No, I just don't have a 'single user' mentality. Yeah, a user on a Unix box catches a virus, it trashes *their* files and infects *their* executables. It doesn't do any damage to anyone else, and chances are it won't spread.
Now watch as this virus takes down whole offices of Windows 9x networked machines.
No, the real reason is that on a real operating system, a clueless luser running a trojan only loses or infects his own files. Big deal. Win95 has no file security, and while NT does, the default installation seems be somewhat lax on who gets permissions to what.
Huh? This doesn't exploit any problems in Windows or its applications: it's a wetware problem (gormless lusers running executables which get mailed to them).
Re:Mozilla... Is it even worth the download?
on
Mozilla M6 released
·
· Score: 1
Hmm, IE. Perhaps when it can make even a half-decent effort of rendering things correctly, supporting CSS-1, etc., it might be worth thinking about.
Re:Excuse my ignorance but...
on
UK Linux Conf
·
· Score: 1
I think the problem is, people have gotten into bad habits. Some programs put very big files into/tmp, when they should probably use/var/tmp. And certainly on my system, elvis drops it's recovery files into/tmp when it dies (though this presumably is a compile time option).. Anyway,/tmp on ext2 is generally fast enough - there was a discussion on linux-kernel about this recently, IIRC.
AFAIK, it has GNOME and KDE. And to be honest glibc-2.0 wasn't all it cracked up to be. If the next version uses glibc-2.1, which is apparently much better (even if it's still not offically released), I don't see the problem..
I generally agree, but it should be pointed out that the unstable branch is just that, and it may make demons fly out of your nose, drink all your beer, sleep with your grandmother or perhaps even cause filesystem corruption. So make sure you have backups.
And yes, Alex B. is a f*ckwit, I thought everyone had him killfiled already. Mind you, Al Viro seemed to make a few not-very-friendly comments, too.
At least Mozilla makes a stab at (i) rendering things correctly, and (ii) conforming to standards. Unlike a certain browser from a so-called software company based in Redmond.
That was supposed to be:/usr/lib/gcc-lib/<arch>/<gcc version>> But for some reason, even in "Plain old text" mode the <>s got eaten. Grr.
You can have multiple versions of gcc and / or egcs on your system, if you compile / install yourself. The actual "gcc" program you run is just a front end -- the actual compiler is usually in/usr/lib/gcc-lib///.
You select the version to run using the -V switch; so if you have egcs installed over gcc 2.7.2.3, gcc -V 2.7.2.3 will use the old compiler.
In which case, my I _respectfully_ you need to review your list of friends?:)
Having said that, some of this stuff is tiresome -- especially the really obvious stuff. What I'd quite like is to actually be taken in by something for a bit..
The kernel doesn't link against glibc. It doesn't link against any libraries. It has it's own versions of any utility funcs it needs - try reading the source before you comment.
That aside, I agree with your point. Try building the kernel with anything other than gcc / egcs and see what happens.
Sounds interesting... Have you ported whatever libc the *BSD systems use to Linux, that sort of thing? Might be a good way around glibc-2.1 licensing issues. Anywhere to get some info?
The trick would be to have the new servers host "alt" top-level domain.. that way people could use the official and the unofficial systems without conflicts...
What is it about RedHat that stops them understanding about "PRE-releases"? I.e. ones Linus doesn't want the world and her husband using, only the developers?
Well, we only joined in the 1970s. Not that long ago I suppose. Do you get/any/ international news over there? How could we opt _out_ of the Euro if we weren't in the EU in first place?
Slashdot Mirror
No, I just don't have a 'single user' mentality. Yeah, a user on a Unix box catches a virus, it trashes *their* files and infects *their* executables. It doesn't do any damage to anyone else, and chances are it won't spread.
Now watch as this virus takes down whole offices of Windows 9x networked machines.
No, the real reason is that on a real operating system, a clueless luser running a trojan only loses or infects his own files. Big deal. Win95 has no file security, and while NT does, the default installation seems be somewhat lax on who gets permissions to what.
Huh? This doesn't exploit any problems in Windows or its applications: it's a wetware problem (gormless lusers running executables which get mailed to them).
Hmm, IE. Perhaps when it can make even a half-decent effort of rendering things correctly, supporting CSS-1, etc., it might be worth thinking about.
NTFS, anyone? *ducks*
I think the problem is, people have gotten into bad habits. Some programs put very big files into /tmp, when they should probably use /var/tmp. And certainly on my system, elvis drops it's recovery files into /tmp when it dies (though this presumably is a compile time option).. Anyway, /tmp on ext2 is generally fast enough - there was a discussion on linux-kernel about this recently, IIRC.
AFAIK, it has GNOME and KDE. And to be honest glibc-2.0 wasn't all it cracked up to be. If the next version uses glibc-2.1, which is apparently much better (even if it's still not offically released), I don't see the problem..
I generally agree, but it should be pointed out that the unstable branch is just that, and it may make demons fly out of your nose, drink all your beer, sleep with your grandmother or perhaps even cause filesystem corruption. So make sure you have backups.
And yes, Alex B. is a f*ckwit, I thought everyone had him killfiled already. Mind you, Al Viro seemed to make a few not-very-friendly comments, too.
Linus said a while back, probably on linux-kernel, that he wants 2.3.x to be much shorter than 2.1.
At least Mozilla makes a stab at (i) rendering things correctly, and (ii) conforming to standards. Unlike a certain browser from a so-called software company based in Redmond.
That was supposed to be: /usr/lib/gcc-lib/<arch>/<gcc version>> But for some reason, even in "Plain old text" mode the <>s got eaten. Grr.
You can have multiple versions of gcc and / or egcs on your system, if you compile / install yourself. The actual "gcc" program you run is just a front end -- the actual compiler is usually in /usr/lib/gcc-lib///.
You select the version to run using the -V switch; so if you have egcs installed over gcc 2.7.2.3, gcc -V 2.7.2.3 will use the old compiler.
Works fine here.
... is obviously substantially different from what we're used to in the UK.
Did anyone fall for any of the April Fools `jokes'?
Did anyone find them funny? At all?
In which case, my I _respectfully_ you need to review your list of friends? :)
Having said that, some of this stuff is tiresome -- especially the really obvious stuff. What I'd quite like is to actually be taken in by something for a bit..
*bzzt* Wrong.
The kernel doesn't link against glibc. It doesn't link against any libraries. It has it's own versions of any utility funcs it needs - try reading the source before you comment.
That aside, I agree with your point. Try building the kernel with anything other than gcc / egcs and see what happens.
Does he mean blu-tack?
Sounds interesting... Have you ported whatever libc the *BSD systems use to Linux, that sort of thing? Might be a good way around glibc-2.1 licensing issues. Anywhere to get some info?
Time to start porting those BSD distros' tools
to Linux, perhaps? I was toying with doing that
for their libc, after the glibc-2.1 saga...
S.
..it's pretty hideous. I can't design sites to save my life, but that's why I don't attempt to.
The trick would be to have the new servers host "alt" top-level domain .. that way people could use the official and the unofficial systems without conflicts...
:)
Hmm, quite an amusing idea actually
As in, 2.2.2-pre2?
What is it about RedHat that stops them understanding about "PRE-releases"? I.e. ones Linus doesn't want the world and her husband using, only the developers?
Anyone fancy porting whatever libc {Free,Net,Open}BSD use to work on Linux?
Just my EUR0.02.
Well, we only joined in the 1970s. Not that long ago I suppose. Do you get /any/ international news over there? How could we opt _out_ of the Euro if we weren't in the EU in first place?
What are the licensing issues associated with either? I thought there were problems with qmail... or am I getting confused with exim?
In that case, the domains are not valid! Don't forget 'resolution' can mean looking at MX records...