Surely there is someone out there with a mere 2 million to start an Amiga-style resurrection project to take over the world. If they get going soon, they might even be able to catch up with current technology. But I guess if Be couldn't profit from it, no one else could either. A shame.
As a young actor, you showed great promise in such films as Judgment at Nuremberg. Ever since Star Trek, however, it seems you have never stepped out of the role of Captain Kirk. Do you ever regret the decision to take on that role?
Christ almighty, what the hell do they put in libc to make it 24 megs? On my FreeBSD system, libc.a is 1568K, and there is talk on the mailing list of finding ways to trim it down.
Can anyone say vaporware? This sounds really cool, but look at the language they use: all benefits and no drawbacks. Can anyone trust a viewpoint like that? Plus, the website is really horribly designed, which leads me to believe they have no money and have never built one of these. I like the idea though, a lot. I'm just skeptical of these utopian idealists.
Every freaking admin has their own way to hack another startup into the main.rc, and every one of 'em names their own.rc's what they like, and stick 'em in/sbin, or/usr/local, or god knows where! It's all legal.
I can't speak for every freaking admin out there, but by default, no scripts go into/sbin, ever! Always/etc. The only ones that go into/usr/local/etc are for third party packages, i.e., they aren't there by default. Also, you might check out NetBSD's beautiful rc system which runs an individual script in/etc/rc.d for each service. You still configure your services in/etc/rc.conf like before. There are no runlevels. FreeBSD 5.0 will be using this same system.
Re:Two powerful commands on the OS X command line
on
More Switching Stories
·
· Score: 2
For those of us who don't have Macs, can you explain how this is different from simply typing in the name of the program you want to use?
As I posted earlier, I saw one of these being played this June, and one can indeed play chords on them. My experience of it was that it sounded rather like an eerie little orchestra all on its own.
There was a performance venue at the Fremont Fair in Seattle this year with a man that played one of these. It was beautifully played, with a haunting sound that made me think of bygone eras. At the end, the guy played a sort of tongue in cheek version of "Stairway to Heaven". I had no idea that this was invented by Benjamin Franklin until now.
What is up with you people? I honestly cannot see the problem with what this guy is doing. The GPL does not require people to give away binaries of their products. The source still is available. Use a different license if you don't like it. Use a different distro if you don't like it. But, for Christ's sake, stop acting like paranoid schizophrenics. This guy is not out to get you!
I love the scene of him driving, and the sound that goes with it. Another great Tarkovsky film, Stalker, has a similar scene that goes on for minutes, except it shows three men riding on a train car. Awesome. Some of us like movies that aren't all action, and let the scenes slowly sink in.
I wasn't logged in and thus inadvertantly read this Katz article, which I always keep turned off in my preferences. I'm not that interested in the trials and tribulations of Amazon employees and all the terrible things they must go through to afford their $400,000 houses. One thing I will say, however, is that although amazon.com may be a virtual mega-mall-evil-conglomerate, it is one of the best designed web sites I have ever come across and they know how to treat their customers. I used to hate them until I actually gave them a try. I still prefer to support smaller businesses such as Powell's Books, but one could certainly do worse than to emulate the quality you can get from Amazon.
I don't think it's because Linux is built with GNU tools that he wants it called GNU/Linux. After all, FreeBSD is also built with some of the GNU tools. But Linux relies on the GNU C library, as well as GNU fileutils, findutils, shellutils, bash, GNU sed, GNU awk, and so forth. Almost all of the Linux userland in a console environment is from GNU. FreeBSD has its own userland. Using GCC to compile your project does not make it GNU in any way.
This is just GNU's Mach kernel that is at 1.3, not the Hurd itself. Hurd still remains at 0.2 or 0.3, I can't remember which and I can't be bothered to look it up. STill, this is good progress. They've fixed some pretty annoying problems since the last time I played with Hurd.
Please provide a link. I don't believe he said that. There is very little GPL code in FreeBSD at all. Aside from the GNU development toolchain (GCC, binutils, ld, cvs, rcs) and a few utilities (grep, sort, groff), the code in FreeBSD is under BSD or BSD-like licenses.
The Tunes people are obviously visionaries with a lot of cool ideas, but unfortunately that's all they have. There is no code. In other words, it's vaporware. I think we're a long way from having a really robust, modular operating system that's easy for anyone to use. It's at least ten years away, probably more.
Almost the entire Gnu Mach kernel is licensed under a BSD-like license from Carnegie Mellon University. They've just slapped a GPL on top of it all. Go look through the source. You can also find examples of the same thing throughout the Gnu C library. So it would seem that the HURD, and the FSF, are indeed interested in BSD-like licensed code.
Jonathan Shapiro, developer of Eros is quoted towards the end of the article. I thought that was cool, since I've had my eye on Eros for a long time. I don't know if it will ever go anywhere, but it sure is cool technology.
I recently on a whim tried out the Oroborus window manager and was pleasantly surprised to find that it is a "boring" wm that does nothing but manage windows, has no menu, icons, pager, or anything. It's also Gnome compliant. It looks really cool by default with a green window border somewhat reminiscent of the qnx gui. The thing that bugs me about Gnome is that it doesn't have its Very Own window manager. Well actually, it seems like it doesn't have a lot of things of its own, like a file manager, to name one. Everything is someone else's project. Gnome will adopt Metacity, and then, like with Enlightenment and Sawfish before it, the developer will head in some other direction, leaving Gnome in search of a new one. You've got Gnome with gmc, you've got Gnome with Nautilus. Which one is the real Gnome? Why doesn't the Gnome project unify and maintain its own components? To me it seems that they're really lacking in this area. I like how organized KDE is. The wm and file manager are built as part of the kdebase tarball. All one neat package. This is not meant to fan any kind of KDE vs. Gnome flames, however. I think Gnome is pretty neat, but I just keep waiting...and waiting...for it to "get there".
There will be a small redirector program called/usr/bin/perl that looks for perl and passes your script on to it, and if it doesn't find perl, gives you an error message.
Slashdot Mirror
Surely there is someone out there with a mere 2 million to start an Amiga-style resurrection project to take over the world. If they get going soon, they might even be able to catch up with current technology. But I guess if Be couldn't profit from it, no one else could either. A shame.
As a young actor, you showed great promise in such films as Judgment at Nuremberg. Ever since Star Trek, however, it seems you have never stepped out of the role of Captain Kirk. Do you ever regret the decision to take on that role?
Christ almighty, what the hell do they put in libc to make it 24 megs? On my FreeBSD system, libc.a is 1568K, and there is talk on the mailing list of finding ways to trim it down.
Can anyone say vaporware? This sounds really cool, but look at the language they use: all benefits and no drawbacks. Can anyone trust a viewpoint like that? Plus, the website is really horribly designed, which leads me to believe they have no money and have never built one of these. I like the idea though, a lot. I'm just skeptical of these utopian idealists.
I can't speak for every freaking admin out there, but by default, no scripts go into /sbin, ever! Always /etc. The only ones that go into /usr/local/etc are for third party packages, i.e., they aren't there by default. Also, you might check out NetBSD's beautiful rc system which runs an individual script in /etc/rc.d for each service. You still configure your services in /etc/rc.conf like before. There are no runlevels. FreeBSD 5.0 will be using this same system.
For those of us who don't have Macs, can you explain how this is different from simply typing in the name of the program you want to use?
Geek Activism?
How about Geektivism!
As I posted earlier, I saw one of these being played this June, and one can indeed play chords on them. My experience of it was that it sounded rather like an eerie little orchestra all on its own.
There was a performance venue at the Fremont Fair in Seattle this year with a man that played one of these. It was beautifully played, with a haunting sound that made me think of bygone eras. At the end, the guy played a sort of tongue in cheek version of "Stairway to Heaven". I had no idea that this was invented by Benjamin Franklin until now.
In what way would that be circumventing copy protection?
yhbt. hand.
A very funny troll too, I might add.
Except this isn't a new VM.
What is up with you people? I honestly cannot see the problem with what this guy is doing. The GPL does not require people to give away binaries of their products. The source still is available. Use a different license if you don't like it. Use a different distro if you don't like it. But, for Christ's sake, stop acting like paranoid schizophrenics. This guy is not out to get you!
I love the scene of him driving, and the sound that goes with it. Another great Tarkovsky film, Stalker, has a similar scene that goes on for minutes, except it shows three men riding on a train car. Awesome. Some of us like movies that aren't all action, and let the scenes slowly sink in.
I wasn't logged in and thus inadvertantly read this Katz article, which I always keep turned off in my preferences. I'm not that interested in the trials and tribulations of Amazon employees and all the terrible things they must go through to afford their $400,000 houses. One thing I will say, however, is that although amazon.com may be a virtual mega-mall-evil-conglomerate, it is one of the best designed web sites I have ever come across and they know how to treat their customers. I used to hate them until I actually gave them a try. I still prefer to support smaller businesses such as Powell's Books, but one could certainly do worse than to emulate the quality you can get from Amazon.
I don't think it's because Linux is built with GNU tools that he wants it called GNU/Linux. After all, FreeBSD is also built with some of the GNU tools. But Linux relies on the GNU C library, as well as GNU fileutils, findutils, shellutils, bash, GNU sed, GNU awk, and so forth. Almost all of the Linux userland in a console environment is from GNU. FreeBSD has its own userland. Using GCC to compile your project does not make it GNU in any way.
Ah, that makes more sense :).
This is just GNU's Mach kernel that is at 1.3, not the Hurd itself. Hurd still remains at 0.2 or 0.3, I can't remember which and I can't be bothered to look it up. STill, this is good progress. They've fixed some pretty annoying problems since the last time I played with Hurd.
Please provide a link. I don't believe he said that. There is very little GPL code in FreeBSD at all. Aside from the GNU development toolchain (GCC, binutils, ld, cvs, rcs) and a few utilities (grep, sort, groff), the code in FreeBSD is under BSD or BSD-like licenses.
The Tunes people are obviously visionaries with a lot of cool ideas, but unfortunately that's all they have. There is no code. In other words, it's vaporware.
I think we're a long way from having a really robust, modular operating system that's easy for anyone to use. It's at least ten years away, probably more.
Almost the entire Gnu Mach kernel is licensed under a BSD-like license from Carnegie Mellon University. They've just slapped a GPL on top of it all. Go look through the source. You can also find examples of the same thing throughout the Gnu C library. So it would seem that the HURD, and the FSF, are indeed interested in BSD-like licensed code.
Jonathan Shapiro, developer of Eros is quoted towards the end of the article. I thought that was cool, since I've had my eye on Eros for a long time. I don't know if it will ever go anywhere, but it sure is cool technology.
I recently on a whim tried out the Oroborus window manager and was pleasantly surprised to find that it is a "boring" wm that does nothing but manage windows, has no menu, icons, pager, or anything. It's also Gnome compliant. It looks really cool by default with a green window border somewhat reminiscent of the qnx gui.
The thing that bugs me about Gnome is that it doesn't have its Very Own window manager. Well actually, it seems like it doesn't have a lot of things of its own, like a file manager, to name one. Everything is someone else's project. Gnome will adopt Metacity, and then, like with Enlightenment and Sawfish before it, the developer will head in some other direction, leaving Gnome in search of a new one.
You've got Gnome with gmc, you've got Gnome with Nautilus. Which one is the real Gnome? Why doesn't the Gnome project unify and maintain its own components? To me it seems that they're really lacking in this area. I like how organized KDE is. The wm and file manager are built as part of the kdebase tarball. All one neat package.
This is not meant to fan any kind of KDE vs. Gnome flames, however. I think Gnome is pretty neat, but I just keep waiting...and waiting...for it to "get there".
There will be a small redirector program called /usr/bin/perl that looks for perl and passes your script on to it, and if it doesn't find perl, gives you an error message.
Have you ever met RMS, and if so, did your beard get tangled up with his?