ISO 3166 codes are assigned to countries, territories, etc. Presumably, if an American moon colony is set up, it will be classified as "United States Minor Outlying Islands", and given ".um". If it declares independence, it can apply to the ISO 3166 maintainers for a code, but what code it will get will depend heavily upon it's name.
Um, it would be wrong to use "=" in this case as well, as he isn't doing assignment. He is asserting equality : a valid use of the equals sign, which is in C spelt "==".
And it's not a keyword anyway, it's an operator. Please stop misapplying terminology, it makes you look very stupid.
Without the GPL, it would be illegal (a criminal offence with a hefty fine in my jurisdiction, I don't know about other people's) for you to do the stuff the GPL allows you to do. It wouldn't automatically become "public domain".
Basically, the kernel is maintained by the person maintaining the kernel. If a bunch of people forked off after Linus' death, the user community would decide who is the "official maintainer" - as no-one is forcing us to use anyone's particular source tree.
The moon is not anyones to sell. When it is colonised and obtains a government, no doubt title deeds will be drawn up and the land allocated in some way : until then, no-one owns it.
Yeah. But you seem to ignored the point that lots of the information used to figure out the M68K macs was obtained by staring at the PowerMac sourecode (stuff like interrupt controllers, glue logic).
When they changed from M68K processors to POwerPC processers, they just changed the processor and didnd't redesign the boards.
If someone made a new kernel from scratch, that wouldn't be a fork?
Forking is usually bad, but there are regrettable instances when it is needed. If you don't have the right to fork, you have no insurance against the maintainer being stupid.
b) Justifiable forking happens very rarely. Want to know why? Because it is the implied threat, or possibility of having a justified fork made which keeps maintainers doing sane stuff.
If Linus started putting really stupid crap in the kernel, there would be a divisive split, sure, but someone would step forward and start maintaining an "unnofficial" kernel without the stupid crap. Eventually, it would become the official version.
For an example of this in action, look at gcc/egcs : where the fork worked in bringing gcc maintainers to their senses.
Forking is a last resort, but it is a useful last resort to have. Otherwise, you're locked into a single vendor, and that is what we are trying to avoid.
Yes it does. Free software, as defined by RMS, is a synonym of Open source, as defined by the Open Source Definition. Sure, the licenses might not be compatible, but that's just a minor annoyance. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.
Yes. It's a result of them using a non-standard character set. In this case, it's IE's fault for not converting text in a form to the standard character set (ISO10646-1) before submitting them to the webserver.
Does Linux keep track of sockets opened by an application and clean them up if it croacks? I don't know.
Of course it does. Managing resources is one of the fundamental points of an Operating System. If you can't do that right you might as well go home and give up.
Please stop spreading misinformation about glibc. Glibc2.0.7 was never officially released in a tarball, it is true, but it was certainly stable, and recommended for use in shipping systems.
Contrast with libc5, which has not been maintained for years.
glibc2.1 is not the development version of glibc2. It is the stable version, and the only currently maintained version. glibc2.0 maintainenence has ceased, and libc5 maintenence was halted ages ago.
Not all projects use the kernel version numbering system.
Um, did you sleep through the whole satellite and cable TV thing here in the UK?
Sure, nearly all the other channels are worthless shit, but that's what happens when you get large numbers of channels, due to split advertising revenues.
Continual dodging, but the questions / answers were more of the form :
JP : Did you threaten to overrule him? MH : I did not overrule him. JP : But did you threaten to overrule him? MH : I did not overrule him. JP : But did you threaten to overrule him? MH : I did not overrule him. etc...
Pretty funny. I imagine Michael Howard has never forgiven Paxman.
I, personally, have no objections to proprietary software on free platforms.
However, Opera certainly do need to sort out their attitude. It does not make sense to insult the platform you are porting to and expect people to buy your product.
Slashdot Mirror
ISO 3166 codes are assigned to countries, territories, etc. Presumably, if an American moon colony is set up, it will be classified as "United States Minor Outlying Islands", and given ".um". If it declares independence, it can apply to the ISO 3166 maintainers for a code, but what code it will get will depend heavily upon it's name.
And it's not a keyword anyway, it's an operator. Please stop misapplying terminology, it makes you look very stupid.
Move along, there is no issue here.
Basically, the kernel is maintained by the person maintaining the kernel. If a bunch of people forked off after Linus' death, the user community would decide who is the "official maintainer" - as no-one is forcing us to use anyone's particular source tree.
The moon is not anyones to sell. When it is colonised and obtains a government, no doubt title deeds will be drawn up and the land allocated in some way : until then, no-one owns it.
When they changed from M68K processors to POwerPC processers, they just changed the processor and didnd't redesign the boards.
It's a crossplatform Unix-based-systems project.
Evil people have gone out of their way to make it hard to make us play them.
PC hardware is very icky, I agree, but Mac hardware design is hardly saintly. See here for details.
I wonder what other features of ours they will steal next? ;)
If someone made a new kernel from scratch, that wouldn't be a fork?
Forking is usually bad, but there are regrettable instances when it is needed. If you don't have the right to fork, you have no insurance against the maintainer being stupid.
There would be nothing wrong with doing that, but why? If people want to waste money by buying shrinkwraps, I say we let them.
a) It's Torvalds, not Thorvolds.
b) Justifiable forking happens very rarely. Want to know why? Because it is the implied threat, or possibility of having a justified fork made which keeps maintainers doing sane stuff.
If Linus started putting really stupid crap in the kernel, there would be a divisive split, sure, but someone would step forward and start maintaining an "unnofficial" kernel without the stupid crap. Eventually, it would become the official version.
For an example of this in action, look at gcc/egcs : where the fork worked in bringing gcc maintainers to their senses.
Forking is a last resort, but it is a useful last resort to have. Otherwise, you're locked into a single vendor, and that is what we are trying to avoid.
Yes it does. Free software, as defined by RMS, is a synonym of Open source, as defined by the Open Source Definition. Sure, the licenses might not be compatible, but that's just a minor annoyance. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.
Yes. It's a result of them using a non-standard character set. In this case, it's IE's fault for not converting text in a form to the standard character set (ISO10646-1) before submitting them to the webserver.
I'm glad you are therefore helping to update and write new API documentation, instead of just whining about it.
(in case they turn up later; this was posted when there were no comments on any articles).
Of course it does. Managing resources is one of the fundamental points of an Operating System. If you can't do that right you might as well go home and give up.
Contrast with libc5, which has not been maintained for years.
Not all projects use the kernel version numbering system.
They haven't made anything open source, let alone "in pieces". The SCL seems to be fooling you.
Sure, nearly all the other channels are worthless shit, but that's what happens when you get large numbers of channels, due to split advertising revenues.
Since when is a released Netscape open-source? (i.e. not Mozilla)
JP : Did you threaten to overrule him? MH : I did not overrule him. JP : But did you threaten to overrule him? MH : I did not overrule him. JP : But did you threaten to overrule him? MH : I did not overrule him. etc...
Pretty funny. I imagine Michael Howard has never forgiven Paxman.
However, Opera certainly do need to sort out their attitude. It does not make sense to insult the platform you are porting to and expect people to buy your product.