for that now). How many here can say the same? ESR has had MANY accomplishments. You can hate him all you want. But the following two facts are irrevocably true: 1) ESR has contributed more to the community than most 2) ESR is fundamentally important, beyond his role as spokesperson. For those of you which claim that you didn't choose him, did you choose Linus Torvalds or Alan Cox? No. Did you choose Richard M Stallman? No. Did you in fact choose anyone? No. Open Source is not a democracy. It is some weird cross between communism and a benevolent dictatorship. Some very strange sort of social darwinism. Whatever your feelings of ESR, remember that he is important.
> have a pentium notebook, which when the battery > is about to die (about 1% life remaining) >it enters save to disk mode. This feature >requires a fat or fat32 partition.. (because of >the program that creates the file in which the >data is stored) > >what happens is the ram (32mb) is saved to that >file. it isnt supported in linux.
Untrue! Linux 2.2 either supports, or there is a patch for, suspend to disk. It's been discussed on linux-kernel a bit, and I know some generated a patch which supposedly works well. I don't know if it got added to the official kernel, though. Try looking in the kernel list archives.
In your fstab, and any place you mount a drive, use the sync option. This should disable the cache, and make all writes synchronous. It WILL hurt performance, but you shouldn't have to worry about disk state.
On the linux-kernel mailing list in December/November there was someone assembling a CVS archive of all the kernel releases he could find. Search the mailing archives for his URL. This might give you essentially what you're looking for and more.
You'll run into a problem with UIDs on most unices (including Linux). On most unices the UID field is 16 bits wide. This means about 64k users. However, it might be signed so it would be 32k (can't remember off-hand). There was a discussion about this in linux-kernel a month or so ago. 2.3 will supposedly feature much larger UIDs. However, this doesn't help you. Look into something like AIX (I think they have a larger UID) or Digital Unix (they might also). You could probably then utilize something like NIS+ or similar for password distribution. Or Kerberos (that's what BU uses).
It was enough for me. I started as an admin only "knowing" Linux with experience (minor) in a couple other Unices.
I've now been adminning for almost 2 years, working on Solaris 2.5.1 and 2.6, SunOS 4, HP-UX 10.20, Linux 2.2 (well late 2.1 and 2.2pre, 2.2 isn't quite out yet... close enough for me), Linux 2.0, and some minor exposure to Irix (but not much, mercifully. No offense to Irix admins out there. But then again, maybe you feel the same way...;-) ).
Systems Administration isn't a job, it's a way of life.
Slashdot Mirror
I know it's not here yet, but it's supposed to be coming. What about the days when your DVD player just spits out a digital signal? What will stop me from put a box in between the two and recording?
Hell if we're using DVD-R for recording from TV by then, what'll stop me from doing that? Or, what stops me from intercepting the data stream coming out of a licensed Windows decoder?
My guess is just some black-box software/hardware and some reverse engineering time. And how would that be illegal? I'm not touching their encryption scheme. And under the fair use principle that data is mine to with as I see fit. I just can't redistribute it.
I ordered on the 22nd from Amazon. I didn't expect to get the gifts on time. They arrived on the 24th. I have to say, I was impressed. Just goes to show, the real e-commerce companies (not the companies that went to the web because it was the next big thing) have a clue. Anyone else is debatable.
IF, as I understand it (and I haven't checked, as the server is busy), they are not distributing source with their ROM image, nor giving instruction on how to obtain a physical copy of the source, nor placing source code in the directory from which you download the source. Note that part (c) of the above doesn't apply if they have modified the source. It only applies if they are mirroring the binary image, essentially.
As to the question of what the original poster is going to do with the source, who cares? He has a right to it under the GPL. If he wants it, he must be given it. If they can't give out the source, then they can't distribute their image.
Now, IANAL and I'm not a member of the GPL gestapo, but the original poster was right (assuming they really aren't offering source). Due to the /. effect it's not possible for me to check the veracity of his statement, so the above may be for naught.
I've got to complain here, being a paid Unix guru (well I can dream about the guru bit, but I do admin work) and I'd like to think that you should at least listen to the opinion of the local Guru. He might not be entirely right, but he might be of some use.
Don't get me wrong. Some of his ideas make sense! Not ignoring the "popular" girls is good advice. But here's where Robin goes wrong (and right):
Other than that, I think Robin hit a lot of good points. I think, probably, it could have been said better, but that's easy for me to say. I didn't write a feature.
To me the thinkpad has always been the ideal model of what a laptop should be. (In particular the 570 series is my favorite, powerful, yet ultralight...)
Then again, maybe there's just something wrong with me.
And if you want numbers about linux threads, trawl through the lkml archives. There was a discussion about this not so long ago.
So if you design something which is almost an equipotential you get an OK shield. Now, I'd think a fine enough mesh (something magnetic is probably best) would be suitable. But IANAEE and IANAP (an Electrical engineer or physicist).
Okay,
Let's look at what ESR has done:
- fetchmail, as noted. This apparently has a decent user-base.
- Many high quality HOWTOs over at the LDP ( I count at least 7, some technical, some not. )
- Lots of press contact. (good & bad)
- Maintains the Jargon File/Hacker's Dictionary
- principal co-developer of ncurses (which you probably use daily)
- helps out with metalab.unc.edu
I'd call that substantial contribution. It's more than I've done. It's more than most people have done. And I'm more than willing to let him do the speaking thing. I don't want to.
So what are you kvetching about?
I would still like to see some more conclusive stuff on Linux's highend SMP abilities (4 or more), bother on i386 and on Alpha and UltraSPARC. Alan Cox claimed there were some speedups to SMP late in 2.1.x (i think) that should have significantly improved hi end perf. Perhaps VAR would sponsr a test?
If Linux doesn't beat all on up to 16 or so processors, we should fix it.
It's not that simple. Currently the biggest problem with the Linux SMP implementation is the IO subsystem. (SCSI and IDE, etc.) The problem is that this subsystem isn't SMP safe. So whenever the kernel enters this portion, it grabs what is known as the kernel lock. Thus disk activity can only happen on 1 processor at a time (bad). In Linux 2.3 they're going to strip this away, so that Linux 2.4 (or 3.0, or whatever) will probably scale far better than Linux 2.2 (of course they'll be making other nice optimizations along the way). But this isn't something you can just fix on a whim.
It's really easy to hate ESR. He's the talking head which spouts off soundbytes in every article on Linux. He's viewed as the person who decides whether software is or isn't open source. He's highly visible. But ESR has done a lot of important things. Netscape going open source can be attributed to him in part (don't forget jwz) as "The Cathedral and The Bazaar" was very influential in that decision. But that's not the only reason he's important. Go to http://metalab.unc.edu/LDP and look at the howto's. How many of those are written by ESR? Remember too that ESR hacked code (most likely he has little time for that now). How many here can say the same? ESR has had MANY accomplishments. You can hate him all you want. But the following two facts are irrevocably true: 1) ESR has contributed more to the community than most 2) ESR is fundamentally important, beyond his role as spokesperson. For those of you which claim that you didn't choose him, did you choose Linus Torvalds or Alan Cox? No. Did you choose Richard M Stallman? No. Did you in fact choose anyone? No. Open Source is not a democracy. It is some weird cross between communism and a benevolent dictatorship. Some very strange sort of social darwinism. Whatever your feelings of ESR, remember that he is important.
> have a pentium notebook, which when the battery > is about to die (about 1% life remaining)
>it enters save to disk mode. This feature >requires a fat or fat32 partition.. (because of >the program that creates the file in which the >data is stored)
>
>what happens is the ram (32mb) is saved to that >file. it isnt supported in linux.
Untrue! Linux 2.2 either supports, or there is a patch for, suspend to disk. It's been discussed on linux-kernel a bit, and I know some generated a patch which supposedly works well. I don't know if it got added to the official kernel, though. Try looking in the kernel list archives.
In your fstab, and any place you mount a drive, use the sync option. This should disable the cache, and make all writes synchronous. It WILL hurt performance, but you shouldn't have to worry about disk state.
On the linux-kernel mailing list in December/November there was someone assembling a CVS archive of all the kernel releases he could find. Search the mailing archives for his URL. This might give you essentially what you're looking for and more.
You'll run into a problem with UIDs on most unices (including Linux). On most unices the UID field is 16 bits wide. This means about 64k users. However, it might be signed so it would be 32k (can't remember off-hand). There was a discussion about this in linux-kernel a month or so ago. 2.3 will supposedly feature much larger UIDs. However, this doesn't help you. Look into something like AIX (I think they have a larger UID) or Digital Unix (they might also). You could probably then utilize something like NIS+ or similar for password distribution. Or Kerberos (that's what BU uses).
Better yet do backups in duplicate to different sorts of media (2 DAT, 2 DLT, whatever you have that works, etc.)
It was enough for me. I started as an admin only "knowing" Linux with experience (minor) in a couple other Unices.
I've now been adminning for almost 2 years, working on Solaris 2.5.1 and 2.6, SunOS 4, HP-UX 10.20, Linux 2.2 (well late 2.1 and 2.2pre, 2.2 isn't quite out yet... close enough for me), Linux 2.0, and some minor exposure to Irix (but not much, mercifully. No offense to Irix admins out there. But then again, maybe you feel the same way...;-) ).
Systems Administration isn't a job, it's a way of life.