The cannonical FreeBSD packet filter is ipfw (AKA ipfirewall), not ipfilter. Having said that, it is BSD licensed, at least the fork of it that lives in FreeBSD. Don't believe me? Read the license:
/*
* Copyright (c) 1993 Daniel Boulet
* Copyright (c) 1994 Ugen J.S.Antsilevich
* Copyright (c) 1996 Alex Nash
* Copyright (c) 2000 Luigi Rizzo
*
* Redistribution and use in source forms, with and without modification,
* are permitted provided that this entire comment appears intact.
*
* Redistribution in binary form may occur without any restrictions.
* Obviously, it would be nice if you gave credit where credit is due
* but requiring it would be too onerous.
*
* This software is provided ``AS IS'' without any warranties of any kind.
*
* $FreeBSD: src/sys/netinet/ip_fw.c,v 1.131.2.23 2001/03/28 05:19:00 simokawa Exp $
*/
Oh, please... they could have "embraced and extended" Kerberos even if it was GPL. There is no indication that they used any code from available BSD licensed implementations, and there's every indication that they have competent enough developers to read the bloody specs and roll their own.
Please don't spoil an otherwise good post with FUD like that.
It's simple really, the license did not grant you the right to distribute modified versions of the software. Take a step back: It's his software, and it's copyrighted by him. He lets you do two things, provided that his notice is preserved and due credit is given (which is fair enough):
1) use it in source and binary forms
2) redistribute it in source and binary forms
One could argue that using the software includes doing the necessary modifications for it to run on your system and whatnot, although I doubt if this would stand in court, however I belive that Darren wouldn't mind you fiddling with his source.
You have no right whatsoever though, to redistribute modified versions of his software in any form, simply because he hasn't explicitly granted you that right. To do this, you would need his permission from day 0, and all he did was clarify the license, not change it.
/*
* Copyright (C) 1993-2000 by Darren Reed.
*
* The author accepts no responsibility for the use of this software and
* provides it on an ``as is'' basis without express or implied warranty.
*
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted
* provided that this notice is preserved and due credit is given
* to the original author and the contributors.
*
* This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
* but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
* MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
*
* I hate legaleese, don't you ?
*/
Contrast that with the BSD license and observe that
Reed's license does not allow redistribution in modified form:
Copyright 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
without specific prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGE.
Are you out of your mind? The burden of compliance with the license rests upon the licensee not the author.
How could you expect the author of IPF to track all users of his software and ensure that they do not supply it in modified form?
He did precisely that mind you. Upon realizing that some group was distributing modified code, he added a clarification that this was against the license.
It was then that all hell broke loose, because some people want to have their cake and eat it too.
People shouldn't be pissed with the author of IPF, but with themselves, for failing to read the license in the first place.
When will pathetic lusers like you realise that developers can do whatever the heck pleases them with THEIR source code?
No, developing software with a license that doesn't give freedoms like the BSD and GNU GPL license will NOT hurt the community. I can develop whatever I want, and put it under a BSD-style license with the addition of a condition that demands that you give me your first born child for my private army or whatever. It's my software, it's my license, you can all go and #@% yourselves if you prefer GPL.
Also, can slashdot PLEASE for the love of $DEITY stop this misinformation? IPF did *NOT* change license. It's just that nobody bothered to *READ* it until now. It is *NOT* BSD style, it never mentioned that redistribution in modified form of source or binary is permitted - people just *ASSUMED* it is, and they were wrong.
BTW, there's something strange happening, I couldn't post this without adding something to "Will they stop someday ?". Here's what I got:
Something is wrong: parent=44 dups=1 discussion=01/05/29/0831233
Duplicate. Did you submit twice?
Let us know if anything exceptionally strange happens
Oh, and now I have to avoid the lameness filter. So here's a fortune:
Bumper sticker:
"All the parts falling off this car are of the very finest British manufacture"
If GoIP and HeadCasting are real (there's no indication that he didn't made this stuff up too), a much more reasonable assumption is that GoIP indeed means Graphics over IP, and HeadCasting is transmitting framebuffer information to a remote display over IP.
Not convinced?
Use your head (no pun intended)... VoIP, GoIP... multicasting, headcasting... and how is matrox calling their dual output feature? DualHead.
Actually, something like this would be quite useful if done in a generic hardware way. Something like VNC in hardware, so to say. Just stick this matrox with the GoIP module here, and stick that monitor on the other side of campus with an apropriate GoIP module, and let them talk over the existing ethernet. Or just fill the campus with monitors all tuned to one of those boards and use it as an announcement/news system that is significantly easier to expand than doing runs of coax to a bunch of IP-challenged display units.
I can certainly find applications for something like that.
Obviously, i just pulled this out of my arse just like the author of the original non-story, however I'd like to believe that at least I'm being more reasonable:)
I agree, the question shouldn't be "Why change" but "Why NOT change?"
To that end, at the NOC of the Academic Insitution I work for as a net/sys admin, we just made it an informal requirement that anything new being setup (either a new service, or upgrading of an existing one) should be IPv6 capable. Simple as that. Sure, it does restrict your choices a bit, but the impact was minimal to us since we use BSD for the majority of our services.
It's been a few months now, and *all* the basic services that we maintain (primary & secondary DNS & MX, http/ftp proxy, a cluster of mailbox hosts hidden behind a POP3/IMAP4 redirector, a large FTP archive and all our web pages) are IPv6 capable. I really like the fact that in all our hosts, all the services are binded to both IPv6 and IPv4 sockets and have both IPv6 and IPv4 addresses pointing to them via DNS.
The result is that, since I use FreeBSD at my workstation, like many other colleagues, we only use IPv4 for connections outside our network.
Granted, we're currently using an extra router and tunnels for IPv6, but it's only a matter of time until we upgrade our border router to handle IPv6 and get rid of the tunnel and speak IPv6 with the backbone we peer with.
I believe that the situation is similar in other countries too - once again it is the Academia that will lead the way, just like it did with IPv4. This is nor surprising. If you ask me *WHY* we converted to IPv6, I cannot give you an answer. Really, there's no answer. We just *DID*. This is not the kind of answer that management of a corporate entity likes to hear from their engineers, especially when it restricts choices somewhat and requires extra work to iron out bugs and problems, and all that for apparently no reason (as far as THEY are concerned).
I also get the impression that the shortage of IPv4 addresses and the difficulty one faces when seeking an allocation, is a status that many corporate entities actually *LIKE*.
Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis, te decet hymnus, Deus in Sion, et tibi reddetur votum in Jerusalem; exaudi orationem meam, ad te omnis caro veniet. Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis.
Here's the relevant bits off/etc/defaults/make.conf (you're supposed to put your changes to/etc/make.conf, which doesn't exist out of the box, mind you):
# The CPUTYPE variable controls which processor should be targetted for
# generated code. This controls processor-specific optimizations in
# certain code (currently only OpenSSL) as well as modifying the value
# of CFLAGS to contain the appropriate optimization directive to gcc.
# The automatic setting of CFLAGS may be overridden using the
# NO_CPU_CFLAGS variable below.
# Currently the following CPU types are recognised:
# Intel x86 architecture:
# (AMD CPUs) k7 k6-2 k6 k5
# (Intel CPUs) p4 p3 p2 i686 i586/mmx i586 i486 i386
# Alpha/AXP architecture: ev6 pca56 ev56 ev5 ev45 ev4
#
# If you experience any problems after setting this flag, please unset
# it again before submitting a bug report or attempting to modify code.
# It may be that certain types of software will become unstable after being
# compiled with processor-specific (or higher - see below) optimization flags.
# If in doubt, do not set CPUTYPE or CFLAGS to non-default values.
#
#CPUTYPE=i686
#NO_CPU_CFLAGS= true # Don't add -march=<cpu> to CFLAGS automatically
#NO_CPU_COPTFLAGS=true # Don't add -march=<cpu> to COPTFLAGS automatically
#
# CFLAGS controls the compiler settings used when compiling C code.
# Note that optimization settings above -O (-O2,...) are not recommended
# or supported for compiling the world or the kernel - please revert any
# nonstandard optimization settings to "-O" before submitting bug reports
# to the developers.
# Note also that at this time the -O2 setting is known to produce BROKEN
# CODE on the Alpha platform.
#
#CFLAGS= -O -pipe
#
# CXXFLAGS controls the compiler settings used when compiling C++ code.
# Note that CXXFLAGS is initially set to the value of CFLAGS. If you wish
# to add to CXXFLAGS value, "+=" must be used rather than "=". Using "="
# alone will remove the often needed contents of CFLAGS from CXXFLAGS.
#
#CXXFLAGS+= -fmemoize-lookups -fsave-memoized
#
# To compile just the kernel with special optimizations, you should use
# this instead of CFLAGS (which is not applicable to kernel builds anyway).
# There is very little to gain by using higher optimization levels, and doing
# so can cause problems.
#
#COPTFLAGS= -O -pipe
As for these getting stomped over, hello! the whole FreeBSD source tree honours these and the vast majority of the ports tree too. If you fetch a tarball of the net then just fix the makefiles so that it does fit the FreeBSD way of doing things, and submit a port. Most of the times this has been done by someone else though, since there are over 5000 ports nowadays...
The INT TLD is nothing special - it is defined in RFC1591 along with the other more well known TLDs (COM, NET, ORG, EDU, GOV, MIL and the ISO-3166 two-letter country codes). Anyway, it is managed by IANA (actually, I think the ITU is responsible for the maintenance and IANA merely handle the registrations or something like that).
It is not very well known because it is restricted to organizations established by international treaties, according to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), and international databases, which are defined as non-commercial entities that provide services of direct relevance to the operation of the public Internet. Clearly not as big a market as COM:)
Your explanation is of course correct technically, and I apologize for this 'clever troll' as someone described it.
However, consider explaining that 10 equals 9 for small values of 10 only on Linux distros out of dozens of other platforms to someone that was being tortured while doing a C assignment. Now, do you get my point? Try not to view this from an ANSI-C-bigot point of view, but from a poor-guy-trying-to-learn-C or poor-guy-assigned-to-port-stuff-to-linux view. There's plenty of bad code out there, and you know it:)
Anyway, just in case any of you really cared, rest assured that I don't base my OS decisions on such stuff, or I wouldn't have any linux boxes around to test this interesting bit of trivia on.
(BTW the lameness filter defies logic, that was the best I could do with the C snippet)
A friend was tortured for a few hours doing an assignment until I took a look at the code and realized the problem boiled down to something that can be reduced to this snippet.
I compiled this with default compiler settings on every platform I could find. This means Digital Unix 4.0, OpenVMS 7.2, Solaris 8, IRIX 6.4, HP-UX 10.20, FreeBSD 4-STABLE, OpenBSD 2.8 and various Linux distros, from ancient to cutting edge - both with gcc and any commercial compilers that happened to be available at each box.
On all Linux distros, and only on Linux distros, ranging from an ancient Slackware setup to the latest Red Hat, I get 9=10. On everything else, I get 10=10. Go figure, and remember that the whole OS is compiled with that.
I think I'll just stick to FreeBSD as far as my intel boxes are concerned.
Hmm, right. Perhaps Content Access Restriction then? Or just GREED for Global Rights Enforcement of Entertainment Data which captures the true essence of these measures:)
Why the entertainment industry makes me sick:
(http://www.trond.com/brazil/b_faq02.html)
"Scheinberg's editors Bill Gordean and Steve Lovejoy created an edit which cut out many of the dream sequences and essential threads in the plot of Brazil, while splicing in all elements of humor and all usable footage involving Sam Lowry and Jill Layton, the "dream girl". If that wasn't bad enough, Gordean and Lovejoy also lopped off the entire ending sequence which involved Sam Lowry's interrogation (and eventual loss of sanity) by his coworker Jack Lint. Instead, they chose to end the film where Sam finally consummates his relationship with Jill, and escapes with her to the country. Also suggested was the replacement of Kamen's symphonic score with one of rock music - in order to "attract teens."
If that doesn't make you sick, I don't know what will. Anyway, after rereading the FAQ, it appears that this edit was not the one released in the US after all, but only due to a LOT of pressure:
"Universal finally opened Gilliam's 132 minute cut of Brazil at two theaters in Los Angeles on Christmas Day, 1985, later slowly bringing it across the country in a limited number of theatres with limited advertising."
I just wonder how many directors were not as 'lucky' as Terry Gilliam was.
Alternatively, watching Terry Gilliams' Brazil[1] half a dozen times or so could enlighten him.
It's getting easier and easier to face the fate of Mr. Tuttle^WButtle I'm afraid.
---
[1] Preferably the European version and definitely NOT the unbelievably stupid US one. I can't believe the nerves they had to happy-end that movie. Hollywood makes me sick.
Try/usr/ports/x11-fonts/webfonts (have to cvsup ports to current first though, or merely grab webfonts and cabextract) and not only do you get those neat monotype fonts that all sites seem to require, but also aliases specificaly for netscape that help SIGNIFICANTLY. I think you'll need XFree86 4.0.x too though.
First of all, I'm sorry that you think that showing someone HOW to help himself in contrast to actually helping someone with the task at hand is elitism. I for one, beg to differ. I do not consider this elitism, quite the conrary actually - I'm pretty sure it leaves the one asking for help better off in the long term and not dependent on the more experienced users. Many of the people I tutored really appreciated this 'method' in retrospect, although I must admit refusing outright to tell someone the correct flags to tar for untaring a tarball for example and insisting he reads the man page might be annoying. But if someone doesn't help himself, he shouldn't expect any more help from the others. It is he that must put the effort, not the ones he seeks guidance from. Ancient greek philosopher Socrates pioneered this teaching method (of showing people how to find truth instead of just telling them the truth) and he was anything but elitist - he was so humble he accepted the unfair death penalty imposed on him and refused to let his students assist him in escaping.
Obviously, there are morons and nutcases in all walks of life and I cannot possibly imagine what kind of characters you might have bumped in to, however basing your OS choices on the 'culture' of an OS rather than pure technical merits is probably not a good idea. I use the right tool for the right job, even if that means that I end up using tools that where created by complete bastards (I could name a few:)
As for the obviousness argument, the fact that it is explicitly stated that ad0 is connected to ata0 should be sufficient hint that that'd be a nice place to look. I mean look at this:
atapci0: <Intel PIIX4 ATA33 controller> port 0xf000-0xf00f at device 7.1 on pci0
ata0: at 0x1f0 irq 14 on atapci0
ata1: at 0x170 irq 15 on atapci0
ad0: 42934MB <WDC WD450AA> [87233/16/63] at ata0-master UDMA33
It's not gibberish either, it's the actual name of the interface, they didn't pick three random letters to name the device. As for the system console, oh well:
sc0: <System console> at flags 0x100 on isa0
sc0: VGA <16 virtual consoles, flags=0x300>
(man sc brings up the syscons manpage mind you)
Really, it is not that hard to get a hang of this, it's not rocket science.
Anyway a unix system is not for your average just-got-my-first-box kind of person, you'd at least expect from someone to have a basic grasp of the functioning of his computer and be willing to learn. The rewards of such an effort will be immense. If he's not willing to invest time, all the books in the world cannot help him, and perhaps he should choose something like MacOS X or Windows that although less rewarding might be more suitable due to the less steep initial learning curve.
Slashdot Mirror
The cannonical FreeBSD packet filter is ipfw (AKA ipfirewall), not ipfilter. Having said that, it is BSD licensed, at least the fork of it that lives in FreeBSD. Don't believe me? Read the license:
/*
* Copyright (c) 1993 Daniel Boulet
* Copyright (c) 1994 Ugen J.S.Antsilevich
* Copyright (c) 1996 Alex Nash
* Copyright (c) 2000 Luigi Rizzo
*
* Redistribution and use in source forms, with and without modification,
* are permitted provided that this entire comment appears intact.
*
* Redistribution in binary form may occur without any restrictions.
* Obviously, it would be nice if you gave credit where credit is due
* but requiring it would be too onerous.
*
* This software is provided ``AS IS'' without any warranties of any kind.
*
* $FreeBSD: src/sys/netinet/ip_fw.c,v 1.131.2.23 2001/03/28 05:19:00 simokawa Exp $
*/
If you bothered to actually read the article you'd have noticed that the author actually did a bang-for-buck table for the tests he run.
Does your point proove that if Kerberos' reference implementation was GPL'd instead of BSD Microsoft could not have embraced and extended it?
Wether Microsoft used existing BSD code or not is irrelevant anyway.
Oh, please... they could have "embraced and extended" Kerberos even if it was GPL. There is no indication that they used any code from available BSD licensed implementations, and there's every indication that they have competent enough developers to read the bloody specs and roll their own.
Please don't spoil an otherwise good post with FUD like that.
It's simple really, the license did not grant you the right to distribute modified versions of the software. Take a step back: It's his software, and it's copyrighted by him. He lets you do two things, provided that his notice is preserved and due credit is given (which is fair enough):
1) use it in source and binary forms
2) redistribute it in source and binary forms
One could argue that using the software includes doing the necessary modifications for it to run on your system and whatnot, although I doubt if this would stand in court, however I belive that Darren wouldn't mind you fiddling with his source.
You have no right whatsoever though, to redistribute modified versions of his software in any form, simply because he hasn't explicitly granted you that right. To do this, you would need his permission from day 0, and all he did was clarify the license, not change it.
It was *never* under the BSD license.
/*
Read carefully:
* Copyright (C) 1993-2000 by Darren Reed.
*
* The author accepts no responsibility for the use of this software and
* provides it on an ``as is'' basis without express or implied warranty.
*
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted
* provided that this notice is preserved and due credit is given
* to the original author and the contributors.
*
* This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
* but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
* MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
*
* I hate legaleese, don't you ?
*/
Contrast that with the BSD license and observe that
Reed's license does not allow redistribution in modified form:
Copyright 1979, 1980, 1983, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994
The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
3. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
without specific prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGE.
Are you out of your mind? The burden of compliance with the license rests upon the licensee not the author.
How could you expect the author of IPF to track all users of his software and ensure that they do not supply it in modified form?
He did precisely that mind you. Upon realizing that some group was distributing modified code, he added a clarification that this was against the license.
It was then that all hell broke loose, because some people want to have their cake and eat it too.
People shouldn't be pissed with the author of IPF, but with themselves, for failing to read the license in the first place.
When will pathetic lusers like you realise that developers can do whatever the heck pleases them with THEIR source code?
No, developing software with a license that doesn't give freedoms like the BSD and GNU GPL license will NOT hurt the community. I can develop whatever I want, and put it under a BSD-style license with the addition of a condition that demands that you give me your first born child for my private army or whatever. It's my software, it's my license, you can all go and #@% yourselves if you prefer GPL.
Also, can slashdot PLEASE for the love of $DEITY stop this misinformation? IPF did *NOT* change license. It's just that nobody bothered to *READ* it until now. It is *NOT* BSD style, it never mentioned that redistribution in modified form of source or binary is permitted - people just *ASSUMED* it is, and they were wrong.
Come on, this is getting childish.
Will they stop someday ?
BTW, there's something strange happening, I couldn't post this without adding something to "Will they stop someday ?". Here's what I got:
Something is wrong: parent=44 dups=1 discussion=01/05/29/0831233
Duplicate. Did you submit twice?
Let us know if anything exceptionally strange happens
Oh, and now I have to avoid the lameness filter. So here's a fortune:
Bumper sticker:
"All the parts falling off this car are of the very finest British manufacture"
If GoIP and HeadCasting are real (there's no indication that he didn't made this stuff up too), a much more reasonable assumption is that GoIP indeed means Graphics over IP, and HeadCasting is transmitting framebuffer information to a remote display over IP.
:)
Not convinced?
Use your head (no pun intended)... VoIP, GoIP... multicasting, headcasting... and how is matrox calling their dual output feature? DualHead.
Actually, something like this would be quite useful if done in a generic hardware way. Something like VNC in hardware, so to say. Just stick this matrox with the GoIP module here, and stick that monitor on the other side of campus with an apropriate GoIP module, and let them talk over the existing ethernet. Or just fill the campus with monitors all tuned to one of those boards and use it as an announcement/news system that is significantly easier to expand than doing runs of coax to a bunch of IP-challenged display units.
I can certainly find applications for something like that.
Obviously, i just pulled this out of my arse just like the author of the original non-story, however I'd like to believe that at least I'm being more reasonable
I agree, the question shouldn't be "Why change" but "Why NOT change?"
To that end, at the NOC of the Academic Insitution I work for as a net/sys admin, we just made it an informal requirement that anything new being setup (either a new service, or upgrading of an existing one) should be IPv6 capable. Simple as that. Sure, it does restrict your choices a bit, but the impact was minimal to us since we use BSD for the majority of our services.
It's been a few months now, and *all* the basic services that we maintain (primary & secondary DNS & MX, http/ftp proxy, a cluster of mailbox hosts hidden behind a POP3/IMAP4 redirector, a large FTP archive and all our web pages) are IPv6 capable. I really like the fact that in all our hosts, all the services are binded to both IPv6 and IPv4 sockets and have both IPv6 and IPv4 addresses pointing to them via DNS.
The result is that, since I use FreeBSD at my workstation, like many other colleagues, we only use IPv4 for connections outside our network.
Granted, we're currently using an extra router and tunnels for IPv6, but it's only a matter of time until we upgrade our border router to handle IPv6 and get rid of the tunnel and speak IPv6 with the backbone we peer with.
I believe that the situation is similar in other countries too - once again it is the Academia that will lead the way, just like it did with IPv4. This is nor surprising. If you ask me *WHY* we converted to IPv6, I cannot give you an answer. Really, there's no answer. We just *DID*. This is not the kind of answer that management of a corporate entity likes to hear from their engineers, especially when it restricts choices somewhat and requires extra work to iron out bugs and problems, and all that for apparently no reason (as far as THEY are concerned).
I also get the impression that the shortage of IPv4 addresses and the difficulty one faces when seeking an allocation, is a status that many corporate entities actually *LIKE*.
Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis, te decet hymnus, Deus in Sion, et tibi reddetur votum in Jerusalem; exaudi orationem meam, ad te omnis caro veniet. Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis.
Here's the relevant bits off /etc/defaults/make.conf (you're supposed to put your changes to /etc/make.conf, which doesn't exist out of the box, mind you):
...) are not recommended
# The CPUTYPE variable controls which processor should be targetted for
# generated code. This controls processor-specific optimizations in
# certain code (currently only OpenSSL) as well as modifying the value
# of CFLAGS to contain the appropriate optimization directive to gcc.
# The automatic setting of CFLAGS may be overridden using the
# NO_CPU_CFLAGS variable below.
# Currently the following CPU types are recognised:
# Intel x86 architecture:
# (AMD CPUs) k7 k6-2 k6 k5
# (Intel CPUs) p4 p3 p2 i686 i586/mmx i586 i486 i386
# Alpha/AXP architecture: ev6 pca56 ev56 ev5 ev45 ev4
#
# If you experience any problems after setting this flag, please unset
# it again before submitting a bug report or attempting to modify code.
# It may be that certain types of software will become unstable after being
# compiled with processor-specific (or higher - see below) optimization flags.
# If in doubt, do not set CPUTYPE or CFLAGS to non-default values.
#
#CPUTYPE=i686
#NO_CPU_CFLAGS= true # Don't add -march=<cpu> to CFLAGS automatically
#NO_CPU_COPTFLAGS=true # Don't add -march=<cpu> to COPTFLAGS automatically
#
# CFLAGS controls the compiler settings used when compiling C code.
# Note that optimization settings above -O (-O2,
# or supported for compiling the world or the kernel - please revert any
# nonstandard optimization settings to "-O" before submitting bug reports
# to the developers.
# Note also that at this time the -O2 setting is known to produce BROKEN
# CODE on the Alpha platform.
#
#CFLAGS= -O -pipe
#
# CXXFLAGS controls the compiler settings used when compiling C++ code.
# Note that CXXFLAGS is initially set to the value of CFLAGS. If you wish
# to add to CXXFLAGS value, "+=" must be used rather than "=". Using "="
# alone will remove the often needed contents of CFLAGS from CXXFLAGS.
#
#CXXFLAGS+= -fmemoize-lookups -fsave-memoized
#
# To compile just the kernel with special optimizations, you should use
# this instead of CFLAGS (which is not applicable to kernel builds anyway).
# There is very little to gain by using higher optimization levels, and doing
# so can cause problems.
#
#COPTFLAGS= -O -pipe
As for these getting stomped over, hello! the whole FreeBSD source tree honours these and the vast majority of the ports tree too. If you fetch a tarball of the net then just fix the makefiles so that it does fit the FreeBSD way of doing things, and submit a port. Most of the times this has been done by someone else though, since there are over 5000 ports nowadays...
bzzzt! wrong -
RSS stands for RDF Site Summary, not Rich Site Summary. And RDF, as we all should know stands for Resource Description Framework.
So, RSS really expands to Resource Description Framework Site Summary.
No wonder PCMCIA.
BSD/OS is quite expensive - I guess it would look like a reasonable choice to your boss.
Oh, I feel pitty for you.
No, it's not better.
A good example is the differences between the Free Software Foundation and the Open Software Foundation.
The INT TLD is nothing special - it is defined in RFC1591 along with the other more well known TLDs (COM, NET, ORG, EDU, GOV, MIL and the ISO-3166 two-letter country codes). Anyway, it is managed by IANA (actually, I think the ITU is responsible for the maintenance and IANA merely handle the registrations or something like that).
:)
It is not very well known because it is restricted to organizations established by international treaties, according to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), and international databases, which are defined as non-commercial entities that provide services of direct relevance to the operation of the public Internet. Clearly not as big a market as COM
Some examples are UN.INT, ITU.INT, WIPO.INT.
Your explanation is of course correct technically, and I apologize for this 'clever troll' as someone described it.
:)
However, consider explaining that 10 equals 9 for small values of 10 only on Linux distros out of dozens of other platforms to someone that was being tortured while doing a C assignment. Now, do you get my point? Try not to view this from an ANSI-C-bigot point of view, but from a poor-guy-trying-to-learn-C or poor-guy-assigned-to-port-stuff-to-linux view. There's plenty of bad code out there, and you know it
Anyway, just in case any of you really cared, rest assured that I don't base my OS decisions on such stuff, or I wouldn't have any linux boxes around to test this interesting bit of trivia on.
If you've got a minute, and one of those 'bleeding edge' OSes, try compiling with no optimizations and running this for fun:
int main(void)
{
int a = 60, b = 6, c = 10;
printf("%d = %d\n", (int) (((60/6)*0.3) + (10*0.7)), (int) ((( a/b)*0.3) + ( c*0.7)));
exit(1);
}
(BTW the lameness filter defies logic, that was the best I could do with the C snippet)
A friend was tortured for a few hours doing an assignment until I took a look at the code and realized the problem boiled down to something that can be reduced to this snippet.
I compiled this with default compiler settings on every platform I could find. This means Digital Unix 4.0, OpenVMS 7.2, Solaris 8, IRIX 6.4, HP-UX 10.20, FreeBSD 4-STABLE, OpenBSD 2.8 and various Linux distros, from ancient to cutting edge - both with gcc and any commercial compilers that happened to be available at each box.
On all Linux distros, and only on Linux distros, ranging from an ancient Slackware setup to the latest Red Hat, I get 9=10. On everything else, I get 10=10. Go figure, and remember that the whole OS is compiled with that.
I think I'll just stick to FreeBSD as far as my intel boxes are concerned.
Hmm, right. Perhaps Content Access Restriction then? Or just GREED for Global Rights Enforcement of Entertainment Data which captures the true essence of these measures :)
Why the entertainment industry makes me sick:
(http://www.trond.com/brazil/b_faq02.html)
"Scheinberg's editors Bill Gordean and Steve Lovejoy created an edit which cut out many of the dream sequences and essential threads in the plot of Brazil, while splicing in all elements of humor and all usable footage involving Sam Lowry and Jill Layton, the "dream girl". If that wasn't bad enough, Gordean and Lovejoy also lopped off the entire ending sequence which involved Sam Lowry's interrogation (and eventual loss of sanity) by his coworker Jack Lint. Instead, they chose to end the film where Sam finally consummates his relationship with Jill, and escapes with her to the country. Also suggested was the replacement of Kamen's symphonic score with one of rock music - in order to "attract teens."
If that doesn't make you sick, I don't know what will. Anyway, after rereading the FAQ, it appears that this edit was not the one released in the US after all, but only due to a LOT of pressure:
"Universal finally opened Gilliam's 132 minute cut of Brazil at two theaters in Los Angeles on Christmas Day, 1985, later slowly bringing it across the country in a limited number of theatres with limited advertising."
I just wonder how many directors were not as 'lucky' as Terry Gilliam was.
Alternatively, watching Terry Gilliams' Brazil[1] half a dozen times or so could enlighten him.
It's getting easier and easier to face the fate of Mr. Tuttle^WButtle I'm afraid.
---
[1] Preferably the European version and definitely NOT the unbelievably stupid US one. I can't believe the nerves they had to happy-end that movie. Hollywood makes me sick.
I very much prefer Copyright Enforcement Measures. I think I've read it somewhere on the register, cheers to whoever it is that came up with this =P
Try /usr/ports/x11-fonts/webfonts (have to cvsup ports to current first though, or merely grab webfonts and cabextract) and not only do you get those neat monotype fonts that all sites seem to require, but also aliases specificaly for netscape that help SIGNIFICANTLY. I think you'll need XFree86 4.0.x too though.
First of all, I'm sorry that you think that showing someone HOW to help himself in contrast to actually helping someone with the task at hand is elitism. I for one, beg to differ. I do not consider this elitism, quite the conrary actually - I'm pretty sure it leaves the one asking for help better off in the long term and not dependent on the more experienced users. Many of the people I tutored really appreciated this 'method' in retrospect, although I must admit refusing outright to tell someone the correct flags to tar for untaring a tarball for example and insisting he reads the man page might be annoying. But if someone doesn't help himself, he shouldn't expect any more help from the others. It is he that must put the effort, not the ones he seeks guidance from. Ancient greek philosopher Socrates pioneered this teaching method (of showing people how to find truth instead of just telling them the truth) and he was anything but elitist - he was so humble he accepted the unfair death penalty imposed on him and refused to let his students assist him in escaping.
:)
Obviously, there are morons and nutcases in all walks of life and I cannot possibly imagine what kind of characters you might have bumped in to, however basing your OS choices on the 'culture' of an OS rather than pure technical merits is probably not a good idea. I use the right tool for the right job, even if that means that I end up using tools that where created by complete bastards (I could name a few
As for the obviousness argument, the fact that it is explicitly stated that ad0 is connected to ata0 should be sufficient hint that that'd be a nice place to look. I mean look at this:
atapci0: <Intel PIIX4 ATA33 controller> port 0xf000-0xf00f at device 7.1 on pci0
ata0: at 0x1f0 irq 14 on atapci0
ata1: at 0x170 irq 15 on atapci0
ad0: 42934MB <WDC WD450AA> [87233/16/63] at ata0-master UDMA33
It's not gibberish either, it's the actual name of the interface, they didn't pick three random letters to name the device. As for the system console, oh well:
sc0: <System console> at flags 0x100 on isa0
sc0: VGA <16 virtual consoles, flags=0x300>
(man sc brings up the syscons manpage mind you)
Really, it is not that hard to get a hang of this, it's not rocket science.
Anyway a unix system is not for your average just-got-my-first-box kind of person, you'd at least expect from someone to have a basic grasp of the functioning of his computer and be willing to learn. The rewards of such an effort will be immense. If he's not willing to invest time, all the books in the world cannot help him, and perhaps he should choose something like MacOS X or Windows that although less rewarding might be more suitable due to the less steep initial learning curve.