If you are talking about that IE sidebar like thing. Go to your View Menu, then select Sidebar.
On another Note, to get Shochwave to work under windows copy the program netscp6.exe to Netscape.exe, then install shockwave and when it asks vor the cersion point it to the plugins directory. It works, but is not perfect.
To get quicktime 4 to work install quicktime for netscape 4. Then copy the QuickTimePlugin.call file as well as the npqtplugin.dll, npqtplugin2.dll, and npqtplugin3.dll files. That should work. I was able to view a few movies with that with no problems.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Maybe by the end of the year well have 2 nice things for xmas. Linux 2.4 and Netscape 6.0. I tried the windows version and it worked with plugins. It launched Real player, and played flash and Java as well.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I've seen a couple of system like this. It looks more like PCVS or Project Control Version Software. The only difference here is that they include video and audio and publishing. Hmm CVS with a web publishing front end maybe?
On another note I have also seen a tool developed originally by Cnet called PRISM which is now sold as storyserver, which has some of this functionality. This is more like a combination of this and cvs.
Obvious "to one of ordinary skill in the art", but of course not to a lawyer........
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
While they can challenge it they have to come up with proior art. It think get / post will suffice for that. However the notion that it will determine what a valid patent is is just nieve. The patent office will continue to do business the way that they have in the past untill it under goes a reform. The way that the goverment works this could be a long while, although we may see it in our lifetimes (assuming your 2).
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I know of a compnay that is creating virtual communities. It is basically IRC on steroids though. They currently have a windows version and are planning on a Linux version as well. The company is
http://www.blaxxun.com/.
A big product of there is http://www.cybertown.com/main_nsframes.html. IT is really cool after you set up an avitar of your own. You can shop and chat and do all sorts of things, including buying a virtual home and have a virtual job.
Okay maybe this is not exactly what they guy was talking about. But he did say 'virtual communities' and did not really define what he meant. Sure you can infer, but that only leads to speculation.
Hey I have virtual friends. People I have only chatted with on line does that count? I do have real frineds too though.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
This decision seems to NOT make any sense what so ever. Weren't there areticles a few months ago if not weeks on how the Linux DVD hackers were getting flack about this? Didn't they get sease and decist orders or something? They took the device and reverse engineered it and came up with drivers and now where are Linux DVD drivers?
I think it is a political / money issue. Where is Sony and the Connectix? sony is based out of japan, is Connectix us based? hmm.
I also wonder who is shelling out more money here?
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Uh I hate to burst your buble, but Mandrake is usually a supped up version of Redhat. If you look at the times that Mandrake comes out, it is usually after Redhat releases. They take the Redhat distro, and add extra programs to it. Then they add some more updates and make it pretty. If there is no sparc version put out by redhat, Mandrake may drop the support of it also. This culd change as Mandrake grows, but I have not seen any reason to think that mandrake would go out of there way for sparc Linux.
On another note, if you are a large company buying sparcs, you are very doubtful going to put Linux on it. As a user maybe, but as a company it is not in your best interestes. Usually when you buy hardware that comes with an OS you get a warrenty. Sun is partcularly good (if you spent enough money) about giving you good support. I know I worked for a company that had then in every other week. Good contract we had.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Palmer defines a hacker incorreclty. His definition is that of a cracker, not a hacker, as defined in IEEE's potentials earlier this year.
So many people say that a hacker is someone who unlawefully breaks into a system. This is totally off the mark. A hacker is just an untrained programmer. A cracker is someone who 'cracks' into a system. This confusion of the two is thanks to the media and there inability ot understand technology.
If hacking is a fealony then there are lots of people that i know that should be arrested, like me. Although I have never tried to break into a system. Just the other day I was hacking at some code for the company I work at. Why? Cause I don't knwo C++ and had to figure out how the program worked to make modifications to it. WHy me? Because there is no one left at the company whoo knows anything at all about some of our systems. And if they do they say they don't. So I had to hack away and try various things to first learn C++ and then learn they system.
News flash to Palmer, the first people who worked on computers were hackers. They had a certain amount of knowledge and then they tried this an dthat. That is what hackers do. They try this and that untill they get it to work. To some extent Crackers are hacker, however not all crackers are hackers.
He mentions the DOS. You don't need to know a thing about programming to do a DOS, as there are scripts out there already that do this. You just need to be able to run the scripts.
If he thinks that he can completely secure a PC then he should think again. In almost any OS there will ALWAYS be vunerabilities. There are just to many lines of code to make any system absolutely secure while makeing it functinoal as well. Sure you can argue that OpenBSD is secure, but it is also had a total focus for just that purpose. I am sure that if you set it up as a web server and started running apache and some other programs as web server software there woudl be a hole that some hacker would find given enough time. Some script something. And once that hole was plugged another one would be found.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
They do this now for 1 Gig mem limitations. The problem is that there are so many #ifdef and #ifndef's in the linux kernel now that some people do not want added kernel options (more #ifdefs).
One of the issues that people seem to fail to realize is that Linus is not necessarily rejectiung the patches because of what they do, but how they are implemented. If patch code is submitted to Linus and the patch is going to make mataining that system difficult (read messy unmaintainable code) Linus will reject it. Linus also does not like large patches either. He likes bits and peices and clean fixes. Hey he started this whole thing, I think he has that right.
Another thing to think of is that ZDNet is a news network. Everyone has been saying that the kernel will fork and blah blah. There are already forks in the kernel but people just don't realize this.
Redhat kernels: Have you ever tried to apply a patch to a stock redhat kernel? I know that since RH5.2 they ship the Linux kernel with there own patches.
SuSE kernels: Last SuSSE I installed (5.3) had both a stock Linux kernel and a custom SUSE kernel with custom SuSE patches.
Corel: never tries them but they patched kde and made it hard to compile other kde software with there distro.
Point? There are already forks in the Linux community, yet it goes on. That is the whole thing about open source. There can be forks. If an idea is good it gets into the mainstream kernel. But these 'forks' need to be tried first and become tested and cleand up in such a maner that they can exist with the rest of the linux kernel.
If you think that everyone is running P200 or P500 or GigHz machines you are wrong. I am sure that there are lots of people out there that are running old 386 / 486 with Linux as routers firewalls, etc. After all you do not need a superfast machine for a firewall if all you are going to firewall is 3 or 4 other machines.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
It looks like they are shooting for 2.4.0 release then. They mention that there is a 2 Terabyte limitation. I think that this is for the entire filesystem not just one ount point, but it is unclear. And yes I have known people to have larger than 2 Terabyte disk space requirements. Right along with there 100 Gig databases.
I thought that the Linux kernel got ride of the 4Gig mem limitation. I know there was a 2 Gig and that in 2.2.17 you can select 1 or 2gig max.
Currently there seems like a lot of limitation on what software you need and all. glibc 2.1.3, kernel 2.4.test-5, etc.
It is good to see that SGI is still working on this after such a long time of silence. I guess working in the Internet world I kinda expect projects to move at internet time. After all that is what kind of pressures I have to work under. But atlas I am not writing filesystems and drivers.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
First whoever moderated this is an butthole, but that is beside the point. The point is that this upgrade from 6.2 to 7.0 is not a real necessary upgrade.
"From YOUR perspective". There are some packages that have changed, and they have added more packages. I think they had to or at least felt that they had to add more packages that people commonly use. Look at SuSE they have way more packages then redhat. Look at debian they have way more than Redhat too. That is not a reason to upgrade.
This is not flamebait as the moderator thinks as well. This is a valid statement and slashdot should change there name to we suck dot!
only one person gave a reason to upgrade. RPM breaks some packages. Well fine, but once again someone decidede that backwards compatibility was not necessary. They changed the rpm database and now you cant use rpm 3 to upgrade to rpm 4. If slashdot is going to continue to use idiots to do moderation then maybe it is time for the community to start leaving we suck dot.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
It may be worth trying out if you have not tried out Redhat before, but if you are upgrading your system it may not be worth it.
I am wondering right now weather it is worth the upgrade. So far I have not seen them get an uypgrade 'right'. Don't get me wrong, I use Redhat. I am wondering if it is really worth the upgrade or not. In looking at what they have now, they have GNOME 1.2. WEll I have the helix code updates. Do I need Redhat? (NO I think not). They have rpm 4.0. What is better in rpm 4 than in 3? They have XFree 4.0. That would be great if I need the hardware. So if you have a newer card you may want to think about 4.0. MY hardware is old (Old S3 Virage card). New kde.
Hmm I'll wait till 2.0. Lots of updates. php 4.0.1 would be nice to upgrade to.
Hmm Perl 5.6. Perl 5.6 is supposed to have threads, but there's probably WONT! I put in a bug report a while ago and said that they have the man page for Perl Threads, but you can not use threads. They should either get ride of the man page or implement threads in perl. They looked it over and there reply was that they would not implement threads because they would have to recompile oh so many packages. They never said anything about just getting ride of the man page either. Can someone confirm that the Redhat 7.0 does not have perl threads?
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Windows does do clustering too. Windows has servers and some think that they are good. With Citrix winframe window can serve programs over a network, besides X11 is outdated and needs revision.
you must be zealot.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
It would be interesting to see Konqueror with the mozilla rendering engine. I think this would speed up Konquereor and give it better rendering. I have also heard that the 2.0 verison of Konqueror will have full JavaScript and Java support as well as plugins. I don't use kde, but I don't mind installing the base and libs and multimedia to get kfm. I like kfm as a file manager better then GNOME, and have tried it as a web browsers and right now it is just to slow (kde 1.1.2). Who knows by this time next year Linux users may have several free browsers that are XHTML compliant as well as fast.
On an off topic note. What has Linux done that windows hasn't? So far the desktops are somewhat differnet looking, but neither has done anything that is noticably better than Windows. Sure some may say it is more stable, but then so are Solaris and the BSD's. They are almost equal on the game playing field. They are near equal in the application field (although some may argue one way or another that one is better). But what has Linux or UNIX in general done lately that Windows hasn't. (And don't give me that lame security argument as you can secure a windows box [put it behing a UNIX firewall]).
I ask here cause slashdot hates my posts!
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I have tried it. If by more useful you mean it crashes more then yes. Last verison I had would not do flash properly, would not do plugins, and would crash alot. This was M17. If I want a program that will crash on me all the time I'll use Windows 95/98 thank you.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
maybe what needs to happen is to replace the Konqueror rendering engine with the mozilla rendering engine. Since it is being dually licensed this may be possible. This would give Konqueror a better rendering engine.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Looking at the milestone, they are now saying that M18 is the last release using the Mx naming conventions adn now they are going with Mozilla 1.x or startting at.9. Well this looks like history repeating itself. If you look at Netscape they actually started with.9 as a browser and then moved to 1.x and so on. If history repeats itself Mozilla will ahve to wait about 2 years before Mozilla 2 or 3 get out and it has a viable (supportable) user base. By then kfm or the Konqueror will be out in 2.x or 3.x fashion with full flash, JavaScript and Java support and people will have UNIX users will have moved to another browser. I know that Konquere is looking better and better and am waiting for kde2.0.
I wonder when Netscape 6.0 will actually be released and how stable it will be. I also wonder how the themes contest is going. No updates of that mentioned on slashdot.
And the winner is???
Here is agood browser timeline.http://www.dejavu.org/ I know it may be old for some but it was rather interesting to get to try these out;-)
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
.. this may be a little off topic, but not really. I hear alot about video cards and gamers these days. But what about video editing under Linux? No one has mentioned anything about video editing in a while (if at all) and this topic has hit the linux kernel mailing list a few times. I am interested in setting up a new system to do full screen video in from a video camera.
What is the best card to do video camera in to computer capturing? The idea is that I can take a video camera around and get some movie clips. Then I can take those video tapes and get them on my computer as avi or mpeg. Next I'd take them and burn them on cdrom. Or make video email from them. This all can be done under windows and Mac. Any idea if any of this is being done under Linux?
I've tried webcams and they are okay but not as good quality as I am looking for.
More importatnly if I were going to spend less than $2000 on a new system what would I need (MB, CPU, memory, video card, HD, and video camera. I have cdrom and burner)
I am posting here cause slashdot would never post this question (or anything else I have posted) as slashdot hates my posts.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I have been wondering the same thing as the asker of the question. I am planning on buying a new machine and thinking that if it is possible to load some parts of the sytem into memory rather than disk this may make it faster. On thing I'd like to have in memory is my/tmp space. I'd also like to have/swap mounted as a RAM disk too. I read a ramsidk howto and it did not seem like an easy task. Is there an easy way to make this happen?
A machine with 512k that is a personal work station coul dhave 256k for memory, 128 for/tmp and 128 for swap. This could add in that necessary performance increas I need for video.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I do own a palm V and am running there OS 3.3. I think it works fine. What does OS 3.5 have that 3.3 doesn't? If you buy a new Palm will it have OS 3.5 or will it still have 3.3 and will they include an upgrade cupon or something?
Personally I think that this is a result of palm OS being free adn Sony and handspring (to mention a few) coming out with palm devices based on the palm os that are better to some extent than palm, and palm sales are probably not as good as they should be. This may be designed to hurt the competition not so much as the end users. But I wonder if they realize that by doing this who will be the one to get the added charges?
It looks like just another case of some company saying our OS is free and then saying no it is not. The same thing can happen with QT so watch out which verison you use for kde all;-O
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
True windows programs do use there own dlls. But they are dll or dynamically linked libraries. But they also use the system dll's. does MFCdll rign a bell? It shoudl it is the foundation of lots of windows programs. As well as many other shared dll. OLE or 'object linking and embedding' woudl make IE a huge monster.
As I said I was not sure about mac. however you say Mac programs are staticly linked, in that when you install a program, it's
just one large application that functions on it's own,. Installing into one folder is not the same as statically linked. Statically linked means that the dlls are part of the executable. Im sure that if you install programas on a Mac and it is not one file that gets installed you are useing shared objects.
What you are actually talking about is 'where' prorgams are installed as opposed to how programs are compiled. 'static' and shared refer to how are program is compiled not how it is installed.
Now if you look at a RH distribution. They are working on that one putting things in one place. Part of that problem stems from the unix file system. It is inherently flawed. It is flawed in the fact that it was set up so that if you want to test software you install into/usr/local/{bin,lib,sbin, etc} if you are installing into the sytem you install into/usr/{bin,lib,etc}. This comes from early UNIX not the packaging system. In looking at redhat most of a program gets installed into/usr/lib/ and then the executables are in/usr/bin. This is done cause/usr/bin is in almost everyone path. If they kept all teh executables in/usr/lib/ then you woudl need to add each dir to your path and then logout and login to have the changes take effect or 'export PATH=$PATH:/usr/lib/` (assuming bash shell here) after each install. Maybe someday people will do that under unix. Maybe the tree will be/usr/packages and then set the env for the system to include the new program and all. Each package then can have a bin,lib. The problem with this is that you eventually will run out of env space when your path gets to be 30 pages long.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Even windows does not do static linking. Windows has all those dlls that come with the packages. I am sure that Mac is probably the same. Static linking has its place, but not for everything. dll save space. If you have all static programs on your machine all programs would get to be big giant monsters that were memory hogs as well. You would not be able to dynamically load and unload dll's either. Sure you may have a faster program, but that extra speed would not be all that much to a shared object and ususally is not needed.
This is really off topic.
Now about rpm and apt-get which is what this was really about. RPM does allow you to save configs, that is whay I usually have all these.rpmsave files after I upgrade a program. I think it would be nice if there was a switch that could be passed to rpm like 'rpm -Uvh --keepconfig.rpm` to save my current configuration file without creating the rpmsave files.
rpm is not perfect. debs are not either. Last time I tried to install debain it did all its package checking at the time I selected the package rather than let me select the packages and then when I was ready to install tell me what dependancies I missed. I like rpm cause I think it was easier to learn than deb's, just my opinion though which where i am I am entitled to!
Now apt-get may work with rpms. This is good. So when does that project get started?
A second feature that would be real nice in rpm is more than just an rpm problems. It is a *nix make problem. Makefiles are not all the same. Some packages use automake and autoconf to generate the Makefile while some people just use make. Then there is really no way to know what it being installed if you are not the packager and without looking at all the sources. If I download a tar.gz and want to have an rpm out of it making that specfiles can be a real pain in the but, and half the time you can never be sure that you got all the files correctly. There has got to be a better way! If a program is in perl it may not use configure scripts it may just use a perl script. Maybe what needs to happen is a concerted effort into creatinga new system management tool. One that takes a snapshot of the system before a package is going to be insatlled and then one that takes one after. Window is doing something like this and allowing users to go back to a given point in time. So you could take a snapshot of the system before you install a program and then after you install it you can see what is changed. If rpm had this capability rpm would see what files had changed after you installed some programs ie after you do a make install or whatever. Those changes could be updated in the rpm database. If something failed the rpm database could roll the system back to before the fiels were installed. It needs some way of doing this. Maybe a program that could be turned and off at will. You could turn on the system file watcher and after you do a make install it would give you alist of fiels that have changed. It would have to be smart enough to ignore/proc of course and/tmp (or configurable to ignore certain directories) hmm....
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Slashdot Mirror
On another Note, to get Shochwave to work under windows copy the program netscp6.exe to Netscape.exe, then install shockwave and when it asks vor the cersion point it to the plugins directory. It works, but is not perfect.
To get quicktime 4 to work install quicktime for netscape 4. Then copy the QuickTimePlugin.call file as well as the npqtplugin.dll, npqtplugin2.dll, and npqtplugin3.dll files. That should work. I was able to view a few movies with that with no problems.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
On another note I have also seen a tool developed originally by Cnet called PRISM which is now sold as storyserver, which has some of this functionality. This is more like a combination of this and cvs.
Obvious "to one of ordinary skill in the art", but of course not to a lawyer........
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
A big product of there is http://www.cybertown.com/main_nsframes.html. IT is really cool after you set up an avitar of your own. You can shop and chat and do all sorts of things, including buying a virtual home and have a virtual job.
Okay maybe this is not exactly what they guy was talking about. But he did say 'virtual communities' and did not really define what he meant. Sure you can infer, but that only leads to speculation.
Hey I have virtual friends. People I have only chatted with on line does that count? I do have real frineds too though.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
For the product.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I think it is a political / money issue. Where is Sony and the Connectix? sony is based out of japan, is Connectix us based? hmm.
I also wonder who is shelling out more money here?
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
On another note, if you are a large company buying sparcs, you are very doubtful going to put Linux on it. As a user maybe, but as a company it is not in your best interestes. Usually when you buy hardware that comes with an OS you get a warrenty. Sun is partcularly good (if you spent enough money) about giving you good support. I know I worked for a company that had then in every other week. Good contract we had.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
So many people say that a hacker is someone who unlawefully breaks into a system. This is totally off the mark. A hacker is just an untrained programmer. A cracker is someone who 'cracks' into a system. This confusion of the two is thanks to the media and there inability ot understand technology.
If hacking is a fealony then there are lots of people that i know that should be arrested, like me. Although I have never tried to break into a system. Just the other day I was hacking at some code for the company I work at. Why? Cause I don't knwo C++ and had to figure out how the program worked to make modifications to it. WHy me? Because there is no one left at the company whoo knows anything at all about some of our systems. And if they do they say they don't. So I had to hack away and try various things to first learn C++ and then learn they system.
News flash to Palmer, the first people who worked on computers were hackers. They had a certain amount of knowledge and then they tried this an dthat. That is what hackers do. They try this and that untill they get it to work. To some extent Crackers are hacker, however not all crackers are hackers.
He mentions the DOS. You don't need to know a thing about programming to do a DOS, as there are scripts out there already that do this. You just need to be able to run the scripts.
If he thinks that he can completely secure a PC then he should think again. In almost any OS there will ALWAYS be vunerabilities. There are just to many lines of code to make any system absolutely secure while makeing it functinoal as well. Sure you can argue that OpenBSD is secure, but it is also had a total focus for just that purpose. I am sure that if you set it up as a web server and started running apache and some other programs as web server software there woudl be a hole that some hacker would find given enough time. Some script something. And once that hole was plugged another one would be found.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
One of the issues that people seem to fail to realize is that Linus is not necessarily rejectiung the patches because of what they do, but how they are implemented. If patch code is submitted to Linus and the patch is going to make mataining that system difficult (read messy unmaintainable code) Linus will reject it. Linus also does not like large patches either. He likes bits and peices and clean fixes. Hey he started this whole thing, I think he has that right.
Another thing to think of is that ZDNet is a news network. Everyone has been saying that the kernel will fork and blah blah. There are already forks in the kernel but people just don't realize this.
Redhat kernels: Have you ever tried to apply a patch to a stock redhat kernel? I know that since RH5.2 they ship the Linux kernel with there own patches.
SuSE kernels: Last SuSSE I installed (5.3) had both a stock Linux kernel and a custom SUSE kernel with custom SuSE patches.
Corel: never tries them but they patched kde and made it hard to compile other kde software with there distro.
Point? There are already forks in the Linux community, yet it goes on. That is the whole thing about open source. There can be forks. If an idea is good it gets into the mainstream kernel. But these 'forks' need to be tried first and become tested and cleand up in such a maner that they can exist with the rest of the linux kernel.
If you think that everyone is running P200 or P500 or GigHz machines you are wrong. I am sure that there are lots of people out there that are running old 386 / 486 with Linux as routers firewalls, etc. After all you do not need a superfast machine for a firewall if all you are going to firewall is 3 or 4 other machines.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
Currently there seems like a lot of limitation on what software you need and all. glibc 2.1.3, kernel 2.4.test-5, etc.
It is good to see that SGI is still working on this after such a long time of silence. I guess working in the Internet world I kinda expect projects to move at internet time. After all that is what kind of pressures I have to work under. But atlas I am not writing filesystems and drivers.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
"From YOUR perspective". There are some packages that have changed, and they have added more packages. I think they had to or at least felt that they had to add more packages that people commonly use. Look at SuSE they have way more packages then redhat. Look at debian they have way more than Redhat too. That is not a reason to upgrade.
This is not flamebait as the moderator thinks as well. This is a valid statement and slashdot should change there name to we suck dot!
only one person gave a reason to upgrade. RPM breaks some packages. Well fine, but once again someone decidede that backwards compatibility was not necessary. They changed the rpm database and now you cant use rpm 3 to upgrade to rpm 4. If slashdot is going to continue to use idiots to do moderation then maybe it is time for the community to start leaving we suck dot.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I am wondering right now weather it is worth the upgrade. So far I have not seen them get an uypgrade 'right'. Don't get me wrong, I use Redhat. I am wondering if it is really worth the upgrade or not. In looking at what they have now, they have GNOME 1.2. WEll I have the helix code updates. Do I need Redhat? (NO I think not). They have rpm 4.0. What is better in rpm 4 than in 3? They have XFree 4.0. That would be great if I need the hardware. So if you have a newer card you may want to think about 4.0. MY hardware is old (Old S3 Virage card). New kde.
Hmm I'll wait till 2.0. Lots of updates. php 4.0.1 would be nice to upgrade to.
Hmm Perl 5.6. Perl 5.6 is supposed to have threads, but there's probably WONT! I put in a bug report a while ago and said that they have the man page for Perl Threads, but you can not use threads. They should either get ride of the man page or implement threads in perl. They looked it over and there reply was that they would not implement threads because they would have to recompile oh so many packages. They never said anything about just getting ride of the man page either. Can someone confirm that the Redhat 7.0 does not have perl threads?
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
you must be zealot.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
On an off topic note. What has Linux done that windows hasn't? So far the desktops are somewhat differnet looking, but neither has done anything that is noticably better than Windows. Sure some may say it is more stable, but then so are Solaris and the BSD's. They are almost equal on the game playing field. They are near equal in the application field (although some may argue one way or another that one is better). But what has Linux or UNIX in general done lately that Windows hasn't. (And don't give me that lame security argument as you can secure a windows box [put it behing a UNIX firewall]).
I ask here cause slashdot hates my posts!
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I wonder when Netscape 6.0 will actually be released and how stable it will be. I also wonder how the themes contest is going. No updates of that mentioned on slashdot.
And the winner is???
Here is agood browser timeline.http://www.dejavu.org/ I know it may be old for some but it was rather interesting to get to try these out ;-)
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
What is the best card to do video camera in to computer capturing? The idea is that I can take a video camera around and get some movie clips. Then I can take those video tapes and get them on my computer as avi or mpeg. Next I'd take them and burn them on cdrom. Or make video email from them. This all can be done under windows and Mac. Any idea if any of this is being done under Linux?
I've tried webcams and they are okay but not as good quality as I am looking for.
More importatnly if I were going to spend less than $2000 on a new system what would I need (MB, CPU, memory, video card, HD, and video camera. I have cdrom and burner)
I am posting here cause slashdot would never post this question (or anything else I have posted) as slashdot hates my posts.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
A machine with 512k that is a personal work station coul dhave 256k for memory, 128 for /tmp and 128 for swap. This could add in that necessary performance increas I need for video.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
I do own a palm V and am running there OS 3.3. I think it works fine. What does OS 3.5 have that 3.3 doesn't? If you buy a new Palm will it have OS 3.5 or will it still have 3.3 and will they include an upgrade cupon or something?
Personally I think that this is a result of palm OS being free adn Sony and handspring (to mention a few) coming out with palm devices based on the palm os that are better to some extent than palm, and palm sales are probably not as good as they should be. This may be designed to hurt the competition not so much as the end users. But I wonder if they realize that by doing this who will be the one to get the added charges?
It looks like just another case of some company saying our OS is free and then saying no it is not. The same thing can happen with QT so watch out which verison you use for kde all ;-O
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
As I said I was not sure about mac. however you say Mac programs are staticly linked, in that when you install a program, it's just one large application that functions on it's own,. Installing into one folder is not the same as statically linked. Statically linked means that the dlls are part of the executable. Im sure that if you install programas on a Mac and it is not one file that gets installed you are useing shared objects.
What you are actually talking about is 'where' prorgams are installed as opposed to how programs are compiled. 'static' and shared refer to how are program is compiled not how it is installed.
Now if you look at a RH distribution. They are working on that one putting things in one place. Part of that problem stems from the unix file system. It is inherently flawed. It is flawed in the fact that it was set up so that if you want to test software you install into /usr/local/{bin,lib,sbin, etc} if you are installing into the sytem you install into /usr/{bin,lib,etc}. This comes from early UNIX not the packaging system. In looking at redhat most of a program gets installed into /usr/lib/ and then the executables are in /usr/bin. This is done cause /usr/bin is in almost everyone path. If they kept all teh executables in /usr/lib/ then you woudl need to add each dir to your path and then logout and login to have the changes take effect or 'export PATH=$PATH:/usr/lib/` (assuming bash shell here) after each install. Maybe someday people will do that under unix. Maybe the tree will be /usr/packages and then set the env for the system to include the new program and all. Each package then can have a bin,lib. The problem with this is that you eventually will run out of env space when your path gets to be 30 pages long.
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!
This is really off topic.
Now about rpm and apt-get which is what this was really about. RPM does allow you to save configs, that is whay I usually have all these .rpmsave files after I upgrade a program. I think it would be nice if there was a switch that could be passed to rpm like 'rpm -Uvh --keepconfig .rpm` to save my current configuration file without creating the rpmsave files.
rpm is not perfect. debs are not either. Last time I tried to install debain it did all its package checking at the time I selected the package rather than let me select the packages and then when I was ready to install tell me what dependancies I missed. I like rpm cause I think it was easier to learn than deb's, just my opinion though which where i am I am entitled to!
Now apt-get may work with rpms. This is good. So when does that project get started?
A second feature that would be real nice in rpm is more than just an rpm problems. It is a *nix make problem. Makefiles are not all the same. Some packages use automake and autoconf to generate the Makefile while some people just use make. Then there is really no way to know what it being installed if you are not the packager and without looking at all the sources. If I download a tar.gz and want to have an rpm out of it making that specfiles can be a real pain in the but, and half the time you can never be sure that you got all the files correctly. There has got to be a better way! If a program is in perl it may not use configure scripts it may just use a perl script. Maybe what needs to happen is a concerted effort into creatinga new system management tool. One that takes a snapshot of the system before a package is going to be insatlled and then one that takes one after. Window is doing something like this and allowing users to go back to a given point in time. So you could take a snapshot of the system before you install a program and then after you install it you can see what is changed. If rpm had this capability rpm would see what files had changed after you installed some programs ie after you do a make install or whatever. Those changes could be updated in the rpm database. If something failed the rpm database could roll the system back to before the fiels were installed. It needs some way of doing this. Maybe a program that could be turned and off at will. You could turn on the system file watcher and after you do a make install it would give you alist of fiels that have changed. It would have to be smart enough to ignore /proc of course and /tmp (or configurable to ignore certain directories) hmm ....
I don't want a lot, I just want it all!
Flame away, I have a hose!