> As a resident of SA, my freedom of speech is about to disappear...
Maybe it is me, but you seem more concerned by the disparition of your freedom to free porn...
(Which, I think, is the real issue. Porn is a mega-business, and internet threatens it [for instance: news://alt.binaries.erotica.picture.*]. Law are getting passed so they can save the business model of soft-porn. You didn't loose any freedom, mostly because you did not had any to start with)
> and especially non-subscription based products where you do not ever possess ANYTHING
Same holds for software. You don't own your windows or office copy. Or your ORACLE copy. And those become useless as time passes, as ORACLE is useless without technical support, oor windows without upgrade for new hardware.
> and they can just take away your software at their will [oh, you write web pages bashing MS, fine no more frontpage for you!]
When you buy ORACLE, you agree to a license that prohibit you to publish benchmarks of ORACLE. It'll, of course, be the same with those subscriptions-based software (to protect the 'corporate image', you'll have to agree to shut-up)
I am ROTFL with this. It is so... gross. As soon as you start subscribing, the they will send you more and more deadly EULAs (because they'll have your files in hostage), and just start milking more and more money.
In the mid-80's (wov that starts to be old) I recall all industry pudits predicting that the future cost of a computer would be 20% harware and 80% software (recall, it was before open-source for the masses). Subscription based may get this (of course, hardware will be free. You would just sign for a 2 years subscription). And, as this is a business model that needs to be protected, stay tuned to see laws to prevent you to hack this (Example: no-reverse engeneering, no-possibility to run untrusted code <ie: not-subscription based>, no right to use open-source software)
All-in-all, I am not worried. Such ugly proposals guarantee that there will be a pool of brillant people to develop free(dom) alternatives. And, after all, if joe random clueless user want to run subscription based software, I don't give a fuck...
> PRZ seems to stress on the points that PGP has NO backdoors as of now and that he and NAI have different visions of the product. Could this be somekind of a hint that NAI now wants to build backdoors into their product, probably to appease NSA or something like that ? After all we know that many MS products do have NSA backdoors.
> Changing the skin kills the menus (File and Edit works, everything after View doesn't)
It only kills the current window. Workaround: open another window, switch the skin from it, then close it.
> It'll get better soon, honest
It did get a *hell* better in the last months. Not really usable for general consumpsion, but it is already my default browser.
> Is the emperor wearing clothes?
About the huge amount of bugs you have, you have to admit that they are not in fundamental parts of the browser. You can browse the web with mozilla with a non proprietary software.
This is huge goodness. Let's say that the emperor have bathclothes..
And thanks for supporting this project. *Everybody* will benefit of it.
I sorta disagree. gcc was not named cc. gnutar was not named tar. They don't have to name their program ssh. RMS would say that they should do things as differently as possible, and provide a --traditional for inter-operability (Btw, I would love hearing what Theo would say if RMS tried to tell himn what to do:-) ).
Sure gnuls would be ridiculous, so my example isn't worth much. Even apache is named httpd, so...
> By your standards F-Secure is diluting the ssh mark
Frankly, I don't know. I was just saying that *I* often confused ssh and openssh, and that *I* would have zero problem using asfkaos (A Shell Formelly Known As OpenSHH) as it would help me to stay away from ssh(tm) products.
OTOH, maybe you are right, and ssh corp should be told to f*ck themselves...
> Good job. We have now taken the position to the outside world of being total assholes.
Saying "If you do that, you'll look like a total asshole" to Theo de Raadt is pushing him to do it. Ask around you "who is the biggest open-source asshole ?". If you remove the goatse.cx (which may not be opensource), most answers will point to Theo.
He is already the most appreciated asshole of the community.
I profoundly disagree. OpenSSH will be tainted for the rest of its life if it doesn't change its name.
I have been confused between openssh and ssh numerous time. Both commmands are named 'ssh', and I think it is an error.
Anyway, the request seems pretty stupid, as OpenSSH is doing a lot of good to ssh corp. If OpenSSH renamed the command to something less related to ssh, like pinss (pins is not secure shell) or yass (yet another secure shell), then ssh corp will loose a lot of mindshare.
Making the issue into "we can legally keep the name" is plain wrong. They want the name ? Give them. The name is just a name. The free alternative is better, so will succeed under any kind of name (and, people will alias ssh to wosin [whatever open ssh is named] anyway, so the pratical impact will be zero).
> More like Netscape 6.0 was released a few months too early.
I don't think so. AOL have different needs than mozilla. They needed to get something out, even if it is crappy. Bad press is better than no press. They release bug fixes, and will release a future version based on the mozilla trunk. At the end, they will have a browser as stable as mozilla is, but will have something to show before. Net result will be positive for them *and* for mozilla (if NS6 didn't exist, you would seem hundred of comments explaining why mozilla is a failure because nothing official was released...)
Btw, mozilla is my main browser for the last 3 months. Crashes often, but is better and better.
Soo true. We can expect to hear that little music more and more. Free software will be charged of every possible problem. Thankfully, there will be laws to regulate this.
> What they have said, is that the government should not encourage it.
> And this is more fair.
Wft the US govt have to do with what a corporation wants ?
> Let me explain:
> The ultimate goal of Open Source is free software.
> Now this means that you don't pay anything for it.
This is not true. Free software means freedom, not "you don't pay anything"
> If this happens, there is no money to pay programmers
The amount of money that goes to the developer is insignifiant. Really. For a retail price of a product, all programmers maybe get 1%. (Very very good contracts, at the time where programmers could do software all by themselves and hand it to a dsitributor, were just a little higher than 10% royalties. this does not exist anymore, and the concept of 'star' programmer does not exist in software houses anymore).
> As a result, intelligent people such as myself,
No sir. You are a moron. I'll stop commenting, as it is just too funny.
> who could command 6 figure salaries in any profession
> No, each of these 'victims' would only receive a single 60 byte packet. This is the opposite of a DoS attack, as you are sending a large number of packets, but each peer is only receiving one of them.
Well, *if* I am the only one to query. In the general case, they would receive 60 bytes packets for every query done in the network.
This is the major flaw of all gnutella-like systems. If only the client knows what is on its disks, then you can kiss scalability good bye, no matter how hard you try.
> Steve Jobs has an open hostility to open source code, and he has never given anything back to the community that wasn't already there.
Wooov. That is a pretty ridiculous statment. The sources of NeXTstep are almost fully avalaible, under the sweet name of the first (early last year) darwin distribution. There are a lot of thing there. netinfo, for instance, is a crude counter example of your troll.
Sure, NeXT did not donate a lot to open source, but more than what they really had to.
Can you point me to the source of obsolete Microsoft products ?
> Anyone who ever wrote a mac application in the 80s or early 90s will tell you, their style guidelines made it IMPOSSIBLE to write an inconsistant gui
> What do others think ?
That you take your dreams for reality. Consistant Mac gui ? I saw so much applications that missed the TrackGoAway() call that it isn't funny (note for the uninformed. The original Mac toolbox was [and still is] a b*tch. Even windows is easier to deal with.). Apple guidelines were very restirctive and were blown away by apple itself numerous times (Hey, who would pretend that HyperCard followed the User Interface Guidelines ?). I was so disgusted of my Inside Mac User Interface that I trowed it in a fire.
Btw, the holy grail of UNIX/GUI was not A/UX, but, of course, NeXTstep. And rejoice, as Mac OS X is basically NeXTstep 6.
And writing an inconsistant AppKit application is really difficult. Writing a consistant Mac application was a nightmare.
Stop smoking crap. Does CD cost less than tapes ? Even for music digitally recorded, that sells more CDs than tapes, CDs are more expensive.
The only matter is "how much money can you milk from the consumer". People buying CDs have more money than people buying tapes, so you can charge more. Same holds for DVDs. Supply and demand is a fucked myth. There is an (potentially) infinite supply of DVDs as they are just bits. MPAA business model is buying laws to charge people. Works pretty well for now.
> I'm speaking practically here. I'm going to visit 10,000 cities. Please give me the absolute guaranteed best route (in my lifetime, if you please).
You are wrong. Either you are speaking theorically, in which case the salesman problem is trivially solvable, or you are talking practically, and you don't give a shit about the *best* route. A good one will be sufficient, and there are very good heuristics for that.
> Yeah, it's that the market for what I do isn't generally using Linux.
> But yes, a gig of memory and a RAM drive would be a good approach.
Don't know if you are going to read this, but you may try a slighly different approach first:
A FAT32 partition. Defragmented. Maybe on a different physical disk.
First, NTFS file system is slow on write because of the journalling. FAT32 is not journalled, and have a better throughtput.
Second, NTFS fragment very easily (which I find hilarious, because a few years ago, it was hyped as good to reduce fragmentation). If you have a lot of files that are created/removed, you ends up with a disk full of holes. When writing a big file on that disk (for instance objects file), your perf goes down in the toilet [mainly because windows is stupid enough to find space "backward"]. I saw trhoughtput divided by 10. Think about it. 10ms seek time adds very fast. You ends up with files that cannot be read fully in less than 1/10 of a second if it is divided in 10 or so fragments. You ends up with a _lot_ of delay. The defragmenter in win2k is not able to really reduce the fragmentation is some non-pathological cases. What is even worse is that the defragmentation don't prevent future files to be fragemented (ie: you get a nicely non-fragmented disk, and then the files you create there are going to be fragemented at creation time).
By using a separate partition for temporary object files (and maybe some often accessed development tools, like the compiler/linker and the header) you can re-create it from scracth to get a nicely non-fragmented space, in which, when link.exe will be called into memory, it'll be loaded at light speed (check that your disk are goods too. I have 25MB/s sustended read on a ABIT HotRod + 46 Gb UDMA-100 IBM disk on Win2K (and the process is CPU-bound).
Third, by judiciously splitting the load on 2 disks, you can overlap I/O and get better performance (in particular for the swap file, if you swap a bit while compiling. Avoid having a fragmented swap file as much as you can). YMMV, but checking with the performance monitor a few hours can give you hindsight on what kind on what access pattern and what kind of throughput you can expect.
Btw, changing your motherboard would be an efficient move too, as if you are maxed at 256Mb you probably have an old box...
> A high percentage of my working day is spent waiting for compiles, as even a single change to a file requires on the order of five minutes of compiling and linking. A lot of that is file read/write time. If I could write it to memory-speed output rather than disk, I would be a happy man
Uh ? Put more RAM. Put even more RAM. And some extra RAM. Then use a ram disk for your object directory, and keep a lot of ram as the file cache. On a bsd, suppress atime update on the directory containing system include/libraries, or mount it read-only or copy it into a ram drive. Remove atime from you sources too.
> According to the task manager
Oh, I guess what your problem is. You use an OS that have a journaled meta-data filesystem (so sloow sync write for each file) and that have *very* high fragmentation (spend most of his time seeking).
You have a thick skull, don't you ? This will only keep the source of the ports current. Of course I already have the whole port tree current. I am supposed to blindly 'make -DBATCH -DFORCE_PKG_REGISTER reinstall' the 200 ports every night too ? It seem that your answer is yes. Is that better than apt-get to keep a system current ? Hardly. Why ? Because 1/ it takes forever on low end machines 2/ it breaks often because it does not respect dependancies or when multiple versions of the same pakage are installed [read pkg_version man page one of those days] 3/ it uses gigabytes of disk space.
It is people like you that give BSDs users their bad reputation.
> I've set up my make.conf to keep every last bit on my system completely up to date - 3rd party software included - with just that one make world.
Please post your make.conf file.
I fail to see exactly what I am supposed to do to keep the ~200 ports I use current. I guess I am doing something wrong here. I cvsup the base system and the port tree weekly. I make world/mergemaster weekly too. But keeping the *installed* versions of ported applications up-to-date is not something that scales well (I can see it working for a few dozen of libraries/utilities/servers/applications). For instance, objects file space needed for the compile of what I use is more than my avalaible disk space (around 5Gb free). I could not do this every night anyway, as the compile is way longer than a single night (on a K7/550)
> The only people who think apt is better than freebsd's cvsup and make are the people who dont understand it. Since Lunix users dont understand much of anything, I'm not surprised this debate always seems to visit slasshdot.
Beeing arrogant don't make you smart or 31337.
cvsup + make is of little help to keep my 486 gateway up to date (A single kernel compile take 3 hours on it. I once let a make world running on it serveral days. It never finished, because the load broke the disk where/usr/obj was located). In this case I mount/usr/[src|obj] from a pre-built machine so I can just installworld.
cvsup is a fantastic tool, but keeping a binary system up-to-date with FreeBSD can be a difficult task (Hint: mozilla needs 1.2Gb of disk space to compile. Hint: all ports are not atomically updated, so you ends up with several versions of the same libraries. Hint: compiles sometimes break. Hint: some ports changed name and location)
I am quite tired of people *pretending* not understanding some the advantages of apt over cvsup/make for third party install. apt is not superior to cvsup/ports and cvsup/ports is not superior to apt. Those are different tools with strenght and weaknesses.
Slashdot Mirror
> As a resident of SA, my freedom of speech is about to disappear ...
Maybe it is me, but you seem more concerned by the disparition of your freedom to free porn...
(Which, I think, is the real issue. Porn is a mega-business, and internet threatens it [for instance: news://alt.binaries.erotica.picture.*]. Law are getting passed so they can save the business model of soft-porn. You didn't loose any freedom, mostly because you did not had any to start with)
Cheers,
--fred
Two points.
> and especially non-subscription based products where you do not ever possess ANYTHING
Same holds for software. You don't own your windows or office copy. Or your ORACLE copy. And those become useless as time passes, as ORACLE is useless without technical support, oor windows without upgrade for new hardware.
> and they can just take away your software at their will [oh, you write web pages bashing MS, fine no more frontpage for you!]
When you buy ORACLE, you agree to a license that prohibit you to publish benchmarks of ORACLE. It'll, of course, be the same with those subscriptions-based software (to protect the 'corporate image', you'll have to agree to shut-up)
I am ROTFL with this. It is so... gross. As soon as you start subscribing, the they will send you more and more deadly EULAs (because they'll have your files in hostage), and just start milking more and more money.
In the mid-80's (wov that starts to be old) I recall all industry pudits predicting that the future cost of a computer would be 20% harware and 80% software (recall, it was before open-source for the masses). Subscription based may get this (of course, hardware will be free. You would just sign for a 2 years subscription). And, as this is a business model that needs to be protected, stay tuned to see laws to prevent you to hack this (Example: no-reverse engeneering, no-possibility to run untrusted code <ie: not-subscription based>, no right to use open-source software)
All-in-all, I am not worried. Such ugly proposals guarantee that there will be a pool of brillant people to develop free(dom) alternatives. And, after all, if joe random clueless user want to run subscription based software, I don't give a fuck...
Cheers,
--fred
> PRZ seems to stress on the points that PGP has NO backdoors as of now and that he and NAI have different visions of the product. Could this be somekind of a hint that NAI now wants to build backdoors into their product, probably to appease NSA or something like that ? After all we know that many MS products do have NSA backdoors.
/usr/local/bin/pgp | grep goatse.cx
It is not _that_ complex.
> strings
>
Cheers,
--fred
> Changing the skin kills the menus (File and Edit works, everything after View doesn't)
It only kills the current window. Workaround: open another window, switch the skin from it, then close it.
> It'll get better soon, honest
It did get a *hell* better in the last months. Not really usable for general consumpsion, but it is already my default browser.
> Is the emperor wearing clothes?
About the huge amount of bugs you have, you have to admit that they are not in fundamental parts of the browser. You can browse the web with mozilla with a non proprietary software.
This is huge goodness. Let's say that the emperor have bathclothes..
And thanks for supporting this project. *Everybody* will benefit of it.
Cheers,
--fred
> gnuls kinda takes the beauty out of unix
:-) ).
I sorta disagree. gcc was not named cc. gnutar was not named tar. They don't have to name their program ssh. RMS would say that they should do things as differently as possible, and provide a --traditional for inter-operability (Btw, I would love hearing what Theo would say if RMS tried to tell himn what to do
Sure gnuls would be ridiculous, so my example isn't worth much. Even apache is named httpd, so...
> By your standards F-Secure is diluting the ssh mark
Frankly, I don't know. I was just saying that *I* often confused ssh and openssh, and that *I* would have zero problem using asfkaos (A Shell Formelly Known As OpenSHH) as it would help me to stay away from ssh(tm) products.
OTOH, maybe you are right, and ssh corp should be told to f*ck themselves...
Cheers,
--fred
> Good job. We have now taken the position to the outside world of being total assholes.
Saying "If you do that, you'll look like a total asshole" to Theo de Raadt is pushing him to do it. Ask around you "who is the biggest open-source asshole ?". If you remove the goatse.cx (which may not be opensource), most answers will point to Theo.
He is already the most appreciated asshole of the community.
Cheers,
--fred
I profoundly disagree. OpenSSH will be tainted for the rest of its life if it doesn't change its name.
I have been confused between openssh and ssh numerous time. Both commmands are named 'ssh', and I think it is an error.
Anyway, the request seems pretty stupid, as OpenSSH is doing a lot of good to ssh corp. If OpenSSH renamed the command to something less related to ssh, like pinss (pins is not secure shell) or yass (yet another secure shell), then ssh corp will loose a lot of mindshare.
Making the issue into "we can legally keep the name" is plain wrong. They want the name ? Give them. The name is just a name. The free alternative is better, so will succeed under any kind of name (and, people will alias ssh to wosin [whatever open ssh is named] anyway, so the pratical impact will be zero).
Cheers,
--fred
> More like Netscape 6.0 was released a few months too early.
I don't think so. AOL have different needs than mozilla. They needed to get something out, even if it is crappy. Bad press is better than no press. They release bug fixes, and will release a future version based on the mozilla trunk. At the end, they will have a browser as stable as mozilla is, but will have something to show before. Net result will be positive for them *and* for mozilla (if NS6 didn't exist, you would seem hundred of comments explaining why mozilla is a failure because nothing official was released...)
Btw, mozilla is my main browser for the last 3 months. Crashes often, but is better and better.
Cheers,
--fred
> If you say it enough it becomes true [...]
Soo true. We can expect to hear that little music more and more. Free software will be charged of every possible problem. Thankfully, there will be laws to regulate this.
Babooey to you,
--fred
> MS do not want to outlaw Open Source.
> What they have said, is that the government should not encourage it.
> And this is more fair.
Wft the US govt have to do with what a corporation wants ?
> Let me explain:
> The ultimate goal of Open Source is free software.
> Now this means that you don't pay anything for it.
This is not true. Free software means freedom, not "you don't pay anything"
> If this happens, there is no money to pay programmers
The amount of money that goes to the developer is insignifiant. Really. For a retail price of a product, all programmers maybe get 1%. (Very very good contracts, at the time where programmers could do software all by themselves and hand it to a dsitributor, were just a little higher than 10% royalties. this does not exist anymore, and the concept of 'star' programmer does not exist in software houses anymore).
> As a result, intelligent people such as myself,
No sir. You are a moron. I'll stop commenting, as it is just too funny.
> who could command 6 figure salaries in any profession
In Yens, I beleive.
> will take different career paths.
This would be a good thing for everyone.
Cheers,
--fred
> Remember, half the population is below average.
Below *median*
Cheers,
--fred
> No, each of these 'victims' would only receive a single 60 byte packet. This is the opposite of a DoS attack, as you are sending a large number of packets, but each peer is only receiving one of them.
Well, *if* I am the only one to query. In the general case, they would receive 60 bytes packets for every query done in the network.
This is the major flaw of all gnutella-like systems. If only the client knows what is on its disks, then you can kiss scalability good bye, no matter how hard you try.
Cheers,
--fred
> Steve Jobs has an open hostility to open source code, and he has never given anything back to the community that wasn't already there.
Wooov. That is a pretty ridiculous statment. The sources of NeXTstep are almost fully avalaible, under the sweet name of the first (early last year) darwin distribution. There are a lot of thing there. netinfo, for instance, is a crude counter example of your troll.
Sure, NeXT did not donate a lot to open source, but more than what they really had to.
Can you point me to the source of obsolete Microsoft products ?
Cheers,
--fred
> Anyone who ever wrote a mac application in the 80s or early 90s will tell you, their style guidelines made it IMPOSSIBLE to write an inconsistant gui
> What do others think ?
That you take your dreams for reality. Consistant Mac gui ? I saw so much applications that missed the TrackGoAway() call that it isn't funny (note for the uninformed. The original Mac toolbox was [and still is] a b*tch. Even windows is easier to deal with.). Apple guidelines were very restirctive and were blown away by apple itself numerous times (Hey, who would pretend that HyperCard followed the User Interface Guidelines ?). I was so disgusted of my Inside Mac User Interface that I trowed it in a fire.
Btw, the holy grail of UNIX/GUI was not A/UX, but, of course, NeXTstep. And rejoice, as Mac OS X is basically NeXTstep 6.
And writing an inconsistant AppKit application is really difficult. Writing a consistant Mac application was a nightmare.
Cheers,
--fred
> Isn't it just a matter of supply and demand?
Stop smoking crap. Does CD cost less than tapes ? Even for music digitally recorded, that sells more CDs than tapes, CDs are more expensive.
The only matter is "how much money can you milk from the consumer". People buying CDs have more money than people buying tapes, so you can charge more. Same holds for DVDs. Supply and demand is a fucked myth. There is an (potentially) infinite supply of DVDs as they are just bits. MPAA business model is buying laws to charge people. Works pretty well for now.
Cheers,
--fred
> I'm speaking practically here. I'm going to visit 10,000 cities. Please give me the absolute guaranteed best route (in my lifetime, if you please).
You are wrong. Either you are speaking theorically, in which case the salesman problem is trivially solvable, or you are talking practically, and you don't give a shit about the *best* route. A good one will be sufficient, and there are very good heuristics for that.
Cheers,
--fred
> Now what I'd love to see, is a free X server for OS X. Mmm, that would make my life complete!
What about XFree86 4.0.2 ? Get the darwin distribution at xfree86.org then the rest from http://mrcla.com/XonX/
Now that I have completed your life, could you refrain to post garbage ? A bash assembler is just awsome...
Cheers,
--fred
> Microsoft was brought down
And I thought it was a slow news day ! The submission queue must be full. I'm ready to yell "duplicate!" when it'll be posted in a few minutes..
Cheers,
--fred
> > Oh, I guess what your problem is.
> Yeah, it's that the market for what I do isn't generally using Linux.
> But yes, a gig of memory and a RAM drive would be a good approach.
Don't know if you are going to read this, but you may try a slighly different approach first:
A FAT32 partition. Defragmented. Maybe on a different physical disk.
First, NTFS file system is slow on write because of the journalling. FAT32 is not journalled, and have a better throughtput.
Second, NTFS fragment very easily (which I find hilarious, because a few years ago, it was hyped as good to reduce fragmentation). If you have a lot of files that are created/removed, you ends up with a disk full of holes. When writing a big file on that disk (for instance objects file), your perf goes down in the toilet [mainly because windows is stupid enough to find space "backward"]. I saw trhoughtput divided by 10. Think about it. 10ms seek time adds very fast. You ends up with files that cannot be read fully in less than 1/10 of a second if it is divided in 10 or so fragments. You ends up with a _lot_ of delay. The defragmenter in win2k is not able to really reduce the fragmentation is some non-pathological cases. What is even worse is that the defragmentation don't prevent future files to be fragemented (ie: you get a nicely non-fragmented disk, and then the files you create there are going to be fragemented at creation time).
By using a separate partition for temporary object files (and maybe some often accessed development tools, like the compiler/linker and the header) you can re-create it from scracth to get a nicely non-fragmented space, in which, when link.exe will be called into memory, it'll be loaded at light speed (check that your disk are goods too. I have 25MB/s sustended read on a ABIT HotRod + 46 Gb UDMA-100 IBM disk on Win2K (and the process is CPU-bound).
Third, by judiciously splitting the load on 2 disks, you can overlap I/O and get better performance (in particular for the swap file, if you swap a bit while compiling. Avoid having a fragmented swap file as much as you can). YMMV, but checking with the performance monitor a few hours can give you hindsight on what kind on what access pattern and what kind of throughput you can expect.
Btw, changing your motherboard would be an efficient move too, as if you are maxed at 256Mb you probably have an old box...
Cheers,
--fred
> A high percentage of my working day is spent waiting for compiles, as even a single change to a file requires on the order of five minutes of compiling and linking. A lot of that is file read/write time. If I could write it to memory-speed output rather than disk, I would be a happy man
Uh ? Put more RAM. Put even more RAM. And some extra RAM. Then use a ram disk for your object directory, and keep a lot of ram as the file cache. On a bsd, suppress atime update on the directory containing system include/libraries, or mount it read-only or copy it into a ram drive. Remove atime from you sources too.
> According to the task manager
Oh, I guess what your problem is. You use an OS that have a journaled meta-data filesystem (so sloow sync write for each file) and that have *very* high fragmentation (spend most of his time seeking).
Cheers,
--fred
--> 2.3.0 since 8 Nov
<http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/secu re/usr.bin/ssh/Makefile>
--> 2.3.0 since 12 Jan
Cheers,
--fred
> well, DVD for me
Yeah. And probably on a Sony VAIO running windows...
Cheers,
--fred
[self emitOpinion:
[Opinion opinionAgreeingTo:
[[Thread currentThread] previousPost]];
Dude, think up.
> cvsup myPortsFileWithOnePortPerLine
You have a thick skull, don't you ? This will only keep the source of the ports current. Of course I already have the whole port tree current. I am supposed to blindly 'make -DBATCH -DFORCE_PKG_REGISTER reinstall' the 200 ports every night too ? It seem that your answer is yes. Is that better than apt-get to keep a system current ? Hardly. Why ? Because 1/ it takes forever on low end machines 2/ it breaks often because it does not respect dependancies or when multiple versions of the same pakage are installed [read pkg_version man page one of those days] 3/ it uses gigabytes of disk space.
It is people like you that give BSDs users their bad reputation.
Cheers,
--fred
> I've set up my make.conf to keep every last bit on my system completely up to date - 3rd party software included - with just that one make world.
/usr/obj was located). In this case I mount /usr/[src|obj] from a pre-built machine so I can just installworld.
Please post your make.conf file.
I fail to see exactly what I am supposed to do to keep the ~200 ports I use current. I guess I am doing something wrong here. I cvsup the base system and the port tree weekly. I make world/mergemaster weekly too. But keeping the *installed* versions of ported applications up-to-date is not something that scales well (I can see it working for a few dozen of libraries/utilities/servers/applications). For instance, objects file space needed for the compile of what I use is more than my avalaible disk space (around 5Gb free). I could not do this every night anyway, as the compile is way longer than a single night (on a K7/550)
> The only people who think apt is better than freebsd's cvsup and make are the people who dont understand it. Since Lunix users dont understand much of anything, I'm not surprised this debate always seems to visit slasshdot.
Beeing arrogant don't make you smart or 31337.
cvsup + make is of little help to keep my 486 gateway up to date (A single kernel compile take 3 hours on it. I once let a make world running on it serveral days. It never finished, because the load broke the disk where
cvsup is a fantastic tool, but keeping a binary system up-to-date with FreeBSD can be a difficult task (Hint: mozilla needs 1.2Gb of disk space to compile. Hint: all ports are not atomically updated, so you ends up with several versions of the same libraries. Hint: compiles sometimes break. Hint: some ports changed name and location)
I am quite tired of people *pretending* not understanding some the advantages of apt over cvsup/make for third party install. apt is not superior to cvsup/ports and cvsup/ports is not superior to apt. Those are different tools with strenght and weaknesses.
Anyway, show us your make.conf.
Cheers,
--fredx