I don't think that is what Debian is meant to be, but that is what it is actually used for. And this has become kind of rationalization for slow infrequent releases.
Most web polls I have seen are completely useless for serious decisions. If 400 users want this feature and 300 users want that feature, what difference does it make? It is easy to request features, but what is much more important is to have the right direction. What do users really want? What is most important? What tasks are most common? What must be easy, what can be made harder?
I think of these tests you get to do at certain job interviews. One question has four options, and you have to decide which statement you agree most with, and which statement you agree least with. And there are many of these questions, and the options are shuffled around to weigh each option against all others
"I think writing email is most important", "I think printing letters on paper is least important", "I think boot time is most important", "I subscribing to RSS feeds is least important".
If such a poll was done right, Gnome people could know if their current direction is aligned with their users opinion. And the other way around.
Take a look at the keyboard - finally a keyboard at a PDA-size device that includes keys for international characters. It takes germans to understand that some alphabets are longer than a-z!
It is as easy as this article describes. It is in Swedish, but the pictures are interesting for everyone. The woman in the article invented a process to create fake finger prints that can be attaced at fingers. She lifted them from ordinary objects, just like the police do. She then went to CeBit to test them at commercial fingerprint readers. She could fool at least three of them.
Let's be realistic. 99.99 % if the time means one in 10000 boots, if you boot every day, it would take you close to 30 years before you install new hardware.
I think this was the most insightful comment on FOSS interoperability I have read in a long long time. It is refreshing to read an opinion that does not focus on language and toolkit differences. Even though - the suggestion for projects to develop sharable building blocks in the form of reusable APIs is very good. I think that is a slow, but certain way to increase interoperability over time - between the subset of applications developed with the same language.
If these APIs then work against common specifications, such as SVG or something that is developed together between several projects, a lot is gained.
It is more important to have applications sharing common patterns of usage than sharing the same toolkits. Keyboard shortcuts is an excellent example of something that can be shared independently of the programming language. Fonts, icons and color themes as well. I believe "consistency" in the form of sharing a common toolkit, is not the holy grail.
Compare with the web - there are thousands, if not millions, of online retailers. Most of the webshops share common usage patterns. Most have shopping baskets, which you can add items to by clickling a button. The buttons for adding things to the basket do not look the same beween sites, and neither does the shopping basket icons, yet millions of people manage to buy things online.
I ran Debian for a year or two around 1999-2000. I liked many parts of it, but over time I got frustrated of following its progress since it was so slow. I have followed several Debian project leader elections over the years, at a distance, by reading the candidate's programs, and no matter who is elected, the slow progress continues. I must say - what difference do they really make? I understand that there could be lots of important stuff being done in the background, but my impression of Debian is that it is a stagnating distribution. Very conservative, moving very slowly. This can be good, but I think also it is dangerous.
Can someone mention the three most positive things going on in the Debian community right now. What will Debian bring in the near future? What makes Debian of today different compared with Debian three years ago?
True - but what is meant with distribution? For example, if I develop a program with Qt, email a binary and the source to my colleague that is going to install it on other computers within our organization, can he then take the source and distribute it further, outside of the organization. Can I bring the code I developed with me when I quit?
Yes, but your native language is english, right? It makes more sense then. Would you like it if the first 10 hits were in spanish and german if you searched for "google"?
I am hijacking this thread because a sudden to ask the Slashdot readership the following:
What really interesting framework / infrastructure projects are currently going on in the Linux world? I don't think there is much interesting progress anymore.
HAL and DBUS are two interesting projects - they are building something new to solve integration of hardware management in a non-hackish way. But what is KDE doing? Refining the framework, adding small, specialized features, but I can't see any real inventions coming along. A small feature here, a small feature there About Gnome, I can't say, don't know it enough. Beagle seems interesting but will it be a standalone, nonintegrated application, or will it blend in to the GNU/Linux infrastructure, making its indexes useful at the commandline as well as on the desktop? Will it be infrastructure, or will it be just another application on Freshmeat?
The configuration nightmare - there seems to be no progress. X.org - what is really happening over there, the future seems very far away. The linux kernel - what new developments are _really_ interesting, from a pure user perspective? Native Java - is it reasonable to believe it will make real inroads in major distributions soon - can we expect it to be fully accepted, and part of the core? Mono - could be promising, but seems still not mature.
Sorry for the hijacking, but I think a discussion about this is far more interesting than grafology about with Bill Gates.
Can someone Mac-knowledgable answer these questions. I imagine this could be used as a media terminal in my living room. Apple sells DVI-to-video converters which should make the video output viewable on my TV. Lets play with the idea that I add connect the headphone jack to my hifi amplifier and add the bluetooth option so I can control the mouse pointer with my mobile phone (works well even in Linux btw). Can I in Mac OSX adjust font sizes, icon sizes and stuff enough to the OS usable on a TV, using my phone as the mouse? Mac should already be one-click-optimized and so on, right? What problems and obstacles do you predict?
Of course the spammer did do wrong. I know this exact case, the child was found on the internet by his aunt, who saw the picture on the hospital web page. You only identified him since he was in the media already, because of these lucky circumstances. This was one of the "miracle stories" that media reported about, to have something good to write in days of absolute horror.
I am really sceptical to the reasoning here. Reasons for a chip to fail a test can be many, a chip that fails a test for a certain clock speed can have other defects as well. Costs for testing, eventually modifying it, and relabelling at a lower clock speed sounds more expensive than actually discarding the chip. No poster in this thread have provided any references to back up their claims and I believe what I see here is propagation of hearsay. For some electrical components such as displays this makes sense - but for advanced CPU's? Please someone, post links.
Slashdot Mirror
I can bet this is over a year away, in regular Linux distribtions too. And just as likely, can Microsoft show something like this in their lab...
I don't think that is what Debian is meant to be, but that is what it is actually used for. And this has become kind of rationalization for slow infrequent releases.
That proves that this question is bad. Both answers are correct, depending on who you ask, right?
XML is better than ini file format when expressing hierarchies, but your example does not illustrate that
mkdir -p
chmod --reference=/tmp
mount --bind
mkdir -p
chmod --reference=/log
mount --bind
mkdir -p
chmod --reference=/var/run
mount --bind
mkdir -p
chmod --reference=/var/spool/fcron
mount --bind
#Need to create certain dirs...
mkdir
mkdir -p
mkdir -p
mkdir -p
And the following in the end
Most web polls I have seen are completely useless for serious decisions. If 400 users want this feature and 300 users want that feature, what difference does it make? It is easy to request features, but what is much more important is to have the right direction. What do users really want? What is most important? What tasks are most common? What must be easy, what can be made harder?
I think of these tests you get to do at certain job interviews. One question has four options, and you have to decide which statement you agree most with, and which statement you agree least with. And there are many of these questions, and the options are shuffled around to weigh each option against all others
"I think writing email is most important", "I think printing letters on paper is least important", "I think boot time is most important", "I subscribing to RSS feeds is least important".
If such a poll was done right, Gnome people could know if their current direction is aligned with their users opinion. And the other way around.
Please elaborate and describe these "few checks".
Take a look at the keyboard - finally a keyboard at a PDA-size device that includes keys for international characters. It takes germans to understand that some alphabets are longer than a-z!
Are there any reports from XDevConf on the net yet?
Of course I have. And I don't create as ridiculous classpaths as you do. Check manifest classpaths sometime.
`mono program.exe' runs your program, no need to
pass a class name, or a path or setup the cp to
run.
'java -jar program.jar' would be the Java equivalent.
The layout of my files is not constrained to
one-file, one-class and the file system hierarchy
does not have to match the namespaces I have
chosen.
one-file - one-class is not neccessary with Java either, although I guess you are somewhat more restricted than in C# (which I don't know well)
It is as easy as this article describes. It is in Swedish, but the pictures are interesting for everyone. The woman in the article invented a process to create fake finger prints that can be attaced at fingers. She lifted them from ordinary objects, just like the police do. She then went to CeBit to test them at commercial fingerprint readers. She could fool at least three of them.
http://nyteknik.se/art/37392
Let's be realistic. 99.99 % if the time means one in 10000 boots, if you boot every day, it would take you close to 30 years before you install new hardware.
I remember this logo. I thought it looked pretty damn good.
I think this was the most insightful comment on FOSS interoperability I have read in a long long time. It is refreshing to read an opinion that does not focus on language and toolkit differences. Even though - the suggestion for projects to develop sharable building blocks in the form of reusable APIs is very good. I think that is a slow, but certain way to increase interoperability over time - between the subset of applications developed with the same language.
If these APIs then work against common specifications, such as SVG or something that is developed together between several projects, a lot is gained.
It is more important to have applications sharing common patterns of usage than sharing the same toolkits. Keyboard shortcuts is an excellent example of something that can be shared independently of the programming language. Fonts, icons and color themes as well. I believe "consistency" in the form of sharing a common toolkit, is not the holy grail.
Compare with the web - there are thousands, if not millions, of online retailers. Most of the webshops share common usage patterns. Most have shopping baskets, which you can add items to by clickling a button. The buttons for adding things to the basket do not look the same beween sites, and neither does the shopping basket icons, yet millions of people manage to buy things online.
I ran Debian for a year or two around 1999-2000. I liked many parts of it, but over time I got frustrated of following its progress since it was so slow. I have followed several Debian project leader elections over the years, at a distance, by reading the candidate's programs, and no matter who is elected, the slow progress continues. I must say - what difference do they really make? I understand that there could be lots of important stuff being done in the background, but my impression of Debian is that it is a stagnating distribution. Very conservative, moving very slowly. This can be good, but I think also it is dangerous.
Can someone mention the three most positive things going on in the Debian community right now. What will Debian bring in the near future? What makes Debian of today different compared with Debian three years ago?
True - but what is meant with distribution? For example, if I develop a program with Qt, email a binary and the source to my colleague that is going to install it on other computers within our organization, can he then take the source and distribute it further, outside of the organization. Can I bring the code I developed with me when I quit?
Yes, but your native language is english, right? It makes more sense then. Would you like it if the first 10 hits were in spanish and german if you searched for "google"?
I am hijacking this thread because a sudden to ask the Slashdot readership the following:
What really interesting framework / infrastructure projects are currently going on in the Linux world? I don't think there is much interesting progress anymore.
HAL and DBUS are two interesting projects - they are building something new to solve integration of hardware management in a non-hackish way. But what is KDE doing? Refining the framework, adding small, specialized features, but I can't see any real inventions coming along. A small feature here, a small feature there About Gnome, I can't say, don't know it enough. Beagle seems interesting but will it be a standalone, nonintegrated application, or will it blend in to the GNU/Linux infrastructure, making its indexes useful at the commandline as well as on the desktop? Will it be infrastructure, or will it be just another application on Freshmeat?
The configuration nightmare - there seems to be no progress. X.org - what is really happening over there, the future seems very far away. The linux kernel - what new developments are _really_ interesting, from a pure user perspective? Native Java - is it reasonable to believe it will make real inroads in major distributions soon - can we expect it to be fully accepted, and part of the core? Mono - could be promising, but seems still not mature.
Sorry for the hijacking, but I think a discussion about this is far more interesting than grafology about with Bill Gates.
What does Ipods have to do with this? Oh yes, this is Slashdot, of course...
You are complaining about nothing. Cellular phones are already incredible cheap, that is why billions of people can afford them.
I would call that stealing, except I wont because that will start a whole other thread thelling me that information cannot be stolen.
Too late! In that case Google is the bigger thief with all the cached content it has stored and provides through its own servers.
Can someone Mac-knowledgable answer these questions. I imagine this could be used as a media terminal in my living room. Apple sells DVI-to-video converters which should make the video output viewable on my TV. Lets play with the idea that I add connect the headphone jack to my hifi amplifier and add the bluetooth option so I can control the mouse pointer with my mobile phone (works well even in Linux btw). Can I in Mac OSX adjust font sizes, icon sizes and stuff enough to the OS usable on a TV, using my phone as the mouse? Mac should already be one-click-optimized and so on, right? What problems and obstacles do you predict?
Of course the spammer did do wrong. I know this exact case, the child was found on the internet by his aunt, who saw the picture on the hospital web page. You only identified him since he was in the media already, because of these lucky circumstances. This was one of the "miracle stories" that media reported about, to have something good to write in days of absolute horror.
I am really sceptical to the reasoning here. Reasons for a chip to fail a test can be many, a chip that fails a test for a certain clock speed can have other defects as well. Costs for testing, eventually modifying it, and relabelling at a lower clock speed sounds more expensive than actually discarding the chip. No poster in this thread have provided any references to back up their claims and I believe what I see here is propagation of hearsay. For some electrical components such as displays this makes sense - but for advanced CPU's? Please someone, post links.