Not near as bad as NetBSD's, I'll admit; but what IS IT with projects dumping perfectly fine logos and going with utter shite?
What does this have to do w/ OpenBSD, you ask?
on
OpenBSD 3.8 Released
·
· Score: 1
I'm assuming that if that's the case with NetBSD, it would be the same for OpenBSD as well (it seems that the order of application porting seems to be Linux or Windows first, then FreeBSD, then NetBSD, then finally OpenBSD).
I can't speak to OpenBSD, but with regards to NetBSD there really isn't VMWare or Qemu. I suppose technically you can get binaries for both; but VMWare is a nightmare to install under NetBSD and even then it only supports old versions (version 2 and 3, if I remember right) --good luck getting a license for those, btw-- and qemu lacks the kqemu module and that lack of functionality makes it almost as slow as bochs.
NetBSD might be ok for virtualisation if someone ports the kqemu module, which I hope they do, honestly. I like the OS -- but not when I need those specific apps.
The only interesting question is wether or not it's possible for a few enlightened city folk to turn the tide against the vast stretches of rural (and southern) faith-based ignorance.
I'm guessing the answer is 'no'. Given that's the case, is there any way to live with it? (again, I'm guessing 'no')
CBS, CNN and ABC News: Big media are lap dogs to the powers that be. To afraid to really speak out for fear of harming revenue, stock value, etc.
And that, as I'm sure you're aware, is precisely what scares Forbes and those of their class. Traditional journalism is a tamed parrot which only says what its' owners have trained it to say.
They needed be afraid though; history has shown that independent social movements and forms of communication remain independent for a very brief period of time before becoming absorbed into the tame and vapid mainstream of social thought and expression.
Blogs scare the societal elites now; but in five years from now they'll be just another corporate form of propaganda, pushing the sheeple in the direction which the top 1% want them to go.
That's a strawman argument. Since most of the books weren't part of the canon in the first place they don't count. That would be tantamount to saying that star wars is different because the fan-fiction doesn't match up to the movies. That's what the apocrypha is, in essence; the fan fiction of the bible.
My challenge is this: translations aside what of the original documents from antiquity is different from the later (medieval onward) copies of the original canonical books.
If you compare any of the canonical books in latin or greek or herbrew can you find discrepencies from the ages?
The original source books have remained unchanged throughout the millienia. I'm not a christian; but even that's a known fact. The jewish and other scholars were insanely anal about copying (partly because of mystical traits which many sects attributed to individual hebrew letters).
Jeez, pull the stick out. Wether it's GTA3, Doom or Custer's Revenge the appeal of anti-social games is simple: Catharsis. The whole idea isn't that you're doing things which you wish you could do; the idea is that you're getting an oppertunity to do things which you'd never do. It's closer to primal scream than anything else. But if you take gaming that seriously, maybe you should stick to mario 64.;)
I started with Peanut linux, I think; some damned umsdos install which came in lha format on a bunch of floppies. Much later, though; this was in 96.
I haven't dealt with modern slackware since 2000 when I started alternating between BSD and Debian, however. What's weird is that with the 10 series of slackware linux crashes trying to load my network card. Haven't really bothered about chasing down the cause since no other distros really have problems with it (most distros load it as 8139too, slackware's 8139too module crashes).
Device Logics/DR DOS is distributing kernel code written by someone else (Udo Kuunt) based on the original Open Dos source code. I am not sure what the legalese behind the original release of the OpenDOS kernel source code is, and I am not having much luck finding a copy of the license online; but for anyone whose interested, here's a timeline of recent DR DOS/Enhanced Dr DOS history to refer to.
Unless I read TFA wrong, the only way that FreeDOS enters into the picture is that two of the GNU programs distributed by their project is included (without source code availability) with "DR DOS 8.1". But the contention regarding the kernel code centers around what was released by Caldera and what license it was released under as well.
I haven't had my coffee yet, so I may be wrong; but here's what I understand of the issue:
1)OpenDOS is released circa 1996 by Caldera, with source code for the kernel included. Not sure under what license, but I don't think it was GNU/GPL (correct me if I'm wrong).
2)Someone starts independent work on the OpenDOS source code and creates several revisions. But relicenses under the GPL
3)A company named Device Logics comes along, buys the rights to DR-DOS from Lineo (who was split off from Caldera a couple of years before they became SCO) and releases a new version (8)
4)THe guy independently working on the kernel releases Fat32 inhancements, which are snatched (against the terms of teh GPL) by DR-DOS nee' Device Logics
5)According to the letter by Jim Hall ITFA they also distribute two FreeDOS programs without providing source (this is cut and dried; the maintainers of those programs clearly have a case there; but I'm mentioning this for completeness).
SOooooooo, what I wonder is this: if the Original IP belonged to Caldera (and now, through aquisition, DR-DOS inc) aren't they free to do with it -and with derived products as they see fit?
If TFA is true, I don't have a really high opinion of these guys (charging $45 for a couple of 3rd-party kernel inhancements and distributing GNU software illictly -without source); but look back at the original license for the kernel source and I bet you ten to one that there is a clause in there which allows this behavior by the owner of the DR DOS code base.
Anyone else having problems reaching major sites like google, yahoo and cnn? It seems like either a)my local net is fuXX0red or (since I'm hearing other people bitch about this) something's hinky with some major routers on the internet.
1)configuration: setting up the emulated kernel drivers is obscure, to be polite; personally speaking I've never managed to get them to work.
2)the port only lets you use select older versions of VMWare (versions 4 and 2, if I remember correctly); you can't simply download the latest (or even a decently recent) version of VMware, you have to use the one that is available with the ports -assuming, of course, that you have the appropriate version's license key (which, for the versions available through the pkgsrc/ports you can only get via warez channels).
I'm a huge fan of pkgsrc and BSD, but VMware is a case where (through no fault of the ports or pkgsrc folk) they just don't cut it.
>a) This free runtime would suck because it doesn't run a Plan 9 vm.
No, this no-cost (NOT 'free') runtime is less than optimal because it does not support older virtual machines which you can find out on the internet (Plan 9 was only an example; but basically VMWare 5 often has problems with running virtual OS installs created by older versions of VMWare)
>b) Since you guess VMware doesn't support freebsd, you recommend Qemu to run linux, freebsd and win*.
Since VMWare does not build a native binary for any platform other than Linux and Windows, I recommend using software which does run on other platforms (at least until the unlikely day I can download a native binary for FreeBSD which will run without Linux emulation) so that you have Virtual Machines which are ready to go in the event you install NetBSD or OSX or whatever.
That's the most interesting thing I've heard on this site in ages. Would you mind giving an example? Maybe tell us what you'd type into a vmdk file (viz-a-viz geometry) to refer to an 2 gigabyte file (which I assume you'd make with the dd line: "dd if=/dev/zero of=something-flat-vmdk obs=1M count=2000"?)?
By 'support' I meant that VMWare, Inc does not make a native binary which you can run on FreeBSD. They make binaries for Linux, and for Windows...if you run anything else, you either do without, or you use pkgsrc or FreeBSD ports (which uses a series of fairly crude hacks to get the Linux binary of an old version of VMWare to run on *BSD).
>but cost and closed source will limit them in the long run. However, litigation and software patents (VMWare has a shitload of patents) will be enough to ensure that they outlast their OSS competition (in the case of patents, will be the way in which they bury said competition).
Slashdot Mirror
Are you seriously going to tell us that Objective C/OpenStep IS?
What about it? Typing takes time once you reach a certain age!
Not near as bad as NetBSD's, I'll admit; but what IS IT with projects dumping perfectly fine logos and going with utter shite?
I'm assuming that if that's the case with NetBSD, it would be the same for OpenBSD as well (it seems that the order of application porting seems to be Linux or Windows first, then FreeBSD, then NetBSD, then finally OpenBSD).
I can't speak to OpenBSD, but with regards to NetBSD there really isn't VMWare or Qemu. I suppose technically you can get binaries for both; but VMWare is a nightmare to install under NetBSD and even then it only supports old versions (version 2 and 3, if I remember right) --good luck getting a license for those, btw-- and qemu lacks the kqemu module and that lack of functionality makes it almost as slow as bochs.
NetBSD might be ok for virtualisation if someone ports the kqemu module, which I hope they do, honestly. I like the OS -- but not when I need those specific apps.
Actually, it's more like "If you use windows, make sure you have the right ghost!"
I have to agree. I've managed to get 2.6 to work with ubuntu; but only after I chmod -x /etc/init.d/hotplug*.
Assuming they reach a point where 2.6 can play nice w/ hotplug, then I'll check it out again.
The only interesting question is wether or not it's possible for a few enlightened city folk to turn the tide against the vast stretches of rural (and southern) faith-based ignorance.
I'm guessing the answer is 'no'. Given that's the case, is there any way to live with it? (again, I'm guessing 'no')
CBS, CNN and ABC News: Big media are lap dogs to the powers that be. To afraid to really speak out for fear of harming revenue, stock value, etc.
And that, as I'm sure you're aware, is precisely what scares Forbes and those of their class. Traditional journalism is a tamed parrot which only says what its' owners have trained it to say.
They needed be afraid though; history has shown that independent social movements and forms of communication remain independent for a very brief period of time before becoming absorbed into the tame and vapid mainstream of social thought and expression.
Blogs scare the societal elites now; but in five years from now they'll be just another corporate form of propaganda, pushing the sheeple in the direction which the top 1% want them to go.
That's a strawman argument. Since most of the books weren't part of the canon in the first place they don't count. That would be tantamount to saying that star wars is different because the fan-fiction doesn't match up to the movies. That's what the apocrypha is, in essence; the fan fiction of the bible.
My challenge is this: translations aside what of the original documents from antiquity is different from the later (medieval onward) copies of the original canonical books.
If you compare any of the canonical books in latin or greek or herbrew can you find discrepencies from the ages?
The original source books have remained unchanged throughout the millienia. I'm not a christian; but even that's a known fact. The jewish and other scholars were insanely anal about copying (partly because of mystical traits which many sects attributed to individual hebrew letters).
Translated, yes; but can you show any tangible proof that it's been changed?
Jeez, pull the stick out. Wether it's GTA3, Doom or Custer's Revenge the appeal of anti-social games is simple: Catharsis. The whole idea isn't that you're doing things which you wish you could do; the idea is that you're getting an oppertunity to do things which you'd never do. It's closer to primal scream than anything else. But if you take gaming that seriously, maybe you should stick to mario 64. ;)
I started with Peanut linux, I think; some damned umsdos install which came in lha format on a bunch of floppies. Much later, though; this was in 96.
I haven't dealt with modern slackware since 2000 when I started alternating between BSD and Debian, however. What's weird is that with the 10 series of slackware linux crashes trying to load my network card. Haven't really bothered about chasing down the cause since no other distros really have problems with it (most distros load it as 8139too, slackware's 8139too module crashes).
Learn something new every day!
I have no idea which is funnier; the OP or the reactions of the humour impaired who responded to it as if it was serious!
Device Logics/DR DOS is distributing kernel code written by someone else (Udo Kuunt) based on the original Open Dos source code. I am not sure what the legalese behind the original release of the OpenDOS kernel source code is, and I am not having much luck finding a copy of the license online; but for anyone whose interested, here's a timeline of recent DR DOS/Enhanced Dr DOS history to refer to.
Unless I read TFA wrong, the only way that FreeDOS enters into the picture is that two of the GNU programs distributed by their project is included (without source code availability) with "DR DOS 8.1". But the contention regarding the kernel code centers around what was released by Caldera and what license it was released under as well.
I haven't had my coffee yet, so I may be wrong; but here's what I understand of the issue:
1)OpenDOS is released circa 1996 by Caldera, with source code for the kernel included. Not sure under what license, but I don't think it was GNU/GPL (correct me if I'm wrong).
2)Someone starts independent work on the OpenDOS source code and creates several revisions.
But relicenses under the GPL
3)A company named Device Logics comes along, buys the rights to DR-DOS from Lineo (who was split off from Caldera a couple of years before they became SCO) and releases a new version (8)
4)THe guy independently working on the kernel releases Fat32 inhancements, which are snatched (against the terms of teh GPL) by DR-DOS nee' Device Logics
5)According to the letter by Jim Hall ITFA they also distribute two FreeDOS programs without providing source (this is cut and dried; the maintainers of those programs clearly have a case there; but I'm mentioning this for completeness).
SOooooooo, what I wonder is this: if the Original IP belonged to Caldera (and now, through aquisition, DR-DOS inc) aren't they free to do with it -and with derived products as
they see fit?
If TFA is true, I don't have a really high opinion of these guys (charging $45 for a couple of 3rd-party kernel inhancements and distributing GNU software illictly -without source); but look back at the original license for the kernel source and I bet you ten to one that there is a clause in there which allows this behavior by the owner of the DR DOS code base.
Anyone else having problems reaching major sites like google, yahoo and cnn? It seems like either a)my local net is fuXX0red or (since I'm hearing other people bitch about this) something's hinky with some major routers on the internet.
IANAL, but I tend to doubt it, since Bell Labs, IBM and others have put VMware-made images onto the web.
There are two problems:
1)configuration: setting up the emulated kernel drivers is obscure, to be polite; personally speaking I've never managed to get them to work.
2)the port only lets you use select older versions of VMWare (versions 4 and 2, if I remember correctly); you can't simply download the latest (or even a decently recent) version of VMware, you have to use the one that is available with the ports -assuming, of course, that you have the appropriate version's license key (which, for the versions available through the pkgsrc/ports you can only get via warez channels).
I'm a huge fan of pkgsrc and BSD, but VMware is a case where (through no fault of the ports or pkgsrc folk) they just don't cut it.
I think I was quite clear in my post, actually:
>a) This free runtime would suck because it doesn't run a Plan 9 vm.
No, this no-cost (NOT 'free') runtime is less than optimal because it does not support older virtual machines which you can find out on the internet (Plan 9 was only an example; but basically VMWare 5 often has problems with running virtual OS installs created by older versions of VMWare)
>b) Since you guess VMware doesn't support freebsd, you recommend Qemu to run linux, freebsd and win*.
Since VMWare does not build a native binary for any platform other than Linux and Windows, I recommend using software which does run on other platforms (at least until the unlikely day I can download a native binary for FreeBSD which will run without Linux emulation) so that you have Virtual Machines which are ready to go in the event you install NetBSD or OSX or whatever.
I thought first you got the sugar?
That's the most interesting thing I've heard on this site in ages. Would you mind giving an example? Maybe tell us what you'd type into a vmdk file (viz-a-viz geometry) to refer to an 2 gigabyte file (which I assume you'd make with the dd line: "dd if=/dev/zero of=something-flat-vmdk obs=1M count=2000"?)?
By 'support' I meant that VMWare, Inc does not make a native binary which you can run on FreeBSD. They make binaries for Linux, and for Windows...if you run anything else, you either do without, or you use pkgsrc or FreeBSD ports (which uses a series of fairly crude hacks to get the Linux binary of an old version of VMWare to run on *BSD).
>but cost and closed source will limit them in the long run.
However, litigation and software patents (VMWare has a shitload of patents) will be enough to ensure that they outlast their OSS competition (in the case of patents, will be the way in which they bury said competition).