I don't know about anyone else, but I have come to the point where every time I see a post by a Gentoo user, I immediately skip to the next post. It may be a wonderful distro but the Gentoo "evangelists" are generally one step away from trolls.
They also seem to seek out any mention of Debian and interject as much G3nt00 R0XX0R5! crap as possible. I don't think the fact that it is mentioned often means a whole lot.
You can buy support for Debian, yes. But when the packages will be updated... that's another question.
Now don't get me wrong, I like Debian, I use it on my personal servers. However I recall then whe last sendmail exploit came out it took a few days for the patch to be released.
ok, I have to call you on this. The last vulnerability that affected both RedHat and Debian's sendmail was fixed on the same day by both. (3/31)
apt-get is a wonderful tool. But until patches are brought out in a more timely fashion I can't in good concience recommend it to any of my clients.
Please point out a specific case that is actually true before making inflamatory statements like this.
The other issue I've found, but I'll admit haven't put a lot of time into finding the solution for, is having a local mirror. When I build a server, if that server were to die, I want to be able to create the exact same version again of all packages. I have run into the situation with Debian of a package being upgraded and breaking things. Though as I said, this is something which is probably solved by now since I haven't looked into this issue in about 2 years.
one command: dpkg --get-selections > list_of_packages
it's right there in the documentation. Yes, even though it is mean some times to tell people to RTFM, it's not always a bad idea.
1) Is there a "roadmap" setout in regards to GTK 2.4/2.6 etc terms of functionality one should expect in up coming releases.
Gnome doesn't have feature-based releases. They are all time-based. So the "roadmap" is that it will be in 6 months:-)
For feature sorts of questions, you pretty much have to look at the mailing list archives of the various modules. Occasionally, there will be discussion on the desktop-devel list about desktop-wide initiatives, but they are mostly very technical bits like new versions of automake etc
I'm afraid your premise is incorrect as all the toolkits besides QT are under the lgpl or even less restrictive licenses (wxWindows, X11). This means your application does not have to be licensed under the gpl to link with it.
This means that GTK not only gives you the same choice, but doesn't require any money for choosing non-gpl.
(this post to be followed by umpteen rants on how the cost of QT is "worth it" in every single scenario)
4. If the mail doesn't seem like spam, just deliver it. If I get 3 non-spammy messages from the same person (separated by a day or more) then add them to my whitelist automatically.
So I (evil spammer) just completely trash your filtering by sending three non-spammy messages, after which point I am added to your whitelist, then bombard you with spam which will automatically be fed in as ham.
All of these challenge-response systems have the additional flaw of "Which address do I send the challenge to?" The reply-to address? The Mail-Followup-To address, the From address, Enevlope-from, etc. Should you trust email claiming to be from yourself?
Really, the problem that is being addressed by C/R systems is better solved by configuring a network of trusted mailers (using digital certificates). Even that seems less than ideal to me though.
Why aren't ESD or ARTS acceptable? Does it really matter to anybody whether/dev/dsp can be accessed by multiple applications when ESD/ARTS can accomplish the same thing with network transparenct thrown in to boot?
The parent is alluding to the following installation instructions from ximian's website:
# Open a terminal window. # Using the su command, become superuser (root). # Type the following command or cut and paste it into your terminal: wget -q -O - http://go.ximian.com |sh
which is, I suppose, no more trusting than installing some random rpm/deb from a website somewhere, but still feels a little more dangerous.
MDI would be better than gimp's approach? If you want to simulate mdi, just keep all your gimp windows in their own workspace... Or if you are really psychotic, run gimp inside an xnest session.
I'm curious though, what makes trapping windows inside one bigger "mother" window inherently better? (StarOffice Desktop anyone?)
In my opinion, programs should leave window management to the window manager, that's what it's there for.
The whole "tcp over tcp is bad" argument is not premature optimization. it _really is_ bad performance-wise. This may not be as true for latency insensitive sorts of operations, but for things like remote display, and music/video streaming, I can assure you that you will notice the difference (unless you do lots of buffering, and buffering adds an initial delay, so that doesn't quite count as "just fine" and is not even possible for things like citrix etc.).
The parent poster did not just make a blanket statement on the subject, he backed it up with relevant data about how tcp/ip works. This is useful information for plenty of people who might find that they don't actually "have something that works" in the tcp/tcp solution.
If the people who use Debian wanted those things they would create them.
The fact is that a model in which you attempt to centrally package every piece of software your users could ever need has been tried, it was a cool idea, but it seems broken to me.
What seems broken about that method? It works well for me and all the systems I manage
You shouldn't need to decide which distro to use on the basis of how easy it is to install things. Period.
This doesn't seem like a bad reason to me. Would you choose a system where you had to manually download tarballs and compile everything by hand? I think what you really mean is that it should be as easy to install things in other distros as it is in Debian, in which case, I would have to agree with you.
I think you mis-parsed his sentence. He is on a UNIX platform and is stating that only open source products provide the features of applications such as ssh and vnc without huge costs on that platform. Not every discussion regarding open source is linux vs windows.
Very nice diatribe, but misdirected in this case. Relax.
A list of bound ports is not terribly useful without being able to map them to a running process/user.
Oh, but look (link at bottom of your page), you can get a program for windows for only $69 to do what netstat and fuser will do on any unix system. I am sure that for some reason or another, that doesn't factor into TCO though, right?
There is no EULA for free software, that's kind of the point. If a license tells you how you can *use* software (or more accurately, how you can't use it) it is non-free by definition.
No one _can_ force MS to change at the moment. That is one of the reasons that people get their panties all-a-twisted about monopolies - inablility of the consumer or competitors to effect a change in the practices of the monopolist.
It is after all their product, and they know that even with shitty proprietary standards, they can still dominate the market, so why should they open up those standards and let all the *nix people in?But, keep in mind, if someone wrote a proprietary *nix file format and it ended up being widely used, MS is going to come saying "Oh, that should be an open standard, give it to us!". Now, since everyone wants MS's monopoly to die, they would more than likely say 'no'. Same thing, shoe is just on the other foot.
This is just silly. You are correct in stating that if one company is successful in edging out the competition, then they are not likely to willingly give up that edge. This is not the point. The point is that the way companies are aquiring their edge (ie closed platforms) are harmful to _consumers_ as well as the competition.
Basically it is like this:
Consumers would like to have complete control over the businesses. Having software written for free by somebody else is the most desirable position.
Businesses would like consumers to pay them enourmous sums for absolutely no work on their own part. Somewhere in the middle is where capitalism happens.
The netatalk package in mandrake cooker is 1.5.3.1,
The netatalk in debian **stable** is 1.5.3.1
Debian is not years behind like you and others here are constantly preaching (trolling?). Just stop it.
I hereby mandate that any person wishing to comment on the age of debian packages pre-cluestick themselves by visiting http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
oh, and picking on potato doesn't count either(my redhat 5.2 cd is so outdated, lousy redhat!)
Would you have preferred that the person who created this add-on to have done nothing instead? Why is it that people just don't understand that a developer who works on one aspect of a project is not necessarily even capable of working on the part that _you_ are personally interested in.
How intelligent would it sound for me to say "I don't like hearing about improvements in konqueror (tabbed browsing, better javascript) when the kernel module api still hasn't been stabilized"?
Basically, what I am saying is, the two are not related in the slightest. Stop using one person's project as an excuse to complain about another.
I am using Cryptocard on a debian server. They use a mysql backend and their own radius server for the actual authentication. The client is java so I can manage it from my debian workstation as well. It was pricy ($10,000 for 250 users) but far less expensive than RSA's equivalent solution.
Why are dependencies considered harmful!? Whose job is it to package the program, the author or the distribution? Whose fault is it if the packaging system makes your life miserable?
It is ridiculous to flame the whole project just becuase you were unable to install the necessary libraries. Get yourself a real package management system if you can't DIY. Try debian, gentoo, freebsd, mandrake and many, many others.
I am sure this claim is completely false. The reason being that free software licenses are the only agreements for the use of software that actually _are_ licenses.
n 1: a legal document giving official permission to do something
[syn: {permit}] 4: the act of giving a formal (usually written) authorization
When was the last time you saw a EULA that actually _gives_ permission? People need to remember that the default set of rights of the recipient of software is defined by copyright. All non-free software EULAs that I have ever seen remove what would otherwise be your right. Let me emphasize the word RIGHT, not your privilege, not something you can get away with by being sneaky but your right. Of course you can give up your rights to a work in exchange for receiving a copy of it, but the rights can only be diminished by your consent.
The GPL and BSD and other OSI approved licenses _are_ actually licenses because they give you permission to do something that you would not otherwise be able to (distribute, modify+distribute, etc).
Perhaps the term "license" as used in proprietary software refers to the permission that you are giving the copyright holder to invade your home or business (BSA).
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about anyone else, but I have come to the point where every time I see a post by a Gentoo user, I immediately skip to the next post. It may be a wonderful distro but the Gentoo "evangelists" are generally one step away from trolls.
They also seem to seek out any mention of Debian and interject as much G3nt00 R0XX0R5! crap as possible. I don't think the fact that it is mentioned often means a whole lot.
(PS - *All* software is source-based)
-Mark
ok, I have to call you on this. The last vulnerability that affected both RedHat and Debian's sendmail was fixed on the same day by both. (3/31)
Please point out a specific case that is actually true before making inflamatory statements like this.
one command:
dpkg --get-selections > list_of_packages
it's right there in the documentation. Yes, even though it is mean some times to tell people to RTFM, it's not always a bad idea.
-Mark
Single-click:
.hidden files:
Applications->Desktop Preferences->File Management
Click "Behaviour"
Choose "Single click to activate items"
As for the launch notification within nautilus, that feature will be in 2.4
Here's a list of the new features in nautilus. There's lots of good stuff including the multi-rooted tree view, and
-Mark
Gnome doesn't have feature-based releases. They are all time-based. So the "roadmap" is that it will be in 6 months
For feature sorts of questions, you pretty much have to look at the mailing list archives of the various modules. Occasionally, there will be discussion on the desktop-devel list about desktop-wide initiatives, but they are mostly very technical bits like new versions of automake etc
I'm afraid your premise is incorrect as all the toolkits besides QT are under the lgpl or even less restrictive licenses (wxWindows, X11). This means your application does not have to be licensed under the gpl to link with it.
This means that GTK not only gives you the same choice, but doesn't require any money for choosing non-gpl.
(this post to be followed by umpteen rants on how the cost of QT is "worth it" in every single scenario)
-Mark
So I (evil spammer) just completely trash your filtering by sending three non-spammy messages, after which point I am added to your whitelist, then bombard you with spam which will automatically be fed in as ham.
All of these challenge-response systems have the additional flaw of "Which address do I send the challenge to?" The reply-to address? The Mail-Followup-To address, the From address, Enevlope-from, etc. Should you trust email claiming to be from yourself?
Really, the problem that is being addressed by C/R systems is better solved by configuring a network of trusted mailers (using digital certificates). Even that seems less than ideal to me though.
-Mark
Why aren't ESD or ARTS acceptable? Does it really matter to anybody whether /dev/dsp can be accessed by multiple applications when ESD/ARTS can accomplish the same thing with network transparenct thrown in to boot?
Nice rant, but try again.
which is, I suppose, no more trusting than installing some random rpm/deb from a website somewhere, but still feels a little more dangerous.
MDI would be better than gimp's approach? If you want to simulate mdi, just keep all your gimp windows in their own workspace... Or if you are really psychotic, run gimp inside an xnest session.
I'm curious though, what makes trapping windows inside one bigger "mother" window inherently better? (StarOffice Desktop anyone?)
In my opinion, programs should leave window management to the window manager, that's what it's there for.
-Mark
The whole "tcp over tcp is bad" argument is not premature optimization. it _really is_ bad performance-wise. This may not be as true for latency insensitive sorts of operations, but for things like remote display, and music/video streaming, I can assure you that you will notice the difference (unless you do lots of buffering, and buffering adds an initial delay, so that doesn't quite count as "just fine" and is not even possible for things like citrix etc.).
The parent poster did not just make a blanket statement on the subject, he backed it up with relevant data about how tcp/ip works. This is useful information for plenty of people who might find that they don't actually "have something that works" in the tcp/tcp solution.
-Mark
What seems broken about that method? It works well for me and all the systems I manage
This doesn't seem like a bad reason to me. Would you choose a system where you had to manually download tarballs and compile everything by hand? I think what you really mean is that it should be as easy to install things in other distros as it is in Debian, in which case, I would have to agree with you.
-Mark
It's called gcc. The config files are a little tricky though. Have fun!
-Mark
I think you mis-parsed his sentence. He is on a UNIX platform and is stating that only open source products provide the features of applications such as ssh and vnc without huge costs on that platform. Not every discussion regarding open source is linux vs windows.
Very nice diatribe, but misdirected in this case. Relax.
-Mark
A list of bound ports is not terribly useful without being able to map them to a running process/user.
Oh, but look (link at bottom of your page), you can get a program for windows for only $69 to do what netstat and fuser will do on any unix system. I am sure that for some reason or another, that doesn't factor into TCO though, right?
There is no EULA for free software, that's kind of the point. If a license tells you how you can *use* software (or more accurately, how you can't use it) it is non-free by definition.
If I create an installer that forces you to click "I Agree" to the lyrics of the Giligan's Island theme song, that does not make them an EULA.
-Mark
I think you missed the word "essential" in that quote. Check ou the US Constitution for more info on which rights are considered essential.
-Mark
Chris Lawrence is working on a new debian menu system that will use the .desktop file standard and vfolders. Sounds like good stuff.
d evel-200207/msg00940.html
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-
No one _can_ force MS to change at the moment. That is one of the reasons that people get their panties all-a-twisted about monopolies - inablility of the consumer or competitors to effect a change in the practices of the monopolist.
This is just silly. You are correct in stating that if one company is successful in edging out the competition, then they are not likely to willingly give up that edge. This is not the point. The point is that the way companies are aquiring their edge (ie closed platforms) are harmful to _consumers_ as well as the competition.
Basically it is like this:
Consumers would like to have complete control over the businesses. Having software written for free by somebody else is the most desirable position.
Businesses would like consumers to pay them enourmous sums for absolutely no work on their own part.
Somewhere in the middle is where capitalism happens.
What browser are you using? There's nothing but css on that site, and not much of it either:
#NavBar {
position: fixed;
width: 5em;
}
the one browser that it _didn't_ seem to work with is IE (5.5: doesn't stay fixed).
The netatalk package in mandrake cooker is 1.5.3.1,
The netatalk in debian **stable** is 1.5.3.1
Debian is not years behind like you and others here are constantly preaching (trolling?). Just stop it.
I hereby mandate that any person wishing to comment on the age of debian packages pre-cluestick themselves by visiting http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
oh, and picking on potato doesn't count either(my redhat 5.2 cd is so outdated, lousy redhat!)
Would you have preferred that the person who created this add-on to have done nothing instead? Why is it that people just don't understand that a developer who works on one aspect of a project is not necessarily even capable of working on the part that _you_ are personally interested in.
How intelligent would it sound for me to say "I don't like hearing about improvements in konqueror (tabbed browsing, better javascript) when the kernel module api still hasn't been stabilized"?
Basically, what I am saying is, the two are not related in the slightest. Stop using one person's project as an excuse to complain about another.
I am using Cryptocard on a debian server. They use a mysql backend and their own radius server for the actual authentication. The client is java so I can manage it from my debian workstation as well. It was pricy ($10,000 for 250 users) but far less expensive than RSA's equivalent solution.
Why are dependencies considered harmful!? Whose job is it to package the program, the author or the distribution? Whose fault is it if the packaging system makes your life miserable?
It is ridiculous to flame the whole project just becuase you were unable to install the necessary libraries. Get yourself a real package management system if you can't DIY. Try debian, gentoo, freebsd, mandrake and many, many others.
The GPL and BSD and other OSI approved licenses _are_ actually licenses because they give you permission to do something that you would not otherwise be able to (distribute, modify+distribute, etc).
Perhaps the term "license" as used in proprietary software refers to the permission that you are giving the copyright holder to invade your home or business (BSA).