Spam sucks, there can be no doubt about it. But how can the Slashdot community, who professes to be so keen on freedom of speech, put themselves behind the criminalization of spam? What am I missing here? It would be far better if we put our energy into making better privacy laws to keep our addresses out of the hands of spammers to begin with. Once they've gotten your email address through legitimate means, however, well I'd say it's fair game for them to spam, spam away.
I thought it was quite annoying how he constantly calls it Gnu/Linux emulation. This is the Linux kernel that's being emulated, not Gnu userspace. After all, the Gnu stuff can be compiled to native BSD binaries. All in all, I'd have to say it's a pretty poor article that added nothing that wasn't already in OpenBSD's compat_linux (8) man page.
True, AtheOS is an amateur project, but given time and enough contributions from other developers, I think it will grow into something worthwhile. It really doesn't have the same goal as Plan9 at all, which is an industrial strength OS for large distributed systems.
Plan9 is also not really open source, since Bell Labs considers any changes you make to the system their intellectual property.
Re:AtheOS is what I've been griping for...
on
AtheOS Interview
·
· Score: 2
Wrong. It is not a Unix clone although it has a pretty complete POSIX layer which allows it to run most of the command line programs you know from Unix. It is also not single user.
I'm curious what toolkit they used to develop this. It would really suck if it was yet another StarOffice-like resource hog that uses java or some such crap. Seriously, why are companies coming out with these suites that don't integrate with anything else on the desktop?
Also, since this is a proprietary application that requires licensing fees, what advantage does one gain by running it on Linux over Windows? Really, what's the point?
You can imagine how much safer the world would be from nuclear warfare if the US had successfully patented atomic weapons before the Russians got their own projects going.
Yes...because of course the Soviet Union would have honored such a patent, otherwise they couldn't have continued to enjoy such a strong relationship with the US.
nautilus and gmc only compete for the desktop if you run them both at the same time with desktop mode on;).
When I ran it, by default gmc would start up first and draw the root window with all its icons. Then the icons disappear and the background turns gray. Then, after a bit of churning away, the nautilus version of the root window appears with completely different icons. To me, that means they're both competing for the desktop. It may be possible to turn this behavior off, but this was default on the beta that I tried.
i really dont understand what you mean about evolution and nautilus dont have a concept of each others existence.
It means when I click on a "mailto" link on my browser, instead of Evolution automatically popping up, a box asks me what to use to send mail. Or, when I click on a URL in an email message from within Evolution, Nautilus isn't the browser to pop up. Mozilla is. Sure, you say, you can change that. But this is supposed to be an integrated environment. The applications are supposed to be aware of eachother. Applications should be able to embed themselves within one another.
as for nautilus having a different look, this is themeable, also, alot of the things nautilus does different from the rest of gnome will be part of the gnome 2 platform. Nautilus was goin to be the core of the gnome 2 platform from the begining, but the release plan for gnome changed, and it was decided one more major release of the 1.x platform would be made be for 2.0. Nautilus will be completely intergrated in gnome 2. xmms uses core technologys, but its interface is made to be compatible with winamps, most mp3 players look different from their platform anyway, so this isnt new. as for mozilla, mozilla isnt part of gnome, nautilus only uses its rendering engine, not the whole browser. its just that most packages for mozilla are for the whole browser and not the core libarys.
Like I said, I'll give it another try when 2.0 is available for testing. I really hope they have it together then.
I certainly hope that adding Nautilus means getting rid of Gmc finally.
[rant mode="on"]
When I tried Gnome 1.4 beta, Nautilus and Gmc competed for control of the desktop. When is Gnome going to figure out that for a desktop to be usable it must be unified? Nautilus has such a different look and feel from the rest of Gnome it might as well belong to a different project; oh wait, it does. Evolution and Nautilus don't have any concept of eachother's existence, in fact no Gnome components are really aware of eachother. And Mozilla? Why did they have to drag that beast into all of this? I love the way Gnome looks, I love how there are themes for both sawfish and gtk that work together, but usability-wise, it still has some ways to go.
A big part of the reason for this is that every component of Gnome is developed by a separate group. Gnome office, composed of Gnumeric, AbiWord, and the Gimp? All completely separate and totally non unified projects. Xmms is the media player? It looks not remotely like any other Gnome application. And the aforementioned Blo^H^H^HMozilla for a web browser? Where's the integration? That's what makes a desktop system usable. I'll give them another chance when 2.0 goes beta.
[/rant]
There may be no future at all for BeOS because BeOS is dying. Things are looking very bad for BeOS. As many of us are already aware, BeOS continues to lose market share; red ink flows like a river of blood.
Major marketing surveys show that BeOS has steadily declined in market share. BeOS is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If BeOS is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyists and dilettantes. BeOS continues to falter. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all intents and purposes, BeOS is dead.
I fully agree. I got BSD's init to compile on Linux, but when I ran it, the kernel complained that init could not be found. I then realized it wouldn't be as easy as I thought:(.
In addition, I'm still to se a BSD with a SysV-style init (altought one evil Linux distro still uses the inferior BSD-style init, Slackware)
I believe SysV init is, for the most part, utter nonsense. Everything that gets started in BSD is done by default from a single file,/etc/defaults/rc.conf, with overrides put into/etc/rc.conf. There is absolutely no messing with runlevels and symlinks or chkconfig or any other such worthless junk. In BSD there are two "runlevels" -- single user mode and multi user mode. NetBSD has done a beautiful job of taking the modularity of SysV init (having a separate script for each service in/etc/rc.d that can be called with stop, start, or restart) and combined it with the simplicity of the BSD way (rc.conf, no bullshit runlevels). There have been talks of porting that system over to FreeBSD, and I hope they do. Slackware, BTW, now uses SysV style init, although in the most incoherent way IMO.
There is an alternative that is already available on FreeBSD (and Linux) that rarely gets mentioned, and that is ADP (Aolserver Dynamic Pages). This uses Aolserver, an open source, multithreaded, and very fast web server that has a built in tcl interpreter with a very rich set of functions. ADP pages embed tcl scripts directly in html. You can also write.tcl scripts that produce html for your pages. I think the reason it is not so well known is because of the name (AOL?? Ugh!), and because tcl is not as popular as perl or python or whatever.
Python doesn't really pay attention to whitespace. It simply requires that tabs be used after conditional statements and when defining functions. In other languages like perl and tcl, you must use curly braces in the same places. How is it really so different? The tab requirement also makes the control flow easier to see, IMO.
Did anyone ever see that Australian tv show Beyond 2000? So many wonderful inventions they showed. How many of those are you using today? Slashdot is just like Beyond 2000. Will any of us ever see plastic semiconductors in use? Quantum computers? How about space elevators?! You may now return to reality.
second, when will this "goat thread" be available on the market? if ever? i would love a pair of goatthread pants or something...blocks bullets and won't wear out.
Ahem...I think you're in the middle of a "goat thread" right now.
Slashdot Mirror
Spam sucks, there can be no doubt about it. But how can the Slashdot community, who professes to be so keen on freedom of speech, put themselves behind the criminalization of spam? What am I missing here? It would be far better if we put our energy into making better privacy laws to keep our addresses out of the hands of spammers to begin with. Once they've gotten your email address through legitimate means, however, well I'd say it's fair game for them to spam, spam away.
I thought it was quite annoying how he constantly calls it Gnu/Linux emulation. This is the Linux kernel that's being emulated, not Gnu userspace. After all, the Gnu stuff can be compiled to native BSD binaries. All in all, I'd have to say it's a pretty poor article that added nothing that wasn't already in OpenBSD's compat_linux (8) man page.
True, AtheOS is an amateur project, but given time and enough contributions from other developers, I think it will grow into something worthwhile. It really doesn't have the same goal as Plan9 at all, which is an industrial strength OS for large distributed systems.
Plan9 is also not really open source, since Bell Labs considers any changes you make to the system their intellectual property.
Wrong. It is not a Unix clone although it has a pretty complete POSIX layer which allows it to run most of the command line programs you know from Unix. It is also not single user.
You are so right. eComStation is the stupidest fucking name ever. What was wrong with OS/2 Warp? That actually had a little flair.
Also, since this is a proprietary application that requires licensing fees, what advantage does one gain by running it on Linux over Windows? Really, what's the point?
Something that a friend and I recently agreed would be nice is the ability for a function to return more than one argument.
Yes...because of course the Soviet Union would have honored such a patent, otherwise they couldn't have continued to enjoy such a strong relationship with the US.
We already have a grammar nazi. Go away.
How many of "Them" do you think have ever heard the word cracker in the same sentence as computer? Few if any. No one is trying to confuse anyone.
They really play on the computer all night.
When I ran it, by default gmc would start up first and draw the root window with all its icons. Then the icons disappear and the background turns gray. Then, after a bit of churning away, the nautilus version of the root window appears with completely different icons. To me, that means they're both competing for the desktop. It may be possible to turn this behavior off, but this was default on the beta that I tried.
i really dont understand what you mean about evolution and nautilus dont have a concept of each others existence.
It means when I click on a "mailto" link on my browser, instead of Evolution automatically popping up, a box asks me what to use to send mail. Or, when I click on a URL in an email message from within Evolution, Nautilus isn't the browser to pop up. Mozilla is. Sure, you say, you can change that. But this is supposed to be an integrated environment. The applications are supposed to be aware of eachother. Applications should be able to embed themselves within one another.
as for nautilus having a different look, this is themeable, also, alot of the things nautilus does different from the rest of gnome will be part of the gnome 2 platform. Nautilus was goin to be the core of the gnome 2 platform from the begining, but the release plan for gnome changed, and it was decided one more major release of the 1.x platform would be made be for 2.0. Nautilus will be completely intergrated in gnome 2. xmms uses core technologys, but its interface is made to be compatible with winamps, most mp3 players look different from their platform anyway, so this isnt new. as for mozilla, mozilla isnt part of gnome, nautilus only uses its rendering engine, not the whole browser. its just that most packages for mozilla are for the whole browser and not the core libarys.
Like I said, I'll give it another try when 2.0 is available for testing. I really hope they have it together then.
[rant mode="on"]
When I tried Gnome 1.4 beta, Nautilus and Gmc competed for control of the desktop. When is Gnome going to figure out that for a desktop to be usable it must be unified? Nautilus has such a different look and feel from the rest of Gnome it might as well belong to a different project; oh wait, it does. Evolution and Nautilus don't have any concept of eachother's existence, in fact no Gnome components are really aware of eachother. And Mozilla? Why did they have to drag that beast into all of this? I love the way Gnome looks, I love how there are themes for both sawfish and gtk that work together, but usability-wise, it still has some ways to go.
A big part of the reason for this is that every component of Gnome is developed by a separate group. Gnome office, composed of Gnumeric, AbiWord, and the Gimp? All completely separate and totally non unified projects. Xmms is the media player? It looks not remotely like any other Gnome application. And the aforementioned Blo^H^H^HMozilla for a web browser? Where's the integration? That's what makes a desktop system usable. I'll give them another chance when 2.0 goes beta.
[/rant]
Satan is such a wonderful savior of ours. Let us now bow and praise him.
There may be no future at all for BeOS because BeOS is dying. Things are looking very bad for BeOS. As many of us are already aware, BeOS continues to lose market share; red ink flows like a river of blood. Major marketing surveys show that BeOS has steadily declined in market share. BeOS is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If BeOS is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyists and dilettantes. BeOS continues to falter. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all intents and purposes, BeOS is dead.
I fully agree. I got BSD's init to compile on Linux, but when I ran it, the kernel complained that init could not be found. I then realized it wouldn't be as easy as I thought :(.
In addition, I'm still to se a BSD with a SysV-style init (altought one evil Linux distro still uses the inferior BSD-style init, Slackware) /etc/defaults/rc.conf, with overrides put into /etc/rc.conf. There is absolutely no messing with runlevels and symlinks or chkconfig or any other such worthless junk. In BSD there are two "runlevels" -- single user mode and multi user mode. NetBSD has done a beautiful job of taking the modularity of SysV init (having a separate script for each service in /etc/rc.d that can be called with stop, start, or restart) and combined it with the simplicity of the BSD way (rc.conf, no bullshit runlevels). There have been talks of porting that system over to FreeBSD, and I hope they do.
I believe SysV init is, for the most part, utter nonsense. Everything that gets started in BSD is done by default from a single file,
Slackware, BTW, now uses SysV style init, although in the most incoherent way IMO.
I suggest you get your head out of your ass.
You took the words right out of my mouth, er fingers.
There is an alternative that is already available on FreeBSD (and Linux) that rarely gets mentioned, and that is ADP (Aolserver Dynamic Pages). This uses Aolserver, an open source, multithreaded, and very fast web server that has a built in tcl interpreter with a very rich set of functions. ADP pages embed tcl scripts directly in html. You can also write .tcl scripts that produce html for your pages.
I think the reason it is not so well known is because of the name (AOL?? Ugh!), and because tcl is not as popular as perl or python or whatever.
Python doesn't really pay attention to whitespace. It simply requires that tabs be used after conditional statements and when defining functions. In other languages like perl and tcl, you must use curly braces in the same places. How is it really so different? The tab requirement also makes the control flow easier to see, IMO.
Did anyone ever see that Australian tv show Beyond 2000? So many wonderful inventions they showed. How many of those are you using today?
Slashdot is just like Beyond 2000. Will any of us ever see plastic semiconductors in use? Quantum computers? How about space elevators?!
You may now return to reality.
How about, um, a python?
since we've had a good ol' fashioned Python vs. Perl flame war here on Slashdot. Thanks, Taco, for this opportunity.
No, no, no. His name is not Chuck. Why don't you look at what Kirk McKusick, the creator of the daemon image has to say.
Ahem...I think you're in the middle of a "goat thread" right now.