Linux does NOT run on FAT32 as a native file system. It has options of EXT2, EXT3 (EXT2 + journaling), ReiserFS, XFS (from SGI), JFS (from IBM) and probably quite a few more. Yes, you could probably make it run from FAT32, if you tried.
EXT2 is similar to FAT32, whereas the others are similar in concept to NTFS -- journaling, ACLs, etc. Each has its own benefit.
I just installed Mepis on my laptop last night -- a Debian derived Live CD that has the ability to install direct from the Live CD. Very slick.
The SuSE 9.0 Live CD didn't recognize the wireless LAN card on my desktop, so that didn't get anywhere.
Mepis was the first Live CD that I could effectively use for work, and not just a rescue CD or quick test. I used various tools for hours on the laptop (450 MHz P3, 328 Mb RAM) and it just worked.
It looks like a couple of the DVD manufacturers don't do firmware. They simply pass on the firmware provided by Sigma -- curhttp://www.kiss-technology.com/?p=gnu&v=usersre ntly 1.0.0.6.
This could provide an interesting wrinkle, as some of the manufacturers look to be nothing more than "assemblers", putting together OEM parts and slapping a label on it.
In this case, it seems to be a case of ignorance and not malice. Actually, the problem might be able to be addressed en masse by convincing Sigma to tell their licensors to put a link on their website back to Sigma's GPL/Source page.
Except...Sigma seems to only distribute the source with their SDK and not to the public.
True, but some of those listed as not providing the code actually DO provide it.
Case in point: Kiss-Technologies
http://www.kiss-technology.com/?p=gnu&v=users
I guess my beef was with the phrasing of the LKML article. It was definitive in phrasing, making it sound like the source was searched for and not found or denied.
About 15 seconds on the Kiss Tech site found the link to download and mention of the GPL. I haven't checked the others, but I assume some have been looked into thoroughly.
Wrong, they're the creation of the MPAA. Read the article you linked. http://www.mpaa.org/movieratings/about/index.htm Specifically, page 2.
" Second, we changed the name of the X category to NC-17:NO ONE 17 AND UNDER ADMITTED. The X rating over the years appeared to have taken on a surly meaning in the minds of many people, a meaning that was never intended when we created the system."
You must be especially sheltered and puritanical to an extreme to believe that teens shoudn't be able to see NC-17 movies (R movies are more or less unenforced). Really now, there's nothing in there they don't know (or are doing).
"Teens" technically means anyone between 13 and 19. They're NOT the same emotionally, mentally or in experience. Lumping them in together is as irresponsible as using the term "intellectual property" when talking about copyrights, trademarks and patents -- different items altogether.
18 year olds can't buy alcohol yet pay taxes, work, and can get drafted to die in a war.
Because the vast majority of alcohol related driving injuries and fatalities involve "teens". Many can't handle the responsibility.
Under 21s can't even enter a bar, thus banning them from their own local music scene until they turn 21.
Any you have no idea how grateful those over 21 are for that.
Sexually active teens get arrested for having sex with consenting teens, etc.
Again, both the lumping of "teens" is a misnomer and the laws were a result of lack of responsibility. "Teens" still have that Superman complex -- where it can't happen to them. Only experience deals with that and the longer you live, the better the chances you have of gaining that experience. Many "teens" are irresponsible with sex -- not fully understanding the potential consequences -- or not believing it can happen to them.
No, I'm not claiming just being an adult automatically fixes that. It isn't an automatic cutoff, more like a learning curve. Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement. Living longer helps you gain more experience.
Finally, like it or not, "teens" are legally CHILDREN. That means their parents still legally hold some responsibility for their actions. The older the kids get, the less responsibility the parents have and the more for the kids. At age 18 is the biggest legal transfer of responsibility. At 21 is the final. Then they can be held responsible for their actions.
If your "teen" gets drunk and smashes up someone's car, Mom & Dad can be held responsible for the damages. Once you hit 18, it is YOUR problem.
There is no way to get a perfect system. The ratings are a guideline. Relax.
As for apathy...NC-17 *WAS* the attempted fix to the system. People didn't know the difference between X- and XXX- so both were a black mark for a serious movie.
You have to distribute source whether or not it's a derivative work.
Not exactly true. You do not have to DISTRIBUTE the source, you can make the source available on request and that is good enough.
See paragraph 2 of the GPL Preamble (...or can get it if you want it.) as well as Item 3, Sub-Item B of the main body:
"b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,"
In short, you DON'T have to distribute the source WITH the product. Making it available via a download would satisfy.
They're expensive because you either have to do an optical-electrical-optical transition, or switch purely optical.
The first takes a speed hit, adds a lot of heat and complexity; the second is in it's infancy and it'll take more than 10 years to bring the price in line with 100 Mbps ethernet.
You're talking about usage -- which is commonly oversubscribed -- whereas I was talking manufacturer's specs.
Nothing will piss off customers more than selling a 100-unit 100 MBps switch where you can't use all the ports to 100 MBps. I used to work for Lucent, and the CBX-500 ATM switch had that issue. I fielded a lot of pissed off customers over that. Backplane/midplane fabric speeds were closely watched among telcos.
You're right -- they aren't going to be doing a lot of 100 MBps sustained transfers.
I was trying to illustrate to some people why Korea doesn't go straight to 10-Gig E or faster. The problem is exponential.
As far as that "expensive" equipment not being expensive in 7 years...
Are that planning on STARTING in 7 years, or having it all rolled out? If the latter (like I suspect), the price of switches in 7 years won't matter because they will all be purchased beforehand and most installed by then.
All these posts who talk about 1 Gbps and fiber aren't thinking it through. The difficulties and costs aren't associated with the cabling or end-point connections -- they're at the switch.
1 Gbps is nice. Now pump an entire apartment unit with GE into the switch. What speed will the internal switch fabric have to support? Assume 200 apartment units, then that is in the neighborhood of 200 Gbps of switch fabric throughput. Consider most of the traffic will be going OUT of the building, the outside pipe will have to be something like an OC-48 ATM or 10-G ethernet connection.
Now THAT switch, and 1,000 more like it, all feed into different switches and the problem multiplies.
Think of the RAM buffers, latency and clock frequency that has to be maintained in the switch to handle 200 Gbps of thruput.
Cisco's top of the line Catalyst 6500 series boasts:
# 32-Gbps bus--Allowing access to a central shared bus # 256-Gbps switch fabric--Located on the switch fabric module (SFM) # 720 Gbps switch fabric--Located on Cisco Catalyst 6500 Series Supervisor Engine 720
So you ARE pushing the edge with mass deployment of fast ethernet.
Why not just wire them onwards to consumers' homes?
Because Fast Ethernet switches are chump change, and fiber switches cost more than many people's houses.
Optical switches are designed for backbones, not connecting everyone and their dog. DWDM, Sonet and ATM don't easily (or affordably) scale out to many-2-many connections.
IBM is a major competitor of Sun. And since Sun has SPARC, it has all it needs in the way of non-x86 processors. It needs a good x86-compatible offering.
Why not Intel? I think Sun & Intel are old enemies over the SPARC/x86 competition.
They have decided they will only sell the Enterprise Server version for thousands of dollars. Not a solution for small shops or desktops, therefore yes they have rejected the business of people who were previously giving them money.
You are greatly misinformed.
RHEL Workstation is $179. Enterprise Server starts at $349. $349 is a far cry from "thousands of dollars".
Slashdot Mirror
E-Week also has a good review.
...Or am I overlooking something
Linux does NOT run on FAT32 as a native file system. It has options of EXT2, EXT3 (EXT2 + journaling), ReiserFS, XFS (from SGI), JFS (from IBM) and probably quite a few more. Yes, you could probably make it run from FAT32, if you tried.
EXT2 is similar to FAT32, whereas the others are similar in concept to NTFS -- journaling, ACLs, etc. Each has its own benefit.
It's reading responses like and being thoroughly interested that really make me realize what a geek I am.
The fact that I not only *understood* the posting, but was considering posting something similar makes me way too much of a geek.
I just installed Mepis on my laptop last night -- a Debian derived Live CD that has the ability to install direct from the Live CD. Very slick.
The SuSE 9.0 Live CD didn't recognize the wireless LAN card on my desktop, so that didn't get anywhere.
Mepis was the first Live CD that I could effectively use for work, and not just a rescue CD or quick test. I used various tools for hours on the laptop (450 MHz P3, 328 Mb RAM) and it just worked.
Live CDs are the way to go.
...was making the first class coaches into Faraday Cages so the dweebs in Stanard Class couldn't snag some airtime.
I can also see some desparate geek trying to download his e-mail -- while zipping along at 100 kph in his car, parallel to the train.
Now for something completely different...
e ntly 1.0.0.6.
It looks like a couple of the DVD manufacturers don't do firmware. They simply pass on the firmware provided by Sigma -- curhttp://www.kiss-technology.com/?p=gnu&v=usersr
This could provide an interesting wrinkle, as some of the manufacturers look to be nothing more than "assemblers", putting together OEM parts and slapping a label on it.
In this case, it seems to be a case of ignorance and not malice. Actually, the problem might be able to be addressed en masse by convincing Sigma to tell their licensors to put a link on their website back to Sigma's GPL/Source page.
Except...Sigma seems to only distribute the source with their SDK and not to the public.
True, but some of those listed as not providing the code actually DO provide it.
Case in point: Kiss-Technologies
http://www.kiss-technology.com/?p=gnu&v=users
I guess my beef was with the phrasing of the LKML article. It was definitive in phrasing, making it sound like the source was searched for and not found or denied.
About 15 seconds on the Kiss Tech site found the link to download and mention of the GPL. I haven't checked the others, but I assume some have been looked into thoroughly.
Except those who read actually use their mind, whereas most movies are viewed with the mind in neutral or off.
THINKING is a benefit that outweighs the rest. The reason a lot of restrictions are put in place is because people DON'T think.
On a side note, history books ARE dangerous. Many of them are dangerously inaccurate or biased. Actually, this applies to most school textbooks.
Wrong, they're the creation of the MPAA. Read the article you linked. http://www.mpaa.org/movieratings/about/index.htm
Specifically, page 2.
" Second, we changed the name of the X category to NC-17:NO ONE 17 AND UNDER ADMITTED. The X rating over the years appeared to have taken on a surly meaning in the minds of many people, a meaning that was never intended when we created the system."
You must be especially sheltered and puritanical to an extreme to believe that teens shoudn't be able to see NC-17 movies (R movies are more or less unenforced). Really now, there's nothing in there they don't know (or are doing).
"Teens" technically means anyone between 13 and 19. They're NOT the same emotionally, mentally or in experience. Lumping them in together is as irresponsible as using the term "intellectual property" when talking about copyrights, trademarks and patents -- different items altogether.
18 year olds can't buy alcohol yet pay taxes, work, and can get drafted to die in a war.
Because the vast majority of alcohol related driving injuries and fatalities involve "teens". Many can't handle the responsibility.
Under 21s can't even enter a bar, thus banning them from their own local music scene until they turn 21.
Any you have no idea how grateful those over 21 are for that.
Sexually active teens get arrested for having sex with consenting teens, etc.
Again, both the lumping of "teens" is a misnomer and the laws were a result of lack of responsibility. "Teens" still have that Superman complex -- where it can't happen to them. Only experience deals with that and the longer you live, the better the chances you have of gaining that experience. Many "teens" are irresponsible with sex -- not fully understanding the potential consequences -- or not believing it can happen to them.
No, I'm not claiming just being an adult automatically fixes that. It isn't an automatic cutoff, more like a learning curve. Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement. Living longer helps you gain more experience.
Finally, like it or not, "teens" are legally CHILDREN. That means their parents still legally hold some responsibility for their actions. The older the kids get, the less responsibility the parents have and the more for the kids. At age 18 is the biggest legal transfer of responsibility. At 21 is the final. Then they can be held responsible for their actions.
If your "teen" gets drunk and smashes up someone's car, Mom & Dad can be held responsible for the damages. Once you hit 18, it is YOUR problem.
There is no way to get a perfect system. The ratings are a guideline. Relax.
As for apathy...NC-17 *WAS* the attempted fix to the system. People didn't know the difference between X- and XXX- so both were a black mark for a serious movie.
I still don't understand why people accept this with movies (R- and X- ratings), but have problems when applied to games and music.
You have to distribute source whether or not it's a derivative work.
Not exactly true. You do not have to DISTRIBUTE the source, you can make the source available on request and that is good enough.
See paragraph 2 of the GPL Preamble (...or can get it if you want it.) as well as Item 3, Sub-Item B of the main body:
"b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,"
In short, you DON'T have to distribute the source WITH the product. Making it available via a download would satisfy.
-Charles
Let the girlfriend/wife jokes begin!
You'd figure the average geek would make one too many Simpson's reference about "Fat Tony" and get his ass whacked before he could do anything useful.
Man, I want a job at the Gartner group. It seems their methods go something like:
1) Something happens
2) Side with big business and release a paper
3) Wait until popular tide changes
4) Release new paper contradicting old one.
Shit, I could do that all day. Sign me up!
It wouldn't surprise me if you were now sued for a DMCA violation -- reverse engineering their business practice!
They're expensive because you either have to do an optical-electrical-optical transition, or switch purely optical.
The first takes a speed hit, adds a lot of heat and complexity; the second is in it's infancy and it'll take more than 10 years to bring the price in line with 100 Mbps ethernet.
Almost.
You're talking about usage -- which is commonly oversubscribed -- whereas I was talking manufacturer's specs.
Nothing will piss off customers more than selling a 100-unit 100 MBps switch where you can't use all the ports to 100 MBps. I used to work for Lucent, and the CBX-500 ATM switch had that issue. I fielded a lot of pissed off customers over that. Backplane/midplane fabric speeds were closely watched among telcos.
You're right -- they aren't going to be doing a lot of 100 MBps sustained transfers.
I was trying to illustrate to some people why Korea doesn't go straight to 10-Gig E or faster. The problem is exponential.
As far as that "expensive" equipment not being expensive in 7 years...
Are that planning on STARTING in 7 years, or having it all rolled out? If the latter (like I suspect), the price of switches in 7 years won't matter because they will all be purchased beforehand and most installed by then.
Cost and switch fabric.
All these posts who talk about 1 Gbps and fiber aren't thinking it through. The difficulties and costs aren't associated with the cabling or end-point connections -- they're at the switch.
1 Gbps is nice. Now pump an entire apartment unit with GE into the switch. What speed will the internal switch fabric have to support? Assume 200 apartment units, then that is in the neighborhood of 200 Gbps of switch fabric throughput. Consider most of the traffic will be going OUT of the building, the outside pipe will have to be something like an OC-48 ATM or 10-G ethernet connection.
Now THAT switch, and 1,000 more like it, all feed into different switches and the problem multiplies.
Think of the RAM buffers, latency and clock frequency that has to be maintained in the switch to handle 200 Gbps of thruput.
Cisco's top of the line Catalyst 6500 series boasts:
# 32-Gbps bus--Allowing access to a central shared bus
# 256-Gbps switch fabric--Located on the switch fabric module (SFM)
# 720 Gbps switch fabric--Located on Cisco Catalyst 6500 Series Supervisor Engine 720
So you ARE pushing the edge with mass deployment of fast ethernet.
Oh, yeah. Fully loaded 6513s run $100,000, easy.
Why not just wire them onwards to consumers' homes?
Because Fast Ethernet switches are chump change, and fiber switches cost more than many people's houses.
Optical switches are designed for backbones, not connecting everyone and their dog. DWDM, Sonet and ATM don't easily (or affordably) scale out to many-2-many connections.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 Workstation Edition has an IPSec/VPN Wizard.
It works nicely, too. Gets rid of all that cruft you mentioned.
IBM is a major competitor of Sun. And since Sun has SPARC, it has all it needs in the way of non-x86 processors. It needs a good x86-compatible offering.
Why not Intel? I think Sun & Intel are old enemies over the SPARC/x86 competition.
Slick, yet entertaining. 8 out of 10 troll points.
"...second only to the Windows..." gave it away. Any Sun employee uttering that phrase would probably be publically executed.
They have decided they will only sell the Enterprise Server version for thousands of dollars. Not a solution for small shops or desktops, therefore yes they have rejected the business of people who were previously giving them money.
You are greatly misinformed.
RHEL Workstation is $179. Enterprise Server starts at $349. $349 is a far cry from "thousands of dollars".
Besides, even if he did "own" it, does the paltry price he is charging just a sign that he's only trying to be a pain in NASA's ass?
Nope. I bet he's trying to get a gov't agency to "recognize" his claim by paying the invoice.
Pointing to a bright light in the sky and saying "mine" doesn't make it so.
Did OrbDev fly up there to mark the boundaries of their claim? Somehow, I think not.
Good luck in enforcing that.