anything that will get rid of the bright line on the right side of the screen, or anything that would tune the center correctly, anything without making my text in X look fuzzy on the right edge is good for me.
Try using the horizontal positioning control on your monitor (every monitor I've ever seen has one) to move the picture to the left. That better? (You might need to shrink the picture a bit widthways to give yourself room to manoeuvre).
It's a nice-looking page, but it needs Tux on there somewhere. What is the point of spending years developing a free operating system, if not to get penguin logos on every web page from here to Timbucktoo?:-)
<head> <title> Not quite the Linux.com web page </title> </head>
<!-- This web page does not have anything sneaky in it. -->
<body> This web page is not here yet. </body> </html>
Java? Is this a troll?
on
Unix in Perl
·
· Score: 1
Wouldn't it make more sense to use something like Java?
Have you ever used Java? You know the way Netscape starts grinding the disk and doubling its RAM consumption when it runs into an applet? You want your system doing that every time you run "ls"?
So, okay, it's a pretty silly idea to have "ls" in Perl too. But last time I checked, Perl ran on more systems than Java, and though it's developing a bit of a gut these days, it's still the Laurel to Java's Hardy.
What operating system was this under? Any operating system with a decent scheduler should let you get a shell to kill the Perl processes(es) with. Or at least reboot cleanly. Unless you were doing something wacky like running Perl with a real-time priority.
Anyway, there's a simple reason why those of us who love Perl love Perl. It works. Having said that, reimplimenting UNIX utilities in Perl is really silly. Perl has a module system for a reason.
That article was some of the most disgusting, mindless uncritical hype I have ever read on the web. It makes all those "Is your computer ready for Windows 2000?" articles look positively objective by comparison. The "journalist" who wrote that drivel even tried to make Intel refusing to say what hardware their demos were running on into a plus-feature. This is a new low for computer journalism.
I guess the/. effect is good for something besides crashing NT webservers. Judging by how much the books above it appear to suck (I never realised Internet people were so interested in self-help and entrepreneurial books!), I don't think its peaked yet. Cool.
Hardly the same thing, though, is it? It's still clearly censorship. Anyway, I don't think they sell that mag in England, and there are other mags I'd buy first (because they have actual nudity, not painted over or artfully concealled).
I looked through a great number of them and didn't see a single bared breast! Makes me wonder why people bother with the Swimsuit Edition when they can get Playboy et al, or, if they prefer "proper" models, see more flesh in almost any woman's magazine.
I guess the answer has something to do with sexual guilt. The porn mags have less attractive models, because if you're wacking off you don't "deserve" to see a pretty girl. Whereas presumably the SI thing is for educational rather than masturbatory purposes, so it's okay to use beautiful women. Seems to me that the Japanese (or many mainland Europeans) are far less neurotic about this sort of thing.
Though personally, not being a geek, I didn't get excited. Notice y'didn't get the centrefold, but I guess this is only Wired. And hey, maybe you'll get the centrefold in the swimsuit edition.
I guess if Open Source software succeeded, it would contradict something he wrote in one of his books.
Grrrr... I don't know why a hatchet job by some clueless economist should make me angry, but it does. My only consolation is, tomorrow I'll have forgotten his article, but he'll still be afraid of Open Source.
Time to squash the "GPL is a Virus" meme
on
Rumours
·
· Score: 1
GPL is NOT a virus. A virus passes by stealth to unwitting hosts. GPL is more like a tattoo. Once you've got it, it's difficult to remove it, but you always have the choice not to get it in the first place. If you use code from any source without checking the license first you are a liability to whoever you work for and they have grounds to fire you. If you are a company placed in this situation, you have a choice; you can either adopt the GPL or stop distributing your software until you've re-written the relevant portion.
The GPL is all about choice. It is a little bit uncompromising for some people's tastes. But, like its creator, there is absolutely nothing underhanded or secretive about it. It says what it means and it does what it says.
Also, your interpretation of the clause in Sprint's license is rather too forgiving. Taking literally, as quoted, it does indeed imply that you couldn't at any time use GPL-licensed software while doing their work. That means no compiling with gcc, no scripting with Perl, and no Linux anywhere in the same room. If the contract is as quoted, compliance would be almost impossible in most UNIX shops.
I'm surprised noone has mentioned this yet, since it kinda blew my mind. It doesn't affect me, since I don't have an N64, or a 450 MHz Pentium, but it's still majorly cool that even through a layer of emulation and with the overhead of the X Window System, Linux still manages to be faster that Windows! Kinda makes you wonder what all those thousands of Microsoft programmers do all day.
While this is obvious flamebait, I think if I was Alan Cox's wife, I would get him to shave. Still, maybe she likes him that way.
Incidentally, though being British means I've never actually encountered any "white trash", don't they normally look more like Kenny's parents than Alax Cox?
glibc2 is supposedly better for multithreading. Although you can patch libc5 to do it, it won't be as solid or as fast. I've heard people say glibc2 is faster in other aspects as well. Other than that, it's just more modern and up-to-date and actively developed. Being libc5-only has been starting to cause me problems in the past few months, and I expect the problems will mount until I cave. Mixed systems have their own problems, though, so I'm gonna start over with a Debian system.
Er... my BBC Micro could do real time spellcheck back in 1987. That's a 6502, for all you suckers don't know. The fact that it's taken Microsoft so long to implement it is merely an indicator of their mind-boggling incompetence.
Sorry if I seem a bit skeptical:-) I think we've already seen quite a bit of Windows programmers campaigning to get the kernel changed so their poor programming techniques will work. And we'll see more of it in the future. As for a focus on usability, well, I think we're more likely to get that from the Mac programmers! They may have a disturbing lust for one-button mice, but I think their hearts are in the right place. We must have a different version of Windows 95 here in England, because I've never experienced this "easy to use Windows" that people keep talking about.
Come on people, you make it too easy for the stupid AC trolls to get you worked up! This is the biggest thread on this article at the moment. They only do it to get a response, and that's exactly what they're getting! Ignore them and they'll evaporate.
Still, if it encourages the development of proper signing infrastructure for Linux downloads, it could turn out to be a good thing in the long run. That's little consolation for everyone who installed login in the last few days, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Try using the horizontal positioning control on your monitor (every monitor I've ever seen has one) to move the picture to the left. That better? (You might need to shrink the picture a bit widthways to give yourself room to manoeuvre).
Fortunately, I don't think that's a scenario we have to worry about :-)
<sound of furious grepping comes from behind the screen>
How about interregnum?
It's a nice-looking page, but it needs Tux on there somewhere. What is the point of spending years developing a free operating system, if not to get penguin logos on every web page from here to Timbucktoo? :-)
<head>
<title>
Not quite the Linux.com web page
</title>
</head>
<!-- This web page does not have anything sneaky in it. -->
<body>
This web page is not here yet.
</body>
</html>
Have you ever used Java? You know the way Netscape starts grinding the disk and doubling its RAM consumption when it runs into an applet? You want your system doing that every time you run "ls"?
So, okay, it's a pretty silly idea to have "ls" in Perl too. But last time I checked, Perl ran on more systems than Java, and though it's developing a bit of a gut these days, it's still the Laurel to Java's Hardy.
Anyway, there's a simple reason why those of us who love Perl love Perl. It works. Having said that, reimplimenting UNIX utilities in Perl is really silly. Perl has a module system for a reason.
That article was some of the most disgusting, mindless uncritical hype I have ever read on the web. It makes all those "Is your computer ready for Windows 2000?" articles look positively objective by comparison. The "journalist" who wrote that drivel even tried to make Intel refusing to say what hardware their demos were running on into a plus-feature. This is a new low for computer journalism.
I guess the /. effect is good for something besides crashing NT webservers. Judging by how much the books above it appear to suck (I never realised Internet people were so interested in self-help and entrepreneurial books!), I don't think its peaked yet. Cool.
Hardly the same thing, though, is it? It's still clearly censorship. Anyway, I don't think they sell that mag in England, and there are other mags I'd buy first (because they have actual nudity, not painted over or artfully concealled).
So, how many crashes have you had today?
I guess the answer has something to do with sexual guilt. The porn mags have less attractive models, because if you're wacking off you don't "deserve" to see a pretty girl. Whereas presumably the SI thing is for educational rather than masturbatory purposes, so it's okay to use beautiful women. Seems to me that the Japanese (or many mainland Europeans) are far less neurotic about this sort of thing.
Though personally, not being a geek, I didn't get excited. Notice y'didn't get the centrefold, but I guess this is only Wired. And hey, maybe you'll get the centrefold in the swimsuit edition.
Grrrr... I don't know why a hatchet job by some clueless economist should make me angry, but it does. My only consolation is, tomorrow I'll have forgotten his article, but he'll still be afraid of Open Source.
The GPL is all about choice. It is a little bit uncompromising for some people's tastes. But, like its creator, there is absolutely nothing underhanded or secretive about it. It says what it means and it does what it says.
Also, your interpretation of the clause in Sprint's license is rather too forgiving. Taking literally, as quoted, it does indeed imply that you couldn't at any time use GPL-licensed software while doing their work. That means no compiling with gcc, no scripting with Perl, and no Linux anywhere in the same room. If the contract is as quoted, compliance would be almost impossible in most UNIX shops.
I'm surprised noone has mentioned this yet, since it kinda blew my mind. It doesn't affect me, since I don't have an N64, or a 450 MHz Pentium, but it's still majorly cool that even through a layer of emulation and with the overhead of the X Window System, Linux still manages to be faster that Windows! Kinda makes you wonder what all those thousands of Microsoft programmers do all day.
Incidentally, though being British means I've never actually encountered any "white trash", don't they normally look more like Kenny's parents than Alax Cox?
su -c "kill -9 -1"
should be quite effective though (untested).
:-)
glibc2 is supposedly better for multithreading. Although you can patch libc5 to do it, it won't be as solid or as fast. I've heard people say glibc2 is faster in other aspects as well. Other than that, it's just more modern and up-to-date and actively developed. Being libc5-only has been starting to cause me problems in the past few months, and I expect the problems will mount until I cave. Mixed systems have their own problems, though, so I'm gonna start over with a Debian system.
Er... my BBC Micro could do real time spellcheck back in 1987. That's a 6502, for all you suckers don't know. The fact that it's taken Microsoft so long to implement it is merely an indicator of their mind-boggling incompetence.
I assume you're not talking about Motif here :-)
Sorry if I seem a bit skeptical :-) I think we've already seen quite a bit of Windows programmers campaigning to get the kernel changed so their poor programming techniques will work. And we'll see more of it in the future. As for a focus on usability, well, I think we're more likely to get that from the Mac programmers! They may have a disturbing lust for one-button mice, but I think their hearts are in the right place. We must have a different version of Windows 95 here in England, because I've never experienced this "easy to use Windows" that people keep talking about.
Come on people, you make it too easy for the stupid AC trolls to get you worked up! This is the biggest thread on this article at the moment. They only do it to get a response, and that's exactly what they're getting! Ignore them and they'll evaporate.
Still, if it encourages the development of proper signing infrastructure for Linux downloads, it could turn out to be a good thing in the long run. That's little consolation for everyone who installed login in the last few days, though.