It's not so much apt-get as the vast number of really good packages. If you want to install something, you're far more likely to find it packaged and packaged well on debian than on redhat.
Debian stable is too old for servers these days. Having to build a custom kernel on another machine and stick it on a CD just so debian can see an Intel network card is ridiculous.
The last straw for me with Debian stable, even for server use, was when I installed Debian stable on a server only to find that the network card wasn't recognised. And I'd have to compile a kernel on another machine, burn it to a CD, and copy it onto the server before I could see the network.
The network card was from that minority manufacturer, Intel.
The trouble is, observation shows that most companies don't actually *want* to produce the best possible product, and will actually penalise developers who have that as a goal...
has anyone else noticed that the mail for openoffice.org seems misconfigured:
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. The following address(es) failed:
discuss-subscribe@openoffice.org:
all relevant MX records point to non-existent hosts:
it appears that the DNS operator for this domain has installed an invalid MX
+record with an IP address instead of a domain name on the right hand side
I'd mail them and tell them... except obviously I can't.
I get the impression that it _should_, but that people are finding that they're better at guessing what should be kept in memory than the caching algorithms...
There are some lovely programs out there which will clean up tmpfiles that are old enough (for clean up, read 'delete'). Having this happen a few times hammers the meaning of _temporary_ into people.
The assumption that dial-up BBS stuff has gone away is a mistake. I still get my mail and news these days from what is basically a fidonet system, and I find it a significantly better service than using one of the big ISPs.
Agreed. Free software is good. However, I don't think licenses like 'free -- if you use it with linux' are as free as I'd like... Linux is nice, but it's not some kind of magical special case...
Hmm, I've possibly got hold of the wrong end of the stick. I've sure I've heard that position from some of the more enthusiastic GNU supporters, but I hadn't actually looked into exactly where it's coming from. Anyone else had that idea, and did you get it direct from the FSF, or was it just a general impression?
Even with a BSD license, the code isn't really locked up -- no free code release can ever become non-free -- at worst, someone else can release a new version under a new license -- I've never been able to see how the software suddenly becomes no longer free when this is done...
I've seen a lot of people talk about doing something about this but not much action - I can't do much myself due to the joys of impending finals, but I do have time for one thing - if anyone's interested in a mailing list to discuss all this and plan a movement/church/web site/whatever I'll setup a mailing list (I'm talking peaceful action here folks, not mass murder, just in case that's unclear). Mail michael@etla.org if you're interested.
Slashdot Mirror
They use more bandwidth, and thus get charged more! Simples.
Yeah, you don't see them often.
I agree, I can't see what the difference is between this and CSRF.
It's not so much apt-get as the vast number of really good packages. If you want to install something, you're far more likely to find it packaged and packaged well on debian than on redhat.
Debian stable is too old for servers these days. Having to build a custom kernel on another machine and stick it on a CD just so debian can see an Intel network card is ridiculous.
The last straw for me with Debian stable, even for server use, was when I installed Debian stable on a server only to find that the network card wasn't recognised. And I'd have to compile a kernel on another machine, burn it to a CD, and copy it onto the server before I could see the network.
The network card was from that minority manufacturer, Intel.
So you want them to put effort in to deal with
your own problems?
The trouble is, observation shows that most companies don't actually *want* to produce the best possible product, and will actually penalise developers who have that as a goal...
has anyone else noticed that the mail for openoffice.org seems misconfigured:
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. The following address(es) failed: discuss-subscribe@openoffice.org: all relevant MX records point to non-existent hosts: it appears that the DNS operator for this domain has installed an invalid MX +record with an IP address instead of a domain name on the right hand sideI'd mail them and tell them... except obviously I can't.
Aargh!
It's *effect*, not *affect*.
I get the impression that it _should_, but that people are finding that they're better at guessing what should be kept in memory than the caching algorithms...
There are some lovely programs out there which will clean up tmpfiles that are old enough (for clean up, read 'delete'). Having this happen a few times hammers the meaning of _temporary_ into people.
Michael.
BSD is cool because it does some things in a way I prefer to the linux way. Linux does some things I prefer to the BSD way.
I think both sides could benefit from looking more closely at the best of what 'the competition' has to offer.
Gonna be damn expensive in most european countries, where we almost always have to pay by the minute for dialup calls.
The assumption that dial-up BBS stuff has gone away is a mistake. I still get my mail and news these days from what is basically a fidonet system, and I find it a significantly better service than using one of the big ISPs.
I agree. I find it deeply offensive and hurtful. It has caused me significant emotional distress. Please remove it at once.
Agreed. Free software is good. However, I don't think licenses like 'free -- if you use it with linux' are as free as I'd like... Linux is nice, but it's not some kind of magical special case...
Hmm, I've possibly got hold of the wrong end of
the stick. I've sure I've heard that position
from some of the more enthusiastic GNU supporters,
but I hadn't actually looked into exactly where it's coming from. Anyone else had that idea, and did you get it direct from the FSF, or was it just a general impression?
Even with a BSD license, the code isn't really
locked up -- no free code release can ever become
non-free -- at worst, someone else can release a new version under a new license -- I've never been able to see how the software suddenly becomes no longer free when this is done...
The FSF seem to think GNU free is the only true form of free software. I don't think that way, but I believe that's their opinion...
Maybe Richard Stallman was right in insisting
that the only true free software was under
the GPL?
We should start projects to recreate all
partially free software in GPL or BSD licensed
form, and _keep_ it that way.
I've seen a lot of people talk about doing something about this but not much action - I can't do much myself due to the joys of impending finals, but I do have time for one thing - if anyone's interested in a mailing list to discuss all this and plan a movement/church/web site/whatever I'll setup a mailing list (I'm talking peaceful action here folks, not mass murder, just in case that's unclear).
Mail michael@etla.org if you're interested.