I don't think consoles and PCs are doomed. Thanks to the mobile gaming all the cheap casual crap (nice alliteration actually, btw) will move there, and we can enjoy less, but better games that are acceptable to pay for.
This has nothing to do with anarchy. BSDL is simply protecting the developer's rights and this is most essential part of a license. A developer does not like to be sued, if someone gets shot in the foot while using a piece of software. And nothing is further enforced on the users of the software.
I started on Linux, too (about 1997). And one time (in 1998), I've been talking with a colleague about licenses. I told him, I really don't care if someone uses my code, I just don't want to get sued, if they use it wrong. He told me that I might be more compatible with the "BSD philosophy" instead of GNU's GPL. And he was correct. I informed myself about it and landed on FreeBSD (in 2001), because of the fantastic application support ("FreeBSD ports collection").
Now, I'm trying to use Linux from time to time (almost every year I try it), but it has nothing to offer for me and it lacks some basic features that are included in FreeBSD and which I really need.
I'm FreeBSD user since 10 years. I try Gentoo about every year, but I always have come back to FreeBSD because of the Ports Collection. I need working software and I don't want to be bothered with some inconsistencies like Gentoo often has in their Portage.
I try Linux again and again, because it has the potential to be a mainstream system. But all Linux distributions get awful with time when it comes to details and suddenly I want my FreeBSD back.
I am not sure, if this is really true. FreeBSD ports collection is the number one argument for me to stay on this platform. I've got over 20,000 ports and can compile them with a huge amount of settings.
You cannot even compare Debian packages with FreeBSD Ports.
I would say that atheists are very aggressive in defending their point of view and try to evangelize it to others. That's enough to start a conflict. It's very interesting how much atheists have to tell theists about God, when they themselves don't support the concept of God. Sometimes, I believe that atheists don't shut up and talk about God more than theists.
Also atheists need God, because they cannot talk about his nonexistence. And this is what makes them really funny to me, who doesn't really care where someone gets their ethics from, as long as we agree on the basics.
Most religions in the world have accepted The Golden Rule. Every single rule you say you derived from religious morals contradicts this Golden Rule, which is by the way the most important rule in Christian religion.
When people don't obey this rule, they are not thinking Christian by definition. So when some people hate homosexuals, it is definitely not Christian, for example. And just because in USA there are some fundamentalist idiots who you call "Christians", it's actually you who make the mistake to think that this is normal for Christians.
Christians believe that the way Jesus Christ handled life is a good example for them. Where the hell did you see Jesus Christ causing harm to other people? According to my understanding, he was a very peaceful person in social way, but he was a revolutionary person in politics and made many Jews really angry, because of his views how religious persons should treat people (for example he was the first person who protested against the rip-off that happened in Jewish community; see: "My house shall be called a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of robbers."). This is probably why he died, because he did not want to accept what religious authorities think is correct, which is pretty paradoxical when you read your comment again.
Why do people think about bible like that? Sorry, I've never been in the USA, but is this typical there? All world knows that you shouldn't take the bible by word, but interpret it for yourself. Are people really that dumb over there? That even includes the "scientists" who fight about this. I'm not sure about the article author either. What do people have to discuss there when they don't even understand the basics?
I'm German, but I am not that arrogant to expect from anyone except Germans to know about East Germany. I consider the people educated when they know where Germany is on the world map. We are not that important, as you might think.
I've been in parts of the world where people think that Hitler was a cool guy and some of them still think that we are Nazis (but they did not mean to offend me; they have been only interested and seeking conversation). German history is not interesting for many people. They have their own problems and their own history.
Question for you: what do you know about the history of Chile for example? I don't know anything about it.
Re:Git could use revision numbers
on
The Rise of Git
·
· Score: 1
I've read that the development on DF switched to git somewhere else. I'm glad that you are not that narrow-minded as the FreeBSD team who chose Subversion only because of its BSDL and their legacy scripts from CVS that you have to touch anyway, when you port something to some other SCM. We discussed it in some unofficial forums what is better (ended up in a flamewar, of course).
Now you can see the direct results of the switch to SVN. They are trying to keep CVS and CVSup alive and they fail. Fortunately, there is portsnap for ports which is highly efficient, but simply does the same as Git but does not have many features like branches and merging of your own changes. World is completely on Subversion by now, but there have been times where Subversion failed and CVSup worked and vice versa.
Now Subversion has 2 ports on FreeBSD. One Subversion port is modified for FreeBSD development. You need to image this! Yeah, of course... let's modify our SCM, because we make a new project! Yeah, ok FreeBSD needs their useless "$FreeBSD$" tag for whatever. As if an SCM cannot determine who did the last change on the file!
FreeBSD could do it better. Even/etc could be on Git, because it offers nice merging possibilities and you don't need any tools like mergemaster or etcupdate.
So far, you've made a better decision going with Git on DF than FreeBSD, in my opinion.
He merely states BSD isn't relevant to desktop systems.
Yes and saying this, he is already wrong. It is as much relevant as Linux is. Maybe he also thinks about Microsoft's position about Linux desktop systems. I hate his arrogance, really. Not every operating system has to be like Linux and developers should respect this before breaking portability generally (see X11 disaster... X11 used to be a standard earlier). There is also a possibility to help in the development.
I am using FreeBSD and I like Linux systems, but having such kind of developers on the Linux side is simply shit and makes the whole Linux community look bad from my point of view.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think consoles and PCs are doomed. Thanks to the mobile gaming all the cheap casual crap (nice alliteration actually, btw) will move there, and we can enjoy less, but better games that are acceptable to pay for.
Quit it... or I start to write this using the entire design patterns catalogue.
This has nothing to do with anarchy. BSDL is simply protecting the developer's rights and this is most essential part of a license. A developer does not like to be sued, if someone gets shot in the foot while using a piece of software. And nothing is further enforced on the users of the software.
I started on Linux, too (about 1997). And one time (in 1998), I've been talking with a colleague about licenses. I told him, I really don't care if someone uses my code, I just don't want to get sued, if they use it wrong. He told me that I might be more compatible with the "BSD philosophy" instead of GNU's GPL. And he was correct. I informed myself about it and landed on FreeBSD (in 2001), because of the fantastic application support ("FreeBSD ports collection").
Now, I'm trying to use Linux from time to time (almost every year I try it), but it has nothing to offer for me and it lacks some basic features that are included in FreeBSD and which I really need.
Do you realize that the returning of contributions even works with Apple on FreeBSD? The evilest of evil companies when it comes to IP.
Yupp... me too. This game is too stupid, in my opinion. I absolutely hate typical casual games. I like arcade style games.
A secret tip: "Muramasa: The Demon Blade" on Wii (2D, simple beat'em up side-scroller, made with much love, action, arcade)
I haven't run *BSD on the desktop since 1998
I'm running FreeBSD on desktop since 2001.
Don't know if you are lying (trolling) or simply have not read the manual (stupid).
You don't need to "switch" you can run Debian in a FreeBSD Jail, if you want.... but I always prefer FreeBSD Jails over Debian Jails.
Hi!
http://slashdot.org/submission/1780750/linux-3d-games-run-faster-on-pc-bsd
The discussion has been archived... but a lot of Linux users criticized Phoronix for publishing bad benchmarks.
They have, but who wants to install any browser plugins? We aren't in the 90s anymore.
In my opinion... you bought this hardware, so it's YOU who made a mistake.
That means for me that your hardware does not support FreeBSD. I select my hardware more carefully, because FreeBSD is the top priority.
Do you also buy a Playstation game and complain that it does not run on your Wii?
As a ports tree committer you should know that FreeBSD also has got packages for people who prefer time over customizability.
I'm FreeBSD user since 10 years. I try Gentoo about every year, but I always have come back to FreeBSD because of the Ports Collection. I need working software and I don't want to be bothered with some inconsistencies like Gentoo often has in their Portage.
I try Linux again and again, because it has the potential to be a mainstream system. But all Linux distributions get awful with time when it comes to details and suddenly I want my FreeBSD back.
I am not sure, if this is really true. FreeBSD ports collection is the number one argument for me to stay on this platform. I've got over 20,000 ports and can compile them with a huge amount of settings.
You cannot even compare Debian packages with FreeBSD Ports.
Also atheists need God, because they cannot talk about his nonexistence. And this is what makes them really funny to me, who doesn't really care where someone gets their ethics from, as long as we agree on the basics.
Most religions in the world have accepted The Golden Rule. Every single rule you say you derived from religious morals contradicts this Golden Rule, which is by the way the most important rule in Christian religion.
When people don't obey this rule, they are not thinking Christian by definition. So when some people hate homosexuals, it is definitely not Christian, for example. And just because in USA there are some fundamentalist idiots who you call "Christians", it's actually you who make the mistake to think that this is normal for Christians.
Christians believe that the way Jesus Christ handled life is a good example for them. Where the hell did you see Jesus Christ causing harm to other people? According to my understanding, he was a very peaceful person in social way, but he was a revolutionary person in politics and made many Jews really angry, because of his views how religious persons should treat people (for example he was the first person who protested against the rip-off that happened in Jewish community; see: "My house shall be called a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of robbers."). This is probably why he died, because he did not want to accept what religious authorities think is correct, which is pretty paradoxical when you read your comment again.
I can see "Missing Plug-In"!
Why do so many people assume that one cannot be Christian and use condoms? You are very narrow-minded, it seems.
Why do people think about bible like that? Sorry, I've never been in the USA, but is this typical there? All world knows that you shouldn't take the bible by word, but interpret it for yourself. Are people really that dumb over there? That even includes the "scientists" who fight about this. I'm not sure about the article author either. What do people have to discuss there when they don't even understand the basics?
I'm German, but I am not that arrogant to expect from anyone except Germans to know about East Germany. I consider the people educated when they know where Germany is on the world map. We are not that important, as you might think.
I've been in parts of the world where people think that Hitler was a cool guy and some of them still think that we are Nazis (but they did not mean to offend me; they have been only interested and seeking conversation). German history is not interesting for many people. They have their own problems and their own history.
Question for you: what do you know about the history of Chile for example? I don't know anything about it.
I've read that the development on DF switched to git somewhere else. I'm glad that you are not that narrow-minded as the FreeBSD team who chose Subversion only because of its BSDL and their legacy scripts from CVS that you have to touch anyway, when you port something to some other SCM. We discussed it in some unofficial forums what is better (ended up in a flamewar, of course).
Now you can see the direct results of the switch to SVN. They are trying to keep CVS and CVSup alive and they fail. Fortunately, there is portsnap for ports which is highly efficient, but simply does the same as Git but does not have many features like branches and merging of your own changes. World is completely on Subversion by now, but there have been times where Subversion failed and CVSup worked and vice versa.
Now Subversion has 2 ports on FreeBSD. One Subversion port is modified for FreeBSD development. You need to image this! Yeah, of course... let's modify our SCM, because we make a new project! Yeah, ok FreeBSD needs their useless "$FreeBSD$" tag for whatever. As if an SCM cannot determine who did the last change on the file!
FreeBSD could do it better. Even /etc could be on Git, because it offers nice merging possibilities and you don't need any tools like mergemaster or etcupdate.
So far, you've made a better decision going with Git on DF than FreeBSD, in my opinion.
No RSI and cheap way to do some fitness exercise, great music of all kinds (although most fun with fast hardcore dance music), community optional.
I don't think your fire extinguisher also invades people's right to have privacy every day for nothing.
He merely states BSD isn't relevant to desktop systems.
Yes and saying this, he is already wrong. It is as much relevant as Linux is. Maybe he also thinks about Microsoft's position about Linux desktop systems. I hate his arrogance, really. Not every operating system has to be like Linux and developers should respect this before breaking portability generally (see X11 disaster... X11 used to be a standard earlier). There is also a possibility to help in the development.
I am using FreeBSD and I like Linux systems, but having such kind of developers on the Linux side is simply shit and makes the whole Linux community look bad from my point of view.