The answer to the question is no.. Cray doesn't use ECL
for the main beasts any more. That was one of the things
that drove them into the ground in the 90's. The Japanese
switched to CMOS, and drove the prices way down.
Cray eventually followed suit, with their former low-end
(YMP-EL which was CMOS based from the get go) spawning
the SV1.
Re:Luke, use the source RPM...
on
Is RPM Doomed?
·
· Score: 1
Source RPMS almost always work even cross-dist.
(ie. here using RedHat source package on an older
mandrake.)
Binary doesn't work, get SRPM, it doesn't extract?
use alien, then put it in the right place on the system
you need it for/usr/src/<whatever>/RPMS/...
(alien wasn't on the box, so I used another box
to extract) log:
[root@basquette djbdns]# rpm -ivh daemontools-0.76-2memphis.src.rpm
only packages with major numbers
I'll take that wager. ObjectiveThought.com (from google) says... bzzzzt... wrong answer...
includes choice morsels such as:
According to Nature 394:313, a recent survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences showed that 72% are outright atheists, 21% are agnostic and only 7% admit to belief in a personal God.
There is indeed a distinct correlation between dedication to scientific principles and an absence of religious belief.
They did the same thing for their PC-style workstations.
I got a CD burner for one (standard Yamaha)
just cliped on brackets backets that fit into the
mounting screw holes on the drive, then
slide the drive into the bay. The connectors
(for SCSI) are fixed to the case at the back.
uhm.. on UNIX, directories and uids exist.
They should be used properly.
Why "must" billing information be stored in
the same place the compiler stores debug stats?
UNIX accounting runs under a particular user
(typically adm) and the information is written
by kernel calls to the pacct file on process termination.
There are very sound reasons for this separation
of concern, like making it impossible for the
compiler (or any other arbitrary program) to
overwrite system accounting data.
There is no reason for a compiler to have to have
any ability to write to the accounting files.
If that is considered a design requirement,
then the design was wrong.
In terms of debug/frequency stats, create a
directory, make the compiler setuid or gid
to be able to write there, and put the stats
and ONLY the stats in that directory (
you do the set(ug)id, at the very end,
just to write the stats file as the last
hurrah.) Or even just leave it public write,
if someone wants to futz with your stats
they really have time on their hands.
I have nothing to say on the merits of capabilities,
but the given example is quite weak, in that it
Fixes a design error by creating an elaborate security
mechanism. The simpler solution would be to
fix the design.
Recovery CD's are not hard to make for Linux.
It is just a chicken an egg market issue.
Ever heard of kickstart ? For RH installs at least.
Hardware Vendors could easily, completely
automate the install of hardware they ship.
To the point of a "one-click" installation that
does everything (all apps, as well as the OS.)
I rolled out 30 PC's with a proprietary app a
couple of years ago ('97). They used a recovery
floppy, because there was some host specific
tweaking required (not for hardware.) but the
rest of the install was a CD-R, which installed
everything, 30 minutes from blank HD to
running system. User interaction: "Press Return"
I keep clear of/usr/local because it is too ingrained
in a lot of apps, and tends to have far
deeper directory trees. Better to go with/opt.
To see the depths
to which this insanity can go, look at building gcc
for multiple paltforms over LUDE (logitheque
Universitaire Distribuee et Extensible) Don't
get me wrong, the package does it's job, it's
just that the result is pretty ugly...
(gcc & LUDE both take into account architectures,
so you have nested architecture trees three or four
levels deep.) the rationale goes back to the bad old days
when/usr/local was NFS mounted from servers,
potentially on different types of workstations.
With modern hard disks, this case should be
far less prevalent.
/opt came about for third party commercial apps,
originally, I think for Solaris systems. It was an
attempt to give ISV's somewhere to put things that
did not upset those persnickety Sysadmins, who all
had very set ideas about how/usr/local should be
used (usually, there was no isolation of packages,
just a jumbled mess.)
/opt based setups tend to be younger and leaner (
ie. they do not account for multiple architectures.)
They often make use of the one directory per
package convention, So they are usually the better
choice.
That said. It doesn't actually matter whether you
use/usr/local or/opt. Either one will become an
intractable mess unless you use some form of package
encapsulation. (ie. a la depot, or one dir/app.)
This might be construed as more than one question, but I figure it has enough of a theme
to be OK....
People are saying that the SSSCA will make it illegal to run Linux in the US. Is that your reading?
If so, then how could it be adjusted to be less nefarious ?
Is there any chance that such adjustments will happen before passage?
This research and development model, in turn, was almost always based on the importance of intellectual property rights. Whether copyrights, patents or trade secrets, it was this foundation in law that made it possible for companies to raise capital, take risks, focus on the long term, and create sustainable business model
This is completely misleading.
Innovation happens in a marketplace built
on open standards where vendors can compete.
Look at PC hardware: PCI, DRAM, chipsets. etc...
Sure, there's IP in there, but there is also standards that allow them to mix and match.
No-one can compete without standards to allow
interoperability.
Microsoft's R&D completely ignores interoperability, and based on monopolistic
market position, imposes their own "innovations"
as "standards." That is not healthy!
That is not what successful companies in "the last twenty years" have been built on, other
than Microsoft.
There can be only one successful company
of this kind in a monopoly. So the argument
boils down to "What's good for Microsoft
is good for America"...
He completely ignores the critical role that standards play, in setting the rules for
competition in any healthy marketplace.
The internet is built on: TCP/IP, DNS, HTTP,...
Yes it is true that no one company owns these,
or can make money on them. That is part and
parcel of why they succeeded as interoperability
tools, and it is the interoperability and
vendor neutrality which made them enabling
technologies for the internet revolution.
That revolution has created revenues for
many many companies like CNN, MS-NBC (!),
E-bay, UPS, etc...
Well gee... What about
"Isn't 30 years of Quebec politicians enough?"
As a theme for an advertising campaign.
(courtesy of Reform, two federal elections ago) Boy those Albertans are just all brotherhood a
nd goodwill...
How about the Ontario government
trying like crazy to close the only French
speaking teaching hospital in the province
as a "budgetary measure" ?
How about when I go to small town Alberta,
and not having any accent, they start talking
to me about "them quebecers..."
Sheesh! Pot calling the kettle black or what?
BTW... While Parizeau is a contemptuous deceptive
racist bastard, as he has demonstrated on a
number of occasions ("Ca va etre une question
astuciex", "L'argent et la vote ethnique",
"Ils vont etre comme des homards dans le pot",
he's great for quotes though!), Bouchard...
Bouchard was certainly on the wrong side, like Levesque, but the two of them were always open, honest, straight-forward, and clear.
Quebecers have always preferred honest,
straight-forward leaders when they were given
a choice. In the 80's the choice was between Parizeau and Bourassa. Bourassa was an effective politician, and on the right
side, but I don't think anyone would ever
think of the attribute "straight-forward" as having any connection with him. (mind you,
he had good reason to be shifty, given
the popular climate.)
Landry, well, "Chiffon rouge"...
I would tend to put him more in the
Parizeau camp, but not as wacky.
anyways...
The fundamental problem with Quebec politics
is that you can vote for the liberals or the
separatists. Voting for anyone else is the
same as voting for the separatists, because
they have a lock on 30% of the population.
There is no room for any viable alternative
to the liberals to spring up. So they are
just kind of there, and "not the PQ."
It isn't terribly inspiring.
Canada was the third nation to get anything
into space, with a satellite to measure the
magnetosphere in the early 60's. While relying
on the US for launch services, Canada launched
the world's first geo-synch. communications
satellite, and few years later the first
digital comm. satellite.
In the last few years, the us of US launchers
has become quite questionable, given the
RADARSAT II debacle. Seems the US didn't want
a commercial satellite of such quality in
orbit for military reasons.
So the US basically refused to launch it.
Nice one... I think that lasted a couple of years.
I cannot find any references to the difficulties,
so I guess it goes under the heading
of men in black Xfiles stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
The answer to the question is no.. Cray doesn't use ECL for the main beasts any more. That was one of the things that drove them into the ground in the 90's. The Japanese switched to CMOS, and drove the prices way down. Cray eventually followed suit, with their former low-end (YMP-EL which was CMOS based from the get go) spawning the SV1.
Source RPMS almost always work even cross-dist. (ie. here using RedHat source package on an older mandrake.) Binary doesn't work, get SRPM, it doesn't extract? use alien, then put it in the right place on the system you need it for /usr/src/<whatever>/RPMS/...
(alien wasn't on the box, so I used another box
to extract) log:
[root@basquette djbdns]# rpm -ivh daemontools-0.76-2memphis.src.rpm
only packages with major numbers
So reading a work from the local drive would be OK, but if the file system were NFS exported, reading it on another machine would be illegal?
If your speakers use bluetooth, is that a "network copy", or an over the air transmission? NFS over 802.11 ? Ready to pay "broadcast" royalties?
I can imagine backup services, that just take an image over the internet. That would be infringing as well.
Their audits are a little different, they're after atheists and homosexuals. I think I prefer the Business Software Alliance.
ObjectiveThought.com (from google)
says... bzzzzt... wrong answer...
includes choice morsels such as:
According to Nature 394:313, a recent survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences showed that 72% are outright atheists, 21% are agnostic and only 7% admit to belief in a personal God.
There is indeed a distinct correlation between dedication to
scientific principles and an absence of religious belief.
http://www.smartwinnipeg.mb.ca/Municipal_Fibre.
I got a CD burner for one (standard Yamaha)
just cliped on brackets backets that fit into the
mounting screw holes on the drive, then
slide the drive into the bay. The connectors
(for SCSI) are fixed to the case at the back.
no tools at all, really slick.
openLDAP+Krb5+openafs
sounds quite nice.
anybody used this ?
uhm.. on UNIX, directories and uids exist.
They should be used properly.
Why "must" billing information be stored in
the same place the compiler stores debug stats?
UNIX accounting runs under a particular user
(typically adm) and the information is written
by kernel calls to the pacct file on process termination.
There are very sound reasons for this separation
of concern, like making it impossible for the
compiler (or any other arbitrary program) to
overwrite system accounting data.
There is no reason for a compiler to have to have
any ability to write to the accounting files.
If that is considered a design requirement,
then the design was wrong.
In terms of debug/frequency stats, create a
directory, make the compiler setuid or gid
to be able to write there, and put the stats
and ONLY the stats in that directory (
you do the set(ug)id, at the very end,
just to write the stats file as the last
hurrah.) Or even just leave it public write,
if someone wants to futz with your stats
they really have time on their hands.
I have nothing to say on the merits of capabilities,
but the given example is quite weak, in that it
Fixes a design error by creating an elaborate security
mechanism. The simpler solution would be to
fix the design.
Recovery CD's are not hard to make for Linux.
It is just a chicken an egg market issue.
Ever heard of kickstart ? For RH installs at least.
Hardware Vendors could easily, completely
automate the install of hardware they ship.
To the point of a "one-click" installation that
does everything (all apps, as well as the OS.)
I rolled out 30 PC's with a proprietary app a
couple of years ago ('97). They used a recovery
floppy, because there was some host specific
tweaking required (not for hardware.) but the
rest of the install was a CD-R, which installed
everything, 30 minutes from blank HD to
running system. User interaction: "Press Return"
in a lot of apps, and tends to have far
deeper directory trees. Better to go with
To see the depths
to which this insanity can go, look at building gcc
for multiple paltforms over LUDE (logitheque
Universitaire Distribuee et Extensible) Don't
get me wrong, the package does it's job, it's
just that the result is pretty ugly...
(gcc & LUDE both take into account architectures,
so you have nested architecture trees three or four
levels deep.) the rationale goes back to the bad old days
when
potentially on different types of workstations.
With modern hard disks, this case should be
far less prevalent.
/opt came about for third party commercial apps,
originally, I think for Solaris systems. It was an
attempt to give ISV's somewhere to put things that
did not upset those persnickety Sysadmins, who all
had very set ideas about how
used (usually, there was no isolation of packages,
just a jumbled mess.)
/opt based setups tend to be younger and leaner (
ie. they do not account for multiple architectures.)
They often make use of the one directory per
package convention, So they are usually the better
choice.
That said. It doesn't actually matter whether you
use
intractable mess unless you use some form of package
encapsulation. (ie. a la depot, or one dir/app.)
Package encapsulation is what is important.
to be OK....
People are saying that the SSSCA will make it illegal to run Linux in the US. Is that your reading?
If so, then how could it be adjusted to be less nefarious ?
Is there any chance that such adjustments will happen before passage?
It's supposed to be like helicopter rides... Every seat is a window seat, I guess, so you're paying for the window XPerience.
the link to the project is dead, search of site for kerdap yields 0 entries... where does it live now?
This is completely misleading.
Innovation happens in a marketplace built on open standards where vendors can compete. Look at PC hardware: PCI, DRAM, chipsets. etc... Sure, there's IP in there, but there is also standards that allow them to mix and match. No-one can compete without standards to allow interoperability.
Microsoft's R&D completely ignores interoperability, and based on monopolistic market position, imposes their own "innovations" as "standards." That is not healthy! That is not what successful companies in "the last twenty years" have been built on, other than Microsoft. There can be only one successful company of this kind in a monopoly. So the argument boils down to "What's good for Microsoft is good for America"...
He completely ignores the critical role that standards play, in setting the rules for competition in any healthy marketplace.
The internet is built on: TCP/IP, DNS, HTTP, ...
Yes it is true that no one company owns these, or can make money on them. That is part and parcel of why they succeeded as interoperability tools, and it is the interoperability and vendor neutrality which made them enabling technologies for the internet revolution.
That revolution has created revenues for many many companies like CNN, MS-NBC (!), E-bay, UPS, etc...
Well gee... What about "Isn't 30 years of Quebec politicians enough?" As a theme for an advertising campaign. (courtesy of Reform, two federal elections ago) Boy those Albertans are just all brotherhood a nd goodwill... How about the Ontario government trying like crazy to close the only French speaking teaching hospital in the province as a "budgetary measure" ? How about when I go to small town Alberta, and not having any accent, they start talking to me about "them quebecers..." Sheesh! Pot calling the kettle black or what? BTW... While Parizeau is a contemptuous deceptive racist bastard, as he has demonstrated on a number of occasions ("Ca va etre une question astuciex", "L'argent et la vote ethnique", "Ils vont etre comme des homards dans le pot", he's great for quotes though!), Bouchard... Bouchard was certainly on the wrong side, like Levesque, but the two of them were always open, honest, straight-forward, and clear. Quebecers have always preferred honest, straight-forward leaders when they were given a choice. In the 80's the choice was between Parizeau and Bourassa. Bourassa was an effective politician, and on the right side, but I don't think anyone would ever think of the attribute "straight-forward" as having any connection with him. (mind you, he had good reason to be shifty, given the popular climate.) Landry, well, "Chiffon rouge" ...
I would tend to put him more in the
Parizeau camp, but not as wacky.
anyways...
The fundamental problem with Quebec politics
is that you can vote for the liberals or the
separatists. Voting for anyone else is the
same as voting for the separatists, because
they have a lock on 30% of the population.
There is no room for any viable alternative
to the liberals to spring up. So they are
just kind of there, and "not the PQ."
It isn't terribly inspiring.
Canada was the third nation to get anything into space, with a satellite to measure the magnetosphere in the early 60's. While relying on the US for launch services, Canada launched the world's first geo-synch. communications satellite, and few years later the first digital comm. satellite. In the last few years, the us of US launchers has become quite questionable, given the RADARSAT II debacle. Seems the US didn't want a commercial satellite of such quality in orbit for military reasons. So the US basically refused to launch it. Nice one... I think that lasted a couple of years. I cannot find any references to the difficulties, so I guess it goes under the heading of men in black Xfiles stuff.