I had to fart around for a couple of hours when I set up my first printer, a Lexmark Z12 which didn't have a specific driver and never worked properly. The CUPS user interface didn't help, as has been mentioned before, as it gives little guidance and wont save you from yourself.
The second time, with an HPDJ660C, already being familiar with the CUPS interface, I had it working in 2 minutes... no software needed to be installed. With a fancy network printer operating via jetdirect it took me another 2 minutes. With a nice HP printer/fax/scanner I got the printing part going in, yes, that's right, 2 minutes. Because the procedure is the same every time, simple every time.
If you have a driver and CUPS+Foomatic+All of that stuff installed, printing under Linux is no trouble at all. It's when I go back to windows and have to download a fucking setup.exe for every new printer model that I go crazy. Or, even just waiting for windows to build "a driver information database" and then copy files it already has... this drives me nuts.
Printing in Linux is not fundamentally broken. Things could work a little more smoothly together, but in the purely technical area the problems have all been solved. The remaining issues are all UI and procedural problems.
"If you really want to like trek I recommend that you take a fresh look at the series from this point of view."
They screwed up the technology. This is a fact. I am no longer interested. All I see is bad and worse. Anything which might otherwise be considered 'good' is also bad, becase it will potentially draw people away from the "Enterprise is bad" camp.
"And it rarely disappoints (the steaming piece of crap that was Voyager, ah... I would be happy if that had never happened to the timeline...)"
Voyager I can forgive. I really didn't like it, 90% of the time, but I can fotgive it. Why? It is low impact. Few things they did there have long-lasting reprecussions. So they did it badly? Who cares. It makes no difference to the Star Trek saga as a whole. Enterprise has been chopping up reality for itself *and all star trek* since day one. That is not cool.
"The key to happiness in life is adjusting your expectations to match reality."
I prefer adjusting reality to my preference. It's less fun in some ways, and more fun in others.
If that sounds sort of beligerent, look at it this way: I envision reality as I think it Should be, and operate as if that is reality. If the world aligns to my views, so much the better. In my world, there is no such thing as Enterprise.
I like Enterprise. Not my favorite. I like it. DS9 is the best. But Enterprise is making a solid effort. It is not producing internal consistency beyond what one would expect when time travel is a central component of the series.
Internal to that one series maybe.
That makes it completely "canonical," at least insofar as time travel often has consequences in trek that change the past (and sometimes the affect future in significant ways).
Even if you were right, the then-future is not the now-past. In TOS/TNG/DS9/etc the past was one way, in Enterprise the present is a different way. The trouble is that the Enterprise future is going to totally obliterate the TOS present and future, because it's based on a different past. This Enterprise stuff therefore can't be the past of (say) TOS, because TOS would not be the future of Enterprise.
This means Enterprise could be a perfectly good past to a series which has never yet aired, and if they wanted to do that why didn't they just make a new series and say "This isn't Star Trek (but it's really Star Trek)"? Only one reason: Marketing and the franchise dollers.
Anyway, if you think that the current producers don't make a concerted effort to get internal consistency, leagues beyond what had ever been attempted before in a sci-fi tv series, you are simply misinformed.
I'm sure they spend gobs of effort making Enterprise consistent with Enterprise--they just don't spend a damn minute even looking to see what else it breaks in past series'.
If I sound bitter, angry, and generally hostile it's only because I am. Star Trek as a complete multi-series saga has been royally fucked for no good reason, and that pisses me off just a tick.
I notice, incidentally, that you did not comment on whether Enterprise was good Trek. So tell me, as a Star Trek fan: Apart from it being (apparantly, according to you) a passingly decent Sci Fi show, and apart from the fact that it disregards canonical fact right and left, is it good Trek?
Do the episodes give you that Trekky feeling and make you go "Wow" at things that aren't just action? Do you gasp for breath at any insights you now and then gain on society?
I have watched and liked Buffy, Angel and Firefly myself. The Simpsons, Futurama, and Family Guy, while I'm at it. Not to mention Jack of All Trades and a few assorted things like that.
This doesn't make me one of those people who watch WB and FOX shows and like them. The shows I have named may have aired on those networks but (with the caveat that an argument to thecontrary could be made in the case of the Simpsons) they are not Fox Shows and they are not WB Shows.
Fox shows are base crap aimed at such a low point in society that it's a wonder the producers don't commit suicide. They are so devoid of any form of cleverness that the level of brain activity in any room drops dramatically the instant any prime-time Fox show is switched on.
WB shows are wishy-washy or derivative or both, they are humdrum repetition of formulaic drama plots which manage to surive solely because their audiences cycle so fast that no one viewer sees more than one or two of the shows before s/he grows out of them.
These things are the meat and potatos of the masses, the same masses (or at least the children of the same masses) who said Star Trek was stupid and just for nerds--which of course is a synonym for worthless.
Yeah? And why do you blame TOS for that being inconsistent? It's the fault of rick fucking berman and the casting people for first contact.
Rick fucking Berman and the current crop of so-called Star Trek writers don't give a damn about Star Trek. They want to produce an action adventure space story which will make money. Does it totally fuck with WELL ESTABLISHED Trek history? "Who cares?" they'll say, "We don't give a shit. If some pimply faced moron wants to object, he can just kiss my ass."
This is becaus they do not LIKE their original fans, they are catering to the masses who know Star Trek only marginally.
Anyone who attempts to create something new in Trek, especially if it's new Old stuff, is OBLIGED to make sure it doesn't blatantly contradict anything. And, since that's sometimes highly inconvenient, to at least build in an explanation, or make the contradicition as light weight as possible.
Rick Fucking Berman and company didn't even bother to lift one finger and remotely TRY. They maliciously said "We don't care about Trek, so NO ONE should care about Trek. We'll do whatever we fucking like, call it Star Trek to get the extra ratings (and extra $$$!) and the public will LIKE it, because that's what we TELL 'EM to like."
The examples are too numerous to even begin to site comprehensively. I've only seen episode 1 of Enterprise, after which I declared the entire searies Dead and non-canonical. From just that episode I observe the following:
Klingons were not discovered until much later, after the Federation was formally established.
Transporter technology in TOS required the people being transported to HOLD STILL. It wasn't until later that they could move, much less RUN, while being transported.
Additionally, transporters were not invented by the Federation until after there WAS a federation.And I'm talking a real one, not just "Us and the Vulcans"
For that matter, VULCANS SHOW NO EMOTION. They just don't. Okay? Sure, Spock did it several times, but he was a half-breed. A full-blood scouts-honor VULCAN does NOT look annoyed like that. No.
On the Enterprise D there is a display of previous versions of the Enterprise, right back to the original navy ship. The one from the time period that Archer is supposed to be in is not shaped like that.
Sensor technology should not have been good enough to detect what SPECIES different life forms on a ship so distant were. Detect life? Sure. How many individual life signs? I doubt it? Species? NO WAY.
The list is nearly endless. And that's ONE episode.
I am not a rabid Star Trek fan. I've read only a couple dozen of the books, and I have only a slight familiarity with many episodes from TOS, and I've missed some episodes of TNG, lots from DS9. (Voyager I started skimming after I realized it was mostly crap.) I am not particularly zealous, but I do insist on one thing: INTERNAL CONSISTENCY. It's one of the big appeals of Star Trek: Maybe it's hard, but you can explain how almost all important elements (especially technology) are consistent with all others.
If I, a relatively calm and disinterested Star Trek fan, can see such glaring problems with Enterprise, surely the real fans can as well. I'm sure there are many "fans" of Enterprise... a bunch of morons who like watching WB and FOX shows. True, real star trek fans of give a slight damn about the series just don't like Enterprise.
Perhaps a few have come to terms with it and treat it as a nice, good series which has nothing really to do with Star Trek. I salute those people. Me, I can't seperate them in my head.
I know of no Star Trek fans who think Enterprise is good Trek. A good show? Some. Good Trek? No fucking way.
Automatically sorts by date added, but new items can be inserted anywhere in the list with ease.
Example session
$ nano ~/TODO --- todo-list - Write a cool TODO list manager ^O ENTER ^X
Done! Simple as that.
Now I realize some will claim that ed is even better for this, but I find that the extra steps involved in entering edit mode to be detrimental to productivity. If you prefer to sort your TODO list in reverse, cat >> can work well (but only for additions).
Those who suggest Emacs are either addicted to lisp or run it all the time anyway. Those attempting to suggest vi will do well to refer to my comments with regards to ed, because if they do so attempt I will be obliged to have them shot.
Even better, with some trivial effort you can write your TODO list in YAML, so it's machine readable if you ever need to load it into something else.
Maybe append it to your.plan, or some personal page, via cron. That would be handy.
# ln -s/usr/bin/apt-get ~/bin/Upgrade\ System # UpgradeSystem install mozilla # Upgrade\ System install mozilla-firefox Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done The following extra packages will be installed:
mozilla-firefox-dom-inspector Suggested packages:
latex-xft-fonts 2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2846 not upgraded. Need to get 10.5MB of archives. After unpacking 397kB disk space will be freed. Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
Of course all of the on-screen text refers to apt, but it can be done.
In serious reply, the reason it's not called Upgrade System is that that's not exactly what it does, and more importantly it's not the only way to do it. APT just happens to have been adopted by Debian. Why say Mozilla and not Web Browser? Because it's not the only web browser. Why say Mozilla and not Internet? Because the web is not the internet. Why say apt-get and not Upgrade System? Because apt is the method being used, and that's not precisely what it does.
Why be accurate instead of "friendly"? Because we tried friendly, and it's better to be accurate if that is the choice.
Will it work if my monitor is a printer or a real teletype? No? Then it's not as good as the Debian installer. You know, the once that doens't assume you'll be able to fire X right up? That one.
I commend you. I kept a Win98 box virus and spyware free for 3 years, because I know what I'm doing. When I finally got the then-current ad aware and ran it the only things it found were things I put there deliberately or already had decided to live with (like stuff that came with kazaa. This was before kza-lite).
However, that was before spyware hit big. I advise you to run ad-aware and see what has leaked in round the edges. Perhaps it will give you insights as to what other precautions to take, but at the very least you will be able to brag aout your cleanliness armed with fun numbers.
"Yeah, but what popular filesharing app DOESN'T have a vomit-inducing moniker?"
giFT.
Seriously. It's called "gift" and one of the things you do with it is upload. It's also an acronym for the real name, which is more descriptive. It's easy to remember and appropriate if you think about it.
The only down side was the name clash with the GNU Image-Finding Tool, but they have switched to gnuift, so all is well.
"Am I correct in stating that it would - have to be/has been - implemented in the command windows on Linux."
Yes.
The complaint the guy had was that/a specific command window/ (as you call them; the correct term is "Terminal Emulator") namely xterm does not behave in the way he wants it to. The cmd.exe/command.com-style Mark thing could be implimented, and as the poster you were replying to already said: If you want good CTRL+C/V integration, use konsole (KDE) or gnome-terminal (GNOME) which will behave in a manner that seems "right" from a windows paradigm. Xterm will continue to behave in a way that seems right in a *nix paradigm.
Needing a Copy key, C was selected. Because C stands for Copy. Needing a Cut key, X was selected. Because X is a convenient mnemonic for 'cut'. Needing a Paste key, V was selected. Because V stands for "It's next to the Copy key, dumbass."
That is the way it *does* work... except that 1 and 2 are left on. They work in almost total independance of the "normal" way. If it concerns you, just don't use the middle mouse button. You'll find that in the vast majority of programs (excepting older versions) the behavior will be Windows-like.
The reason 1 and 2 can't be turned off completely is that/people wont stand for it/. Who? Me, and thousands of others, who don't get easily confused and find that having access to the selection buffer is/extremely/ convenient.
Highlighting text puts it into the X selection buffer. Middle clicking pastes the X selection buffer. CTRL+C (or whatever copy is set to) puts text onto the X clipboard. CTRL+V (or whatever) pastes the X clipboard.
Notice: THERE ARE TWO BUFFERS. The X selection buffer and the X clipboard buffer. If your app overwrites the clipboard on highlight then it s misbehaving (see fd.o for what is "right").
Adjust your thinking just a smidge: When you select, it does not copy. It acts just like in Windows... only you can also access the last selection on a way Windows prevents.
Repeat: If your apps do not behave this way,/they are broken/. Don't blame *nix, or X, blame the author of the app. Some apps are deliberately broken (because it makes More Sense[tm]) but not terribly many.
"A 20% performance hit really doesn't matter. Look at the rate of speed increases in hardware. When new systems come out doubling performance at such a regular pace, a one-time 20% slowdown to switch to an otherwise superior architecture with other benefits is an easy pill to swallow."...tell taht to Java.
What was it everyone said "Sure, Java is a bit slow NOW. But just wait! With the next rev of CPUs it'll be just as fast as the apps you use now."
Only the CPUs revved and all the apps sped up, so Java was still proportionally slower. Whoops.
Java is *still* slow. Sometimes you don't notice so much, but you do notice.
Slashdot Mirror
I had to fart around for a couple of hours when I set up my first printer, a Lexmark Z12 which didn't have a specific driver and never worked properly. The CUPS user interface didn't help, as has been mentioned before, as it gives little guidance and wont save you from yourself.
The second time, with an HPDJ660C, already being familiar with the CUPS interface, I had it working in 2 minutes... no software needed to be installed. With a fancy network printer operating via jetdirect it took me another 2 minutes. With a nice HP printer/fax/scanner I got the printing part going in, yes, that's right, 2 minutes. Because the procedure is the same every time, simple every time.
If you have a driver and CUPS+Foomatic+All of that stuff installed, printing under Linux is no trouble at all. It's when I go back to windows and have to download a fucking setup.exe for every new printer model that I go crazy. Or, even just waiting for windows to build "a driver information database" and then copy files it already has... this drives me nuts.
Printing in Linux is not fundamentally broken. Things could work a little more smoothly together, but in the purely technical area the problems have all been solved. The remaining issues are all UI and procedural problems.
Like, say, tea.
"If you really want to like trek I recommend that you take a fresh look at the series from this point of view."
They screwed up the technology. This is a fact. I am no longer interested. All I see is bad and worse. Anything which might otherwise be considered 'good' is also bad, becase it will potentially draw people away from the "Enterprise is bad" camp.
"And it rarely disappoints (the steaming piece of crap that was Voyager, ah... I would be happy if that had never happened to the timeline...)"
Voyager I can forgive. I really didn't like it, 90% of the time, but I can fotgive it. Why? It is low impact. Few things they did there have long-lasting reprecussions. So they did it badly? Who cares. It makes no difference to the Star Trek saga as a whole. Enterprise has been chopping up reality for itself *and all star trek* since day one. That is not cool.
"The key to happiness in life is adjusting your expectations to match reality."
I prefer adjusting reality to my preference. It's less fun in some ways, and more fun in others.
If that sounds sort of beligerent, look at it this way: I envision reality as I think it Should be, and operate as if that is reality. If the world aligns to my views, so much the better. In my world, there is no such thing as Enterprise.
I like Enterprise. Not my favorite. I like it. DS9 is the best. But Enterprise is making a solid effort. It is not producing internal consistency beyond what one would expect when time travel is a central component of the series.
Internal to that one series maybe.
That makes it completely "canonical," at least insofar as time travel often has consequences in trek that change the past (and sometimes the affect future in significant ways).
Even if you were right, the then-future is not the now-past. In TOS/TNG/DS9/etc the past was one way, in Enterprise the present is a different way. The trouble is that the Enterprise future is going to totally obliterate the TOS present and future, because it's based on a different past. This Enterprise stuff therefore can't be the past of (say) TOS, because TOS would not be the future of Enterprise.
This means Enterprise could be a perfectly good past to a series which has never yet aired, and if they wanted to do that why didn't they just make a new series and say "This isn't Star Trek (but it's really Star Trek)"? Only one reason: Marketing and the franchise dollers.
Anyway, if you think that the current producers don't make a concerted effort to get internal consistency, leagues beyond what had ever been attempted before in a sci-fi tv series, you are simply misinformed.
I'm sure they spend gobs of effort making Enterprise consistent with Enterprise--they just don't spend a damn minute even looking to see what else it breaks in past series'.
If I sound bitter, angry, and generally hostile it's only because I am. Star Trek as a complete multi-series saga has been royally fucked for no good reason, and that pisses me off just a tick.
I notice, incidentally, that you did not comment on whether Enterprise was good Trek. So tell me, as a Star Trek fan: Apart from it being (apparantly, according to you) a passingly decent Sci Fi show, and apart from the fact that it disregards canonical fact right and left, is it good Trek?
Do the episodes give you that Trekky feeling and make you go "Wow" at things that aren't just action? Do you gasp for breath at any insights you now and then gain on society?
I use Emacs.
I have watched and liked Buffy, Angel and Firefly myself. The Simpsons, Futurama, and Family Guy, while I'm at it. Not to mention Jack of All Trades and a few assorted things like that.
This doesn't make me one of those people who watch WB and FOX shows and like them. The shows I have named may have aired on those networks but (with the caveat that an argument to thecontrary could be made in the case of the Simpsons) they are not Fox Shows and they are not WB Shows.
Fox shows are base crap aimed at such a low point in society that it's a wonder the producers don't commit suicide. They are so devoid of any form of cleverness that the level of brain activity in any room drops dramatically the instant any prime-time Fox show is switched on.
WB shows are wishy-washy or derivative or both, they are humdrum repetition of formulaic drama plots which manage to surive solely because their audiences cycle so fast that no one viewer sees more than one or two of the shows before s/he grows out of them.
These things are the meat and potatos of the masses, the same masses (or at least the children of the same masses) who said Star Trek was stupid and just for nerds--which of course is a synonym for worthless.
Funniest damn thing I've seen all day...
Compare apples and apples, please. Comparing Konq to GAIM is not right.
/usr/lib/libnautilus.so.2 (0x4003b000) /usr/lib/libnautilus-adapter.so.2 (0x4004d000) /usr/lib/libnautilus-private.so.2 (0x40051000) /usr/lib/libeel-2.so.2 (0x40105000) /usr/lib/libXrender.so.1 (0x40198000) /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x401a0000) /usr/lib/libgailutil.so.17 (0x401ae000) /usr/lib/libglade-2.0.so.0 (0x401b5000) /usr/lib/librsvg-2.so.2 (0x401ca000) /usr/lib/libgsf-1.so.1 (0x401e2000) /usr/lib/libbz2.so.1.0 (0x40202000) /usr/lib/libgnome-desktop-2.so.2 (0x40212000) /usr/lib/libgnomeui-2.so.0 (0x40228000) /usr/lib/libbonoboui-2.so.0 (0x402b6000) /usr/lib/libgnomecanvas-2.so.0 (0x40319000) /usr/lib/libgnome-2.so.0 (0x40345000) /usr/lib/libesd.so.0 (0x40359000) /usr/lib/libaudiofile.so.0 (0x40362000) /usr/lib/libart_lgpl_2.so.2 (0x40380000) /usr/lib/libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 (0x40396000) /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0x403bc000) /usr/lib/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 (0x4068e000) /usr/lib/libatk-1.0.so.0 (0x406ff000) /usr/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 (0x4071a000) /usr/lib/libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 (0x4072f000) /usr/lib/libpangox-1.0.so.0 (0x40734000) /usr/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 (0x40741000) /usr/lib/libbonobo-2.so.0 (0x40776000) /usr/lib/libgnomevfs-2.so.0 (0x407d1000) /usr/lib/libgconf-2.so.4 (0x4082e000) /usr/lib/libxml2.so.2 (0x40857000) /usr/lib/libgnutls.so.7 (0x40951000) /usr/lib/libtasn1.so.0 (0x40989000) /usr/lib/libgcrypt.so.1 (0x40997000) /lib/tls/libnsl.so.1 (0x409cf000) /usr/lib/libz.so.1 (0x409e4000) /lib/tls/librt.so.1 (0x409f5000) /usr/lib/libbonobo-activation.so.4 (0x409fb000) /usr/lib/libORBitCosNaming-2.so.0 (0x40a11000) /usr/lib/libORBit-2.so.0 (0x40a16000) /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0x40a65000) /usr/lib/libgthread-2.0.so.0 (0x40a9f000) /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 (0x40aa4000) /lib/tls/libm.so.6 (0x40ab3000) /usr/lib/libgmodule-2
ldd `which nautilus`
libnautilus.so.2 =>
libnautilus-adapter.so.2 =>
libnautilus-private.so.2 =>
libeel-2.so.2 =>
libXrender.so.1 =>
libXext.so.6 =>
libgailutil.so.17 =>
libglade-2.0.so.0 =>
librsvg-2.so.2 =>
libgsf-1.so.1 =>
libbz2.so.1.0 =>
libgnome-desktop-2.so.2 =>
libgnomeui-2.so.0 =>
libbonoboui-2.so.0 =>
libgnomecanvas-2.so.0 =>
libgnome-2.so.0 =>
libesd.so.0 =>
libaudiofile.so.0 =>
libart_lgpl_2.so.2 =>
libpangoft2-1.0.so.0 =>
libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 =>
libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 =>
libatk-1.0.so.0 =>
libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 =>
libpangoxft-1.0.so.0 =>
libpangox-1.0.so.0 =>
libpango-1.0.so.0 =>
libbonobo-2.so.0 =>
libgnomevfs-2.so.0 =>
libgconf-2.so.4 =>
libxml2.so.2 =>
libgnutls.so.7 =>
libtasn1.so.0 =>
libgcrypt.so.1 =>
libnsl.so.1 =>
libz.so.1 =>
librt.so.1 =>
libbonobo-activation.so.4 =>
libORBitCosNaming-2.so.0 =>
libORBit-2.so.0 =>
libgobject-2.0.so.0 =>
libgthread-2.0.so.0 =>
libpthread.so.0 =>
libm.so.6 =>
libgmodule-2.0.so.0 =>
Yeah? And why do you blame TOS for that being inconsistent? It's the fault of rick fucking berman and the casting people for first contact.
Rick fucking Berman and the current crop of so-called Star Trek writers don't give a damn about Star Trek. They want to produce an action adventure space story which will make money. Does it totally fuck with WELL ESTABLISHED Trek history? "Who cares?" they'll say, "We don't give a shit. If some pimply faced moron wants to object, he can just kiss my ass."
This is becaus they do not LIKE their original fans, they are catering to the masses who know Star Trek only marginally.
Anyone who attempts to create something new in Trek, especially if it's new Old stuff, is OBLIGED to make sure it doesn't blatantly contradict anything. And, since that's sometimes highly inconvenient, to at least build in an explanation, or make the contradicition as light weight as possible.
Rick Fucking Berman and company didn't even bother to lift one finger and remotely TRY. They maliciously said "We don't care about Trek, so NO ONE should care about Trek. We'll do whatever we fucking like, call it Star Trek to get the extra ratings (and extra $$$!) and the public will LIKE it, because that's what we TELL 'EM to like."
The examples are too numerous to even begin to site comprehensively. I've only seen episode 1 of Enterprise, after which I declared the entire searies Dead and non-canonical. From just that episode I observe the following:
Klingons were not discovered until much later, after the Federation was formally established.
Transporter technology in TOS required the people being transported to HOLD STILL. It wasn't until later that they could move, much less RUN, while being transported.
Additionally, transporters were not invented by the Federation until after there WAS a federation.And I'm talking a real one, not just "Us and the Vulcans"
For that matter, VULCANS SHOW NO EMOTION. They just don't. Okay? Sure, Spock did it several times, but he was a half-breed. A full-blood scouts-honor VULCAN does NOT look annoyed like that. No.
On the Enterprise D there is a display of previous versions of the Enterprise, right back to the original navy ship. The one from the time period that Archer is supposed to be in is not shaped like that.
Sensor technology should not have been good enough to detect what SPECIES different life forms on a ship so distant were. Detect life? Sure. How many individual life signs? I doubt it? Species? NO WAY.
The list is nearly endless. And that's ONE episode.
I am not a rabid Star Trek fan. I've read only a couple dozen of the books, and I have only a slight familiarity with many episodes from TOS, and I've missed some episodes of TNG, lots from DS9. (Voyager I started skimming after I realized it was mostly crap.) I am not particularly zealous, but I do insist on one thing: INTERNAL CONSISTENCY. It's one of the big appeals of Star Trek: Maybe it's hard, but you can explain how almost all important elements (especially technology) are consistent with all others.
If I, a relatively calm and disinterested Star Trek fan, can see such glaring problems with Enterprise, surely the real fans can as well. I'm sure there are many "fans" of Enterprise... a bunch of morons who like watching WB and FOX shows. True, real star trek fans of give a slight damn about the series just don't like Enterprise.
Perhaps a few have come to terms with it and treat it as a nice, good series which has nothing really to do with Star Trek. I salute those people. Me, I can't seperate them in my head.
I know of no Star Trek fans who think Enterprise is good Trek. A good show? Some. Good Trek? No fucking way.
nano.
.plan, or some personal page, via cron. That would be handy.
Advantages:
Can be accessed easily from the command line. (Try THAT with your fancy project manager!)
With SSH, can update TODO list from anywhere with a net connection.
Simple, human-readable, cross-platform storage format.
Automatically sorts by date added, but new items can be inserted anywhere in the list with ease.
Example session
$ nano ~/TODO
--- todo-list
- Write a cool TODO list manager
^O
ENTER
^X
Done! Simple as that.
Now I realize some will claim that ed is even better for this, but I find that the extra steps involved in entering edit mode to be detrimental to productivity. If you prefer to sort your TODO list in reverse, cat >> can work well (but only for additions).
Those who suggest Emacs are either addicted to lisp or run it all the time anyway. Those attempting to suggest vi will do well to refer to my comments with regards to ed, because if they do so attempt I will be obliged to have them shot.
Even better, with some trivial effort you can write your TODO list in YAML, so it's machine readable if you ever need to load it into something else.
Maybe append it to your
So it's pretty big, but on the plus side... no licensing costs. You picks your down sides and you lives with them.
# ln -s /usr/bin/apt-get ~/bin/Upgrade\ System
# UpgradeSystem install mozilla
# Upgrade\ System install mozilla-firefox
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
mozilla-firefox-dom-inspector
Suggested packages:
latex-xft-fonts
2 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2846 not upgraded.
Need to get 10.5MB of archives.
After unpacking 397kB disk space will be freed.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n]
Of course all of the on-screen text refers to apt, but it can be done.
In serious reply, the reason it's not called Upgrade System is that that's not exactly what it does, and more importantly it's not the only way to do it. APT just happens to have been adopted by Debian. Why say Mozilla and not Web Browser? Because it's not the only web browser. Why say Mozilla and not Internet? Because the web is not the internet. Why say apt-get and not Upgrade System? Because apt is the method being used, and that's not precisely what it does.
Why be accurate instead of "friendly"? Because we tried friendly, and it's better to be accurate if that is the choice.
Will it work if my monitor is a printer or a real teletype? No? Then it's not as good as the Debian installer. You know, the once that doens't assume you'll be able to fire X right up? That one.
Bring it back.
Pretty please?
I'll give you a chocolate chip cookie.
(Okay, it has one bite in it...)
I commend you. I kept a Win98 box virus and spyware free for 3 years, because I know what I'm doing. When I finally got the then-current ad aware and ran it the only things it found were things I put there deliberately or already had decided to live with (like stuff that came with kazaa. This was before kza-lite).
However, that was before spyware hit big. I advise you to run ad-aware and see what has leaked in round the edges. Perhaps it will give you insights as to what other precautions to take, but at the very least you will be able to brag aout your cleanliness armed with fun numbers.
"kill -9 $( ps ax | grep X | cut '-d ' -f1 )"
Why not
kill -9 $(pidof X)
?
Or even better, use -HUP instead of -9 (no reliance on *DM).
At least, I think X restarts on HUP...
Yes, but it was Netscape 5 code. The "Netscape 6" thing was an AOL attempt to beat Microsoft inv ersion nunmbers.
The fun thing is that many unix experts can't tell you what this does and why it's not such a good idea. ;-)
It's not such a good idea becase '*.bak' isn't a directory. You probably want -iname '*.bak'.
You see, find is my Favorite UNIX Utility. The power boggles ones mind.
But if I were just giving it a cursory glance after being asked by some annoying luser "Is this correct?" I might not notice.
"Yeah, but what popular filesharing app DOESN'T have a vomit-inducing moniker?"
giFT.
Seriously. It's called "gift" and one of the things you do with it is upload. It's also an acronym for the real name, which is more descriptive. It's easy to remember and appropriate if you think about it.
The only down side was the name clash with the GNU Image-Finding Tool, but they have switched to gnuift, so all is well.
"Am I correct in stating that it would - have to be/has been - implemented in the command windows on Linux."
/a specific command window/ (as you call them; the correct term is "Terminal Emulator") namely xterm does not behave in the way he wants it to. The cmd.exe/command.com-style Mark thing could be implimented, and as the poster you were replying to already said: If you want good CTRL+C/V integration, use konsole (KDE) or gnome-terminal (GNOME) which will behave in a manner that seems "right" from a windows paradigm. Xterm will continue to behave in a way that seems right in a *nix paradigm.
Yes.
The complaint the guy had was that
"Why is "V" Paste, anyway?"
That's easy.
Needing a Copy key, C was selected. Because C stands for Copy. Needing a Cut key, X was selected. Because X is a convenient mnemonic for 'cut'. Needing a Paste key, V was selected. Because V stands for "It's next to the Copy key, dumbass."
No charge.
/me beats John Hurliman with a cluestick
/people wont stand for it/. Who? Me, and thousands of others, who don't get easily confused and find that having access to the selection buffer is /extremely/ convenient.
That is the way it *does* work... except that 1 and 2 are left on. They work in almost total independance of the "normal" way. If it concerns you, just don't use the middle mouse button. You'll find that in the vast majority of programs (excepting older versions) the behavior will be Windows-like.
The reason 1 and 2 can't be turned off completely is that
This is a common mistake. In reality:
/they are broken/. Don't blame *nix, or X, blame the author of the app. Some apps are deliberately broken (because it makes More Sense[tm]) but not terribly many.
Highlighting text puts it into the X selection buffer.
Middle clicking pastes the X selection buffer.
CTRL+C (or whatever copy is set to) puts text onto the X clipboard.
CTRL+V (or whatever) pastes the X clipboard.
Notice: THERE ARE TWO BUFFERS. The X selection buffer and the X clipboard buffer. If your app overwrites the clipboard on highlight then it s misbehaving (see fd.o for what is "right").
Adjust your thinking just a smidge: When you select, it does not copy. It acts just like in Windows... only you can also access the last selection on a way Windows prevents.
Repeat: If your apps do not behave this way,
Slime Forest Adventure will help. It wont teach you everything, but it's a good/fun/free way to learn some japanese.
"A 20% performance hit really doesn't matter. Look at the rate of speed increases in hardware. When new systems come out doubling performance at such a regular pace, a one-time 20% slowdown to switch to an otherwise superior architecture with other benefits is an easy pill to swallow." ...tell taht to Java.
What was it everyone said "Sure, Java is a bit slow NOW. But just wait! With the next rev of CPUs it'll be just as fast as the apps you use now."
Only the CPUs revved and all the apps sped up, so Java was still proportionally slower. Whoops.
Java is *still* slow. Sometimes you don't notice so much, but you do notice.