You're right; I'm wrong. djb released qmail to the public domain (which isn't relicensing; public domain isn't a license; it's no need for a license.) in the slides for the presentation of the paper, not in the paper itself. I was confused.
After presenting that paper, he also published the slides from the presentation in which he dedicated qmail to the public domain. Somehow I confused the paper with the slides, so yes, my apologies for making wrongful accusations.
"Hard codes port numbers." Okay, *you* go ahead and change port 25. Tell me when you get everybody else to use a different number and then I'll change my code. (hint: I won't be holding my breath.) "Uses non-descript variables." Usually 'i' is an iterator, but you can use it any way you want. On the other hand, he calls the remote IP address "remoteip", the remote host "remotehost" and the remote user info "remoteinfo", but if you think that's non-descript, I wonder what variable names *you* would use. "Forces interpretations one way without allowing changing." I have no idea what you're talking about; so far you don't either. "Hard codes directory structures", yes, this is to prevent attackers from subverting the paths."Has to write a monitoring program to monitor his daemons..." Actually that's because Unix HAS NO monitoring program which allows you to send a signal to a child, which is why people resort to REALLY GROSS hacks like: kill -HUP `ps aux | grep processname | grep -v grep | awk print $1` . Then again, you'd probably complain if djb *didn't* provide daemontools.
"perfect sense" to an insane person. Okay, so when I want to tell somebody what program to run, do I tell them/usr/bin/foobar or/usr/local/bin/foobar? Because, just as you say, there may already be a foobar in/usr/bin which the user didn't want to overwrite. The only way I can tell them is to execute another round-trip of question and answer to find out whether they compiled it themselves or whether it came as a package. With qmail, I can say "run/var/qmail/bin/qmail-qstat" and tell me the second number.
What if the file system layout standards are wrong? For example, the same piece of software can have two different installation locations:/usr and/usr/local depending on who compiled it. That's just wrong.
I think the idea is that the program which runs jpegtopnm sets up the sandbox. But djb is pointing in the direction of "Change Unix so it's easier to drop privileges."
It's funny how many people bitch about the license when IN THE PDF UNDER DISCUSSION djb announced that qmail was going into the public domain. So, now that qmail is Open Source, will you be sticking with it?
I can confirm this. djb send me, John Levine and Dave Sill (prominent qmail book authors) an email saying that he was going to put qmail into the public domain.
No documentation?? Every executable has a man page, even executables that the system runs (e.g. qmail-local or qmail-remote). His licensing isn't poorly explained. But then again, you can't run 'man' so no wonder you couldn't Google for "djb licensing" and find http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html Your third allegation was true until the publication of this PDF which you obviously didn't read since it included a dedication of qmail to the public domain. The binaries aren't "mixed in with the mail spool". Binaries are in/var/qmail/bin, the queue is in/var/qmail/queue.
1 for 4. 25%. That's a failing grade in every school I know of.
Also, you can't reasonably expect any privacy in email unless you encrypt its contents.
And if you come into my house without my permission, I'll fucking kill you, even if my door is unlocked. And indeed, the courts support the use of deadly force against home invaders. Just like Hollywood supports the use of deadly force against space invaders.
No, you can't read my email even if I haven't encrypted it. Even if you're the *recipient* of my email, you can't disclose its contents further than I've spread it.
Plus there's gnash, which is an open source flash player which will play youtube videos, or at least until the next time they rev to a newer version of flash.
gnash plays media these days. Yes, it doesn't do a perfect job of emulation, however it's straightforward to stick to the parts of flash that work in both gnash and flash.
It's really bizarre. I keep hearing from all these people that they want Ron Paul to win, but they think nobody is going to vote for him. Well, damnit, if you're a Republican, vote for him! And if he gets the nomination, vote for him!
Slashdot Mirror
You're right; I'm wrong. djb released qmail to the public domain (which isn't relicensing; public domain isn't a license; it's no need for a license.) in the slides for the presentation of the paper, not in the paper itself. I was confused.
After presenting that paper, he also published the slides from the presentation in which he dedicated qmail to the public domain. Somehow I confused the paper with the slides, so yes, my apologies for making wrongful accusations.
Crap. Somehow I thought that the linked document was the one for his talk, in which he released qmail to the public domain. Apologies, my bad.
"Hard codes port numbers." Okay, *you* go ahead and change port 25. Tell me when you get everybody else to use a different number and then I'll change my code. (hint: I won't be holding my breath.) "Uses non-descript variables." Usually 'i' is an iterator, but you can use it any way you want. On the other hand, he calls the remote IP address "remoteip", the remote host "remotehost" and the remote user info "remoteinfo", but if you think that's non-descript, I wonder what variable names *you* would use. "Forces interpretations one way without allowing changing." I have no idea what you're talking about; so far you don't either. "Hard codes directory structures", yes, this is to prevent attackers from subverting the paths."Has to write a monitoring program to monitor his daemons..." Actually that's because Unix HAS NO monitoring program which allows you to send a signal to a child, which is why people resort to REALLY GROSS hacks like: kill -HUP `ps aux | grep processname | grep -v grep | awk print $1` . Then again, you'd probably complain if djb *didn't* provide daemontools.
Errr, no. The executables in this case are specific to the machine, thus they *belong* in /var. Putting them anyplace else would be wrong.
"perfect sense" to an insane person. Okay, so when I want to tell somebody what program to run, do I tell them /usr/bin/foobar or /usr/local/bin/foobar? Because, just as you say, there may already be a foobar in /usr/bin which the user didn't want to overwrite. The only way I can tell them is to execute another round-trip of question and answer to find out whether they compiled it themselves or whether it came as a package. With qmail, I can say "run /var/qmail/bin/qmail-qstat" and tell me the second number.
eRuIyf O EMg98 1 he8YTsYz 1 e + C9T9vck / FlLqB97Lww48KNyK6D8PuMBjWb62 / 7ob
pYQAKMj9oPpSvyLPSfhN0TpvbGypj0PsELLYQwTGX0bMx4Vw2ye / / JkZxti8Tvhf
H6HXP0s8El9HnmqRJf3sIqVrLVlWzCJTDpjNTbowfe O u + DJXLm5k8WiiU + 9SwEbE
7IcGRSrVdPuXuX6CGeQc O wJwWSSi 1 teV3aWft7R7Ty5gl 1 C0VCyaGxwobCmhD4FF
Ge2q8Cac8pG3 1 AEVuvzPJmZpq + Seqj9ZouCDLzW3J9W7sfW O ksiYxQ3tR0tCaYcy
e / wpFFYTDu / St + 3ItdIPc 1 Xfd O 3m6NtKrWk9lfAxQPVoyW2kduzSGWyYz7yrvUJQ
8zBTWLxtIZQdwgnPet0g / WoMVkvbw5M / oD9N4t7UU + 5AeMd / LHCinAJI 1 L8cdCA5
2JSno4N / B6grNfW 1 iZH8 + E 1 uES 1 7xApKkz6TDjBbCCQ30MJ + SupTdtKsGqjC27U7
krEHBAS7bA2yhe3pesdNwQ6pQkFSUDULjPGVFTdA8JG0JC + kWc 1 7nnDKPk98m + 1 P
pDo 1 g / wc3l7hIiA3oHkVf + g6uAn6WF5PYqBscyaC / BRlVDCAUQwqSwtydwB 1 Z9Gz
YL4lRZlYyFou6Nz33b O duVPS 1 vqsF0BrquL / ptmixY4=
http://www.amazon.com/How-Buildings-Learn-Happens-Theyre/dp/0140139966
Handhelds.org has been around for more than 8 years now, providing Linux on handhelds PDAs and mobile phones.
What if the file system layout standards are wrong? For example, the same piece of software can have two different installation locations: /usr and /usr/local depending on who compiled it. That's just wrong.
I think the idea is that the program which runs jpegtopnm sets up the sandbox. But djb is pointing in the direction of "Change Unix so it's easier to drop privileges."
I'm really disappointed that you didn't read TFA. "Example where qmail did badly: integer arithmetic."
It's funny how many people bitch about the license when IN THE PDF UNDER DISCUSSION djb announced that qmail was going into the public domain. So, now that qmail is Open Source, will you be sticking with it?
I can confirm this. djb send me, John Levine and Dave Sill (prominent qmail book authors) an email saying that he was going to put qmail into the public domain.
No documentation?? Every executable has a man page, even executables that the system runs (e.g. qmail-local or qmail-remote). /var/qmail/bin, the queue is in /var/qmail/queue.
His licensing isn't poorly explained. But then again, you can't run 'man' so no wonder you couldn't Google for "djb licensing" and find http://cr.yp.to/distributors.html
Your third allegation was true until the publication of this PDF which you obviously didn't read since it included a dedication of qmail to the public domain.
The binaries aren't "mixed in with the mail spool". Binaries are in
1 for 4. 25%. That's a failing grade in every school I know of.
Rediffmail uses qmail. 60M users and counting.
The Lego Group has a trademark on Lego(tm) brand plastic building bricks. Maybe better to call BugLabs' products building bricks?
And if you come into my house without my permission, I'll fucking kill you, even if my door is unlocked. And indeed, the courts support the use of deadly force against home invaders. Just like Hollywood supports the use of deadly force against space invaders.
No, you can't read my email even if I haven't encrypted it. Even if you're the *recipient* of my email, you can't disclose its contents further than I've spread it.
Plus there's gnash, which is an open source flash player which will play youtube videos, or at least until the next time they rev to a newer version of flash.
gnash plays media these days. Yes, it doesn't do a perfect job of emulation, however it's straightforward to stick to the parts of flash that work in both gnash and flash.
'sheer numbers of people needing free treatment'
You're kiddiing, right? Whenever something is free, there will ALWAYS be people who 'need' a treatmenr and can't afford it.
Anybody who thinks there isn't government interference between a patient and doctor is so out of touch with reality that he can be safely ignored.
It's really bizarre. I keep hearing from all these people that they want Ron Paul to win, but they think nobody is going to vote for him. Well, damnit, if you're a Republican, vote for him! And if he gets the nomination, vote for him!
Not for distance. You're still subject to the 18Kfeet (max) limitation imposed by the resistance (gauge) of the wire.
Prior art should be an affirmative defense against patent infringement.