Config file is local, it's the log file on the network. And config program would whine about nonaccessible log file.
That was an *example* I gave, not a concrete catch-all-circumstances design architecture for configuration tools.
If you want better examples of configuration validation at config time, I can come up with them if you'd prefer.
So you do not use sendmail, BIND, dhcp, samba, apache, NIS, kerberos, ipsec, ipfilter etc? You Windows user then?;) And you ideal is regedit? Stop - regedit does not allow to check anything you putting in there;)
Sendmail, bind, samba, apache, NIS, etc etc etc don't tend to be configured or modified by end-users. They tend to be handled by administrators - who would also benefit from a robust config tool, but not as greatly.
As for regedit?
1. Yes, it does check things you're putting in there. Sure, it doesn't do much, but at least it makes sure you don't put text in a numeric field.
2. Who said anything about using a registry? Actually, come to think of it, who said anything about using binary config files? IIRC, it was you who brought up both straw-man arguments. All I'm saying is that a configuration user interface would be better to modify the configuration than editing it by hand.
My preference is self-configuring software, if it's possible. I hate to click on knobs to do self-evident things. And if something broken I have to fix it fast.
Believe me, it's much faster to configure something by clicking on buttons than by rooting through MAN pages trying to figure out exactly which combinations of parameters you can and can't use. As for self-configuration? Yet another straw-man argument. Self-configuring software doesn't need a config file by definition. Sheesh.
Perhaps we have different focus - I work with server software and it often should work in minimal environment. Consider firewall software. Folks who write it don't do GUI (usually). But there is fwbuilder (fwbuilder.org) which fullfill the need in GUI configurator for beginners or lazy. I'm fine with text firewall configs, I might fire up fwbuilder as well. And I like firewall developers to focus on firewall features - not to spend time on GUI.
True. In fact, I'd agree with you; server-side, it's a nicety - not a necessity. But there's a lot more client-side/end-consumer development going on these days than server-side development. For that, it's a necessity.
What the problem? Binary config files don't validate parameters either.
Yes, but with binary config files, you have a program which writes those binaries, and which does the validation.
The OP was claiming that plain text files are more than good enough for configuration. His mindset is "well, you can read, can't you?".
Why a GUI? why not CLI, for example?
Whichever you prefer. Radio button choices are easier to make with a GUI, and most end-users will be using a GUI such as KDE or Gnome, so I'd suggest a GUI. If you're doing all of your work from the CLI, you might well want to edit the text config by hand. *shrugs*
That's kind of nice - then your configuration program would rival your real program in complexity. At the same time it's trivial to allow your program to log error messages in case of non-recognisable parameters or missing files/wrong paths. And sometimes your configuration program can't work properly - for example - it's downtime and files on network are nonaccessible and your config program do not allow you to enter them..
Yes, but if you can't access the config file over the network, you can't edit the text-based config file either, so it's a moot point.
And as I said before, it may well be trivial to allow your program to log error messages, but that's of no use if the user only runs into a configuration error several weeks from now. Or the user isn't the person who knows how to edit the config file.
Oh, and if you're too lazy to code up a quick config editor even if it's in TCL or some other similar language, then I'm not sure I really want to use the rest of your code. Mainly because your attention to detail across the project as a whole would appear to be lacking.
Yeah, there not that important thats why we did silly stuff like create autoconf to configure and install software. That is why we carry around the install.sh form X11 to install software in a predictable and sane way. That is why we have plain readable text files to configure our software. The reality holds true for closed and open source as well.
Plain readable text files don't validate parameters or combinations of parameters for you. That's part of the problem; they're just text. Put a GUI around it, and all of a sudden you can prevent users from saying that - say - they want to log all output to a file, but they specify a file which is invalid.
With a GUI in there, you can tell the user that they've made a mistake while they're editing that file. With a plain text file, they have to wait until they use the feature they're configuring, and that may be days or months from now - well after they've forgotten what they changed.
Take a good long hard look at where most of your stem cells come from before you open your selfish mouth next time. Destroying life to save life is sin.
You lost souls should stop playing god lest ye be destroyed.
You know, we can solve this debate easily.
Ask God to come down and explain his/her/its position on this.
When we get an answer from the big guy himself, we can stop arguing about it.
Sound good to you?
And no, I won't accept an answer from anyone other than God. Because you might just be making it up.
The copyright situation is rapidly getting to the point where the little guy is not going to be able to create a work (music especially) and publish and distribute it himself. Why? The big guns will find a way to show his work is a derivative of one that they own and take it from him. If this is not possible now, please explain why.
That's the argument I have against using the GPL as a license because it will destroy the whole software.
People run around claiming that my argument is bullshit.
Copyright has only one good purpose. That's prevent other people from claiming credit for your work. Everything else is just evil.(but profitable)
Spoken like someone who has never created anything of worth in their life.
Copyright is essential. It gives the average Joe who is good at - say - writing or music the chance to elevate themselves and get enough money to do *other things*. Otherwise, everyone would be working 24x7 just to make ends meet.
Yep. Under section (as I recall) 80 of the Copyright Act, you may make a copy of any recording, in whole or in part, for personal use. However, you may not make a copy for anyone else's use, nor may they make a copy for your use. You have to be the one making a copy from the original format (CD, etc).
You have that right regardless of whether or not this levy is in place. That right has been around for a long long time.
The levy is not a tax on doing that. So what is it a tax on? Because if you're being taxed for doing something, you may as well go ahead and do it.
That's a load of crap. Copyright only serves to restrict access. It's a method of exclusion. It keeps people out if they don't "play the game". It's censorship(-1, Redundant) Abolishing copyright will give us all access to more really horrible music, etc., but it won't reduce the amount of good music. On the contrary, it would allow more good musicians to get the their work out without having to go through a middleman. It would be easier to self publish, but this is something that powerful people don't want. These kind of people want to control what gets published, and copyright is(was?) the perfect way to do it
You really are talking complete and utter crap.
Copyright in no way whatsoever prevents an author or musician from publishing their own work. I can write a book this year, publish it myself next year, and the only thing preventing me (the guy doing it by himself with no middleman) from being royally screwed by the big guys is copyright.
You do realize that Mozilla's Chrome and the use of the term "chrome" by Microsoft to describe UI widgets are not actually related? And that the patent doesn't actually talk about anything even close to Mozilla's use of the term?
Wrong. They only cost 'the system' less if they're insolvent and can't pay for their own healthcare, i.e. only if there is a 'the system' which guarantees free medical care. Under a system where we all have the freedom to pay for our own healthcare, they might even 'help keep costs down' by keeping the volume of paid-for health care up.
So in other words, your tirade in a previous post about having to pay for Johnny Cheeseburger who smokes 4 packs a day when you have a perfectly clean-living lifestyle... well, basically means that you're increasing healthcare premiums?
The 'entitlements' thinking of most people is staggering. Things change radically if you think in terms where healthcare isn't a gimmie-gimmie.
You're talking to the wrong person if you're talking about "entitlement" thinking. Then again, you do hang out on a website where people seem to feel entitled to free music, free movies and free software, regardless. I wonder what side of that fence you're on.
Three of the more important ones on there are Vitamin C, Paracetamol and Potassium Bicarbonate.
Potassium bicarb to balance out the sodium bicarb and keep your electrolyte levels where they should be. Vitamin C, because it's highly depleted by drinking, and paracetamol, which is much better than aspirin for those kinds of headaches.
Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is also better for your stomach.
I've chosen not to breed. I've chosen not to smoke. I eat properly and excercise. And I pay for the excessive health care expenses of people who do those things.... and if you get cancer or alzheimers, or any number of other diseases which require intensive care...?
If nothing else, smoking reduces the need for expensive, long-term geriatric care. Over time, smokers actually cost the system less.
We had this discussion in EMT class. At least here, EMT's don't get to do IVs. So the EMT hangover fix is lots of high-flow O2. The paramedic hangover fix, on the other hand, involves saline, dextrose, and some sort of vitamin complex I think, plus high-flow O2.
Something else that works rather well -- which may never be sold in the puritanical US -- is:
Ummm, no. It sounds like you know what you'd like to spend MY money on.
Yes, and you'd spend my money on YOU.
It's an aggregate system. Stop thinking "me me me" all the time.
Do you honestly think that it's any different with health insurance? I'm paying for your medical treatment with that. Of course, you're paying for mine. We are, however, both paying the insurance companies a large chunk of change so that they can make a profit on the whole deal.
Government-run healthcare is the same as insurance schemes, but no-one is sitting at the top trying to keep their shareholders happy by skimming off profits.
If you don't see how it's in your interest that your fellow citizens are fit and able to contribute to society rather than be sick, infirm and unable to work then you're rather more short-sighted than I first thought.
Heck, who cares about fellow citizens? Play the laws of averages, and that "fellow citizen" could well be you. I don't see any problem with a little enlightened self-interest. And it'd certainly be a better way of spending money than a lot of the bureaucratic nonsense that Washington spends the cash on. Hundreds of billions spent on a war in Iraq vs. a standard level of free health care for all. I know what I'd spend my money on.
mplayer acts as glue for dozens of codecs that people wrote. That's not to trivialize the work they've had to do to support all manner of video and audio output and codec sources, since they've done a lot of really good work here, but the end result isn't any more impressive than Media Player Classic for Windows, other than it runs on something other than Windows.... and in some cases, it acts as glue for dozens of codecs that other people wrote, copyrighted, and didn't give permission to be redistributed in any form - especially not the win32codecs package.
A mathematician, a physicist, and an engineer were asked to review this mathematical problem. In a high school gym, all the girls in the class were lined up against one wall, and all the boys against the opposite wall. Then, every ten seconds, they walked toward each other until they were half the previous distance apart. The mathematician, physicist, and engineer were asked, " When will the girls and boys meet?" The mathematician said, " Never." The physicist said, " In an infinite amount of time." The engineer said, " Well... in about two minutes, they'll be close enough for all practical purposes."
I take it that this is the only physicist in the world that failed calculus?
Ever go out for dinner, order an entree, and come up a few bucks short because of tax, tip, charges for water, blah blah blah?
Its ridiculous
Some of it is ridiculous. Tipping is not. Tipping ensures good service; and you only tip when you get that good service. The only time that tipping is higher is with large groups of people - who often times don't tip at all.
France, for example, has a standard 15% gratuity added onto every meal. Woe betide you if you get crappy service and try to avoid paying that.
Slashdot Mirror
Config file is local, it's the log file on the network. And config program would whine about nonaccessible log file.
;) And you ideal is regedit? Stop - regedit does not allow to check anything you putting in there ;)
That was an *example* I gave, not a concrete catch-all-circumstances design architecture for configuration tools.
If you want better examples of configuration validation at config time, I can come up with them if you'd prefer.
So you do not use sendmail, BIND, dhcp, samba, apache, NIS, kerberos, ipsec, ipfilter etc? You Windows user then?
Sendmail, bind, samba, apache, NIS, etc etc etc don't tend to be configured or modified by end-users. They tend to be handled by administrators - who would also benefit from a robust config tool, but not as greatly.
As for regedit?
1. Yes, it does check things you're putting in there. Sure, it doesn't do much, but at least it makes sure you don't put text in a numeric field.
2. Who said anything about using a registry? Actually, come to think of it, who said anything about using binary config files? IIRC, it was you who brought up both straw-man arguments. All I'm saying is that a configuration user interface would be better to modify the configuration than editing it by hand.
My preference is self-configuring software, if it's possible. I hate to click on knobs to do self-evident things. And if something broken I have to fix it fast.
Believe me, it's much faster to configure something by clicking on buttons than by rooting through MAN pages trying to figure out exactly which combinations of parameters you can and can't use. As for self-configuration? Yet another straw-man argument. Self-configuring software doesn't need a config file by definition. Sheesh.
Perhaps we have different focus - I work with server software and it often should work in minimal environment. Consider firewall software. Folks who write it don't do GUI (usually). But there is fwbuilder (fwbuilder.org) which fullfill the need in GUI configurator for beginners or lazy. I'm fine with text firewall configs, I might fire up fwbuilder as well. And I like firewall developers to focus on firewall features - not to spend time on GUI.
True. In fact, I'd agree with you; server-side, it's a nicety - not a necessity. But there's a lot more client-side/end-consumer development going on these days than server-side development. For that, it's a necessity.
What the problem? Binary config files don't validate parameters either.
Yes, but with binary config files, you have a program which writes those binaries, and which does the validation.
The OP was claiming that plain text files are more than good enough for configuration. His mindset is "well, you can read, can't you?".
Why a GUI? why not CLI, for example?
Whichever you prefer. Radio button choices are easier to make with a GUI, and most end-users will be using a GUI such as KDE or Gnome, so I'd suggest a GUI. If you're doing all of your work from the CLI, you might well want to edit the text config by hand. *shrugs*
That's kind of nice - then your configuration program would rival your real program in complexity. At the same time it's trivial to allow your program to log error messages in case of non-recognisable parameters or missing files/wrong paths. And sometimes your configuration program can't work properly - for example - it's downtime and files on network are nonaccessible and your config program do not allow you to enter them..
Yes, but if you can't access the config file over the network, you can't edit the text-based config file either, so it's a moot point.
And as I said before, it may well be trivial to allow your program to log error messages, but that's of no use if the user only runs into a configuration error several weeks from now. Or the user isn't the person who knows how to edit the config file.
Oh, and if you're too lazy to code up a quick config editor even if it's in TCL or some other similar language, then I'm not sure I really want to use the rest of your code. Mainly because your attention to detail across the project as a whole would appear to be lacking.
Yeah, there not that important thats why we did silly stuff like create autoconf to configure and install software. That is why we carry around the install.sh form X11 to install software in a predictable and sane way. That is why we have plain readable text files to configure our software. The reality holds true for closed and open source as well.
Plain readable text files don't validate parameters or combinations of parameters for you. That's part of the problem; they're just text. Put a GUI around it, and all of a sudden you can prevent users from saying that - say - they want to log all output to a file, but they specify a file which is invalid.
With a GUI in there, you can tell the user that they've made a mistake while they're editing that file. With a plain text file, they have to wait until they use the feature they're configuring, and that may be days or months from now - well after they've forgotten what they changed.
and for good reason!
Take a good long hard look at where most of your stem cells come from before you open your selfish mouth next time. Destroying life to save life is sin.
You lost souls should stop playing god lest ye be destroyed.
You know, we can solve this debate easily.
Ask God to come down and explain his/her/its position on this.
When we get an answer from the big guy himself, we can stop arguing about it.
Sound good to you?
And no, I won't accept an answer from anyone other than God. Because you might just be making it up.
The copyright situation is rapidly getting to the point where the little guy is not going to be able to create a work (music especially) and publish and distribute it himself. Why? The big guns will find a way to show his work is a derivative of one that they own and take it from him. If this is not possible now, please explain why.
That's the argument I have against using the GPL as a license because it will destroy the whole software.
People run around claiming that my argument is bullshit.
Copyright has only one good purpose. That's prevent other people from claiming credit for your work. Everything else is just evil.(but profitable)
Spoken like someone who has never created anything of worth in their life.
Copyright is essential. It gives the average Joe who is good at - say - writing or music the chance to elevate themselves and get enough money to do *other things*. Otherwise, everyone would be working 24x7 just to make ends meet.
Yep. Under section (as I recall) 80 of the Copyright Act, you may make a copy of any recording, in whole or in part, for personal use. However, you may not make a copy for anyone else's use, nor may they make a copy for your use. You have to be the one making a copy from the original format (CD, etc).
You have that right regardless of whether or not this levy is in place. That right has been around for a long long time.
The levy is not a tax on doing that. So what is it a tax on? Because if you're being taxed for doing something, you may as well go ahead and do it.
That's a load of crap. Copyright only serves to restrict access. It's a method of exclusion. It keeps people out if they don't "play the game". It's censorship(-1, Redundant) Abolishing copyright will give us all access to more really horrible music, etc., but it won't reduce the amount of good music. On the contrary, it would allow more good musicians to get the their work out without having to go through a middleman. It would be easier to self publish, but this is something that powerful people don't want. These kind of people want to control what gets published, and copyright is(was?) the perfect way to do it
You really are talking complete and utter crap.
Copyright in no way whatsoever prevents an author or musician from publishing their own work. I can write a book this year, publish it myself next year, and the only thing preventing me (the guy doing it by himself with no middleman) from being royally screwed by the big guys is copyright.
I've never seen MS talk about "chrome" before
Really?
Their "Chrome" stuff predates Mozilla. Although they're not using the word in that context.
1998 references to Chrome from Microsoft
You do realize that Mozilla's Chrome and the use of the term "chrome" by Microsoft to describe UI widgets are not actually related? And that the patent doesn't actually talk about anything even close to Mozilla's use of the term?
Please. RTFP.
Wrong. They only cost 'the system' less if they're insolvent and can't pay for their own healthcare, i.e. only if there is a 'the system' which guarantees free medical care. Under a system where we all have the freedom to pay for our own healthcare, they might even 'help keep costs down' by keeping the volume of paid-for health care up.
... well, basically means that you're increasing healthcare premiums?
So in other words, your tirade in a previous post about having to pay for Johnny Cheeseburger who smokes 4 packs a day when you have a perfectly clean-living lifestyle
The 'entitlements' thinking of most people is staggering. Things change radically if you think in terms where healthcare isn't a gimmie-gimmie.
You're talking to the wrong person if you're talking about "entitlement" thinking. Then again, you do hang out on a website where people seem to feel entitled to free music, free movies and free software, regardless. I wonder what side of that fence you're on.
You can probably actually make up a good workalike by mixing gatorade with one alka-seltzer tab and a couple of tylenol. Shouldn't taste too bad :)
Although it might be a lot of work if you do have a hangover at the time...
Looks like Alka-Seltzer.
I suggest you look more closely.
Alka-Seltzer: Aspirin 325mg, Citric Acid 1000mg, Sodium Bicarbonate 1916mg.
Beecham's Resolve:
Paracetamol 1000mg, Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) 30mg, Sodium bicarbonate 808mg, Citric acid 1185mg, Sodium carbonate (anhydrous) 153mg, Potassium bicarbonate 715mg
Three of the more important ones on there are Vitamin C, Paracetamol and Potassium Bicarbonate.
Potassium bicarb to balance out the sodium bicarb and keep your electrolyte levels where they should be. Vitamin C, because it's highly depleted by drinking, and paracetamol, which is much better than aspirin for those kinds of headaches.
Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is also better for your stomach.
Believe me, when you have a hangover, the last thing you worry about is the taste.
Actually, it's quite pleasant.
Buy a Creative Nomad Zen NX instead. Much better than the iPod.
I've chosen not to breed. I've chosen not to smoke. I eat properly and excercise. And I pay for the excessive health care expenses of people who do those things. ... and if you get cancer or alzheimers, or any number of other diseases which require intensive care...?
If nothing else, smoking reduces the need for expensive, long-term geriatric care. Over time, smokers actually cost the system less.
We had this discussion in EMT class. At least here, EMT's don't get to do IVs. So the EMT hangover fix is lots of high-flow O2. The paramedic hangover fix, on the other hand, involves saline, dextrose, and some sort of vitamin complex I think, plus high-flow O2.
Something else that works rather well -- which may never be sold in the puritanical US -- is:
"Beecham's" Resolve
Ummm, no. It sounds like you know what you'd like to spend MY money on.
Yes, and you'd spend my money on YOU.
It's an aggregate system. Stop thinking "me me me" all the time.
Do you honestly think that it's any different with health insurance? I'm paying for your medical treatment with that. Of course, you're paying for mine. We are, however, both paying the insurance companies a large chunk of change so that they can make a profit on the whole deal.
Government-run healthcare is the same as insurance schemes, but no-one is sitting at the top trying to keep their shareholders happy by skimming off profits.
If you don't see how it's in your interest that your fellow citizens are fit and able to contribute to society rather than be sick, infirm and unable to work then you're rather more short-sighted than I first thought.
Heck, who cares about fellow citizens? Play the laws of averages, and that "fellow citizen" could well be you. I don't see any problem with a little enlightened self-interest. And it'd certainly be a better way of spending money than a lot of the bureaucratic nonsense that Washington spends the cash on. Hundreds of billions spent on a war in Iraq vs. a standard level of free health care for all. I know what I'd spend my money on.
mplayer acts as glue for dozens of codecs that people wrote. That's not to trivialize the work they've had to do to support all manner of video and audio output and codec sources, since they've done a lot of really good work here, but the end result isn't any more impressive than Media Player Classic for Windows, other than it runs on something other than Windows. ... and in some cases, it acts as glue for dozens of codecs that other people wrote, copyrighted, and didn't give permission to be redistributed in any form - especially not the win32codecs package.
Never mind... that'll teach me to read the post correctly. It's that "every 10 seconds" bit that's a killer.
A mathematician, a physicist, and an engineer were asked to review this mathematical problem. In a high school gym, all the girls in the class were lined up against one wall, and all the boys against the opposite wall. Then, every ten seconds, they walked toward each other until they were half the previous distance apart. The mathematician, physicist, and engineer were asked, " When will the girls and boys meet?" The mathematician said, " Never." The physicist said, " In an infinite amount of time." The engineer said, " Well... in about two minutes, they'll be close enough for all practical purposes."
I take it that this is the only physicist in the world that failed calculus?
You've got it backwards. The physicist dumps the water. Physicists just want the ballpark answers, engineers worry about the fourth decimal place.
Nope. Engineers are the "to within 1 order of magnitude" guys.
Ever go out for dinner, order an entree, and come up a few bucks short because of tax, tip, charges for water, blah blah blah?
Its ridiculous
Some of it is ridiculous. Tipping is not. Tipping ensures good service; and you only tip when you get that good service. The only time that tipping is higher is with large groups of people - who often times don't tip at all.
France, for example, has a standard 15% gratuity added onto every meal. Woe betide you if you get crappy service and try to avoid paying that.
It's not like ntfs.sys is readily distributable free of charge like the Win32 codec DLL's are, right? Or is it?
Just FYI; the codec DLLs aren't distributable free of charge either.