There was a website out there where the owner was a jerk and on every page of his, he put a couple 1 x 1 pixel IFRAMES that loaded a page from his competitor's website. His page loaded fine (since the layout engines knew the size, they didn't wait for the whole IFRAME to load) and each page caused a bandwidth sap on his competitors site, costing him money and being a small scale DDoS.
Actually, I love Linux because it's closer to Unix than BSD A nit to pick, but neither is more "UNIX" than the other. If you think about it, one time BSD was UNIX, it's spiritually descended from the original UNIX. I think you feel more at home because it's closer to other commercial UNIXen, its more SVR4ish. One reason I like BSD more is it's more consistent; Linux took SVR4 bits and pieces and mixed them with BSD bits and pieces as Linus felt like and some that were neither. Even saying "Linux is more SVR4ish" is a bit of a minor misstatement, because a lot of what makes the feel is the userland, which changes from distro to distro. Last time I used Slackware (I'm dating myself I bet) it had a very BSDish init sequence, while others were SVR4ish, and RedHat was bastardized SVR4.
(when dealing with BSD meant spending most of your time on gratuitous incompatibilities like using "index()" for "strchr()") Huhn? strchr is an ANSI C function. It's been in BSD since it was still distributed on tapes, before FreeBSD existed. And yes I know this is just an example, but in the Linux world, I have to worry about distros, and which version of which libs this guy has. At least if someone says "FreeBSD 4.8" I know exactly whats in his base system, not worry about which RPMs he has, which he's updated manually. Different kind of incompatibility.
And the parts of Linux I find most annoying are the most BSDish parts (like the behavior of ps). Not sure what you mean here. ps on Linux has both SVR4 (UNIX as you say) or BSD behaviors depending on how you give the command line args. Even in the pseudo-BSD mode, it's very SVR4ish (doesn't collect all the data that a true BSD ps should be able to spit out).
I'm not trying to troll. I'm not even trying to convince you to try FreeBSD (or any BSD for that matter). Just pointing out that some of your ideas of why BSD or why Linux aren't as clear cut as you think. I think the great Linux vs. BSD wars are stupid and counterproductive. "Gee, my free and rock solid UNIX like OS with pretty good application support is so much better than YOUR Gee, my free and rock solid UNIX like OS with pretty good application support." Reminds me of a certain The Onion T-Shirt
I don't think your current actions perform anything except give you some self satisfaction, and give the clerk a "some asshole came into line . .." story and possibly pissing the clerk off to where they'd think about getting you arested (you did admit to a felony with the downloading).
Instead of being annoying, why don't you do something more useful like printing a flyer talking about the problem, and what to look for, and recommending people not buying any albums that are marked like that? If you're serious about the problem, you could even research a few albums and list the ones you know to have copy protection on your sheet. If you go this route, you may want to check your rights on where public space ends and the store's private property begins. Sadly enough, your rights to protest even in this benign way are now in question. Oregon was trying to get protesters labelled as "economic terrorists."
Hard to respect the prognosticating skills of a person who, in his book predicting the future, failed to see what was already shaping up to be the biggest sea change in his field since he entered it.
It's not equal, but his point was if anything this would hurt the G5 and not help it. Most folks tuning gcc have access to Intel hardware. It's sucked on Alpha and Sparc for quite some time just because people don't have that hardware access. Hard to optimize for things you can't see. The P4 has been out for a while, the G5 hasn't even shipped yet. I'm sure gcc hurt Apple more than it hurt the P4.
Another quick: BSD is built on the Linux kernel too?
No, all of the BSDs (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD) have their own, self made kernel. They're all spiritual descendents from the original BSD, which itself was a fork of the original UNIX and made significant improvements to it. They now each do things in sufficiently different ways that they all have their own kernel, though a lot of things are shared when they can be.
In a way, your question isn't the right one; which BSD are you asking about? Unlike Linux, where Linux is just a kernel and the rest of the apps form whats called a distribution, the BSDs are a kernel and all the base things that make up an OS.
He says that with recent updates, you can now see the threads with top(8)
I hope this is something you can turn off and on. One of my problems with the Linux threading model is that you see every thread as a proc, which makes it harder to administer a box. top output becomes overwhelming.
My fave is that USB 1.1 tops out at "Full" speed, while faster USB 2.0 is "High" speed. Shouldn't full speed be the fastest? These guys didn't think to forward proof themselves?
Re:Blockers once again seem non-corporeal
on
Mozilla 1.4RC2 Released
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Just to be silly, I opened the Bugzilla link; 3 of them are already fixed, and a 4th is a licensing issue if you link statically against gcc libstfc++ (which I don't think is the default).
Of the remaining bugs, one is about the status bar, which doesn't seem to be a blocker, and the other two remaining are mem leaks which I would consider blockers. That just leaves two big ones. They probably have time to get thse and so they're probably good for 1.4.
I keep thinking back to my Amiga when a 40 Mb hard drive was huge.
I ran a Mac lab where a lot of the machines had 20meg drives, and that wasn't all that long ago. They used to sell a 10Mb drive (I forgot how ungodly it cost) for Apple ][s. Apple DOS 3.3 could only recognize floppy size chunks, about 140Kb IIRC, so the thing had to be partitioned into along the lines of 80 pseudo-drives. I never saw one physically, but I can imagine what the P.I.T.A. that was.
I remember all the people buying Dalmations. Dalmations are fairly inbred, and a good percentage are deaf. These traits don't help them get long term homes after a movie like 101 or 102 Dalmations.
My big thing is: Advertisers get millions of dollars by saying TV affects (buying) behavior. Most current films and a lot of TV shows have product placement to sell new product. This means that someone is paying money for the show to affect (buying) behavior. But if someone follows what they see on TV and hits someone (WWF, ahem, WWE, or cop shows, or any violent shows) they tend to say "We're just entertainment, we don't affect behavior". So which is it?
Read-Copy Update was originally designed for DYNIX/ptx, a UNIX operating system from Sequent Computer Systems Inc.,
now a part of IBM.
And SMP is such a generic term that saying "you copied SMP so you must have copied our kernel" is worthless. It's like saying you coped my car because you have an engine. In SMPs case, the devil is in the details, and thats what tells you whether you'll scale well.
Re:I guess no ones been paying attention
on
Sun's Last Stand
·
· Score: 1
It also has linuxes network threading model for tcp/ip. and some other things hidden away. I forget, but isn't the TCP/IP stack on Solaris STREAMS based, or is that just other SVR4 Unixen, not Solaris. If so it's a totally different process, no real way of sharing code. Even if not, I doubt if there's anything from Linux in the TCP/IP stack. Sun was one of the first TCP/IP implementations, and they feel it's a crown jewel. If they did borrow code, it probably would be from BSD, since for years it had a stack that performed better under load. There's some scattered GNU tools about, and the compiler and dbx are moving to be more gcc/gdb compatible, but its not a wholesale move.
now for some news many dont know, Sun has revealed to certain people that Solaris v10 will *BE* Linux. Well, not exactly Linux, but a conglomeration of Linux, BSD and Solaris. SVR4 already has massive BSD parts in it. They already went down the "compatible with BSD" road. Remember SunOS <=4 was BSD-based. They needed to be compatible. I doubt if they feel the need to be more compatible.
Want more proof? How about the fact that Apple's OSX is actually the BSD kernel riding on top of Debian Linux ? Whaaa? The core of Darwin is a microkernel with a FreeBSDish kernel at the same level. No Debian at all. The FreeBSD kernel is not "on top" of anything, its at the base layer.
One of the apps that use this is named VOMIT which seems to take a libpcap style dump of an Internet Telephone conversation and convert it to a wave. I'd love for some covernmetn spook to use this in a court of law. "Yeah, we got a phone tap, we're gonna use VOMIT".
I don't think what you suggest will work. Different compilers would throw out different code depending on the optimizer in the compiler and compile flags.
Also you don't need the grep in your sig. awk does pattern matching.
The whole GNU project is really one big hack. It's one big act of subversive playful cleverness...
Richard Stallman, Revolution OS (DVD)
One thing to remember with the whole "hack" quote is, coming from an MIT guy (which Stallman was) it has three possible connotations.
1) an act of breaking into something. Though most folks would use the term cracker here, SCO is probably pleased when people associate these negative connotations with Stallman's statement. The "subversive" part of the quote probably doesn't win many favors in big business or in the Bush regime.
2) a clever solution to a problem, sometimes Quick and Dirty just to get it out, othertimes smashingly elegant. SCO probably would say that Stallman meant the first Quick and Dirty, for its connotations of low quality. Stallman probably meant a lot more of the latter.
3) MIT calls pranks "Hacks". Well past the "shaving cream on someones hand while they sleep, feather on face to make them scratch" stage, these required inticate planning and timing. From the "playful" portion of his quite, I kind of feel Stallman meant more of this. In this case, the "hack" is on the closed source companies, which pissed him off because he couldn't get the source to change a printer driver that MIT actually had helped develop. He was further pissed off by Digital discontinuing the PDP-10, which threw MIT's computing plans a massive curveball. By making a computing system himself, he was able to bypass all these restrictions and have a useful system. The big "hack" was that this was useful, and joined his programming skills with his social views of sharing.
Slashdot Mirror
PCODE on Linux, YAYYY!!!
Jokes aside, how much PCODE is still left in Mickeysoft products?
There was a website out there where the owner was a jerk and on every page of his, he put a couple 1 x 1 pixel IFRAMES that loaded a page from his competitor's website. His page loaded fine (since the layout engines knew the size, they didn't wait for the whole IFRAME to load) and each page caused a bandwidth sap on his competitors site, costing him money and being a small scale DDoS.
1. Pre-caching links on current page(s)
Mozilla can do this already. If you set up the links in the header ricght, it will pre-fetch.
Actually, I love Linux because it's closer to Unix than BSD
A nit to pick, but neither is more "UNIX" than the other. If you think about it, one time BSD was UNIX, it's spiritually descended from the original UNIX. I think you feel more at home because it's closer to other commercial UNIXen, its more SVR4ish. One reason I like BSD more is it's more consistent; Linux took SVR4 bits and pieces and mixed them with BSD bits and pieces as Linus felt like and some that were neither. Even saying "Linux is more SVR4ish" is a bit of a minor misstatement, because a lot of what makes the feel is the userland, which changes from distro to distro. Last time I used Slackware (I'm dating myself I bet) it had a very BSDish init sequence, while others were SVR4ish, and RedHat was bastardized SVR4.
(when dealing with BSD meant spending most of your time on gratuitous incompatibilities like using "index()" for "strchr()")
Huhn? strchr is an ANSI C function. It's been in BSD since it was still distributed on tapes, before FreeBSD existed. And yes I know this is just an example, but in the Linux world, I have to worry about distros, and which version of which libs this guy has. At least if someone says "FreeBSD 4.8" I know exactly whats in his base system, not worry about which RPMs he has, which he's updated manually. Different kind of incompatibility.
And the parts of Linux I find most annoying are the most BSDish parts (like the behavior of ps).
Not sure what you mean here. ps on Linux has both SVR4 (UNIX as you say) or BSD behaviors depending on how you give the command line args. Even in the pseudo-BSD mode, it's very SVR4ish (doesn't collect all the data that a true BSD ps should be able to spit out).
I'm not trying to troll. I'm not even trying to convince you to try FreeBSD (or any BSD for that matter). Just pointing out that some of your ideas of why BSD or why Linux aren't as clear cut as you think. I think the great Linux vs. BSD wars are stupid and counterproductive. "Gee, my free and rock solid UNIX like OS with pretty good application support is so much better than YOUR Gee, my free and rock solid UNIX like OS with pretty good application support." Reminds me of a certain The Onion T-Shirt
I don't think your current actions perform anything except give you some self satisfaction, and give the clerk a "some asshole came into line . . ." story and possibly pissing the clerk off to where they'd think about getting you arested (you did admit to a felony with the downloading).
Instead of being annoying, why don't you do something more useful like printing a flyer talking about the problem, and what to look for, and recommending people not buying any albums that are marked like that? If you're serious about the problem, you could even research a few albums and list the ones you know to have copy protection on your sheet. If you go this route, you may want to check your rights on where public space ends and the store's private property begins. Sadly enough, your rights to protest even in this benign way are now in question. Oregon was trying to get protesters labelled as "economic terrorists."
The Road Ahead, Now Including the Internet!!!
Hard to respect the prognosticating skills of a person who, in his book predicting the future, failed to see what was already shaping up to be the biggest sea change in his field since he entered it.
I'm the man
I'm the man
I'm so bad I should be in detention!
It's not equal, but his point was if anything this would hurt the G5 and not help it. Most folks tuning gcc have access to Intel hardware. It's sucked on Alpha and Sparc for quite some time just because people don't have that hardware access. Hard to optimize for things you can't see. The P4 has been out for a while, the G5 hasn't even shipped yet. I'm sure gcc hurt Apple more than it hurt the P4.
Another quick: BSD is built on the Linux kernel too?
:)
No, all of the BSDs (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD) have their own, self made kernel. They're all spiritual descendents from the original BSD, which itself was a fork of the original UNIX and made significant improvements to it. They now each do things in sufficiently different ways that they all have their own kernel, though a lot of things are shared when they can be.
In a way, your question isn't the right one; which BSD are you asking about? Unlike Linux, where Linux is just a kernel and the rest of the apps form whats called a distribution, the BSDs are a kernel and all the base things that make up an OS.
Just to confuse you more.
Why only 8-gig of RAM? 64-bit CPUs supports terabytes.
Needs OS support. Panther isn't 64 bit yet.
He says that with recent updates, you can now see the threads with top(8)
I hope this is something you can turn off and on. One of my problems with the Linux threading model is that you see every thread as a proc, which makes it harder to administer a box. top output becomes overwhelming.
This is Slashdot, so shouldn't this post have been repeated five times?
See Question 2 from the FAQ.
My fave is that USB 1.1 tops out at "Full" speed, while faster USB 2.0 is "High" speed. Shouldn't full speed be the fastest? These guys didn't think to forward proof themselves?
Just to be silly, I opened the Bugzilla link; 3 of them are already fixed, and a 4th is a licensing issue if you link statically against gcc libstfc++ (which I don't think is the default).
Of the remaining bugs, one is about the status bar, which doesn't seem to be a blocker, and the other two remaining are mem leaks which I would consider blockers. That just leaves two big ones. They probably have time to get thse and so they're probably good for 1.4.
I keep thinking back to my Amiga when a 40 Mb hard drive was huge.
I ran a Mac lab where a lot of the machines had 20meg drives, and that wasn't all that long ago. They used to sell a 10Mb drive (I forgot how ungodly it cost) for Apple ][s. Apple DOS 3.3 could only recognize floppy size chunks, about 140Kb IIRC, so the thing had to be partitioned into along the lines of 80 pseudo-drives. I never saw one physically, but I can imagine what the P.I.T.A. that was.
"Emacs would make a great operating system, now if only someone would write a decent text editor for it."
It is best viewed in its Mystery Science Theatre 3000 version; without the commentary it would be unbearable.
Or Sven-surround-sound... BERRRRWWYYYYNNNNNNN
I remember all the people buying Dalmations. Dalmations are fairly inbred, and a good percentage are deaf. These traits don't help them get long term homes after a movie like 101 or 102 Dalmations.
My big thing is: Advertisers get millions of dollars by saying TV affects (buying) behavior. Most current films and a lot of TV shows have product placement to sell new product. This means that someone is paying money for the show to affect (buying) behavior. But if someone follows what they see on TV and hits someone (WWF, ahem, WWE, or cop shows, or any violent shows) they tend to say "We're just entertainment, we don't affect behavior". So which is it?
I never heard of RCU, so I did a Google search for it. From http://lse.sourceforge.net/locking/rcupdate.html
And SMP is such a generic term that saying "you copied SMP so you must have copied our kernel" is worthless. It's like saying you coped my car because you have an engine. In SMPs case, the devil is in the details, and thats what tells you whether you'll scale well.
It also has linuxes network threading model for tcp/ip. and some other things hidden away.
I forget, but isn't the TCP/IP stack on Solaris STREAMS based, or is that just other SVR4 Unixen, not Solaris. If so it's a totally different process, no real way of sharing code. Even if not, I doubt if there's anything from Linux in the TCP/IP stack. Sun was one of the first TCP/IP implementations, and they feel it's a crown jewel. If they did borrow code, it probably would be from BSD, since for years it had a stack that performed better under load. There's some scattered GNU tools about, and the compiler and dbx are moving to be more gcc/gdb compatible, but its not a wholesale move.
now for some news many dont know, Sun has revealed to certain people that Solaris v10 will *BE* Linux. Well, not exactly Linux, but a conglomeration of Linux, BSD and Solaris.
SVR4 already has massive BSD parts in it. They already went down the "compatible with BSD" road. Remember SunOS <=4 was BSD-based. They needed to be compatible. I doubt if they feel the need to be more compatible.
Want more proof? How about the fact that Apple's OSX is actually the BSD kernel riding on top of Debian Linux ?
Whaaa? The core of Darwin is a microkernel with a FreeBSDish kernel at the same level. No Debian at all. The FreeBSD kernel is not "on top" of anything, its at the base layer.
One of the apps that use this is named VOMIT which seems to take a libpcap style dump of an Internet Telephone conversation and convert it to a wave. I'd love for some covernmetn spook to use this in a court of law. "Yeah, we got a phone tap, we're gonna use VOMIT".
I don't think what you suggest will work. Different compilers would throw out different code depending on the optimizer in the compiler and compile flags.
Also you don't need the grep in your sig. awk does pattern matching.
kill -HUP `ps -ef | awk '/Saddam Hussein/{print $2}'`
this one won't spit errors if it doesn't match any processes.
ps -ef | awk '/Saddam Hussein/{print "kill -HUP", $2}' | sh
OGG Also Break Many Heads With Open Source CD!!! ME MISS OLD OGG
Me miss ogg too. And Haiku guy
BTW: lameness filter sucks (capitalization).
Richard Stallman
The whole GNU project is really one big hack. It's one big act of subversive playful cleverness...
Richard Stallman, Revolution OS (DVD)
One thing to remember with the whole "hack" quote is, coming from an MIT guy (which Stallman was) it has three possible connotations.
1) an act of breaking into something. Though most folks would use the term cracker here, SCO is probably pleased when people associate these negative connotations with Stallman's statement. The "subversive" part of the quote probably doesn't win many favors in big business or in the Bush regime.
2) a clever solution to a problem, sometimes Quick and Dirty just to get it out, othertimes smashingly elegant. SCO probably would say that Stallman meant the first Quick and Dirty, for its connotations of low quality. Stallman probably meant a lot more of the latter.
3) MIT calls pranks "Hacks". Well past the "shaving cream on someones hand while they sleep, feather on face to make them scratch" stage, these required inticate planning and timing. From the "playful" portion of his quite, I kind of feel Stallman meant more of this. In this case, the "hack" is on the closed source companies, which pissed him off because he couldn't get the source to change a printer driver that MIT actually had helped develop. He was further pissed off by Digital discontinuing the PDP-10, which threw MIT's computing plans a massive curveball. By making a computing system himself, he was able to bypass all these restrictions and have a useful system. The big "hack" was that this was useful, and joined his programming skills with his social views of sharing.