I don't see how *any* package management system can solve that problem. It's hard to implement "give me what I want" functionality. But apt-cache search does seach through descriptions, which helps if you have a vague idea of what you want and can supply keywords.
My gripe is that it doesn't say anything about the architecture of the application. It gives a nice application development stack, and shows how the interrelate nicely. But as far as the program itself is concerned, it doesn't say anything of significance. Where it says "High Level Application Code" is where the real architecture is located. To me, a diagram like this reeks of vapor. (not that the application itself is - it's just what the image conveys)
There's supposedly enough backwards compatibility in a high end itanium to run PA-RISC stuff. And HP has a good (perhaps not large, but certainly well paying) installed base for their HP-UX machines. Pushing itanium has the advantage of "providing" an upgrade path for all of them.
There's also a glide backend. And one of the links posted in another comment said that there's also a bare-bones opengl renderer, so it sounds like the whole thing's pretty well abstracted.
Um... no. HP does designs their own stuff. A printer (inkjet, anyway) is mostly just the head, which is part of the ink cartridge. They do TONS of research on that stuff, and they make them themselves. The case they slap it in and the feed mechanics may or may not be made in house, but that's not the important part. It's mostly cosmetics.
While I'm not a kernel hacker, I think I know why this happens.
As soon as you fill up physical memory, you're using swap space. The kernel will either swap other programs to disk to make room for yours, or it will swap parts of yours out that aren't being used. Either way, disk i/o is very expensive - hence the performance decrease. No kernel can help that, really. Once you're out of memory, you're out.
Woody has the package "kernel-image-2.4.xx". You can install it via apt. Be sure to follow the instructions though - they're ramdisk builds and a little wierd. Works fine for me though.
I've used MAX/MSP before, and it's one hell of a tool. I just couldn't wrap my mind around it enough to do anything useful with it in the time that I spent with it. (just a few weeks) It's like learning a new instrument, but instead it's a meta-instrument. Crazy stuff.
To some extent, you're right - the compiler and linker are indeed external programs. You can generate a Makefile and compile the whole thing outside the IDE, if you're so inclined.
But the real reason that windows programmers swear by MSDev is its wizard system. MFC, the Win32 API wrapper with which most C++ GUI apps are built, requires a great deal of black magic. It uses obscure, undocumented macros to implement critical functionality. The only way to really use MFC is through the wizards, which take care of the macros for you.
Another reason: the Win32 API and MFC are both far to complex to remember. Without MSDev's annoying-as-all-hell code completion, you'd spend even more time reading MSDocs(tm) than already.
Oh, how I wish I never had the occasion to learn these things.
2 grand really isn't that much for a library, especially a good one. That's rather cheap, really. Such toolkits aren't targeted at people, but at corportations, who have no problem spending that kind of money. Have you looked at LEADTools? A good redistribution licencse (that's for redistributing their DLLs) costs around $40,000. And people *gladly* pay it.
The trick with the red nipple is to set the tracking high enough and to be gentle - don't push down on it, just give it enough pressure to catch your finger on the rough surface. And when it wears down, replace the thing! Makes all the difference in the world.
Slashdot Mirror
http://nethack.org
I don't see how *any* package management system can solve that problem. It's hard to implement "give me what I want" functionality. But apt-cache search does seach through descriptions, which helps if you have a vague idea of what you want and can supply keywords.
> I'd also like to see a source compile option
> added. If apt was combined with Gentoo's
> emerge, Debian would be almost unstopable.
Check out apt-build. It does exactly what you think it does.
My gripe is that it doesn't say anything about the architecture of the application. It gives a nice application development stack, and shows how the interrelate nicely. But as far as the program itself is concerned, it doesn't say anything of significance. Where it says "High Level Application Code" is where the real architecture is located. To me, a diagram like this reeks of vapor. (not that the application itself is - it's just what the image conveys)
Check out the "Architecture" section - it has quite possibly the stupidest block diagram I've ever seen.
So what you're saying is that people buy products because of "a step up in stability."
Oooh! Shiny! *poing*
I want an automatic weapon for a paperweight! How cool would THAT be?!?!
Exactly. It stabilizes your system too.
There's supposedly enough backwards compatibility in a high end itanium to run PA-RISC stuff. And HP has a good (perhaps not large, but certainly well paying) installed base for their HP-UX machines. Pushing itanium has the advantage of "providing" an upgrade path for all of them.
There's also a glide backend. And one of the links posted in another comment said that there's also a bare-bones opengl renderer, so it sounds like the whole thing's pretty well abstracted.
> lazy open source driver authors with selfish
> attitudes
Um... what? Selfish people who write software for free? Huh?
*sigh*, feeding the trolls...
Use the i810 driver, especially in newer kernels. It used to have quality issues, but they may be fixed now. Me, I just bought a generic SB16.
That makes me hurt. Badly. ;)
Um... no. HP does designs their own stuff. A printer (inkjet, anyway) is mostly just the head, which is part of the ink cartridge. They do TONS of research on that stuff, and they make them themselves. The case they slap it in and the feed mechanics may or may not be made in house, but that's not the important part. It's mostly cosmetics.
While I'm not a kernel hacker, I think I know why this happens.
As soon as you fill up physical memory, you're using swap space. The kernel will either swap other programs to disk to make room for yours, or it will swap parts of yours out that aren't being used. Either way, disk i/o is very expensive - hence the performance decrease. No kernel can help that, really. Once you're out of memory, you're out.
Woody has the package "kernel-image-2.4.xx". You can install it via apt. Be sure to follow the instructions though - they're ramdisk builds and a little wierd. Works fine for me though.
I've used MAX/MSP before, and it's one hell of a tool. I just couldn't wrap my mind around it enough to do anything useful with it in the time that I spent with it. (just a few weeks) It's like learning a new instrument, but instead it's a meta-instrument. Crazy stuff.
I think they need to keep it polarized for it to work.
Dude, chess is pretty nerdy - I think that's the qualifier.
But the real reason that windows programmers swear by MSDev is its wizard system. MFC, the Win32 API wrapper with which most C++ GUI apps are built, requires a great deal of black magic. It uses obscure, undocumented macros to implement critical functionality. The only way to really use MFC is through the wizards, which take care of the macros for you.
Another reason: the Win32 API and MFC are both far to complex to remember. Without MSDev's annoying-as-all-hell code completion, you'd spend even more time reading MSDocs(tm) than already.
Oh, how I wish I never had the occasion to learn these things.
2 grand really isn't that much for a library, especially a good one. That's rather cheap, really. Such toolkits aren't targeted at people, but at corportations, who have no problem spending that kind of money. Have you looked at LEADTools? A good redistribution licencse (that's for redistributing their DLLs) costs around $40,000. And people *gladly* pay it.
even better - smart pants.
Are you advertising for these guys or something? Jeez.
I couldn't find them on IBM's own site. Also, there seems to be some mention of alternative trackpoint caps, but haven't found where to buy them.
The trick with the red nipple is to set the tracking high enough and to be gentle - don't push down on it, just give it enough pressure to catch your finger on the rough surface. And when it wears down, replace the thing! Makes all the difference in the world.