Yes, the project is commercial - but so are many Linux ventures (Loki, Red Hat - need I go on). The
full version for Linux will be freely available for download, so I don't see the project's
commercialisation as being a major factor here. I'm sure that there will be people that will want to
see otherwise, but commercialism != evil corporate domination.
OK. Redhat etc. are corporate, but they return to the community. You do not. Hence the hostility.
Regarding use of the word "Operating System" - the Linux release available for download is in fact
promoted as a Run-Time Environment. The download page is pretty clear on this, to quote the link:
"Athena Run-Time Environment (i386 Preview)". This naming convention only applies to the Linux
release.
How is this even a runtime (not Run-Time, that's not a word) environment. A runtime environment implies its own binary (crossplatform?) format. You seem to be running pure Linux binaries. Oh yeah, with whatever APIs you call to make them AthenaOS binaires. I forgot. Just like my GNOME apps are really binaries for GNOME/OS. Right.
Other platforms are a different matter entirely - the exact reasoning behind all this will
become clear as time moves on.
Ummmmmm. Voodoo. You don't say.
As for open source, the policy on this is pretty clear and you should see somewhere between 25 -
50% of the project's source code available to the public. I've noticed a few people quoting certain
areas of the website and twisting it as if to make out that we have some sort of evil attitude towards
open source. While we don't use the GPL for our product, this does not mean that we hate the idea of
publicly available source code.
If you claim to be open at all what possible reason would you have not to be all open? Because competitors could steal your code? No (if you think this, then you don't know shit about the GPL). Because it is less secure? No (see last parenthetical comment). Because:
Using the GPL would have caused major problems for the project
that would have meant handing over many of our rights over to the Free Software Foundation.
How does using the GPL hand your rights to the FSF?? If you assigned them your copyright also, then it would, but that's not a requirement of the GPL.
It
simply wasn't an option, but that doesn't make it a bad project.
No, non-GPL != bad project. Project that claims to offer a crossplatform, kernel independent, GUI-based OS (JAVA!!!!!) but whose features above a WindowManager/Desktop Environment (i.e. GNOME/KDE) are pure vapor, while maintianing closed source == bad project.
Regarding distribution, this is a pretty simple policy that prevents third parties from distributing the
software on CDs or from web-sites without our permission. That's all - a pretty basic expression of
copyright. Although judging from some of the posted remarks, it could also be interpreted as an evil
plot designed to destroy the Linux community from the inside, eating it away like a cancerous cell to
ensure that Microsoft can still reign supreme - because after all, Rocklyte Systems is just another
corporation out to get you all while you're tucked away in your beds. Sheesh.
Redhat does it and is more succesful than you'll ever be. I'm sorry P. Manias, but you really do insult this community, and hence, you will fail (not with a bang...).
Interestingly enough, one of the first uses of this kind of virtualization was under IBMs OS/370, which is/was used on big mainframes. If you get the chance, Linux can run under (diagonally from) OS/370, so in theory you could get Win95 on a mainframe. (Gasp.. choke..:)
Most mainframes don't use x86, and so x86 virtualization is not an option for them.
No, not x86 virt.. just the virtualization by means of command trapping and direct processor access...
But in the case of running Plex86 on the S/390 (whose hardware, as well as software has explicit support for virtualization, which is unusual), the direct proccessor access would be for the wrong proccessor. To run Windows with Plex86, you need an x86. To even run Plex86, you need an x86.
So yes linux can run on an S/390 (not an S/370), but no you could not run Plex86 on it.
You could run bochs though (probably) which is a true x86 emulator and then run windows on that, but I don't know why you would.
The graphics on games NOW are bad. Do you remember what the graphics on the PSX were at the very beging? They were REALLY bad. It's just that game designers haven't figured out how to use the PS2's unique (and it really is) graphics pipeline. When they do....
Actually we do know. Eli Biham and Adi Shamir (the S in RSA) discovered differential cryptanalysis in 1990. Differential cryptanalysis made short work of many algorithms of the day *except* DES. It was found that any other s-box configuration, including totally random ones, made the whole algorithm fall quickly to this new method. Subsequently, an IBM researcher admitted that they knew about differential cryptanalysis in the early seventies but the NSA convinced them that discussing the method or the s-box criteria would harm US interests.
So then, we still don't know. All you did is tell us why the S box values were picked (to thwart cryptanalysis. We knew this.), but not the method that determined those numbers.
I say FrontPage 2000's the Pits,
But my Boss seems to think it's the Shits. (so) I threw BO2K,
On his Server one day,
Now the Network's at my fingertips!
Especially if the private key was mathematically related to the biometric data in some way. Then (to respond to another reply) not even a bit-by-bit copy of the card would do any good.
Do you honestly think that everyone who has ever received a paycheck from the US Govt is some
brainwashed zombie who can't be trusted to tie his own shoes without somehow involving himself in a
conspiracy?
No. I am saying that if I were a judge, and I had worked for MS, I would be disqualified from hearing the anti-trust suit against them because if I had EVER had ANY sort of realationship with them, I WOULD BE PARTIAL. Full impartiality legally means NO relationship with ANY of the parties involved, EVER.
Man, I know there's no Big Brother, UFOs, whatever. What I'm asking for is simply a true impartial review of a system that may well be unconstitutional. Nothing more.
Perrit's job is to verify that the DoJ has accurately represented the functionality of Carnivore and to verify that Carnivore does not collect any more information than the DoJ says it does.
Except that the DoJ has never said what exactly Carnivore does collect. All they have said is that it does so legally. Perrit's job is to see what is being collected. He seems to have stated that if the DoJ wants him to, it wouldn't be "unreasonable" for him to LIE about it. That's what gets me.
From reading Perrit's answers, it looks like his mind is already made up. Dismissing serious concerns over the constitutionality of Carnivore as conspiracy theories, and the overall tone of his answers makes it pretty darn clear that he's going to say that Carnivore's just fine and perfectly legal.
And even if he comes to the opposite conclusion, It is not unreasonable for the Justice Department to assure that the details of confidential criminal investigations or of foreign intelligence methods and procedures will not disclosed to the public.
That sounds to me like he's willing to be censored. This whole thing is a bit more than fishy if you ask me.
And yes, if you worked for the Feds at any time (even 24 years ago), much less the DoJ (Krent), then that sure as helldisqualifies one from undertaking an independent review. That's what impartiality means.
System Bus: The AMD Athlon processor's system bus is the first 200MHz system bus for x86 platforms, as well as the fastest x86 processor bus available, delivering up 50 percent more peak bandwidth than any other x86 system bus. The AMD Athlon system bus is designed for scalable multiprocessing and leverages high-performance Alpha(TM) EV6 bus technology to enable exceptional system performance.
System Bus: The AMD Athlon processor's system bus is the first 200MHz system bus for x86 platforms, as well as the fastest x86 processor bus available, delivering up 50 percent more peak bandwidth than any other x86 system bus. The AMD Athlon system bus is designed for scalable multiprocessing and leverages high-performance Alpha(TM) EV6 bus technology to enable exceptional system performance.
EV6 is the system bus that the Alpha and Athlon use. So yes, it does.
Get your mainframe!! Mainframes here!!
on
User Mode Linux
·
· Score: 3
User mode Linux == Mainframe-like functionality?
Isn't this sort of thing that the S390s do? So couldn't we now start running mad-crazy numbers of VMs on straight up PC hardware? So if I were an ISP, I could give each of my clients their own host, yes?
Dude!!! If your configuration doesn't work and everyone else's seemingly identical configs do, then you screwed up. Claiming otherwise is FUD.
I know that Reiserfs doesn't play well with the VFS in its current state. Viro has made that plenty clear. It does however play just fine with fat and vfat. My roommate mounts reiser and fat as we speak on 2.4.0-test*. It does work.
BTW, why are you using xconfig for a devel kernel? It's not updated as often. Use menuconfig or something if you must, but not xconfig.
Slashdot Mirror
- Yes, the project is commercial - but so are many Linux ventures (Loki, Red Hat - need I go on). The
full version for Linux will be freely available for download, so I don't see the project's
commercialisation as being a major factor here. I'm sure that there will be people that will want to
see otherwise, but commercialism != evil corporate domination.
OK. Redhat etc. are corporate, but they return to the community. You do not. Hence the hostility.- Regarding use of the word "Operating System" - the Linux release available for download is in fact
promoted as a Run-Time Environment. The download page is pretty clear on this, to quote the link:
"Athena Run-Time Environment (i386 Preview)". This naming convention only applies to the Linux
release.
How is this even a runtime (not Run-Time, that's not a word) environment. A runtime environment implies its own binary (crossplatform?) format. You seem to be running pure Linux binaries. Oh yeah, with whatever APIs you call to make them AthenaOS binaires. I forgot. Just like my GNOME apps are really binaries for GNOME/OS. Right.- Other platforms are a different matter entirely - the exact reasoning behind all this will
become clear as time moves on.
Ummmmmm. Voodoo. You don't say.- As for open source, the policy on this is pretty clear and you should see somewhere between 25 -
50% of the project's source code available to the public. I've noticed a few people quoting certain
areas of the website and twisting it as if to make out that we have some sort of evil attitude towards
open source. While we don't use the GPL for our product, this does not mean that we hate the idea of
publicly available source code.
If you claim to be open at all what possible reason would you have not to be all open? Because competitors could steal your code? No (if you think this, then you don't know shit about the GPL). Because it is less secure? No (see last parenthetical comment). Because:- Using the GPL would have caused major problems for the project
that would have meant handing over many of our rights over to the Free Software Foundation.
How does using the GPL hand your rights to the FSF?? If you assigned them your copyright also, then it would, but that's not a requirement of the GPL.- It
simply wasn't an option, but that doesn't make it a bad project.
No, non-GPL != bad project. Project that claims to offer a crossplatform, kernel independent, GUI-based OS ( JAVA!!!!! ) but whose features above a WindowManager/Desktop Environment (i.e. GNOME/KDE) are pure vapor, while maintianing closed source == bad project.- Regarding distribution, this is a pretty simple policy that prevents third parties from distributing the
software on CDs or from web-sites without our permission. That's all - a pretty basic expression of
copyright. Although judging from some of the posted remarks, it could also be interpreted as an evil
plot designed to destroy the Linux community from the inside, eating it away like a cancerous cell to
ensure that Microsoft can still reign supreme - because after all, Rocklyte Systems is just another
corporation out to get you all while you're tucked away in your beds. Sheesh.
Redhat does it and is more succesful than you'll ever be. I'm sorry P. Manias, but you really do insult this community, and hence, you will fail (not with a bang...).That sure as hell is one painfull looking connect error.
Link, for God's Sake!! Give us a link!!
Most mainframes don't use x86, and so x86 virtualization is not an option for them.
No, not x86 virt.. just the virtualization by means of command trapping and direct processor access...
But in the case of running Plex86 on the S/390 (whose hardware, as well as software has explicit support for virtualization, which is unusual), the direct proccessor access would be for the wrong proccessor. To run Windows with Plex86, you need an x86. To even run Plex86, you need an x86.
So yes linux can run on an S/390 (not an S/370), but no you could not run Plex86 on it.
You could run bochs though (probably) which is a true x86 emulator and then run windows on that, but I don't know why you would.
The graphics on games NOW are bad. Do you remember what the graphics on the PSX were at the very beging? They were REALLY bad. It's just that game designers haven't figured out how to use the PS2's unique (and it really is) graphics pipeline. When they do....
- Actually we do know. Eli Biham and Adi Shamir (the S in RSA) discovered differential cryptanalysis in 1990. Differential cryptanalysis made short work of many algorithms of the day *except* DES. It was found that any other s-box configuration, including totally random ones, made the whole algorithm fall quickly to this new method. Subsequently, an IBM researcher admitted that they knew about differential cryptanalysis in the early seventies but the NSA convinced them that discussing the method or the s-box criteria would harm US interests.
So then, we still don't know. All you did is tell us why the S box values were picked (to thwart cryptanalysis. We knew this.), but not the method that determined those numbers.Why is this information still classified?
Actually he did.
not a problem.
(To quote myself)
You can in fact write (and compile) code for JVM in Eiffel, Fortran, LISP, Visual Basic, Ada 95, Python, PERL, C, any language that GCC supports, and a whole slew of other languages (170 or so).
See the comments to cid 135 and this page.
BS! You can in fact write (and compile) code for JVM in Eiffel, Fortran, LISP, Visual Basic, Ada 95, Python, PERL, C, any language that GCC supports, and a whole slew of other languages.
In the future, keep your uninformed ramblings to yourself.
See the comments to cid#135this page.
I say FrontPage 2000's the Pits,
But my Boss seems to think it's the Shits.
(so) I threw BO2K,
On his Server one day,
Now the Network's at my fingertips!
Especially if the private key was mathematically related to the biometric data in some way. Then (to respond to another reply) not even a bit-by-bit copy of the card would do any good.
I know I can't spell.
Digital Paper, and a whole LOT of cool other stuff.
The digital paper is the coolest though.
Pioneer 10 was powered by the Intel 4004.
Do you honestly think that everyone who has ever received a paycheck from the US Govt is some brainwashed zombie who can't be trusted to tie his own shoes without somehow involving himself in a conspiracy?
No. I am saying that if I were a judge, and I had worked for MS, I would be disqualified from hearing the anti-trust suit against them because if I had EVER had ANY sort of realationship with them, I WOULD BE PARTIAL. Full impartiality legally means NO relationship with ANY of the parties involved, EVER.
Man, I know there's no Big Brother, UFOs, whatever. What I'm asking for is simply a true impartial review of a system that may well be unconstitutional. Nothing more.
He's claiming that once you've worked for an agency, you can no longer be impartial, not that you cannot be a good person anymore.
Exactly. Full impartiality means no (zip, zero, zilch, past, present or future) relationship with any of the parties.
Perrit's job is to verify that the DoJ has accurately represented the functionality of Carnivore and to verify that Carnivore does not collect any more information than the DoJ says it does.
Except that the DoJ has never said what exactly Carnivore does collect. All they have said is that it does so legally. Perrit's job is to see what is being collected. He seems to have stated that if the DoJ wants him to, it wouldn't be "unreasonable" for him to LIE about it. That's what gets me.
From reading Perrit's answers, it looks like his mind is already made up. Dismissing serious concerns over the constitutionality of Carnivore as conspiracy theories, and the overall tone of his answers makes it pretty darn clear that he's going to say that Carnivore's just fine and perfectly legal.
And even if he comes to the opposite conclusion,
It is not unreasonable for the Justice Department to assure that the details of confidential criminal investigations or of foreign intelligence methods and procedures will not disclosed to the public.
That sounds to me like he's willing to be censored. This whole thing is a bit more than fishy if you ask me.
And yes, if you worked for the Feds at any time (even 24 years ago), much less the DoJ (Krent), then that sure as hell disqualifies one from undertaking an independent review. That's what impartiality means.
Oh well. Big Brother knows best I guess.
From the AMD Athlon FAQ:
- System Bus: The AMD Athlon processor's system bus is the first 200MHz system bus for x86 platforms, as well as the fastest x86 processor bus available, delivering up 50 percent more peak bandwidth than any other x86 system bus. The AMD Athlon system bus is designed for scalable multiprocessing and leverages high-performance Alpha(TM) EV6 bus technology to enable exceptional system performance.
You sir, have no idea what you are talking about.From the AMD Athlon FAQ:
- System Bus: The AMD Athlon processor's system bus is the first 200MHz system bus for x86 platforms, as well as the fastest x86 processor bus available, delivering up 50 percent more peak bandwidth than any other x86 system bus. The AMD Athlon system bus is designed for scalable multiprocessing and leverages high-performance Alpha(TM) EV6 bus technology to enable exceptional system performance.
Yes, I see the pattern.EV6 is the system bus that the Alpha and Athlon use. So yes, it does.
User mode Linux == Mainframe-like functionality?
Isn't this sort of thing that the S390s do? So couldn't we now start running mad-crazy numbers of VMs on straight up PC hardware? So if I were an ISP, I could give each of my clients their own host, yes?
Fun stuff!
That's really some twisted stuff. Don't tell PETA.
Gates did however write (by himself mind you and by hand) that little calculator app that has been in EVERY version of MacOS (including OS X Beta).
Now isn't that enough to prove that he is a master programer, I mean a non-graphing calculator for god's sake!!
'nuff said.
Dude!!! If your configuration doesn't work and everyone else's seemingly identical configs do, then you screwed up. Claiming otherwise is FUD.
I know that Reiserfs doesn't play well with the VFS in its current state. Viro has made that plenty clear. It does however play just fine with fat and vfat. My roommate mounts reiser and fat as we speak on 2.4.0-test*. It does work.
BTW, why are you using xconfig for a devel kernel? It's not updated as often. Use menuconfig or something if you must, but not xconfig.