The latest 2.0 kernel is 2.0.39. It was released in 2001, years after the 2.2 kernel came out.
The latest 2.2 kernel is 2.2.25. It was released this march, years after the 2.4 kernel was released.
I don't see any reason to assume the same won't be true with the 2.4 series.
At my work, we are still running 2.2 systems. 2.4 kernels in our production system are a pretty recent occurance. I don't see us running 2.6 for quite a while, so it would be nice if 2.4 continue to run on new hardware as it comes out.
I mean, once you install a "server" operating system using a generic kernel, then go and recompile the kernel to include support for whatever hardware you have in your server.
What exactly is the purpose of hardware detection in this case? You won't be using X11, USB, or any of that stuff that needs to be "detected" on a server, and by installing Linux in the first place you accept the responsibility that you know what you are doing.
Not everyone uses linux for just servers. And even on servers, installing custom kernels doesn't scale well if you support a large number of machines of different types.
I love autodetection. I spent a lot of time setup Redhat kickstart installations that ended up being supported on a variety of hardware. Should a machine require manual work just because this particular machine included an intel NIC instead of a 3com?
I know what I'm doing. I can compile a custom kernel, but it might not be the best use of my time.
I might agree with this statement if you assume that "desktop linux" = "home linux".
Linux can currently work very well on corporate desktops where there is centralized management and clueful people in charge of selecting hardware that is supported.
The 64MB of memory might be the requirements for installing Fedora. The installer itself uses quite a bit of memory.
If you installed Fedora with 64MB of RAM in the machine, and then removed all but 8 or 16, the machine would most likely work in console mode, depending on what daemons you have running, and what apps you attempt to launch.
Isn't it just as obvious that 20 corporate lawyers against a single public defender simply ISN'T fair?
Public Defender?
I believe these are civil cases, not criminal, so I'm not certain that public defenders are even provided. If you don't have the money for a lawyer, good luck.
From what I've read in the past, it's legal, but it's a violation of your support contract to distribute the binary copies. So if you share the CDs, you're in breach of your support contract, and the support you already paid for is gone.
Using copied CDs should be perfectly fine, if you can find someone willing to risk their rather expensive support contract by providing them to you.
IDE was unstable/scary for most of the early 2.5 series. I believe it around around 2.5.40 or so when the IDE system changes were removed and things became usable again.
Well, as the letter states, the code was redudant as well. The functionality provided by the code was already available as a different function, so removing it was the right solution, public domain or not.
it's not too difficult to modify the source rpm to apply the patch, and then rebuild it. That's how I've been maintaining the legacy systems I've had to deal with.
As the article states, 45 states currently require that taxes be collected when a resident of that state purchases an item online.
The problem that they're trying to deal with here is that they have no way to force internet retailers to collect those taxes unless they are based in that state.
So if a MA resident buys something online from a company based in WA, the company in WA is required to collect taxes, but MA cannot do anything if they do not.
Pine/GnuPG ask me for a passphrase each time I encrypt and/or sign a message.
Actually, you're only prompted for a passphrase when signing an e-mail/file, not when you encrypt. If you're getting prompted for both, then you're most likely doing a sign/encrypt rather than just an encrypt.
Encrypting uses the public portion of the recipients key, which isn't passphrase protected.
This virus has it's own built in SMTP engine. I believe the thought is that it's going to be used as a worldwide network of open relays rather than collecting the e-mail addresses from the infected machines.
5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.
I see that as a good thing. What possible reason is there to have file and printer sharing open to the internet?
Ok, but where do you stop? Hey, why only close the affected ports, when you can close all unused ports? Then you can save yourself the hassle of the next exploit.
I'm guessing that was the thoughts behind one of the ISPs I deal with at work when they decided to lock down just about every TCP port (excluding 80 since these are webservers after all).
Imagine our dismay when we tried to ssh into these linux boxes, and found that port 22 was now filtered. But I suppose if there is ever an ssh worm, those machines are now safe.
I support linux desktops for a rather large group of people. The machines are shared, and often are often used by multiple people from day to day.
Currently, I have to limit the resolution to 1280x1024 on those machines. Anything higher than that, and a portion of the people have trouble reading the screen.
I personally run at 1600x1200 so I can fit more on the screen. Some people like lower resolutions. Now I can setup a single desktop machine that can do any resolution, and will in fact automatically save the users preferences.
And yes, I realize that X supported changing the resolutions previously, but I don't know many people who like dealing with a virtual desktop larger than the actual resolution of the screen. Being able to automatically resize the desktop with the resolution is something I've been waiting for for a long time.
I mean unless you're talking purely publishing type people who have only ever used a Mac, that's not a bad achievement to find people WITH computer skills who have never been near Windows or Linux!
They didn't say never been near windows. They said no prior experience with Windows XP. There are plenty of versions of Windows before XP.
There's just one slight problem with this theory. Too many of them run the same exact software.
For example, a few months ago there was a named resolver bug. Another bug like that would most likely have affected Redhat, SuSE, Debian, Mandrake, *BSD, probably OS X, and most likely some of your "others".
Perhaps the different update methods would have helped though.
That discusses the code under the NDA. I thought I had read at one point that they would release some of the code to the general public. (probably a small piece)
Actually, I thought the whole point of the lawsuit was that they had been trying to negotiate with IBM, but the negotiations brokedown.
Negotiations there should be read as "blackmail".
As I recall SCO basically demanded 1 Billion dollars from IBM, or they would cancel IBM's license to distribute AIX. Not much of a negotiation.
On a side note, didn't SCO promise to actually show some of the infringing code to the public sometime in July? I tried searching for the story, but there have been too damn many SCO stories.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, color me wrong. Looks like there won't be any additions to 2.4 besides security updates after 2.4.24. ::Sigh::
The latest 2.0 kernel is 2.0.39. It was released in 2001, years after the 2.2 kernel came out.
The latest 2.2 kernel is 2.2.25. It was released this march, years after the 2.4 kernel was released.
I don't see any reason to assume the same won't be true with the 2.4 series.
At my work, we are still running 2.2 systems. 2.4 kernels in our production system are a pretty recent occurance. I don't see us running 2.6 for quite a while, so it would be nice if 2.4 continue to run on new hardware as it comes out.
I mean, once you install a "server" operating system using a generic kernel, then go and recompile the kernel to include support for whatever hardware you have in your server.
What exactly is the purpose of hardware detection in this case? You won't be using X11, USB, or any of that stuff that needs to be "detected" on a server, and by installing Linux in the first place you accept the responsibility that you know what you are doing.
Not everyone uses linux for just servers. And even on servers, installing custom kernels doesn't scale well if you support a large number of machines of different types.
I love autodetection. I spent a lot of time setup Redhat kickstart installations that ended up being supported on a variety of hardware. Should a machine require manual work just because this particular machine included an intel NIC instead of a 3com?
I know what I'm doing. I can compile a custom kernel, but it might not be the best use of my time.
I might agree with this statement if you assume that "desktop linux" = "home linux".
Linux can currently work very well on corporate desktops where there is centralized management and clueful people in charge of selecting hardware that is supported.
The 64MB of memory might be the requirements for installing Fedora. The installer itself uses quite a bit of memory.
If you installed Fedora with 64MB of RAM in the machine, and then removed all but 8 or 16, the machine would most likely work in console mode, depending on what daemons you have running, and what apps you attempt to launch.
Isn't it just as obvious that 20 corporate lawyers against a single public defender simply ISN'T fair?
Public Defender?
I believe these are civil cases, not criminal, so I'm not certain that public defenders are even provided. If you don't have the money for a lawyer, good luck.
From what I've read in the past, it's legal, but it's a violation of your support contract to distribute the binary copies. So if you share the CDs, you're in breach of your support contract, and the support you already paid for is gone.
Using copied CDs should be perfectly fine, if you can find someone willing to risk their rather expensive support contract by providing them to you.
As long as you didn't need IDE anyways.
IDE was unstable/scary for most of the early 2.5 series. I believe it around around 2.5.40 or so when the IDE system changes were removed and things became usable again.
Well, as the letter states, the code was redudant as well. The functionality provided by the code was already available as a different function, so removing it was the right solution, public domain or not.
it's not too difficult to modify the source rpm to apply the patch, and then rebuild it. That's how I've been maintaining the legacy systems I've had to deal with.
As the article states, 45 states currently require that taxes be collected when a resident of that state purchases an item online.
The problem that they're trying to deal with here is that they have no way to force internet retailers to collect those taxes unless they are based in that state.
So if a MA resident buys something online from a company based in WA, the company in WA is required to collect taxes, but MA cannot do anything if they do not.
Pine/GnuPG ask me for a passphrase each time I encrypt and/or sign a message.
Actually, you're only prompted for a passphrase when signing an e-mail/file, not when you encrypt. If you're getting prompted for both, then you're most likely doing a sign/encrypt rather than just an encrypt.
Encrypting uses the public portion of the recipients key, which isn't passphrase protected.
I seem to recall some 500,000 servers being compromised by a worm last month. Do they only count attacks by people?
Pointy-Haired Boss. it's a dilbert reference.
This virus has it's own built in SMTP engine. I believe the thought is that it's going to be used as a worldwide network of open relays rather than collecting the e-mail addresses from the infected machines.
Although hey, free e-mail addresses.
I believe this is what you're talking about:
5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or
distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it.
I see that as a good thing. What possible reason is there to have file and printer sharing open to the internet?
Ok, but where do you stop? Hey, why only close the affected ports, when you can close all unused ports? Then you can save yourself the hassle of the next exploit.
I'm guessing that was the thoughts behind one of the ISPs I deal with at work when they decided to lock down just about every TCP port (excluding 80 since these are webservers after all).
Imagine our dismay when we tried to ssh into these linux boxes, and found that port 22 was now filtered. But I suppose if there is ever an ssh worm, those machines are now safe.
We don't yet have a theory of gravity that works for the galaxy, or fits with electromagnetic and nuclear forces.
Don't worry... I'm on it.
I support linux desktops for a rather large group of people. The machines are shared, and often are often used by multiple people from day to day.
Currently, I have to limit the resolution to 1280x1024 on those machines. Anything higher than that, and a portion of the people have trouble reading the screen.
I personally run at 1600x1200 so I can fit more on the screen. Some people like lower resolutions. Now I can setup a single desktop machine that can do any resolution, and will in fact automatically save the users preferences.
And yes, I realize that X supported changing the resolutions previously, but I don't know many people who like dealing with a virtual desktop larger than the actual resolution of the screen. Being able to automatically resize the desktop with the resolution is something I've been waiting for for a long time.
I mean unless you're talking purely publishing type people who have only ever used a Mac, that's not a bad achievement to find people WITH computer skills who have never been near Windows or Linux!
They didn't say never been near windows. They said no prior experience with Windows XP. There are plenty of versions of Windows before XP.
There's just one slight problem with this theory. Too many of them run the same exact software.
For example, a few months ago there was a named resolver bug. Another bug like that would most likely have affected Redhat, SuSE, Debian, Mandrake, *BSD, probably OS X, and most likely some of your "others".
Perhaps the different update methods would have helped though.
Hm. Speaking of X-Boxes, they run a variant of the Win2k kernel. Are they vulnerable to this?
And don't forget the . between kernel and org.
That discusses the code under the NDA. I thought I had read at one point that they would release some of the code to the general public. (probably a small piece)
Actually, I thought the whole point of the
lawsuit was that they had been trying to negotiate
with IBM, but the negotiations brokedown.
Negotiations there should be read as "blackmail".
As I recall SCO basically demanded 1 Billion dollars from IBM, or they would cancel IBM's license to distribute AIX. Not much of a negotiation.
On a side note, didn't SCO promise to actually show some of the infringing code to the public sometime in July? I tried searching for the story, but there have been too damn many SCO stories.