UNIX® 03 is POSIX. It is a "common update to IEEE Std 1003.1,1996 Edition, IEEE Std 1003.2, 1992 Edition, their ISO/IEC counterparts and the previous version of the Single UNIX Specification".
In the case of uname, compare the UNIX and the
IBM definitions. They look the same. In practise, the two ways it conforms to POSIX.1 yet differs from Solaris are the -m flag and the -r flag. With -m, AIX prints a hexadecimal number indicating the precise machine model rather than just the architecture (however this has become less useful on new IBM pSeries systems as "many new machines share a common machine ID of 4C"). This information can be augmented with the output of uname -M. With -r, I think only the major and minor version numbers are printed (it doesn't mention the point release since any point release should be compatible with other releases in that series). More precise information can be determined by running oslevel.
I agree it would be nicer if uname -m gave a human-readable architecture description as many other UNIX systems do, but POSIX doesn't require it be human readable or have a 1:1 mapping to CPU architecture.
What did you expect killall to do? It has been around since System V and kills all processes. It was introduced to Linux in the PSmisc project and took on another meaning.
The Solaris equivalent is pkill and is also available on Linux from the procps project.
The more sensible thing would be for all distributions to remove killall and standardize on pkill. killall5 could be retained if necessary.
Banks charge you for their services like most companies. It costs something to provide their branches, tellers, accounts, statements, autotellers, online banking, etc.. Most banks also provide fee free accounts to students, pensioners, and other concession card holders. As much as I would also love to have a free bank account, most offer flat fee accounts for between 3 and 5 dollars, and I'd bet most customers don't even pay that much.
What's the big deal?
This is traditionally the purpose of the release notes; experienced users would know to read them before attempting an upgrade or installation to learn of such issues, however in this case:
If you look a little more closely, you'll see the article was syndicated by Reuters. The journalist was Reed Stevenson, and the original article is on the Reuters web site.
You might like to try enabling Light mode in your user preferences. It removes a lot of the unnecessary graphics and doesn't seem to use nested tables for layout, but retains all the real content.
Light mode looks just fine in the latest Mozilla browsers (both Seamonkey and Firebird). It also loads faster.
I'm not at all sure if Linux could pass, since it has, eg, a rename(2) system call in place of unlink.
I'm not at all sure what prompted that. Of course GNU/Linux systems support the unlink system call. You can see the GNU C library implementation of unlink and the Open Group specification of unlink. As GNU/Linux attempts to be compatible with Unix, it would be ridiculous for it to not provide unlink.
To be able to use the UNIX brand, a system must be certified to comply with the Single UNIX Specification (SUS). The SUS typically states what the interface and behavior must be, but not the exact implementation. From the above-mentioned documentation, the unlink system call seems to be compliant with the specification.
The real issue with GNU/Linux systems is certification. Even if they do provide a working implementation of SUS, each release must be certified by The Open Group as compliant. This is reportedly quite a lengthy, expensive process.
That said, there are probably aspects of a GNU/Linux system that do not conform to SUS, such as the varying threading implementations. Lately, however, Red Hat has been encouraging the use of NPTL, an implementation of POSIX Threads, so it is conceivable that someone might try to certify a particular GNU/Linux distribution as UNIX some time in the near future.
Many European writers will write the digit 1 as a vertical line with a hook at the top (sometimes with a bar at the bottom) and the letter I as a vertical line (sometimes with a dot above, even for an uppercase I). This is the same appearance as many sans-serif computer typefaces (such as Arial and Helvetica).
Many engineers and mathematicians (especially those from the US/UK) will write the digit 1 as a vertical line and the letter I as a vertical line with bars at the top and bottom. This is an exaggerated form of the serifs you find in serif typefaces (such as Times and Palatino).
(Yes the above descriptions are simplistic, but hopefully the illustrate the point.)
great way to see latest GNOME and KDE as intended
on
FreeBSD 5.1 Released
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
As the release notes state, FreeBSD 5.1 includes the latest stable releases of GNOME and KDE, 2.2.1 and 3.1.2 respectively.
Getting FreeBSD 5.1 would be a great way to easily get the latest stable versions of these desktop environments as they were intended to be (without all the distribution-specific customizations made by Red Hat, SuSE, and so on).
Granted, you could also use Gentoo current or Debian unstable, but FreeBSD 5.1 is likely to be more stable (in the sense of not frequently changing) and you can get it on CD.
5.1 release directory not readable until release
on
FreeBSD 5.1 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Something that nobody so far has picked up on, is that this is just the start of an entirely new versioning scheme. Red Hat's operating systems manager, Matt Wilson, has suggested that the release following 9 may not be 9.1 or 10, but rather something entirely different.
This makes sense in the light of Red Hat's recent announcement of its Enterprise range. I guess Red Hat Linux may no longer exist in its current form, but rather branch into Red Hat Linux Enterprise and Red Hat Linux Personal, with a new version numbering scheme to boot, maybe starting again at 1, or maybe even based on the year it was released in.
I'm really disappointed that this is the default shell in OS X. Using tcsh is downright painful for anyone used to real tab-completion (e.g., zsh, bash).
Neither tcsh nor bash offer anything other than basic tab completion in a default installation. Have a look at my ~/.complete for some ideas. You can integrate these completion commands in your ~/.cshrc or source ~/.complete from your ~/.cshrc.
zsh wins by a light year compared to anything else, especially with its tab completion libraries (imagine being able to hit TAB after typing cvs to get a list of the subcommands)
If you think zsh is the only shell that can do this, you need to get out more. I was able to easily get such functionality in tcsh using the following command:
complete cvs 'p/1/(checkout co update add remove commit ci)/'
I don't have anything in particular against bash or zsh, but I think you'll find that on further investigation bash, tcsh, and zsh all have many useful features in common. For some more inspiration, have a look at my shell configuration files and dotfiles.com.
Re:Gosh..
on
RMS Turns 50
·
· Score: 2, Informative
In the UK, I believe GTA is rated 18, so minors may not be allowed to download the game. This would also explain why one of the first fields is your age.
Hell even backing up CDs and Games is alowable by law
Er, no it isn't. You're not allowed to make MP3s of copyrighted works (even if you own a copy), you're not allowed to copy your audio CD on to an audio cassette, you're not allowed to record a TV show (even if it's broadcast on free-to-air), and you're definately not allowed to make "backup" copies of software.
Perhaps you're getting confused by all this American talk about "fair use". About the only thing I believe we're legally allowed to do is make photocopies of small portions of books for academic purposes. We don't have "fair use" here in Australia in the same way as the USA.
...it would have been more tolerable had he not felt the need to comment on fucking everything...
For those who wish to read only the original content, you can use CSS to disable the comments by putting the following rule in your browser's user style sheet:
.comment { display: none; }
In Mozilla, this means adding the above line to $HOME/.mozilla/profile name/random salt/chrome/userContent.css and restarting your browser. The same can also be achieved in Opera.
Admittedly it's a little much to make these changes for just one Web page, but as more Web pages start to use CSS, this sort of thing will hopefully apply to more than just one or two pages. Alternatively, you could contact ESR and suggest he provide an alternate stylesheet so you can easily toggle comment display.
The US theory is that programs of social benefit (education, welfare, etc.) should be paid by individuals rather than the state.
If individuals give to worthy causes, it's money the state doesn't need to collect in taxes to help fund this cause, which is presumably why the government allows you a tax deduction on such donations.
Due to encumbrance it makes more sense for Sun (etc) to port any useful code over to Linux over time and eventually discard their own Unix or use it solely for a trusted computing platform. SGI is most likely to go this route because everything that makes IRIX special is application-level crap and some silly widget sets.
IRIX has a number of assets that Linux does not have, even in the kernel space -- including scalability (support for up to 512 CPUs, 512 GiB RAM), advanced file systems (XFS journaled file system, XVM volume management), advanced networking (Clustered XFS, SAN), standards compliance (POSIX, DII-COE, Trusted IRIX), and a Unix (BSD+SysV) heritage -- that place IRIX in a different league from Linux and *BSD. It's not that these features could not be added to Linux, but at this time Linux and IRIX have different target markets.
AIX and Solaris also have features not found in Linux, I'm just not sure why you singled IRIX out. Don't forget that SGI has also developed a reputation, particularly for high-performance systems and cutting-edge hardware.
That said, many Unix companies do seem to be adopting Linux to some extent. Who knows what SGI will do?
Slashdot Mirror
FC2 sucks worse than any distro I've ever used
Didn't you ever run Red Hat 6.0? or 7.0? or 8.0?...
UNIX® 03 is POSIX. It is a "common update to IEEE Std 1003.1,1996 Edition, IEEE Std 1003.2, 1992 Edition, their ISO/IEC counterparts and the previous version of the Single UNIX Specification".
In the case of uname, compare the UNIX and the IBM definitions. They look the same. In practise, the two ways it conforms to POSIX.1 yet differs from Solaris are the -m flag and the -r flag. With -m, AIX prints a hexadecimal number indicating the precise machine model rather than just the architecture (however this has become less useful on new IBM pSeries systems as "many new machines share a common machine ID of 4C"). This information can be augmented with the output of uname -M. With -r, I think only the major and minor version numbers are printed (it doesn't mention the point release since any point release should be compatible with other releases in that series). More precise information can be determined by running oslevel.
I agree it would be nicer if uname -m gave a human-readable architecture description as many other UNIX systems do, but POSIX doesn't require it be human readable or have a 1:1 mapping to CPU architecture.
What did you expect killall to do? It has been around since System V and kills all processes. It was introduced to Linux in the PSmisc project and took on another meaning.
The Solaris equivalent is pkill and is also available on Linux from the procps project.
The more sensible thing would be for all distributions to remove killall and standardize on pkill. killall5 could be retained if necessary.
Banks charge you for their services like most companies. It costs something to provide their branches, tellers, accounts, statements, autotellers, online banking, etc.. Most banks also provide fee free accounts to students, pensioners, and other concession card holders. As much as I would also love to have a free bank account, most offer flat fee accounts for between 3 and 5 dollars, and I'd bet most customers don't even pay that much. What's the big deal?
If you look a little more closely, you'll see the article was syndicated by Reuters. The journalist was Reed Stevenson, and the original article is on the Reuters web site.
Copyright is a law (otherwise known as an act of parliament). It cannot be altered unless a bill passes both houses of parliament.
The Australian Government has a web site about The Australian Legal System that explains all this.
You might like to try enabling Light mode in your user preferences. It removes a lot of the unnecessary graphics and doesn't seem to use nested tables for layout, but retains all the real content.
Light mode looks just fine in the latest Mozilla browsers (both Seamonkey and Firebird). It also loads faster.
In the US, they are more commonly referred to as English units .
I'm not at all sure what prompted that. Of course GNU/Linux systems support the unlink system call. You can see the GNU C library implementation of unlink and the Open Group specification of unlink. As GNU/Linux attempts to be compatible with Unix, it would be ridiculous for it to not provide unlink.
To be able to use the UNIX brand, a system must be certified to comply with the Single UNIX Specification (SUS). The SUS typically states what the interface and behavior must be, but not the exact implementation. From the above-mentioned documentation, the unlink system call seems to be compliant with the specification.
The real issue with GNU/Linux systems is certification. Even if they do provide a working implementation of SUS, each release must be certified by The Open Group as compliant. This is reportedly quite a lengthy, expensive process.
That said, there are probably aspects of a GNU/Linux system that do not conform to SUS, such as the varying threading implementations. Lately, however, Red Hat has been encouraging the use of NPTL, an implementation of POSIX Threads, so it is conceivable that someone might try to certify a particular GNU/Linux distribution as UNIX some time in the near future.
Many European writers will write the digit 1 as a vertical line with a hook at the top (sometimes with a bar at the bottom) and the letter I as a vertical line (sometimes with a dot above, even for an uppercase I). This is the same appearance as many sans-serif computer typefaces (such as Arial and Helvetica).
Many engineers and mathematicians (especially those from the US/UK) will write the digit 1 as a vertical line and the letter I as a vertical line with bars at the top and bottom. This is an exaggerated form of the serifs you find in serif typefaces (such as Times and Palatino).(Yes the above descriptions are simplistic, but hopefully the illustrate the point.)
As the release notes state, FreeBSD 5.1 includes the latest stable releases of GNOME and KDE, 2.2.1 and 3.1.2 respectively.
Getting FreeBSD 5.1 would be a great way to easily get the latest stable versions of these desktop environments as they were intended to be (without all the distribution-specific customizations made by Red Hat, SuSE, and so on).
Granted, you could also use Gentoo current or Debian unstable, but FreeBSD 5.1 is likely to be more stable (in the sense of not frequently changing) and you can get it on CD.
After the problems that occurred when the last release was announced early, the FreeBSD release team created a new permissions scheme so that only mirror admins could access the 5.1 release directory before the official release. If anybody else tried to access the 5.1 release directory (even on a mirror site), they would get a 403 (access denied) error.
In this case, clearly it was of little use for Slashdot to announce the availability of FreeBSD 5.1 early.
If you had bothered to read the Debian GNU/NetBSD home page (for which there is a link in the story), you would realize that is it.
A much better English equivalent is "Anti-CD".
Yes, the next major release of Red Hat Linux will be Red Hat 9, but:
Something that nobody so far has picked up on, is that this is just the start of an entirely new versioning scheme. Red Hat's operating systems manager, Matt Wilson, has suggested that the release following 9 may not be 9.1 or 10, but rather something entirely different. This makes sense in the light of Red Hat's recent announcement of its Enterprise range. I guess Red Hat Linux may no longer exist in its current form, but rather branch into Red Hat Linux Enterprise and Red Hat Linux Personal, with a new version numbering scheme to boot, maybe starting again at 1, or maybe even based on the year it was released in.
Neither tcsh nor bash offer anything other than basic tab completion in a default installation. Have a look at my ~/.complete for some ideas. You can integrate these completion commands in your ~/.cshrc or source ~/.complete from your ~/.cshrc.
If you think zsh is the only shell that can do this, you need to get out more. I was able to easily get such functionality in tcsh using the following command:
I don't have anything in particular against bash or zsh, but I think you'll find that on further investigation bash, tcsh, and zsh all have many useful features in common. For some more inspiration, have a look at my shell configuration files and dotfiles.com.
For a few insights into this rebellion against control, read Free as in Freedom and Why GNU su does not support the wheel group.
In the UK, I believe GTA is rated 18, so minors may not be allowed to download the game. This would also explain why one of the first fields is your age.
I had a quick check of the things I claimed above. It seems that:
I stand corrected. :-)
Hell even backing up CDs and Games is alowable by law
Er, no it isn't. You're not allowed to make MP3s of copyrighted works (even if you own a copy), you're not allowed to copy your audio CD on to an audio cassette, you're not allowed to record a TV show (even if it's broadcast on free-to-air), and you're definately not allowed to make "backup" copies of software.
Perhaps you're getting confused by all this American talk about "fair use". About the only thing I believe we're legally allowed to do is make photocopies of small portions of books for academic purposes. We don't have "fair use" here in Australia in the same way as the USA.
For those who wish to read only the original content, you can use CSS to disable the comments by putting the following rule in your browser's user style sheet:
.comment { display: none; }
In Mozilla, this means adding the above line to $HOME/.mozilla/profile name/random salt/chrome/userContent.css and restarting your browser. The same can also be achieved in Opera.
Admittedly it's a little much to make these changes for just one Web page, but as more Web pages start to use CSS, this sort of thing will hopefully apply to more than just one or two pages. Alternatively, you could contact ESR and suggest he provide an alternate stylesheet so you can easily toggle comment display.
The US theory is that programs of social benefit (education, welfare, etc.) should be paid by individuals rather than the state. If individuals give to worthy causes, it's money the state doesn't need to collect in taxes to help fund this cause, which is presumably why the government allows you a tax deduction on such donations.
Unfortunately in real life, moderators are a little slower to apply that -1 moderation, and it's a little harder to set your threshold to +3.
Odd that we're having a discussion about karma here on Slashdot, don't you think?
IRIX has a number of assets that Linux does not have, even in the kernel space -- including scalability (support for up to 512 CPUs, 512 GiB RAM), advanced file systems (XFS journaled file system, XVM volume management), advanced networking (Clustered XFS, SAN), standards compliance (POSIX, DII-COE, Trusted IRIX), and a Unix (BSD+SysV) heritage -- that place IRIX in a different league from Linux and *BSD. It's not that these features could not be added to Linux, but at this time Linux and IRIX have different target markets.
AIX and Solaris also have features not found in Linux, I'm just not sure why you singled IRIX out. Don't forget that SGI has also developed a reputation, particularly for high-performance systems and cutting-edge hardware.
That said, many Unix companies do seem to be adopting Linux to some extent. Who knows what SGI will do?