But your code is not as closely neat as the 2.0 version, which even compiles:
/* put angle brackets at includes. */
#include stdio.h
#include unistd.h
int main(int argc, char**argv)
{
printf("RGBS plugin v2.00 (C) 2001 Fjear-Nation.net\n");
printf("This product includes software developed by the University of California, Berkeley, and its contributors.\n");
printf("This product includes characters standardized by ANSI, ISO and their contributors.\n");
printf("This product includes words in a language developed by the People of England.\n");
You have two options to deal with Linux here: provide gigantic static-linked binaries, which will cripple the freedom of your users and make their systems inefficient, or provide source code they can compile on their platforms (this way enabling your application to run also on other architectures like PPC, Alpha, Sparc...).
Yet, if you are willing to cripple user freedom, then just make binaries for a reference distribution (Distribution ZZZ version X.Y) and put a neon-orange sign in the shrink-wrap box "Requires ZZZ Linux X.Y". You're already taking the users' freedom in respect to the software they use, taking a little more and obligating them to use an specific version of a distro is just a step further).
If you are not willing to provide the source code for the users of your software, you'd better not be developing software, the world is better without you. Really.
Napster is not peer-to-peer, it is client-server architecture. Free Net and Mojo Nation are P2P.
See Free Haven
for resources on real P2P development.
When a Court orders the shutting off of Napster, it shuts off the server(s) and the system is gone.
The judge doesn't have to enter your home to shut down the whole system.
On correct implementations of P2P the court would have to shut down at least N-1 nodes of an N-node network (or break links so that no 2 nodes can talk to each other).
Build a rail in east-west direction, mount
workstation on, wait until dawn, and then just
keep up with Earth rotation.
The light of dawn after a night of bug
hunting is the most inspiring light that can
drive the user into awe.
Of course someone could take a snapshot of the
window upon dawn, measure luminance with a photometer and build an LCD display the size of a window to emulate dawn. Volunteers;-) ?
I started with doc++ for my projects but later switched to scandoc.
The main con about doc++ (IMHO) is the lack of configurability of the output look and feel.
While scandoc will generate only HTML output (and you should look for other tools if LaTeX, TXT, Groff, your-format-here output is desired), it is very configurable, requiring some Perl hacking to get the template to generate what you want.
I know Intel's chip naming is awful, but
we should at least cope with it.
I miss the days of Z80A, 65C02 and TI9929
but hopefully the guys at Transmeta are working so we can again compute with TM3200 and TM5400 instead of Celerons, Pentiums, Durons and Weirdiums. Meanwhile, K6-3's and K7's are still fine.:)
The term "market" in this list looks interesting.
By being mentioned in that list it seems that the guy is considered to have used every bit of opportunity to make money in his field. If thats not the case, why isnt Stallman there ? If it is exactly that, why is Linus there ? He is exactly the opposite of what this list tries to gather: people who used their creations (Sun, Apple, Microsoft...) to build a really big pile of money.
2) Microsoft may employ the most technically brilliant programmers and tech doc writers in the world, but we will never know, because they're working for Microsoft, whose products are closed and not targeted at developers and hackers. It is very sad to have such a nice guy like Kojima working for Conectiva. He deserved a better work place.
3) SuSE and Mandrake used RedHat (RPM included) as the base for their distros, and now develop independent work. Mandrake has a goal: an easier and pentium-optimized distribution. Everytime a new Red Hat version is released Conectiva grabs it, repackages every RPM, possibly adding bloated translations in the process, and releases as "Conectiva Linux".
4) Anyone who ever joined brazilian Linux-related IRC channels know that Conectiva is ridicularized everywhere, it is a joke among all who work with Linux. Now Conectiva has its own IRC server, or else its employees would just get bashed on wide-public IRC's like BrasIRC.
5) Lack of other groups commercially developing Linux in Brazil is no reason to sanctify Conectiva. Lack of competition reminds me of Microsoft, not GNU/Linux. I will not sanctify such a company.
6) As far as I can remember, the easiest way to get a job done is...doing it. Instead of posting articles to freshmeat/slashdot Claudio should WORK on a packaging system, unless his intentions are to have someone else (Red Hat) do the work for his company.
This only strengthens the whole feeling (of everybody who ever used Conectiva Linux) that the previous article by Conectiva employee Claudio Matsuoka about RPM was just a spurious attempt to make people think Conectiva actually develops a Linux distribution.
This is false, since the very first Conectiva distros they were just translations to portuguese of Red Hat Linux.
Now the guys at Conectiva will get RH 7, translate, screw it up in a multitude of ways and change the auto-update system so that it only connects to Conectiva's servers. And we thought they would _create_ something. *grin* Do expect Conectiva 6 (current version is 5.x) to be out in a month or so. And why I'm not surprised they won't have to develop their own marvelous packaging system ?
The situation with Microsoft is that nobody knows what to do with it.
The first decision was to divide it as it has gathered too much power. Having this one decided, they faced the question: divide in how many companies ? The correct answer to this is the number of Microsoft-like companies we would like to have in the world: zero.
The whole thing is not about monopoly or jurisprudence, it is about dividing by zero.
"For in the end, this is not only a fight about the protection of music or movies, software code or video games. Nor is it a fight about technology's promise or its limitations. This is, at its core, quite simply about right and wrong."
Of course your right makes you earn pounds of money and make us buy CDs for absurd prices. (Why didn't Lars disclose how much goes to record company and how much they make per cd ?). Nobody voted for this guy to decide what is right and what is wrong, and no internet user asked this company to decide how Internet should be, thanks.
"Thank you for letting me speak from the heart."
Brewing ideas and speaking them out is not illegal. Not yet. I'm sure RIAA and the guys behind DMCA are already working to get around this. And was that your heart your wallet ?
First of all, things like OLE, CORBA, JBuilder and Visual Basic aren't good for kids. I would say they're not good even for adults, but that would make this a flamebait.
My personal experience was with an 8-bit computer called MSX, common in Japan, Europe and South America. It was based on the Zilog Z80 3.58 MHz CPU, had 64K RAM (usually) and a 32K ROM BASIC. It plugged in the TV.
The manuals were wonderful, a complete reference for BASIC plus hardware specs for all I/O. A good intro to computers and programming logic too. Books teaching Z80 assembly were plenty at that time (circa 1988), I managed to learn how to program on it easily when I was 9-10.
If you never loaded and saved programs from/to an audio cassette tape (at 2400 bps) you should definetely get an 8-bit computer (MSX, C64, Apple II and the like)!
If you can't get a simple system, restrain the working domain. Kids should be able to know the difference between the editor, compiler, and runtime environment (if any). DOS/Windows programming environments usually mess all these into one furry thing, from Turbo C++ 2.0 to the latest.
PERL would be a nice pick, I just don't know any books directed especially to kids. Suggestions ?
Teaching an editor other than vi would be a nice pedagogical pick too, at least for kids:)
Eeeewl! Not only will my infinite loops run faster, I'll be able to run several of them in parallel!
Will IBM open a 12-year-old-script-kiddie special offer to allow all americans to democratically be able DDoS whoever upsets them or will this be kept for geeks and suits ?
What I meant with obscurantism was the attitude of "Now that TechWatch unveiled this fraud everybody knows how to make. It should have been kept secret.", as it has been commented earlier.
The first time I saw these cartridge-like CPUs (PII, PIII, Athlon) I found them strange.
Now the problem with fakes shows up. Firstly, it have been said on top of this comment that "now everybody knows how to do it.". Security by obscurantism is no security.
Now to the practical side: To what temperature does a non-overclocked Athlon's plastic case get ? Is it imperative that the case be black for thermal dissipation or could it be transparent so that people could peek at the core inside without voiding the warranty ? Not a translucent case like iMac but a truly glassy plastic.
Not only it would be good to avoid frauds, would look nice too.:)
No, the Netscape Communicator 4.72 is still based on Motif.
The Preview Release 1 of Netscape 6 (which does use GTK) is full of bugs and mostly unusable (I was unable to post a software announcement to Freshmeat due to problems with forms, that renders it unusable)
Mozilla and Netscape are different things. Mozilla was Netscape, gone under heavy development, and now Mozilla is part of Netscape, but Mozilla will continue to be released independently.
And the Motif trouble is not only on GNU/Linux, but every Unix. Until Netscape higher or equal to 6.0 is released and becomes standard, and all platforms replace old Netscapes for the new one (the 3.0 to 4.x change took a lot of time), it will still be around.
Motif should be dead, we all would like it to be dead, but still has lots of strings attached, it the zombie will still be smelling funny around for some time.
Microwaving a CD is pointless, CDs cannot (the best of my knowledge) be heaten by our ovens' 2.45 GHz microwaves. Better break the CDs to tiny pieces and throw it in the plastic section of selective trash, for burning it would cause more harm to the environment than Metallica is worth.
GTK does not compare to Motif. This is absolutely true. While GTK is open and free (both meanings of free), developed by the people who actually need it, Motif was for years on the only choice for GUI programmers, who said "Oh, damn, I'll have to use that Motif thingie again.". Not to mention that Motif is not free, just the kind of software that sucks.
Even Tcl/Tk is a better GUI development tool than Motif, and when we are down to that, it's time to say "Rest in Pieces, Motif".
The last blow still remaining to strike is the move of Netscape from Motif to GTK. When it happens definitively, Motif is dead, period.
Aside from the political motivation of U.S. laws, classifying software as munitions seems like one of those fortunes that read "In (your-favorite-us-state-here) it is not allowed to ride a white male horse after 5 p.m..
Hmmm... finally the book cover from ORA isn't an animal. Now on with the "Silverware Series". Guess there'll be some "The Final Guide To Fork'ing And Exec'ing" with a cute fork on the cover...nahhh
Slashdot Mirror
#include stdio.h
#include unistd.h
int main(int argc, char**argv)
{
printf("RGBS plugin v2.00 (C) 2001 Fjear-Nation.net\n");
printf("This product includes software developed by the University of California, Berkeley, and its contributors.\n");
printf("This product includes characters standardized by ANSI, ISO and their contributors.\n");
printf("This product includes words in a language developed by the People of England.\n");
sleep(2); fprintf(stderr,"Unable to initialize RGBS plugin, error 566: PEBCAK situation.\n");
return 1;
}
You have two options to deal with Linux here: provide gigantic static-linked binaries, which will cripple the freedom of your users and make their systems inefficient, or provide source code they can compile on their platforms (this way enabling your application to run also on other architectures like PPC, Alpha, Sparc...).
Yet, if you are willing to cripple user freedom, then just make binaries for a reference distribution (Distribution ZZZ version X.Y) and put a neon-orange sign in the shrink-wrap box "Requires ZZZ Linux X.Y". You're already taking the users' freedom in respect to the software they use, taking a little more and obligating them to use an specific version of a distro is just a step further).
If you are not willing to provide the source code for the users of your software, you'd better not be developing software, the world is better without you. Really.
See Free Haven for resources on real P2P development.
When a Court orders the shutting off of Napster, it shuts off the server(s) and the system is gone. The judge doesn't have to enter your home to shut down the whole system.
On correct implementations of P2P the court would have to shut down at least N-1 nodes of an N-node network (or break links so that no 2 nodes can talk to each other).
The light of dawn after a night of bug hunting is the most inspiring light that can drive the user into awe.
Of course someone could take a snapshot of the window upon dawn, measure luminance with a photometer and build an LCD display the size of a window to emulate dawn. Volunteers ;-) ?
The main con about doc++ (IMHO) is the lack of configurability of the output look and feel.
While scandoc will generate only HTML output (and you should look for other tools if LaTeX, TXT, Groff, your-format-here output is desired), it is very configurable, requiring some Perl hacking to get the template to generate what you want.
Here is an example of scandoc-generated documentation.
I know Intel's chip naming is awful, but we should at least cope with it.
I miss the days of Z80A, 65C02 and TI9929 but hopefully the guys at Transmeta are working so we can again compute with TM3200 and TM5400 instead of Celerons, Pentiums, Durons and Weirdiums. Meanwhile, K6-3's and K7's are still fine. :)
The term "market" in this list looks interesting.
By being mentioned in that list it seems that the guy is considered to have used every bit of opportunity to make money in his field. If thats not the case, why isnt Stallman there ? If it is exactly that, why is Linus there ? He is exactly the opposite of what this list tries to gather: people who used their creations (Sun, Apple, Microsoft...) to build a really big pile of money.
2) Microsoft may employ the most technically brilliant programmers and tech doc writers in the world, but we will never know, because they're working for Microsoft, whose products are closed and not targeted at developers and hackers. It is very sad to have such a nice guy like Kojima working for Conectiva. He deserved a better work place.
3) SuSE and Mandrake used RedHat (RPM included) as the base for their distros, and now develop independent work. Mandrake has a goal: an easier and pentium-optimized distribution. Everytime a new Red Hat version is released Conectiva grabs it, repackages every RPM, possibly adding bloated translations in the process, and releases as "Conectiva Linux".
4) Anyone who ever joined brazilian Linux-related IRC channels know that Conectiva is ridicularized everywhere, it is a joke among all who work with Linux. Now Conectiva has its own IRC server, or else its employees would just get bashed on wide-public IRC's like BrasIRC.
5) Lack of other groups commercially developing Linux in Brazil is no reason to sanctify Conectiva. Lack of competition reminds me of Microsoft, not GNU/Linux. I will not sanctify such a company.
6) As far as I can remember, the easiest way to get a job done is...doing it. Instead of posting articles to freshmeat/slashdot Claudio should WORK on a packaging system, unless his intentions are to have someone else (Red Hat) do the work for his company.
This is false, since the very first Conectiva distros they were just translations to portuguese of Red Hat Linux.
Now the guys at Conectiva will get RH 7, translate, screw it up in a multitude of ways and change the auto-update system so that it only connects to Conectiva's servers. And we thought they would _create_ something. *grin* Do expect Conectiva 6 (current version is 5.x) to be out in a month or so. And why I'm not surprised they won't have to develop their own marvelous packaging system ?
The first decision was to divide it as it has gathered too much power. Having this one decided, they faced the question: divide in how many companies ?
The correct answer to this is the number of Microsoft-like companies we would like to have in the world: zero.
The whole thing is not about monopoly or jurisprudence, it is about dividing by zero.
Of course your right makes you earn pounds of money and make us buy CDs for absurd prices. (Why didn't Lars disclose how much goes to record company and how much they make per cd ?). Nobody voted for this guy to decide what is right and what is wrong, and no internet user asked this company to decide how Internet should be, thanks.
"Thank you for letting me speak from the heart."
Brewing ideas and speaking them out is not illegal. Not yet. I'm sure RIAA and the guys behind DMCA are already working to get around this. And was that your heart your wallet ?
First of all, things like OLE, CORBA, JBuilder and Visual Basic aren't good for kids. I would say they're not good even for adults, but that would make this a flamebait.
:)
My personal experience was with an 8-bit computer called MSX, common in Japan, Europe and South America. It was based on the Zilog Z80 3.58 MHz CPU, had 64K RAM (usually) and a 32K ROM BASIC.
It plugged in the TV.
The manuals were wonderful, a complete reference for BASIC plus hardware specs for all I/O. A good intro to computers and programming logic too. Books teaching Z80 assembly were plenty at that time (circa 1988), I managed to learn how to program on it easily when I was 9-10.
If you never loaded and saved programs from/to an audio cassette tape (at 2400 bps) you should definetely get an 8-bit computer (MSX, C64, Apple II and the like)!
If you can't get a simple system, restrain the working domain. Kids should be able to know the difference between the editor, compiler, and runtime environment (if any). DOS/Windows programming environments usually mess all these into one furry thing, from Turbo C++ 2.0 to the latest.
PERL would be a nice pick, I just don't know any books directed especially to kids. Suggestions ?
Teaching an editor other than vi would be a nice pedagogical pick too, at least for kids
Eeeewl! Not only will my infinite loops run faster, I'll be able to run several of them in parallel!
Will IBM open a 12-year-old-script-kiddie special offer to allow all americans to democratically be able DDoS whoever upsets them or will this be kept for geeks and suits ?
Roblimo Corp, Lliw Rensie, Brian W. Kerninghan */
#include stdio.h
#include stdlib.h
#include string.h
int main() {
printf("Hello world!\n");
umask(0);
linking with code from John Carmack */
quakeEngine();
return 0;
}
What I meant with obscurantism was the attitude of "Now that TechWatch unveiled this fraud everybody knows how to make. It should have been kept secret.", as it has been commented earlier.
Now the problem with fakes shows up. Firstly, it have been said on top of this comment that "now everybody knows how to do it.". Security by obscurantism is no security.
Now to the practical side: To what temperature does a non-overclocked Athlon's plastic case get ? Is it imperative that the case be black for thermal dissipation or could it be transparent so that people could peek at the core inside without voiding the warranty ? Not a translucent case like iMac but a truly glassy plastic.
Not only it would be good to avoid frauds, would look nice too. :)
The Preview Release 1 of Netscape 6 (which does use GTK) is full of bugs and mostly unusable (I was unable to post a software announcement to Freshmeat due to problems with forms, that renders it unusable)
Mozilla and Netscape are different things. Mozilla was Netscape, gone under heavy development, and now Mozilla is part of Netscape, but Mozilla will continue to be released independently.
And the Motif trouble is not only on GNU/Linux, but every Unix. Until Netscape higher or equal to 6.0 is released and becomes standard, and all platforms replace old Netscapes for the new one (the 3.0 to 4.x change took a lot of time), it will still be around.
Motif should be dead, we all would like it to be dead, but still has lots of strings attached, it the zombie will still be smelling funny around for some time.
Microwaving a CD is pointless, CDs cannot (the best of my knowledge) be heaten by our ovens' 2.45 GHz microwaves. Better break the CDs to tiny pieces and throw it in the plastic section of selective trash, for burning it would cause more harm to the environment than Metallica is worth.
Ok, fine article, good answer. But it is scaring the way it avoids the word GNU while correctly identifies Linux as the kernel, not the full OS.
GTK does not compare to Motif. This is absolutely true. While GTK is open and free (both meanings of free), developed by the people who actually need it, Motif was for years on the only choice for GUI programmers, who said "Oh, damn, I'll have to use that Motif thingie again.". Not to mention that Motif is not free, just the kind of software that sucks.
Even Tcl/Tk is a better GUI development tool than Motif, and when we are down to that, it's time to say "Rest in Pieces, Motif".
The last blow still remaining to strike is the move of Netscape from Motif to GTK. When it happens definitively, Motif is dead, period.
Aside from the political motivation of U.S. laws, classifying software as munitions seems like one of those fortunes that read "In (your-favorite-us-state-here) it is not allowed to ride a white male horse after 5 p.m..
Does those fortune laws actually still exist ?
If they take my paranoia away, what else will remain ?
Hmmm... finally the book cover from ORA isn't an animal. Now on with the "Silverware Series". Guess there'll be some "The Final Guide To Fork'ing And Exec'ing" with a cute fork on the cover...nahhh