A bit more flexible option than the laptops people are suggesting.. You can find cases at elan vital and aopen. Asus has numerous boards in microatx. Here's their KT133 based one.
If you want even smaller, you can go FlexATX. Motherboards are scarce, however. I think Tyan has one, but no AGP slot on there.
You have a directory of files with a ".mpa" extension. The extension should be ".mp3". You want to change all the files in one operation. As far as I know, impossible under
not only Windows Explorer, but ALSO under UNIX shells! (Scripting as always does not count, only basic shell commands.)
You may argue this is a script, but I think it's basic shell.
for x in *.mpa; do mv $x `echo $x | sed -e 's/a$/3/'`; done
And this one you can't refute, although mmv is not that popular nor commonplace:
Crappy article. I fear Mr Burg may have missed the point in some places in the article. I wonder if Raskin is happy with what Mr. Burg has come up with. If not, where He is found below, He = Mr. Burg, else He = Raskin.
It's a lot of words to express (in my opinion) his distaste for the design of OS X. He thinks it gets in the way. (I'm not saying whether it does or not. Nor do I care.)
He touts the PalmOS in its ability to be transparent. BeOS in eVilla, too. These things are too simple- try to do something fairly complex on one of these devices? Say, code in a new language using man pages or HTML as a reference. While making sure the bug you just fixed in a totally seperate project doesn't crash it. And watch a kernel compile. And monitor irc. And idle on ICQ. And listen to MP3s. And maybe visit napster once in awhile.
The badly named section "Adopting new ideas" tries to say that everything should be done at the click of a single button AS WELL AS there should be buttons (hot keys) to do every single task. The author strikes me as someone not too keen on learning new things. An OS being a tool, it requires you to learn how to use it. A Tool (caps intentional) that doesn't require much learning USUALLY won't do much more for you than if you were Tool-less.
Mr. Raskin: if it gets in the way, don't use it. BUT if it's easiar to deal with IT getting in the way than to deal with the problem ANY OTHER WAY, then make a damn decision.
These people amaze me. I mean, once we all get seriously jacked in, like do away with the meat entirely, will they choose to be run under some wrapper simulating constant pleasure? Like out of a Vonnegut tale.
What I like about Linux configuration is that I can do it at the console, from my parents' machine several cities away, and not have to worry about blowing a config option or
wasting time trying to reproduce XML tags. I type, save, it's done, any mistakes are clearly my fault.
Why can't this be done with XML config files? XML isn't some binary format, it's TEXT!
There are already 50 000 different formats for text-based config files in Linux/*NIX. Since XML won't automatically take over every single program and tool, that will give
admins and users 50 001 different formats, and that one will be much less readable in the event of a necessary quick fix.
You're an admin a decade from now and you're used to the new BIND configuration. You find an old Linux 2.0.x box running the old version of BIND. Now you'll have to look up the docs and learn it. Rather than with our theoretical XML translation engine (from XML to format X) taking care of that. (Oh, bind8? Alright..)
I respect that you like the less complicated scenario of native config files, and in some cases they are more suited to the config data at hand (ie no `tags and crap'), but XML does give some order to it that some people will like..
-- while($s ne "just another perl hacker"){ $s.=["a".."z"," "]->[rand 25] }
On redhat or probably any other RPM based system (Mandrake, SuSE, etc) the package manager is 'rpm'. There is a GUI frontend called gnorpm that probably does what add/remove would do. On Debian based systems there's apt (apt-get, apt-cache) and gnome-apt for a frontend.
What is the equivilent of autoexec.bat/startup folder?
First of all, Linux boot up is a bit more complicated than DOS bootup. The first thing that is run by the linux kernel is "init". This is a compiled executable (there is not reason it cannot be but that's another subject) that then executes the 'rc' script. (/etc/init.d/rc on debian, redhat is probably/etc/rc.d/init.d/rc) Which then uses either System V or BSD-style initilisation. I believe the majority of linux distributions use System V now. System V is complicated: there are 7 runlevels, 0 through 6. Three of them are 'special' 0: shutdown/halt, 1: single user, 6: reboot. The rest are general purpose, usually one being assigned to a non-xdm (xdm is the login manager, with the graphical login prompt) and one assigned to xdm. Now that we have covered runlevels, back to System V initialisation. You hvae the init script direcotyr (where "rc" is) which has all your init scripts. Now you also have a bunch of links to those scripts in directories labelled with an incrementing integer (rc0.d rc1.d rc2.d etc.) that corresponds to the runlevel that is being initialised. To enable a script to be run you have to prefix the link-to-script's name with a K or an S as well as a priority (lowest to highest) using 2 digits. An example of my rc0.d:
ie all services are to be killed because we're shutting down. (Blast <PRE> filtering!)
Where is dialup networking?
Dunno. Use your package manager and search for things like 'dial' and 'ppp' etc.
Where is device manager/what the heck do I do with this linux driver on disk?
There is no "cute" device manager. You can look in/proc for a lot of info about the running system and what peripherals are attached. Installing drivers for devices is a bit more complex. Basically what they (usually) are are kernel modules. These are usually specific to a kernel version and kernel versions aren't standardised across distributions which means that you usually have to recompile a driver (assuming source is available) for your kernel if you're running anything but a really mainstream linux distribution. This used to be RedHat 6.2 but I don't know anymore. In short, installing drivers not provided by your distro is at least a pain in the ass and at most impossibly difficult.
How do you do this 'webserver' thing that linux is supposed to be so good at?
It's the best in its price range. (And bests some outside of its price range):d I'll point you to the docs because this is a very vague question: apache.org docs
--
while($s ne "just another perl hacker"){ $s.=["a".."z"," "]->[rand 25] }
In layman-ish terms: the frogger script as submitted was encrypted. When run it decrypts itself and runs the decrypted stuff. The decrypted stuff is much easiar to read. He even provided a formatted decrypted version.:)
Also: to run it I think you need to import the tk module on the command line.
Not really. If you download the entries and look at some of the solutions you'll see that they are indeed *designed* to be obfuscated.
From the frogger entry's SOLUTION:
This program was encrypted by using the bit string operators to XOR the
program itself with a string of 0x01 characters. The program starts of
by evaluating the encoded program against a string of 0x01 characters to
restore itself, and then evaluates the resulting string to start the
program. The program itself looks like this once unencoded:
I agree with Taco in that this is more like Phantom Menace.
The interface, to some, is revolutionary. Bah. I think it needs a bit more time to set in and more apps to exxagerate its nooks and cranies. But then again I use linux and I happen to like my own personal take on things. Which is, of course, more suited to multiple desktops and large numbers of xterms than it is a single desktop with IE, a file manager, Word, Quicken, etc. But to apple's credit the visual effects are stunning. (Why those people who think it revolutionary, do so is beyond me. Perhaps the laws of relativity could play some role. coughcoughstuckinmacosfortoolongcoughcough)
What would have been revolutionary was if Apple introduced an OS based on the concept of little modular userland tools instead of the Big Bloated Monster-like things that have been the standard since (probably) the first Mac.
That, my friends, is what putting MacOS (Apple's UI team) on top of UNIX means to me.
When you do an 'rpm -Uvh my.rpm' or 'rpm -i my.rpm' what do you think is happening? Two scripts are being run as root, one before extractions and one after.
I felt he had some good points. A dependency system that doesn't depend on itself being present in its dependencies *would* be cool.
I'd just like to balance the comments here a bit by saying what points i thought weren't trash, but maybe a bit limited in scope (naive, but..); specifically, his predictions that:
He predicts that after today (or yesterday) greed and efficiency will be less valued as the result of such talents (ie money) would be a commodity to *everyone*. And therefore people will strive to create, etc. Resulting in the gizmo culture. Which he likens to some sort of extreme fad production thing. (This will be "wasteful" [in the traditional sense] but will waste no more than a person's effort.. read "because of the internet" etc)
I guess (I haven't really studied it much) that he's predicting the return of the rennaisance (or whatever the correct spelling is).
I think Be looked ahead on this part.. they have some of the underlying support already in for multi-user.. it wouldn't be as hard to do as, for example, windows 95..
Maybe they'd open-source it to fragment Mozilla development.. Though I've heard that they only have a handful of volunteer coders working on Mozilla.. Hmm.
I don't think the author intended to provide a _complete_ history that suits _everybody's_ tastes. they did it to the best of their ability, time allowing. and included whom they thought deserved mention.. i found it pleasant to know that Bill wasn't always evil. (maybe he was just hiding it, who cares?)
Good idea. Reminds me of when I got my first Mac SE, the keyboard came late, so I only had a mouse. Of course, I could do most things, and even `type' with keycaps + copy/paste.
Expanding upon your brilliance i'd like to say that I'm not too co-ordinated with my mouse, so I'd like to say, swirl it a bit and be able to click to reset the cursor to the center. A different click to make it disappear. Anyway the point is we could expand upon the app w/ clicks since the palm doesn't has as many options as our mouse.:)
I see a lot of this around and such. But I can't help but wonder if the reason porn is so enjoyable to the little ones is because it's so `bad'. Obviously it's not the only reason (hormones come to mind, I'm still 17:P), but it is probably a contributing factor.
Anyway, this isn't a big problem. (schools having to deal with students diggin up porn) The only problem in porn is the few that are so obsessed with it that they either a) try to live out their sexual fantasies or b) spend most of their time viewing porn and neglecting life. These few are probably also somewhat screwed up there as well. Again, like with those violent teens, porn shouldn't be blamed. The person is responsible, and to a lesser extent their parents.
I disagree with point 1 of your solution. I'm not saying it's outright wrong, but I am saying I didn't grow up that way - i was given a lot of freedom, but was.. i guess afraid somehow of unknown consequences. no one threatened me, no one laid down specific rules, didn't even have a curfew, but i _knew_ that i would get some (verbal) beating if I were to come home late. Guess I was a good kid? Nup, i refuse to believe that. It's something else..
Slashdot Mirror
IMO, from the screenshots on the QPE site you linked to, the QNX interface is much, much, *much* nicer.
But I guess the difference is that one is available for download and one is just (so far as I'm concerned) pretty pictures.
I use zsh, so I get to use RPROMPT :)
export PROMPT="%U%m%u:%~ %# "
export RPROMPT="%@ | %D{%e %B %G}"
Which comes out something like:
tro:~_ 3:14PM |6 July 2001
I used to use colors on the box name calculated using a sum of its letters' ascii values to ensure some uniqueness. But I stopped for some reason.
The right side of the prompt disappears when you type enough on the left side to make it over there.
--
A bit more flexible option than the laptops people are suggesting.. You can find cases at elan vital and aopen. Asus has numerous boards in microatx. Here's their KT133 based one.
If you want even smaller, you can go FlexATX. Motherboards are scarce, however. I think Tyan has one, but no AGP slot on there.
--
You have a directory of files with a ".mpa" extension. The extension should be ".mp3". You want to change all the files in one operation. As far as I know, impossible under not only Windows Explorer, but ALSO under UNIX shells! (Scripting as always does not count, only basic shell commands.)
You may argue this is a script, but I think it's basic shell.
And this one you can't refute, although mmv is not that popular nor commonplace:--
Crappy article. I fear Mr Burg may have missed the point in some places in the article. I wonder if Raskin is happy with what Mr. Burg has come up with. If not, where He is found below, He = Mr. Burg, else He = Raskin.
It's a lot of words to express (in my opinion) his distaste for the design of OS X. He thinks it gets in the way. (I'm not saying whether it does or not. Nor do I care.)
He touts the PalmOS in its ability to be transparent. BeOS in eVilla, too. These things are too simple- try to do something fairly complex on one of these devices? Say, code in a new language using man pages or HTML as a reference. While making sure the bug you just fixed in a totally seperate project doesn't crash it. And watch a kernel compile. And monitor irc. And idle on ICQ. And listen to MP3s. And maybe visit napster once in awhile.
The badly named section "Adopting new ideas" tries to say that everything should be done at the click of a single button AS WELL AS there should be buttons (hot keys) to do every single task. The author strikes me as someone not too keen on learning new things. An OS being a tool, it requires you to learn how to use it. A Tool (caps intentional) that doesn't require much learning USUALLY won't do much more for you than if you were Tool-less.
Mr. Raskin: if it gets in the way, don't use it. BUT if it's easiar to deal with IT getting in the way than to deal with the problem ANY OTHER WAY, then make a damn decision.
These people amaze me. I mean, once we all get seriously jacked in, like do away with the meat entirely, will they choose to be run under some wrapper simulating constant pleasure? Like out of a Vonnegut tale.
--
What I like about Linux configuration is that I can do it at the console, from my parents' machine several cities away, and not have to worry about blowing a config option or wasting time trying to reproduce XML tags. I type, save, it's done, any mistakes are clearly my fault.
Why can't this be done with XML config files? XML isn't some binary format, it's TEXT!
There are already 50 000 different formats for text-based config files in Linux/*NIX. Since XML won't automatically take over every single program and tool, that will give admins and users 50 001 different formats, and that one will be much less readable in the event of a necessary quick fix.
You're an admin a decade from now and you're used to the new BIND configuration. You find an old Linux 2.0.x box running the old version of BIND. Now you'll have to look up the docs and learn it. Rather than with our theoretical XML translation engine (from XML to format X) taking care of that. (Oh, bind8? Alright..)
I respect that you like the less complicated scenario of native config files, and in some cases they are more suited to the config data at hand (ie no `tags and crap'), but XML does give some order to it that some people will like..
--
while($s ne "just another perl hacker"){ $s.=["a".."z"," "]->[rand 25] }
Here it goes...
On redhat or probably any other RPM based system (Mandrake, SuSE, etc) the package manager is 'rpm'. There is a GUI frontend called gnorpm that probably does what add/remove would do. On Debian based systems there's apt (apt-get, apt-cache) and gnome-apt for a frontend.
First of all, Linux boot up is a bit more complicated than DOS bootup. The first thing that is run by the linux kernel is "init". This is a compiled executable (there is not reason it cannot be but that's another subject) that then executes the 'rc' script. (/etc/init.d/rc on debian, redhat is probablyrc0.d
rc0.d/K90sysklogd
rc0.d/K30setserial
rc0.d/K25hwclock.sh
rc0.d/K20makedev
rc0.d/S30urandom
rc0.d/S20sendsigs
rc0.d/S31umountnfs.sh
rc0.d/S40umountfs
rc0.d/S90halt
rc0.d/K20logoutd
rc0.d/S35networking
rc0.d/S10portmap
rc0.d/K20inetd
rc0.d/K14ppp
rc0.d/K12kerneld
rc0.d/K89pcmcia
rc0.d/K01gdm
rc0.d/K20ssh
rc0.d/K10rplay
rc0.d/K20apache
rc0.d/K20postgresql
ie all services are to be killed because we're shutting down. (Blast <PRE> filtering!)
Dunno. Use your package manager and search for things like 'dial' and 'ppp' etc.
There is no "cute" device manager. You can look in /proc for a lot of info about the running system and what peripherals are attached. Installing drivers for devices is a bit more complex. Basically what they (usually) are are kernel modules. These are usually specific to a kernel version and kernel versions aren't standardised across distributions which means that you usually have to recompile a driver (assuming source is available) for your kernel if you're running anything but a really mainstream linux distribution. This used to be RedHat 6.2 but I don't know anymore. In short, installing drivers not provided by your distro is at least a pain in the ass and at most impossibly difficult.
It's the best in its price range. (And bests some outside of its price range) :d I'll point you to the docs because this is a very vague question: apache.org docs
--
while($s ne "just another perl hacker"){ $s.=["a".."z"," "]->[rand 25] }
In layman-ish terms: the frogger script as submitted was encrypted. When run it decrypts itself and runs the decrypted stuff. The decrypted stuff is much easiar to read. He even provided a formatted decrypted version. :)
Also: to run it I think you need to import the tk module on the command line.
er, module: HTML::Mason
Not really. If you download the entries and look at some of the solutions you'll see that they are indeed *designed* to be obfuscated.
From the frogger entry's SOLUTION:
and so on..Use ssh to bounce X11 from home over to your office and ICQ/AIM/email from there. *grin*
I agree with Taco in that this is more like Phantom Menace.
The interface, to some, is revolutionary. Bah. I think it needs a bit more time to set in and more apps to exxagerate its nooks and cranies. But then again I use linux and I happen to like my own personal take on things. Which is, of course, more suited to multiple desktops and large numbers of xterms than it is a single desktop with IE, a file manager, Word, Quicken, etc. But to apple's credit the visual effects are stunning. (Why those people who think it revolutionary, do so is beyond me. Perhaps the laws of relativity could play some role. coughcoughstuckinmacosfortoolongcoughcough)
What would have been revolutionary was if Apple introduced an OS based on the concept of little modular userland tools instead of the Big Bloated Monster-like things that have been the standard since (probably) the first Mac.
That, my friends, is what putting MacOS (Apple's UI team) on top of UNIX means to me.
AFS is a network file system. xfs, ext(2|3) are not. (I don't know about the other ones.)
When you do an 'rpm -Uvh my.rpm' or 'rpm -i my.rpm' what do you think is happening? Two scripts are being run as root, one before extractions and one after.
I felt he had some good points. A dependency system that doesn't depend on itself being present in its dependencies *would* be cool.
I'd just like to balance the comments here a bit by saying what points i thought weren't trash, but maybe a bit limited in scope (naive, but..); specifically, his predictions that:
He predicts that after today (or yesterday) greed and efficiency will be less valued as the result of such talents (ie money) would be a commodity to *everyone*. And therefore people will strive to create, etc. Resulting in the gizmo culture. Which he likens to some sort of extreme fad production thing. (This will be "wasteful" [in the traditional sense] but will waste no more than a person's effort.. read "because of the internet" etc)
I guess (I haven't really studied it much) that he's predicting the return of the rennaisance (or whatever the correct spelling is).
I think Be looked ahead on this part.. they have some of the underlying support already in for multi-user.. it wouldn't be as hard to do as, for example, windows 95..
Maybe they'd open-source it to fragment Mozilla development.. Though I've heard that they only have a handful of volunteer coders working on Mozilla.. Hmm.
in case esddsp can't do it, try:
esdctl off
(Un-hogs the sound device)
I personally think EsounD is very nice. Sure BeOS' sound system is nicer, but esd does the job just as well with esd-aware apps.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe journaling plays a role in file recovery. fsck'ing 10 gigs can take awhile.
Anyone else more versed on how this works?
Just wondering if one can possibly find one of these around? Where and how much?
/me bites the bait
I don't think the author intended to provide a _complete_ history that suits _everybody's_ tastes. they did it to the best of their ability, time allowing. and included whom they thought deserved mention.. i found it pleasant to know that Bill wasn't always evil. (maybe he was just hiding it, who cares?)
damn trolls. gawk gawk gawk
Good idea. Reminds me of when I got my first Mac SE, the keyboard came late, so I only had a mouse. Of course, I could do most things, and even `type' with keycaps + copy/paste.
Expanding upon your brilliance i'd like to say that I'm not too co-ordinated with my mouse, so I'd like to say, swirl it a bit and be able to click to reset the cursor to the center. A different click to make it disappear. Anyway the point is we could expand upon the app w/ clicks since the palm doesn't has as many options as our mouse. :)
I see a lot of this around and such. But I can't help but wonder if the reason porn is so enjoyable to the little ones is because it's so `bad'. Obviously it's not the only reason (hormones come to mind, I'm still 17 :P), but it is probably a contributing factor.
Anyway, this isn't a big problem. (schools having to deal with students diggin up porn) The only problem in porn is the few that are so obsessed with it that they either a) try to live out their sexual fantasies or b) spend most of their time viewing porn and neglecting life. These few are probably also somewhat screwed up there as well. Again, like with those violent teens, porn shouldn't be blamed. The person is responsible, and to a lesser extent their parents.
I disagree with point 1 of your solution. I'm not saying it's outright wrong, but I am saying I didn't grow up that way - i was given a lot of freedom, but was .. i guess afraid somehow of unknown consequences. no one threatened me, no one laid down specific rules, didn't even have a curfew, but i _knew_ that i would get some (verbal) beating if I were to come home late. Guess I was a good kid? Nup, i refuse to believe that. It's something else..