The SRPMS do have source code in them. What do you think they contained, 135 megs of "SCO RULES!!!1"? $ rpm2cpio ~/linux-2.4.13-21S.src.rpm |cpio -id 54674 blocks
$ tar jxvf linux-2.4.13.tar.bz2 linux/ linux/Makefile . . . linux/REPORTING-BUGS
etc etc.
Compiles and all that. It's even vanilla, like srpms usually, patches are in separate files and applied only when building the package.
Sure, and I can claim to own all code that's in any way similar to my code here: "i++". It sure as hell doesn't mean that "there are some ways" that I can now kill any development anywhere.
They can claim whatever they want, but you didn't answer: What are those few ways they could use to kill all OS (and CS?) development.
Up2date is decent enough for RH errata (their servers are sometimes quite laggy but that's not the softwares fault...)
And there are plenty of good 3rd party software available (Fedora, Freshrpms, Matthew Hall's rpms, etc...), sure you can't use up2date with these, but if you're going to install 3rd party software, then one more software (apt-rpm or yum) doesn't matter anyway.
RedHat handles running on runlevel 5 just fine. In some cases it might not handle user manually installing non-approved, non-tested, binary only drivers from another company, usually it works just fine, though, that suggestion was just a suggestion for those rare cases. Exactly same guidelines should be done messing around any other distro and unknown software.
Don't make excuses for one of the most consistently touchy Linuxes. I gave up on redhat because it seems to never autodetect everything properly AND manage to install properly on the first go.
Don't make running five years old release with lousy results an excuse to bash one of the most modern and easiest to use and install distributions you've never even tried. Troll.
It's packaged for commercial use, it should "just work" out of the box.
It does. Commercial desktop users don't have any business installing nvidia opengl drivers themselves, they're supposed to be working, not playing guage.
RedHat has ALWAYS included lots of reasonably stable but still very cutting edge software, especially on.0 releases. Which is good, not all people want stability at the cost of functionality.
Everyone who wants ten-year release cycle and thus damn well tested and stable software from stone age runs debian.
I (SCO) own the land (SysV) and someone (IBM) builds a house (AIX) on it, thanks pals, I now own that house.
Now IBM takes a small piece of house they build, let's say, a chair and small table (RCU, SMP...), and gives it to neighbours house on neighbours land neither of us own (Linux). After this I (SCO) am claiming to own that neighbours land and house as well, and not only the chair and table.
Re:Before all the flamers get in.
on
Qt On DirectFB
·
· Score: 1
Surely this could be reduced if we were to eliminate the network layer?
Yeah, sure it could. No, wait, it couldn't.
X does NOT use network layer when running on local host. Then again, why am I telling that, you won't be listening, nor will any other moron that doesn't bother checking facts but is still yelling about how network capabilities of X are eating performance.
Re:Before all the flamers get in.
on
Qt On DirectFB
·
· Score: 1
Alan Cox on the XFree86.org list said in his experience laggy GUIs were caused by lack of 2D hardware accelleration in the drivers being used. Many 2D accelleration techniques are apparently proprietary. Someone mentioned a couple of drivers (I think for ATI) where the author had reverse engineered the 2D hardware accelleration by hand tracing through the binary Windows drivers.
There you have it. X is "slow" because of shitty drivers.
Now guess what? Implementing a new graphics background from scratch doesn't have any drivers at all, much less fast ones. It would take YEARS to get even to point where X is now, and I highly doubt X would stand still while it happens.
Anyone who sees some sense in doing that, should get his/her head examined.
They most certainly are NOT asking you to audit every line of code and remove words red hat from it. Only that you remove anaconda-images and redhat-logos rpm-packages (which are not GPL'd, nothing questionable here), and that you do not label your version as RHL.
Point is, RedHat's apache CAN NOT have a remote root exploit because RedHat's apache is not running as root.
Of course they are responsible for software they package, but most of non-OS level software do not need to run with total control of host machine, like majority of microsoft programs seem to do.
So yes, I'd say its a fair to not compare, full "root" exploit on windows and someone getting hold of "apache" account on rh are way different on potential damage and other implications.
Those three mentioned devices are phone/pda combinations and thus it's quite obvious that they need to have bit better software platforms to be of any use.
For your regular phones, things aren't quite that well. Mostly its those very same java midlets (memory is probably somewhere in ~100-300k range depending on the phone, no size limits other than that for invidual midlet, AFAIK, but I may be wrong).
No access to hardware worth mentioning (in addition to MIDP standard, manufacturers own extensions that tend to be mostly useful for games, fast screen access, controlling vibrator/backlight, etc. Nokia phones, for example don't even have socket connections for tcp/ip, only http).
And the stuff still must be downloaded over the air (GPRS in most new phones is max 50kbps or so), or with data cable that tends to cost another ~50 euros. Maybe with bluetooth if the phone has it, cheaper ones dont.
Firebird, though, doesn't support that quick launch feature, and thus takes way longer to start than the big brother... hopefully that's not going to stay this way.
Capitalism can allow bit more raw-profitable but less customer-ripping solutions to come out as most profitable.
If any cellphone provider in Europe would be stupid enough to start billing from receiving calls and messages, people would vote with their feet so damn fast that company would be bankrupt in a nanosecond.
The "most profitable solution" is not so profitable anymore if nobody uses it.
I can also send messages from 'net and be billed for it in phone bill, if "receiver pays" really is only thing you can come up that will allow people to send messages with something other than a phone, bzzt, next try. I know that electronic payment systems are centuries behind in US, but anything that simple still shouldn't be impossible.
But fine, keep your absurd system, I don't be the one paying for spammers and other messages I didn't want.
3. She spilled the coffee, it DOESN'T MATTER what else she was doing at the same time, if McDonalds employee would've poured the coffee over her, there might be something here...
If you pick up that weapon that's delivered to you instead of food, well knowing it's a weapon, point it to yourself, pull the trigger and shoot yourself in to foot with it, I'd say you have full responsibility over what happened.
Maybe someone should deliver you bit common sense in place of the food you order.
Glass doesn't need to be cleaned very thoroughly for recycling, (for reuse, yes), exactly because it's melted.
When you melt it down, it requires alot of heat. The energy to create that heat has to come from somewhere - most often natural gas burners. So recycling glass actually consumes large amounts of fossil fuels.
And why not bury it? Glass is made from melted sand...
Yeah. Right. Don't recycle because recycled class must be melted, melting bad, bad!
Instead make new glass to replace buried ones by melting sand, melting good, good!
Right. Mind you if I point there's something very strange with this statement? Btw. glass waste melts in lot lower temperatures than what is required for making new glass from raw materials.
How you manage to mangle that into energy (and thus, fossil fuel) savings for virgin glass, goes beoynd my reasoning.
Yes, I know about RTGs, but they are way smaller and use less radioactive material than a real reactor big enough to power reasonable sized electrolyzing plant would (those three RTGs on Cassini wield under 300W of electricity per piece). And that plutonium doesn't ever need to be actually used, its just sits there slightly heating itself, thus it can be encapsulated into re-entry withstanding capsules, not quite so with reactor fuel.
Well, time will tell whether or not that will happen.
The device capable of accomplishing this would be called a nuclear reactor.
Just exactly how are you planning on getting one of those to Mars with current trend of every nutcase resisting anything with word nuclear in it? Even here on surface... good grief if you'd try to put one (and plenty of that horrible radioactive fuel) on a ROCKET.
It's water. You still have to figure out how to break the molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. Is it near enough to sun that solar power would produce enough electricity for large-scale fuel (and air) production for spacecraft (and possibly humans).
If not.. are there fissionable materials near surface? Reactor with enough fuel for years will NOT be leaving Earth anytime soon with envirofreaks resisting pretty mucn anything you can imagine, but most of all something with words nuclear or atomic in it.
Slashdot Mirror
RH has used Anaconda (the python installer) at least since RH8, nothing new in Severn on that front.
Also RHN stuff and lots of rh gui config tools have been python since at least mid 7.x days (can't check further back than 7.2 right now...)
The SRPMS do have source code in them. What do you think they contained, 135 megs of "SCO RULES!!!1"?
.
$ rpm2cpio ~/linux-2.4.13-21S.src.rpm |cpio -id
54674 blocks
$ tar jxvf linux-2.4.13.tar.bz2
linux/
linux/Makefile
.
.
linux/REPORTING-BUGS
etc etc.
Compiles and all that. It's even vanilla, like srpms usually, patches are in separate files and applied only when building the package.
Sure, and I can claim to own all code that's in any way similar to my code here: "i++". It sure as hell doesn't mean that "there are some ways" that I can now kill any development anywhere.
They can claim whatever they want, but you didn't answer: What are those few ways they could use to kill all OS (and CS?) development.
If I couldn't understand difference between words "first" and "fourth", then I wouldn't be accusing other people about being on drugs.
Shouldn't answer to AC trolls, though...
Up2date is decent enough for RH errata (their servers are sometimes quite laggy but that's not the softwares fault...)
And there are plenty of good 3rd party software available (Fedora, Freshrpms, Matthew Hall's rpms, etc...), sure you can't use up2date with these, but if you're going to install 3rd party software, then one more software (apt-rpm or yum) doesn't matter anyway.
In other words, RedHat can't handle it.
RedHat handles running on runlevel 5 just fine. In some cases it might not handle user manually installing non-approved, non-tested, binary only drivers from another company, usually it works just fine, though, that suggestion was just a suggestion for those rare cases. Exactly same guidelines should be done messing around any other distro and unknown software.
Don't make excuses for one of the most consistently touchy Linuxes. I gave up on redhat because it seems to never autodetect everything properly AND manage to install properly on the first go.
Don't make running five years old release with lousy results an excuse to bash one of the most modern and easiest to use and install distributions you've never even tried. Troll.
It's packaged for commercial use, it should "just work" out of the box.
It does. Commercial desktop users don't have any business installing nvidia opengl drivers themselves, they're supposed to be working, not playing guage.
That's not true.
.0 releases. Which is good, not all people want stability at the cost of functionality.
RedHat has ALWAYS included lots of reasonably stable but still very cutting edge software, especially on
Everyone who wants ten-year release cycle and thus damn well tested and stable software from stone age runs debian.
This is more along the lines:
I (SCO) own the land (SysV) and someone (IBM) builds a house (AIX) on it, thanks pals, I now own that house.
Now IBM takes a small piece of house they build, let's say, a chair and small table (RCU, SMP...), and gives it to neighbours house on neighbours land neither of us own (Linux). After this I (SCO) am claiming to own that neighbours land and house as well, and not only the chair and table.
Surely this could be reduced if we were to eliminate the network layer?
Yeah, sure it could. No, wait, it couldn't.
X does NOT use network layer when running on local host. Then again, why am I telling that, you won't be listening, nor will any other moron that doesn't bother checking facts but is still yelling about how network capabilities of X are eating performance.
Alan Cox on the XFree86.org list said in his experience laggy GUIs were caused by lack of 2D hardware accelleration in the drivers being used. Many 2D accelleration techniques are apparently proprietary. Someone mentioned a couple of drivers (I think for ATI) where the author had reverse engineered the 2D hardware accelleration by hand tracing through the binary Windows drivers.
There you have it. X is "slow" because of shitty drivers.
Now guess what? Implementing a new graphics background from scratch doesn't have any drivers at all, much less fast ones. It would take YEARS to get even to point where X is now, and I highly doubt X would stand still while it happens.
Anyone who sees some sense in doing that, should get his/her head examined.
They most certainly are NOT asking you to audit every line of code and remove words red hat from it. Only that you remove anaconda-images and redhat-logos rpm-packages (which are not GPL'd, nothing questionable here), and that you do not label your version as RHL.
That's what services are for. Torrent probably doesn't run as one, but "server" processes should.
Startup scripts (no, not symlinks in pf->startup), or service wrappers might get the job done for primitive software as well.
Stellar energy? Those long-dead stars werent OUR own sun after all...
Point is, RedHat's apache CAN NOT have a remote root exploit because RedHat's apache is not running as root.
Of course they are responsible for software they package, but most of non-OS level software do not need to run with total control of host machine, like majority of microsoft programs seem to do.
So yes, I'd say its a fair to not compare, full "root" exploit on windows and someone getting hold of "apache" account on rh are way different on potential damage and other implications.
Those three mentioned devices are phone/pda combinations and thus it's quite obvious that they need to have bit better software platforms to be of any use.
For your regular phones, things aren't quite that well. Mostly its those very same java midlets (memory is probably somewhere in ~100-300k range depending on the phone, no size limits other than that for invidual midlet, AFAIK, but I may be wrong).
No access to hardware worth mentioning (in addition to MIDP standard, manufacturers own extensions that tend to be mostly useful for games, fast screen access, controlling vibrator/backlight, etc. Nokia phones, for example don't even have socket connections for tcp/ip, only http).
And the stuff still must be downloaded over the air (GPRS in most new phones is max 50kbps or so), or with data cable that tends to cost another ~50 euros. Maybe with bluetooth if the phone has it, cheaper ones dont.
I think Mozilla development team has serious personal problems of its decision makers as they want to bring Perl to XUL.
The link referred to a mozdev project, nothing to do with Mozilla development teams official work.
It also mentioned it's based on someone others python version and had link to there as well, if that's what you like...
Mozilla does, yes.
Firebird, though, doesn't support that quick launch feature, and thus takes way longer to start than the big brother... hopefully that's not going to stay this way.
Capitalism can allow bit more raw-profitable but less customer-ripping solutions to come out as most profitable.
If any cellphone provider in Europe would be stupid enough to start billing from receiving calls and messages, people would vote with their feet so damn fast that company would be bankrupt in a nanosecond.
The "most profitable solution" is not so profitable anymore if nobody uses it.
I can also send messages from 'net and be billed for it in phone bill, if "receiver pays" really is only thing you can come up that will allow people to send messages with something other than a phone, bzzt, next try. I know that electronic payment systems are centuries behind in US, but anything that simple still shouldn't be impossible.
But fine, keep your absurd system, I don't be the one paying for spammers and other messages I didn't want.
That's a problem (not very hard one, though, done before a bazillion times...) of service provider.
1. Who cares?
2. Who cares?
3. She spilled the coffee, it DOESN'T MATTER what else she was doing at the same time, if McDonalds employee would've poured the coffee over her, there might be something here...
If you pick up that weapon that's delivered to you instead of food, well knowing it's a weapon, point it to yourself, pull the trigger and shoot yourself in to foot with it, I'd say you have full responsibility over what happened.
Maybe someone should deliver you bit common sense in place of the food you order.
Glass doesn't need to be cleaned very thoroughly for recycling, (for reuse, yes), exactly because it's melted.
When you melt it down, it requires alot of heat. The energy to create that heat has to come from somewhere - most often natural gas burners. So recycling glass actually consumes large amounts of fossil fuels.
And why not bury it? Glass is made from melted sand...
Yeah. Right. Don't recycle because recycled class must be melted, melting bad, bad!
Instead make new glass to replace buried ones by melting sand, melting good, good!
Right. Mind you if I point there's something very strange with this statement? Btw. glass waste melts in lot lower temperatures than what is required for making new glass from raw materials.
How you manage to mangle that into energy (and thus, fossil fuel) savings for virgin glass, goes beoynd my reasoning.
Newsflash: Earths entire surface IS already covered with biomass.
Yes, I know about RTGs, but they are way smaller and use less radioactive material than a real reactor big enough to power reasonable sized electrolyzing plant would (those three RTGs on Cassini wield under 300W of electricity per piece). And that plutonium doesn't ever need to be actually used, its just sits there slightly heating itself, thus it can be encapsulated into re-entry withstanding capsules, not quite so with reactor fuel.
Well, time will tell whether or not that will happen.
The device capable of accomplishing this would be called a nuclear reactor.
Just exactly how are you planning on getting one of those to Mars with current trend of every nutcase resisting anything with word nuclear in it? Even here on surface... good grief if you'd try to put one (and plenty of that horrible radioactive fuel) on a ROCKET.
It's water. You still have to figure out how to break the molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. Is it near enough to sun that solar power would produce enough electricity for large-scale fuel (and air) production for spacecraft (and possibly humans).
If not.. are there fissionable materials near surface? Reactor with enough fuel for years will NOT be leaving Earth anytime soon with envirofreaks resisting pretty mucn anything you can imagine, but most of all something with words nuclear or atomic in it.