Your assertion that host addresses are always 64 bits may be correct. My grasp of the subject matter is *very* weak. However, I daresay that you can have a IPV6 host that's been generated from even a/128 assigment. All the subnet stuff is for is to manage routing between groups of hosts (or even single hosts in our/128 example), right? Stateless autoconfig won't work, but we *do* have DHCPv6.
Heh. Thanks for giving up your mod opportunity. This was useful information.
I've got to keep in mind that -ultimately- we want to get out as much good, useful source code as possible. Whatever helps advance that goal is a good thing.
Well, IDK. In "Sid Meyer's" Alpha Centauri, once you got the Space Elevator and equipped your units with Drop Pods, you could move them within two squares of an enemy base, instantly.
I'm not saying that we have a Space Elevator, per se...
I'll see your advert iff: * You don't use client-side JavaScript to insert it into the page. * It's not a Flash ad. * It's not HUGE. (mail.yahoo.com: I'm glaring in your direction.) * The host you use to serve the ad has *never* shown me an annoying, flashy "OMG YOU MAY HAVE WON AN IPOD" style ad. (doubleclick.net and RealMedia.com are right out, sorry.)
Every out of the kernel tree FOSS driver dies on every kernel update.
This is wrong. pcc_acpi (0.8.4) builds with 2.6.16, 2.6.24, and *would* have worked with 2.6.26 had its author not used a private part of a structure (marked "DO NOT USE" in the relevant header) to get some info. Four small code changes later (using the proper getter and setter functions) and we're back in business again!
"do not install *any* updates, ever"
I personally know the status of a dozen or so Linux machines, most of them running Ubuntu. Their users apply security patches soon after being prompted by their distro's updater. I haven't heard a single one of the users of those machines complain of a security update breaking their systems. Anecdotal evidence kinda sucks, doesn't it?
If you're not going to present some hard facts, please go back to guarding your bridge.
It is not in anyway acceptable for you to enforce an ideology on me just because I use your idea.
You're not using his idea. You're using his *code*. If his idea is not protected by a patent, you can use it all you like. It's when you lift his implementation that you have to abide by his licensing terms. Get it?
If you don't want to license your code under the GPL, modify the GPL'd code in question to communicate with your code via some IPC mechanism, then release *those* changes to the world. Bingo-bango, you get to use the GPL'd code, and you get to keep your preferred licensing model. Is this more work than just using the linker? Yes. It it less work than reimplementing the lib in question? Probably.
Perhaps the PP should have written "but -with a clear conscience- use..."?
If this addendum doesn't change your comment, then consider this. If you agree to pay royalties to the milkman after you develop and patent the SAF 3000, then you fail to do so, you're legally and morally in the wrong. Likewise, if you incorporate GPL'd software into your project and don't abide by the terms of the license (your agreement with the software's copyright holder), then you're legally and morally in the wrong.
Is proprietary software "evil"? Not inherently so, no. IMO, it frequently leads to evil things... broken, poorly supported systems (like the Adobe Flash plugin), systems that cost *tons* of money to develop new devices for, or systems that prevent someone from doing things like scratching their Operating-Systems-design itch.
As you say, all we can do is keep making free software. Hopefully we're having some fun while we're doing it!
An institution would probably do what most engineering firms do: require the inventor to hand over all rights to the invention for some token amount. Makes legal issues hella easy to resolve.;)
Those performance margins right up to the ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro CF were statistically insignificant. The big gain that I see on the horizon for my box is an upgrade to a PCI-E card. (Hooray for high-speed symmetric transmissions!)
People spend so much time on this 'cause... managers are too overworked to pay attention to details? Managers don't *want* to pay attention to details? Managers really aren't *supposed* to pay attention to details?
I'm not being snarky or cynical here. (I'm actually trying to figure out use and care instructions for my own manager.;) )
Slashdot Mirror
Your assertion that host addresses are always 64 bits may be correct. My grasp of the subject matter is *very* weak. However, I daresay that you can have a IPV6 host that's been generated from even a /128 assigment. All the subnet stuff is for is to manage routing between groups of hosts (or even single hosts in our /128 example), right? Stateless autoconfig won't work, but we *do* have DHCPv6.
Heh. Thanks for giving up your mod opportunity. This was useful information.
I've got to keep in mind that -ultimately- we want to get out as much good, useful source code as possible. Whatever helps advance that goal is a good thing.
Boards based on intel's 945 Chipset has max 2GB Ram support.
$ lspci
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/PM/GMS, 943/940GML and 945GT Express Memory Controller Hub (rev 03)
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)
$ cat /proc/meminfo
MemTotal: 3362304 kB
How often do you really have to move 100 MB or 2.5 GB of files around?
If you're me, you do this every goddamn day.
Well, IDK. In "Sid Meyer's" Alpha Centauri, once you got the Space Elevator and equipped your units with Drop Pods, you could move them within two squares of an enemy base, instantly.
I'm not saying that we have a Space Elevator, per se...
# echo "dev-util/git -perl" >> /etc/portage/package.use /etc/portage/package.use
# emerge git && emerge perl
# echo "dev-util/git perl" >>
# emerge git
Right?
And yes. Git will still be stupid. (It's stupid hard for stupid people like me to use the command line client. :/)
*nods*
I'll see your advert iff:
* You don't use client-side JavaScript to insert it into the page.
* It's not a Flash ad.
* It's not HUGE. (mail.yahoo.com: I'm glaring in your direction.)
* The host you use to serve the ad has *never* shown me an annoying, flashy "OMG YOU MAY HAVE WON AN IPOD" style ad. (doubleclick.net and RealMedia.com are right out, sorry.)
*shrug* I'm not involved in a fight. I use Linux-based operating systems 'cause I enjoy it. I'm a hobbyist. Why are you so worked up about *software*?
You could name a couple of drivers that broke, and what kernel revs broke them.
Is that an unreasonable request?
Every out of the kernel tree FOSS driver dies on every kernel update.
This is wrong. pcc_acpi (0.8.4) builds with 2.6.16, 2.6.24, and *would* have worked with 2.6.26 had its author not used a private part of a structure (marked "DO NOT USE" in the relevant header) to get some info. Four small code changes later (using the proper getter and setter functions) and we're back in business again!
"do not install *any* updates, ever"
I personally know the status of a dozen or so Linux machines, most of them running Ubuntu. Their users apply security patches soon after being prompted by their distro's updater. I haven't heard a single one of the users of those machines complain of a security update breaking their systems.
Anecdotal evidence kinda sucks, doesn't it?
If you're not going to present some hard facts, please go back to guarding your bridge.
But after this you'll never claim the kernel to be "stable", will you?
From futher upthread:
For example there is no stable Linux kernel,
You're employing a homonym! Congratulations. This isn't the version of "stable" that the PP was referencing.
No, they do not! And I have already proven it: huge amount of FOSS drivers die in every minor-minor (e.g. security) kernel update.
You've proven nothing until you provide even a basic citation.
Bah. Change "after you develop and patent the" to "upon the completion and patenting of" in my previous message. I'm an illiterate buffoon.
It is not in anyway acceptable for you to enforce an ideology on me just because I use your idea.
You're not using his idea. You're using his *code*.
If his idea is not protected by a patent, you can use it all you like. It's when you lift his implementation that you have to abide by his licensing terms. Get it?
If you don't want to license your code under the GPL, modify the GPL'd code in question to communicate with your code via some IPC mechanism, then release *those* changes to the world. Bingo-bango, you get to use the GPL'd code, and you get to keep your preferred licensing model.
Is this more work than just using the linker? Yes.
It it less work than reimplementing the lib in question? Probably.
Perhaps the PP should have written "but -with a clear conscience- use..."?
If this addendum doesn't change your comment, then consider this. If you agree to pay royalties to the milkman after you develop and patent the SAF 3000, then you fail to do so, you're legally and morally in the wrong. Likewise, if you incorporate GPL'd software into your project and don't abide by the terms of the license (your agreement with the software's copyright holder), then you're legally and morally in the wrong.
Heh. ACTA, anyone?
Crazy laws know no borders these days.
You seem reasonable. Kudos!
Is proprietary software "evil"? Not inherently so, no. IMO, it frequently leads to evil things... broken, poorly supported systems (like the Adobe Flash plugin), systems that cost *tons* of money to develop new devices for, or systems that prevent someone from doing things like scratching their Operating-Systems-design itch.
As you say, all we can do is keep making free software. Hopefully we're having some fun while we're doing it!
An institution would probably do what most engineering firms do: require the inventor to hand over all rights to the invention for some token amount. Makes legal issues hella easy to resolve. ;)
Those performance margins right up to the ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro CF were statistically insignificant. The big gain that I see on the horizon for my box is an upgrade to a PCI-E card. (Hooray for high-speed symmetric transmissions!)
*points to Picassa* :(
People spend so much time on this 'cause... managers are too overworked to pay attention to details? Managers don't *want* to pay attention to details? Managers really aren't *supposed* to pay attention to details?
I'm not being snarky or cynical here. (I'm actually trying to figure out use and care instructions for my own manager. ;) )
Tag characters? Like described in this document, and the linked PDF? http://unicode.org/faq/languagetagging.html
If so, that's an interesting feature. (That I'm never gonna use 'cause they say not to, natch.)
Isn't Chrome more lightweight than FF 3?
I really don't know. I only briefly used the very first public beta Chrome release.
http://doc.trolltech.com/4.4/license-gpl-exceptions.html