In addition to the fact EV1Servers is supporting SCO, it has just been neatly demonstrated EV1Servers is incapable of standing up to a slashdotting.
Not so. Look at EV1's MRTG graphs -- there isn't even a blip from the slashdot effect.
All that has been demonstrated here is that the server which runs EV1's forum isn't capable of handling the load... as long as you're not hosting your web site on that server, there is no problem.
don't forget to use proper descriptive text(see the w3's homepage- "here" is a perfect example of what NOT to use between the A tags!)
Not necessarily. For material which you don't intend for people to find via search engines, it's entirely appropriate.
For example, if you've got a web page about some software you've written, and you've got a tarball linked from that page, you probably want Google to point people towards the page, not the tarball. Saying that the tarball is <a href="foo.tar.gz">here</a> reduces the chance that the tarball will appear inappropriately as a search result.
4.6.1 never existed. It was going to exist, but some security issues appeared, so it was aborted. But you're right, I forgot about 3.5.1-RELEASE, mostly because it was never tagged in the CVS repository.
Updating from 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE.
on
FreeBSD 5.2.1 Released
·
· Score: 5, Informative
[I posted the message below to -current and -security, providing an easier upgrade path from 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE]
In order to provide an easy update path for i386 systems from FreeBSD 5.2 to FreeBSD 5.2.1, FreeBSD Update will now update systems running FreeBSD 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE. To take advantage of these updates, install and run FreeBSD Update, and reboot into the new kernel:
# cd/usr/ports/security/freebsd-update && make install clean # cp/usr/local/etc/freebsd-update.conf.sample/usr/local/etc/freebsd-update.conf #/usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update fetch #/usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update install # shutdown -r now
If you have recompiled any files locally, FreeBSD Update may not be able to update them automatically (it will complain). With the latest version of FreeBSD Update (version 1.5), you can use one of the following commands: #/usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update --branch crypto fetch or #/usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update --branch nocrypto fetch depending upon whether you installed the "crypto" distribution, to force files to be updated. (If you're not sure if you installed the "crypto" distribution, you almost certainly did).
FreeBSD Update will update a 5.2-RELEASE system to the exact binaries distributed with 5.2.1-RELEASE, with the following exceptions:
1. Files under the following directories will not be updated:
The ports and src trees can be updated using cvsup; the files in/usr/share/man/cat* are rebuilt from (updated) man pages automatically.
2. FreeBSD binaries include, in their headers, the value of __FreeBSD_version on the machine where they were compiled. This value was bumped from 502000 to 502010 as part of the release engineering process; binaries for which this is the ONLY change will not be updated.
As always, this is something I'm providing personally; it is in no way endorsed by the Security Officer, Release Engineering team, or the project as a whole.
Is it just me or are point point releases of FBSD pretty rare?
You're right. The only other one was 4.6.2-RELEASE. (I'm not counting the 2.2.x releases -- 2.2 was a major version number:) ).
Almost seems like 5.2 was a bit of a rush job.
5.2 was right on the boundary between "experimental" and "stable". As such, lots of people started using it once it was released, but few people actually participated in testing it. I believe that 5.2 had one of the longest ever periods between code freeze and release.
You have to understand a language well enough to figure out the examples given in higher level courses.
If higher level courses include *any* examples of code, they're not being taught properly. Pseudo-code (or even just pretty pictures) should be sufficient.
No, here we are meant to learn how to write the next Windows (O/S) or Excel (Applications).
Computer Science != Computer Programming. A good computer science program will have minimal coding requirements (just as much as is required to demonstrate the theory).
Sorry pal, but it doesn't take much imagination to see how useful a hypo kit could be to a hijacker, like you said, "most people can't even feel it go in."
I think the grandparent is overstating things a bit here: The pain is minimal, but it's unusual to not notice it entirely, and it's almost impossible to give an insulin injection to an uncooperative patient -- the needles are thin enough that any sort of violent movement will break them.
You need to start looking more trustworthy. When I check in for my flights, I'm always asked "Do you have any sharp objects", I always answer "Yes", and they don't care. Then I walk through security with a hundred lancets and several dozen needles (and a container clearly marked "WARNING: Biohazard. Destroy by incineration"), and nobody blinks.
But why should they? I'm a white Anglo-Saxon male, 22 years old, flying to and from university or academic conferences. Obviously I'm not a terrorist.
people don't seem to grasp that [the GPL is] only incompatible with licenses that have more RESTRICTIONS than the gpl
You seem to misunderstand the GPL. The GPL is not only incompatible with licenses which have *more* restrictions than the GPL; it is incompatible with licenses which have *different* restrictions.
For example, the following license is GPL-incompatible, but it is vastly more free:
Anti-msikvwebasdoiju public license: 1. You may do anything you want with works distributed under this license, except for including them in a software project called "msikvwebasdoiju".
Language diversity isn't necessarily a good thing. Some really cool code (cvsup and portupgrade) has been kept out of the FreeBSD base system because it would require importing yet another language (modula 3 and ruby, respectively).
Of course, if you're a closed-source programmer, you can use whatever compiled language you like; but with open-source code, using obscure languages imposes a cost upon your users and limits your code's usage.
As easy as it is to point to Microsoft as an example of monoculture, Open Source software is equally at fault here. Take "deflate" encoding as an example: How many different implementations are there? What fraction of deflate-using applications use an implementation other than zlib?
If anything, the ease of code reuse inherent in Open Source software makes monoculture easier to achieve.
Slashdot Mirror
In addition to the fact EV1Servers is supporting SCO, it has just been neatly demonstrated EV1Servers is incapable of standing up to a slashdotting.
Not so. Look at EV1's MRTG graphs -- there isn't even a blip from the slashdot effect.
All that has been demonstrated here is that the server which runs EV1's forum isn't capable of handling the load... as long as you're not hosting your web site on that server, there is no problem.
don't forget to use proper descriptive text(see the w3's homepage- "here" is a perfect example of what NOT to use between the A tags!)
Not necessarily. For material which you don't intend for people to find via search engines, it's entirely appropriate.
For example, if you've got a web page about some software you've written, and you've got a tarball linked from that page, you probably want Google to point people towards the page, not the tarball. Saying that the tarball is <a href="foo.tar.gz">here</a> reduces the chance that the tarball will appear inappropriately as a search result.
Why didn't RotK get nominated for the "Best Foreign Language film" award? Elvish is a foreign language, right?
Heh, even a "bad" release of FreeBSD is still pretty good compared, oh, say, a bad RedHat release
A "bad" release of FreeBSD is pretty good even compared to a "good" RedHat release.
(In my defense re: forgetting about 4.1.1, I was thinking about point-releases-due-to-problems, not point-releases-due-to-added-features.)
Do you have any idea how many people actually use your service?
Yes. Around 100 systems per day; in total, somewhere around 2500 systems have been patched.
Are there any plans to make it an "official" offering of the FreeBSD project?
Yes. I recently joined the FreeBSD security team, and now that 5.2.1 is out of the way, I'll be pushing to get the integration underway.
FreeBSD 4.1.1 existed also, and was tagged.
Umm. I knew that. I even used FreeBSD 4.1.1. Sigh...
4.6.1 never existed. It was going to exist, but some security issues appeared, so it was aborted. But you're right, I forgot about 3.5.1-RELEASE, mostly because it was never tagged in the CVS repository.
[I posted the message below to -current and -security, providing an easier upgrade path from 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE]
/usr/ports/security/freebsd-update && make install clean /usr/local/etc/freebsd-update.conf.sample /usr/local/etc/freebsd-update.conf /usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update fetch /usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update install
/usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update --branch crypto fetch /usr/local/sbin/freebsd-update --branch nocrypto fetch
/usr/ports
/usr/share/doc
/usr/share/man/cat*
/usr/src
/usr/share/man/cat* are rebuilt from (updated) man pages
In order to provide an easy update path for i386 systems from
FreeBSD 5.2 to FreeBSD 5.2.1, FreeBSD Update will now update
systems running FreeBSD 5.2-RELEASE to 5.2.1-RELEASE. To take
advantage of these updates, install and run FreeBSD Update, and
reboot into the new kernel:
# cd
# cp
#
#
# shutdown -r now
If you have recompiled any files locally, FreeBSD Update may
not be able to update them automatically (it will complain).
With the latest version of FreeBSD Update (version 1.5), you
can use one of the following commands:
#
or
#
depending upon whether you installed the "crypto" distribution,
to force files to be updated. (If you're not sure if you
installed the "crypto" distribution, you almost certainly did).
FreeBSD Update will update a 5.2-RELEASE system to the exact
binaries distributed with 5.2.1-RELEASE, with the following
exceptions:
1. Files under the following directories will not be updated:
The ports and src trees can be updated using cvsup; the files
in
automatically.
2. FreeBSD binaries include, in their headers, the value of
__FreeBSD_version on the machine where they were compiled.
This value was bumped from 502000 to 502010 as part of the
release engineering process; binaries for which this is the
ONLY change will not be updated.
As always, this is something I'm providing personally; it is
in no way endorsed by the Security Officer, Release Engineering
team, or the project as a whole.
Colin Percival
Is it just me or are point point releases of FBSD pretty rare?
:) ).
You're right. The only other one was 4.6.2-RELEASE. (I'm not counting the 2.2.x releases -- 2.2 was a major version number
Almost seems like 5.2 was a bit of a rush job.
5.2 was right on the boundary between "experimental" and "stable". As such, lots of people started using it once it was released, but few people actually participated in testing it. I believe that 5.2 had one of the longest ever periods between code freeze and release.
So is this like uh... a thinly disguised advert, or what?
No. It isn't disguised.
We need computer scientists writing code to ensure high-quality products.
No, we don't. We need computer scientists designing software. The coding can be done by monkeys (or half the population of India, these days...)
You have to understand a language well enough to figure out the examples given in higher level courses.
If higher level courses include *any* examples of code, they're not being taught properly. Pseudo-code (or even just pretty pictures) should be sufficient.
No, here we are meant to learn how to write the next Windows (O/S) or Excel (Applications).
Computer Science != Computer Programming. A good computer science program will have minimal coding requirements (just as much as is required to demonstrate the theory).
I'm currently disassembling a new worm which is using ICQ to spread. It downloads code from www.jokeworld.biz and www.ustrading.info.
I reported this 12 hours ago. WTF are those web sites still online?
Let me guess: People deserve to have their cars stolen because they are too cheap to install expensive anti-theft devices?
Or is it only large corporations which deserve to be stolen from?
Third time on the observer... it's a trupe?
The correct abbreviation for "triplicate" would be "trip". Which is also short for a possible explanation for such reposts...
That's quite a flamebait-inducing post you've got there...
Don't you mean "That's flamebaitbait"?
Sorry pal, but it doesn't take much imagination to see how useful a hypo kit could be to a hijacker, like you said, "most people can't even feel it go in."
I think the grandparent is overstating things a bit here: The pain is minimal, but it's unusual to not notice it entirely, and it's almost impossible to give an insulin injection to an uncooperative patient -- the needles are thin enough that any sort of violent movement will break them.
You need to start looking more trustworthy. When I check in for my flights, I'm always asked "Do you have any sharp objects", I always answer "Yes", and they don't care. Then I walk through security with a hundred lancets and several dozen needles (and a container clearly marked "WARNING: Biohazard. Destroy by incineration"), and nobody blinks.
But why should they? I'm a white Anglo-Saxon male, 22 years old, flying to and from university or academic conferences. Obviously I'm not a terrorist.
You seem to misunderstand the GPL. The GPL is not only incompatible with licenses which have *more* restrictions than the GPL; it is incompatible with licenses which have *different* restrictions.
For example, the following license is GPL-incompatible, but it is vastly more free:
Lawyers file lawsuit. Lawyers settle lawsuit, with defendant agreeing to donate money to lawyers. How is this constructive?
Rather than giving money to the FSF, why not give money to groups which write free software?
Language diversity isn't necessarily a good thing. Some really cool code (cvsup and portupgrade) has been kept out of the FreeBSD base system because it would require importing yet another language (modula 3 and ruby, respectively).
Of course, if you're a closed-source programmer, you can use whatever compiled language you like; but with open-source code, using obscure languages imposes a cost upon your users and limits your code's usage.
I'm curious to know if any Slashdot readers gave/received any unusual gifts - and whether the gift was appreciated or not?
:(
I've appreciated every unusual gift I've received on Valentine's day.
Heck, I've appreciated every gift, unusual or not, which I've received on Valentine's day.
Ok, I'll admit it: I've never received any gifts on Valentine's day.
As easy as it is to point to Microsoft as an example of monoculture, Open Source software is equally at fault here. Take "deflate" encoding as an example: How many different implementations are there? What fraction of deflate-using applications use an implementation other than zlib?
If anything, the ease of code reuse inherent in Open Source software makes monoculture easier to achieve.
So, what you're saying is that if there's a plague of worms attacking Windows systems, we shouldn't export non-Windows systems to England?
Remember, there was lots of food being grown in Ireland during said famine; but it was being exported to England.