Actually Linux is not a derivative like BSD is. All BSDs and all commercial Unicies (HP/UX, AIX, Solaris, VMS, etc.) can trace their lineage back directly to AT&T Unix. Linux does not have this direct lineage. It was grown out of the workalike needs of one particular developer. Therefore it is wrong to say that Linux is a Unix derivative whereas, MACH, the BSDs and all commercial Unicies are definately derivatives.
The thing is this can be done using gnutls and OpenPGP authentication method. By using the PGP web of trust methods you will only let people into the network that meet some threshold of trust. So if I sign your key and you sign my key and we trust each other 100% then if you sign someone else's key then I will trust it to some degree already. They can join the network and then later I could sign their key too after chatting exchanging files or whatnot and then they become 100% trusted too.
This web of trust authentication can already be done and can be utilized fairly easily using gnutls and gpgme libraries. Someone will do it someday.
I'd fully recommend Quanta. It is hands down the best that I've used. I used to think that Dreamweaver couldn't be beat, but quanta does it all very well and has a great interface. I'd say give it a shot if at all possible and try to give it a full day or two and read the docs. This is one Open Source project that has good docs.
You think you feel bad. I have gentoo and I just got done compiling Quake3. I wonder how long until the Quake4 ebuild is ready so I can start compiling it! It might finish before Quake5 is out.
What do you mean there is nothing like this on the AMD side. The one you site has two PCI 2.2, one PCIe (8x) and two PCI-X (one 100/66 the other 66 only). This Opteron board on the otherhand has two PCIe (16x each), one PCI 2.3 and two PCI-X (one 100 and the other 133/100). Or if you want four way board you can try this one.
I call BS on the BS calling BS. AMD does have extra capacity. The good news for AMD is that the extra capacity doesn't cost them any extra money, because it's in the form of on-demand production from 3rd parties. The AMD reps I talk to really don't care about the Dell piece of the business right now. They prefere where they are, because they get to compete against Dell in the server/workstation space using HP, IBM and Sun together. They don't care which integrator get's the sell as long as AMD CPUs power the boxes.
However, if Dell and AMD were to work out a deal it would be fantastic if Dell would replace Intel in some space for the AMD products. Otherwise there is a possibility that Dell might stick AMD into a not very well supported configuration or sell it without any marketing behind it, or any other way that could hurt AMD. I don't think AMD loses sleep at night worrying about Dell. There will be a point where Dell will give them a fair shake and feature AMD products. When that day comes AMD will be able to ramp production extremely quickly.
Remember you don't have to fab everything yourself.
Okay where to start on your post. Spe'lling mistake's indeed mister fabircates.
Nevermind that. I guess we need to break this down a little further. If you want x86 servers and workstations your options are: Celeron, Pentium IV, Xenon, Athlon 64, Athlon 64-X2, Athlon FX and Opteron. If your workloads are very demanding then your only real options become Xenon, 64-X2, Fx and Opteron. In that space the only thing that the Xenon delivers that AMD doesn't deliver on is in cache size. If you are doing SMP at 4 processors the Intel SMP falls down with shared memory busses and traffic cops. You spend more time waiting for the memory bus to come available then you do actually transfering data. However we are now into a concern of the server market. On workstations, I'd prefer to have a 64-X2 or an FX chip compared to an intel chip due to heat and performance. Intel may have been first to market with Dual Core, but only OEMs could get them. The Intel Dual Core is a joke architecturally. On the AMD you have layered caches where each processor has its own L1 cache and L2, but the L3 on die cache is shared. So each processor can share cache data if processes migrate between them.
Also I don't understand your point about fabrication. Are you implying that AMD doesn't fabricate their own chips? AMD fabs many lines of chips and flash memory. You also seem to say that just because intel has more market share that all other contenters are irrelevent, I disagree strongly with that. I never said that the Pentium III was a bad chip. It was a great chip for the consumer, because there wasn't anything out there that could compete with it. That is until the Athlon launched. Once that happened intel couldn't keep up. They've been behind ever since. When they launched the Pentium IV people didn't switch over to it until they quit manufacturing the Pentium III.
I'm not an AMD fanboy, I just feel that their products now are much better than intel's in the x86 workstation/server market.
Except for the Itanium2 which is sort of a running joke, everything Intel has out there right now is low end. The only great product they have on the market is the Pentium-M. Their Dual-Core is a joke, both in architecture and in heat/power consumption. IF you compare AMD's current products (Opteron x65/70/75 line and the Dual Core 64's) to intel's best offerings, there is no comparison AMD wins hands down in almost all categories. The categories that matter to me there is not a real choice AMD runs away with it.
Also has anyone gotten SLI mode to work for a workstation on an Intel platform? Last time I saw it attempted it couldn't be done reliably, at least not with Nvidia's solution. I wan't my servers to use the least amount of power, put out the least amount of heat, have the smallest footprint possible and have excellent performance. I can balance those with Dual Core Opterons and get something that comes in a great package. IBM/SUN/HP all sell those types of servers and Intel just can't touch them.
What might be happening is that the windows developers feel like by porting to Linux they would have to give up the Shareware portion and go completely Open Source. I would be comfortable porting Windows/OSX Shareware software as shareware software on Linux. Maybe these developers need a little more information before they jump into the Linux pond.
I have a small team of Linux developers that are looking for some work of this nature. We would be more than happy to help you. Send me an email or message on/.
I'll update my profile to have my current email address. krakrjak at gmail dot com
lspci cat/proc/cpuinfo lsusb cat/proc/scsi/scsi ls/dev (if using udev) dmesg|less (or more depending on your PAGER) free
These usually are enough to determine if BIOS thinks your hardware exists. And also this should help determine if the kernel has loaded a driver and given a device node to your hardware. If you need to know if a harddrive is bad (or partition) you can use the old standby: dd if=/dev/ of=/dev/null
That will tell you if you can read all the data on the device or not. Hope that helps.
As far as books go I also feel that "The Art of UNIX Programming" is also a must read. Even if you don't manage any projects specifically for a *nix environment, you will find many useful tidbits of software design.
You may want to make it and Code Complete required reading for programmers under you just in case they missed out on good fundamental software engineering practices.
The volume management on Solaris is tacked on. Veritas is an option as it is on linux, HP/UX, AIX and almost any other operating system out there. I prefer the BSDL LVM implementation over just about anything out there. LVM works *very* well and the same version runs on Linux that runs on HP/UX. Solaris may be more polished on Big Iron, but Linux isn't really lagging by much. Just look at what IBM has committed with their new Power5 based servers where feature parity between AIX and Linux is almost a reality.
So while Solaris is more polished on Sun hardware I have a hard time believing that Sun has been doing much more than lagging behind other Commercial Unix shops for the last several years. Look at how far AIX and HP/UX have come and the hardware they run on. Sun's JVM isn't fastest on Solaris so where is that polish?
Perl has a standardized documentation feature: PODs. You can embed all manner of documentation alongside your code and then see the output (much like a man page) by running 'perldoc [perl module]'. If you use classgen you get a POD skeleton in your perl modules.
I do agree that standardized documentation built into a language is quite powerful.
If you don't like ringers and screensavers expiring you should try www.3gupload.com. For a one-time donation ($5.99 minimum) unlimited downloads with no expiration dates. I have sprint and it has paid for itself pretty damn quickly.
In my area of the US there is such a carrier. Cricket Wireless offers service in a few locations that I'm aware of: Little Rock, Fort Smith, Fayetteville Arkansas. $29.99 a month unlimited local area calling.
Like another poster stated, it isn't really a GPS unit but more of a relative position finder to the nearest tower.
I have sprint service as well and just upgraded my phone to one with this service. I turned the locator on and checked the weather using the wireless web option and it gave me the correct local weather (no zipcode needed). When I went to a neighboring community about 20 miles away I check the weather again and it gave me the new city's weather forecast.
There could potentially be plenty of services for this feature. Resturant suggestions, directions, movie times and ticket purchasing, event calendars, multiplayer gaming against locals and many more I can't think of. Most of these are still to come howerver.
Let's see if I can remember anything from my algorithms class.
How is this not O(n)?
Read on for an explanation. I do believe you gave the answer to your own question in your post. I will also assume that you understand "Big-O" notation well enough to follow the answer.
Each process still gets its time slice calcuated, it is removed from one queue, and inserted into another.
Correct. You've nailed it. Insertion into a Que operates in O(1) time. Removal from the Que is also a constant time algorithm. A Que inserts at the tail of the list (or the end of the array) and De-Ques from the Head of the list (or the beginning of the array). Ques do not permit searching, sorting or accessing the data after the first element.
If we De-Que a process, run it then calculate some information and Que it up that would run in O(c1*O(1)+c2*O(1)) = O(1).
This is still an oversimplification and does not take into account the possibility of a Priority Que in which insertion runs in O(lg n) and De-Queing runs in O(1). So a heap sort using a Priority Que runs in O(n*lg n).
I just finished Stranger In a Strange Land and I think you are wrong. It does have an emotional grip. The entire first third or so of the book is about where Michael came from and how he escapes the clutches of an unruly corrupt world government.
While I haven't read any other Heinlein, I feel that Stranger is one of the stronger books I've ever read. I did think it wrapped up too quickly, but I felt that Michael was a great 3D character. When he finally laughs I got a huge smile on my face and became overjoyed.
I don't read very fast and usually can't read for great lengths of time however, this book held my attention for more time at a stretch than any since I read 1984. I think you may be influenced by not agreeing with the ideals presented in the book. I didn't agree with them, but I did think that it was interesting to see them wrapped up in that manner.
I'm not flaming (I hope), but your dismissal of Michael as a disinteresting character seems intellectually dishonest.
One of the best word games of all time! It's been out of print for ages, but a new company has bought the rights and are now selling it in a nice tin package.
It's an excellent two player game, as each player always has something to do. However, we had luck playing as two teams of two over Thanksgiving.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually Linux is not a derivative like BSD is. All BSDs and all commercial Unicies (HP/UX, AIX, Solaris, VMS, etc.) can trace their lineage back directly to AT&T Unix. Linux does not have this direct lineage. It was grown out of the workalike needs of one particular developer. Therefore it is wrong to say that Linux is a Unix derivative whereas, MACH, the BSDs and all commercial Unicies are definately derivatives.
The thing is this can be done using gnutls and OpenPGP authentication method. By using the PGP web of trust methods you will only let people into the network that meet some threshold of trust. So if I sign your key and you sign my key and we trust each other 100% then if you sign someone else's key then I will trust it to some degree already. They can join the network and then later I could sign their key too after chatting exchanging files or whatnot and then they become 100% trusted too.
This web of trust authentication can already be done and can be utilized fairly easily using gnutls and gpgme libraries. Someone will do it someday.
I'd fully recommend Quanta. It is hands down the best that I've used. I used to think that Dreamweaver couldn't be beat, but quanta does it all very well and has a great interface. I'd say give it a shot if at all possible and try to give it a full day or two and read the docs. This is one Open Source project that has good docs.
You think you feel bad. I have gentoo and I just got done compiling Quake3. I wonder how long until the Quake4 ebuild is ready so I can start compiling it! It might finish before Quake5 is out.
What do you mean there is nothing like this on the AMD side. The one you site has two PCI 2.2, one PCIe (8x) and two PCI-X (one 100/66 the other 66 only). This Opteron board on the otherhand has two PCIe (16x each), one PCI 2.3 and two PCI-X (one 100 and the other 133/100). Or if you want four way board you can try this one.
Unfortunately your argument does not hold water
I call BS on the BS calling BS. AMD does have extra capacity. The good news for AMD is that the extra capacity doesn't cost them any extra money, because it's in the form of on-demand production from 3rd parties. The AMD reps I talk to really don't care about the Dell piece of the business right now. They prefere where they are, because they get to compete against Dell in the server/workstation space using HP, IBM and Sun together. They don't care which integrator get's the sell as long as AMD CPUs power the boxes.
However, if Dell and AMD were to work out a deal it would be fantastic if Dell would replace Intel in some space for the AMD products. Otherwise there is a possibility that Dell might stick AMD into a not very well supported configuration or sell it without any marketing behind it, or any other way that could hurt AMD. I don't think AMD loses sleep at night worrying about Dell. There will be a point where Dell will give them a fair shake and feature AMD products. When that day comes AMD will be able to ramp production extremely quickly.
Remember you don't have to fab everything yourself.
Okay where to start on your post. Spe'lling mistake's indeed mister fabircates.
Nevermind that. I guess we need to break this down a little further. If you want x86 servers and workstations your options are: Celeron, Pentium IV, Xenon, Athlon 64, Athlon 64-X2, Athlon FX and Opteron. If your workloads are very demanding then your only real options become Xenon, 64-X2, Fx and Opteron. In that space the only thing that the Xenon delivers that AMD doesn't deliver on is in cache size. If you are doing SMP at 4 processors the Intel SMP falls down with shared memory busses and traffic cops. You spend more time waiting for the memory bus to come available then you do actually transfering data. However we are now into a concern of the server market. On workstations, I'd prefer to have a 64-X2 or an FX chip compared to an intel chip due to heat and performance. Intel may have been first to market with Dual Core, but only OEMs could get them. The Intel Dual Core is a joke architecturally. On the AMD you have layered caches where each processor has its own L1 cache and L2, but the L3 on die cache is shared. So each processor can share cache data if processes migrate between them.
Also I don't understand your point about fabrication. Are you implying that AMD doesn't fabricate their own chips? AMD fabs many lines of chips and flash memory. You also seem to say that just because intel has more market share that all other contenters are irrelevent, I disagree strongly with that. I never said that the Pentium III was a bad chip. It was a great chip for the consumer, because there wasn't anything out there that could compete with it. That is until the Athlon launched. Once that happened intel couldn't keep up. They've been behind ever since. When they launched the Pentium IV people didn't switch over to it until they quit manufacturing the Pentium III.
I'm not an AMD fanboy, I just feel that their products now are much better than intel's in the x86 workstation/server market.
Why thank you I try v'ry hard to spell like tha't. Perhaps a more judicious use of preview is needed.
Except for the Itanium2 which is sort of a running joke, everything Intel has out there right now is low end. The only great product they have on the market is the Pentium-M. Their Dual-Core is a joke, both in architecture and in heat/power consumption. IF you compare AMD's current products (Opteron x65/70/75 line and the Dual Core 64's) to intel's best offerings, there is no comparison AMD wins hands down in almost all categories. The categories that matter to me there is not a real choice AMD runs away with it.
Also has anyone gotten SLI mode to work for a workstation on an Intel platform? Last time I saw it attempted it couldn't be done reliably, at least not with Nvidia's solution. I wan't my servers to use the least amount of power, put out the least amount of heat, have the smallest footprint possible and have excellent performance. I can balance those with Dual Core Opterons and get something that comes in a great package. IBM/SUN/HP all sell those types of servers and Intel just can't touch them.
What might be happening is that the windows developers feel like by porting to Linux they would have to give up the Shareware portion and go completely Open Source. I would be comfortable porting Windows/OSX Shareware software as shareware software on Linux. Maybe these developers need a little more information before they jump into the Linux pond.
I have a small team of Linux developers that are looking for some work of this nature. We would be more than happy to help you. Send me an email or message on /.
I'll update my profile to have my current email address. krakrjak at gmail dot com
lspci /proc/cpuinfo /proc/scsi/scsi /dev (if using udev)
cat
lsusb
cat
ls
dmesg|less (or more depending on your PAGER)
free
These usually are enough to determine if BIOS thinks your hardware exists. And also this should help determine if the kernel has loaded a driver and given a device node to your hardware. If you need to know if a harddrive is bad (or partition) you can use the old standby:
dd if=/dev/ of=/dev/null
That will tell you if you can read all the data on the device or not. Hope that helps.
As far as books go I also feel that "The Art of UNIX Programming" is also a must read. Even if you don't manage any projects specifically for a *nix environment, you will find many useful tidbits of software design.
You may want to make it and Code Complete required reading for programmers under you just in case they missed out on good fundamental software engineering practices.
The volume management on Solaris is tacked on. Veritas is an option as it is on linux, HP/UX, AIX and almost any other operating system out there. I prefer the BSDL LVM implementation over just about anything out there. LVM works *very* well and the same version runs on Linux that runs on HP/UX. Solaris may be more polished on Big Iron, but Linux isn't really lagging by much. Just look at what IBM has committed with their new Power5 based servers where feature parity between AIX and Linux is almost a reality.
So while Solaris is more polished on Sun hardware I have a hard time believing that Sun has been doing much more than lagging behind other Commercial Unix shops for the last several years. Look at how far AIX and HP/UX have come and the hardware they run on. Sun's JVM isn't fastest on Solaris so where is that polish?
Perl has a standardized documentation feature: PODs. You can embed all manner of documentation alongside your code and then see the output (much like a man page) by running 'perldoc [perl module]'. If you use classgen you get a POD skeleton in your perl modules.
I do agree that standardized documentation built into a language is quite powerful.
If you don't like ringers and screensavers expiring you should try www.3gupload.com. For a one-time donation ($5.99 minimum) unlimited downloads with no expiration dates. I have sprint and it has paid for itself pretty damn quickly.
In my area of the US there is such a carrier. Cricket Wireless offers service in a few locations that I'm aware of: Little Rock, Fort Smith, Fayetteville Arkansas. $29.99 a month unlimited local area calling.
Like another poster stated, it isn't really a GPS unit but more of a relative position finder to the nearest tower.
I have sprint service as well and just upgraded my phone to one with this service. I turned the locator on and checked the weather using the wireless web option and it gave me the correct local weather (no zipcode needed). When I went to a neighboring community about 20 miles away I check the weather again and it gave me the new city's weather forecast.
There could potentially be plenty of services for this feature. Resturant suggestions, directions, movie times and ticket purchasing, event calendars, multiplayer gaming against locals and many more I can't think of. Most of these are still to come howerver.
Let's see if I can remember anything from my algorithms class.
How is this not O(n)?
Read on for an explanation. I do believe you gave the answer to your own question in your post. I will also assume that you understand "Big-O" notation well enough to follow the answer.
Each process still gets its time slice calcuated, it is removed from one queue, and inserted into another.
Correct. You've nailed it. Insertion into a Que operates in O(1) time. Removal from the Que is also a constant time algorithm. A Que inserts at the tail of the list (or the end of the array) and De-Ques from the Head of the list (or the beginning of the array). Ques do not permit searching, sorting or accessing the data after the first element.
If we De-Que a process, run it then calculate some information and Que it up that would run in O(c1*O(1)+c2*O(1)) = O(1).
This is still an oversimplification and does not take into account the possibility of a Priority Que in which insertion runs in O(lg n) and De-Queing runs in O(1). So a heap sort using a Priority Que runs in O(n*lg n).
Hope that helps.
104 97 32 104 97 13 10
Moron frogs.
I could have sworn that frogs were french.....
I just finished Stranger In a Strange Land and I think you are wrong. It does have an emotional grip. The entire first third or so of the book is about where Michael came from and how he escapes the clutches of an unruly corrupt world government.
While I haven't read any other Heinlein, I feel that Stranger is one of the stronger books I've ever read. I did think it wrapped up too quickly, but I felt that Michael was a great 3D character. When he finally laughs I got a huge smile on my face and became overjoyed.
I don't read very fast and usually can't read for great lengths of time however, this book held my attention for more time at a stretch than any since I read 1984. I think you may be influenced by not agreeing with the ideals presented in the book. I didn't agree with them, but I did think that it was interesting to see them wrapped up in that manner.
I'm not flaming (I hope), but your dismissal of Michael as a disinteresting character seems intellectually dishonest.
It has been in my mail client since.....10/13/2003. Mozilla Thunderbird has included a threaded view since at least 0.3.
View->Messages->Threaded
This seems like a no brainer. I've had it previously using other mail clients as well. I just thought this was a common feature.
One of the best word games of all time! It's been out of print for ages, but a new company has bought the rights and are now selling it in a nice tin package.
It's an excellent two player game, as each player always has something to do. However, we had luck playing as two teams of two over Thanksgiving.
Hopefully it should make it into the main XFree86 trunk soon...
Did anyone else fall out of their chairs laughing too? If MAS might make into XFree86 soon there wouldn't be a need for Xouvert.