This is exactly the thing I'm afraid of. I think Microsoft's future FUD factory will be pointed square at pointy-hair types. Microsoft would love a future where everyone has to run NT because the pointy-hair bosses make them. The problem with Linux (or anything, for that matter) is if someone tries it once and if turned off to it (for whatever reason), they probably will never go back to it; hell, they'll probably avoid it.
The thing that could hurt Linux the most right now is if everyone pushed Linux really hard now, especially for desktops. Then all of the pointy-hair bosses (as well as Joe Shmoe Window User) try Linux and decide that they don't like it because of.... (whatever reason). Then they never go back to it again.
> Really? When they tought me about graphs in high school they said the break symbol was required.
Well, when I took math in college, the prof said that all graphs are arbitrary anyway. Starting at 0 is a convention, and a good one at that, but not absolutely required. As a matter of fact, the prof also mentioned that in the topology class, they also throw out the convention of straight graph axises and learned how to do "normal" math on weird graphs. I suspect that your high school teacher probably made that rule to instill in you a respect for convention as well as to lessen the time he/she spent on grading homework.
I think an Xterm would fit into that paradigm. Imagine a cube, with an xterm on each side. You could have it spinning slowly, for instance, with a top running in each (if you watch many machines). You could probably have it timed so that top's update occurs just as that face is coming into view.
If you want only one Xterm, then imagine if your conventional xterm has depth, so that you could turn it sideways (kind of like a shade feature but going left to right instead of up to down). It would look cool with the change in colors, shadows, and all.
I agree, it would be an interesting field to research (including playing with the monstrous hardware it takes to do these 3d tricks).
I've wondered, why always su to root instead of logging in? I understand the part about ssh'ing from a trusted machine or on the console, but I never got why you'd go through two layers of security if you have to type in root's password anyway (at su's prompt).
I think they mean that it sucked compared to, say, Empire Strikes Back and definitely sucked compared to what they anticipated due to the heaping mounds of hype. It's probably still a generally good movie and they want to catch all the details, just don't buy into the hype, is all.
I think a journaling filesystem is one where it keeps a journal of what, when, and where it is writing data, between the time it schedules it to be written and the time it is actually written. That way, if a system crashes, the filesystem can look at the journal and continue where it left off, not losing any data. A non-journaling filesystem schedules stuff to be written, then acts as if the write has happened. This works ok, until the system crashes. If a write was pending when the system crashed, that data is lost.
My highest was around 120 on Linux on a dual 233 machine, our news server. This was all disk I/O though... I was making INN cycbuffs (dd if=/dev/zero of=./buffer1 bs=1k count=500000) * (64 cycbuffs), set them all up and let the machine whirr for a hour or so. The system just kept chugging along til it got done. Granted, this is not an everyday experience, but it was interesting nonetheless.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really that long ago.
Actually, Linux has been around for 8 or 9 (not counting the fact that it is based off of Unix, which is much older).
This is exactly the thing I'm afraid of. I think Microsoft's future FUD factory will be pointed square at pointy-hair types. Microsoft would love a future where everyone has to run NT because the pointy-hair bosses make them. The problem with Linux (or anything, for that matter) is if someone tries it once and if turned off to it (for whatever reason), they probably will never go back to it; hell, they'll probably avoid it.
.... (whatever reason). Then they never go back to it again.
The thing that could hurt Linux the most right now is if everyone pushed Linux really hard now, especially for desktops. Then all of the pointy-hair bosses (as well as Joe Shmoe Window User) try Linux and decide that they don't like it because of
> Really? When they tought me about graphs in high school they said the break symbol was required.
Well, when I took math in college, the prof said that all graphs are arbitrary anyway. Starting at 0 is a convention, and a good one at that, but not absolutely required. As a matter of fact, the prof also mentioned that in the topology class, they also throw out the convention of straight graph axises and learned how to do "normal" math on weird graphs. I suspect that your high school teacher probably made that rule to instill in you a respect for convention as well as to lessen the time he/she spent on grading homework.
Of course, you know, in the stories the prince always comes and it always ends "They lived happily ever after."
Debian (potato at least, not sure about slink) can install using apt, which means via FTP or HTTP.
Stampede will have an FTP install; I'm just not sure if they've written that part of the install script yet.
Slackware does NFS installs, and you've already said - RedHat does FTP.
I think an Xterm would fit into that paradigm. Imagine a cube, with an xterm on each side. You could have it spinning slowly, for instance, with a top running in each (if you watch many machines). You could probably have it timed so that top's update occurs just as that face is coming into view.
If you want only one Xterm, then imagine if your conventional xterm has depth, so that you could turn it sideways (kind of like a shade feature but going left to right instead of up to down). It would look cool with the change in colors, shadows, and all.
I agree, it would be an interesting field to research (including playing with the monstrous hardware it takes to do these 3d tricks).
I've wondered, why always su to root instead of logging in? I understand the part about ssh'ing from a trusted machine or on the console, but I never got why you'd go through two layers of security if you have to type in root's password anyway (at su's prompt).
Disclaimer: I haven't seen it yet...
I think they mean that it sucked compared to, say, Empire Strikes Back and definitely sucked compared to what they anticipated due to the heaping mounds of hype. It's probably still a generally good movie and they want to catch all the details, just don't buy into the hype, is all.
Disclaimer: I'm not a fs guru, but...
I think a journaling filesystem is one where it keeps a journal of what, when, and where it is writing data, between the time it schedules it to be written and the time it is actually written. That way, if a system crashes, the filesystem can look at the journal and continue where it left off, not losing any data. A non-journaling filesystem schedules stuff to be written, then acts as if the write has happened. This works ok, until the system crashes. If a write was pending when the system crashed, that data is lost.
My highest was around 120 on Linux on a dual 233 machine, our news server. This was all disk I/O though ... I was making INN cycbuffs (dd if=/dev/zero of=./buffer1 bs=1k count=500000) * (64 cycbuffs), set them all up and let the machine whirr for a hour or so. The system just kept chugging along til it got done. Granted, this is not an everyday experience, but it was interesting nonetheless.