Try romfs then. I built a GNU/Linux distro in 2000 which used romfs and ext2fs (only because xiafs is orphaned) natively and could be installed into a ext2fs partition or a loopback-root image on, e.g. a FAT partition.
Servers ought to use/usr/share/zoneinfo/right/UTC anyways because of the logs and stuff, and me, being consistent, despite living in right/Europe/Berlin zone, switched all my clocks (server, desktop, notebook, watch, wrist clock, microwave oven clock, car clock etc.) to UTC. I just add the one or two hours in mind.
- Ad IPFilter: It was thrown out because of a licence change in the development version. This was, however, not the reason. Darren Reed said that this change was no change, but rather a clarification, and that this be the interpretation of his licence from the beginning (one was not allowed to redistribute modified versions, but the OpenBSD team has heavily modified it for security fixes and feature enhancements).
That's why it was removed. Shortly later Darren made agreements with FBSD and NBSD, and I don't know the current situation, but since we have OpenIPF now, I don't care either.
OTOH I don't flame Darren on the OpenBSD lists for "just" being there, advocating IPFilter and helping users of DarrenBSD. He may get the one or other funny or a-bit-flamatory comment though when he is just trolling...
- Ad SMP in FreeBSD
I think I have made it clear enough that I just have heard what I posted, and if not, I hope it is clear now. It was not my information, I just got that somewhere (don't even know where, I think news:de.asr)
He's biking and doing other physical stuff all day when other people sleep, thus he's fitter than the rest (RMS stumbling over his beard, or TUX just fatly waddling around, waiting febblemindedly(sp?) grinning for the daemon's fork to impale him.
Renaming (in general) sort of works, but you lose the earlier names, or the history. I usually mv the RCS files if it's not a big deal. Also, with a bit of inter-developer action, you could tag the tree before the rename, and after, so everyone could diff his changes. Oh, wait.
You missed the big scary missing point of cvs (after renaming): disconnected operation.
See, a developer at flight cannot simply check in. Even if he has a local copy of the master repo, he would need to preserve it, etc etc, with many hassles. I first encountered it getting the OpenBSD source via CTM, by retrieving the full repository. CTM cannot update any more when you modificate the files (ok there is some mechanism to circumvent that, but xxx,v.ctm is just ugly).
Some OpenBSD developer told me in IRC (#OpenBSD on OpenProjects.net (www.freenode.net)) that they will switch to OpenCM in some years when it is more mature. (it became a port some days later...) which is said to be better. They will not use any of the other CMS, he added.
They were right to refuse code with insecure licences (Theo removed many code from OpenBSD because of licence issues) and tell us that Linux is non-free (remember the story about RMS telling us that bitkeeper and vendor-supplied scsi code are unfree?)
I knew that Theo was right, even if I have my small struggles with him, too. If people want to try out free operating systems with fewer licence issues, try out OpenBSD.
NetBSD still uses IPFilter (by Darren Reed) which started the licence questioning in OpenBSD, and at least FreeBSD 4.x has patented SMP code from BSD/OS in it (that's why they started SMPng IIRC).
What is with the free-as-in-beer IIS FastEnc win32 codec (l3codeca.acm - encode up to 56 kbps, decode unlimited, (c) 1999, corrects decoding error at 128 kbps from the (c) 1997 codec) - I got that one in original, with no license terms applied.
What do I do if I just put it up at this site? Would that mean IIS has to pay themselfes? AFAIK&IANAL Licenses cannot be applied retrospectively except if said so in the original one.
*narf* too bad that I don't use Windows any longer. Time to move to Ogg Vorbis - does my Pentium-90 with OpenBSD and 32 MB RAM bear it?
Open Software is all about freedom, which neither free (as in FSF), free (as in beer) and commercial software gives you:
* you are free in the choice which software you choose
* you may do anything with it except claim you wrote it
or sue the authors and contributors over it
Free (as in FSF) software doesn't permit the latter (you may not close the source); free (as in beer) software is basically commercial software.
But, if I were to choose a newsreader, and I am currently using pine, but Microsoft in a sudden removes _all_ the known problems from Outlook Expreß and I can run it under wine, I'll probably do it, because it is a better programme.
By denying the right to choose - even to choose falsely - you are denying both the most basic idea of democracy and the foundation on which open software is built on.
---- People who read me often find I am no friend of GNU, and I kind of hate the GPL (not the LGPL) because of its viral effect. I also flame quite often against GNU crap (also because it's often bloat).
But this post is not intended a flamebait in any way, it rather tries to enumerate that denying the right to choose is bad, and forcing free or unfree (as opposed to open) software is bad.
My point was: * I know from earlier that FreeBSD-releases have been
announced by Slashdot when this announce was not
yet fully official. * I found it quite amusing when I read, back then, a
comment from a FreeBSD developer, asking for/. to
only post such stories again when they come, pgp signed,
from a developer. * I wondered whether it was officially this time, that's
why I asked. * I got a comment which showed me that it was - and
which author wondered about this NOT happening...
Furthermore I wrote about the OpenBSD release scheme, to show that we don't have this kind of problems. My post was not intended a flamebait in any way.
I remember about 4.6 being announced ten times or so, and a reply from a developer to only post announcements when they are pgp-signed from a freebse developer.
nah, all not my stuff - we release on
December 1th
June 1th of every year, and a bit earlier this year. There is nothing to interpretate...
Joe's Own Editor:
http://mitglied.lycos.de/tygs/bsd/editor.php
Either in a PuTTY ssh session to my OpenBSD server, or natively compiled - for example, with the free Borland C++ 5.5 Command Line compilers.
... from the 8080 to the Pentium IV
on
AMD's 64-Bit Chip
·
· Score: 2
No, binary compatible is the 8088/8086, the former 8-bit to the mainboard and thus exclusively used in IBM PC and XT, the latter one year earlier, but with its 16-bit bus making mainboards twice as expensive.
The 8080 has a different command set, but with some macroes 8080 assembly source code can be re-compiled.
If you also have the product whose protocol you are trying to emulate, let someone in a free country trace it with a debugger (gdb, WinICE, Turbo Debugger...) in order to find at least the assembly code out.
Then you can hire an assembly guru (like me:) to write a routine which does the same.
It happens because I do feel that the OpenSSH team has not made any mistake. The early 3.3 release and the usage of privsep was not forced because, how some Theo-haters express it, he wants people to use his new toy privsep, but because they needed a fix for the hole and couldn't tell where it was because then, the exploit would have existed before the patch. And the original finder of the flaw has leaked it or something like this. I still feel comfortable with that team.
This must have been equality of the thinking fluid. Then sorry when you have made this earlier - it took me ten minutes to get this right with link checking, so maybe we even have typed this in parallel.
Darren Reed also asked in the OpenBSD misc mailing list for prior art and points to pf probably being affected, too (read here).
Daniel Hartmeier, swiss Author of PF, the OpenBSD packet filter, has a good reply finding prior art and Darren even thanks him explicitly a lot, which is not what we _were_ used to read from him.
I personally do not have any objections against him, still - though I use pf as it is in OpenBSD - the operating system of my choice, and not even the recent OpenSSH bug could prevent me from trusting that team.
OpenBSD is looking for some people who have copyright on the pppd (not ppp) code, because their license does not explicitly permit modification and pppd is in danger of being removed.
Uh, XFree86 4.2.0 on OpenBSD also includes wm2, which is (until I install icewm) my personal favourite. Does cygX come with it, too?
I have some installations of Win95, WIn98SE, NT 3.51 Server and NT 5.02 Workstation (aka stock Win2k SP2) - does it run on these, too? [ and no, these are NOT _my_ desktop platforms;
personally I use OpenBSD for nearly everything ]
Slashdot Mirror
Counter-Strike, and nothing else.
GNU/Linux is not an option because it
a) does crash more often than Win2k
b) has a lower fps than the 30fps I can
achieve on Win2k (S3 Twister-K)
OpenBSD, which I use for everything else,
does support the S3 quite well, too, but
unluckily, WINE does not run on it since 1999.
Try romfs then. I built a GNU/Linux distro in 2000
which used romfs and ext2fs (only because xiafs is
orphaned) natively and could be installed into a
ext2fs partition or a loopback-root image on, e.g.
a FAT partition.
Maybe I'll upload it one time.
Servers ought to use /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/UTC
anyways because of the logs and stuff, and me, being
consistent, despite living in right/Europe/Berlin zone,
switched all my clocks (server, desktop, notebook,
watch, wrist clock, microwave oven clock, car clock
etc.) to UTC. I just add the one or two hours in mind.
Evil evil... and I thought I got bad stuff:
Acer Aspire 1300XC notebook, new.
"CMOS setup" is called SCU and has three(!)
options: date, time of day and boot order.
Oh yeah, during boot-up, hit escape to change
the boot order *sigh*, f12 to boot from network
or f2 to enter SCU.
- Ad IPFilter:
It was thrown out because of a licence change in
the development version. This was, however, not the
reason.
Darren Reed said that this change was no change,
but rather a clarification, and that this be the
interpretation of his licence from the beginning
(one was not allowed to redistribute modified
versions, but the OpenBSD team has heavily modified
it for security fixes and feature enhancements).
That's why it was removed.
Shortly later Darren made agreements with FBSD and
NBSD, and I don't know the current situation, but
since we have OpenIPF now, I don't care either.
OTOH I don't flame Darren on the OpenBSD lists for
"just" being there, advocating IPFilter and helping
users of DarrenBSD. He may get the one or other funny
or a-bit-flamatory comment though when he is just
trolling...
- Ad SMP in FreeBSD
I think I have made it clear enough that I just have
heard what I posted, and if not, I hope it is clear
now. It was not my information, I just got that
somewhere (don't even know where, I think news:de.asr)
- Hope this helps, HAND
Theo deRaadt? Yay, I know why he isn't in.
He's biking and doing other physical stuff all day
when other people sleep, thus he's fitter than the
rest (RMS stumbling over his beard, or TUX just
fatly waddling around, waiting febblemindedly(sp?)
grinning for the daemon's fork to impale him.
Binary works kind of well.
Renaming (in general) sort of works, but you lose
the earlier names, or the history. I usually mv the
RCS files if it's not a big deal.
Also, with a bit of inter-developer action, you
could tag the tree before the rename, and after,
so everyone could diff his changes. Oh, wait.
You missed the big scary missing point of cvs
(after renaming): disconnected operation.
See, a developer at flight cannot simply check in.
Even if he has a local copy of the master repo, he
would need to preserve it, etc etc, with many
hassles.
I first encountered it getting the OpenBSD source
via CTM, by retrieving
the full repository. CTM cannot update any more when
you modificate the files (ok there is some mechanism
to circumvent that, but xxx,v.ctm is just ugly).
Some OpenBSD developer told me in IRC (#OpenBSD on
OpenProjects.net (www.freenode.net)) that they will
switch to OpenCM in some years when it is more mature.
(it became a port some days later...) which is said
to be better. They will not use any of the other CMS,
he added.
Maybe this helps.
They were right to refuse code with insecure licences
(Theo removed many code from OpenBSD because
of licence issues) and tell us that Linux is non-free
(remember the story about RMS telling us that bitkeeper
and vendor-supplied scsi code are unfree?)
I knew that Theo was right, even if I have my small
struggles with him, too.
If people want to try out free operating systems with
fewer licence issues, try out OpenBSD.
NetBSD still uses IPFilter (by Darren Reed) which
started the licence questioning in OpenBSD, and at
least FreeBSD 4.x has patented SMP code from BSD/OS
in it (that's why they started SMPng IIRC).
What is with the free-as-in-beer IIS FastEnc
win32 codec (l3codeca.acm - encode up to 56 kbps,
decode unlimited, (c) 1999, corrects decoding error
at 128 kbps from the (c) 1997 codec) - I got that
one in original, with no license terms applied.
What do I do if I just put it up at
this site? Would that mean IIS has to pay
themselfes?
AFAIK&IANAL Licenses cannot be applied retrospectively
except if said so in the original one.
*narf* too bad that I don't use Windows any longer.
Time to move to Ogg Vorbis - does my Pentium-90 with
OpenBSD and 32 MB RAM bear it?
Open Software is all about freedom, which neither
free (as in FSF), free (as in beer) and commercial
software gives you:
* you are free in the choice which software you choose
* you may do anything with it except claim you wrote it
or sue the authors and contributors over it
Free (as in FSF) software doesn't permit the latter
(you may not close the source); free (as in beer)
software is basically commercial software.
But, if I were to choose a newsreader, and I am
currently using pine, but Microsoft in a sudden
removes _all_ the known problems from Outlook
Expreß and I can run it under wine, I'll probably
do it, because it is a better programme.
By denying the right to choose - even to choose
falsely - you are denying both the most basic
idea of democracy and the foundation on which
open software is built on.
----
People who read me often find I am no friend of
GNU, and I kind of hate the GPL (not the LGPL)
because of its viral effect. I also flame quite
often against GNU crap (also because it's often bloat).
But this post is not intended a flamebait in any
way, it rather tries to enumerate that denying the
right to choose is bad, and forcing free or unfree
(as opposed to open) software is bad.
Well, to be exact, Mac OSX is a microkernel-OS
which emulates a BSD-alike kernel. And it's got
some of the old FreeBSD userland IIRC.
My point was: /. to
* I know from earlier that FreeBSD-releases have been
announced by Slashdot when this announce was not
yet fully official.
* I found it quite amusing when I read, back then, a
comment from a FreeBSD developer, asking for
only post such stories again when they come, pgp signed,
from a developer.
* I wondered whether it was officially this time, that's
why I asked.
* I got a comment which showed me that it was - and
which author wondered about this NOT happening...
Furthermore I wrote about the OpenBSD release scheme,
to show that we don't have this kind of problems. My
post was not intended a flamebait in any way.
I remember about 4.6 being announced ten times or
so, and a reply from a developer to only post
announcements when they are pgp-signed from a
freebse developer.
nah, all not my stuff - we release on
December 1th
June 1th
of every year, and a bit earlier this year.
There is nothing to interpretate...
Yep, I'm a happy OpenBSD sysadmin and user.
Actually, Mac OSX is not UNIX(tm), but it is as
much Unix as OpenBSD, Linux, Windows NT/2000/XP are.
Well, I wish OpenBSD hat native UTF-8 - currently it
is totally locale unaware and just makes 8bit==latin-1
assumptions.
This does not mean I want NLS or I18N: localized
error messages, locale in general, LANG= and LC_*=
do suck a lot.
Joe's Own Editor:
http://mitglied.lycos.de/tygs/bsd/editor.php
Either in a PuTTY ssh session to my OpenBSD server,
or natively compiled - for example, with the free
Borland C++ 5.5 Command Line compilers.
No, binary compatible is the 8088/8086, the former
8-bit to the mainboard and thus exclusively used in
IBM PC and XT, the latter one year earlier, but with
its 16-bit bus making mainboards twice as expensive.
The 8080 has a different command set, but with some
macroes 8080 assembly source code can be re-compiled.
If you also have the product whose protocol you are
:)
trying to emulate, let someone in a free country trace
it with a debugger (gdb, WinICE, Turbo Debugger...)
in order to find at least the assembly code out.
Then you can hire an assembly guru (like me
to write a routine which does the same.
It happens because I do feel that the OpenSSH team
has not made any mistake. The early 3.3 release and
the usage of privsep was not forced because, how some
Theo-haters express it, he wants people to use his new
toy privsep, but because they needed a fix for the hole
and couldn't tell where it was because then, the
exploit would have existed before the patch. And the
original finder of the flaw has leaked it or something
like this.
I still feel comfortable with that team.
This must have been equality of the thinking fluid.
Then sorry when you have made this earlier - it took
me ten minutes to get this right with link checking,
so maybe we even have typed this in parallel.
I don't know as I have no knowledge of the products
;-)
you mentioned, but since there are prior arts, I
suppose the patent won't apply anyways.
A happy pf user
Darren Reed also asked in the OpenBSD misc mailing list
for prior art and points to pf probably being affected,
too (read here).
Daniel Hartmeier, swiss Author of PF, the OpenBSD packet
filter, has a good reply finding prior art and Darren even thanks him explicitly a lot, which is not what we _were_ used to read from him.
I personally do not have any objections against him,
still - though I use pf as it is in OpenBSD - the operating system of my choice, and not
even the recent OpenSSH bug could prevent me from
trusting that team.
OpenBSD is looking for some people who have
copyright on the pppd (not ppp) code, because
their license does not explicitly permit
modification and pppd is in danger of being removed.
OpenBSD - I don't think it has fewer arches than Debian.
One word: NetBSD. Though I don't know whether they
have XF4.2 yet.
XWin32 does that. CygX I yet have to test...
Uh, XFree86 4.2.0 on OpenBSD also includes wm2, which
is (until I install icewm) my personal favourite.
Does cygX come with it, too?
I have some installations of Win95, WIn98SE,
NT 3.51 Server and NT 5.02 Workstation (aka stock
Win2k SP2) - does it run on these, too?
[ and no, these are NOT _my_ desktop platforms;
personally I use OpenBSD for nearly everything ]