It shows.
You don't put those thinks in the kernel, you put them in the *shell*.
That is how Windows does it.
The difference is that Windows uses many of the Explorer routines internally, so when you log on, you've it working already, so what is needed is just to load a seperate window/process, and not to wait for all the libraries to load.
So is the ability to run code, you know.
Being able to script the OS is a good advantage, it can be misused, naturally.
Want to hear about the VIM vulnerability that allows an attacker to run code of his choosing on the user's computer?
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/other_ad vi sory-1251.html
You didn't hear about it because nobody send vim documents in large enough quanteties to make this a viable way for a virus.
I Love You vbs is no different than a user openning an exectuable. (Hell, vbs files *are* executables, in Windows)
Who is to blame here? The scripttable OS, or the user for opening a file?
How about linux's scripts? They may not have the same power as VBS, but they can certainly be as distructive.
Does linux's bash scripts, frex, are an extreme and unneccessary security risk?
I would second that point, especially about getting help.
In chat rooms, newsgroups, and RL, asking a Linux guy a question that he thinks is silly will often result in an angry "RTFM, idiot!"
Asking in Windos char rooms, newgroups, or someone who deals with Windows, will often be;
a> more polite.
b> informative.
Netcraft count hostnames, not servers.
It's entirely possible (and likely) that thousands of hosts would be served from one box. (ISPs and the like).
This seems to be a common place to use Apache.
OTOH, IIS is more common in multiply boxes per hosts. (Commercial sites)
In the 80s, there was some copy protection that released a virus in your computer if you tried to copy it.
Another company bought full page ads saying something like "our products, which does X, don't include, and will never include, Y, which destroy your computer"
Very soon, the copy protection company went bankrupt.
If someone (say with an someone@microsoft.com email) start asking unpredictable questions, like how you should call Linux?
It's very easy to bait Stallman.
I hear they are considerring the following options:
1. You've got mail, which was forwarded to the nearest censors. The email, or the police, would reach you within 24 to 48 hours. Please wait.
2. You've got mail, it was censored.
3. You've got mail, traitor!
4. You've got mail, and 15 years in jail.
5. You've got mail, and will be able to read it for a small bribe.
For a start, considerring the way death panalty is handled in the US, it would take a century to kill a company, all this time the tax payer would've to pay it money.
Oh, and since making money is the sole justification of a company, prefer to see all of Linux's companies on death row.
Yes, it was a ruling where a judge (with stocks in the company) ruled that a company is a person for all purposes and intents aside from the right to vote.
This allowed the company to get a big tax - deduction.
Hi, it *could* be worse.
It could say that MS & AOL-Time Warner are going to merge.
Putting aside the unpleasant implications, do you've any idea how tiring it would be to wring MS-AOL-Time Warner all the time?
We have left, two middles, and right.
Left & Right are both fanatics, the left says, bend over and spread your legs, the right says, get a sword and start foaming at the mouth.
The two middles are identical, but the left one change its name every couple of years so the public wouldn't remember the fuck ups that they did.
Oh, and I forgot the relegious types (don't really care about left or right, give me money *now*! God it the only Truth, and laws will make sure of that. Unless the laws are inconvenient, then we have permission from Above to ignore them.) the sectors types (don't care about politics, but I want the money!) and the anit-relegious types (don't care about anything, stop the relegious!)
All of the above, BTW, allign themselves with the right, sort of.
The relegious will do anything if you legalisate relegious laws or give them money.
The anti-relegious has some pricipals, apperantly.
And *no one* understands what the sectors does.
We also changed the elections system *twice* in the last ten years, and had a 3 prime ministers in the last three years, the last two didn't manage to keep their chair for the whole time they were elected to.
On, and in the previous elections, it was quite common for people to vote for the left prime minister, and then vote for the far right party, just so he wouldn't get too big for his head.
> Uh huh, so if he just made the files two seperate downloads this would put him in the clear?
I don't *think* so.
That they ship the whole thing together just makes it easier to say that they violate the GPL.
Shipping it as two seperated downloads will get you into the courts deciding "is dynamic linking is derived work or not?"
The GPL says that if you bundle the GPL code with non-GPL code, then you must GPL the whole thing.
Qoute from the GPL:
If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
Slashdot Mirror
In some cases,I'm certain, you'll find that people are using sourceforge as the master copy.
> I am not a tech savvy hacker
It shows.
You don't put those thinks in the kernel, you put them in the *shell*.
That is how Windows does it.
The difference is that Windows uses many of the Explorer routines internally, so when you log on, you've it working already, so what is needed is just to load a seperate window/process, and not to wait for all the libraries to load.
So is the ability to run code, you know.
d vi sory-1251.html
Being able to script the OS is a good advantage, it can be misused, naturally.
Want to hear about the VIM vulnerability that allows an attacker to run code of his choosing on the user's computer?
http://www.linuxsecurity.com/advisories/other_a
You didn't hear about it because nobody send vim documents in large enough quanteties to make this a viable way for a virus.
I Love You vbs is no different than a user openning an exectuable. (Hell, vbs files *are* executables, in Windows)
Who is to blame here? The scripttable OS, or the user for opening a file?
How about linux's scripts? They may not have the same power as VBS, but they can certainly be as distructive.
Does linux's bash scripts, frex, are an extreme and unneccessary security risk?
Themselves.
MS biggest competition is older version of itself.
8$ millions? That is a piss-poor country if it will be grateful for that amount of money.
I would second that point, especially about getting help.
In chat rooms, newsgroups, and RL, asking a Linux guy a question that he thinks is silly will often result in an angry "RTFM, idiot!"
Asking in Windos char rooms, newgroups, or someone who deals with Windows, will often be;
a> more polite.
b> informative.
Netcraft count hostnames, not servers.
It's entirely possible (and likely) that thousands of hosts would be served from one box. (ISPs and the like).
This seems to be a common place to use Apache.
OTOH, IIS is more common in multiply boxes per hosts. (Commercial sites)
If they were patented, they clones couldn't have been built.
DirectX is the de-facto gaming API for Windows.
;-
That is like trying to install a 3D game for Linux and complain when it requires OpenGL.
Sadly, a lot of programs stick their dlls in the system dir.
Office has a lot of dlls
Are they replacing *system* files? Maybe, but I would be surprised if they replaced a system file to a version not publically avialble.
In the 80s, there was some copy protection that released a virus in your computer if you tried to copy it.
Another company bought full page ads saying something like "our products, which does X, don't include, and will never include, Y, which destroy your computer"
Very soon, the copy protection company went bankrupt.
If someone (say with an someone@microsoft.com email) start asking unpredictable questions, like how you should call Linux?
It's very easy to bait Stallman.
But manslaughter is applicable, as well as criminal neglectness.
I hear they are considerring the following options:
1. You've got mail, which was forwarded to the nearest censors. The email, or the police, would reach you within 24 to 48 hours. Please wait.
2. You've got mail, it was censored.
3. You've got mail, traitor!
4. You've got mail, and 15 years in jail.
5. You've got mail, and will be able to read it for a small bribe.
For a start, considerring the way death panalty is handled in the US, it would take a century to kill a company, all this time the tax payer would've to pay it money.
Oh, and since making money is the sole justification of a company, prefer to see all of Linux's companies on death row.
Yes, it was a ruling where a judge (with stocks in the company) ruled that a company is a person for all purposes and intents aside from the right to vote.
This allowed the company to get a big tax - deduction.
I wouldn't be very surprised if it did.
The activation means that you XP is like a shareware.
Hi, it *could* be worse.
It could say that MS & AOL-Time Warner are going to merge.
Putting aside the unpleasant implications, do you've any idea how tiring it would be to wring MS-AOL-Time Warner all the time?
WMP8 is much better than WMP7, I wouldn't say it's as good as WinAMP, but it's certainly a contenster.
Hi, you should try it *here*.
We have left, two middles, and right.
Left & Right are both fanatics, the left says, bend over and spread your legs, the right says, get a sword and start foaming at the mouth.
The two middles are identical, but the left one change its name every couple of years so the public wouldn't remember the fuck ups that they did.
Oh, and I forgot the relegious types (don't really care about left or right, give me money *now*! God it the only Truth, and laws will make sure of that. Unless the laws are inconvenient, then we have permission from Above to ignore them.) the sectors types (don't care about politics, but I want the money!) and the anit-relegious types (don't care about anything, stop the relegious!)
All of the above, BTW, allign themselves with the right, sort of.
The relegious will do anything if you legalisate relegious laws or give them money.
The anti-relegious has some pricipals, apperantly.
And *no one* understands what the sectors does.
We also changed the elections system *twice* in the last ten years, and had a 3 prime ministers in the last three years, the last two didn't manage to keep their chair for the whole time they were elected to.
On, and in the previous elections, it was quite common for people to vote for the left prime minister, and then vote for the far right party, just so he wouldn't get too big for his head.
> Uh huh, so if he just made the files two seperate downloads this would put him in the clear?
I don't *think* so.
That they ship the whole thing together just makes it easier to say that they violate the GPL.
Shipping it as two seperated downloads will get you into the courts deciding "is dynamic linking is derived work or not?"
Linus was wrong. (Bye Bye Karma... )
The GPL says that if you bundle the GPL code with non-GPL code, then you must GPL the whole thing.
Qoute from the GPL:
If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
What about COM components?
They can be run on seperate memory spaces.
If they are correct, and dynamic linking doesn't create a derived work, then no one would have to pay TrollTech for closed source Qt applications.
And time, not to mention that there wouldn't be any more lawyers :-D
Static lib linking happen at compiling time, by the developer.
Dynamic linking happens on the user's computer.