I don't think there is anything wrong with using release candidates on ANY system. I do think you should avoid the development branch unless you have done enough testing to be sure it is stable enough... and even then only after a feature freeze.
Is GCC not supported on a 286? I think as long as you could run almost ANY operating system you can run GCC. You could then cross compile... you just couldn't run the resulting binary on the compiling system. But that wasn't what the grandparent said.
A great location for general usage related queries is forums.gentoo.org which contains useful information that can be easily applied to and Distro. They're are a plethora of mailing lists, but I don't know what sunmanagers is like so I couldn't suggest any.
But the problem with the central location is that it is firmly and centrally controlled. If you like it and it feels right, then by all means stick with it. I guess our criteria for quality support are different.
Look at the DNS... all of them come through Sun, this hardly makes it as easy to get help as linux. The reason you see RTFM in the groups discussing linux is that it's hard to go to google and not get a relevant document to your issue.
I really didn't get that out of it. It was negative towards Sun, for sure, but I didn't see wired painting a doom and gloom scenario about it. They did mention that they had billions in cash at hand, which I read that as being highly unlikely to be any sort of takeover target.
That makes it sound as if microsoft was in some way their competitor, which they barely are. Sun does not have any reliance on microsofts technologies. In reality the fact that they where making an enemy out of MS is why they were having problems. Whether or not they failed to make up with MS is completely irrelevant to their current situation. This IS what the article says. This is not what the summary suggests.
I whole heartedly agree. I have been dissecting linux implementations for a few years now to become effective in it's administration. I cannot do that as easily with Solaris. There is a cornicopia of info for linux on the web. Solaris? NADA.
Recently when we had a melt down of our application box, we had horrible service from Sun... and had to track down competent consultants to get it back to running. I no longer need to chant "Move to Linux" every other day because Suns doing all the reinforcement my company needs.
That summary is only half correct. The article attributes the preoccupation with microsoft as one of their problems... not with making up with them (which they still haven't)
There is a thousand odd characters in the japanese alphabet, so I'm sure that 10 wpm would be lucky. I couldn't imagine touch typing that kind of keyboard.
Oddly enough this was discussed in this months wired
Check out number 18 & 13 for the reference. prescient comment but I am sure blockbuster and walmart haven't hid the fact that they are interested in doing this.
Taking a quick jab at the situation with Occams razor...
Is it more likely that...
SCO a small company with limited resources and developers versed in open source code discovers their is a vast conspiracy to steal their lackluster IP that they don't own and place it into a VERY public place.
That this same company has made some rediculous and unsubtantiated claim that could bite them back. What they actually uncovered was their own liberal use of public domain (nothing wrong with that) and brought a searchlight focusing on all their code for violation of GPL.
If the kernel contains this "Compatibility Layer" then it does violate the GPL. It isn't fishy to hold the GPL source next to the compatibilty layer, it would be violating copyright. I don't see anywhere in the GPL that states you may use the source to add functionality to a closed source. In fact I seem to recall that it is VIRAL in that manner. SCO is not owed the right to make a clone or compatibility layer. GPL is owed the right to have any software based off of it to be GPLed as well. The burden of proof would then be on them to prove that they did not use GPLed code to run GPL code.
How is this Flamebait. Parent is correct, TV is in no way owed to anybody. If companies want TV to be universal to peddle their crap they can pay for it.
I don't push any distro... but certainly by far my favorite is gentoo. Not really for major optimized performance, but more for it's package management and great community information distribution. I have stopped using goggle and moved to gentoo forums for almost any linux related query.
Currently any system that I use regularly runs gentoo.
I really don't see any benefit to an Apple Laptop... Though I could be wrong. One HUGE advantage may be out of the gate hardware support. I would love to get my Inspiron 8100 to have all the battery monitoring and such working. I have got it working (with no work) on Redhat 7.1. But I need to look into it for Gentoo.
Maybe even a "cookbook" series:
- Implementing CUPS for Sweet Printing Stuff.
- Using OpenLDAP: Why the hell you should. etc...
I would like a Why the hell you should book series. It would make for a get row on my bookshelf. We could do a series for MS products two... Maintaining Exchange: What the f*ck were you thinking?
C'mon... isn't this a little too escapist-fantasyish, even for slashdot? I know every geek dreams of hitting it off with a Ms.(insert state of choice here), but isn't living it through the eyes of her lawyer Ex-BF a bit much? Talk about living vicariously through others..
I agree, This has nothing to do with SCO at all. I like my Soap-Operas to be about corporate craziness, not real life psychodrama.
I would agree that SCO management probably does think they have had code stolen from them. I would further concur that even as a past linux distributor that they don't really get "Linux" as an entity. The following is my thinking...
1) As a distributor of linux I would have to have at some point a conflict of interest in my company since I also have a Proprietary product targeting the same platform (x86).
2) I am a tiny operation who can hardly afford to have a development team, so I can NOT afford to innovate but rather just keep up with the Jones'.
3) My proprietary product see innovation unlike the product has ever seen since I get purchased by this linux company;)
4) I begin to have some middle management "audit" our code and low and behold it seems there is a tremendous amount of shared code.
Ad-Nauseum) I am Darl McBride, an individual that has shown himself to not understand his customer, his business or seemingly reality... (I have heard that Novell's responce to him leaving was one relief.) A middle manager comes and tells me that my open product has quite a bit of code in common with my proprietary one. I am going to hear this as the open product STOLE from us, where as occum's razor would tell the rest of us that we probably need to watch our development teams a lot closer so we don't steal anything else. Darl decided to act stupid and piss off most of his customer base, and all of his potential customer base and potential partners.
If I were a stock holder I would be pushing for a vote of no confidence on this guy and pushing for a public apology. Not that I would expect it. Come on, This guy is pissing away any chance this company has of surviving... you gotta be an angry shareholder.
Very, since due to the ACTUAL terms of the lawsuit cannot be about anything that has to do with IP, Copyright or Trademark. All of these things are not owned by SCO. Therefore such a move looks more negative for the kernel team then positive.
Not only would it set back development, it would add development where there was none. It also makes it look like they have something to hide.
Why react to SCO at all. They don't even have the appearance of being right.
Even better is the fact that when a Telecom or Large ISP hits CAP A, they take developers off of new dev and apply them to fix issues. I have witnessed this, and It's quite amazing and reassuring to their customers.
Any comment stating that this is going to kill cisco should be marked -1 (Lack of Clue). You buy gear from Cisco, Nortel or Lucent for support (read: sue potential). If you put your ISP on a commodity linux box and expect five 9's you need to back off the medication.
For WAN connectivity to OC3 levels I seriously doubt this would be an issue. I don't think you would use it as internet backbone router, but that is not what this would be used for anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think there is anything wrong with using release candidates on ANY system. I do think you should avoid the development branch unless you have done enough testing to be sure it is stable enough... and even then only after a feature freeze.
Is GCC not supported on a 286? I think as long as you could run almost ANY operating system you can run GCC. You could then cross compile... you just couldn't run the resulting binary on the compiling system. But that wasn't what the grandparent said.
A great location for general usage related queries is forums.gentoo.org which contains useful information that can be easily applied to and Distro. They're are a plethora of mailing lists, but I don't know what sunmanagers is like so I couldn't suggest any.
But the problem with the central location is that it is firmly and centrally controlled. If you like it and it feels right, then by all means stick with it. I guess our criteria for quality support are different.
Look at the DNS... all of them come through Sun, this hardly makes it as easy to get help as linux. The reason you see RTFM in the groups discussing linux is that it's hard to go to google and not get a relevant document to your issue.
I really didn't get that out of it. It was negative towards Sun, for sure, but I didn't see wired painting a doom and gloom scenario about it. They did mention that they had billions in cash at hand, which I read that as being highly unlikely to be any sort of takeover target.
That makes it sound as if microsoft was in some way their competitor, which they barely are. Sun does not have any reliance on microsofts technologies. In reality the fact that they where making an enemy out of MS is why they were having problems. Whether or not they failed to make up with MS is completely irrelevant to their current situation. This IS what the article says. This is not what the summary suggests.
This was not even close to what the article was trying to say. It is slasdot misunderstanding.
I whole heartedly agree. I have been dissecting linux implementations for a few years now to become effective in it's administration. I cannot do that as easily with Solaris. There is a cornicopia of info for linux on the web. Solaris? NADA.
Recently when we had a melt down of our application box, we had horrible service from Sun... and had to track down competent consultants to get it back to running. I no longer need to chant "Move to Linux" every other day because Suns doing all the reinforcement my company needs.
That summary is only half correct. The article attributes the preoccupation with microsoft as one of their problems... not with making up with them (which they still haven't)
There is a thousand odd characters in the japanese alphabet, so I'm sure that 10 wpm would be lucky. I couldn't imagine touch typing that kind of keyboard.
Oddly enough this was discussed in this months wired
Check out number 18 & 13 for the reference. prescient comment but I am sure blockbuster and walmart haven't hid the fact that they are interested in doing this.
Taking a quick jab at the situation with Occams razor...
Is it more likely that...
SCO a small company with limited resources and developers versed in open source code discovers their is a vast conspiracy to steal their lackluster IP that they don't own and place it into a VERY public place.
That this same company has made some rediculous and unsubtantiated claim that could bite them back. What they actually uncovered was their own liberal use of public domain (nothing wrong with that) and brought a searchlight focusing on all their code for violation of GPL.
If the kernel contains this "Compatibility Layer" then it does violate the GPL. It isn't fishy to hold the GPL source next to the compatibilty layer, it would be violating copyright. I don't see anywhere in the GPL that states you may use the source to add functionality to a closed source. In fact I seem to recall that it is VIRAL in that manner. SCO is not owed the right to make a clone or compatibility layer. GPL is owed the right to have any software based off of it to be GPLed as well. The burden of proof would then be on them to prove that they did not use GPLed code to run GPL code.
How is this Flamebait. Parent is correct, TV is in no way owed to anybody. If companies want TV to be universal to peddle their crap they can pay for it.
I don't push any distro... but certainly by far my favorite is gentoo. Not really for major optimized performance, but more for it's package management and great community information distribution. I have stopped using goggle and moved to gentoo forums for almost any linux related query.
Currently any system that I use regularly runs gentoo.
I really don't see any benefit to an Apple Laptop... Though I could be wrong. One HUGE advantage may be out of the gate hardware support. I would love to get my Inspiron 8100 to have all the battery monitoring and such working. I have got it working (with no work) on Redhat 7.1. But I need to look into it for Gentoo.
Maybe even a "cookbook" series:
- Implementing CUPS for Sweet Printing Stuff.
- Using OpenLDAP: Why the hell you should.
etc...
I would like a Why the hell you should book series. It would make for a get row on my bookshelf. We could do a series for MS products two... Maintaining Exchange: What the f*ck were you thinking?
C'mon... isn't this a little too escapist-fantasyish, even for slashdot? I know every geek dreams of hitting it off with a Ms.(insert state of choice here), but isn't living it through the eyes of her lawyer Ex-BF a bit much? Talk about living vicariously through others..
I agree, This has nothing to do with SCO at all. I like my Soap-Operas to be about corporate craziness, not real life psychodrama.
I would agree that SCO management probably does think they have had code stolen from them. I would further concur that even as a past linux distributor that they don't really get "Linux" as an entity. The following is my thinking...
;)
1) As a distributor of linux I would have to have at some point a conflict of interest in my company since I also have a Proprietary product targeting the same platform (x86).
2) I am a tiny operation who can hardly afford to have a development team, so I can NOT afford to innovate but rather just keep up with the Jones'.
3) My proprietary product see innovation unlike the product has ever seen since I get purchased by this linux company
4) I begin to have some middle management "audit" our code and low and behold it seems there is a tremendous amount of shared code.
Ad-Nauseum) I am Darl McBride, an individual that has shown himself to not understand his customer, his business or seemingly reality... (I have heard that Novell's responce to him leaving was one relief.) A middle manager comes and tells me that my open product has quite a bit of code in common with my proprietary one. I am going to hear this as the open product STOLE from us, where as occum's razor would tell the rest of us that we probably need to watch our development teams a lot closer so we don't steal anything else. Darl decided to act stupid and piss off most of his customer base, and all of his potential customer base and potential partners.
If I were a stock holder I would be pushing for a vote of no confidence on this guy and pushing for a public apology. Not that I would expect it. Come on, This guy is pissing away any chance this company has of surviving... you gotta be an angry shareholder.
Very, since due to the ACTUAL terms of the lawsuit cannot be about anything that has to do with IP, Copyright or Trademark. All of these things are not owned by SCO. Therefore such a move looks more negative for the kernel team then positive.
Not only would it set back development, it would add development where there was none. It also makes it look like they have something to hide.
Why react to SCO at all. They don't even have the appearance of being right.
Even better is the fact that when a Telecom or Large ISP hits CAP A, they take developers off of new dev and apply them to fix issues. I have witnessed this, and It's quite amazing and reassuring to their customers.
There are many suppliers of WAN gear for x86 as seen here.
Any comment stating that this is going to kill cisco should be marked -1 (Lack of Clue). You buy gear from Cisco, Nortel or Lucent for support (read: sue potential). If you put your ISP on a commodity linux box and expect five 9's you need to back off the medication.
Yes if by custom you mean interface cards... I guess my linksys NIC's and video cards would make my PCs custom too.
For WAN connectivity to OC3 levels I seriously doubt this would be an issue. I don't think you would use it as internet backbone router, but that is not what this would be used for anyway.