That there are actual shipping software that follows this principle and still manages to improve and add new features and capabilities at a high rate. Sometimes people make stupid decisions; no one will ever be able to type ls * without an error in/usr/lib/systemd/system because someone though it was a good idea to put a file there called -.slice there. Now it's part of the API so it has to stay that way. Inconventient, yes. But will it prevent new features and improvements? No.
So you released version 111 and some people downloaded it and purchased a support contract. Then you add a major new features in version 112 that due to their awesomeness have to break backward compatibility with version 111, and for that reason the aforementioned customer is not going to upgrade right away... but they did find a bug in version 111 that you are obligated to fix.
Myth number one, new features does not need breaking changes. Take a look at the Linux kernel. Probably the most modern kernel of all time, yet its developers take pride in that they don't break compatibility. New features does not have to come with the price of breaking changes.
RedHat takes a different, more Apple-like approach: Their point-releases are just inline updates, like Ubuntu LTS; but they're *major* updates, removing old features and subsystems, integrating completely new systems, changing behaviors, and generally breaking all kinds of shit. There's no support for the previous point release, at all; if you call RHEL support, they tell you to update or else they have nothing for you. The difference between RHEL 6.10 and RHEL 7 is functionally similar to the difference between RHEL 6.9 and RHEL 6.10, or RHEL 7 and RHEL 7.1.
Here you're actually not completely correct. Red Hat does provide Extended Update Support (EUS) as an option to customers that want to standardize on a minor RHEL release for some time, usually two years.
Then you have Ubuntu and Debian, who follow a very clear policy: Each release will receive no updates which change any functionality. If it worked on release day, it will work in exactly the same way at EOL. Bugfixes may enable previously-broken functionality; they try not to alter functionality such that previous work-arounds start behaving differently, unless the application is so crippled as to be unuseful. This is okay because the scope of a distribution release implies a major change; Ubuntu has a point release system for LTS to signify minor feature updates.
Actually, Ubuntu just bumped python3 from 3.4.0 to 3.4.3 in Trusty LTS yesterday.
They can't. For lots of legacy/legal reasons those organizations outright *own* those/8s, as opposed to just having been "assigned" or "allocated" to them.
Well they can own them as much as they want. No one is technically forced to route their IPs to them. But it doesn't matter, that wouldn't solve anything. IPv6 is the only way forward and nothing that I've seen changes that.
Apps is just one of the things it can search for. Among other things you can search for contacts, files, notes. Type in a mathematical calculation and it computes it for you, or the name of a city and it tells you the local time there.
That works too but at least for me it's often slower. Where did they put the Terminal app, was it under Accessories or Utilities? Now I just have to look at T since they are ordered alphabetically. The old menu system from GNOME 2 also suffered that it didn't allow you to search for apps by typing its name.
True, the post above yours did say that. I apologize. The point is however still that you don't actually need any extensions at all in order to get a good desktop experience, as long as you're willing to accept something that isn't a Windows clone as a desktop.
The Ubuntu GNOME team is doing as good job as they can but if you just want to try out the new release you may want to give the Fedora 23 beta a spin. Ubuntu is unfortunately often behind with GNOME. They are planning on shipping the old 3.16 release in Ubuntu 15.10 so getting a supported 3.18 release will probably not happen until 16.04.
It's a good way to get an overview of the apps you have installed. I seldom use the icons when launching apps though, I just enter the first few characters and press return.
Yeah, that's the point. What you're given by default (and what GNOME's developers seem to focus on) is the touch oriented interface. Getting the desktop means installing extensions.
It was designed with touch in mind but not as a requirement. It was designed to be used as is on a desktop as well as on a tablet.
And if you think that a desktop needs a task bar then maybe you should take a look at OS X. They have the Dock which GNOME 3 has a similar implementation of, but what they don't have is a task bar. The task bar is a very Windows-centric design pattern and I don't think that Windows in any way is the definition of what defines a desktop OS.
Yeah, because a locally cached list is anywhere near as accurate as checking each cert as it is used. In fact, there are plenty of sites with bad certs that work just fine in Chrome because they aren't on the list.
The only people that have any legitimate fear of getting shot are criminals.
Shy should criminals fear getting shot? If they are armed then that's one thing but lots of criminals are unarmed. There's usually no reason for police to ever point a gun at you if you're unarmed and not threatening.
OpenGL is a specification, not source code. It's a document that describes a number of interfaces that an OpenGL implementation should implement. OpenGL is also quite old and stems from the early 90s, long before open source was even termed. Open simply means that the specification is open, as in anyone can read the specification and create his or her own implementation.
I personally prefer the new gedit. It has the same functionality as before, they just moved some things around. The content of the menu bar is now under the menu button, and they removed the toolbar which just duplicated a lot of functionality. Do you really need dedicated buttons for cut, copy and paste that takes up a lot of screen space? Most people will use the keyboard shortcuts for those things. This is just complaining for the sake of complaining.
Because RHEL has direct support from RedHat and CentOS has community support. Since the src.rpm's are the same for RedHat and CentOS (minus the trademark graphics), I'm comfortable calling CentOS a clone of RHEL.
So if they are the same does that mean that the same day that I can download RHEL 7.2 I will be able to download CentOS 7.2 (yes I know that they don't use that version scheme)?
So, how did I manage to run ZFS on fairly old and underpowered Solaris servers without performance problems almost ten years ago? Did the Linux guys somehow break the whole thing as they ported it to Linux?
But C? Who da ELL uses that anymore? C++!! Notice the PLUS PLUS? That's double plus good!! Google wants the world to drink its coke. That is all. Men won't care about GO-ogle. Women? Numbers too small and, yes, Helen Reddy, very easy to ignore.
The GNOME desktop environment is too a large extent written in C, and so are many applications that target the GNOME environment.
Slashdot Mirror
That there are actual shipping software that follows this principle and still manages to improve and add new features and capabilities at a high rate. Sometimes people make stupid decisions; no one will ever be able to type ls * without an error in /usr/lib/systemd/system because someone though it was a good idea to put a file there called -.slice there. Now it's part of the API so it has to stay that way. Inconventient, yes. But will it prevent new features and improvements? No.
So you released version 111 and some people downloaded it and purchased a support contract. Then you add a major new features in version 112 that due to their awesomeness have to break backward compatibility with version 111, and for that reason the aforementioned customer is not going to upgrade right away... but they did find a bug in version 111 that you are obligated to fix.
Myth number one, new features does not need breaking changes. Take a look at the Linux kernel. Probably the most modern kernel of all time, yet its developers take pride in that they don't break compatibility. New features does not have to come with the price of breaking changes.
RedHat takes a different, more Apple-like approach: Their point-releases are just inline updates, like Ubuntu LTS; but they're *major* updates, removing old features and subsystems, integrating completely new systems, changing behaviors, and generally breaking all kinds of shit. There's no support for the previous point release, at all; if you call RHEL support, they tell you to update or else they have nothing for you. The difference between RHEL 6.10 and RHEL 7 is functionally similar to the difference between RHEL 6.9 and RHEL 6.10, or RHEL 7 and RHEL 7.1.
Here you're actually not completely correct. Red Hat does provide Extended Update Support (EUS) as an option to customers that want to standardize on a minor RHEL release for some time, usually two years.
Then you have Ubuntu and Debian, who follow a very clear policy: Each release will receive no updates which change any functionality. If it worked on release day, it will work in exactly the same way at EOL. Bugfixes may enable previously-broken functionality; they try not to alter functionality such that previous work-arounds start behaving differently, unless the application is so crippled as to be unuseful. This is okay because the scope of a distribution release implies a major change; Ubuntu has a point release system for LTS to signify minor feature updates.
Actually, Ubuntu just bumped python3 from 3.4.0 to 3.4.3 in Trusty LTS yesterday.
They can't. For lots of legacy/legal reasons those organizations outright *own* those /8s, as opposed to just having been "assigned" or "allocated" to them.
Well they can own them as much as they want. No one is technically forced to route their IPs to them. But it doesn't matter, that wouldn't solve anything. IPv6 is the only way forward and nothing that I've seen changes that.
Then the universe is in balance. :-)
Apps is just one of the things it can search for. Among other things you can search for contacts, files, notes. Type in a mathematical calculation and it computes it for you, or the name of a city and it tells you the local time there.
That works too but at least for me it's often slower. Where did they put the Terminal app, was it under Accessories or Utilities? Now I just have to look at T since they are ordered alphabetically. The old menu system from GNOME 2 also suffered that it didn't allow you to search for apps by typing its name.
True, the post above yours did say that. I apologize. The point is however still that you don't actually need any extensions at all in order to get a good desktop experience, as long as you're willing to accept something that isn't a Windows clone as a desktop.
The Ubuntu GNOME team is doing as good job as they can but if you just want to try out the new release you may want to give the Fedora 23 beta a spin. Ubuntu is unfortunately often behind with GNOME. They are planning on shipping the old 3.16 release in Ubuntu 15.10 so getting a supported 3.18 release will probably not happen until 16.04.
It's a good way to get an overview of the apps you have installed. I seldom use the icons when launching apps though, I just enter the first few characters and press return.
Yeah, that's the point. What you're given by default (and what GNOME's developers seem to focus on) is the touch oriented interface. Getting the desktop means installing extensions.
It was designed with touch in mind but not as a requirement. It was designed to be used as is on a desktop as well as on a tablet.
And if you think that a desktop needs a task bar then maybe you should take a look at OS X. They have the Dock which GNOME 3 has a similar implementation of, but what they don't have is a task bar. The task bar is a very Windows-centric design pattern and I don't think that Windows in any way is the definition of what defines a desktop OS.
Despite all the negative buzz against GNOME 3, latest releases are, in my opinion, very good (and I hated GNOME 3 with a passion when it came up).
Also, they're putting efforts on style consistency and usability which is very welcome.
Same thing here. GNOME 3.10 finally made me leave fvwm and switch to GNOME full-time. Before that it was still an unfinished experience in many ways.
Yeah, because a locally cached list is anywhere near as accurate as checking each cert as it is used. In fact, there are plenty of sites with bad certs that work just fine in Chrome because they aren't on the list.
But who would ever visit one of those sites?
The only people that have any legitimate fear of getting shot are criminals.
Shy should criminals fear getting shot? If they are armed then that's one thing but lots of criminals are unarmed. There's usually no reason for police to ever point a gun at you if you're unarmed and not threatening.
OpenGL is a specification, not source code. It's a document that describes a number of interfaces that an OpenGL implementation should implement. OpenGL is also quite old and stems from the early 90s, long before open source was even termed. Open simply means that the specification is open, as in anyone can read the specification and create his or her own implementation.
It borrows parts of the FreeBSD user land but that's pretty much where the "FreeBSD based" ends.
But then the software that broke was obviously broken, so this was a good test to catch them and fix them.
I personally prefer the new gedit. It has the same functionality as before, they just moved some things around. The content of the menu bar is now under the menu button, and they removed the toolbar which just duplicated a lot of functionality. Do you really need dedicated buttons for cut, copy and paste that takes up a lot of screen space? Most people will use the keyboard shortcuts for those things. This is just complaining for the sake of complaining.
Because RHEL has direct support from RedHat and CentOS has community support. Since the src.rpm's are the same for RedHat and CentOS (minus the trademark graphics), I'm comfortable calling CentOS a clone of RHEL.
So if they are the same does that mean that the same day that I can download RHEL 7.2 I will be able to download CentOS 7.2 (yes I know that they don't use that version scheme)?
It's the same thing, just a different set of default packages.
So, how did I manage to run ZFS on fairly old and underpowered Solaris servers without performance problems almost ten years ago? Did the Linux guys somehow break the whole thing as they ported it to Linux?
What's sane about allowing large-scale copyright infringement?
But C? Who da ELL uses that anymore? C++!! Notice the PLUS PLUS? That's double plus good!! Google wants the world to drink its coke. That is all. Men won't care about GO-ogle. Women? Numbers too small and, yes, Helen Reddy, very easy to ignore.
The GNOME desktop environment is too a large extent written in C, and so are many applications that target the GNOME environment.
Can you point to any information on that? Would be interesting to see a list of affected models.