Of much interest: "A Humboldt Country sheriff's deputy responded to a concerned bystander's phone call reporting that a man had struck a female passenger inside a truck."
SUN's is almost 6 times larger than RHAT in term of market cap and that means SUN is almost 6 times more valuable as a company that RHAT in term of dollars!
OK, you're right.
But... SUN also owns a lot of buildings. Real Estate. Fabs (I think). Stuff like that. What does RHAT own? one building? Whose value is higher if you subtract assets like real estate (which have nothing to do with the company's product)?
Bet SUN is still more valuable than RHAT, but I wonder by how much.
Failed due to a linking error after about 20 minutes of compiling. I'm not willing to continue messing with this, as I have no vested interest, but this is a known issue and the workaround is trivial:
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/kerberos/2003-A ug ust/003627.html
It continues to be my belief that you COULD compile vanilla SAMBA out of the box with nearly no extra work.
I can't just take the virgin code from, say, Samba, and compile...
You sure about that? Have you tried it? I have not, but I bet it would just work.
OK, so I'm not just BSing, I've downloaded. I'm configuring. Worked. I'm makeing. So far, so good. I gotta post this before it times out. I'll followup with the results.
OS X in this regard is no better than Windows. It's an opaque operating system and dispite the list of changes that Apple provides, there's no real way to know if the patch is going to kill your system.
And this differs from using any other non-public domain software how?
Well, commercial software generally has a $ amount associated with it if you redistribute it.
If you link to something that is ditributed with the OS you're selling on, it could fall into one of a few categories: 1. It's GPL, and you're screwwed (see grandparent post). The biggest problem here is that your screwwage is not well defined. 2. It's system proprietary and free for use with the system. 3. It's system proprietary and you have to pay to use it. Here you're screwwed, but you'll know exactly the $ amount up front [lawyers notwithstanding].
Finally, if you redistribute (or depend on) something using a BSD [style] license, it is free for use when linked in - even though it is not PD.
If I tried to then sell my work, I would also have to release my source.
Didn't read the article, did you? That is one thing you would not have to do.
Sigh. OK, BS pedantic games:
If I tried to then sell my work, I would also have to release my source.
Yes, I would have to release my source. Failing to do so would [likely] result in damages, C&D, or nothing, depending on what the courts decide.
Or I could rewrite my code. Or do other things.
But you cannot be compelled to the latter.
(You might also be liable for damages on what you'd already sold, but that's a separate issue.)
Sounds pretty compelling. So, yeah, I have a choice. Comply with the GPL, or face the consequences.
The point I was making is this: Yes, it is possible to accidentally use GPL'd code. Yes, you're screwwed if you do. No, screwwed does not mean you'll be executed. Yes, screwwed probably means there will be a cost to you: time, money, or both.
Making a derivative work of a software program IS NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT.
Sure it is. If there is a library available on a system that I use, and I link to that library, it is VERY possible for that to happen without me realizing that library is GPL'd. If I tried to then sell my work, I would also have to release my source.
That has not happened to me, but it is pretty easy for me to imagine.
GPL code owners have been pretty good about allowing accidental users of GPL code to back out things like that, however (replacing the library with a proprietary one, etc).
...They're always at the regular $299/399/499 price...
The other day came in the mail a 10% off coupon for various items at Best Buy, including 'MP3 Players'.. 'Excludes Apple iPod Players.' Needless to say, a Merry Christmas is still aways off.
Now of course the problem is that Sun's massive support network is currently aimed entirely at business, so it will take them some retooling to make it consumer-friendly. Let's hope they succeed - there hasn't been a big-company supported alternative to Windows on low-end computers since IBM's OS/2.
I gotta say, I find that comparison ridiculous. IBM had been in business, providing solutions from the DB server in the back to the registers in the front for years. Decades. Hell, IBM sold WPs and typewriters to real users.
SUN sells servers. I don't think they've every marketed any kind of solution to any kind of user (successfully).
What's more, OS/2 was trying to compete with windows WAAAAY back in the early days of windows. Windows is pretty entrenched now.
As much as I'd love to see someone unseat M$, I don't think SUN stands a chance.
That's the most important thing. There are so many folks that would love to work from home, but can't. Turns out that some folks just don't like it! If you finally get this thing you've wished for, and find you don't like it, get over it and go into the office.
I work from home and I really like it. What's also important is that I do a good job of it - I stay pretty focused (more than I often do at the office:-) I've worked with folks who just don't like working from home, and those who would like to, but just can not stay focused.
Now I can finally login as root on OSX. Considering all my friends running OsX have no idea what their root password is, or for that matter what root is, this seems like a blessing.
If you have admin rights on the system: Log in. sudo su -
Done.
But really, you should almost never need to be root. For those times that you do, I recommend: sudo whaterver I need to do
That way you don't become root and accidentally do something you should not have been doing. It's one command at a time...
I think every house should have a phone that will operate without local electrical power, just in case.
Agree, and I do.
When I start to think about getting my own house, I intend to factor the price of a whole house generator into figuring what I can afford.
Depending on where you're headed, think green: solar, hydro, or wind! My sister lives off the electrical grid (hydro), and it's amazing. Just have to give a little more thought into what you're running.
Re:5 years in the business...
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 1
Why is everyone so obsessed with people not having to be admins to configure software without reading the manual (and if you have to, learning to read it).
Most users don't need to read the Windows or Mac manual before setting up their computer. That's because the config tools are self documenting. That's how it should be. See, there are applications that you use to configure your computer, and they have text that tells you what's going on. If you're really lost, they have help buttons. vi is not the right tool to configure your system.
You wouldn't expect someone with no knowledge to be able to change their car radiator, or for that matter the oil. You have to read the manual, or know what your looking for.
See, your radiator doesn't have [much] text on it, nor do the tools needed to replace the radiator. There is no "replace radiator" application. There is no place for a help button if you're really lost. That's how computers should be different from cars - they should be more self-documenting and easier to use.
If you can't read the Haynes manual, you need to learn what it's talking about first.
No, the computer should do the right thing. So should the software.
Thanks for keeping linux and other free software obscure!
Oh, and w0w - yer really a l33t h4xor!
Re:5 years in the business...
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 1
XML is overkill for anything that's only one or two levels deep.
It is a reasonable standard, and in the absense of others (which seems to be the case in/etc), it seems like a good way to go.
In any case, think how much larger all those daemons would be if they had to include an XML parser or at least parse through a DOM tree... Sure, we've got memory and cycles to waste, but that doesn't mean we have to.
A single shlib. They'd be smaller because they wouldn't include their own parser. As for efficiency, I wonder how fast the parsers are they all these programs have. I guess they're plenty fast, but so are xml parsers. Finally, they usually parse these files only once, or seldom.
Nor most modern phones - which need electrical. Nor traffic lights. Lucky I don't depend on that kinda stuff being up all the time!
Re:5 years in the business...
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 1
Most of those files that use # for a comment do have a single parser in common:/bin/sh
A bunch do, but many don't. For those that are really dressed up sh files, I have to agree with you. For the rest, a standard format (XML) would be nice.
bombadil% ls/etc/*.conf...
/etc/6to4.conf: shell
/etc/gdb.conf: not shell
/etc/inetd.conf: not shell
/etc/kern_loader.conf: blank?
/etc/named.conf: not shell
/etc/ntp.conf: not shell
/etc/resolv.conf: not shell
/etc/rtadvd.conf: no clue
/etc/slpsa.conf: probably shell
/etc/smb.conf: not shell
/etc/syslog.conf: not shell
/etc/xinetd.conf: not shell
So in that set, around 3/4 were not shell files.
Most administrators know what to do.
But it would be real nice if there were a standard format, and those files were easy to parse, and there were a (very) few config tools that would do the right thing(tm), and one didn't have to be an "administrator" to get it right.
Re:5 years in the business...
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 1
I hate XML with a passion. Let me present you with three examples
1) Programming languages based on XML.
Yup.
2) XSLT
Have you tried it? I rest my case.
I'm coding some right now, and it's not easy. The thing is this: it is tremendously powerful, and good at doing the one thing it's good at: converting XML to XML. There aren't many cases when you should need to do this, and XSLT beats perl, IMHO.
3) SOAP
Okay, initially this actually seemed like a good idea to me, but having thought about it, I really think it sucks. Okay, so it is easier to implement SOAP for a particular platform or programming language, but a wire protocol is like a compiler or an OS kernel in a certain sense - it is okay that it is very hard to write, as long as it is stable and high performance, because it is such a central component.
Let me start by saying I much prefer XML-RPC.
I totally agree with you in one respect: you shouldn't care that SOAP uses XML. Why do you? If you noticed it, you must be doing something wrong, unless you're writing an implemntation - in which case you should be grateful that it's so easy to do!
Finally, my crusade for XML:/etc files. All those damn config files with their propietary one line formats where # signs mean a comment should be written in XML. Then they would all use the same damn parser, and it would be easy for one to borrow information from another, and it would be easy to write a tool to maintain them using the UI of your choice.
That's the kinda think XML is ideal for: we gotta store some flatfile data. It should be human readable/editable if need be. XML is a great tool for that job.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.epic.org/privacy/hiibel/default.html
Of much interest:
"A Humboldt Country sheriff's deputy responded to a concerned bystander's phone call reporting that a man had struck a female passenger inside a truck."
So it would seem he was not 'accosted at random'.
SUN's is almost 6 times larger than RHAT in term of market cap and that means SUN is almost 6 times more valuable as a company that RHAT in term of dollars!
OK, you're right.
But... SUN also owns a lot of buildings. Real Estate. Fabs (I think). Stuff like that. What does RHAT own? one building? Whose value is higher if you subtract assets like real estate (which have nothing to do with the company's product)?
Bet SUN is still more valuable than RHAT, but I wonder by how much.
Please supply a reference to that information.
Failed due to a linking error after about 20 minutes of compiling. I'm not willing to continue messing with this, as I have no vested interest, but this is a known issue and the workaround is trivial:
A ug ust/003627.html
http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/kerberos/2003-
It continues to be my belief that you COULD compile vanilla SAMBA out of the box with nearly no extra work.
I can't just take the virgin code from, say, Samba, and compile...
You sure about that? Have you tried it? I have not, but I bet it would just work.
OK, so I'm not just BSing, I've downloaded. I'm configuring. Worked. I'm makeing. So far, so good. I gotta post this before it times out. I'll followup with the results.
OS X in this regard is no better than Windows. It's an opaque operating system and dispite the list of changes that Apple provides, there's no real way to know if the patch is going to kill your system.
Did you miss http://developer.apple.com/darwin/?
Have fun with the kernel...
Ya know - the first episode of season 2 did almost nothing for me. Episode 2 is damn funny.
I gotta wonder... Why?
My city didn't have a domain when I started out, so I went with the county, which did have one. It's worked great for me.
And this differs from using any other non-public domain software how?
Well, commercial software generally has a $ amount associated with it if you redistribute it.
If you link to something that is ditributed with the OS you're selling on, it could fall into one of a few categories:
1. It's GPL, and you're screwwed (see grandparent post). The biggest problem here is that your screwwage is not well defined.
2. It's system proprietary and free for use with the system.
3. It's system proprietary and you have to pay to use it. Here you're screwwed, but you'll know exactly the $ amount up front [lawyers notwithstanding].
Finally, if you redistribute (or depend on) something using a BSD [style] license, it is free for use when linked in - even though it is not PD.
If I tried to then sell my work, I would also have to release my source.
Didn't read the article, did you? That is one thing you would not have to do.
Sigh. OK, BS pedantic games:
If I tried to then sell my work, I would also have to release my source.
Yes, I would have to release my source. Failing to do so would [likely] result in damages, C&D, or nothing, depending on what the courts decide.
Or I could rewrite my code. Or do other things.
But you cannot be compelled to the latter.
(You might also be liable for damages on what you'd already sold, but that's a separate issue.)
Sounds pretty compelling. So, yeah, I have a choice. Comply with the GPL, or face the consequences.
The point I was making is this:
Yes, it is possible to accidentally use GPL'd code. Yes, you're screwwed if you do. No, screwwed does not mean you'll be executed. Yes, screwwed probably means there will be a cost to you: time, money, or both.
Badly written man page. Code copied from another app. Javadoc that failed to include the GPL statement. Same for phpdoc or perldoc.
Yeah, this doesn't happen often. Yes, it does happen. No, it's not a big deal.
Making a derivative work of a software program IS NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN HAPPEN BY ACCIDENT.
Sure it is. If there is a library available on a system that I use, and I link to that library, it is VERY possible for that to happen without me realizing that library is GPL'd. If I tried to then sell my work, I would also have to release my source.
That has not happened to me, but it is pretty easy for me to imagine.
GPL code owners have been pretty good about allowing accidental users of GPL code to back out things like that, however (replacing the library with a proprietary one, etc).
...They're always at the regular $299/399/499 price...
.. 'Excludes Apple iPod Players.' Needless to say, a Merry Christmas is still aways off.
.
/ WebObjects/A ppleStore.woa/70702/wo/Lh7my7TA0KCr3f9EhEZxWPiry53 /0.0.7.1.0.5.13.0.3.0.0.0.0.3.1.1.0?51,37
The other day came in the mail a 10% off coupon for various items at Best Buy, including 'MP3 Players'
Looks like "still a ways off" is $29.90
Finally:
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE
(special deals page):
Refurb iPod 10GB (Mac & Windows) Dock not included: $229.
You didn't look very hard, did you?
Now of course the problem is that Sun's massive support network is currently aimed entirely at business, so it will take them some retooling to make it consumer-friendly. Let's hope they succeed - there hasn't been a big-company supported alternative to Windows on low-end computers since IBM's OS/2.
I gotta say, I find that comparison ridiculous. IBM had been in business, providing solutions from the DB server in the back to the registers in the front for years. Decades. Hell, IBM sold WPs and typewriters to real users.
SUN sells servers. I don't think they've every marketed any kind of solution to any kind of user (successfully).
What's more, OS/2 was trying to compete with windows WAAAAY back in the early days of windows. Windows is pretty entrenched now.
As much as I'd love to see someone unseat M$, I don't think SUN stands a chance.
I wonder if that's true.
I imagine that most countries of any size do have regions that roughly correspond to states.
Cool idea.
You're in DIRE need of a better locator selector. Make it 2-step - select state first, then city - or something...
Having said all that, it's not for everyone
:-) I've worked with folks who just don't like working from home, and those who would like to, but just can not stay focused.
That's the most important thing. There are so many folks that would love to work from home, but can't. Turns out that some folks just don't like it! If you finally get this thing you've wished for, and find you don't like it, get over it and go into the office.
I work from home and I really like it. What's also important is that I do a good job of it - I stay pretty focused (more than I often do at the office
It's not for everyone.
Yeah, it is pretty thin pickin's game-wise. It SEEMS like it's getting better, but that may just be me wishing it so...
Now I can finally login as root on OSX. Considering all my friends running OsX have no idea what their root password is, or for that matter what root is, this seems like a blessing.
If you have admin rights on the system:
Log in.
sudo su -
Done.
But really, you should almost never need to be root. For those times that you do, I recommend:
sudo whaterver I need to do
That way you don't become root and accidentally do something you should not have been doing. It's one command at a time...
I think every house should have a phone that will operate without local electrical power, just in case.
Agree, and I do.
When I start to think about getting my own house, I intend to factor the price of a whole house generator into figuring what I can afford.
Depending on where you're headed, think green: solar, hydro, or wind! My sister lives off the electrical grid (hydro), and it's amazing. Just have to give a little more thought into what you're running.
Why is everyone so obsessed with people not having to be admins to configure software without reading the manual (and if you have to, learning to read it).
Most users don't need to read the Windows or Mac manual before setting up their computer. That's because the config tools are self documenting. That's how it should be. See, there are applications that you use to configure your computer, and they have text that tells you what's going on. If you're really lost, they have help buttons. vi is not the right tool to configure your system.
You wouldn't expect someone with no knowledge to be able to change their car radiator, or for that matter the oil. You have to read the manual, or know what your looking for.
See, your radiator doesn't have [much] text on it, nor do the tools needed to replace the radiator. There is no "replace radiator" application. There is no place for a help button if you're really lost. That's how computers should be different from cars - they should be more self-documenting and easier to use.
If you can't read the Haynes manual, you need to learn what it's talking about first.
No, the computer should do the right thing. So should the software.
Thanks for keeping linux and other free software obscure!
Oh, and w0w - yer really a l33t h4xor!
XML is overkill for anything that's only one or two levels deep.
/etc), it seems like a good way to go.
It is a reasonable standard, and in the absense of others (which seems to be the case in
In any case, think how much larger all those daemons would be if they had to include an XML parser or at least parse through a DOM tree... Sure, we've got memory and cycles to waste, but that doesn't mean we have to.
A single shlib. They'd be smaller because they wouldn't include their own parser.
As for efficiency, I wonder how fast the parsers are they all these programs have. I guess they're plenty fast, but so are xml parsers. Finally, they usually parse these files only once, or seldom.
Nor most modern phones - which need electrical. Nor traffic lights. Lucky I don't depend on that kinda stuff being up all the time!
A bunch do, but many don't. For those that are really dressed up sh files, I have to agree with you. For the rest, a standard format (XML) would be nice.
bombadil% ls
So in that set, around 3/4 were not shell files.
Most administrators know what to do.
But it would be real nice if there were a standard format, and those files were easy to parse, and there were a (very) few config tools that would do the right thing(tm), and one didn't have to be an "administrator" to get it right.
I hate XML with a passion. Let me present you with three examples
/etc files. All those damn config files with their propietary one line formats where # signs mean a comment should be written in XML. Then they would all use the same damn parser, and it would be easy for one to borrow information from another, and it would be easy to write a tool to maintain them using the UI of your choice.
1) Programming languages based on XML.
Yup.
2) XSLT
Have you tried it? I rest my case.
I'm coding some right now, and it's not easy. The thing is this: it is tremendously powerful, and good at doing the one thing it's good at: converting XML to XML. There aren't many cases when you should need to do this, and XSLT beats perl, IMHO.
3) SOAP
Okay, initially this actually seemed like a good idea to me, but having thought about it, I really think it sucks. Okay, so it is easier to implement SOAP for a particular platform or programming language, but a wire protocol is like a compiler or an OS kernel in a certain sense - it is okay that it is very hard to write, as long as it is stable and high performance, because it is such a central component.
Let me start by saying I much prefer XML-RPC.
I totally agree with you in one respect: you shouldn't care that SOAP uses XML. Why do you? If you noticed it, you must be doing something wrong, unless you're writing an implemntation - in which case you should be grateful that it's so easy to do!
Finally, my crusade for XML:
That's the kinda think XML is ideal for: we gotta store some flatfile data. It should be human readable/editable if need be. XML is a great tool for that job.