Er... evince is already in Fedora Core 4 (where it is the default PDF viewer on fresh installs) and even Debian stable, so quite likely Ubuntu too. Were you being ironic?
Perhaps we should all learn Flash and start writing applications in it...
Er, no.
Perhaps we should be looking at real standards such as CSS, E4X and SVG. Furthermore, we need to lobby certain people to implement such standards in their browsers.
Er.. if two computers connect to the same access point, won't they have direct access to each other? And.. if you're not relying on firewalls to protect you from each other you will get to show your ignorant laptop-owning friends how to remove their worms your other ignorant friends (or passers-by) kindly infect them with... the hard way.
Idiots (as in "...for Dummies") like GNOME because of its consistent UI; because they can work out how to do something without a degree in Nerd Science.
Idiots (as in Windows "Power User" feature-junkies) like KDE because they can show off the latest whizzy-feature.
OK, so I overstated it somewhat. Both desktops have their pros and cons, both from a user's and a programmer's perspective. Both are memory hogs, especially in EyeCandy(tm) mode, but both are looking forward to machines of tomorrow. You wouldn't want to run Beagle on a machine with 64MB RAM; you might prefer to stick with twm.
RPC is beautiful and very much in the UNIX philosophy of not writing the same program twice. If your distribution still uses sed and awk in its boot process, why shouldn't one bit of a desktop environment borrow another's print preview or file selector?
Sure the CPU can think faster, but with software RAID 5 don't you have to write twice as much data over the PCI bus as you would with hardware? Ditto RAID 1.
Yeah--oddly though I'm getting better Bonnie results by using Linux RAID 5 than their hardware RAID 5. But it is possible (just) to stream full-size, full-framerate PAL video to 'em over NFS! (sustained 40MB/s).
Anyway in software you can now do RAID 6:)
It's worth reminding RH/Fedora users that Arjan van de Ven maintains kernel RPMs (including new module RPMs etc), and those with yum and apt can very easily test 2.6 using these files.
There are backports and loads of repositories, which again are largely backports from testing/unstable.
You might be prepared to compromise, using only unstable packages for things which are non-critical, but you're bound to get bitten by the new packages' dependency trees invading libraries etc which you wanted to keep from stable.
Secondly, if you want to use more than one third-party repository you're simply going to have to pray they're orthogonal.
Finally, and most importantly, note that testing and unstable have no security patches created in an organised way. You might find yourself either downgrading to stable or trying to patch source packages by hand (rather defeating the point of repositories..).
If you can identify the first kernel to exhibit this behaviour (use the -bk snapshots too if you have time), it would help the kernel hackers pin the bug down!
To say "you're safe" without qualification is surely tempting fate. I'm pretty sure the crackers out there take more satisfaction in breaking software backed by such arrogant, bullish claims!
I don't know, but one critical missing for me is writeable views. Replication (even single-master) gives you the added sweetness of the ability to hot dump:)
1.4.x (like 1.0.x) is a "long-lived" release (ie even after the 1.5 it will be maintained). For stability and large-scale deployments 1.4 should be good for a fair while:)
You need to get your MTA to reject such mail during the SMTP conversation (ie the virus scanning must occur inside the MTA). Unfortunately, to reduce collateral "damage", this must happen for all ingoing and outgoing mailers;
then it reduces to a relaying problem.
Look for milters in sendmail, exiscan or local_scan() functions in Exim, no doubt other mailers worth their salt have similar APIs.
In server environements with stripped [sic] 15K cheetah SCSI drives, you'd worry more about stability than speed.
I'm not convinced. ext3 under 2.4 on SMP can be cripplingly slow entirely for software reasons--lock_kernel() being the biggest culprit.
Having said that, my new big fileserver is going to be ext3 on 2.6 (eventually!); the data volumes being on a 12-way RAID-5 set and the journals on a RAID-1 pair. It seems to perform adequately with dir_index and sparse_super.
The main thing that swings it for me is the brilliant e2fsck.
Ho ho! They, unlike Debian, want people to keep as current as possible. Not everyone shares Debian's philosophy, and note that there is no OOo in Debian stable (nor will there be till at least Easter..)
Slashdot Mirror
The scheduler in Linux has just been ripped out.
They kind of already do, with a live bookmark hitting the main RSS feed.
Er... evince is already in Fedora Core 4 (where it is the default PDF viewer on fresh installs) and even Debian stable, so quite likely Ubuntu too. Were you being ironic?
Perhaps we should all learn Flash and start writing applications in it...
Er, no.
Perhaps we should be looking at real standards such as CSS, E4X and SVG. Furthermore, we need to lobby certain people to implement such standards in their browsers.
Er.. if two computers connect to the same access point, won't they have direct access to each other? And.. if you're not relying on firewalls to protect you from each other you will get to show your ignorant laptop-owning friends how to remove their worms your other ignorant friends (or passers-by) kindly infect them with... the hard way.
Time to feed the trolls..
OK, so I overstated it somewhat. Both desktops have their pros and cons, both from a user's and a programmer's perspective. Both are memory hogs, especially in EyeCandy(tm) mode, but both are looking forward to machines of tomorrow. You wouldn't want to run Beagle on a machine with 64MB RAM; you might prefer to stick with twm.
RPC is beautiful and very much in the UNIX philosophy of not writing the same program twice. If your distribution still uses sed and awk in its boot process, why shouldn't one bit of a desktop environment borrow another's print preview or file selector?
It's been such a long time that people have been getting this wrong that I'm losing hope.
NB "it's" can mean "it has", as in my previous sentence. I wouldn't be surprised if there were yet other valid alternatives.
For exim >= 4.12 just drop this into your DATA ACL:
The other bits are similarly easy :)
Sure the CPU can think faster, but with software RAID 5 don't you have to write twice as much data over the PCI bus as you would with hardware? Ditto RAID 1.
Yeah--oddly though I'm getting better Bonnie results by using Linux RAID 5 than their hardware RAID 5. But it is possible (just) to stream full-size, full-framerate PAL video to 'em over NFS! (sustained 40MB/s). Anyway in software you can now do RAID 6 :)
It's worth reminding RH/Fedora users that Arjan van de Ven maintains kernel RPMs (including new module RPMs etc), and those with yum and apt can very easily test 2.6 using these files.
Read the readme.txt for full details.
- 1 gigabyte = 1000**3 bytes
- 1 gibibyte = 1024**3 bytes
But nobody really cares about such discrepancies in today's bloated world!In a word, no.
There are backports and loads of repositories, which again are largely backports from testing/unstable.
You might be prepared to compromise, using only unstable packages for things which are non-critical, but you're bound to get bitten by the new packages' dependency trees invading libraries etc which you wanted to keep from stable.
Secondly, if you want to use more than one third-party repository you're simply going to have to pray they're orthogonal.
Finally, and most importantly, note that testing and unstable have no security patches created in an organised way. You might find yourself either downgrading to stable or trying to patch source packages by hand (rather defeating the point of repositories..).
All three of the above problems have bitten me.
Cool; vi is a derived work from one of the professors at my institution in the UK.
Does this mean Queen Mary owns NASA?
Debian and Fedora could easily end up merging.
Think of it: already Progeny are porting anaconda to Debian, and Fedora can do apt..
It won't be long before they're essentially the same thing, and maybe that is not a Bad Thing.
If you can identify the first kernel to exhibit this behaviour (use the -bk snapshots too if you have time), it would help the kernel hackers pin the bug down!
If you call your product "open" SSL (or openssh for that matter), and occasionally people will discover it's Exactly What It Says On The Tin.
:)
Well it amused me anyway
Drivers have existed for some chipsets for quite some time now.
To say "you're safe" without qualification is surely tempting fate. I'm pretty sure the crackers out there take more satisfaction in breaking software backed by such arrogant, bullish claims!
"safe wrt this bug" would be more appropriate.
I don't know, but one critical missing for me is writeable views. Replication (even single-master) gives you the added sweetness of the ability to hot dump :)
1.4.x (like 1.0.x) is a "long-lived" release (ie even after the 1.5 it will be maintained). For stability and large-scale deployments 1.4 should be good for a fair while :)
Look for milters in sendmail, exiscan or local_scan() functions in Exim, no doubt other mailers worth their salt have similar APIs.
I'm not convinced. ext3 under 2.4 on SMP can be cripplingly slow entirely for software reasons--lock_kernel() being the biggest culprit.
Having said that, my new big fileserver is going to be ext3 on 2.6 (eventually!); the data volumes being on a 12-way RAID-5 set and the journals on a RAID-1 pair. It seems to perform adequately with dir_index and sparse_super.
The main thing that swings it for me is the brilliant e2fsck.
Yes, it's GTK2--ironically Gimp is one of the last GTK1 users!
Ho ho! They, unlike Debian, want people to keep as current as possible. Not everyone shares Debian's philosophy, and note that there is no OOo in Debian stable (nor will there be till at least Easter..)