hello all. i totally agree. it should be noted that rsync is generally best at being used to "pull" content, where rdist is best at "pushing" it. different paradigm, different design goals. i've found pull to be (arguably) easier to manage in *most* cases; i find it easier to make pull emulate push, but the other way around seems significantly more difficult to achieve. both serve their purposes well. i myself i use rsync wherever possible. it's horribly efficient when synchronizing very large structures of related directory structures around. cheers! Peter
i've used the solid state devices shown here: http://www.mti.com/database/index.htm with a good deal of success. they have higher throughput than the above-mentioned, low latency, and have a battery and disk inside to help avoid unexpected loss of data when power fails... all in all, for ultra-heavily hit oracle tablespaces, these are a life-saver. Peter
howdy... i'd like to point out, as has been mentioned here in numerous sub-threads, the OMG has not altered their model for language independence UNLESS you wish to take advantage of the new (i.e. EJB centric) features. thus, if you need to write applications that cooperate in all the environments you mentioned, you still can... you just won't be able to do things like have the client demarcate a transaction, pass a serialized smart-proxy back to the client, etc. you can still work within the "original" constraints. personally, i have no problem with what the omg folks have decided. i've had extensive experience with the EJB spec to date, and feel quite comfortable with it. there's NOTHING that says we can't wrap EJB activities with IDL interfaces that are language agnostic... (in fact, we've done exactly that... we've created "service-based" idl wrappers around the object model.) it might require a bit more design effort, but anything is possible if you need to get the job done badly enough and there's a big-enough payoff for making this decision. (say, i don't have to write the thread pool, dbms connection pool, event model, object life-cycle, etc, etc, etc.) just my 0.02 Peter
i agree. and i disagree. if they do market studies, they may not REALIZE why people are ditching their products because the as word travels, the story can change many times over... i still think that well constructed criticism of their policies is in order just to send the message as clearly as possible... Peter
re: Mostly true, but why is NT in there?
on
WSJ Says Linux Lags
·
· Score: 1
hm... in early linux distros (haven't checked today's distros) that used shared libraries, all the "essential" binaries were dynamically linked with stubs instead of statically linked (i personally prefer the former). you could, therefore, lose one file, say,/lib/libc.so.6 and you were TOAST (assuming/lib/libc.so.7 didn't exist, etc, etc, etc.). unfortunately, your argument falls apart somewhere around this subtlety. i know of no operating system designed in the manner in which you speak, but i'd SURE love to see one:) cheers! Peter
re: it's auditing not logging WSJ finds lacking
on
WSJ Says Linux Lags
·
· Score: 1
hi all.. for clarity, i'd like to reiterate what others have said early on in these discussions... the most probable interpretation of the wsj article author's statment is that linux (2.x) currently lacks a log-based (i.e. journaling) filesystem. (such as the original veritas (vxfs) filesystem, etc.) just figured i've seen so many people who didn't seem to catch that (very salient) point, that it needed reiterated... Peter
there's this odd trend going around in some companies these days that i've heard about that goes something like this: if you have your MCSE certification, you're *eligible* for a merit increase. if not, you're not. PERIOD. if this becomes the rule where i work, i'm outta there, the same day. it would not matter WHAT technical certification it was. certification has its place, it's simply rarely accurate at comprehensively gauging a person's subject-matter competence. (with some notable exceptions: Professional Engineer, and most recent cisco certified network engineer) cheers all! Peter
wow. while i college at Ohio State, a group of us rented a *very* nice 3 bedroom apartment for $600.00 per month. this was a 1450 square foot apartment that was exquisitely kept by the property owner. i guess i'm not so sad making what i make here...:) cheers! Peter
surprisingly, i actually agree with their assessment of this case (even though the point was well made in the first 3 paragraphs but numerous pages followed:). it really was quite well argued, and makes good sense to a "reasonable" person that considers both sides.
what's interesting to me is that the primary assertion is that the consumer has the opportunity to review the "shrink-wrap" license, and subsequently, if they refuse to enter the agreement, they have the opportunity to return the product, etc. if they choose to use the product after review, they've consented.
now, since that was a significant component of their argument, most likely being one of the most important factors in convincing the judge, how does this impact microsoft's recent slithering to get the EULA changed to avoid this "out-clause"?
this is a very interesting point to me...
would it continue to be defensible in federal court with this arguably critical concept absent?
as much as i love the entire open-source movement (and will never go back), your arguments are very well founded. i've still not, after 10 years, been able to really fundamentally swallow the more militant values that a great deal of fsf (and now open-source) proponents hold dear.
it appears that a not-insignificant set of conclusions can be drawn about the emotional security of the/. community by looking at the "profession" statistics in the poll that is running currently...
i hate to say it, but when i was in college, i felt just like these kids do.
now that i'm in the "real world", and have had to grow out of my idealism a bit (there's plenty left, believe me), i realize that utopia is merely a figment of my imagination...
i'd say, don't take this inflamatory bunk so hard... they're kids blowing steam before mid-terms, finals, etc. and they've certainly NEVER been in your position before...
i venture to guess that the vast majority have yet had to deal with millions to billions of dollars riding on one of their no-way-out decisions...
let's say that i work for a potato-chip manufacturer, and while in the grocery store one day, i devise a much more efficient, elegant way of stacking raw potato bags (*not* potato-CHIP bags) in an in-store display.
i mention to my coworker that i have devised this amazingly elegant potato-bag-stacking methodology, and i begin to devise ways of making a business out of said method, including but not limited to patenting the process by which i do said stacking...
so, if i'm reading your defense of dsc correctly, you believe that my potato-chip-employer can lay claim to my potato-bag-stacking prowess, simply because potatos were involved, and i *just happened* to work for a company that dealt in potatos???
don't buy it.. not even a bit.
what i *DO* buy is that if i sign a clause of this nature that makes their property all products, algorithms, & concepts WHILE ON THEIR CLOCK working toward THEIR GOALS, i'm legally bound.
clearly, in the scenario i gave, i was not working on their clock nor toward their goals in devising my method, however i did mention the concept while on their clock... i believe this case is quite analogous to the dilemma he's in.
i have been told on numerous occations that such contracts are *rarely* enforcable in court.
i find it fairly interesting how we've got those, like myself, that are in the "have nots", defending our decisions, while those in the "haves" are, generalizing, criticising it.
i personally feel that everyone should at least *TRY* their hand at the higher-learning IFF they are of persistent enough character to make it a worthwhile investment of their energy. I, personally, should never have wasted the money.. I was far too immature when college started to get anything of worth out of it. My time and money were much better spent (after i bailed) purchasing college textbooks and reading...
i think it's important to note that every human mind learns in an ENTIRELY different way. Some need personal attention from teachers, while others need nothing but time and maturity, etc.
for some, college is a necessary step in their plans for what they see as success... for others, college is the embodiment of all that is what they are (say professional students)... for others, college is a step that can likely be avoided, as they've matured beyond this point through other means... for yet others, college simply CAN NOT BE AFFORDED for one reason or another.
i can without question say that i was FAR too immature when i entered college to truly understand or appreciate 95% of what was learned in the first 3 years... (not counting the computer science courses, which were mostly review)
it's amazing how now, years later, all of those concepts when reviewed (as i read my old textbooks, etc) make PERFECT sense...
that type of subconscious learning is that which, in my opinion, is probably responsible for many of the intellectual breakthroughs of the last 5 centuries...
the human mind can crunch away beautifully in the background....
anway, a long winded synonym for:
try it. if it's obvious that it's not for you, move on, but DO NOT TAKE THAT DECISION LIGHTLY...
Slashdot Mirror
hello all. i totally agree. it should be noted that rsync is generally best at being used to "pull" content, where rdist is best at "pushing" it. different paradigm, different design goals. i've found pull to be (arguably) easier to manage in *most* cases; i find it easier to make pull emulate push, but the other way around seems significantly more difficult to achieve. both serve their purposes well. i myself i use rsync wherever possible. it's horribly efficient when synchronizing very large structures of related directory structures around. cheers! Peter
i've used the solid state devices shown here: http://www.mti.com/database/index.htm with a good deal of success. they have higher throughput than the above-mentioned, low latency, and have a battery and disk inside to help avoid unexpected loss of data when power fails... all in all, for ultra-heavily hit oracle tablespaces, these are a life-saver. Peter
as i recall, someone out there already has a volume manager for linux that works almost exactly like hp's volume manager...
anyone have more details on its location, etc?
Peter
howdy... i'd like to point out, as has been mentioned here in numerous sub-threads, the OMG has not altered their model for language independence UNLESS you wish to take advantage of the new (i.e. EJB centric) features. thus, if you need to write applications that cooperate in all the environments you mentioned, you still can... you just won't be able to do things like have the client demarcate a transaction, pass a serialized smart-proxy back to the client, etc. you can still work within the "original" constraints. personally, i have no problem with what the omg folks have decided. i've had extensive experience with the EJB spec to date, and feel quite comfortable with it. there's NOTHING that says we can't wrap EJB activities with IDL interfaces that are language agnostic... (in fact, we've done exactly that... we've created "service-based" idl wrappers around the object model.) it might require a bit more design effort, but anything is possible if you need to get the job done badly enough and there's a big-enough payoff for making this decision. (say, i don't have to write the thread pool, dbms connection pool, event model, object life-cycle, etc, etc, etc.) just my 0.02 Peter
i agree. and i disagree. if they do market studies, they may not REALIZE why people are ditching their products because the as word travels, the story can change many times over... i still think that well constructed criticism of their policies is in order just to send the message as clearly as possible... Peter
hm... in early linux distros (haven't checked today's distros) that used shared libraries, all the "essential" binaries were dynamically linked with stubs instead of statically linked (i personally prefer the former). you could, therefore, lose one file, say, /lib/libc.so.6 and you were TOAST (assuming /lib/libc.so.7 didn't exist, etc, etc, etc.). unfortunately, your argument falls apart somewhere around this subtlety. i know of no operating system designed in the manner in which you speak, but i'd SURE love to see one :) cheers! Peter
hi all.. for clarity, i'd like to reiterate what others have said early on in these discussions... the most probable interpretation of the wsj article author's statment is that linux (2.x) currently lacks a log-based (i.e. journaling) filesystem. (such as the original veritas (vxfs) filesystem, etc.) just figured i've seen so many people who didn't seem to catch that (very salient) point, that it needed reiterated... Peter
there's this odd trend going around in some companies these days that i've heard about that goes something like this: if you have your MCSE certification, you're *eligible* for a merit increase. if not, you're not. PERIOD. if this becomes the rule where i work, i'm outta there, the same day. it would not matter WHAT technical certification it was. certification has its place, it's simply rarely accurate at comprehensively gauging a person's subject-matter competence. (with some notable exceptions: Professional Engineer, and most recent cisco certified network engineer) cheers all! Peter
wow. while i college at Ohio State, a group of us rented a *very* nice 3 bedroom apartment for $600.00 per month. this was a 1450 square foot apartment that was exquisitely kept by the property owner. i guess i'm not so sad making what i make here... :) cheers! Peter
Hi all..
:). it really was quite well argued, and makes good sense to a "reasonable" person that considers both sides.
surprisingly, i actually agree with their assessment of this case (even though the point was well made in the first 3 paragraphs but numerous pages followed
what's interesting to me is that the primary assertion is that the consumer has the opportunity to review the "shrink-wrap" license, and subsequently, if they refuse to enter the agreement, they have the opportunity to return the product, etc. if they choose to use the product after review, they've consented.
now, since that was a significant component of their argument, most likely being one of the most important factors in convincing the judge, how does this impact microsoft's recent slithering to get the EULA changed to avoid this "out-clause"?
this is a very interesting point to me...
would it continue to be defensible in federal court with this arguably critical concept absent?
your thoughts?
Peter
George,
/. community by looking at the "profession" statistics in the poll that is running currently...
as much as i love the entire open-source movement (and will never go back), your arguments are very well founded. i've still not, after 10 years, been able to really fundamentally swallow the more militant values that a great deal of fsf (and now open-source) proponents hold dear.
it appears that a not-insignificant set of conclusions can be drawn about the emotional security of the
i hate to say it, but when i was in college, i felt just like these kids do.
now that i'm in the "real world", and have had to grow out of my idealism a bit (there's plenty left, believe me), i realize that utopia is merely a figment of my imagination...
i'd say, don't take this inflamatory bunk so hard... they're kids blowing steam before mid-terms, finals, etc. and they've certainly NEVER been in your position before...
i venture to guess that the vast majority have yet had to deal with millions to billions of dollars riding on one of their no-way-out decisions...
cheers all!
lighten up!
Peter
i'm somewhat confused...
i've become so comfortable with the servlet paradigm, i never want to go back....
i believe JIT performance improvements will eventually abate the performance arguments...
i've seen a fairly good number of sizeable projects done with servlets recently...
it certainly doesn't seem that anyone around slashdot feels likewise...
am i alone?
Peter
wow.
:(
you sure you're not a lawyer?
that's exactly the reply i'd expect from a bad (or good, depending upon the vantage point) one...
was anyone ACTUALLY confused about this facet of my example? wasn't this an obvious implication?
somehow, i figure most reasonable readers wouldn't have wasted the time to point this out...
me
sorry.
don't buy it.
let's say that i work for a potato-chip manufacturer, and while in the grocery store one day, i devise a much more efficient, elegant way of stacking raw potato bags (*not* potato-CHIP bags) in an in-store display.
i mention to my coworker that i have devised this amazingly elegant potato-bag-stacking methodology, and i begin to devise ways of making a business out of said method, including but not limited to patenting the process by which i do said stacking...
so, if i'm reading your defense of dsc correctly, you believe that my potato-chip-employer can lay claim to my potato-bag-stacking prowess, simply because potatos were involved, and i *just happened* to work for a company that dealt in potatos???
don't buy it..
not even a bit.
what i *DO* buy is that if i sign a clause of this nature that makes their property all products, algorithms, & concepts WHILE ON THEIR CLOCK working toward THEIR GOALS, i'm legally bound.
clearly, in the scenario i gave, i was not working on their clock nor toward their goals in devising my method, however i did mention the concept while on their clock... i believe this case is quite analogous to the dilemma he's in.
i have been told on numerous occations that such contracts are *rarely* enforcable in court.
guess we'll see...
Peter
i don't get it... :)
:) :) ;)
if you've done the legwork to get to 2.2.0pre8, then you've done 99.95% of the tricky, time-consuming part...
just rebuild and reboot
it's not that bad
i'd MUCH rather be in this position than to wait 19 months for the next service pack
Peter
i find it fairly interesting how we've got those, like myself, that are in the "have nots", defending our decisions, while those in the "haves" are, generalizing, criticising it.
i personally feel that everyone should at least *TRY* their hand at the higher-learning IFF they are of persistent enough character to make it a worthwhile investment of their energy. I, personally, should never have wasted the money.. I was far too immature when college started to get anything of worth out of it. My time and money were much better spent (after i bailed) purchasing college textbooks and reading...
i think it's important to note that every human mind learns in an ENTIRELY different way. Some need personal attention from teachers, while others need nothing but time and maturity, etc.
for some, college is a necessary step in their plans for what they see as success...
for others, college is the embodiment of all that is what they are (say professional students)...
for others, college is a step that can likely be avoided, as they've matured beyond this point through other means...
for yet others, college simply CAN NOT BE AFFORDED for one reason or another.
i can without question say that i was FAR too immature when i entered college to truly understand or appreciate 95% of what was learned in the first 3 years... (not counting the computer science courses, which were mostly review)
it's amazing how now, years later, all of those concepts when reviewed (as i read my old textbooks, etc) make PERFECT sense...
that type of subconscious learning is that which, in my opinion, is probably responsible for many of the intellectual breakthroughs of the last 5 centuries...
the human mind can crunch away beautifully in the background....
anway, a long winded synonym for:
try it. if it's obvious that it's not for you, move on, but DO NOT TAKE THAT DECISION LIGHTLY...
cheers!
Peter
"geeks love pop culture"...
:)
count me outta that one
me
i'd really like to see public/private key encryption (and thus authentication) wrapped into the thing.
an example of the u.i. would be that you can have "authenticated" messages be real-time, and all others go to mail...
or, authenticated messages are "green" in color, whilst non-authenticated are "red"
lots of possibilities...
cool tool indeed.
i'll need to go help out..
me