It's not that the games "suck" it is that it "sucks" to have games crash/not work and peripherals not work on a regular basis, and to have to put in lots of work to play. The parent I replied to had to install three different versions of windows to play three different games because it just would not work any other way. That is part of the problem with PC Gaming.
So what I am saying is not that the games suck (there are indeed many nice PC games) but that the experience sucks, and I got tired of various controllers not working (besides the fact I have not found any on par with the PS2 controller) and games not working and crashing, etc etc. When I come home to play a game, I want to relax and play. I do not want to have to debug more crashes as I have been doing that all day. And my PS2's uptime rivals (and sometimes has exceeded) that of my Linux boxes for variable reasons.
Actually, I have been considering DAOC. Everquest works for multiplayer on PS2, but I understand they still have many of the same problems they had when I tried playing it the first time. DAOC seems to me to be the way a MMPORPG should be, but unfortunately it does not work with winex, the developers have apparently done naughty things that make it difficult/impossible to fix the problem, and transgaming does not seem interested in trying anyhow. Of course installing this would mean just the kind of work I said I did not like doing for the sake of play, but one would hope it would only have to happen once. As it is, if I change my mind about it I would have to install it under Windows, which breaks 3 rules in one for me. (I have decided to honour software licenses, not to install windows, and the third being my problem with playing games on a platform where I have to monkey mightily to get anything to work at all, if it does at all.)
I am curious as to why you did not like your PS2 Linux kit. I thought it was a pretty fair price for the components, all of which can be used in other areas (the ethernet attachment works for multiplayer, the usb kb and mouse likewise, and the hard drive, well, it's a hard drive). I was mainly wanting it for curiousity. Of course if you do not like yours you could always sell it to someone who would;).
I have been to an Apple Store, and it was quite an experience. It is exactly how buying a mac should be. They have pictures on the apple.com site, but it is just something else to experience it. They have MacGeniuses (that is their title:) ) to answer any question for free and help with a variety of things, including repairs. They have a store full of software, books, and peripherals that work for apple as well as every apple product, in a store like no other, really. It is something Linux enthusiasts should think about. (Granted the atmosphere at LUGs has been comparable, with that extra Linux flavour, of course):).
You can actually check out macs at CompUSA and Fry's if you have one, and I think BestBuy. But the problems with the mac support and display at these stores provided part of the impetus for the creation of the Apple stores. Of the three, Fry's in my experience has the most robust mac support/selection/display. They seem to have 1/3 whitebox, 1/3 oempc, 1/3 Mac as far as computers go, and of course plenty of mac books software and peripherals. Of course my experience is limited to the Fry's in Texas and the Apple Stores in Ohio.
I have successfully mucked around in the terminal/etc on Best BUy and CompUSA display macs. Also you might consider that Apple has user groups as well (Linux was not the first!) and presumably you could search for one in your area and meet the people there, who would be more than happy to show you their Macs and such and answer questions, though I have never gotten round to going to one.
Your documentation problem is an interesting one, and I have to say I agree this is something useful. (I think it is rather obvious the other answerers are blinded, as many Linux contributers/users seem to be, by "what is" and "how you do it now" and are not seeing the benefit of how it could be done.
A major problem here is the ragmentation of documentation even for a given command. A little bit in the man page, a bit in the info file, a bit in some randoom PDF, some random text files, a HOWTO, a mini-HOWTO, an Oreilly book, and some random web pages, besides a few archived emails from a list and some usenet articles, and maybe by the time you have gone through all that you will know what to do sometimes. (If not, you need to email a list).
Of course it would be much easier to RTFM if the FM was easier to read, or get to. It would be nice if one or a couple of these places was fairly complete. To be fair, many packages do this, and it is the package's job to provide docs, but this f course leads to an inconsistency, such that some package maintainers like info, others man, and others want you to read their web site, etc. I agree wholeheartedly that it is the distro's job to fill in the cracks. And there are some examples.
For instance, OpenBSD (yes not a Linux Distro, but everyone starts on the same foot on most packages) has decided that they will provide adequate man pages, and they will have everything documented in man pages such that you can actually use those pages, and only those pages, and get things to work. And they do it. Compare the man page for some random package/command on OpenBSD to the *very same one* on Linux (same version even) and you will see what I mean. Someone in the OpenBSD team is fixing the bloody man pages. So why can't Linux distros do it?
Of course the extreme where every file is documented on the system is a very good one to hope for, and something to think about. Also a better doc system than man (though so far I like man best) might be helpful in this task.
The naysayers to your problems are ignoring the fact that distributions change things all the time. It is their job to fill in the cracks and make a useable system. To their credit, I think most have done a lot of work getting things to happen their way. But as usual, there is more that could be done...
The poster was *not* saying that LFS should do anything of the sort. The Poster was suggesting that rather than creating millions of distributions we should perhaps work on one, or even a few, until they are fixed and workable, much in the vein of the guy who wrote the article recently about the fragmented nature of open source programs (thousands of word processors and text editors and many many years before a single one of them installs with a spell checker!).
As many others have put more elegantly, LFS is not a distro. It is a set of instructions for how to make a distro. But unlike the other poster was claiming, the LFS will not fix the parent's problem any more than anything else, because the answer in LFS even moreso than from RedHat and co. is "write it yourself if you want it!"
To be fair, the maintainers of the scripts (whatever gentoo calls them) research the dependencies. So you should thank the maintainers! (perhaps this will become an exclamation much like C3PO's "Thank the Creator!" or "Thank God!"):)
I also had nothing but hell with urpmi. Essentially it would figure out that dependencies were needed and then not install stuff. Part of the fault was with broken standard rpms from mandrake from what I can tell (this was trying to upgrade Mandrake 8.0 to 8.1, using the rpms from cd, and the rpms wanted dependencies with slightly different names than what those packages were called by the 8.0 rpms).
My boss swears by Red Carpet, and if you want RPM to work, I hear this is the way to go, but it seems there are many reasons this method is a broken one.
Futurama and Home Movies are two of my favorites form Adult Swim. But they definitely could put more stuff in there. Honestly it would be kind of cool to have an adult swim channel and have even more risque/violent cartoons than are currently on adult swim (futurama is on fox during primetime for crying out loud, so kids probably watch it.)
I have heard this explanation before, and it is interesting, though I ave not deeply researched the Nero connection, it is true he was a major persecutor of Christians (and lots of other people, but he ended up particularly hating Christians). I remmeber Suetonius saying that there were reports of seeing Nero long after his death; it kind of had the ring to me of the sightings of famous dead rock stars in today's society. I have to wonder if Christians in the period heard these stories and what they thought of them.
No, and we have given links as to why you are wrong. the lines you depict would *not* decode to a 6. That is why you are wrong. They are also, as you freely admit, markers and not number codes.
Since/. purposefully screws up any url you post in the text, it helps people very much if you make real links.:P
Also I find it ironic that VA would boot the LFS project off their servers and then/. the new server. That is kind of funny, in a perverse sort of way.
That sounds bad. I should point out then that sourcemage has an excellent installer (pretty much teh best I have seen so far for experts, with options to shell out at any step in the process, for instance), and many excellent tools for configuring various things affecting the build process. It is also pretty easy to reconfigure things by hand if you prefer.
I have not tried Gentoo. Actually since Sourceror was the first source-based distro I heard of (on/.) and Sourcemage is its decendant, I tried Sourcemage first and liked it very much.
All of the source based distributions are based on LFS. he whole point of LFS was to teach you how to make your own distribution. The problem was in order to teach people how to make a distribution, it was necessary to make a reference distribution (well, they referenced packages in the LFS-HOWTO, and ended up making the versions they used in making the HOWTO available, so by default this becomes a distro). It kind of grew from there. Gentoo/SourceMage/Sourcerer/etc take the LFS packages and add scripts that automate the download/compile and an installer, among other things.
So in essence the main reason to go through the LFS and such is to learn more about how Linux works and how to make your own distro (or better understand why your distro does things the way they do). Sourcemage is my current favorite distribution, but I have ordered the new LFS book because I want to learn more. (the Howto, sources, and I think even the book are also available online).
Maybe this would be what Apple needs; a program where you can borrow a mac for say 30 days and then pay for it if you like it. But then again, everyone has a 30 day return policy, so theoretically you can buy it, try it, and if you don't like it, you can send it back and get your money then buy a Dell or a Thinkpad or something. Then you can put Linux on it and load up lots of aqua themes and wish it was the same;).
Try it before you buy it would be rough for apple to administer, but I have to wonder if it would not be possible for them to institute a trade-in program like gateway, but accepting x86 hardware as well as old mac hardware. It is worth thinking about, but probably too much of a PITA fr it to be worth it (Gateway, methinks, is desperate).
Oh, and there are mac notebooks for around $1000, they are the ibooks. Apple has had cheap macs since about 1999 when that whole series of i-stuff came out the first time.
But in a GUI Environment you would not have to type the names. They could e as long as you want them to be. I like the command line as much as the next guy, and would argue that it beats any modern gui in terms of usability and flexibility. But that does not mean we could not one day have a GUI that did more, or that common tasks cannot be currently abstracted by a GUI.
Apple indeed quit working on Linux, but it did at one time distribute a linux system called mklinux. It was based on RedHat and had a mach kernel rather than the normal Linux kernel. Whether that makes it not Linux anymore is certainly an interesting academic question. Of course, Darwin ended up taking away a lot of the development that used to happen on mkLinux. Apparently work has gone slowly, as in the 5 years or more I have been looking at this project off and on there still has not been a "release" though it appears the site is being updated and release candidates being released.
Actually, you are wrong. You can see what they are talking about by carefully studying this code and comparing it to the other codes.
Re:Does WineX let you enable sound enhancements?
on
WineX 3.0 Examined
·
· Score: 1
Yet another example of what happens when politics gets in the way of innovation. Why can't developers understand that what is important is making things work?
This kind of crap is exactly why I switched my gaming platform years ago. Really I don't know why people say they keep a Windows machine around "for games" playing games on windows sucks, big time. Speaking of which, just can't wait to get this particular little jewel
Actually the what we know of the soap is that it is unlikely it was manufactured in vast quantities (or made up all of the soap in Germany). There is no conclusive evidence of it in such quantities, but it is possible it existed on a small scale. Ultimately there is no conclusive evidence, which is why it can't have been made in large quantities, because that would leave too much of a trail.
The lamp shades, however, did happen. That much is documented. There are isolated bars of soap which were said to be from people's fat, but afaik no one has done an analysis of any surviving bars (if any) and found one made of such substances.
But they do make an interesting point, even if they may use FUD about OSS to make it: When government gives preference to OSS simply because it is open source, its citizens lose. But neither should the commericial software get preference. Fair competition and a case-by-case judgment of the best tool for the job should be used.
I have to disagree. I think the government should use Free (as in speech) software as often as it can, and that citizens will always win in the end if it does. The government employs a lot of programmers. If it needs more features in a given product, and it is free software, they can add that feature and they get to keep the result. (even under the GPL, sources only have to be distributed if the software is itself distributed). This means the taxpayers will get systems that will continue essentially forever with whatever minor tweaking is needed to keep going, and rather than trying to form processes around limitations in software, they can form software to fit their needs.
More efficient processes and more efficient use of code means less tax dollars wasted. And those programmers that get hired, well, we do need to create more tech jobs, right? So it helps the economy all around. Money paid to microsoft will pay some programmers, but a lot of it will go to that burgeoning $50Billion bank account they "need to fight impending litigation." This means money not being circulated, and in broad terms uncirculated money is Bad for the Economy.
And if the software is free as in gratis, even more tax money is saved.
Anyway, I think generally we should use the best tool for the job, but I think if the government used an the best Free Software available for any job which is actually fulfilled by such software, the taxpayer will win even if the government "wastes" billions on programming and support costs, because all of this is money going back into the economy directly.
The best proof we have against tyranny in the US is the morality of our very own military. Every soldier swears to defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, and has a moral obligation to uphold that oath. This is one of the unstated checks against a rogue president, who, since he has full control of the military, could theoretically order them to do anything he pleases.
If the aforementioned revolt had widespread backing, it s likely some of our soldiers would join the rebellion and take their high-tech weapons with them. But they would have to be convinced they are truly acting to defend the Constituiton against a domestic enemy.
Oddly enough, the army in 1920s-40s Germany had to take essentially the same oath, but they failed to uphold their oath and disobey Hitler. The nightmare which ensued was the direct result of this failure, and one our own soldiers will do well to remember (and probably do).
Slashdot Mirror
It's not that the games "suck" it is that it "sucks" to have games crash/not work and peripherals not work on a regular basis, and to have to put in lots of work to play. The parent I replied to had to install three different versions of windows to play three different games because it just would not work any other way. That is part of the problem with PC Gaming.
So what I am saying is not that the games suck (there are indeed many nice PC games) but that the experience sucks, and I got tired of various controllers not working (besides the fact I have not found any on par with the PS2 controller) and games not working and crashing, etc etc. When I come home to play a game, I want to relax and play. I do not want to have to debug more crashes as I have been doing that all day. And my PS2's uptime rivals (and sometimes has exceeded) that of my Linux boxes for variable reasons.
Actually, I have been considering DAOC. Everquest works for multiplayer on PS2, but I understand they still have many of the same problems they had when I tried playing it the first time. DAOC seems to me to be the way a MMPORPG should be, but unfortunately it does not work with winex, the developers have apparently done naughty things that make it difficult/impossible to fix the problem, and transgaming does not seem interested in trying anyhow. Of course installing this would mean just the kind of work I said I did not like doing for the sake of play, but one would hope it would only have to happen once. As it is, if I change my mind about it I would have to install it under Windows, which breaks 3 rules in one for me.
(I have decided to honour software licenses, not to install windows, and the third being my problem with playing games on a platform where I have to monkey mightily to get anything to work at all, if it does at all.)
I am curious as to why you did not like your PS2 Linux kit. I thought it was a pretty fair price for the components, all of which can be used in other areas (the ethernet attachment works for multiplayer, the usb kb and mouse likewise, and the hard drive, well, it's a hard drive). I was mainly wanting it for curiousity. Of course if you do not like yours you could always sell it to someone who would ;).
I have been to an Apple Store, and it was quite an experience. It is exactly how buying a mac should be. They have pictures on the apple.com site, but it is just something else to experience it. They have MacGeniuses (that is their title :) ) to answer any question for free and help with a variety of things, including repairs. They have a store full of software, books, and peripherals that work for apple as well as every apple product, in a store like no other, really. It is something Linux enthusiasts should think about. (Granted the atmosphere at LUGs has been comparable, with that extra Linux flavour, of course) :).
You can actually check out macs at CompUSA and Fry's if you have one, and I think BestBuy. But the problems with the mac support and display at these stores provided part of the impetus for the creation of the Apple stores. Of the three, Fry's in my experience has the most robust mac support/selection/display. They seem to have 1/3 whitebox, 1/3 oempc, 1/3 Mac as far as computers go, and of course plenty of mac books software and peripherals. Of course my experience is limited to the Fry's in Texas and the Apple Stores in Ohio.
I have successfully mucked around in the terminal/etc on Best BUy and CompUSA display macs. Also you might consider that Apple has user groups as well (Linux was not the first!) and presumably you could search for one in your area and meet the people there, who would be more than happy to show you their Macs and such and answer questions, though I have never gotten round to going to one.
Your documentation problem is an interesting one, and I have to say I agree this is something useful. (I think it is rather obvious the other answerers are blinded, as many Linux contributers/users seem to be, by "what is" and "how you do it now" and are not seeing the benefit of how it could be done.
A major problem here is the ragmentation of documentation even for a given command. A little bit in the man page, a bit in the info file, a bit in some randoom PDF, some random text files, a HOWTO, a mini-HOWTO, an Oreilly book, and some random web pages, besides a few archived emails from a list and some usenet articles, and maybe by the time you have gone through all that you will know what to do sometimes. (If not, you need to email a list).
Of course it would be much easier to RTFM if the FM was easier to read, or get to. It would be nice if one or a couple of these places was fairly complete. To be fair, many packages do this, and it is the package's job to provide docs, but this f course leads to an inconsistency, such that some package maintainers like info, others man, and others want you to read their web site, etc. I agree wholeheartedly that it is the distro's job to fill in the cracks. And there are some examples.
For instance, OpenBSD (yes not a Linux Distro, but everyone starts on the same foot on most packages) has decided that they will provide adequate man pages, and they will have everything documented in man pages such that you can actually use those pages, and only those pages, and get things to work. And they do it. Compare the man page for some random package/command on OpenBSD to the *very same one* on Linux (same version even) and you will see what I mean. Someone in the OpenBSD team is fixing the bloody man pages. So why can't Linux distros do it?
Of course the extreme where every file is documented on the system is a very good one to hope for, and something to think about. Also a better doc system than man (though so far I like man best) might be helpful in this task.
The naysayers to your problems are ignoring the fact that distributions change things all the time. It is their job to fill in the cracks and make a useable system. To their credit, I think most have done a lot of work getting things to happen their way. But as usual, there is more that could be done...
The poster was *not* saying that LFS should do anything of the sort. The Poster was suggesting that rather than creating millions of distributions we should perhaps work on one, or even a few, until they are fixed and workable, much in the vein of the guy who wrote the article recently about the fragmented nature of open source programs (thousands of word processors and text editors and many many years before a single one of them installs with a spell checker!).
As many others have put more elegantly, LFS is not a distro. It is a set of instructions for how to make a distro. But unlike the other poster was claiming, the LFS will not fix the parent's problem any more than anything else, because the answer in LFS even moreso than from RedHat and co. is "write it yourself if you want it!"
I haven't seen a distribution yet where I haven't had to venture into /etc at some point.
You could always use the LFS instructions and then make one... :) Oh what fun it would be to ride on that particular camel my friend :).
To be fair, the maintainers of the scripts (whatever gentoo calls them) research the dependencies. So you should thank the maintainers! (perhaps this will become an exclamation much like C3PO's "Thank the Creator!" or "Thank God!") :)
I also had nothing but hell with urpmi. Essentially it would figure out that dependencies were needed and then not install stuff. Part of the fault was with broken standard rpms from mandrake from what I can tell (this was trying to upgrade Mandrake 8.0 to 8.1, using the rpms from cd, and the rpms wanted dependencies with slightly different names than what those packages were called by the 8.0 rpms).
My boss swears by Red Carpet, and if you want RPM to work, I hear this is the way to go, but it seems there are many reasons this method is a broken one.
Oh, but for mod points. I wonder what happens if you try to mod a discussion you already posted in? ;)
/me crawls back into his chair
Futurama and Home Movies are two of my favorites form Adult Swim. But they definitely could put more stuff in there. Honestly it would be kind of cool to have an adult swim channel and have even more risque/violent cartoons than are currently on adult swim (futurama is on fox during primetime for crying out loud, so kids probably watch it.)
I have heard this explanation before, and it is interesting, though I ave not deeply researched the Nero connection, it is true he was a major persecutor of Christians (and lots of other people, but he ended up particularly hating Christians). I remmeber Suetonius saying that there were reports of seeing Nero long after his death; it kind of had the ring to me of the sightings of famous dead rock stars in today's society. I have to wonder if Christians in the period heard these stories and what they thought of them.
No, and we have given links as to why you are wrong. the lines you depict would *not* decode to a 6. That is why you are wrong. They are also, as you freely admit, markers and not number codes.
No because you get -1 DidNotPostLinksCorrectly :P
Here :).
are
the
mirrors
for
your
enjoyment,
mein
gut
freund
Since /. purposefully screws up any url you post in the text, it helps people very much if you make real links. :P
Also I find it ironic that VA would boot the LFS project off their servers and then /. the new server. That is kind of funny, in a perverse sort of way.
That sounds bad. I should point out then that sourcemage has an excellent installer (pretty much teh best I have seen so far for experts, with options to shell out at any step in the process, for instance), and many excellent tools for configuring various things affecting the build process. It is also pretty easy to reconfigure things by hand if you prefer.
I have not tried Gentoo. Actually since Sourceror was the first source-based distro I heard of (on /.) and Sourcemage is its decendant, I tried Sourcemage first and liked it very much.
All of the source based distributions are based on LFS. he whole point of LFS was to teach you how to make your own distribution. The problem was in order to teach people how to make a distribution, it was necessary to make a reference distribution (well, they referenced packages in the LFS-HOWTO, and ended up making the versions they used in making the HOWTO available, so by default this becomes a distro). It kind of grew from there. Gentoo/SourceMage/Sourcerer/etc take the LFS packages and add scripts that automate the download/compile and an installer, among other things.
So in essence the main reason to go through the LFS and such is to learn more about how Linux works and how to make your own distro (or better understand why your distro does things the way they do). Sourcemage is my current favorite distribution, but I have ordered the new LFS book because I want to learn more. (the Howto, sources, and I think even the book are also available online).
Maybe this would be what Apple needs; a program where you can borrow a mac for say 30 days and then pay for it if you like it. But then again, everyone has a 30 day return policy, so theoretically you can buy it, try it, and if you don't like it, you can send it back and get your money then buy a Dell or a Thinkpad or something. Then you can put Linux on it and load up lots of aqua themes and wish it was the same ;).
Try it before you buy it would be rough for apple to administer, but I have to wonder if it would not be possible for them to institute a trade-in program like gateway, but accepting x86 hardware as well as old mac hardware. It is worth thinking about, but probably too much of a PITA fr it to be worth it (Gateway, methinks, is desperate).
Oh, and there are mac notebooks for around $1000, they are the ibooks. Apple has had cheap macs since about 1999 when that whole series of i-stuff came out the first time.
But in a GUI Environment you would not have to type the names. They could e as long as you want them to be. I like the command line as much as the next guy, and would argue that it beats any modern gui in terms of usability and flexibility. But that does not mean we could not one day have a GUI that did more, or that common tasks cannot be currently abstracted by a GUI.
Apple indeed quit working on Linux, but it did at one time distribute a linux system called mklinux. It was based on RedHat and had a mach kernel rather than the normal Linux kernel. Whether that makes it not Linux anymore is certainly an interesting academic question. Of course, Darwin ended up taking away a lot of the development that used to happen on mkLinux. Apparently work has gone slowly, as in the 5 years or more I have been looking at this project off and on there still has not been a "release" though it appears the site is being updated and release candidates being released.
Too bad it apparently only works on Windows.
But it does look neat enough.
erg, slashdot ate my link.
Actually, you are wrong. You can see what they are talking about by carefully studying this code and comparing it to the other codes.
Yet another example of what happens when politics gets in the way of innovation. Why can't developers understand that what is important is making things work?
This kind of crap is exactly why I switched my gaming platform years ago. Really I don't know why people say they keep a Windows machine around "for games" playing games on windows sucks, big time. Speaking of which, just can't wait to get this particular little jewel
Actually the what we know of the soap is that it is unlikely it was manufactured in vast quantities (or made up all of the soap in Germany). There is no conclusive evidence of it in such quantities, but it is possible it existed on a small scale. Ultimately there is no conclusive evidence, which is why it can't have been made in large quantities, because that would leave too much of a trail.
The lamp shades, however, did happen. That much is documented. There are isolated bars of soap which were said to be from people's fat, but afaik no one has done an analysis of any surviving bars (if any) and found one made of such substances.
But they do make an interesting point, even if they may use FUD about OSS to make it: When government gives preference to OSS simply because it is open source, its citizens lose. But neither should the commericial software get preference. Fair competition and a case-by-case judgment of the best tool for the job should be used.
I have to disagree. I think the government should use Free (as in speech) software as often as it can, and that citizens will always win in the end if it does. The government employs a lot of programmers. If it needs more features in a given product, and it is free software, they can add that feature and they get to keep the result. (even under the GPL, sources only have to be distributed if the software is itself distributed). This means the taxpayers will get systems that will continue essentially forever with whatever minor tweaking is needed to keep going, and rather than trying to form processes around limitations in software, they can form software to fit their needs.
More efficient processes and more efficient use of code means less tax dollars wasted. And those programmers that get hired, well, we do need to create more tech jobs, right? So it helps the economy all around. Money paid to microsoft will pay some programmers, but a lot of it will go to that burgeoning $50Billion bank account they "need to fight impending litigation." This means money not being circulated, and in broad terms uncirculated money is Bad for the Economy.
And if the software is free as in gratis, even more tax money is saved.
Anyway, I think generally we should use the best tool for the job, but I think if the government used an the best Free Software available for any job which is actually fulfilled by such software, the taxpayer will win even if the government "wastes" billions on programming and support costs, because all of this is money going back into the economy directly.
The best proof we have against tyranny in the US is the morality of our very own military. Every soldier swears to defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, and has a moral obligation to uphold that oath. This is one of the unstated checks against a rogue president, who, since he has full control of the military, could theoretically order them to do anything he pleases.
If the aforementioned revolt had widespread backing, it s likely some of our soldiers would join the rebellion and take their high-tech weapons with them. But they would have to be convinced they are truly acting to defend the Constituiton against a domestic enemy.
Oddly enough, the army in 1920s-40s Germany had to take essentially the same oath, but they failed to uphold their oath and disobey Hitler. The nightmare which ensued was the direct result of this failure, and one our own soldiers will do well to remember (and probably do).