'Makes it appear to be run by a bunch of half-wits.. I don't understand any level of justification that would make anybody think it was wise to touch SSL in your own distribution.
Such bugs and the thread posted from debian discussions show how far linux has to go to really be viewed in any sort of professional light.
What it means is that they have injested radioactive particles (stuff that is an alpha/beta/gamma emitter), that are radioactive themselves. This is much more dangerous then external radiation, as the affects can last a lifetime.
With regards to patching GPL programs, I still have a problem with this. It seems GPL lovers want it both ways. For a long time lame, the mp3 encoder many people love, released a _patch_ as a piece of GPL'd software, while the base code that it patched onto was clearly copyrighted (was it not?).
So why then, cannot one simply distribute just a patch, and copyright the patch. It seems both sides are abusing the idea of copyright's and GPL for their own benefit.
For the record, I do understand that lame has, as of this point, replaced all of the original source that it patched, but I believe my point is still the same.
Its worth reading the article in depth. The solution that Intel and Nokia are pushing on appears to be a settop box that will bring in Digital Video bitstreams, while decoding data brought in over the digital signal.
i.e. In the U.S., with HiDef signals coming soon, you can insert data into the signal, and extract it at the customer end and show it to users.
This shouldn't be confused with delivering something like Digital Video over the internet. Its a fine line, and the article doesn't seem clear about that difference. I would guess that any true 'internet browser' in the box, would still have to use some existing land line for regular browsing. (For more information check out www.mpeg.org, and search for ATSC)
Byron
P.S. Having worked in the broadcast industry, let me tell you that if they do expect to deliver 'web like content' over DVB, they'll still have to get stations equiped with the right equipment, which also takes a lot of time.
1.) pgcc has a bunch of the old pentium optimizations that Intel put together and patched into some really old gcc (2.4? something a long time ago). Various people have moved the patches forward and what not, and their current layout is contained in the pgcc patches, which I take it, haven't made it into egcs mainstream, because their stability at high levels of optimization isn't guarenteed.
2.) On a PII 233, depending on the numerical calculation you're doing, you can get 5% speed boost or so. Nothing major.
I've used both without any noticable problem, but have not seen any large speed difference in the two. (If you're doing heavy numerics, it's probably worth it to investigate pgcc.. otherwise, no).
Slashdot Mirror
'Makes it appear to be run by a bunch of half-wits.. I don't understand any level of justification that would make anybody think it was wise to touch SSL in your own distribution.
Such bugs and the thread posted from debian discussions show how far linux has to go to really be viewed in any sort of professional light.
Thanks for posting this. I just got a 323 after reading the following forum, which may be of use to others:
http://wiki.dns323.info/start
'didn't sound perfect, but has far fewer complaints then some other devices I bought (and regretted).
And if they block ssh as many do, you can use anonymizer.com, which you get if you don't enough money to the EFF.
Have you used a modern P4? They run at 53C no problem. They load down to 56C in many cases, and start throttling back at 60. (or was it 65?)
Thats die temp. Are you using an Athlon?
My parents live in rural IL (61330 area code), and are using DirectWay (DirectTV satellite internet ), with success.
No, it doesn't have the ping time you guys like, but its extremely popular among rural farmers already.
Byron
What it means is that they have injested radioactive particles (stuff that is an alpha/beta/gamma emitter), that are radioactive themselves. This is much more dangerous then external radiation, as the affects can last a lifetime.
Byron
With regards to patching GPL programs, I still have a problem with this. It seems GPL lovers want it both ways. For a long time lame, the mp3 encoder many people love, released a _patch_ as a piece of GPL'd software, while the base code that it patched onto was clearly copyrighted (was it not?).
So why then, cannot one simply distribute just a patch, and copyright the patch. It seems both sides are abusing the idea of copyright's and GPL for their own benefit.
For the record, I do understand that lame has, as of this point, replaced all of the original source that it patched, but I believe my point is still the same.
Byron
Its worth reading the article in depth. The solution that Intel and Nokia are pushing on appears to be a settop box that will bring in Digital Video bitstreams, while decoding data brought in over the digital signal.
i.e. In the U.S., with HiDef signals coming soon, you can insert data into the signal, and extract it at the customer end and show it to users.
This shouldn't be confused with delivering something like Digital Video over the internet. Its a fine line, and the article doesn't seem clear about that difference. I would guess that any true 'internet browser' in the box, would still have to use some existing land line for regular browsing. (For more information check out www.mpeg.org, and search for ATSC)
Byron
P.S. Having worked in the broadcast industry, let me tell you that if they do expect to deliver 'web like content' over DVB, they'll still have to get stations equiped with the right equipment, which also takes a lot of time.
For what its worth:
1.) pgcc has a bunch of the old pentium optimizations that Intel put together and patched into some really old gcc (2.4? something a long time ago). Various people have moved the patches forward and what not, and their current layout is contained in the pgcc patches, which I take it, haven't made it into egcs mainstream, because their stability at high levels of optimization isn't guarenteed.
2.) On a PII 233, depending on the numerical calculation you're doing, you can get 5% speed boost or so. Nothing major.
I've used both without any noticable problem, but have not seen any large speed difference in the two. (If you're doing heavy numerics, it's probably worth it to investigate pgcc.. otherwise, no).