What does "Kougar" tell you? "Kroupware?" "JuK?" "Konquerer?"
Seriously, you don't know what 'JuK' could possibly mean???!? I can understand the rest, but not that one (unless they never had jukeboxes where you're from)
I wouldn't mod you down if I could, because you've stumbled on an ancient Chinese secret: Gentoo isn't perfect for all applications. Zounds! It was a poor attempt at flamebait, yes, but I personally wouldn't mod you down even for that.;-D
Don't do -UD (use/etc/portage/package.keywords and/etc/portage/package.unmask if you must use unstable packages) and after doing an emerge -uD world, follow it up with a revdep-rebuild. So:
emerge sync && emerge -uD world && revdep-rebuild
Well, not quite right: I'd recommend just doing the
emerge sync
then see if portage has been updated. If so, before you do the emerge -uD world do
etc-update
making sure to NOT do -5 unless you know what you're doing. Then, after that's done, run
revdep-rebuild
to make sure those pesky dependencies weren't broken when you did the -D.
Gentoo is many things, but it's not the lazy man's Linux distribution.
Every time I'm in best buy, I have no less than 6 people ask me if I need help with something. While I appreciate the attentitiveness to an extent, it is a little over the top.
I hear ya. When i worked in retail, that sort of attention usually meant that we thought you were shoplifting. That's why I don't appreciate that sort of attention to my every need, and why I walk out after the 4th cheerful, helpful employee that WON'T LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE!!! and my business goes elsewhere.
Once again, I don't understand why people shout "save the proprietary development companies!" and why they champion a GNU project as the best choice for proprietary software development.
Look, it's very simple. If you're going to use a GNU-compatible license, there's no need to worry. If you're writing the next Microsoft Word and hope to make millions, cough up $3000 dollars. Capitalism at work.
Yay, GNOME, for making one of the few platforms that one can write proprietary, for-profit software without contributing monitarily to the original project. Kudos!
At least when someone decides to write closed for-profit software under Qt, it helps to ensure the future of Qt.
Besides, GNOME's tied to Mozilla at the hip, and they don't exactly seem to "get" this whole FOSS thing anymore, anyway. Can't repackage Thunderbird with the original art? C'mon. What's next? GNOME guys, howabout an independent LGPLed HTML widget, eh?
Note to mindless GNOME zealots: This comment posted with Epiphany.
I wouldn't. The refusal to remove eyecandy bloat from Metacity, and the constant questioning of whether or not the user really knows that they do and don't want (despite users saying so) tells me that Havoc & Co. are living in a fairy dreamland where they're right and everyone else is wrong, and we'll all thank them for telling us how we really feel and what's more efficient to us.
Yeah, right.
Re:Great , another config file format to learn.
on
Mandrakelinux Goes X.org
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Right now X.Org is mostly a code cleanup of the last GPL-friendly XFree86. That will change eventually. I'm running X.Org at home, and there were very few changes. The advantage right now is that you're running something somewhat close to latest-greatest XFree86, except that it's undergone some minor changes.
It's not just the minor licensing issue: XFree86 moves at a snail's pace, and it's not from lack of people trying to change it. Hopefully we'll see some modernisation, and new features designed to take advantage of modern hardware.
I could see this being viable if, and only if, they do some sort of JIT compilation, or something similar to what ARDI did years ago with Executor. IIRC Executor could keep track of what code had run repeatedly, and convert any oft-run code to native machine code. I just remember that it ran the MacOS apps that actually would run at acceptable speeds.
I doubt Apple will be happy if PearPC ever grows any intelligent compilation features like this, because it would mean that their OS would run on generic hardware. I predict that if it ever happens, the price of the OS will go up (thanks, guys) and the license will become more Draconian (thanks again.)
You're joking, but in both cases, it sounds like ol' Rod wants to tax people who sell goods privately. I'm with you, actually; this business of taxing watercraft that individuals sell stinks. I knew my state was in financial trouble, but I wasn't sure until now just how bad.
Now, I wonder if our governor will keep taking expensive flights between Springfield and Chicago every weekend at taxpayers' expense if he expects Joe Sixpack to charge and pay taxes when he sells his bass boat?
They cycle through this; they pour money into GNOME, then announce that Linux on the desktop is dumb, then announce that the corporate desktop is a target for them, then announce that it's not, then announce that it is...I think RH is run by a chimp these days.
Maybe the goal is to convince people to release documentation under certain licenses, and to convince hardware manufacturers to go totally Free, but will it work?
And I was going to recommend Debian for the office's fileserver. Wonder what documentation will be ripped out, anyway? That won't fly...
I know this feeling, though I'm not in the IT sector (though I do a bit of admin-type work.) A department head, a publisher, and both think that I should do what they've told me, not what the other has told me. Also, because of the "a bit of admin-type work" aspect of my job, when the head bos s decides to send different departments in different directions (including mine) and each department's direction involves doing things with a computer that they don't know how to do, guess who gets to go about 30 different directions?
...will we immediately see things like, say, a GNOME 2.6.1 release with all JPEG support ripped out, and maybe we could rip out all the Web browsers too to keep from violating the patent, and perhaps rip out the GIMP's JPEG plugin as well?
I'm not kidding; if the GNUbies are going to stick to their guns, that's what should happen.
Colour me stupid, but I don't pay any license fees to run my mp3 players.
I'll happily color you stupid. If you're playing MP3s with a free-for-download MP3 player, then no, I guess you're not, but someone is. If you have a hardware player, or are using an available-with-the-OS player such as iTunes, then yes, you paid for it, just as you help pay for driver development (Windows and MacOS drivers aren't free, even if they appear to be.)
Another "informative" comment by someone who hasn't read the article yet. Bravo; you're a jackass.
Look, it's simple. This is a Carbon app. It's a single file. This could potentially be used to attack both OS9 and OS X users. This is not a case of "the directory is the app" as you think.
What makes this spoof so easy is that they've taken advantage of OS X's handling of both resource forks AND file extensions, so that Finder makes it appear that the file is, in fact, an MP3. If you do a Command-I you (apparently) see that it's an application.
I wondered how long it'd be before someone took advantage of this...
Oh, yay: an "insightful" comment that gets it dead wrong from the very start. Where did this "OS X runs on FreeBSD" myth get started, anywya? OS X uses some userland apps from FreeBSD.
I wish I had some points to award you, Anonymous Coward. That was *sniff* beautiful.
And it's absolutely true. Who set the goal to be taking over the end-user's desktop, anyway? When I was introduced to Linux years ago, I saw all these pieces that already existed, and saw them as a possible alternative to the current systems. Systems like KDE came among, then GNOME, and at some point someone (I know not who, though I'd like to break their legs) decided to start pushing Linux (and only Linux! Why don't FreeBSD zealots get hounded???!?) as an alternative. Reporters and whiny editorialists soon followed.
And now, what do we have today? KDE is okay, yeah, but I'd still say it's for those middle-of-the-road people like me; someone unwilling to use the totally mainstream but unwilling to give up the comforts. GNOME? It's the nightmarish "Aunt Tillie" vision of what a desktop ought to be, and becomes more hobbled with each release. I didn't start using Linux to be treated like a complete moron, and I didn't keep using it to be treated as if I were braindead. Do end users really need to be "saved" from their current conditions? If anything, I think having us around has helped to spur Microsoft and Apple on to greater things, and to (possibly) be a bit more honest about it. We have a fairly healthy symbiosis now! I suppose there's something to be said for making Free Software indispensible, but offering up a completely unfamiliar OS that integrates poorly with other peoples' solutions (which is what we have now) isn't going anywhere, and given the current tack, isn't likely to.
Do we really want to turn Linux, FreeBSD, etc. into operating systems where the OS makes decisions about how the hardware is detected and handled, and makes decisions about what it was that you really meant to do, rather than what you specified (even if you know what you're doing?)
The thing to notice here is how far behind we have left Aunt Tillie. Rule 1 of writing software for nontechnical users is this: if they have to read documentation to use it you designed it wrong. The interface of the software should be all the documentation the user needs. You'd have lost the non-techie before the point in this troubleshooting sequence where a hacker like me even got fully engaged.
So, Eric, how long until the manual-optional fetchmail is ready?
The funny thing that I've noticed here is that we're seeing mainly a GNOME-centric perspective. As a KDE user, I don't even have to touch the CUPS web interface, and IMHO setting up printers (even remote ones) is fairly easy.
But then again, that's not GNOME, and even though all reasons for GNOME's existence evaporated a few years ago, we must still hold a grudge against KDE for their past transgressions. Yeah, well, whatever. GNOME violates patents just by being a multi-window UI system running on top of (more than likely) XFree86. Let's see, they rely on a non-free display server that violates a backing-store patent. Let's boycott GNOME!
Meh. Anyway, back on the subject: I usually find something in ESR's writing that makes me nod my head. Not this time, though. Simpler front-ends exist for CUPS, and the author of several needlessly complex pieces of software has no right to badmouth other projects because some end user might have to read the manual. Hell, my wife had to read the Win98 manual to know where to *cough* Start. I guess they got it wrong.
People seem to be fond of claiming that business wants GNOME instead of KDE; I'd like to see some real numbers on that rather than the usual hand-waving.
The reason it seems strange to me is because KDE (IMHO) offers precisely what I'd look for in a desktop environment in a business environment. You have a system that, given a relatively "standard" system, can handle init, can handle cron jobs, can handle printers, etc. and do so from a centralized app. Also, KDE has more polished automation features (read: app scriptability.) Now, granted, GNOME can do much of what KDE can do these days, but given that KDE project leaders have even done government contract work (read: Germany) I have to wonder just how much more popular GNOME is in business circles.
Yes, I know the argument. Use GNOME, and if you ever develop proprietary apps, you don't have to pay a licensing fee! Hooray, GNOME wins with the crooks, hucksters, and sheisters who want to get ahead by finding suckers willing to get ripped off. Yes, I firmly believe in the concept of Free Software but Miguel and Co. is truly deluded if they think they're attracting quality business clients when their main selling point is "you can do everything for free...and we won't sue!"
Slashdot Mirror
What does "Kougar" tell you? "Kroupware?" "JuK?" "Konquerer?"
Seriously, you don't know what 'JuK' could possibly mean???!? I can understand the rest, but not that one (unless they never had jukeboxes where you're from)
As an OS X user, I'm interested in learning about these mythical one-click installs everyone talks about...
I wouldn't mod you down if I could, because you've stumbled on an ancient Chinese secret: Gentoo isn't perfect for all applications. Zounds! It was a poor attempt at flamebait, yes, but I personally wouldn't mod you down even for that. ;-D
Don't do -UD (use /etc/portage/package.keywords and /etc/portage/package.unmask if you must use unstable packages) and after doing an emerge -uD world, follow it up with a revdep-rebuild. So:
emerge sync && emerge -uD world && revdep-rebuild
Well, not quite right: I'd recommend just doing the
emerge sync
then see if portage has been updated. If so, before you do the emerge -uD world do
etc-update
making sure to NOT do -5 unless you know what you're doing. Then, after that's done, run
revdep-rebuild
to make sure those pesky dependencies weren't broken when you did the -D.
Gentoo is many things, but it's not the lazy man's Linux distribution.
Every time I'm in best buy, I have no less than 6 people ask me if I need help with something. While I appreciate the attentitiveness to an extent, it is a little over the top.
I hear ya. When i worked in retail, that sort of attention usually meant that we thought you were shoplifting. That's why I don't appreciate that sort of attention to my every need, and why I walk out after the 4th cheerful, helpful employee that WON'T LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE!!! and my business goes elsewhere.
Way to miss the sarcasm.
Once again, I don't understand why people shout "save the proprietary development companies!" and why they champion a GNU project as the best choice for proprietary software development.
Look, it's very simple. If you're going to use a GNU-compatible license, there's no need to worry. If you're writing the next Microsoft Word and hope to make millions, cough up $3000 dollars. Capitalism at work.
Yay, GNOME, for making one of the few platforms that one can write proprietary, for-profit software without contributing monitarily to the original project. Kudos!
At least when someone decides to write closed for-profit software under Qt, it helps to ensure the future of Qt.
Besides, GNOME's tied to Mozilla at the hip, and they don't exactly seem to "get" this whole FOSS thing anymore, anyway. Can't repackage Thunderbird with the original art? C'mon. What's next? GNOME guys, howabout an independent LGPLed HTML widget, eh?
Note to mindless GNOME zealots: This comment posted with Epiphany.
I wouldn't. The refusal to remove eyecandy bloat from Metacity, and the constant questioning of whether or not the user really knows that they do and don't want (despite users saying so) tells me that Havoc & Co. are living in a fairy dreamland where they're right and everyone else is wrong, and we'll all thank them for telling us how we really feel and what's more efficient to us.
Yeah, right.
Right now X.Org is mostly a code cleanup of the last GPL-friendly XFree86. That will change eventually. I'm running X.Org at home, and there were very few changes. The advantage right now is that you're running something somewhat close to latest-greatest XFree86, except that it's undergone some minor changes.
It's not just the minor licensing issue: XFree86 moves at a snail's pace, and it's not from lack of people trying to change it. Hopefully we'll see some modernisation, and new features designed to take advantage of modern hardware.
I for one welcome the change.
Insult the reader with abrasive teaser copy and expect them to read. Lest we forget, the rise of the Intarweb brought the rise of bad journalism.
I could see this being viable if, and only if, they do some sort of JIT compilation, or something similar to what ARDI did years ago with Executor. IIRC Executor could keep track of what code had run repeatedly, and convert any oft-run code to native machine code. I just remember that it ran the MacOS apps that actually would run at acceptable speeds.
I doubt Apple will be happy if PearPC ever grows any intelligent compilation features like this, because it would mean that their OS would run on generic hardware. I predict that if it ever happens, the price of the OS will go up (thanks, guys) and the license will become more Draconian (thanks again.)
You're joking, but in both cases, it sounds like ol' Rod wants to tax people who sell goods privately. I'm with you, actually; this business of taxing watercraft that individuals sell stinks. I knew my state was in financial trouble, but I wasn't sure until now just how bad.
Now, I wonder if our governor will keep taking expensive flights between Springfield and Chicago every weekend at taxpayers' expense if he expects Joe Sixpack to charge and pay taxes when he sells his bass boat?
Marketing.
They cycle through this; they pour money into GNOME, then announce that Linux on the desktop is dumb, then announce that the corporate desktop is a target for them, then announce that it's not, then announce that it is...I think RH is run by a chimp these days.
Score another victory for Free Software!
Maybe the goal is to convince people to release documentation under certain licenses, and to convince hardware manufacturers to go totally Free, but will it work?
And I was going to recommend Debian for the office's fileserver. Wonder what documentation will be ripped out, anyway? That won't fly...
I know this feeling, though I'm not in the IT sector (though I do a bit of admin-type work.) A department head, a publisher, and both think that I should do what they've told me, not what the other has told me. Also, because of the "a bit of admin-type work" aspect of my job, when the head bos s decides to send different departments in different directions (including mine) and each department's direction involves doing things with a computer that they don't know how to do, guess who gets to go about 30 different directions?
Yay,
...will we immediately see things like, say, a GNOME 2.6.1 release with all JPEG support ripped out, and maybe we could rip out all the Web browsers too to keep from violating the patent, and perhaps rip out the GIMP's JPEG plugin as well?
I'm not kidding; if the GNUbies are going to stick to their guns, that's what should happen.
I'll happily color you stupid. If you're playing MP3s with a free-for-download MP3 player, then no, I guess you're not, but someone is. If you have a hardware player, or are using an available-with-the-OS player such as iTunes, then yes, you paid for it, just as you help pay for driver development (Windows and MacOS drivers aren't free, even if they appear to be.)
Another "informative" comment by someone who hasn't read the article yet. Bravo; you're a jackass.
Look, it's simple. This is a Carbon app. It's a single file. This could potentially be used to attack both OS9 and OS X users. This is not a case of "the directory is the app" as you think.
What makes this spoof so easy is that they've taken advantage of OS X's handling of both resource forks AND file extensions, so that Finder makes it appear that the file is, in fact, an MP3. If you do a Command-I you (apparently) see that it's an application.
I wondered how long it'd be before someone took advantage of this...
Oh, yay: an "insightful" comment that gets it dead wrong from the very start. Where did this "OS X runs on FreeBSD" myth get started, anywya? OS X uses some userland apps from FreeBSD.
And it's absolutely true. Who set the goal to be taking over the end-user's desktop, anyway? When I was introduced to Linux years ago, I saw all these pieces that already existed, and saw them as a possible alternative to the current systems. Systems like KDE came among, then GNOME, and at some point someone (I know not who, though I'd like to break their legs) decided to start pushing Linux (and only Linux! Why don't FreeBSD zealots get hounded???!?) as an alternative. Reporters and whiny editorialists soon followed.
And now, what do we have today? KDE is okay, yeah, but I'd still say it's for those middle-of-the-road people like me; someone unwilling to use the totally mainstream but unwilling to give up the comforts. GNOME? It's the nightmarish "Aunt Tillie" vision of what a desktop ought to be, and becomes more hobbled with each release. I didn't start using Linux to be treated like a complete moron, and I didn't keep using it to be treated as if I were braindead. Do end users really need to be "saved" from their current conditions? If anything, I think having us around has helped to spur Microsoft and Apple on to greater things, and to (possibly) be a bit more honest about it. We have a fairly healthy symbiosis now! I suppose there's something to be said for making Free Software indispensible, but offering up a completely unfamiliar OS that integrates poorly with other peoples' solutions (which is what we have now) isn't going anywhere, and given the current tack, isn't likely to.
Do we really want to turn Linux, FreeBSD, etc. into operating systems where the OS makes decisions about how the hardware is detected and handled, and makes decisions about what it was that you really meant to do, rather than what you specified (even if you know what you're doing?)
So, Eric, how long until the manual-optional fetchmail is ready?
The funny thing that I've noticed here is that we're seeing mainly a GNOME-centric perspective. As a KDE user, I don't even have to touch the CUPS web interface, and IMHO setting up printers (even remote ones) is fairly easy.
But then again, that's not GNOME, and even though all reasons for GNOME's existence evaporated a few years ago, we must still hold a grudge against KDE for their past transgressions. Yeah, well, whatever. GNOME violates patents just by being a multi-window UI system running on top of (more than likely) XFree86. Let's see, they rely on a non-free display server that violates a backing-store patent. Let's boycott GNOME!
Meh. Anyway, back on the subject: I usually find something in ESR's writing that makes me nod my head. Not this time, though. Simpler front-ends exist for CUPS, and the author of several needlessly complex pieces of software has no right to badmouth other projects because some end user might have to read the manual. Hell, my wife had to read the Win98 manual to know where to *cough* Start. I guess they got it wrong.
People seem to be fond of claiming that business wants GNOME instead of KDE; I'd like to see some real numbers on that rather than the usual hand-waving.
The reason it seems strange to me is because KDE (IMHO) offers precisely what I'd look for in a desktop environment in a business environment. You have a system that, given a relatively "standard" system, can handle init, can handle cron jobs, can handle printers, etc. and do so from a centralized app. Also, KDE has more polished automation features (read: app scriptability.) Now, granted, GNOME can do much of what KDE can do these days, but given that KDE project leaders have even done government contract work (read: Germany) I have to wonder just how much more popular GNOME is in business circles.
Yes, I know the argument. Use GNOME, and if you ever develop proprietary apps, you don't have to pay a licensing fee! Hooray, GNOME wins with the crooks, hucksters, and sheisters who want to get ahead by finding suckers willing to get ripped off. Yes, I firmly believe in the concept of Free Software but Miguel and Co. is truly deluded if they think they're attracting quality business clients when their main selling point is "you can do everything for free...and we won't sue!"
Naw. The KDE has its own HTML rendering engine. This also happens to be the same rendering engine that Apple uses for its own Safari browser.
Even if you ignore the Vorbis zealots, it really is better. It's not a stellar format, but it can beat MP3 (yes, even lame) for filesize/quality.