ext3 was really sold as a fix for all problems and it has turned out to be crap. Ooooooh, it's journaling... woohooo! So was/is NTFS, no body raves about how great NTFS is, atleast not on slashdot.
It's marginally better than ext2, but that's not saying much. I can't even count the number of ext3 file systems I've had trashed in the past couple of months.
I'd give reiser a try if I were you. So far it's been good to me.
I wonder how they expect anyone to actually use an operating system whose installation procedure makes experienced users panic... Oh, yeah; I forgot. It's open source.
Mastery of mspaint does not qualify you as an experienced user.
They should spend more on dictionaries. Perhaps then they could tighten up their federal funding before it gets too loose.
Re:Just when you thought it would never happen to
on
PostgreSQL 7.4 Released
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
These types of posts are lame.
Who the hell cares if you compiled this on some archaic beast and now have to recompile? Here, I'll give you $10, go buy a machine that's 5x faster.
Same with all those "Damn, I just downloaded the ISO yesterday and now there's a new version... teeheeee" get a life. No one cares about you and your 9600 dialup connection you're saturating using archaic means of installing an OS. (read: iso based installs)
The documentation is pretty poor. I think if Linux were a more organized and coherent community higher quality documentation would surface.
Until then, you can always use FreeBSD. The documentation requires you have a basic level of clue, however it's exceptionally nice documentation for the most part.
To me it's obvious that MS realizes how valuable it is to work with the BSD community. Almost makes you wonder if they would work with the Linux community if they weren't such rabid revolutionaries all following in RMS's footsteps.
So basically, CURRENT is like the 2.5.xx/2.6.xtest series of Linux, STABLE is like 2.4.xx, and RELEASE is more like 2.4.x9. Unless there are extreme circumstances, or important new hardware, RELEASE versions aren't put out that often. Hell, 4.7 and 4.8 were 6 months apart, and it'll be at least six months since 4.8 (April 3) before 4.9 is out.
This is a good way of looking at it. Though releases are made based on a timed release schedule optimisticly looking for one every quarter, however it ends up being every 6 months.
As others have pointed out this is partially correct. Atleast with respect to the stability of the STABLE branch and RELEASE being a snapshot from the STABLE branch made ideally every 6 months (4 months?).
However, RELEASE branches are kept up to date in relation to security. The only changes made to RELEASE branches are those made to provide security patches. Last time i checked the SA site all releases back to 4.6 were officially supported, and those prior to 4.6 are supported, though not officially.
While it's true that RELEASE branches are considered the most stable, there's little worry with keeping up with the STABLE branch. I vote for no branch renaming, just education of users.
We should be aware by now that any company can manufacture a TCO, even those behind Linux. The only valuable TCO is the one that your company produces and uses to make its decisions.
Alright, time to start the count down. I think they'll make it 6 months. Any one else like to place bids on how long they'll continue this? Many vendors have tried the Linux route and simply found that there really was no demand. Linux users generally don't buy from Dell, Gateway, HP, etc.
It was my understanding that UFS2 only brought about features which enabled much larger file systems. Can you please link to information regarding the performance of UFS2 versus UFS?
Slashdot Mirror
ext3 was really sold as a fix for all problems and it has turned out to be crap. Ooooooh, it's journaling... woohooo! So was/is NTFS, no body raves about how great NTFS is, atleast not on slashdot.
It's marginally better than ext2, but that's not saying much. I can't even count the number of ext3 file systems I've had trashed in the past couple of months.
I'd give reiser a try if I were you. So far it's been good to me.
hoorah for banning cell phones
It's the part about knowing what you're doing that rules out most of the Linux community. :)
need to share your obj dir too
Apparently the software was not designed to be used by the majority of the Linux community.
I had a bottle neck named after me. Three cheers for the Von Neumann bottle neck.
Seriously. You're the type that wouldn't fill out a form if the legal agreement read "You agree to nothing, you're bound to nothing, have a nice day."
You and your hippy friends need to come join the rest of us in the 21st century where idiots sue because their coffee is hot.
Why did MS choose to use surveymonkey? This seems like a hoax.
They should spend more on dictionaries. Perhaps then they could tighten up their federal funding before it gets too loose.
These types of posts are lame.
Who the hell cares if you compiled this on some archaic beast and now have to recompile? Here, I'll give you $10, go buy a machine that's 5x faster.
Same with all those "Damn, I just downloaded the ISO yesterday and now there's a new version... teeheeee" get a life. No one cares about you and your 9600 dialup connection you're saturating using archaic means of installing an OS. (read: iso based installs)
One of the best quotes. It's dead on too.
The documentation is pretty poor. I think if Linux were a more organized and coherent community higher quality documentation would surface.
Until then, you can always use FreeBSD. The documentation requires you have a basic level of clue, however it's exceptionally nice documentation for the most part.
nope
To me it's obvious that MS realizes how valuable it is to work with the BSD community. Almost makes you wonder if they would work with the Linux community if they weren't such rabid revolutionaries all following in RMS's footsteps.
Because Theo is bordering on being just as annoying as RMS?
This is a good way of looking at it. Though releases are made based on a timed release schedule optimisticly looking for one every quarter, however it ends up being every 6 months.
As others have pointed out this is partially correct. Atleast with respect to the stability of the STABLE branch and RELEASE being a snapshot from the STABLE branch made ideally every 6 months (4 months?).
However, RELEASE branches are kept up to date in relation to security. The only changes made to RELEASE branches are those made to provide security patches. Last time i checked the SA site all releases back to 4.6 were officially supported, and those prior to 4.6 are supported, though not officially.
While it's true that RELEASE branches are considered the most stable, there's little worry with keeping up with the STABLE branch. I vote for no branch renaming, just education of users.
It might perhaps be related to the sculpture at the CIA location. Perhaps others must be solved in order to solve the CIA puzzle.
Tell your friends. Btw, it's just about 30 minutes old.
This, on top of it being in the matrix will have every pimply 13 year old trying to haxor the gibson.
We should be aware by now that any company can manufacture a TCO, even those behind Linux. The only valuable TCO is the one that your company produces and uses to make its decisions.
Alright, time to start the count down. I think they'll make it 6 months. Any one else like to place bids on how long they'll continue this? Many vendors have tried the Linux route and simply found that there really was no demand. Linux users generally don't buy from Dell, Gateway, HP, etc.
So, 6 months. What do you say?
It was my understanding that UFS2 only brought about features which enabled much larger file systems. Can you please link to information regarding the performance of UFS2 versus UFS?