I like this idea, maybe even with some kind of discussions linked to the slashbox. That way the people who want to see what the latest kernel is on slashdot can and those who don't want to won't. I certainly like the idea better than having every devel release posted as a story.
Re:Please stop posting devel kernel releases.
on
Linux 2.3.2 Released
·
· Score: 2
I'm not saying that all kernel anouncements should be ignored. Just the devel ones. A) because newbies might get bitten. B) There are going to be a lot of them and it's quickly going to get very annoying, espeically when it gets to the point where there are 3 releases on the same page of slashdot.
The really short time between 2.2.8 and 2.2.9 was due to a nasty bug that could cause fs corruption. Other than that it's averaging about 1 every 2 weeks, not too bad. And remember just because there is a new kernel doesn't mean you have to upgrade. Unless the kernel does something for you specifically there is no need. Some of us (my self included) like to stay on the bleeding edge, but then again I don't complain about how fast they come out.
The difference between 2.2.8 and 2.1.44 is 2.2.8 could cause problems under heavy I/O. I think 2.1.44 pretty much was just about garanteed to trash your fs.
No, 2.3.x is a DEVELOPEMENT tree. It's not intended for general use. That's what 2.2.x is here for. The developement releases come out often and are not thoroughly debugged or tested. They often contain unknown and sometimes dangerous bugs.
They can (and often are) quite unstable. Some of them (2.1.44 comes to mind) can even trash your file systems. Basically don't play with them unless you are willing to deal with your system being rendered useless.
They aren't relevant for most slashdot readers and there are going to be a LOT more of them before 2.4 comes out. Posting them to slashdot is just a waste of space.
Actually it depends on the OS/compiler/arch/time of day/phase of the moon/color of your socks. Basically on some systems chars default to signed on others they are unsigned. IIRC on most (all?) PCs they default to unsigned, but this could be wrong. It's generally considered bad to assume anything about the sign of chars.
I fully agree that sun isn't doing anything out of goodness. They are a bussiness and they want to make money. If they can make money by supporting linux apps good for them. But linux also wins. It makes linux appear to software companies to be a better platform to port to. Port to linux, automatically get a Solaris, *BSD, SCO port. Also it gives linux some good press.
Yah sun is looking out for their own rear-end, but so what? They aren't hurting us in the process, so why not?
Statically linking binaries probally wouldn't be necisary. Just about every library you need under linux is GPL'd or under some other open source license. It should be really easy to get the libraries to run dynamically linked linux executables. I do agree that this is excellent for the unix platform. Atleast x86 unix. Might help get more commercial apps for x86 unix. Ie, port to linux, automatically get ports to Solaris, SCO, *BSD, etc. World domination is a step closer. I can't wait until people start working on a way to make NT run linux binaries, that's when we know that we've won.
I imagine it would be tremendously difficult. Look at cygwin. It's been going on for years just to provide source code level compatibility and it still doesn't work perfectly. lxrun works well on SCO and Solaris because the underlying OSes are very similar. Few syscalls need to be emulated. NT's posix subsystem is beyond broken. It would probally be easier to just port the entire linux kernel to NT (minus most of the drivers of course). If you just want bash and sed and utils of that sort, grab cygwin, it really sux under win9x but it works ok on NT.
I actually have first hand experience with this, from dealing with a sun sales rep. Basically they want to sell you their compiler for money. They freely admit that GCC is available and that it works, they just mention that their compiler works better. I don't know if it's true or not but when you are dropping close to $100k for a new system the cost of the compiler isn't a real issue.
Would you rather that Linus just sat on the bug fixes, or released a "service pack" every 3 or 4 months ala windows nt. I'm glad that there have been 8 kernels since january. The more bug fixes the better.
I'm curious if anyone who has actually built a dual celeron system (w/o having to do any soldering) can help me figure out where I can obtain the cpus, mb, and the converters and about how much money this will cost (don't worry about case / ram / whatever else, I can figure that out on my own).
You are actually right. I thought that X was definately a prime though. The problem is it's not necisarally (or even probally) the next prime. Ie 2*3+1 = 7 but you miss 5. Arg! Too much math in my head (AP Calc BC exam is next thursday).
Wait, so you make a contract w/ company X to not release the source to something. Then you buy company X. You still cannot release the source for the product? Who is going to sue you? Company X? But they are now you, so why would you sue yourself.
The thing is, given the american legal system, i can see this as being 100% true.
There is something I feel I should point out. It's not just a large prime, they are really simple to come by. IIRC a Mersenne Prime is a prime number in the form (2^n)-1. There is a rather simple formula forgetting primes from another prime. I forget what it is but it's something like taking a prime and multiply it by 2 then add 1. Although this hasn't been working for me too well so far. If anyone else knows this formula please post it. It's gonna drive me crazy to figure it out. Then again I could be 100% off.
So it's C2 when it's not connected to a network. But any system which you have physical access to is inheirently insecure (reboot w/ a boot disk, open up the box and remove the hdd, and so on). Maybe it's just me but this kinda seems like a bit of an oxymoron. Why not remove the monitor and keyboard too while your at it? Hey, remove the power cord, and lock the box in a safe. Then no one will be able to hack it.
The answer is no. If you don't distribute your modified binaries you don't have to distribute the source. It would be stupid to try to enforce that because it would be really difficult to prove that someone was using a modified GPL program privately.
Well I invite you to join in ToastOS, an effort to port linux to your toaster. Just think of the possibilities, wake up in the morning, telnet to your toaster, and start toasting your bread. Plus with linux's reliability you can be sure your toaster won't crash during that critical "browning" stage.
(Everyone is entitled to some brain dead comments)
Hey thanks, I just got the xfstt rpm from the redhat powertools collection. rpm -ivh blar. Followed the simple instructions in/usr/doc/xfstt. And wow!!! That page is beautiful now.
Slashdot Mirror
I like this idea, maybe even with some kind of discussions linked to the slashbox. That way the people who want to see what the latest kernel is on slashdot can and those who don't want to won't. I certainly like the idea better than having every devel release posted as a story.
I'm not saying that all kernel anouncements should be ignored. Just the devel ones. A) because newbies might get bitten. B) There are going to be a lot of them and it's quickly going to get very annoying, espeically when it gets to the point where there are 3 releases on the same page of slashdot.
The really short time between 2.2.8 and 2.2.9 was due to a nasty bug that could cause fs corruption. Other than that it's averaging about 1 every 2 weeks, not too bad. And remember just because there is a new kernel doesn't mean you have to upgrade. Unless the kernel does something for you specifically there is no need. Some of us (my self included) like to stay on the bleeding edge, but then again I don't complain about how fast they come out.
The difference between 2.2.8 and 2.1.44 is 2.2.8 could cause problems under heavy I/O. I think 2.1.44 pretty much was just about garanteed to trash your fs.
No, 2.3.x is a DEVELOPEMENT tree. It's not intended for general use. That's what 2.2.x is here for. The developement releases come out often and are not thoroughly debugged or tested. They often contain unknown and sometimes dangerous bugs.
They can (and often are) quite unstable. Some of them (2.1.44 comes to mind) can even trash your file systems. Basically don't play with them unless you are willing to deal with your system being rendered useless.
They aren't relevant for most slashdot readers and there are going to be a LOT more of them before 2.4 comes out. Posting them to slashdot is just a waste of space.
Actually it depends on the OS/compiler/arch/time of day/phase of the moon/color of your socks. Basically on some systems chars default to signed on others they are unsigned. IIRC on most (all?) PCs they default to unsigned, but this could be wrong. It's generally considered bad to assume anything about the sign of chars.
I fully agree that sun isn't doing anything out of goodness. They are a bussiness and they want to make money. If they can make money by supporting linux apps good for them. But linux also wins. It makes linux appear to software companies to be a better platform to port to. Port to linux, automatically get a Solaris, *BSD, SCO port. Also it gives linux some good press.
Yah sun is looking out for their own rear-end, but so what? They aren't hurting us in the process, so why not?
Statically linking binaries probally wouldn't be necisary. Just about every library you need under linux is GPL'd or under some other open source license. It should be really easy to get the libraries to run dynamically linked linux executables. I do agree that this is excellent for the unix platform. Atleast x86 unix. Might help get more commercial apps for x86 unix. Ie, port to linux, automatically get ports to Solaris, SCO, *BSD, etc. World domination is a step closer. I can't wait until people start working on a way to make NT run linux binaries, that's when we know that we've won.
I imagine it would be tremendously difficult. Look at cygwin. It's been going on for years just to provide source code level compatibility and it still doesn't work perfectly. lxrun works well on SCO and Solaris because the underlying OSes are very similar. Few syscalls need to be emulated. NT's posix subsystem is beyond broken. It would probally be easier to just port the entire linux kernel to NT (minus most of the drivers of course). If you just want bash and sed and utils of that sort, grab cygwin, it really sux under win9x but it works ok on NT.
I actually have first hand experience with this, from dealing with a sun sales rep. Basically they want to sell you their compiler for money. They freely admit that GCC is available and that it works, they just mention that their compiler works better. I don't know if it's true or not but when you are dropping close to $100k for a new system the cost of the compiler isn't a real issue.
Would you rather that Linus just sat on the bug fixes, or released a "service pack" every 3 or 4 months ala windows nt. I'm glad that there have been 8 kernels since january. The more bug fixes the better.
From what I've heard Linux has the fastest TCP/IP stack of any OS. But i've never seen any numbers to back this up.
I'm curious if anyone who has actually built a dual celeron system (w/o having to do any soldering) can help me figure out where I can obtain the cpus, mb, and the converters and about how much money this will cost (don't worry about case / ram / whatever else, I can figure that out on my own).
You are actually right. I thought that X was definately a prime though. The problem is it's not necisarally (or even probally) the next prime. Ie 2*3+1 = 7 but you miss 5. Arg! Too much math in my head (AP Calc BC exam is next thursday).
Hot swapping of everything is planned for 2.3.
Wait, so you make a contract w/ company X to not release the source to something. Then you buy company X. You still cannot release the source for the product? Who is going to sue you? Company X? But they are now you, so why would you sue yourself.
The thing is, given the american legal system, i can see this as being 100% true.
There is something I feel I should point out. It's not just a large prime, they are really simple to come by. IIRC a Mersenne Prime is a prime number in the form (2^n)-1. There is a rather simple formula forgetting primes from another prime. I forget what it is but it's something like taking a prime and multiply it by 2 then add 1. Although this hasn't been working for me too well so far. If anyone else knows this formula please post it. It's gonna drive me crazy to figure it out. Then again I could be 100% off.
KDE and GNOME both come with stock rh6.0.
So it's C2 when it's not connected to a network. But any system which you have physical access to is inheirently insecure (reboot w/ a boot disk, open up the box and remove the hdd, and so on). Maybe it's just me but this kinda seems like a bit of an oxymoron. Why not remove the monitor and keyboard too while your at it? Hey, remove the power cord, and lock the box in a safe. Then no one will be able to hack it.
"enchanced p2 with mmx". The PII had mmx. The PIII had KNI and mmx.
The answer is no. If you don't distribute your modified binaries you don't have to distribute the source. It would be stupid to try to enforce that because it would be really difficult to prove that someone was using a modified GPL program privately.
Well I invite you to join in ToastOS, an effort to port linux to your toaster. Just think of the possibilities, wake up in the morning, telnet to your toaster, and start toasting your bread. Plus with linux's reliability you can be sure your toaster won't crash during that critical "browning" stage.
(Everyone is entitled to some brain dead comments)
Hey thanks, I just got the xfstt rpm from the redhat powertools collection. rpm -ivh blar. Followed the simple instructions in /usr/doc/xfstt. And wow!!! That page is beautiful now.