Umm.. hope your pocket doesn't have a hole in it. You might convince your significant other that you were coming down with some geek illness if you accidently printed kernel source code on the wrong body parts.
Obviously you've not done tech support for computers using male (the ones with balls) mice. Most of those suckers will quickly get clogged up and start jumping around like a rat on a hotplate.
I never understood why so many businesses use that type of mouse. $10 for a male mouse or $15 for a female (optical) mouse. I've never seen a case where an otpical mouse isn't better equipped to handle heavy usage by dirty nasty users.
I doubt they put it that way. Honestly what is wrong with having found a hole in an existing product that lets you do what you're trying to do.. but you realize it'd damage the company making the product if you used that hole.. so you offer not to if they'll just give you the ability to do what you originally wanted to do?
If Microsoft won't bargain than their loss.. I'd go ahead and use the exploit they've found. Like the whole CSS thing they may crucify the hackers (making heroes of them) but they'll never put the genie back in the lamp.
I rsync my files from my home servers to a web server with a speedy connection (on a cron job). If I understand what you're saying about this patent then it seems that I'm infringing. I've even gone so far as to use IP rules to forward given traffic to my slow poke home server or to block traffic from users not using a caching proxy network I'm familiar with. At one time I had millions of files that were on my home server that'd upload to my speedy server only when requested and would expire after a given time (you ever try to buy 100Gb of hosted space?).
All of these things sound as if they could bump against such a patent. I hate retards that patent obvious ideas. I'll certainly never patent anything.:P
I could see MacOS X as more of a threat to Windows than to Linux. I think the KDE/Gnome projects are mostly lost (to much trying to be like Windows and MacOS) but when Linux finally does get it's head straight for what it really wants on the desktop then I think it'll surpass everything. Of course since it's not really a Linux desktop.. it's an open desktop.. so it might very well run on OSX, Windows, *BSD, etc too.
Eventually the open development model will outstrip anything possible by a single company. I do think it'll be a while though before Apple needs to worry. We have to wait for the opensource programmers to stop trying to play copycat.
What's the benefit of using Java or C# in Linux instead of one of the already popular languages such as Perl, Python, or Ruby? Java programs seem to have a lot of overhead and seem to be more work to develop. I haven't tried C# but is it any better? I think Java may be slightly faster than Python (even with Psyco) but not a lot. (I haven't compared it to Perl or Ruby.) I'd rather see RedHat work on speeding up Python and other languages already in heavy use on Linux.
I can see being upset that you can't even find steady employment in your chosen field when many people are using your work. I've experienced that and it does suck. He does seem to be a bit unrealistic about things though. A lot of IT/programmers are having a hard time making a living these days. He shouldn't take it personally.
I do think that companies that use opensource projects should be willing to kick back some profit sharing to the actual developers and offer to hire the developers if they can afford to do so. This is why I license my code as GPL and not a looser license like BSD. If they want to use my work in a non-open project then they'll have to pay me for the right.
If the species is more hardy than the original then why shouldn't it replace the original? Consider it engineered evolution. I'd let loose some glowing bass if they had some that weren't sterile.. it'd make the local lake much more fun.
If the original species really is fitting to survive it'll survive anyway. There are already many different kinds of fish in the lake. I doubt adding one more would wipe out any other species. Besides I'd think glowing fish would quickly be eatten by bigger fish.:)
I don't know about everyone else but when I see things like this I first ask 'Why?'.. then 'What the fuck.. cool!' If they didn't cost to much I'd buy some of these. I can imagine the pleasure of my cats sitting in a dark room watching the swimming fish glow in the dark.
It's a shame they can't provide a drug that could be given to current pets to make them glow. (Yes, I admit it.. I'd probably dose myself.. who needs a glow in the dark condom now!) I'd feel safer letting my pets out to pee at night if they glowed. I'm sure all drivers would notice them then. Could they make just the hair glow?
Umm I still pay taxes and I'm sure I'm in the lowest 40%. They're going to stop removing taxes from my paycheck? No forced money out for a retirement fund that won't exist by the time I'm old? If Bush managed to remove that theft from my paycheck I'll change my mind and vote for him come elections.:)
If they were really better then they'd be used more. Now one consideration is that often technical and market excelelnce are related. Being better technology will help a product sell.. but if it is still unable to get enough sells to pay for itself then it may very well disappear anyway. This is one reason why opensource is good. Nobody that I know of can compete dollar for dollar against Windows but if your program is good and opensourced then it may very well become competitive. Of course if you're trying to make a living off of it opensource may not pay your bills.. but then a dead closed source product won't either.:)
The fact that Linux is mostly Unix is partly one reason it's gained popularity but I wouldn't say it's the main reason. Other OS's that were technically excellent could benefit from the same forces that have made Linux a player. Open source code, community, a familiar programming enviroment.. just to name a few things.
This isn't exactly true. I have millions of files in a ReiserFS partition and none of them have ever been lost or damaged. You can have collisions but nothing is lost. To avoid this problem (and increase performance) don't put all the files in one directory. Instead of a million files in/storage try/storage/FE/DC/BA/filename and so on. I make an effort never to put about 1000 files/subdirectories in a directory. The 256 you get from using 00-FF (in hex) works out rather well. You'll get a lot better performance from any filesystem that way (at least the ones I've ever tried).
Do you think they'll actually give the collected money to unemployed or low income folks? Not likely. I find it hard to believe that Micron is going to keep or create any more US jobs because of this. If American's want jobs then let them buy American products. I go out of my way to do so, and to make purchases from local companies when available, even if things cost a bit more. I do buy a lot of foreign products too but I usually buy unique products that American companies don't make.
I am thinking of purchasing Hynix ram for my computer but I tried the Crucial/Micron memory first.. it didn't work with my mobo but I'm told Hynix will.
The only reason I can see them being in the kernel i speed. I'd really like to see it made easier to make userspace hooks for filesystems. I'd love to be able to configure a given bit of my filesystem to run arbitrary commands when different fs events happened. Say when a file was created, accessed, changed, or deleted it could call my custom scripts. Obviously you'd want to be able to specify which files did and didn't make such calls because you don't want every file making such calls.. for effeciency reasons. That'd make it a snap to build things like WinFS without putting it actually in the kernel.
I don't really think it makes much sense to store the mime type. I'd maybe cache such data for quicker lookups but I'd not make it a set bit of data because it can easily be changed during the files life. An easy example is that a file could be whatever and then be compressed but still have the same filename. It's as impractical to permantently store mime type as it is to use file extensions. I don't really see a point in storing icons and other info as part of a file either really. I guess a default icon might be an okay idea for applications as they tend to need individual icons. I think the apps file format should make room for such things and not the filesystem though.
I hate filesystems where you get into hassles if you download the files to different types of filesystems and things lose half their information and no longer work right.. or try to include the information and no longer work right. I guess that is a lot of my worry about such meta data in the filesystem. If it doesn't get tangled like that then I guess it's a perfectly fine idea.
I do think that file formats should always include some sort of identifying code to make guessing the mime type easier. I get annoyed at file formats that make no effort to be easily identified.
I didn't realize XFS let you store arbitary meta data.. I'll have to look more into it.:)
Ext3 is good for things like MySQL that have few files. In fact if you have a partition for database files I'd suggest using Ext3. Something like ResiserFS will far out perform Ext3 as soon as your filesystem grows even mildly complex. You'll also usually save significant amounts of diskspace.
If a file format supports meta data that is a fine place to keep it but it doesn't hurt to index it into a database for quicker lookup. Obviously things like filesize and an images dimensions are usually stored in the file or filesystem but included in a db they can be much quicker to sort through. Useful for many tasks.
Also a lot of metadata is personal and you might not want to share it. Or the inverse problem. You might want to share metadata but not the file. These are good reasons to sepperate files and their metadata as the case finds fitting.
It'd be quite easy to use one of these as the underlying filesystem and build the security model as a layer on top of the filesystem. Obviously, if you are booting from another OS your filesystem security model means dick anyway so in case of accessing files created by each others OS there is no reason to respect such information anyway. That sort of issue has been dealt with already many times (Samba, NFS, etc) and would be easy to find a solution to.
I do that sort of thing with my own MySQL db. It's very handy and I think it should be a standard tool but I don't think it really fits in the kernel. What'd be REALLY handy is a virtual file system that would make sure all files on the underlying real filesystem were unique. I have to use a Python program to import all my files to make sure of that. Is something of a pain. With that lil bit of help it'd be really easy to manage all such files via a relational tool.
I store file locations, size, various useful timestamps (creation, last accessed, last changed, etc), and a mime type in the main table and then important mime types have additional tables to store information just for that mime type. An example being that all image mime types might have a length, width, and color depth.. which would be useless data for something like an mp3.:)
Geeks everywhere have been doing this already for a long time. It's nothing new or innovative. It's even been done in the filesystem code by several different groups (and that's still a bad idea). I've been doing this with Linux and MySQL for years. Once again Microsoft is trying to claim innovation on something everyone else was already doing.
On the other hand I wouldn't mind seeing a standard library for this purpose if one doesn't already exist. I know Gnome has a VFS library. I'm not sure how much of it is reused by other projects or who originated it.
ReiserFS, JFS, and XFS at least handle 200Gb drives easily. I believe all of them can handle multi-terabyte sized files even. You can use the LVM to glue multiple drives together into one large physical drive also. Comes in handy.:)
Remember when you had to punch information into cards by hand? Imagine doing that with 200Gb of information!;)
I don't really know what you mean. You can move files anywhere and they should still work as long as the program you are using knows how to find them. Sure if you wanted to you could replace a normal file opening statement with one that did a search for the file using SQL or something similar. This isn't really a filesystem function.. it's just a layer on top of it. It'd work with pretty much any filesystem and a database. Programmers often employ virtual filesystems to work with such information. If the program supports it then it'll work. You will notice they said that WinFS will still provide a directory structure for files.. so that existing programs will still work (And users won't be confussed).
With any filesystem you don't really know where on the disk the file is being stored. Directories are really just some glue to make it easier to work with files. It works well because most information is heirarchal. Unix/Linux also makes it easy to create links. This is an easy way to provide multiple heirarchies for the same files.
How'd ya manage to do that? I've used ReiserFS for years under heavy stress on several different systems and have never had a problem. It performs well. It's reliable. I've never had any data loss. Even dying harddrives didn't lose any data although obviously they made it give odd errors.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm.. hope your pocket doesn't have a hole in it. You might convince your significant other that you were coming down with some geek illness if you accidently printed kernel source code on the wrong body parts.
Obviously you've not done tech support for computers using male (the ones with balls) mice. Most of those suckers will quickly get clogged up and start jumping around like a rat on a hotplate.
I never understood why so many businesses use that type of mouse. $10 for a male mouse or $15 for a female (optical) mouse. I've never seen a case where an otpical mouse isn't better equipped to handle heavy usage by dirty nasty users.
I doubt they put it that way. Honestly what is wrong with having found a hole in an existing product that lets you do what you're trying to do.. but you realize it'd damage the company making the product if you used that hole.. so you offer not to if they'll just give you the ability to do what you originally wanted to do?
If Microsoft won't bargain than their loss.. I'd go ahead and use the exploit they've found. Like the whole CSS thing they may crucify the hackers (making heroes of them) but they'll never put the genie back in the lamp.
I rsync my files from my home servers to a web server with a speedy connection (on a cron job). If I understand what you're saying about this patent then it seems that I'm infringing. I've even gone so far as to use IP rules to forward given traffic to my slow poke home server or to block traffic from users not using a caching proxy network I'm familiar with. At one time I had millions of files that were on my home server that'd upload to my speedy server only when requested and would expire after a given time (you ever try to buy 100Gb of hosted space?).
:P
All of these things sound as if they could bump against such a patent. I hate retards that patent obvious ideas. I'll certainly never patent anything.
I could see MacOS X as more of a threat to Windows than to Linux. I think the KDE/Gnome projects are mostly lost (to much trying to be like Windows and MacOS) but when Linux finally does get it's head straight for what it really wants on the desktop then I think it'll surpass everything. Of course since it's not really a Linux desktop.. it's an open desktop.. so it might very well run on OSX, Windows, *BSD, etc too.
Eventually the open development model will outstrip anything possible by a single company. I do think it'll be a while though before Apple needs to worry. We have to wait for the opensource programmers to stop trying to play copycat.
What's the benefit of using Java or C# in Linux instead of one of the already popular languages such as Perl, Python, or Ruby? Java programs seem to have a lot of overhead and seem to be more work to develop. I haven't tried C# but is it any better? I think Java may be slightly faster than Python (even with Psyco) but not a lot. (I haven't compared it to Perl or Ruby.) I'd rather see RedHat work on speeding up Python and other languages already in heavy use on Linux.
I can see being upset that you can't even find steady employment in your chosen field when many people are using your work. I've experienced that and it does suck. He does seem to be a bit unrealistic about things though. A lot of IT/programmers are having a hard time making a living these days. He shouldn't take it personally.
I do think that companies that use opensource projects should be willing to kick back some profit sharing to the actual developers and offer to hire the developers if they can afford to do so. This is why I license my code as GPL and not a looser license like BSD. If they want to use my work in a non-open project then they'll have to pay me for the right.
If the species is more hardy than the original then why shouldn't it replace the original? Consider it engineered evolution. I'd let loose some glowing bass if they had some that weren't sterile.. it'd make the local lake much more fun.
:)
If the original species really is fitting to survive it'll survive anyway. There are already many different kinds of fish in the lake. I doubt adding one more would wipe out any other species. Besides I'd think glowing fish would quickly be eatten by bigger fish.
I don't know about everyone else but when I see things like this I first ask 'Why?'.. then 'What the fuck.. cool!' If they didn't cost to much I'd buy some of these. I can imagine the pleasure of my cats sitting in a dark room watching the swimming fish glow in the dark.
It's a shame they can't provide a drug that could be given to current pets to make them glow. (Yes, I admit it.. I'd probably dose myself.. who needs a glow in the dark condom now!) I'd feel safer letting my pets out to pee at night if they glowed. I'm sure all drivers would notice them then. Could they make just the hair glow?
Umm I still pay taxes and I'm sure I'm in the lowest 40%. They're going to stop removing taxes from my paycheck? No forced money out for a retirement fund that won't exist by the time I'm old? If Bush managed to remove that theft from my paycheck I'll change my mind and vote for him come elections. :)
If they were really better then they'd be used more. Now one consideration is that often technical and market excelelnce are related. Being better technology will help a product sell.. but if it is still unable to get enough sells to pay for itself then it may very well disappear anyway. This is one reason why opensource is good. Nobody that I know of can compete dollar for dollar against Windows but if your program is good and opensourced then it may very well become competitive. Of course if you're trying to make a living off of it opensource may not pay your bills.. but then a dead closed source product won't either. :)
The fact that Linux is mostly Unix is partly one reason it's gained popularity but I wouldn't say it's the main reason. Other OS's that were technically excellent could benefit from the same forces that have made Linux a player. Open source code, community, a familiar programming enviroment.. just to name a few things.
If you can do it better then go for it! If we like your resulting product we'll use it.
Ext3 is slower and wastes more space than ReiserFS. It also can't support as big of files but that isn't likely to be a problem for you. :)
This isn't exactly true. I have millions of files in a ReiserFS partition and none of them have ever been lost or damaged. You can have collisions but nothing is lost. To avoid this problem (and increase performance) don't put all the files in one directory. Instead of a million files in /storage try /storage/FE/DC/BA/filename and so on. I make an effort never to put about 1000 files/subdirectories in a directory. The 256 you get from using 00-FF (in hex) works out rather well. You'll get a lot better performance from any filesystem that way (at least the ones I've ever tried).
Do you think they'll actually give the collected money to unemployed or low income folks? Not likely. I find it hard to believe that Micron is going to keep or create any more US jobs because of this. If American's want jobs then let them buy American products. I go out of my way to do so, and to make purchases from local companies when available, even if things cost a bit more. I do buy a lot of foreign products too but I usually buy unique products that American companies don't make.
I am thinking of purchasing Hynix ram for my computer but I tried the Crucial/Micron memory first.. it didn't work with my mobo but I'm told Hynix will.
The only reason I can see them being in the kernel i speed. I'd really like to see it made easier to make userspace hooks for filesystems. I'd love to be able to configure a given bit of my filesystem to run arbitrary commands when different fs events happened. Say when a file was created, accessed, changed, or deleted it could call my custom scripts. Obviously you'd want to be able to specify which files did and didn't make such calls because you don't want every file making such calls.. for effeciency reasons. That'd make it a snap to build things like WinFS without putting it actually in the kernel.
I don't really think it makes much sense to store the mime type. I'd maybe cache such data for quicker lookups but I'd not make it a set bit of data because it can easily be changed during the files life. An easy example is that a file could be whatever and then be compressed but still have the same filename. It's as impractical to permantently store mime type as it is to use file extensions. I don't really see a point in storing icons and other info as part of a file either really. I guess a default icon might be an okay idea for applications as they tend to need individual icons. I think the apps file format should make room for such things and not the filesystem though.
:)
I hate filesystems where you get into hassles if you download the files to different types of filesystems and things lose half their information and no longer work right.. or try to include the information and no longer work right. I guess that is a lot of my worry about such meta data in the filesystem. If it doesn't get tangled like that then I guess it's a perfectly fine idea.
I do think that file formats should always include some sort of identifying code to make guessing the mime type easier. I get annoyed at file formats that make no effort to be easily identified.
I didn't realize XFS let you store arbitary meta data.. I'll have to look more into it.
Ext3 is good for things like MySQL that have few files. In fact if you have a partition for database files I'd suggest using Ext3. Something like ResiserFS will far out perform Ext3 as soon as your filesystem grows even mildly complex. You'll also usually save significant amounts of diskspace.
If a file format supports meta data that is a fine place to keep it but it doesn't hurt to index it into a database for quicker lookup. Obviously things like filesize and an images dimensions are usually stored in the file or filesystem but included in a db they can be much quicker to sort through. Useful for many tasks.
Also a lot of metadata is personal and you might not want to share it. Or the inverse problem. You might want to share metadata but not the file. These are good reasons to sepperate files and their metadata as the case finds fitting.
It'd be quite easy to use one of these as the underlying filesystem and build the security model as a layer on top of the filesystem. Obviously, if you are booting from another OS your filesystem security model means dick anyway so in case of accessing files created by each others OS there is no reason to respect such information anyway. That sort of issue has been dealt with already many times (Samba, NFS, etc) and would be easy to find a solution to.
I do that sort of thing with my own MySQL db. It's very handy and I think it should be a standard tool but I don't think it really fits in the kernel. What'd be REALLY handy is a virtual file system that would make sure all files on the underlying real filesystem were unique. I have to use a Python program to import all my files to make sure of that. Is something of a pain. With that lil bit of help it'd be really easy to manage all such files via a relational tool.
:)
I store file locations, size, various useful timestamps (creation, last accessed, last changed, etc), and a mime type in the main table and then important mime types have additional tables to store information just for that mime type. An example being that all image mime types might have a length, width, and color depth.. which would be useless data for something like an mp3.
Geeks everywhere have been doing this already for a long time. It's nothing new or innovative. It's even been done in the filesystem code by several different groups (and that's still a bad idea). I've been doing this with Linux and MySQL for years. Once again Microsoft is trying to claim innovation on something everyone else was already doing.
On the other hand I wouldn't mind seeing a standard library for this purpose if one doesn't already exist. I know Gnome has a VFS library. I'm not sure how much of it is reused by other projects or who originated it.
ReiserFS, JFS, and XFS at least handle 200Gb drives easily. I believe all of them can handle multi-terabyte sized files even. You can use the LVM to glue multiple drives together into one large physical drive also. Comes in handy. :)
;)
Remember when you had to punch information into cards by hand? Imagine doing that with 200Gb of information!
I don't really know what you mean. You can move files anywhere and they should still work as long as the program you are using knows how to find them. Sure if you wanted to you could replace a normal file opening statement with one that did a search for the file using SQL or something similar. This isn't really a filesystem function.. it's just a layer on top of it. It'd work with pretty much any filesystem and a database. Programmers often employ virtual filesystems to work with such information. If the program supports it then it'll work. You will notice they said that WinFS will still provide a directory structure for files.. so that existing programs will still work (And users won't be confussed).
With any filesystem you don't really know where on the disk the file is being stored. Directories are really just some glue to make it easier to work with files. It works well because most information is heirarchal. Unix/Linux also makes it easy to create links. This is an easy way to provide multiple heirarchies for the same files.
How'd ya manage to do that? I've used ReiserFS for years under heavy stress on several different systems and have never had a problem. It performs well. It's reliable. I've never had any data loss. Even dying harddrives didn't lose any data although obviously they made it give odd errors.