MPlayer and FFMPEG have a very close relationship. FFMPEG's CVS server is hosted by MPlayer, and many of the developers develop for both projects.
That said, MPlayer doesn't really rely on ffmpeg. Though it makes use of libavcodec as (usually) the default codecs, there are almost always OTHER codecs which would support the same formats if libavcodec wasn't available.
For MPEG-4, Xvid and Divx are available natively, and several Windows DLLs are available if you're on x86.
For MPEG-1/2, it's one of the rare cases where the available ffmpeg codecs aren't default, as libmpeg2 is simply faster, and still open source.
Just about all other codecs at least have Win32 DLLs to fall-back on, if libavcodec isn't available.
In the case of libavformat is hardly used. It's the muxer and demuxer of last resort if MPlayer doesn't already have built-in support for the format you want, but that's rarely the case, anyhow.
Would that stop a determined cracker? No! But it's an extra layer of hassle that you're making them jump through, and if it takes them an extra five minutes to figure out, then maybe that's enough.
If you're talking about some script kiddie, that's exploiting a large number of machines, they've already compiled all the code they need, and just transfer the binaries to the individual machines.
If you're talking about a one-off attack by someone determined to get root on your box, as you said, you're equally screwed.
It's like filtering MAC addresses: you don't use that as your sole line of defense, but it's a nice idea in addition to your other methods.
MAC address filtering can be a significant line of defense, if you're also monitoring the network for anomolies, such as duplicate MACs. Removing GCC doesn't come anywhere close. It would hardly slow anyone down.
And philosophically, an ideal system is one that does not one whit more than it was designed to do. You could install X and ircd on a firewall, too, but if those don't help it fulfill its deployment goals then why do it?
I can understand if there are space considerations (I have OpenBSD 3.8 running on a 32MB Flash card myself), but otherwise, throw any programs on there which might come in handy.
Daemons and X11 do not qualify, as they both require additional privlidges. Although X11 may be acceptable if only used over network connection, and nothing needs to be SUID or have direct, user, hardware access.
IMHO, the best idea OpenBSD brings to the table is that drivers for ALL supported hardware are included, and will be automatically enabled on boot-up. That means you can take a hard drive with OpenBSD on it, from one system to another, and not need to do any reconfiguration at all. It will automatically use the highest ATA mode possible, probing the new USB2 card for devices, etc.
The exceptions being X11 (if you're using it), and your IP addresses (if you aren't using DHCP, PPP, PPPoE, etc).
Swap soundcards, and the new one will be working on boot-up, just like nothing ever happened. It doesn't need crazy and buggy hacks like many Linux distros use. It's all in the kernel. FreeBSD is close, but it still requires you to manually choose your soundcard.
Installing was also easy. If you have a little patience and are not afraid of a text-only install, starting OpenBSD was very easy.
It's easy, so long as you don't want to dual-boot. Then it gets complicated.
Re:Source updates on a minimal system?
on
OpenBSD 3.9 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I could maintain a lot of stuff in 10GB, but given the sensitive nature of most OpenBSD installations (such as firewalls, etc.), GCC is not among the things I want to have around.
Kill this goddammed myth already...
Removing programs from your hard drive can't POSSIBLY make your machine any more secure. Taking the SUID/SGID bit off can, but that's a bit different, and programs like GCC aren't SUID, anyhow.
It's absolutely ridiculous to assume an intruder NEEDS you to install GCC for him. He can quite easily install OpenBSD on his own hardware and compile the code there, transfering the binary to your box. Or he can install whatever dev tools he wants, once he has root on your box.
Please, point out a single POSSIBLE way that having GCC on your machine COULD make your machine SLIGHLY less secure. JUST ONE!
In his farewell address as President, the other George (Washington), warned us against political parties. And since then, we promptly split into party lines:
I'll repeat what I've said hundreds of times before on/.
"Just because someone famous said it, doesn't make it true."
For founding fathers, people always quote the ones who expoused a view similar to the one they want, and ignore the 50% of founding fathers to staunchly disagreed with that view, and said quite the opposite.
But hey, some of the founding fathers believed in slavery, so it's a real shame our country has deteriorated so much as to let that wonderful institution be outlawed...
I guess we're getting this story now because people wised-up about "Bird Flu". Which, of course, was the successor to the short-lived "Super Volcanos" scare, which was itself the successor to the "World-ending Asteroid" scare story.
It's not that the stories themselves are complete nonsense, it's the way that they are handled. It's as if each one is the focus of world attention for a few weeks, then COMPLETELY disappearing when the ratings drop. Then a short intermission, and the next one comes along with more hype than the last.
I sure am glad that asteroids and bird flu aren't a threat anymore (who fixed them, BTW?), and I can focus on being scared by this new thing.
I think that's only part of the Google annoyances.
Many of the text ad-boxes they provide in their search results, now point to similar sites, which have NO content at all, except google ad-sense ads, based on the search terms you used to get there.
It's a bit like a Google.com infinite loop. You except the ads to be relevant, instead you get a link to more Google ads that should be relevant, but might actually be ANOTHER ad-sense click-through site.
This really is going to be the downfall of Google's much heralded text ads. They haven't shown any interest in fixing it when I contacted them about a few specific instances, so I generally just don't expect Google ads to be worthwile anymore. I think they've given up on their ingenious ad-placement, and are just going for whatever can bring in a few more bucks right now.
Is that really the case, or is it that you only hear the outsourcing horror stories when they use the India equivalent (Samosa delivery person with two weeks of training)?
I can't be sure. What I know is that of ALL the outsourced call-centers I've been in contact with, there have always been extremely irritating problems like the above.
I suspect it is actually the case, since companies like Dell, which demand good tech support, have found outsourcing infeasable.
Of course, I suppose an alternate theory is that there aren't enough PHDs to go around. Which leaves you with about the same result.
It's also great if you are a customer and you get support from a university graduate instead of somebody with two weeks of training.
It's not so great if the university graduate can't understand you, nor you him. In fact, it's downright horrible.
When I call up my ISP to tell them that they are mis-routing packets to certain sites, it doesn't matter whether the guy on the phone is a high school dropout, or a PHD. What matters is that he understands you when you tell them you aren't running Windows, and couldn't possibly run through the idiot checklist if you wanted to. What matters is that they understand when you tell them to send the message up the chain of command.
When the company is question has an outsourced call-center, I find it much easier to switch ISPs, than to report a problem...
Space travel has become more expensive than it was in the Apollo days
That's not even remotely true. It's vastly cheaper now.
Besides that, your whole post seems extremely one-sided. You talk about billions of dollars "wasted" because they didn't set-up the colony on the moon and mars that you wanted. You completely ignore ALL accomplishments of NASA and the Space Shuttle in the past 30+ years, etc.
Yes, and China is just a country. Never mind the wholesale violations of human rights.
The RIAA is just an organization. Never mind their political influence leading to FBI raids due to copyright violations. Congress passing laws which mandate crippling consumer audio electronics, nearly eliminating fair use. etc.
Never mind Wal-mart's tremendous ammount of money and power, and how they unappologetically use it to crush their competition, stop unionization, destroy the economics of smaller cities which refuse to subsudize their stores, etc.
99% of the population doesn't care how much fun it is to do doughnuts in, when they're paying $30,000 to buy it.
That's where the "widely" part comes in. Fuel effecient cars don't need to play to your own particular niche, and it's moronic to say that they should.
How can I make firefox use a custom style sheet on a per-site basis? How about IE? How about Opera? How can I then tie all three browsers to a single set of style sheets so I don't have to deal with it?
All of which are trivial.
Then how can I make it mobile so that if I log in at a cyber cafe or a public computing lab then my custom style sheets are there waiting for me?
A rather ridiculous restriction to impose.
Hmm, it would seem that from a global perspective that it would take less effort to enable/. to do it for me when you consider such effort would have to be replicated by 10s of thousands of people to provide the same impact.
No, it would take a tremendous ammount of effort for/. to store everyone's style sheet, dynamically serve that data for EVERY USER instead of a single static CSS.
consider such effort would have to be replicated by 10s of thousands of people to provide the same impact.
Well that's just bullshit. It would save effort if your teachers did your homework for you too, wouldn't it?
There are two ways to acheive this sort of thing, and gears are more hassle than a big resistor.
No, running the generator at a variable RPMs is much less hassle, and more effecient than literally throwing away the excess power. You'd have to have an incredibly massive resistor and cooling system to discard the levels of power we're talking about. Running an engine at constant RPMs is more effecient, but not effecient enough that turning excess power into heat results in a net gain.
One of the big differences is, she has seniority in the senate, and sits on some powerful boards.
I don't want a 99% Republican with the power to push-through legislation like Feinstein has. I'd rather have a 100% Republican, who won't have practically any power for the next 6 years.
They think they can contain the dinosaurs contained on the island by making them "lysine dependent". People are fucking lysine dependent. It's an essential amino acid
No wonder they always want to eat us... For the tasty lysine.
As much as it galls me, I know the only solution is to vote for the Republican Candidate this year (Richard Mountjoy), who is running against Feinstein.
Feinstein is the most pro-Hollywood senator around, for reason that should be obvious. She's extremely pro-business, siding with Republicans trying to take away your right to sue companies. She was the co-sponsor of the PATRIOT Act. She voted to invade Iraq, and now her husband's company is making millions in contracts there. That seems to be the same reason she's a heavy supporter of China.
The only way the democrats are going to put up somebody else is if we kick Feinstein out, and live with Mountjoy for the next 6 years.
I've sent MANY letters, faxes, and e-mails to Feinstein's office over the years about the RIAA/MPAA's overbearing and heavy-handed tactics, and they all come back with the same form letter about the need to protect copyrighted material. She clearly doesn't care, and it's time for her to go.
Slashdot Mirror
"Nurse. Hand me a scalpel and 80CCs of WD-40... Stat!"
I think that's a bit too simplistic...
MPlayer and FFMPEG have a very close relationship. FFMPEG's CVS server is hosted by MPlayer, and many of the developers develop for both projects.
That said, MPlayer doesn't really rely on ffmpeg. Though it makes use of libavcodec as (usually) the default codecs, there are almost always OTHER codecs which would support the same formats if libavcodec wasn't available.
For MPEG-4, Xvid and Divx are available natively, and several Windows DLLs are available if you're on x86.
For MPEG-1/2, it's one of the rare cases where the available ffmpeg codecs aren't default, as libmpeg2 is simply faster, and still open source.
Just about all other codecs at least have Win32 DLLs to fall-back on, if libavcodec isn't available.
In the case of libavformat is hardly used. It's the muxer and demuxer of last resort if MPlayer doesn't already have built-in support for the format you want, but that's rarely the case, anyhow.
I know, perhaps I'm just being pedantic...
If you're talking about some script kiddie, that's exploiting a large number of machines, they've already compiled all the code they need, and just transfer the binaries to the individual machines.
If you're talking about a one-off attack by someone determined to get root on your box, as you said, you're equally screwed.
MAC address filtering can be a significant line of defense, if you're also monitoring the network for anomolies, such as duplicate MACs. Removing GCC doesn't come anywhere close. It would hardly slow anyone down.
I can understand if there are space considerations (I have OpenBSD 3.8 running on a 32MB Flash card myself), but otherwise, throw any programs on there which might come in handy.
Daemons and X11 do not qualify, as they both require additional privlidges. Although X11 may be acceptable if only used over network connection, and nothing needs to be SUID or have direct, user, hardware access.
The exceptions being X11 (if you're using it), and your IP addresses (if you aren't using DHCP, PPP, PPPoE, etc).
Swap soundcards, and the new one will be working on boot-up, just like nothing ever happened. It doesn't need crazy and buggy hacks like many Linux distros use. It's all in the kernel. FreeBSD is close, but it still requires you to manually choose your soundcard.
It's easy, so long as you don't want to dual-boot. Then it gets complicated.
Kill this goddammed myth already...
Removing programs from your hard drive can't POSSIBLY make your machine any more secure. Taking the SUID/SGID bit off can, but that's a bit different, and programs like GCC aren't SUID, anyhow.
It's absolutely ridiculous to assume an intruder NEEDS you to install GCC for him. He can quite easily install OpenBSD on his own hardware and compile the code there, transfering the binary to your box. Or he can install whatever dev tools he wants, once he has root on your box.
Please, point out a single POSSIBLE way that having GCC on your machine COULD make your machine SLIGHLY less secure. JUST ONE!
I'll repeat what I've said hundreds of times before on
"Just because someone famous said it, doesn't make it true."
For founding fathers, people always quote the ones who expoused a view similar to the one they want, and ignore the 50% of founding fathers to staunchly disagreed with that view, and said quite the opposite.
But hey, some of the founding fathers believed in slavery, so it's a real shame our country has deteriorated so much as to let that wonderful institution be outlawed...
Fluids flowing uphill due to being heated... Used to cool hot computer chips...
What an amazing breakthrough, and not at all vastly inferior to using natural (passive) convection to do the same much faster, simpler, and better.
Maybe he'll click "Submit" a few seconds before me, next time...
Only one number off. So close, and yet so far.
1 .html
Features cut from Firefox 2:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060430-670
I guess we're getting this story now because people wised-up about "Bird Flu". Which, of course, was the successor to the short-lived "Super Volcanos" scare, which was itself the successor to the "World-ending Asteroid" scare story.
It's not that the stories themselves are complete nonsense, it's the way that they are handled. It's as if each one is the focus of world attention for a few weeks, then COMPLETELY disappearing when the ratings drop. Then a short intermission, and the next one comes along with more hype than the last.
I sure am glad that asteroids and bird flu aren't a threat anymore (who fixed them, BTW?), and I can focus on being scared by this new thing.
I think that's only part of the Google annoyances.
Many of the text ad-boxes they provide in their search results, now point to similar sites, which have NO content at all, except google ad-sense ads, based on the search terms you used to get there.
It's a bit like a Google.com infinite loop. You except the ads to be relevant, instead you get a link to more Google ads that should be relevant, but might actually be ANOTHER ad-sense click-through site.
This really is going to be the downfall of Google's much heralded text ads. They haven't shown any interest in fixing it when I contacted them about a few specific instances, so I generally just don't expect Google ads to be worthwile anymore. I think they've given up on their ingenious ad-placement, and are just going for whatever can bring in a few more bucks right now.
I can't be sure. What I know is that of ALL the outsourced call-centers I've been in contact with, there have always been extremely irritating problems like the above.
I suspect it is actually the case, since companies like Dell, which demand good tech support, have found outsourcing infeasable.
Of course, I suppose an alternate theory is that there aren't enough PHDs to go around. Which leaves you with about the same result.
It's not so great if the university graduate can't understand you, nor you him. In fact, it's downright horrible.
When I call up my ISP to tell them that they are mis-routing packets to certain sites, it doesn't matter whether the guy on the phone is a high school dropout, or a PHD. What matters is that he understands you when you tell them you aren't running Windows, and couldn't possibly run through the idiot checklist if you wanted to. What matters is that they understand when you tell them to send the message up the chain of command.
When the company is question has an outsourced call-center, I find it much easier to switch ISPs, than to report a problem...
That's not even remotely true. It's vastly cheaper now.
Besides that, your whole post seems extremely one-sided. You talk about billions of dollars "wasted" because they didn't set-up the colony on the moon and mars that you wanted. You completely ignore ALL accomplishments of NASA and the Space Shuttle in the past 30+ years, etc.
Well said!
I suggest you try to use proper grammer when insulting the intelligence of others.
Yes, and China is just a country. Never mind the wholesale violations of human rights.
The RIAA is just an organization. Never mind their political influence leading to FBI raids due to copyright violations. Congress passing laws which mandate crippling consumer audio electronics, nearly eliminating fair use. etc.
Never mind Wal-mart's tremendous ammount of money and power, and how they unappologetically use it to crush their competition, stop unionization, destroy the economics of smaller cities which refuse to subsudize their stores, etc.
99% of the population doesn't care how much fun it is to do doughnuts in, when they're paying $30,000 to buy it.
That's where the "widely" part comes in. Fuel effecient cars don't need to play to your own particular niche, and it's moronic to say that they should.
All of which are trivial.
A rather ridiculous restriction to impose.
No, it would take a tremendous ammount of effort for
Well that's just bullshit. It would save effort if your teachers did your homework for you too, wouldn't it?
No, running the generator at a variable RPMs is much less hassle, and more effecient than literally throwing away the excess power. You'd have to have an incredibly massive resistor and cooling system to discard the levels of power we're talking about. Running an engine at constant RPMs is more effecient, but not effecient enough that turning excess power into heat results in a net gain.
No. Bribing a small fraction of them over a few years would be enough to get public opinion in their favor.
Plenty of people are vulnerable to the power of suggestion.
Most reviewers make an effort not to be far off the reviews of others.
That's extremely vague. "few problems" to you might mean an full engine rebuild every few years... I have no way of knowing.
One of the big differences is, she has seniority in the senate, and sits on some powerful boards.
I don't want a 99% Republican with the power to push-through legislation like Feinstein has. I'd rather have a 100% Republican, who won't have practically any power for the next 6 years.
No wonder they always want to eat us... For the tasty lysine.
Completely untrue, and this bullshit has been refuted time and time again.
To anyone in California who may be reading this:
As much as it galls me, I know the only solution is to vote for the Republican Candidate this year (Richard Mountjoy), who is running against Feinstein.
Feinstein is the most pro-Hollywood senator around, for reason that should be obvious. She's extremely pro-business, siding with Republicans trying to take away your right to sue companies. She was the co-sponsor of the PATRIOT Act. She voted to invade Iraq, and now her husband's company is making millions in contracts there. That seems to be the same reason she's a heavy supporter of China.
The only way the democrats are going to put up somebody else is if we kick Feinstein out, and live with Mountjoy for the next 6 years.
I've sent MANY letters, faxes, and e-mails to Feinstein's office over the years about the RIAA/MPAA's overbearing and heavy-handed tactics, and they all come back with the same form letter about the need to protect copyrighted material. She clearly doesn't care, and it's time for her to go.
No, actually it would ELIMINATE peak-usage time, making it average-out over the whole day.