Get a clue. You need to download files from one. As an example, ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/2.8/i386/ contains less than 95Mb of data. Why would you rather download ~600Mb?!
I really don't give a fsck about what everyone else is using as an excuse for an OS. IMO, what's important is what I am using, and I'd like to be able to decide that myself.
So, instead of trying to get all of these clueless people to replace whatever crap they're using with Linux, put the energy on advocating open standards, non-proprietary file formats etc. This way, everyone will be able to use the platform they like best (even if it's Windows).
My major gripe is the "RE: " instead of "Re: " prefix on replies/follow-ups. Maybe it's not so much to get upset about, but it doesn't stop there since this prefix is cluelessly "translated" in the non-US versions. So for example, in the swedish version it's "SV: " (which, I presume, is short for "svar", meaning "reply" and not "regarding"). Frequently you see subject lines ending up like "Re: SV: Re: SV: RE: SV: Re: blah, blah blah"... since it's hard for software to recognise and remove "Re: " if it's turned into whatever the local MS translator thinks it means.
Now, RFC822 doesn't really forbid this abomination, but AFAIK Outlook is also a Usenet agent and RFC1036 ("Standard for USENET Messages") clearly states:
2.1.4. Subject
The "Subject" line (formerly "Title") tells what the message is about. It should be suggestive enough of the contents of the message to enable a reader to make a decision whether to read the message based on the subject alone. If the message is submitted in response to another message (e.g., is a follow-up) the default subject should begin with the four characters "Re:", and the "References" line is required. For follow-ups, the use of the "Summary" line is encouraged.
and furthermore in section 2.2.5:
[...] Implementations should provide a follow-up command, which allows a user to post a follow-up message. This command should generate a "Subject" line which is the same as the original message, except that if the original subject does not begin with "Re:" or "re:", the four characters "Re:" are inserted before the subject.
In general, MS is really bad at following current practice, it being a standard or just recommendation. And in this case, it's something that affects other people and not just users of MS's software (in which case I could care less...)
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I bet the {Open,Net}BSD people would love to get their kernels infected by the GPL.
I suppose you've never considered the difference between Flash and RAM technology?
Ah, you mean something like the irssi backdoor?
So howcome Windows 98, 98SE and ME were affected too (1980's technology)?
Why?
Why would anyone want a drop in replacement for something that is ugly, bloated and insecure?
So you mean a name like Dragonball MX1 isn't cool enough? ;-)
Occasional security problems?! BIND has a history as a heap of junk. There's no reason at all to put up with that.
The "bugs" are in the design of the interfaces. That's pretty hard to fix w/o breaking the standards.
Huh? I thought Microsoft created .NET.
Get a clue. You need to download files from one. As an example, ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/2.8/i386/ contains less than 95Mb of data. Why would you rather download ~600Mb?!
See DjVu "non-commercial" site.
--Daniel
You are wrong about AXFR. See
I really don't give a fsck about what everyone else is using as an excuse for an OS. IMO, what's important is what I am using, and I'd like to be able to decide that myself.
So, instead of trying to get all of these clueless people to replace whatever crap they're using with Linux, put the energy on advocating open standards, non-proprietary file formats etc. This way, everyone will be able to use the platform they like best (even if it's Windows).
Sure, but the point is that GCC can be used with several different libc implementations.
Dear AC, get some clues: StrongARM SA-1110 Linecard.
Hint: ARM is king of power-efficiency in the (high-end) embedded world.
If I was a sendmail fan, I would tell you that "you're not supposed to edit the .cf file!" ... but I'm not; I prefer qmail.
So safer but slightly slower disk I/O means less usable to to you?
The ARM7TDMI core, on which both the Atmel AT91 series and this new chip are based, does not include an MMU.
My major gripe is the "RE: " instead of "Re: " prefix on replies/follow-ups. Maybe it's not so much to get upset about, but it doesn't stop there since this prefix is cluelessly "translated" in the non-US versions. So for example, in the swedish version it's "SV: " (which, I presume, is short for "svar", meaning "reply" and not "regarding"). Frequently you see subject lines ending up like "Re: SV: Re: SV: RE: SV: Re: blah, blah blah"... since it's hard for software to recognise and remove "Re: " if it's turned into whatever the local MS translator thinks it means.
Now, RFC822 doesn't really forbid this abomination, but AFAIK Outlook is also a Usenet agent and RFC1036 ("Standard for USENET Messages") clearly states:
and furthermore in section 2.2.5:In general, MS is really bad at following current practice, it being a standard or just recommendation. And in this case, it's something that affects other people and not just users of MS's software (in which case I could care less...)
/Daniel
Sure, this was exactly my point. Or rather: Common Lisp is not the only Lisp language.
Scheme is Lisp.
FWIW, it was actually in Sweden. Read all about it here.
I'm not familiar with Exim, but aren't there more efficient solutions?
Although my experiences have been with much smaller configurations, qmail reportedly handles loads of this magnitude on lesser hardware.