Anyone know if Reiserfs4 got into the 2.6 release? I think I read Reiser had been pushing Linus to include Reiser4, and from what I've read in LinuxJournal, Reiser4 supposed to be 2-3 times faster than Reiser3.
Well, considering he introduced the NT line at SGI and pretty much ran the company to the ground before jumping ship and moved to Microsoft, yes, it's a surprise.
Or did you only mean your in favor of your "right" to profit from code others wrote in a unilateral exchange?
Again, as so many people here on/., you are missing the point of FSF.
Read this interview before you get back to me: http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/0 8/16/2056252&mode=thread&tid=117
Note were Kuhn mentions that the choice of software license is a choice the developer SHOULD NOT HAVE.
I like the GPL. It basically says, you want this software, you pay back in your changes. THAT IS FAIR. And as a producer, I have a choice in making my software under this license. Again, I have a CHOICE. If FSF had their way, I wouldn't have that CHOICE. That is slavery. Note again, I'm talking as me as a producer, not as a consumer.
own) but with freebsd, people can just steal it and never give you credit. Is that right? Not sure here.
Both force you to give credit. In fact, BSD used make it so that you have to have give credit much more prominent than GPL, which the FSF objected to. Check around for BSD and the advertising clause.
It's about everyone having choices, including the producers.
Actually, if you read the FSF site and interviews from the proponents, it becomes clear that they don't want the producers to have that choice.
Do you have the freedom to take away my right to the food in your fridge? Do you have the right to take away my freedom to go where I want, if it happens to be inside your property? It's your property, you should have a say even if it limits my freedom. If it's my code, I have a say even if it might limit your freedom. You don't like it, well, don't walk on my property. On in software terms, don't use my software.
Similarly, a free software license should not allow anyone to take the work of others and sell/redistribute it as his own. It protects the freedom of the developers and contributors to always have access to (the source code of) their creation.
1. BSD license doesn't allow you to sell another person's product as your own. But you can chane it and sell it. 2. The source code is still available to the BSD people even if someone takes the code and doesn't release the changes. The code the original coders wrote don't magically disappear when someone else make the code propriatery.
Finally, BSD license says the software is a GIFT. GPL demands payment. I have no problems with either, but people better be honest about it.
My problem with FSF and RMS is actually the basic tenet of the moment: the idea that the producer (developer) has no more rights than the consumer (user). In this view, ideally, the developer really shouldn't have a say in what license to give their software. There shouldn't be a license at all (GPL should be a basic right to the user). I disagree with this. I think the developer has an overriding right to the product created. If the user doesn't like that, well, too bad. If the user gets to set the terms, then the developer could choose not to make the product in the first place. The world would be worse off in this case. Also, for all the talk about putting the users in slavery, the ideal which FSF ask for would put the developer in slavery.
That said, I do choose GPL over a BSD license because of its effect. The BSD license is a true gift license, in the sense it basically says: "take this product and use it as you see fit." With GPL, you are basically saying: "take this product and use it as you see fit, BUT the payment is, if you want to redistribute it, you need to give the source, and any changes you have made to it." To me, this a fair payment. But note, I had the choice to chose which license I would like to put in my product.
Sometimes, reading/., I wonder how many GPL cheerleaders understand this difference.
btw, I thought Unicenter and others already supported Linux. No?
Unicenter TNG probably don't support Linux. Traditionally, CA focused Unicenter on Windows (they don't even have anything for Solaris). OpenView NNM might run on Linux, not sure about the latest version (haven't checked). Tivoli does (I saw an IBM representative run the Tivoli desktop on Linux at a LinuxWorld two years ago).
If I remember correctly, the engineers at Sun liked gtk because it used C, which they were used to. Also they felt their customers were more used C too, since Motif is C.
I kinda have a fondness for CDE, myself. First UNIX system I was on (HP-UX at SCU) ran CDE. And those drawers made it easy to get at the apps I wanted.
Granted, this was the first time I read osnews, but didn't the article seem weird to anyone? They hinted at an interview, but instead of quoting the person, they paraphrased the whole interview... Who knows what the Sun guy actually said, and what got interpreted by the interviewer/writer?
Most companies that sell propriatery software, maybe except for MS, would take the money they made on the software and reinvest it in the company, either in the form of new hardware or software tools or other. The only difference is how the money goes back into the economy.
I couldn't find any notes about USB. I usually have problems when I try to mount a memory stick on my Sony Clie on Linux (system freezes... nothing can be done except hard reboot, can't even ssh/telnet into the box). Anyone had any similar problems?
In the U.S., it was cheap, easy and reliable to authenticate each credit card purchase with a phone call to the Visa/Mastercard mother ship. Since that method wasn't as practical in Europe
What are you talking about? The POTS in Europe is great. I think the whole creditcard issue is more because Europeans don't like being in debt. At least in Norway, most people seem to only want to spend what that have (unlike Americans that like to spend and worry about it later).
Why did the guy from Oracle ask for LVM? I thought the 2.4 series already had LVM (I'm using it now). From Linus' reply, it seems like there is a new LVM? Anyone have any information about the difference and what the problem with the old one was?
I disagree with you on the issue of new users. I don't think most people have a problem with trying new interfaces. And I think Microsoft knows this. Why? Because they usually make some cosmetic change between each version of Windows, not counting the huge change between 3.1 to '95.
The problem I see in the Free Software community is that it tries to copy the Windows interface, but only on the surface. People will look at it, and expect it to work like it did in Windows, and then they find out that it doesn't. I rather have an uniq GUI (like Mac is uniq, or OS/2 was uniq) for UNIX/Linux so that people won't be confused.
It's also one of the reason I really like Enlightenment. It's finally a window manager that doesn't try to copy something that went before. It creates an identity uniq to the system.
I agree. Actually, since I live so far away from my friends (I'm in the US, they're in Norway), I actually ask for their computer when I come back for Christmas. Probably spend a day or so, making sure they don't have any viruses, run defrag, help them remove ad related programs and in general make the system more responsive. Then again, they never complain when I call them 3 am, after a night out being shot down...
But's that unpossible! I keep hearing how much more advanced the whole of Europe is compared to the US...
Only when it comes to cell phone... and banking. Then again, this is Norway. There are people who have to pay for a TV license for channels they don't receive.
I didn't have 'CGI' on my resume, just Perl and Python and PHP and a few others. He said I wouldn't get hired anywhere. I took 30 seconds to explain that CGI was effectively shorthand for someone who knew Perl or something like that.
Happened to me too. I put that I had POSIX development experience in my resume. I didn't get hired (didn't get past the HR person) because I didn't mention I had Linux API experience. And explaining to them that POSIX API and Linux API is basically the same thing, didn't help (I was being uncommunicative). Sigh...
Slashdot Mirror
My understanding is that Sprint is bad all over. In the Bay Area, Sprint is considered the worse provider.
Naaah, just your right to choosing your own license on the software you wrote.
Remember, the GPL is like any other license, you must abide by it or lose the privelidge of using the software.
Actually, no. GPL doesn't deal with use at all, only with distribution.
Anyone know if Reiserfs4 got into the 2.6 release? I think I read Reiser had been pushing Linus to include Reiser4, and from what I've read in LinuxJournal, Reiser4 supposed to be 2-3 times faster than Reiser3.
You linked to DeCSS.cpp. He didn't write that piece. He wrote the GUI (maybe not even that).
Well, considering he introduced the NT line at SGI and pretty much ran the company to the ground before jumping ship and moved to Microsoft, yes, it's a surprise.
Actually, he didn't. He was credited for doing it, but as far as I know, he just wrote the GUI in VisualBasic.
Or did you only mean your in favor of your "right" to profit from code others wrote in a unilateral exchange?
/., you are missing the point of FSF.
0 8/16/2056252&mode=thread&tid=117
Again, as so many people here on
Read this interview before you get back to me: http://interviews.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/
Note were Kuhn mentions that the choice of software license is a choice the developer SHOULD NOT HAVE.
I like the GPL. It basically says, you want this software, you pay back in your changes. THAT IS FAIR. And as a producer, I have a choice in making my software under this license. Again, I have a CHOICE. If FSF had their way, I wouldn't have that CHOICE. That is slavery. Note again, I'm talking as me as a producer, not as a consumer.
own) but with freebsd, people can just steal it and never give you credit. Is that right? Not sure here.
Both force you to give credit. In fact, BSD used make it so that you have to have give credit much more prominent than GPL, which the FSF objected to. Check around for BSD and the advertising clause.
It's about everyone having choices, including the producers.
Actually, if you read the FSF site and interviews from the proponents, it becomes clear that they don't want the producers to have that choice.
I don't have the freedom to take away yours.
Do you have the freedom to take away my right to the food in your fridge? Do you have the right to take away my freedom to go where I want, if it happens to be inside your property? It's your property, you should have a say even if it limits my freedom. If it's my code, I have a say even if it might limit your freedom. You don't like it, well, don't walk on my property. On in software terms, don't use my software.
Similarly, a free software license should not allow anyone to take the work of others and sell/redistribute it as his own. It protects the freedom of the developers and contributors to always have access to (the source code of) their creation.
1. BSD license doesn't allow you to sell another person's product as your own. But you can chane it and sell it.
2. The source code is still available to the BSD people even if someone takes the code and doesn't release the changes. The code the original coders wrote don't magically disappear when someone else make the code propriatery.
Finally, BSD license says the software is a GIFT. GPL demands payment. I have no problems with either, but people better be honest about it.
My problem with FSF and RMS is actually the basic tenet of the moment: the idea that the producer (developer) has no more rights than the consumer (user). In this view, ideally, the developer really shouldn't have a say in what license to give their software. There shouldn't be a license at all (GPL should be a basic right to the user). I disagree with this. I think the developer has an overriding right to the product created. If the user doesn't like that, well, too bad. If the user gets to set the terms, then the developer could choose not to make the product in the first place. The world would be worse off in this case. Also, for all the talk about putting the users in slavery, the ideal which FSF ask for would put the developer in slavery.
/., I wonder how many GPL cheerleaders understand this difference.
That said, I do choose GPL over a BSD license because of its effect. The BSD license is a true gift license, in the sense it basically says: "take this product and use it as you see fit." With GPL, you are basically saying: "take this product and use it as you see fit, BUT the payment is, if you want to redistribute it, you need to give the source, and any changes you have made to it." To me, this a fair payment. But note, I had the choice to chose which license I would like to put in my product.
Sometimes, reading
btw, I thought Unicenter and others already supported Linux. No?
Unicenter TNG probably don't support Linux. Traditionally, CA focused Unicenter on Windows (they don't even have anything for Solaris). OpenView NNM might run on Linux, not sure about the latest version (haven't checked). Tivoli does (I saw an IBM representative run the Tivoli desktop on Linux at a LinuxWorld two years ago).
If I remember correctly, the engineers at Sun liked gtk because it used C, which they were used to. Also they felt their customers were more used C too, since Motif is C.
I kinda have a fondness for CDE, myself. First UNIX system I was on (HP-UX at SCU) ran CDE. And those drawers made it easy to get at the apps I wanted.
Granted, this was the first time I read osnews, but didn't the article seem weird to anyone? They hinted at an interview, but instead of quoting the person, they paraphrased the whole interview... Who knows what the Sun guy actually said, and what got interpreted by the interviewer/writer?
What a bunch of BS.
Most companies that sell propriatery software, maybe except for MS, would take the money they made on the software and reinvest it in the company, either in the form of new hardware or software tools or other. The only difference is how the money goes back into the economy.
I couldn't find any notes about USB. I usually have problems when I try to mount a memory stick on my Sony Clie on Linux (system freezes... nothing can be done except hard reboot, can't even ssh/telnet into the box). Anyone had any similar problems?
If RedHat goes out of business, I can see IBM buying them up. I don't think Microsoft can squeeze IBM out of business
In the U.S., it was cheap, easy and reliable to authenticate each credit card purchase with a phone call to the Visa/Mastercard mother ship. Since that method wasn't as practical in Europe
What are you talking about? The POTS in Europe is great. I think the whole creditcard issue is more because Europeans don't like being in debt. At least in Norway, most people seem to only want to spend what that have (unlike Americans that like to spend and worry about it later).
Lots of people I know use AOL, even if the know how to use the computer. Mostly because of convenience (lots of access points when you travel).
Why did the guy from Oracle ask for LVM? I thought the 2.4 series already had LVM (I'm using it now). From Linus' reply, it seems like there is a new LVM? Anyone have any information about the difference and what the problem with the old one was?
I disagree with you on the issue of new users. I don't think most people have a problem with trying new interfaces. And I think Microsoft knows this. Why? Because they usually make some cosmetic change between each version of Windows, not counting the huge change between 3.1 to '95.
The problem I see in the Free Software community is that it tries to copy the Windows interface, but only on the surface. People will look at it, and expect it to work like it did in Windows, and then they find out that it doesn't. I rather have an uniq GUI (like Mac is uniq, or OS/2 was uniq) for UNIX/Linux so that people won't be confused.
It's also one of the reason I really like Enlightenment. It's finally a window manager that doesn't try to copy something that went before. It creates an identity uniq to the system.
I agree. Actually, since I live so far away from my friends (I'm in the US, they're in Norway), I actually ask for their computer when I come back for Christmas. Probably spend a day or so, making sure they don't have any viruses, run defrag, help them remove ad related programs and in general make the system more responsive. Then again, they never complain when I call them 3 am, after a night out being shot down...
But's that unpossible! I keep hearing how much more advanced the whole of Europe is compared to the US...
Only when it comes to cell phone... and banking. Then again, this is Norway. There are people who have to pay for a TV license for channels they don't receive.
I didn't have 'CGI' on my resume, just Perl and Python and PHP and a few others. He said I wouldn't get hired anywhere. I took 30 seconds to explain that CGI was effectively shorthand for someone who knew Perl or something like that.
Happened to me too. I put that I had POSIX development experience in my resume. I didn't get hired (didn't get past the HR person) because I didn't mention I had Linux API experience. And explaining to them that POSIX API and Linux API is basically the same thing, didn't help (I was being uncommunicative). Sigh...