What's going to happen to all that old UNIX licensing stuff that they do? AFAIK, I've used their ancient unix archives to play with a pdp-11 emulator. Heck, it was a great quick place to get a real UNIX from quickly that would boot on it.
What's going to happen to SCO's intellectual property when it croaks? Who will buy it? I think the ancient unices that they own are of great interest. I'd love to see those in the public domain, but that's probably wishful thinking.
Re:My greatest fear is
on
World of Ends
·
· Score: 1
Ooh, you might be on to something there. Indeed, that is a scary prospect.
So basically, a sentient internet would be a tentacle rape admiring, attention deficit disorder inflicted, skr1pt k1dd13 talking, english language murdering, goatsecx link posting, warez trading, smut flinging, movie trading, blazingly intelligent, music pirating slashdot troll...
More interesting would be getting some display login manager (of the xdm kind) running twice on two screens, which then handle the two X screens. I've done it with Sunrays (well, the sunray server does a lot, that's probably cheating, but what the hey) and it should be possible with one machine and some XDMCP querying to the local machine per X server 'screen'.
If you do manage to set this up, document it. I'd love to read it and mull over it:)
First: Qt is LGPL'ed not GPL'ed. There's a big difference.
Second: s/Linux/X11/ on that comment
Seriously, there are more *nix-like operating system that can use LGPL licensed Qt. As long as you use Qt with X11, it's fine. Even if you use Qt under X11 under Cygwin (under windows) and GPL your code, you can use LGPL'ed Qt.
It's the native win32 port and the embedded Qt which are going to set you back a couple of bucks if you choose to use those.
That's called a fork bomb, and it's more efficient if you coded it in C (not really much more work, and hey, it 'runs out' of memory faster). An endless while() loop with malloc() works wonders too:).
ulimit (in bourne shells) and limit (in C shells) can protect the machines from resource starvation attacks like these. In FreeBSD (and probably other BSD's as well, I've seen it in BSD/OS (a.k.a. BSDi) too) at least you can hardwire limits into the user's environment with the classes system and login.conf. Do equivalents for Linux exist?
That's not really the issue, since the IDE subsystem is still a bit wonky (why else did they port the 2.4 IDE system to 2.5?), and well, there _was_ the nvidia driver issue.
Bleeding edge usually means you bleed from time to time. I don't like bleeding. I bled when I did follow FreeBSD 5, when they put in KSE, and I bled when they took out perl all of a sudden (not that I disagree with that move, it did force me to reinstall all my perl modules, so I bled.. again), and when they moved to gcc 3 (lots of stuff broke, mainly ports).
Sure I can run multiple (devel) kernels on a box, but I want to be able to work too, and not bleed:)
I'd love to try 2.5, but the closed nvidia drivers is the only thing that's keeping me grounded to 2.4.
Although I _suspect_ they will run fine on 2.5, I don't want to risk it. It's still a little too bleeding edge for me. They call it bleeding edge for a reason, because you _will_ bleed and get hurt from time to time.
I guess I am a big fat ninny when it comes to bleeding edge stuff (although I do lust for all the new toys, the waiting just increases my contentness when such cool stuff gets part of stable stuff):-)
Speaking of avoiding the bleeding edge, it would be sooo cool if this IO scheduler was backported to 2.4.
Well, the AS scheduler started life as a FreeBSD implementation (BSD dead? yeah right... whatever) but doing those benchmarks on other OSen on similar hardware is like comparing Apples and Oranges. Hardly worth it.
Also, I doubt that one could alter the I/O scheduler (let alone install an alternative) in the win* operating systems.
The AS I/O scheduler is very very interesting. I hope some kind soul would backport it to 2.4.
Well, if more people would help out these guys some more, we would have source compatibility with Mac OS X on Darwin on Intel.
Oh, yeah quartz graphics, well, we have display postscript (DPS), which was also what the old NeXT OS used, so we could have NeXT-like OS X apps on our darwin boxes:)
Actually, LaTeX is very nice, once you understand how it works. The trouble with WYSIWYG has always been that you only get what you see.
Not trying to start a flamewar over this, but (strictly IMHO) I feel I am more productive with LaTeX because I don't have to worry about layout. But that's just me. Second is that I loathe proprietary formats, but that's a whole different bowl of wax to mull about.
Short answer: Quickest to set up. Quickest to recover.
Long answer: I made my own releases with the release Makefile that lives in/usr/src somewhere. With some custom packages added I just scripted an installation ready to go. So, in the event that one of the terminals break (for whatever reason), I can have another one up in less than 30 minutes. I basically script disklabel and fdisk to blow a disklabel on the device, run newfs on all the filesystems and unpack the base tarball and install some packages in there. Then it sets up DHCP networking and fetches a tarball with a KDE kiosk config from another internal box. It took me several days to get it _just_ _right_, but it works really cool now. Boot machine, stick in CD, get some coffee, and voila, instant terminal.
Yes, I did play with several Linux distro's to do this, but it was quicker, easier and less painless with FreeBSD. Somehow I always go back to FreeBSD when it comes to things like this. It's hella more flexible. I love it.
As for the video support, yeah, I know NVIDIA has FreeBSD drivers, but they need to get more stable. I'm now on Gentoo with my desktop, but once driver support for FreeBSD NVIDIA is rock solid, I'll go back to FreeBSD on my desktop. Fortunately, my KDE terminals have Matrox MGA Gxx's, for which driver support is pretty solid in FreeBSD, lucky me.
Well, yes, I heard remarks like that:) I know, ignorance is bliss. Heck, the customers are happy with it. They can watch their pages with java, flash and all that neat stuff, so they basically don't care what is browsing the web for them.
I also set Konq's javascrip popup policy to 'smart', which stops the endless flood of popups on some sites. Some of the users were _thrilled_ that konq did this.
The cafe owner is quite satisfied, but not enough yet to move all the boxes to *nix. (I used FreeBSD for the terminals, but the users never noticed;). Heh, maybe some day I'll switch im over completely:)
I'm not a KDE user, so I'm not actually saying that KDE is doing it wrong. But GNOME 2 is doing it right.
By what standards? Your own? If it is to your own standards, then by all means, be happy you have the choice of _not_ running KDE at all:)
I think Daniel is on to something. I've used both desktop environments, and yes, I loved Gnome 1.4, and I hate Gnome 2. Why? Because it gets in the way with how I want my desktop to work. KDE provides the mechanisms to tweak how you want your environment to work. It's the first thing I did when I started KDE for the first time. After that, I never touched the UI configuration because it was _just_ right_ for me.
Also, my family here uses KDE and they never complained how it worked. They are used to macs, so I set KPersonalizer to use the Mac-like defaults. No problem at all, they were right at home.
And as for confusing options, well, tend to go explore in Kcontrol and change colors/icons whatever themselves, and they never had to call me over _once_. So the whole point is moot, for me, and my direct environment (a.k.a. family that use my systems).
I like KDE's flexibility. You hate "complexity". It all boils down to preference.
While I'm typing anyway, I might share an anecdote. At an internetcafe where I do some freelance work I set up some KDE kiosk-mode terminals (KDE 3.1), as a test to see if people would use them instead of the defacto policied-shut winders box. I set some up, with some nice apps (Kopete, Konqueror, Moz, Phoenix, kvirc, java stuff, flash plugins etc etc.), planted some icons on the desktop to start them, slapped a nice style on it, put some nice looking icon sets in there, and just let it sit to be used. They've been sitting in the shop for a few days now, running happily.
To my surprise, the customers liked the KDE boxes. Actually, they fight over who gets to use them! And of course there's the added bones of less headaches. The winders machines tend to clutter up so much at the end of the day, I need to zap them all and put a ghost image back for the next day. Never once was that needed with KDE.
It's just so cool how you can take _out_ KDE's flexibility of you need it. Does GNOME have a Kiosk framework like KDE's?
I think the baseball bat is too cruel. Where I worked, a rubber chicken lart worked best without physically harming the developers (much). Also, keeping up scores of howmany times a developer was larted every month helped a lot. The one with the highest lart-score was to be called "crap-coder" for that whole month.
It's social systems like these that work better than _every_ software based solution:)
Slashdot Mirror
What's going to happen to SCO's intellectual property when it croaks? Who will buy it? I think the ancient unices that they own are of great interest. I'd love to see those in the public domain, but that's probably wishful thinking.
So basically, a sentient internet would be a tentacle rape admiring, attention deficit disorder inflicted, skr1pt k1dd13 talking, english language murdering, goatsecx link posting, warez trading, smut flinging, movie trading, blazingly intelligent, music pirating slashdot troll...
Eek...
It explains exactly what I usually tell everyone that notices that "insecurity". What's next, ls -l reads /etc/passwd? ;-)
Well, I tend to disagree. It tends to make people stupid though, and it's hellishly smart at that as well. Just look at this place :-)
I too read something similar at first, but somehow my brain contorted it into "End of World". Weird.
Actually, Linus owns the Linux trademark.
If you do manage to set this up, document it. I'd love to read it and mull over it :)
(wait for it...)
Hit any fly to continue
Second: s/Linux/X11/ on that comment
Seriously, there are more *nix-like operating system that can use LGPL licensed Qt. As long as you use Qt with X11, it's fine. Even if you use Qt under X11 under Cygwin (under windows) and GPL your code, you can use LGPL'ed Qt.
It's the native win32 port and the embedded Qt which are going to set you back a couple of bucks if you choose to use those.
<voice type=homer> Mmmmm..... Mecha's :-)
</voice>
ulimit (in bourne shells) and limit (in C shells) can protect the machines from resource starvation attacks like these. In FreeBSD (and probably other BSD's as well, I've seen it in BSD/OS (a.k.a. BSDi) too) at least you can hardwire limits into the user's environment with the classes system and login.conf. Do equivalents for Linux exist?
Bleeding edge usually means you bleed from time to time. I don't like bleeding. I bled when I did follow FreeBSD 5, when they put in KSE, and I bled when they took out perl all of a sudden (not that I disagree with that move, it did force me to reinstall all my perl modules, so I bled.. again), and when they moved to gcc 3 (lots of stuff broke, mainly ports).
Sure I can run multiple (devel) kernels on a box, but I want to be able to work too, and not bleed :)
Heck, I might give 2.5 a shot this week. Woohoo.
Just wondering...
Although I _suspect_ they will run fine on 2.5, I don't want to risk it. It's still a little too bleeding edge for me. They call it bleeding edge for a reason, because you _will_ bleed and get hurt from time to time.
I guess I am a big fat ninny when it comes to bleeding edge stuff (although I do lust for all the new toys, the waiting just increases my contentness when such cool stuff gets part of stable stuff) :-)
Speaking of avoiding the bleeding edge, it would be sooo cool if this IO scheduler was backported to 2.4.
Also, I doubt that one could alter the I/O scheduler (let alone install an alternative) in the win* operating systems.
The AS I/O scheduler is very very interesting. I hope some kind soul would backport it to 2.4.
Oh, yeah quartz graphics, well, we have display postscript (DPS), which was also what the old NeXT OS used, so we could have NeXT-like OS X apps on our darwin boxes :)
Nah, you should've bought a Mac ;-)
*ducks*
(disclaimer: I am the proud owner of an iMac, so no mac zealotry please, I am already a convert )
Not trying to start a flamewar over this, but (strictly IMHO) I feel I am more productive with LaTeX because I don't have to worry about layout. But that's just me. Second is that I loathe proprietary formats, but that's a whole different bowl of wax to mull about.
Short answer: Quickest to set up. Quickest to recover.
Long answer: I made my own releases with the release Makefile that lives in /usr/src somewhere. With some custom packages added I just scripted an installation ready to go. So, in the event that one of the terminals break (for whatever reason), I can have another one up in less than 30 minutes. I basically script disklabel and fdisk to blow a disklabel on the device, run newfs on all the filesystems and unpack the base tarball and install some packages in there. Then it sets up DHCP networking and fetches a tarball with a KDE kiosk config from another internal box. It took me several days to get it _just_ _right_, but it works really cool now. Boot machine, stick in CD, get some coffee, and voila, instant terminal.
Yes, I did play with several Linux distro's to do this, but it was quicker, easier and less painless with FreeBSD. Somehow I always go back to FreeBSD when it comes to things like this. It's hella more flexible. I love it.
As for the video support, yeah, I know NVIDIA has FreeBSD drivers, but they need to get more stable. I'm now on Gentoo with my desktop, but once driver support for FreeBSD NVIDIA is rock solid, I'll go back to FreeBSD on my desktop. Fortunately, my KDE terminals have Matrox MGA Gxx's, for which driver support is pretty solid in FreeBSD, lucky me.
Yes.
I also set Konq's javascrip popup policy to 'smart', which stops the endless flood of popups on some sites. Some of the users were _thrilled_ that konq did this.
The cafe owner is quite satisfied, but not enough yet to move all the boxes to *nix. (I used FreeBSD for the terminals, but the users never noticed ;). Heh, maybe some day I'll switch im over completely :)
By what standards? Your own? If it is to your own standards, then by all means, be happy you have the choice of _not_ running KDE at all :)
I think Daniel is on to something. I've used both desktop environments, and yes, I loved Gnome 1.4, and I hate Gnome 2. Why? Because it gets in the way with how I want my desktop to work. KDE provides the mechanisms to tweak how you want your environment to work. It's the first thing I did when I started KDE for the first time. After that, I never touched the UI configuration because it was _just_ right_ for me.
Also, my family here uses KDE and they never complained how it worked. They are used to macs, so I set KPersonalizer to use the Mac-like defaults. No problem at all, they were right at home.
And as for confusing options, well, tend to go explore in Kcontrol and change colors/icons whatever themselves, and they never had to call me over _once_. So the whole point is moot, for me, and my direct environment (a.k.a. family that use my systems).
I like KDE's flexibility. You hate "complexity". It all boils down to preference.
While I'm typing anyway, I might share an anecdote. At an internetcafe where I do some freelance work I set up some KDE kiosk-mode terminals (KDE 3.1), as a test to see if people would use them instead of the defacto policied-shut winders box. I set some up, with some nice apps (Kopete, Konqueror, Moz, Phoenix, kvirc, java stuff, flash plugins etc etc.), planted some icons on the desktop to start them, slapped a nice style on it, put some nice looking icon sets in there, and just let it sit to be used. They've been sitting in the shop for a few days now, running happily.
To my surprise, the customers liked the KDE boxes. Actually, they fight over who gets to use them! And of course there's the added bones of less headaches. The winders machines tend to clutter up so much at the end of the day, I need to zap them all and put a ghost image back for the next day. Never once was that needed with KDE.
It's just so cool how you can take _out_ KDE's flexibility of you need it. Does GNOME have a Kiosk framework like KDE's?
And yeah, I agree OpenFirmware kicks butt. Netbooting never was easier :)
It's social systems like these that work better than _every_ software based solution :)