Would you run a mission critical server on Ubunto? I think not.
Yet just how many people run mission critical servers? If Debian is to be a server OS fine. It should define itself as one, concentrate only on apps a server requires, and quit worrying about what other distributions are doing.
With gentoo I never had such problems with masked packages and unofficial ebuilds. Which doesn't mean that debian sid doesn't have other advantages.
Being source based its only logical that Gentoo won't run into incompatability problems due to differences in precompiled libraries. But, if you are careful with the repositories you choose Sid holds its own. KDE-3.4, for example, was available from the maintainers.
Thanks to the astute posters above...
on
Gentoo 2005.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
...for pointing out that I yet again have made a typo. Yes, of course I meant '02, not `92. It's an age thing. After you live through enough of them, the decades just seem to start running together.
Gentoo has no "unstable" branch in the sense you present it here. You can choose to install software marked as unstable (in the opinion of the individual ebuild maintainers). You claim to say you understand this concept, but you mix up the ideas of unstable and unmasked packages.
I've had ACCEPT_KEWORDS="~arch" in my make.conf since it was introduced so am essentially running an unstable branch of Gentoo. I guess that is the unstable to which the grandparent referring. Why he is surprised by breakage when he does so though is whole other story.
Gentoo seems is always fresh, while my Debian is somewhat old... Despite compiling time, i would have been using Gentoo instead of debian for 1~ year.
You know I've been running Gentoo since '92 with "~arch" in my make.conf as my main distro while keeping a Debian unstable partition around for the occasional portage borkings and I must say you are so totally wrong. Anyone who uses Sid and a handful of unofficial repositories will be almost as current as Gentoo "~arch".
That said though, I do still prefer compiling free software from scratch and Gentoo is the natural choice. As far as all the compile time jokes most smaller packages don't take much longer on a fast processor to emerge than to apt-get a binary. Large ones like KDE are another story but then again your system is still usable while they build in the background.
That only applies to making a computer program compatible with another computer program. That means it is legal to modify or work around code in PowerDVD (a program) to make it run under Wine but it is not legal to modify xine to make it play DVDs or modify Workbone/cdparanoia to handle CDs with copy prevention technology because neither audio CDs or video DVDs are computer programs.
Xine is a program that plays DVDs. KDE, Gnome, and Linux also are programs. In order for those programs to compatibly work together to play DVDs it is necessary to read them.
Copyright was always a bargain. Well first off, Copyright wasn't "always".
Governments granted creators of works exclusive rights... A concept not generally accepted until a couple of centuries ago, yet somehow Leonardo, Shakespeare, and Mozart et al still managed to create. ...for a limited period of time, with the understanding that after that period, the material would fall into the public domain.
Which, with current copyright terms, is a terrible deal for the public because the material will not freely available until after those alive when it was created are long dead.
Don't take me wrong, I'm not totally against copyrights. If you want your work protected fine, just be sure to let everyone know that is your intent. The two biggest problems with the law the way it is today is the length of protection and the lack of required registration in a searchable database. It is quite ridiculous that despite thousands of years worth of art being in the public domain people have to assume everything is copyrighted unless it is specifically stated that it is not.
Why would I have someone in Canada DeCSS it for me, when its legal in the US? Have you read the DMCA?
Just to point at the relevant section for the grandparent.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title.
IMNSHO having a box on the net is nearly as sharp situation as driving a car - how about some computer-internet-licence if one wants to have one?
Interesting idea. To take your car license analogy a bit further there should of course be different levels of licensing also. Learner's permits for beginners, regular licenses for normal users, and professional licenses for content providers and programmers. Fines, suspensions, and revocations should be based on the potential harm that could result from the infraction.
For example, users who neglect to use a firewall could be fined $50, content providers who neglect to scan their files for viruses could face license suspension, and progammers who neglect to check for security holes could face license revocation.
Say what ? The whole point of the GPL is to trade the "typical" set of "encumbrances" with a single one - doing anything with GPed code and then distributing it means you have to GPL your work.
The GPL says no such thing. Want to make a picture? Use any GPL'd program to create that picture and the picture is still yours. Want to create music? Use GPL'd software and the music is still yours also. The only time the GPL requires you to GPL your work is when you copy GPL'd into your work. It requires nothing for simple use.
What I don't get is why so many slashdotters are AGAINST the use of IP law as it stands.
I guess I'll add my biggest gripe about current copyright law to the others that have responded to you, and that is the lack of a registration requirment. There simply is no easy way to determine whether or not a work is in the public domain, and protection being the default is not the answer because there is no way to ask a dead person if it is okay for everyone to pass his work around.
Sure, Netscape was great back in the day but it went south a long time ago and the Mozilla suite is just a reminder of that. Really, I'm not trying to be flamebait here. Can anyone honestly say the latter versions of Netscape were any good? It got to be a bloated monster, it's time that chapter was closed.
Microsoft said the same thing, why use a browser that includes everything but the kitchen sink when you can just use IE. Didn't even bother to bundle it with an email client and practically forced everyone to switch by pulling the rug out from under Netscape's suite. That was as much of a factor in my switching to Linux back then as anything else.
But, at least the suite formerly known as Moz is now open source, and I'm not shy in donating to projects that I like. Sure hope they come up with a better name than "Sea Monkey" though. No car or "from the ashes" names though, something dignified that reminds one of its rich history yet still relevant in a modern world...Lazarus perhaps?
Cancelling the Mozilla suite has been the in the roadmap for a long time... It's certainly not breaking my heart, I wish they would have done it long ago.
But for some of us old farts who stuck with Netscape despite Microsoft doing everything it could to cause its demise, it is heartbreaking. Who would've ever thought that those stepping up to save it would be the ones to kill it off.
Wait a minute...
Yeah there it is...my old 3.04 Navigator Gold license. Maybe I should frame it.
Keys? We don't need no friggin' keys.
on
NeroLinux vs. K3b
·
· Score: 1
The reason they want users to buy windows version to use nerolinux is simple. They don't want to go through the effort of making a new scheme to prevent piracy. Instead of having separate buy linux version and buy windows version things with different keys and such. They will just sell keys. You can even think of it as you're not buying the windows version. You're buying a key from ahead that lets you use either version. Also, this way people who already have a windows key can get the linux version for free.
Our applications drive perfectly well without them, thank you.
The Indians are not stealing your jobs. US people in particular, and Western people in general, are pricing themselves too high given the expensive lifestyles they lead.
Which expensive lifestyles? SUVs, overeating, rampant consumerism, irrational Imperial wars in the other side of the planet. All tha adds up until your economy, or parts of it, become uncompetitive.
I'll won't comment on the Imperial wars, but as for the rest this is a "catch-22". If less things are bought there is less need for people to make things which would lead to more people, both in the west and abroad, without jobs.
A) Having to recompile kernels/worrying that apps will be broken by upgrading that kernel. For that matter, I don't want to have to compile anything, ever. Just to make this clear, never.
Those who don't want to compile commonly use distros that perform the task for them.
Come up with either something akin to Windows where I click on a standard installer,
Did you know you could compile most apps from scratch in less time than it takes to read a MS apps Eula? But that's right, you don't want to compile, ever. Synaptic is point and click, so is KPackage. As for drop and install, I'm sure anyone who felt such a feature was needed could hack something up that would launch apt, rpm, or emerge (oops, almost forgot, no compiling) when a package is dropped on the desktop.
Find a technical solution to the various issues with forking. You need to fix this while we have Linus. Linus can't hold things together forever- and I doubt IBM, Red Hat, Novell, HP, SUSE, et al can coexist on their own. This is an opportunity, not a problem.
Nah, since it isn't even really a problem there is no opportunity. If the man wants people to use his programs all he has to do is distribute the source. Anyone can than compile it, and the various distribution's maintainers can package it up for users who prefer binaries.
Slashdot Mirror
Bullshit. You idiots keep using "Fair Use" as your justification, and you know what Congress will do? They'll take away Fair Use.
Sure they could do that, the same as they took away "Alchohol Use" about eighty years ago.
I'd like to hear what anyone else thinks about Debian as a Server distro.
Many have come to think of Debian as only a server OS. That's why Ubuntu and similar exist.
Would you run a mission critical server on Ubunto? I think not.
Yet just how many people run mission critical servers? If Debian is to be a server OS fine. It should define itself as one, concentrate only on apps a server requires, and quit worrying about what other distributions are doing.
Yeah, and I have 10 years of c# experience.
I've apologized for my typo, what more can I do?
You fucking mods are idiots, and you gentoo fanboys invading all these stories aren't much better.
The story was about a Gentoo release, this particular thread was addressing the misconception that Debian Sid was not as up to date as Gentoo.
With gentoo I never had such problems with masked packages and unofficial ebuilds. Which doesn't mean that debian sid doesn't have other advantages.
Being source based its only logical that Gentoo won't run into incompatability problems due to differences in precompiled libraries. But, if you are careful with the repositories you choose Sid holds its own. KDE-3.4, for example, was available from the maintainers.
...for pointing out that I yet again have made a typo. Yes, of course I meant '02, not `92. It's an age thing. After you live through enough of them, the decades just seem to start running together.
Gentoo has no "unstable" branch in the sense you present it here. You can choose to install software marked as unstable (in the opinion of the individual ebuild maintainers). You claim to say you understand this concept, but you mix up the ideas of unstable and unmasked packages.
I've had ACCEPT_KEWORDS="~arch" in my make.conf since it was introduced so am essentially running an unstable branch of Gentoo. I guess that is the unstable to which the grandparent referring. Why he is surprised by breakage when he does so though is whole other story.
Gentoo seems is always fresh, while my Debian is somewhat old ... Despite compiling time, i would have been using Gentoo instead of debian for 1~ year.
You know I've been running Gentoo since '92 with "~arch" in my make.conf as my main distro while keeping a Debian unstable partition around for the occasional portage borkings and I must say you are so totally wrong. Anyone who uses Sid and a handful of unofficial repositories will be almost as current as Gentoo "~arch".
That said though, I do still prefer compiling free software from scratch and Gentoo is the natural choice. As far as all the compile time jokes most smaller packages don't take much longer on a fast processor to emerge than to apt-get a binary. Large ones like KDE are another story but then again your system is still usable while they build in the background.
No it just proves that:
1-Slashdotters don't read the patent.
Current research indicates that reading patents is potentially 3x more dangerous than not reading them.
That only applies to making a computer program compatible with another computer program. That means it is legal to modify or work around code in PowerDVD (a program) to make it run under Wine but it is not legal to modify xine to make it play DVDs or modify Workbone/cdparanoia to handle CDs with copy prevention technology because neither audio CDs or video DVDs are computer programs.
Xine is a program that plays DVDs. KDE, Gnome, and Linux also are programs. In order for those programs to compatibly work together to play DVDs it is necessary to read them.
Copyright was always a bargain.
...for a limited period of time, with the understanding that after that period, the material would fall into the public domain.
Well first off, Copyright wasn't "always".
Governments granted creators of works exclusive rights...
A concept not generally accepted until a couple of centuries ago, yet somehow Leonardo, Shakespeare, and Mozart et al still managed to create.
Which, with current copyright terms, is a terrible deal for the public because the material will not freely available until after those alive when it was created are long dead.
Don't take me wrong, I'm not totally against copyrights. If you want your work protected fine, just be sure to let everyone know that is your intent. The two biggest problems with the law the way it is today is the length of protection and the lack of required registration in a searchable database. It is quite ridiculous that despite thousands of years worth of art being in the public domain people have to assume everything is copyrighted unless it is specifically stated that it is not.
Why would I have someone in Canada DeCSS it for me, when its legal in the US? Have you read the DMCA?
Just to point at the relevant section for the grandparent.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title.
IMNSHO having a box on the net is nearly as sharp situation as driving a car - how about some computer-internet-licence if one wants to have one?
Interesting idea. To take your car license analogy a bit further there should of course be different levels of licensing also. Learner's permits for beginners, regular licenses for normal users, and professional licenses for content providers and programmers. Fines, suspensions, and revocations should be based on the potential harm that could result from the infraction.
For example, users who neglect to use a firewall could be fined $50, content providers who neglect to scan their files for viruses could face license suspension, and progammers who neglect to check for security holes could face license revocation.
Sound good? Not to me it doesn't.
...but what I really want to know is whatever happened to the BBC open sourcing its archives?
Say what ? The whole point of the GPL is to trade the "typical" set of "encumbrances" with a single one - doing anything with GPed code and then distributing it means you have to GPL your work.
The GPL says no such thing. Want to make a picture? Use any GPL'd program to create that picture and the picture is still yours. Want to create music? Use GPL'd software and the music is still yours also. The only time the GPL requires you to GPL your work is when you copy GPL'd into your work. It requires nothing for simple use.
What I don't get is why so many slashdotters are AGAINST the use of IP law as it stands.
I guess I'll add my biggest gripe about current copyright law to the others that have responded to you, and that is the lack of a registration requirment. There simply is no easy way to determine whether or not a work is in the public domain, and protection being the default is not the answer because there is no way to ask a dead person if it is okay for everyone to pass his work around.
the company's preferred browser
or for short, Preferred
Forgot all about the store. I was thinking of the Heinlein character, Lazarus Long, who transcended both time and space.
Sure, Netscape was great back in the day but it went south a long time ago and the Mozilla suite is just a reminder of that. Really, I'm not trying to be flamebait here. Can anyone honestly say the latter versions of Netscape were any good? It got to be a bloated monster, it's time that chapter was closed.
Microsoft said the same thing, why use a browser that includes everything but the kitchen sink when you can just use IE. Didn't even bother to bundle it with an email client and practically forced everyone to switch by pulling the rug out from under Netscape's suite. That was as much of a factor in my switching to Linux back then as anything else.
But, at least the suite formerly known as Moz is now open source, and I'm not shy in donating to projects that I like. Sure hope they come up with a better name than "Sea Monkey" though. No car or "from the ashes" names though, something dignified that reminds one of its rich history yet still relevant in a modern world...Lazarus perhaps?
Cancelling the Mozilla suite has been the in the roadmap for a long time... It's certainly not breaking my heart, I wish they would have done it long ago.
But for some of us old farts who stuck with Netscape despite Microsoft doing everything it could to cause its demise, it is heartbreaking. Who would've ever thought that those stepping up to save it would be the ones to kill it off.
Wait a minute...
Yeah there it is...my old 3.04 Navigator Gold license. Maybe I should frame it.
The reason they want users to buy windows version to use nerolinux is simple. They don't want to go through the effort of making a new scheme to prevent piracy. Instead of having separate buy linux version and buy windows version things with different keys and such. They will just sell keys. You can even think of it as you're not buying the windows version. You're buying a key from ahead that lets you use either version. Also, this way people who already have a windows key can get the linux version for free.
Our applications drive perfectly well without them, thank you.
What if a man wants to make a living?
He'd sell his services to support, maintain, and improve his code.
Worked for me in FF.
Works in the real Mozilla(20050304), too.
The Indians are not stealing your jobs. US people in particular, and Western people in general, are pricing themselves too high given the expensive lifestyles they lead.
Which expensive lifestyles? SUVs, overeating, rampant consumerism, irrational Imperial wars in the other side of the planet. All tha adds up until your economy, or parts of it, become uncompetitive.
I'll won't comment on the Imperial wars, but as for the rest this is a "catch-22". If less things are bought there is less need for people to make things which would lead to more people, both in the west and abroad, without jobs.
A) Having to recompile kernels/worrying that apps will be broken by upgrading that kernel. For that matter, I don't want to have to compile anything, ever. Just to make this clear, never.
Those who don't want to compile commonly use distros that perform the task for them.
Come up with either something akin to Windows where I click on a standard installer,
Did you know you could compile most apps from scratch in less time than it takes to read a MS apps Eula? But that's right, you don't want to compile, ever. Synaptic is point and click, so is KPackage. As for drop and install, I'm sure anyone who felt such a feature was needed could hack something up that would launch apt, rpm, or emerge (oops, almost forgot, no compiling) when a package is dropped on the desktop.
Find a technical solution to the various issues with forking. You need to fix this while we have Linus. Linus can't hold things together forever- and I doubt IBM, Red Hat, Novell, HP, SUSE, et al can coexist on their own. This is an opportunity, not a problem.
Nah, since it isn't even really a problem there is no opportunity. If the man wants people to use his programs all he has to do is distribute the source. Anyone can than compile it, and the various distribution's maintainers can package it up for users who prefer binaries.