That's probably because of GCC, which has somewhat of an ubiquitous presence in the *NIX world.
To them, GCC is a necessary evil:) Of course, they have to abide by the license, and thusly they make the GPL text available on one of their FTP servers.
Which doesn't mean they are in love with it of course:)
Microsoft isn't against OSS at all, they use and have used OSS code when it was convenient for them. A recent example is their SFU (Services For Unix), which has a lot of tools taken from the OpenBSD code base (check with ident(1) if you don't believe me). Last I checked, the BSD license is still accepted by the Open Source foundation as a valid Open Source license.
They just don't like the GPL and derivative/similar licenses. They hate it so much they FUD against it. Why they don't like these kind of licenses is for you to speculate about:)
Now mod me down already for saying something that's true and impopular:(
As seen on bsdinstaller.org, written by DragonFlyBSD developers.
The article poster might at least have mentioned that, but here it is, in a comment.
The DragonFly installer team really deserve kudos for this thing. Especially for making it so generic. I heard someone even made an OpenBSD installer from this. It really is that flexible and easy to muck with.
The first revisions of this relied on CAPS, which is the new IPC framework in DragonFly. Later on, other ways of IPC were added (sockets etc.) which makes this possible. Also, kudos to GeekGod of livebsd.com for sending the patches to the FreeSBIE team.
The cool thing about the bsdinstaller is that the interface is decoupled from the back end which does the actual partitioning/copying/etc. There is even a CGI front-end available. Do your installs from a web browser!:) Oh, and an X-based installer (both Qt and GTK) is in the works.
Better yet, you can also install this patch to alleviate the problem alltogether... It may require oneofthese other patches though (there are even more options, I had to pick three). But they aren't very hard to install:)
A little bit offtopic to this thread, but I feel I need to say it anyway:
I have to say that the NVIDIA guys are way more relaxed than say intel or broadcom. I'll give you an example: I contribute to the DragonFlyBSD project. NVIDIA found out that I have been porting the FreeBSD X11 NVIDIA driver to DFBSD. They contacted me, and after some pleasant communication, they sent me a prerelease driver for me to port. But that just started things rolling, because I passed on the contact details to Joerg Sonneberger, and he managed to get the nvidia ethernet binary object relicensed so it could be included in our base install.
"The Postgres-R project is being referred to as "a working model", because it is currently based on PostgreSQL-6.4.2 and needs to be merged with the PostgreSQL-7.2 code base along with a good deal of integration effort."
Call me again when PostgreSQL does replication like MySQL does. MySQL may be a glorified cardfile, but some things (like master/slave replication) are stuff that I _need_ for work, and it works well.
On the dragonflybsd mailing lists there's a big thread about using PXEboot to netboot the new installer so machines without spindles or floppies can install dragonflybsd. Lots of info on how to set up DHCP for booting pxe-enabled machines. Might also be worth checking out.
Some of Hans' closest friends at klaphek is black too. He used to come to the meetings, and that's where I've met him a couple of times and spoke with him.
Your lusers must love you to bits. I mean literally.
Seriously, don't be too strict. Overly strictness can cause rebellion, and ultimately, the loss of your job. Especially if you do it to someone upstairs (like the CTO/CEO/CIO/insert bulky TLA). Or do you exclude them from you rigid policy? If yes, then you're a hypocrite.
Bottom line (like others have posted, and I re-iterate): Happy lusers are less bothersome/troublesome lusers.
As long as they don't fudge with eyecandy on the servers, they can fudge up their workstations all they like. I have recent backups of their important data, a Ghost image or a system image (in case of Linux or FreeBSD) and a fresh $HOME skeleton with which they can start over that I can put back in a snap. And the plus is all the nice goodies the lusers give me when I "rescue" their machine, and even better: - They actually LIKE me. Can you believe that?
Guess who gets the proverbial "pat on the back" (read: lots of cool free stuff) on sysadmin day? I guess you won't be the lucky one.
This is no different from the constant stream of improvements DFBSD folks appropriate from FreeBSD5, often with no attribution at all.
Please point out an example where DFBSD doesn't attribute correctly. I think you won't find any. (and if you do, please mail the kernel-list, since the dfbsd crew is very strict about that)
Read Hsu's license. It's a 4 clause BSD license, which _REQUIRES_ attribution, since it has that advertisement clause added back in. It's just different from the usual BSD license. If you would have bothered to read DragonFly's source of the TCP stack, you would have known.
Oh, you were wondering where you could read the source? Well, DragonFly's cvsweb has a nice interface for it. You can also compare codebases at lxr.watson.org.
Also, DFBSD has diverged from FreeBSD 4 a great deal already. The userland might be mostly the same, but kernelwise it's all different. The developers put a lot of time and effort in it. The fact that you don't see the difference means that they are doing their work correctly. So to say that it is *entirely* based off of it is completely false. It also has bits from NetBSD and OpenBSD.
For the record, I don't give a hoot if they take code from DragonFly. The guys working on DF should be credited for their work, that's all.
How much did they nick from DragonFly? I recall that Jeffrey Hsu revamped the DFBSD TCP stack to great extent. If they did, I'd like to see some attribution.
I recommmend a good Pub as well. In a good Pub, the staff is talkative and friendly, the people are diverse, the beer is nice and tasty and the food is palatable. (just like you said), but, I just as easily whip out my laptop + wifi _in_ that same pub to talk to people I know on IRC.
Best of both worlds.
Re:But does SP2 take out the trash as well?
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 1
I wouldn't call this "out of my way" to bypass the feature. They could have closed it off a little better.
Wrt single user booting, sure, no system is secure when an attacker has physical access to the hardware. But I can see how these flaws are remotely exploitable, which is much worse. The first flaw is more a social engineering issue, but I can see how flaw #2 can cause real problems.
I'm usually referred to as "IT" aroudn where I work, and yes, I do get a lot of flak for data loss that lusers themselves cause. Of course, the flak comes from the lusers, but upper management is already clues in as to what is really the case.
Every time some luser comes in with a stolen/broken/damaged/coffee-soaked/drenched/chrus hed/whathaveyou laptop, and asking for a replacement, they usually claim exactly what you say when they lose their data. Not that that helps them much.
But the kensington lock situation is a real problem. Many of my lusers have got these and use them. Now I have to track every one of 'em down and confiscate them. Boy, am I going to be popular today or what?
Slashdot Mirror
That's probably because of GCC, which has somewhat of an ubiquitous presence in the *NIX world.
:) Of course, they have to abide by the license, and thusly they make the GPL text available on one of their FTP servers.
:)
To them, GCC is a necessary evil
Which doesn't mean they are in love with it of course
Microsoft isn't against OSS at all, they use and have used OSS code when it was convenient for them. A recent example is their SFU (Services For Unix), which has a lot of tools taken from the OpenBSD code base (check with ident(1) if you don't believe me). Last I checked, the BSD license is still accepted by the Open Source foundation as a valid Open Source license.
They just don't like the GPL and derivative/similar licenses. They hate it so much they FUD against it. Why they don't like these kind of licenses is for you to speculate about :)
Now mod me down already for saying something that's true and impopular :(
The article poster might at least have mentioned that, but here it is, in a comment.
The DragonFly installer team really deserve kudos for this thing. Especially for making it so generic. I heard someone even made an OpenBSD installer from this. It really is that flexible and easy to muck with.
The first revisions of this relied on CAPS, which is the new IPC framework in DragonFly. Later on, other ways of IPC were added (sockets etc.) which makes this possible. Also, kudos to GeekGod of livebsd.com for sending the patches to the FreeSBIE team.
The cool thing about the bsdinstaller is that the interface is decoupled from the back end which does the actual partitioning/copying/etc. There is even a CGI front-end available. Do your installs from a web browser! :) Oh, and an X-based installer (both Qt and GTK) is in the works.
Not that I am biased or anything ;)
With KDE it's already a possibility with DCOP and all. Every KDE app's function is accessible by it. Dunno about GNOME though, I never use that :)
Better yet, you can also install this patch to alleviate the problem alltogether... It may require one of these other patches though (there are even more options, I had to pick three). But they aren't very hard to install :)
I have to say that the NVIDIA guys are way more relaxed than say intel or broadcom. I'll give you an example: I contribute to the DragonFlyBSD project. NVIDIA found out that I have been porting the FreeBSD X11 NVIDIA driver to DFBSD. They contacted me, and after some pleasant communication, they sent me a prerelease driver for me to port. But that just started things rolling, because I passed on the contact details to Joerg Sonneberger, and he managed to get the nvidia ethernet binary object relicensed so it could be included in our base install.
This just shows that it can be done.
I'd drink the water.
In other words: still useless, but here soon(tm)
Call me again when PostgreSQL does replication like MySQL does. MySQL may be a glorified cardfile, but some things (like master/slave replication) are stuff that I _need_ for work, and it works well.
On the dragonflybsd mailing lists there's a big thread about using PXEboot to netboot the new installer so machines without spindles or floppies can install dragonflybsd. Lots of info on how to set up DHCP for booting pxe-enabled machines. Might also be worth checking out.
He was a pretty cool guy. I'll miss him.
It does nowadays with kde 3.3
KDE had task grouping before MS ever did.
And if you don't use windows, KDE's kio-fish will do all the neat scp stuff in konqueror.
grmbl, damn slashdot. Watch out when copy&pasting that, there is a stray space in there courtesy of slashcode.
Share and enjoy, and why don't you stick your head in a pig ;)
he bought two of 'em, read the damn article.
Seriously, don't be too strict. Overly strictness can cause rebellion, and ultimately, the loss of your job. Especially if you do it to someone upstairs (like the CTO/CEO/CIO/insert bulky TLA). Or do you exclude them from you rigid policy? If yes, then you're a hypocrite.
Bottom line (like others have posted, and I re-iterate): Happy lusers are less bothersome/troublesome lusers.
As long as they don't fudge with eyecandy on the servers, they can fudge up their workstations all they like. I have recent backups of their important data, a Ghost image or a system image (in case of Linux or FreeBSD) and a fresh $HOME skeleton with which they can start over that I can put back in a snap. And the plus is all the nice goodies the lusers give me when I "rescue" their machine, and even better: - They actually LIKE me. Can you believe that?
Guess who gets the proverbial "pat on the back" (read: lots of cool free stuff) on sysadmin day? I guess you won't be the lucky one.
Please point out an example where DFBSD doesn't attribute correctly. I think you won't find any. (and if you do, please mail the kernel-list, since the dfbsd crew is very strict about that)
Oh, you were wondering where you could read the source? Well, DragonFly's cvsweb has a nice interface for it. You can also compare codebases at lxr.watson.org.
Also, DFBSD has diverged from FreeBSD 4 a great deal already. The userland might be mostly the same, but kernelwise it's all different. The developers put a lot of time and effort in it. The fact that you don't see the difference means that they are doing their work correctly. So to say that it is *entirely* based off of it is completely false. It also has bits from NetBSD and OpenBSD.
For the record, I don't give a hoot if they take code from DragonFly. The guys working on DF should be credited for their work, that's all.
How much did they nick from DragonFly? I recall that Jeffrey Hsu revamped the DFBSD TCP stack to great extent. If they did, I'd like to see some attribution.
Best of both worlds.
Wrt single user booting, sure, no system is secure when an attacker has physical access to the hardware. But I can see how these flaws are remotely exploitable, which is much worse. The first flaw is more a social engineering issue, but I can see how flaw #2 can cause real problems.
I'm usually referred to as "IT" aroudn where I work, and yes, I do get a lot of flak for data loss that lusers themselves cause. Of course, the flak comes from the lusers, but upper management is already clues in as to what is really the case.
Every time some luser comes in with a stolen/broken/damaged/coffee-soaked/drenched/chrus hed/whathaveyou laptop, and asking for a replacement, they usually claim exactly what you say when they lose their data. Not that that helps them much.
But the kensington lock situation is a real problem. Many of my lusers have got these and use them. Now I have to track every one of 'em down and confiscate them. Boy, am I going to be popular today or what?