You are confused. Linux kernels aren't for the masses. The masses should rpm -U or apt-get a new kernel.
I'm not trolling. I'm serious. Don't install a kernel if you don't know what you're doing. The kernel is the base of your system so you shouldn't toy around with it.
The changelogs are quite readible to the indented audience.
First level and most second level nameservers don't do recursive queries: you can't ask them about anything not in their zones. You can't ask a second level DNS for the IP of a first level DNS (and it doesn't need to know that).
Almost all DNS servers that do support recursive queries (e.g. the one your ISP lets you use) have a database with the IPs of the rootservers. Most DNS servers people run at their homes have that database (I have).
You'd be multicasting those IPs to a whole lot more machines than just the second level servers, which don't need them anyway.
This doesn't mean it won't work: most routers on the net already are connected to a multicast net. It could work that way for DNS servers too.
You're probably confused. In most of Europe the quantity 'billion' or whatever it may be in some other language (biljoen in Dutch) is 10e12. In the USA a billion is 10e9. Similary, a trilion is 10e15 in Europe and 10e12 in the USA.
10e9 is 'miljard' in Dutch (and sounds similar in most European languages, AFAIK).
Are slow readers to be penalized for their "late" moderations?
No they aren't. And just this makes it very hard to implement it. It would require slashcode to remember the scores it presents to a moderator until moderation is done (you offcourse cannot let the webbrowser of the moderator remember them, to avoid abuse). Implementing this would be very, very not trivial I think.
It's a matter of personal interest. The editors don't care about Windows, hence they know little about it. Offcourse they're using it from time to time -- almost everybody does, but that doesn't say they know anything about it.
AFAIK Qt only has to be licenced for commercial development, something Sun can certainly afford. Still a major drawback, but one customers won't directly suffer from (though indirectly the cost of their software will rise).
The real reason why Sun's going for Gnome is C. The developers at Sun are more used to C than C++ and Gnome==C, KDE==C++.
Are they're going to implement filehandles properly? I want to be able to do:
my $fh = open $file or die;
Because right now implementing a recursive function which opens a file is... odd... wrong... ugly:
Example snipped because of lameness filter.
(from man perlfunc, the open function)
Having to pass a string as a filehandle and manually incrementing it is just plain silly. Filehandles shouldn't be global. IMHO they just should be a reference or something similar.
Furthermore, the use of '$| = 1' to autoflush a stream is ugly. Why not 'autoflush($handle)' or something similar?
I do know about the FileHandle module. This module is proof that regular filehandles are too ugly. You shouldn't need the FileHandle module to be able to do basic filehandle stuff.
In that case the matter is resolved easily. Developers by definition do non-standard work. That can't be done in a SOE. Developers HAVE to be able to play and experiment. They HAVE to be able to write applications that need to write to certain registery keys which are protected by the SOE (think of installers, experminenting with different configurations, etc).
One of the biggest advantages and disadvantages is the lack of leadership and direction in Open Source.
I'm not going to tell here what the advantages of lack of leadership are. I'm sure everybody here already knows. And besides: that's not the question;-)
Lack of direction means lack of uniformity. Which means the system is harder to learn. Nobody in Open Source is forced to use somebody other's wheel, so the invent their own. This creates inconsistent interfaces, config files, file locations, distribution channels, licenses, etc, etc.
Now, for us hardcore Linux hackers that's no problem. I do know about sendmail.cf, named.conf, smb.conf, fstab, lilo.conf and all those nice and inconsistent file formats. But in my experience they tend to annoy beginners. Same story goes for Gnome/KDE/X-interface-of-the-week.
And there's next to nothing you can do about this problem.
I usually express the quality of software in the urge to upgrade.
I wanted to upgrade each and every Linux 2.4.x kernel. Hence, they are of low quality. When I was still running 2.2.x I couldn't care less. 2.2.x were fine kernels.
Before Mozilla 0.9.2 came out, I checked about every other day wether the next milestone had come out yet. Mozilla sucked bad. Recently I upgraded to 0.9.5. Big deal. I did it because I do it all the time, but 0.9.4 was fine too.
Somehow Windows users tend to wait anxiously for the next release of Windows. Each and every version again. 'Nuff said, I think.
Hmm, you swallowed the M$ line that the shell (internet explorer) is part of the OS.
But is is. Not MSIE-the-application but MSIE-the-library. Yes, most people don't see the difference between these two, but you can compare MSIE-the-application to konqueror and MSIE-the-library to KHTML.
It's my opinion that anything which is assumed to be part of the OS by many or all applications and/or users is part of the OS.
On Linux this includes:
The kernel
Libraries, including the C, C++, curses, pam, z, crypt libraries
Bourne shell including frequently used tools such as grep, awk, sed, cut, sort
Tools like mount, iptables, ifconfig, modutils
X Windowing system and libraries
I would even go as far as saying the KDE base libraries are part of the OS.
Yes, they are spam-free. I have never received any mail from them I didn't want (to be more accurate: I can hardly remember getting any mail from them at all). And I'm user #38371, registered back in dec 95.
What I'm FAR more worried about: I can't remember my password so I think I'm going to lose my registration:-(
During the stable life of 2.4.x it became more or less clear to me that the current model of development for the Linux kernel doesn't work very well.
Changes that were too experimental for a stable kernel but too important to be deferred to an experimental kernel were included in 2.4.x all the time (the VM changes in 2.4.10 being the best example).
This makes me wonder: isn't it possible to improve the scheme of x.even.y = stable and x.odd.y = unstable? Even as we speak the -ac series provides an experimental kernel within the stable series. Maybe we could enhance this model into something more official.
I'm not sure about the actual form yet. I was thinking about something in the line of three kernels:
Stable: users should be able to rely on this blindly. This kernel works. Each and every release.
Testing: this kernel should evolve into the next stable kernel. More ambitious than the current -pre kernels; longer running development and more testing. Yet, nothing really radically new.
Experimental: playground for hackers. New features are introduced here.
The 'Testing' branch is new. I imagine these kernels to be released every month or so, at about the rate the stable kernel is released now. As soon as the Testing kernel proves something works and it stable, it's up for inclusion in the stable kernel.
Stable kernels should IMHO be lower-paced. Maybe a major release every four to six months or so. The VM is allowed to change radically, but only after having been tested extensively in the Testing series. Offcourse simple bugfixes should be allowed in. This would give us a stable kernel every month. It just wouldn't be a terrible interesting one, as it should be.
The Experimental kernels are as experimental as the current x.odd.y series.
That has to be a darn small ISP. My ISP uses at least four incoming MX'es, eight maildrop boxes, four outgoing SMTP's and a couple of loadbalanced pop3 servers. The webservers are loadbalanced too and are running Apache on *BSD. Then again, they must have about 60.000 clients on dialup and DSL.
No, you're right. From the looks of things, 2.5 won't have statically allocated devices. Instead it will use a DevFS-like system. It probably won't be devfs itself, but that isn't too bad: devfs is only the first implementation of a dynamic device-filesystem and therefore tends to have some child-deseases.
Everything copyrighted (and that's about everything anybody writes) can't be distributed unless the author gives permission to do so. This permission is called a license. In the license the author sets the conditions under which the work may be used, distributed, sold, etc.
Only work donated to the public domain may be distributed without a license.
Slashdot Mirror
You are confused. Linux kernels aren't for the masses. The masses should rpm -U or apt-get a new kernel.
I'm not trolling. I'm serious. Don't install a kernel if you don't know what you're doing. The kernel is the base of your system so you shouldn't toy around with it.
The changelogs are quite readible to the indented audience.
No, because that isn't how it works.
First level and most second level nameservers don't do recursive queries: you can't ask them about anything not in their zones. You can't ask a second level DNS for the IP of a first level DNS (and it doesn't need to know that).
Almost all DNS servers that do support recursive queries (e.g. the one your ISP lets you use) have a database with the IPs of the rootservers. Most DNS servers people run at their homes have that database (I have).
You'd be multicasting those IPs to a whole lot more machines than just the second level servers, which don't need them anyway.
This doesn't mean it won't work: most routers on the net already are connected to a multicast net. It could work that way for DNS servers too.
You're probably confused. In most of Europe the quantity 'billion' or whatever it may be in some other language (biljoen in Dutch) is 10e12. In the USA a billion is 10e9. Similary, a trilion is 10e15 in Europe and 10e12 in the USA.
10e9 is 'miljard' in Dutch (and sounds similar in most European languages, AFAIK).
Alright, I was spreading FUD. It does seem to work in msie too.
A much nicer sollution is used by the Danish: go visit dk to register a .dk domain.
I've heard this may fail in msie though.
Are slow readers to be penalized for their "late" moderations?
No they aren't. And just this makes it very hard to implement it. It would require slashcode to remember the scores it presents to a moderator until moderation is done (you offcourse cannot let the webbrowser of the moderator remember them, to avoid abuse). Implementing this would be very, very not trivial I think.
Still, for me as a user it would be nice ;-)
I'd like to see the score of an article at the time the moderation I'm metamoderating was done.
A slightly interesting post at +3 shouldn't be awarded yet another point, so in that case an 'interesting' moderation would be unfair.
Currently you only see the comment and think 'hey, interesting' and you'd M2 it as fair.
And please dump the over/underrated moderations. They're only used to dodge M2.
It's a matter of personal interest. The editors don't care about Windows, hence they know little about it. Offcourse they're using it from time to time -- almost everybody does, but that doesn't say they know anything about it.
That is, if the editors are anything like me.
AFAIK Qt only has to be licenced for commercial development, something Sun can certainly afford. Still a major drawback, but one customers won't directly suffer from (though indirectly the cost of their software will rise).
The real reason why Sun's going for Gnome is C. The developers at Sun are more used to C than C++ and Gnome==C, KDE==C++.
I guess my docs and knowledge are out of date then ;-) Glad to hear they fixed it already.
On the autoflush: it's ugly to do:
select HANDLE
$| = 1;
I want to be able to do
autoflush HANDLE;
Are they're going to implement filehandles properly? I want to be able to do:
my $fh = open $file or die;
Because right now implementing a recursive function which opens a file is... odd... wrong... ugly:
Example snipped because of lameness filter.
(from man perlfunc, the open function)
Having to pass a string as a filehandle and manually incrementing it is just plain silly. Filehandles shouldn't be global. IMHO they just should be a reference or something similar.
Furthermore, the use of '$| = 1' to autoflush a stream is ugly. Why not 'autoflush($handle)' or something similar?
I do know about the FileHandle module. This module is proof that regular filehandles are too ugly. You shouldn't need the FileHandle module to be able to do basic filehandle stuff.
Either you're not going to see this comment or it's indeed just a slow night. Well, at least in my TZ it's night (22:47) ;-)
SOE = Standard Operating Environment
In that case the matter is resolved easily. Developers by definition do non-standard work. That can't be done in a SOE. Developers HAVE to be able to play and experiment. They HAVE to be able to write applications that need to write to certain registery keys which are protected by the SOE (think of installers, experminenting with different configurations, etc).
One of the biggest advantages and disadvantages is the lack of leadership and direction in Open Source.
I'm not going to tell here what the advantages of lack of leadership are. I'm sure everybody here already knows. And besides: that's not the question ;-)
Lack of direction means lack of uniformity. Which means the system is harder to learn. Nobody in Open Source is forced to use somebody other's wheel, so the invent their own. This creates inconsistent interfaces, config files, file locations, distribution channels, licenses, etc, etc.
Now, for us hardcore Linux hackers that's no problem. I do know about sendmail.cf, named.conf, smb.conf, fstab, lilo.conf and all those nice and inconsistent file formats. But in my experience they tend to annoy beginners. Same story goes for Gnome/KDE/X-interface-of-the-week.
And there's next to nothing you can do about this problem.
I usually express the quality of software in the urge to upgrade.
I wanted to upgrade each and every Linux 2.4.x kernel. Hence, they are of low quality. When I was still running 2.2.x I couldn't care less. 2.2.x were fine kernels.
Before Mozilla 0.9.2 came out, I checked about every other day wether the next milestone had come out yet. Mozilla sucked bad. Recently I upgraded to 0.9.5. Big deal. I did it because I do it all the time, but 0.9.4 was fine too.Somehow Windows users tend to wait anxiously for the next release of Windows. Each and every version again. 'Nuff said, I think.
Just Linux please. I think I made it pretty clear I don't really like the name GNU/Linux ;-)
Hmm, you swallowed the M$ line that the shell (internet explorer) is part of the OS.
But is is. Not MSIE-the-application but MSIE-the-library. Yes, most people don't see the difference between these two, but you can compare MSIE-the-application to konqueror and MSIE-the-library to KHTML.
It's my opinion that anything which is assumed to be part of the OS by many or all applications and/or users is part of the OS.
On Linux this includes:
- The kernel
- Libraries, including the C, C++, curses, pam, z, crypt libraries
- Bourne shell including frequently used tools such as grep, awk, sed, cut, sort
- Tools like mount, iptables, ifconfig, modutils
- X Windowing system and libraries
I would even go as far as saying the KDE base libraries are part of the OS.Yes, they are spam-free. I have never received any mail from them I didn't want (to be more accurate: I can hardly remember getting any mail from them at all). And I'm user #38371, registered back in dec 95.
:-(
What I'm FAR more worried about: I can't remember my password so I think I'm going to lose my registration
During the stable life of 2.4.x it became more or less clear to me that the current model of development for the Linux kernel doesn't work very well.
Changes that were too experimental for a stable kernel but too important to be deferred to an experimental kernel were included in 2.4.x all the time (the VM changes in 2.4.10 being the best example).
This makes me wonder: isn't it possible to improve the scheme of x.even.y = stable and x.odd.y = unstable? Even as we speak the -ac series provides an experimental kernel within the stable series. Maybe we could enhance this model into something more official.
I'm not sure about the actual form yet. I was thinking about something in the line of three kernels:
- Stable: users should be able to rely on this blindly. This kernel works. Each and every release.
- Testing: this kernel should evolve into the next stable kernel. More ambitious than the current -pre kernels; longer running development and more testing. Yet, nothing really radically new.
- Experimental: playground for hackers. New features are introduced here.
The 'Testing' branch is new. I imagine these kernels to be released every month or so, at about the rate the stable kernel is released now. As soon as the Testing kernel proves something works and it stable, it's up for inclusion in the stable kernel.Stable kernels should IMHO be lower-paced. Maybe a major release every four to six months or so. The VM is allowed to change radically, but only after having been tested extensively in the Testing series. Offcourse simple bugfixes should be allowed in. This would give us a stable kernel every month. It just wouldn't be a terrible interesting one, as it should be.
The Experimental kernels are as experimental as the current x.odd.y series.
So, what's the world's least powerfull Unix server (in recent history)? Does it run Linux too?
That has to be a darn small ISP. My ISP uses at least four incoming MX'es, eight maildrop boxes, four outgoing SMTP's and a couple of loadbalanced pop3 servers. The webservers are loadbalanced too and are running Apache on *BSD. Then again, they must have about 60.000 clients on dialup and DSL.
More like: +1, Duh, everybody knows that! :-)
But Emacs doesn't even compare to vi, so I don't really understand the fuss.
They are available now. See this beast. Sara's been running the system for about a year now, IIRC.
No, you're right. From the looks of things, 2.5 won't have statically allocated devices. Instead it will use a DevFS-like system. It probably won't be devfs itself, but that isn't too bad: devfs is only the first implementation of a dynamic device-filesystem and therefore tends to have some child-deseases.
Everything copyrighted (and that's about everything anybody writes) can't be distributed unless the author gives permission to do so. This permission is called a license. In the license the author sets the conditions under which the work may be used, distributed, sold, etc.
Only work donated to the public domain may be distributed without a license.