Matter-antimatter reactions give you 100% of the mass converted into energy.
Gamma ray energy, that is.
Note also that antimatter annihiliates any matter it touches.
Core problem 1 is how to produce antimatter cheaply, and in enough quantity. Right now, it's only produced in particle accelerators.
Core problem 2 is how to transport it. If it's charged, you can use a magnetic bottle, but if it's not....
Core problem 3 is how to change the gamma rays into something useful. Gamma rays, you may recall, only interact with heavy metals (e.g. Pb) enough to really consider it. (Sure, they interact with, say, DNA, but not very often, compared to the number that get through unaffected). And even in things like Pb, it's only attenuated not stopped. The gamma rays might excite an electron, but that'll fall back to ground state, giving another gamma ray. It might interact with the nucleus, warming the substance a very little bit, but that's it. We don't have a good way of converting gamma rays into, say, heat to provide steam for traditional turbines.
The chart you supplied is lousy. Either it's vastly out of date, or it's deliberately slanted against non-IE browsers.
For one, it simply lists an x for what is apparently full support, an (s) for somewhat supported, and nothing for no support. This is a terrible way of comparing things, since different browsers have different levels of support and different bugs in their implementation. CSS2 support is notoriously problematic, iirc. Not to mention that having "DHTML" and "JavaScript" support categories after this x/(s)/ fashion is fairly ludicrous. What about the various W3C CSS and DOM levels, and even the various components within DOM level 2?
But the most blatant problem with the table is the fact that it covers Internet Explorer 6, Netscape 6, Netscape 4, and Opera 3.02(!), amongst others. While IE6 is current, NS4 and Opera 3.02 certainly are not! Not to mention that NS7, while quite nice, is lacking a lot from the cutting-edge Mozilla 1.3 and 1.4 versions.
Anyone have a better comparison chart? Please post 'em below!
Re:You mean Internet Explorer for Windows
on
PocketPC 2003 Reviewed
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Opacity is in the upcoming CSS3 standard, which Mozilla is helping test. Thus, it was prefixed with moz- to specify that it wasn't in a full-fledged standard.
Actually, a bug was found in CSS2 because of Mozilla's strict standards support (see Netscape's development documents on images in a table for more info).
The nice thing about Mozilla is that its extensions tend to be obvious. TMK, all Mozilla off-standard stuff is recognizable as such, as you have so aptly demonstated (note the "moz-" prefix). Unlike Other Browsers which implement their extensions in unrecognizable fashion (e.g. MARQUEE tag).
Anyhow, you're not talking about not supporting standards, you're talking of adding to the stuff out there (and note that I've shown that Mozilla is being a good citizen in this respect!). For supporting existing W3C standards, nothing is better than Mozilla, and IE falls far short. Example: DOM level 2 compliance, esp. wrt. event handling.
Sounds like my story. I switched from a Palm IIIe to a Sharp Zaurus 5500. All of a sudden, I could do all kinds of crazy stuff, like browse the web with my 802.11 card, use SSH, mount shares, stream music (via shoutcast as well as via ESD or whatever), etc. all combined with the PDA features that make my life as a physics grad student much easier on top of making my life as a geek much easier. It additionally rocks, because of all the community support of Linux on the platform.
Only problem is, Palm IIIe is ancient, and the recent Palm stuff is actually equivalent to the PocketPC and TrollTech stuff, from what I've seen of it.
What version of Palm were you using? The handspring and Palm phone stuff I've seen rock.
The Sun workstations are pretty damn old SPARC 5's.
Actually, they're not. They're about 1.5-year-old Ultra 5s. They're darned good, and they've even been given a default GUI that's like Windows, with a Start button and everything!
I'm pretty sure that the biggest scare-off is that they're *GASP* Unix! They're different!.
They're actually pretty fast; just need Mozilla, OpenOffice, etc. on them. GNOME would be good, too. But I haven't dealt with them for a lont time. Complain to Consult if you want stuff installed; I bet they'll do it if they have time.
If they can get good apps installed, then I think that it might well have a 'nix rennaisance (amongst those in the know and those curious).
Actually, the app selction is identical to what is installed on the central servers, so it's really quite extensive. SPSS, S-PLUS, Matlab, Mathematica, yadda yadda yadda. Just need Mozilla (upgrade to NS4 that was installed when I left), possibly GNOME, trillian if you want it, etc. Just ask!
I think that, once the Necessary Apps (Moz or NS7, GNOME, OpenOffice, etc.) are installed on them, CNS should publicize the heck out of 'em. That way, people know that they're actually usable computer systems.
Have you tried X11 (preferably recent software) over the same link, with same/similar machines? I'd be interested. I'd bet your work link is substantially wider than my 3mb (*sigh* 1.5mb here, whenever it gets here) cap. What is your work link?
Lower-end stuff (e.g. xterms) run slower over a dialup link (I'm sure I'm not even getting 40-50 kbps here), but it's entirely usable, particularly if I've been using it for a little while. Netscape 4 was lousy. I just tried it. I'm at 16-bit colour, BTW.
Back when I had a cable modem (before I moved to a place where they said I'd have a cable modem by the end of last year. hah!), which was capped at 3Mbps, I ran Mozilla 1 over the cablemodem, over a long distance (they hadn't hooked in to KANREN, so my traffic to the university went from Manhattan, KS through Manhattan, NY and back) from my older Ultra10 workstation (It had, I think, just been upped to 256MB RAM), displaying on my Debian (XFree 4? Or was it still 3?) PII 400 w/ 512 MB RAM, and it ran just fine. I don't recall it being substantially slower than local. I was either running 16bit or 24bit depth. Quite possiby 24bit, since I wasn't trying to run many games then (I made it 16bit for games over winex).
Oh, did I mention that those were over an encrypted connection? (ssh X11 tunneling)
Heck, the university used Sun IPX/IPC with Linux as thin-clients, displaying from a couple of (actually fairly crummy IIRC) central servers. It was pretty usable, too.
I remember people bitching because IBM actually had the nerve to use LinDVD on their laptops and it supported everythign WinDVD does (macrovision on the SVideo out was the biggie).
Yup. I concur. Macrovision is danged annoying (my TV only has a finite number of connectors, but I can daisychain stuff together if it's not MM-"protected"!) That, and if I'd like to change formats or back it up to another disc (you know, that pesky "fair use" thing) then I'm SOL. OTOH, it's probably legal. *sigh*
Likewise, silly laws and restrictions regarding DVDs and encryption won't go away instantly.
Yup. Actually, I'm considering MS Office 11 and its DRM and OpenOffice and other open productivity programs, and thinking that companies would probably really like it. OO is looking at better GPG/PGP coordination (good idea!), but making it more granular (i.e. allowing/disallowing printing, writing, reading, etc.) is lacking.
If DRM is ever going to be trusted, it's gotta be FOSS (it'll be non-centric, since anyone can read the source code and replicate the functionality exactly; and we'll be sure to include (or will include when somebody hacks it in; probably in about 5 seconds!) Fair Use provisions into it. Compare this with MSFT's lock-in (passport + Windows Server required?!), and we'd have an MS Office Killer --if and only if!--we get it implemented in time to prevent the people getting locked in to MSFT. Once they do that, they're SOL on their old documents unless someone can hack MSFT's DRM outside the US or other stupid IP country (DMCA and equivalent being the problem).
Some aspects of DRM are positive, and it'll be looked for in business solutions! We've gotta have it or lose what little momentum we've gotten.
Although I'm no fan of SCO/Caldera, I'd take it over Windows any day.
Now, if they shipped no OS (I have a vague recollection that this might be what they're doing instead; bah! Where are my transcripts?!;) or Debian or Red Hat or SuSE or especially Mandrake (they need the cash).
Hey, at least they got the distro right. Give them time, they'll find xine.:)
heh.
Mmmm. Xine. If only I didn't have to break the law to view my legally purchased!!![I don't pirate software nor movies nor songs] DVDs.
Umm, I mean, I, like all patriotic, freedom-loving Americans, use Microsoft® Windows® and Microsoft® Windows® Media Player® exclusively, and am looking forward to having the privilege of supporting Microsoft® every month by buying, nee, leasing their subscription software, and to help in any way I can (money, adding to their userbase and thus peer pressure by using their software and spreading their formats and proprietary extensions, etc.) to help them crush weak competitors who only confuse me by creating gasp! Choices!
Err, Please move along. There is nothing to see here.
FWIW, an IBM salesdroid I talked with a few months ago said they might ship linux on their laptops this year. We'll see. Nobody's getting my money if I have to send a portion to Redmond, too.
Just gimme a friggin' laptop without Windows on it! [OK, at a reasonable price, Apple-boy.
There's no question that parts of this spec have nice ramifications. When we, the FOSS community, see something in the hardware that's neat or that will provide some new functionality, werden wir es natürlich ausschlachten. But the biggest problem, which does not reassure me nor the rest of the community, and which seems to be hinted to by this apparently glossed-over bit of the TCPA FAQ (http://www.trustedcomputing.org/docs/Website_TCPA %20FAQ_0703021.pdf):
22. How does TCPA relate to the recent Palladium announcement from Microsoft?
Microsoft is a founding member of the TCPA. Detailed Palladium questions should be directed to Microsoft at this time.
That seems to imply to me at least that there's a TCPA<->Palladium link in the background that seems rather sinister. Particularly the reference to MSFT being a "founding member" (although that could be to clearify MSFT's role in TCPA, although that tends to make me (and I'm sure many others) envision TCPA being driven at least to a modest, if not large extent, by the World's most Wealthy and Powerful Monopolist, who has been proven again and again to abuse this position to further its own interests and crush actual and potential competition) and in particular the "directed to Microsoft at this time" bit seems to signal to me that the TCPA is just the hardware component of Palladium, and that TCPA will accomodate Palladium and MSFT (who is doing everything it can to kill Linux and Free Software) when the time is right. Maybe even now, but only the members (or even a subset of them!) know. After all, an API is only as open as is actually revealed.
I would be much more reassured if you were actually an active part of the AMI TCPA contingent, and then also privvy to all of the internal docs. You could then possibly reassure us that we won't be excluded from the fun now or later on down the road.
An additional thorn in my side is this "membership" business. It seems that you have to sign some agreements in order to get more access to TCPA docs, which leads me to wonder that the "open" specification isn't really quite so open, and that we're being left outside in the cold for anything that will potentially hurt us, so that we will go along with it. Once again, an API is only as open as is actually revealed.
Yes, but that is only a Vastly Cool Feature that is So Vastly Cool in combination with:
Bookmarked Tab Groups Opening a Tab Group as the Homepage
For instance, I have certain bookmark groups for different bits of JavaDocs. Verreh nice to have a bunch of relevant sections (e.g. actions and related classes) in a bookmark tab. Simply click on the group in the toolbar, and POOF! Documentation heaven.
I'm pretty sure it's that either hiesr (his+her, pronounced hee-zer) DHCP server not providing search, or not having the appropriate fields set. Or it might be a generational windowsism. I'm thinking it's probably the former or fotter (former + latter, pronounced fah-ter).
Niftyfun word confections.;)
The Internet keywords is another thing entirely from what's discussed in the article. I'm not quite certain how exactly it functions; it seems to fetch urls based on what an external entity (or maybe a config file) assigns to the keywords. http://www.mozilla.org/docs/end-user/internet-keyw ords.html seems to be the page for info on it, as I see you've found. It's nice that you can customize it.:)
Works for me, Mozilla 1.3a (build 2002120618), sid Debian. I use "www" in the address bar and get the departmental web server. I also use DHCP, so my resolver is configured by what the server tells pump.
My guess is that either:
a) Your DHCP server isn't giving you a good set of search domains, or
b) It's a funky Windows-ism, or
c) It's a bug in Moz that got fixed before my version.
I don't have windows on this machine, I tested it on a nearby windows (95 or 98) machine, and got the same problem you did. Thus, I'd conclude offhand (since we share the same dhcp server) that it's b) It's a funky Windows-ism or c) It's a bug in Moz that got fixed before my version.. Maybe shelling out money for a new version of Windows would fix it, or perhaps downloading a recent nightly build?
Wait. Analyzing further, it might well be d) pump is integrating the search path from the existing resolv.conf when it gets data, I'm assuming from a dhcp server that doesn't give data on the search domains.
Thus, the answer might well be that you just need to tap your admin on the shoulder and tell them that they need to add info to DHCP server's response so that you get good search info. This should fix it for Moz, since it is known to work fine with a good search path in the version I'm using. Don't know about IE or other browsers, though.
Re:cause linux/oss/unix admins are all talk
on
Due Diligence?
·
· Score: 1
Umm, 137 is netbios-ns, the netbios name service, which is for SMB/CIFS names, which is Windows Networking. Looks like somebody's scanning Windows Shares. Might want to pick a better port to laugh about.:)
For an individual tree, yes. Is also a form of QA, since a given patch must convince the maintainer (either directly or via a large group) that the patch is correct. However, the program itself is very democratic, since the user has complete control over his/her own tree, and can publish this tree (AKA fork the project) independently of the original. Thus, in effect, it is a democracy, since each user has absolute control over the program that they actual ly run, although they might not have much influence with the original project. (Now, as many would point out, most users don't exercise this and/or don't particularly care, but there are those who do, and it leads to a miriad of cool possibilities, and much more control than a config file or especially a silly Registry can provide.)
Contrast this with closed source, where the company/programmer is truly a dictator, and wields extremely strict control over the program.
Hmm. I found a thread at http://www.php.net/manual/en/security.apache.php which seems to validate your claim. However, one of the writes that one can use apache2's perchild mpm module. This seems like a pretty good solution to me. There's also mention of open_basedir.
'Scuse my naiivite, but why not have them in different virtual roots? Then nobody pees in anyone else's pond, because they simply can't access the other ponds.
It looks like it supports DLLs amongst other sorts of libs, so I guess it can directly import Windows-only codecs? Sounds like a nifty idea. Niftier idea, though, would be for the friggin' developers to develop for Windows and Linux. [Or just Linux.;)
Slashdot Mirror
Matter-antimatter reactions give you 100% of the mass converted into energy.
Gamma ray energy, that is.
Note also that antimatter annihiliates any matter it touches.
Core problem 1 is how to produce antimatter cheaply, and in enough quantity. Right now, it's only produced in particle accelerators.
Core problem 2 is how to transport it. If it's charged, you can use a magnetic bottle, but if it's not....
Core problem 3 is how to change the gamma rays into something useful. Gamma rays, you may recall, only interact with heavy metals (e.g. Pb) enough to really consider it. (Sure, they interact with, say, DNA, but not very often, compared to the number that get through unaffected). And even in things like Pb, it's only attenuated not stopped. The gamma rays might excite an electron, but that'll fall back to ground state, giving another gamma ray. It might interact with the nucleus, warming the substance a very little bit, but that's it. We don't have a good way of converting gamma rays into, say, heat to provide steam for traditional turbines.
hardly. Works great for me.
freedesktop and linux standards base make it possible, stone-age troll monkey.
Aaaagh! Flashbacks... to... Illuminatus... trilogy! Gaah!
isn't this Blackdown's Java?
How is this different from Blackdown?
The chart you supplied is lousy. Either it's vastly out of date, or it's deliberately slanted against non-IE browsers.
For one, it simply lists an x for what is apparently full support, an (s) for somewhat supported, and nothing for no support. This is a terrible way of comparing things, since different browsers have different levels of support and different bugs in their implementation. CSS2 support is notoriously problematic, iirc. Not to mention that having "DHTML" and "JavaScript" support categories after this x/(s)/ fashion is fairly ludicrous. What about the various W3C CSS and DOM levels, and even the various components within DOM level 2?
But the most blatant problem with the table is the fact that it covers Internet Explorer 6, Netscape 6, Netscape 4, and Opera 3.02(!), amongst others. While IE6 is current, NS4 and Opera 3.02 certainly are not! Not to mention that NS7, while quite nice, is lacking a lot from the cutting-edge Mozilla 1.3 and 1.4 versions.
Anyone have a better comparison chart? Please post 'em below!
Opacity is in the upcoming CSS3 standard, which Mozilla is helping test. Thus, it was prefixed with moz- to specify that it wasn't in a full-fledged standard.
Actually, a bug was found in CSS2 because of Mozilla's strict standards support (see Netscape's development documents on images in a table for more info).
The nice thing about Mozilla is that its extensions tend to be obvious. TMK, all Mozilla off-standard stuff is recognizable as such, as you have so aptly demonstated (note the "moz-" prefix). Unlike Other Browsers which implement their extensions in unrecognizable fashion (e.g. MARQUEE tag).
Anyhow, you're not talking about not supporting standards, you're talking of adding to the stuff out there (and note that I've shown that Mozilla is being a good citizen in this respect!). For supporting existing W3C standards, nothing is better than Mozilla, and IE falls far short. Example: DOM level 2 compliance, esp. wrt. event handling.
Sounds like my story. I switched from a Palm IIIe to a Sharp Zaurus 5500. All of a sudden, I could do all kinds of crazy stuff, like browse the web with my 802.11 card, use SSH, mount shares, stream music (via shoutcast as well as via ESD or whatever), etc. all combined with the PDA features that make my life as a physics grad student much easier on top of making my life as a geek much easier. It additionally rocks, because of all the community support of Linux on the platform.
Only problem is, Palm IIIe is ancient, and the recent Palm stuff is actually equivalent to the PocketPC and TrollTech stuff, from what I've seen of it.
What version of Palm were you using? The handspring and Palm phone stuff I've seen rock.
Actually, they're not. They're about 1.5-year-old Ultra 5s. They're darned good, and they've even been given a default GUI that's like Windows, with a Start button and everything!
I'm pretty sure that the biggest scare-off is that they're *GASP* Unix! They're different!
They're actually pretty fast; just need Mozilla, OpenOffice, etc. on them. GNOME would be good, too. But I haven't dealt with them for a lont time. Complain to Consult if you want stuff installed; I bet they'll do it if they have time.
If they can get good apps installed, then I think that it might well have a 'nix rennaisance (amongst those in the know and those curious).
Actually, the app selction is identical to what is installed on the central servers, so it's really quite extensive. SPSS, S-PLUS, Matlab, Mathematica, yadda yadda yadda. Just need Mozilla (upgrade to NS4 that was installed when I left), possibly GNOME, trillian if you want it, etc. Just ask!
I think that, once the Necessary Apps (Moz or NS7, GNOME, OpenOffice, etc.) are installed on them, CNS should publicize the heck out of 'em. That way, people know that they're actually usable computer systems.
Have you tried X11 (preferably recent software) over the same link, with same/similar machines? I'd be interested. I'd bet your work link is substantially wider than my 3mb (*sigh* 1.5mb here, whenever it gets here) cap. What is your work link?
Hmm. That's not what my Google search says. Interesting. Are you sure you're not talking Citrix or something?
Soon as I get my cable modem connection here, I'll re-test.
Horse hockey. I have.
p df, Microsoft Terminal Svcs is only able to do 8 bits (256 colors). Is that still accurate?
Lower-end stuff (e.g. xterms) run slower over a dialup link (I'm sure I'm not even getting 40-50 kbps here), but it's entirely usable, particularly if I've been using it for a little while. Netscape 4 was lousy. I just tried it. I'm at 16-bit colour, BTW.
Back when I had a cable modem (before I moved to a place where they said I'd have a cable modem by the end of last year. hah!), which was capped at 3Mbps, I ran Mozilla 1 over the cablemodem, over a long distance (they hadn't hooked in to KANREN, so my traffic to the university went from Manhattan, KS through Manhattan, NY and back) from my older Ultra10 workstation (It had, I think, just been upped to 256MB RAM), displaying on my Debian (XFree 4? Or was it still 3?) PII 400 w/ 512 MB RAM, and it ran just fine. I don't recall it being substantially slower than local. I was either running 16bit or 24bit depth. Quite possiby 24bit, since I wasn't trying to run many games then (I made it 16bit for games over winex).
Oh, did I mention that those were over an encrypted connection? (ssh X11 tunneling)
Heck, the university used Sun IPX/IPC with Linux as thin-clients, displaying from a couple of (actually fairly crummy IIRC) central servers. It was pretty usable, too.
Slow at 100Mbit my ass.
And, according to www.ncl.cs.columbia.edu/publications/cucs-022-00.
Yup. I concur. Macrovision is danged annoying (my TV only has a finite number of connectors, but I can daisychain stuff together if it's not MM-"protected"!) That, and if I'd like to change formats or back it up to another disc (you know, that pesky "fair use" thing) then I'm SOL. OTOH, it's probably legal. *sigh*
Yup. Actually, I'm considering MS Office 11 and its DRM and OpenOffice and other open productivity programs, and thinking that companies would probably really like it. OO is looking at better GPG/PGP coordination (good idea!), but making it more granular (i.e. allowing/disallowing printing, writing, reading, etc.) is lacking.
If DRM is ever going to be trusted, it's gotta be FOSS (it'll be non-centric, since anyone can read the source code and replicate the functionality exactly; and we'll be sure to include (or will include when somebody hacks it in; probably in about 5 seconds!) Fair Use provisions into it. Compare this with MSFT's lock-in (passport + Windows Server required?!), and we'd have an MS Office Killer --if and only if!--we get it implemented in time to prevent the people getting locked in to MSFT. Once they do that, they're SOL on their old documents unless someone can hack MSFT's DRM outside the US or other stupid IP country (DMCA and equivalent being the problem).
Some aspects of DRM are positive, and it'll be looked for in business solutions! We've gotta have it or lose what little momentum we've gotten.
Now, if they shipped no OS (I have a vague recollection that this might be what they're doing instead; bah! Where are my transcripts?!
heh.
Mmmm. Xine. If only I didn't have to break the law to view my legally purchased!!! [I don't pirate software nor movies nor songs] DVDs.
Umm, I mean, I, like all patriotic, freedom-loving Americans, use Microsoft® Windows® and Microsoft® Windows® Media Player® exclusively, and am looking forward to having the privilege of supporting Microsoft® every month by buying, nee, leasing their subscription software, and to help in any way I can (money, adding to their userbase and thus peer pressure by using their software and spreading their formats and proprietary extensions, etc.) to help them crush weak competitors who only confuse me by creating gasp! Choices!
Err, Please move along. There is nothing to see here.
That was exactly my response, too.
FWIW, an IBM salesdroid I talked with a few months ago said they might ship linux on their laptops this year. We'll see. Nobody's getting my money if I have to send a portion to Redmond, too.
Just gimme a friggin' laptop without Windows on it! [OK, at a reasonable price, Apple-boy.
"to boot" Very punny.
That seems to imply to me at least that there's a TCPA<->Palladium link in the background that seems rather sinister. Particularly the reference to MSFT being a "founding member" (although that could be to clearify MSFT's role in TCPA, although that tends to make me (and I'm sure many others) envision TCPA being driven at least to a modest, if not large extent, by the World's most Wealthy and Powerful Monopolist, who has been proven again and again to abuse this position to further its own interests and crush actual and potential competition) and in particular the "directed to Microsoft at this time" bit seems to signal to me that the TCPA is just the hardware component of Palladium, and that TCPA will accomodate Palladium and MSFT (who is doing everything it can to kill Linux and Free Software) when the time is right. Maybe even now, but only the members (or even a subset of them!) know. After all, an API is only as open as is actually revealed.
I would be much more reassured if you were actually an active part of the AMI TCPA contingent, and then also privvy to all of the internal docs. You could then possibly reassure us that we won't be excluded from the fun now or later on down the road.
An additional thorn in my side is this "membership" business. It seems that you have to sign some agreements in order to get more access to TCPA docs, which leads me to wonder that the "open" specification isn't really quite so open, and that we're being left outside in the cold for anything that will potentially hurt us, so that we will go along with it. Once again, an API is only as open as is actually revealed
What reassurances can you offer?
There's an article on Koha in the most recent Linux Journal. Doesn't offer a whole lot of info, but it's an interesting look at the project.
Yes, but that is only a Vastly Cool Feature that is So Vastly Cool in combination with:
Bookmarked Tab Groups
Opening a Tab Group as the Homepage
For instance, I have certain bookmark groups for different bits of JavaDocs. Verreh nice to have a bunch of relevant sections (e.g. actions and related classes) in a bookmark tab. Simply click on the group in the toolbar, and POOF! Documentation heaven.
I'm pretty sure it's that either hiesr (his+her, pronounced hee-zer) DHCP server not providing search, or not having the appropriate fields set. Or it might be a generational windowsism. I'm thinking it's probably the former or fotter (former + latter, pronounced fah-ter).
;)
w ords.html seems to be the page for info on it, as I see you've found. It's nice that you can customize it. :)
Niftyfun word confections.
The Internet keywords is another thing entirely from what's discussed in the article. I'm not quite certain how exactly it functions; it seems to fetch urls based on what an external entity (or maybe a config file) assigns to the keywords. http://www.mozilla.org/docs/end-user/internet-key
Works for me, Mozilla 1.3a (build 2002120618), sid Debian. I use "www" in the address bar and get the departmental web server. I also use DHCP, so my resolver is configured by what the server tells pump.
My guess is that either:
a) Your DHCP server isn't giving you a good set of search domains, or
b) It's a funky Windows-ism, or
c) It's a bug in Moz that got fixed before my version.
I don't have windows on this machine, I tested it on a nearby windows (95 or 98) machine, and got the same problem you did. Thus, I'd conclude offhand (since we share the same dhcp server) that it's b) It's a funky Windows-ism or c) It's a bug in Moz that got fixed before my version.. Maybe shelling out money for a new version of Windows would fix it, or perhaps downloading a recent nightly build?
Wait. Analyzing further, it might well be
d) pump is integrating the search path from the existing resolv.conf when it gets data, I'm assuming from a dhcp server that doesn't give data on the search domains.
Thus, the answer might well be that you just need to tap your admin on the shoulder and tell them that they need to add info to DHCP server's response so that you get good search info. This should fix it for Moz, since it is known to work fine with a good search path in the version I'm using. Don't know about IE or other browsers, though.
Umm, 137 is netbios-ns, the netbios name service, which is for SMB/CIFS names, which is Windows Networking. Looks like somebody's scanning Windows Shares. Might want to pick a better port to laugh about. :)
For an individual tree, yes. Is also a form of QA, since a given patch must convince the maintainer (either directly or via a large group) that the patch is correct. However, the program itself is very democratic, since the user has complete control over his/her own tree, and can publish this tree (AKA fork the project) independently of the original. Thus, in effect, it is a democracy, since each user has absolute control over the program that they actual ly run, although they might not have much influence with the original project. (Now, as many would point out, most users don't exercise this and/or don't particularly care, but there are those who do, and it leads to a miriad of cool possibilities, and much more control than a config file or especially a silly Registry can provide.)
Contrast this with closed source, where the company/programmer is truly a dictator, and wields extremely strict control over the program.
Hmm. I found a thread at http://www.php.net/manual/en/security.apache.php
which seems to validate your claim. However, one of the writes that one can use apache2's perchild mpm module. This seems like a pretty good solution to me. There's also mention of open_basedir.
Sound better to you?
'Scuse my naiivite, but why not have them in different virtual roots? Then nobody pees in anyone else's pond, because they simply can't access the other ponds.
Ja, I finally found it at freshmeat.
;)
It looks like it supports DLLs amongst other sorts of libs, so I guess it can directly import Windows-only codecs? Sounds like a nifty idea. Niftier idea, though, would be for the friggin' developers to develop for Windows and Linux. [Or just Linux.