Saynig it's "broken" is hogwash. Saying it's "broken in some circumstances" would be correct. The university I attend has had macs connecting to SMB shares and the like for at least the past year or so now without any issues. So, thank you very much, I don't want it disabled.
DTrace is Solaris in the same way that your pinky is you.
Indeed, it is part of me just as DTrace is a part of Solaris as I said...
Wow, that puts it into another light because it tells us that the holdup is not actually technical: Sun already has a releasable Solaris source tree, they are just hanging on to it--well, why exactly?
Yes, it isn't entirely technical, it's mostly legal and a few other things. It will be out by the end of Q2. Stop trolling.
Blastwave.org is "a collective effort to create a set of binary packages of free software, that can be automatically installed to a Solaris computer (sparc or x86 based) over the network." How do ports of open source software to Solaris demonstrate that an open source Solaris exists?
It doesn't, however the main person behind blastwave.org has already posted that he has builds of OpenSolaris up and running, and they plan on having a PowerPC port of OpenSolaris.
Well, that just cinched it for me. No way in heck I'm even looking at playing this game. WoW's silly limitations on characters affecting the world is bad enough, but that's just stupid. Thanks for posting that little tidbit.
I have never, ever, ever, felt like it was a grind to get to level 60 in World of Warcraft. If anything, I've felt like it's leveled me too fast, and I barely play 10 hours a week. (At level 52, almost 53 already)...
Guild Wars so far has nothing to offer me as far as I can see...
I can login to my JDS 3 Desktop and have everything up *much* faster than I ever can with RedHat Enterprise Linux 3.0 WS (which I also have installed).
Also, are they still stuck on PCI-X? Is Apple going to move to PCI-Express anytime soon or will they be left behind for the time being?
How about you realise that most of the industry is still using PCI-X in higher end equipment, not PCI Express. There is significantly more hardware available (if you're not talking video cards) for PCI-X than there is PCI Express. About the only complaint I would have is that they didn't move to PCI-X 2.0...
It's not a redunant comment idiot moderators. When I posted there were zero comments listed. Just because you saw another person's before mine doesn't mean I was posting redundant information.
"Don't throw anything away. 2121.042690 megabytes (and counting) of free storage so you'll never need to delete another message."
Their new Infinity + 1 storage technology or some Jazz like that (hey their marketing words not mine);) At the very least 2GB. I'm sure at the time these things were created in response it was because of the 1GB thing...
It's something of a halfway contribution. It's open in the sense that anyone can get the source, and modify it freely. But if the code can't be taken out and used along other common open licenses, the value of that contribution is lessened.
Except the GPL is about the only major open source license that I know of that it's incompatbile with.
There's nothing stopping those using BSD, MIT, and many other licensed projects from using CDDL stuff.
Most projects with licenses incompatible with the GPL offer some form of dual licensing to allow cooperation between projects - Sun aren't doing that.
But, no one said they have to. As far as cooperation, one could say that GPL projects should cooperate with others and offer dual licensing as well. The point is that there are many projects out there that can use CDDL code because they're NOT GPL. So it's silly to say that it's useless.
Do you think this maybe might indicate there is some sort of difference between the two situations?
Yes, it indicates to me that *some* people when it comes down to it are just GPL zealots. The fact is, it's open source. Just because it doesn't work with their favourite license doesn't make it any less a valuable contribution.
Just because they release their code in a manner specifically designed to be useless to the open source community
Useless? How so? Just because you can't stick the code in the Linux kernel doesn't make it usesless.
You also imply that the BSDs don't count by your uninformed statement. Since the BSD license has no prohibitions in place that would prevent it linking with CDDL code at all.
So if anything, a very large portion of the Open Source community can benefit from it.
How the heck was my post a redundant comment? Has the moderation world gone mad? I posted to the story when there were barely any comments at all. Bah.
Nope. You're the confused one here. Take a look at their site again.
To quote the FSF faq:
Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they form a single larger program. If either part is covered by the GPL, the whole combination must also be released under the GPL--if you can't, or won't, do that, you may not combine them.
Slashdot Mirror
Somehow I doubt that a company with over 30,000 employees and billions of dollars in cash is going to go belly up in a year.
Saynig it's "broken" is hogwash. Saying it's "broken in some circumstances" would be correct. The university I attend has had macs connecting to SMB shares and the like for at least the past year or so now without any issues. So, thank you very much, I don't want it disabled.
DTrace is Solaris in the same way that your pinky is you.
Indeed, it is part of me just as DTrace is a part of Solaris as I said...
Wow, that puts it into another light because it tells us that the holdup is not actually technical: Sun already has a releasable Solaris source tree, they are just hanging on to it--well, why exactly?
Yes, it isn't entirely technical, it's mostly legal and a few other things. It will be out by the end of Q2. Stop trolling.
Blastwave.org is "a collective effort to create a set of binary packages of free software, that can be automatically installed to a Solaris computer (sparc or x86 based) over the network." How do ports of open source software to Solaris demonstrate that an open source Solaris exists?
It doesn't, however the main person behind blastwave.org has already posted that he has builds of OpenSolaris up and running, and they plan on having a PowerPC port of OpenSolaris.
So, no points for you Mr. Troll.
No, part of the proof is already here in DTrace, since it is is an almost inseperable part of Solaris.
Additionally, part of the proof is already here in that over 30 some pilot teams already have OpenSolaris such as blastwave.org, and so on.
Finally, their announcement said it was to be released in Q2 of this year. Q2 isn't over yet...
Really, the trolls are getting tiring.
Don't forget SUN
Well, that just cinched it for me. No way in heck I'm even looking at playing this game. WoW's silly limitations on characters affecting the world is bad enough, but that's just stupid. Thanks for posting that little tidbit.
I have never, ever, ever, felt like it was a grind to get to level 60 in World of Warcraft. If anything, I've felt like it's leveled me too fast, and I barely play 10 hours a week. (At level 52, almost 53 already)...
Guild Wars so far has nothing to offer me as far as I can see...
Solaris 10 already solved problems like this with SMF:
e v_ intro.html
:)
http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/content/selfheal/sd
I can login to my JDS 3 Desktop and have everything up *much* faster than I ever can with RedHat Enterprise Linux 3.0 WS (which I also have installed).
Nice to see RedHat catching up finally
Leave off the quotes in your query and the first hit that comes back is a pretty good definition I'd say.
Or just look for "explicit state software model checking".
Also, are they still stuck on PCI-X? Is Apple going to move to PCI-Express anytime soon or will they be left behind for the time being?
How about you realise that most of the industry is still using PCI-X in higher end equipment, not PCI Express. There is significantly more hardware available (if you're not talking video cards) for PCI-X than there is PCI Express. About the only complaint I would have is that they didn't move to PCI-X 2.0...
If you don't mind using KDE stuff there's kdevelop, which is pretty nice.
If you're of the GTK persusasion, Anjuta's pretty decent too.
I must agree though, Visual Studio is the best that I've seen when it comes to editing source in an IDE still...
Welcome to slashdot, where all the slashbots enjoy moderating you into Hell if they don't agree with you. Thank I have Karma to burn.
It's not a redunant comment idiot moderators. When I posted there were zero comments listed. Just because you saw another person's before mine doesn't mean I was posting redundant information.
Actually, GMail is offering:
;) At the very least 2GB. I'm sure at the time these things were created in response it was because of the 1GB thing...
"Don't throw anything away.
2121.042690 megabytes (and counting) of free storage so you'll never need to delete another message."
Their new Infinity + 1 storage technology or some Jazz like that (hey their marketing words not mine)
Well, I'm a "FOSS" developer technically, and it's attracted me. You were saying?
I'm not a GNOME developer and it works the way *I* want too. How nice of you to pretend otherwise :)
Thanks for moderating down someone's opinion just because you don't like it.
It's something of a halfway contribution. It's open in the sense that anyone can get the source, and modify it freely. But if the code can't be taken out and used along other common open licenses, the value of that contribution is lessened.
Except the GPL is about the only major open source license that I know of that it's incompatbile with.
There's nothing stopping those using BSD, MIT, and many other licensed projects from using CDDL stuff.
Most projects with licenses incompatible with the GPL offer some form of dual licensing to allow cooperation between projects - Sun aren't doing that.
But, no one said they have to. As far as cooperation, one could say that GPL projects should cooperate with others and offer dual licensing as well. The point is that there are many projects out there that can use CDDL code because they're NOT GPL. So it's silly to say that it's useless.
Of course the test itself is an interpretation of the spec. Ahem.
Do you think this maybe might indicate there is some sort of difference between the two situations?
Yes, it indicates to me that *some* people when it comes down to it are just GPL zealots. The fact is, it's open source. Just because it doesn't work with their favourite license doesn't make it any less a valuable contribution.
Just because they release their code in a manner specifically designed to be useless to the open source community
Useless? How so? Just because you can't stick the code in the Linux kernel doesn't make it usesless.
You also imply that the BSDs don't count by your uninformed statement. Since the BSD license has no prohibitions in place that would prevent it linking with CDDL code at all.
So if anything, a very large portion of the Open Source community can benefit from it.
Linux doesn't define Open Source.
How the heck was my post a redundant comment? Has the moderation world gone mad? I posted to the story when there were barely any comments at all. Bah.
Nope. You're the confused one here. Take a look at their site again.
To quote the FSF faq:
Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they form a single larger program. If either part is covered by the GPL, the whole combination must also be released under the GPL--if you can't, or won't, do that, you may not combine them.
So your theory just got busted.
Sorry, that just isn't true.
Using CDDL licensed software gives you the rights to the code completely under the terms it gives.
Stop trying to spread FUD.