Have patience. I'm working on a galeon package for 1.3.3. Currently galeon is still very beta for GNOME2. IIRC, evolution won't run with gtk2.0 at all.
But maybe I just tell myself that to dull the pain of having no package managment. Maybe the past isn't as good as we rememeber.
Why don't you look on that cd set for pkgtool. Slackware 3.0 has package management.
I'm still wondering why when I have my hotmail filter set to "exclusive" (only recieve from those in my address book, which contains 10 addresses), I continue to get loads of spam each day in my inbox, including some very embarassing things that would cause my mom to faint if she walked in.
Dude, you wouldn't have that problem if you didn't put those spammers in your address book!
One thing that's still very common in many parts of Appalachia are old log cabins, most of which are uninhabited. Granted, the vast majority of these have fallen in, but when you consider that most of them were constructed by crews of volunteers in only a few days, then you realize that the ones that are still standing were built strong to last long.
Consider this, most log cabins that are over a hundred years old are made of tough wood, not pine, spruce, or fir. Take a look at hickory, but chestnut is much better if you can find it or afford it. Chestnut used to be very common in Appalachia until the blight killed most of it in the 1840s (I think it was that decade anyway). Dove-tail joints and hewn logs make the straightest walls which is more asstetically pleasing to many people. They are also arguably the strongest joint for log cabins. Saddle joints (the way you traditionally think of logs being put together one atop the other) are another very strong joint that is at least as popular and doesn't require hewn logs.
Flooring is done with two (or three) sills (long thick logs hewn on all four sides, and sleepers (the rough equivilant of 4x4s laid in between the sills). When flooring is laid atop them, it makes for a very sturdy, secure floor.
For roofing you can't beat tin. Tin roofs are rated for 50 years, and often last much much longer. Take a drive down through my neck of the woods and you'll see many structures still standing that are well over 100 years old with tin roofing (albeit with many of these roofs laid on years after the fact when the original wooden shingles needed replacing).
Not sure if this actually qualifies, but here goes.
A friend of mine who frequents here once had a video card that would not fit into his case. I forget the exact model. He called up the manufacturer and asked them what he could do. They told him that everything on the board past a certain point was just redundant, and that it could be safely removed without affecting performance. Naturally, he got that in writing before taking a hacksaw and hacking off almost half the card! It worked when he finally got it in.
Why would the non-profit PCI-SIG care if some regular Joe compiles a list of PCI-IDs, puts them on a website, and uses the PCI logo? Isn't the point of non-profit organizations to overcome adversaties and improve the betterment of life? While they certainly have a legal base for this, doesn't this violate the spirit of a non-profit company, and if so, why can't we remove their non-profit status and make them start paying taxes or something?
It seems to me that since a non-profit company exists to benefit the country (and therefore is not taxed the same), that we, the country, should have some grounds to fight back. WHere are those grounds, and if they don't exist, who has the force to push such legislation through US Congress?
While vaporware is generally thought of as software, what about hardware? I'd say AMD's Hammer not coming out this year was the biggest vaporware of the year.
You remind me of my uncle. When he was 15, he needed a job, so he went to a construction sight, grabbed some tools, and got to work. This was completely on his free time. Later, he expected to get paid for it. Guess what happened! You're right! He didn't get paid for that time he worked there, but he was hired on the spot.
Rather the legislation should require the actual companies (like Intel) to start REAL clean-up programs and actually build facilities for reclaiming the toxics in their machines.
What makes it Intel, or AMD's responsability to do this? Why should they be shouldered with the burden of disposing of YOUR waste properly. Just because they built the product does not mean they are responsible for how it is disposed. If the government is going to require a product to be recyced, the government needs to handle that itself.
To say that Intel should have to build facilities to see to it that electronic goods they may have made are properly disposed of is akin to saying that Coca~Cola and Pepsi need to build aluminum recycling plants nation-wide, or that the New York Times and Chicago Tribune et al should be forced to build paper recycling plants nationwide. This is unfair and ludicrous.
Where does it stop? If I am a small buisiness owner making $30,000 a year profit manufacturing widgets that use mercury, should I be forced to bild a wdiget recycling plant? I would much rather see some sort of tax impossed on new PC sales to have PC drop-off places around the nation. I for one cannot recycle my old PCs 'cause I have no earthly idea where the hell to send them. This is never mentioned to anyone who buys a PC, and down here in the Georgia swamps, most people can't afford to ship a heavy metal box hal-way across the State or country.
I mean, why exactly do you consider it damage? Isn't the supposed goal of this anti-trust lawsuit to bring about competition? If that competition does exist, then has not the goal been met?
The Anaheim Angels could play the Macon Braves (single A minor league baseball team) and it wouldn't be considered competition. That another alternative exists does not inherently qualify it as a competitor. If this recent paltry mention of Linux means Microsoft now has competition, why didn't Apple qualify as competition long ago?
In the settlement it talks about MS having to disclose information only to companies with a sound business model that meats critera set out by MS. Where does OSS fall? Can MS say OSS is not up to its standards and therefore not release the code?
More importantly, what is a sound business model, and who gets to decide what a sound business model is? It's one thing to say RedHat or Caldera don't have sound business models because they are loosing money, but what about the Linux distribution that's always in the black? How can MS say Slackware has a bad business model, when it's been a successful business for 10 years?
Additionally what effect will MS's right to charge have on OSS? Can MS only charge for developers to see the code or are they entitled to charge royalties for the implementation of the code? (Can you legally reverse engineer a software having seen the code?)
And what are they allowed to charge? Can Microsoft arbitrarily set it's own price, or is that somehow limited? If RedHat, SuSE, et al are unable to meet the requirements as a successful business, what's to stop Microsoft from high balling Slackware or other small companies that might be successful businesses? And what of community businesses like Debian? Debian is developed independently completely by volunteers with no real company behind it. What's to stop the OSS community from taking up a collection for Debian to buy the right to view these APIs? Also, if the community were to buy the APIs in such a way, would it then be public domain (doubtful)?
The big question is, can Samba benefit from this, or are the conditions of the released information going to make it incompatible with the GPL? And can the information be dirty/clean intellectually transferred between one tainted person and one "clean" person even with whatever type of NDA they put on the agreement?
I'd say yes, and no. Since MS doesn't have to disclose code, APIs, etc for authentication and other security related issues, Samba cleary won't be getting any help from MS. With that said, the settlement seems to say to me that MS can't prevent ISV's or OEM from competing with it. In other words, doesn't this make the WinXP EULA forbidding usage of XP with Samba invalid? If not, please correct me as I really want to know.
I hear a lot of bitchin' about installations and configurations that newbies can't do. These rants are generally given by people who have some experience with *nix and Linux in particular. They assume that the newbie will be unable to do something, and bail. If the point of a review is to see what newbies can or can not do with the installer, why the hell don't newbies install the distro and tehn write the review? Why must it always be some second party speaking of a third party's capabilities, or lack thereof? Please people, stop the newbie this and newbie that until you actually find a fuckin' newbie and ask him/her.
The thing is that Apple users have heard all the anti-Apple flack for years and know where their loyalties lie. The average Windows user doesn't know that anything else exists. It's easy to convert or at least influence a Windows user who hasn't developed any real loyalties.
You just missed the entire point of this article. Microsoft knows they're not going to convince hardcore Apple users to switch. This copy of Apple's switch campaing, is for MS users who might be tempted to switch. If a user is considering switching to Apple, then sees that some other people are switching from Apple to MS, the user might very well decide to stay right where he is. The theory of course, is that a user who is easily persuaded to try Apple could be easily persuaded not to try Apple; get it?
Slashdot Mirror
Have patience. I'm working on a galeon package for 1.3.3. Currently galeon is still very beta for GNOME2. IIRC, evolution won't run with gtk2.0 at all.
But maybe I just tell myself that to dull the pain of having no package managment. Maybe the past isn't as good as we rememeber. Why don't you look on that cd set for pkgtool. Slackware 3.0 has package management.
ftp.kpn.be has one.
I'm still wondering why when I have my hotmail filter set to "exclusive" (only recieve from those in my address book, which contains 10 addresses), I continue to get loads of spam each day in my inbox, including some very embarassing things that would cause my mom to faint if she walked in. Dude, you wouldn't have that problem if you didn't put those spammers in your address book!
One thing that's still very common in many parts of Appalachia are old log cabins, most of which are uninhabited. Granted, the vast majority of these have fallen in, but when you consider that most of them were constructed by crews of volunteers in only a few days, then you realize that the ones that are still standing were built strong to last long.
Consider this, most log cabins that are over a hundred years old are made of tough wood, not pine, spruce, or fir. Take a look at hickory, but chestnut is much better if you can find it or afford it. Chestnut used to be very common in Appalachia until the blight killed most of it in the 1840s (I think it was that decade anyway). Dove-tail joints and hewn logs make the straightest walls which is more asstetically pleasing to many people. They are also arguably the strongest joint for log cabins. Saddle joints (the way you traditionally think of logs being put together one atop the other) are another very strong joint that is at least as popular and doesn't require hewn logs.
Flooring is done with two (or three) sills (long thick logs hewn on all four sides, and sleepers (the rough equivilant of 4x4s laid in between the sills). When flooring is laid atop them, it makes for a very sturdy, secure floor.
For roofing you can't beat tin. Tin roofs are rated for 50 years, and often last much much longer. Take a drive down through my neck of the woods and you'll see many structures still standing that are well over 100 years old with tin roofing (albeit with many of these roofs laid on years after the fact when the original wooden shingles needed replacing).
Troll! had you ever ran Slackware you'd know there were no 5.x releases!
Go back under your bridge.
my hda is currently hanging by its ide cable and happily reading and writing away
Hey Barry, when did you start posting to Slashdot?
Not sure if this actually qualifies, but here goes.
:^)
A friend of mine who frequents here once had a video card that would not fit into his case. I forget the exact model. He called up the manufacturer and asked them what he could do. They told him that everything on the board past a certain point was just redundant, and that it could be safely removed without affecting performance. Naturally, he got that in writing before taking a hacksaw and hacking off almost half the card! It worked when he finally got it in.
Nope, I didn't believe him either.
Why would the non-profit PCI-SIG care if some regular Joe compiles a list of PCI-IDs, puts them on a website, and uses the PCI logo? Isn't the point of non-profit organizations to overcome adversaties and improve the betterment of life? While they certainly have a legal base for this, doesn't this violate the spirit of a non-profit company, and if so, why can't we remove their non-profit status and make them start paying taxes or something?
It seems to me that since a non-profit company exists to benefit the country (and therefore is not taxed the same), that we, the country, should have some grounds to fight back. WHere are those grounds, and if they don't exist, who has the force to push such legislation through US Congress?
This sucks.
While vaporware is generally thought of as software, what about hardware? I'd say AMD's Hammer not coming out this year was the biggest vaporware of the year.
Times like this, I wish there was a "-1, Moron" option.
1600 Pennsylvain Avenue :-)
Washington D.C.
You remind me of my uncle. When he was 15, he needed a job, so he went to a construction sight, grabbed some tools, and got to work. This was completely on his free time. Later, he expected to get paid for it. Guess what happened! You're right! He didn't get paid for that time he worked there, but he was hired on the spot.
What makes it Intel, or AMD's responsability to do this? Why should they be shouldered with the burden of disposing of YOUR waste properly. Just because they built the product does not mean they are responsible for how it is disposed. If the government is going to require a product to be recyced, the government needs to handle that itself.
To say that Intel should have to build facilities to see to it that electronic goods they may have made are properly disposed of is akin to saying that Coca~Cola and Pepsi need to build aluminum recycling plants nation-wide, or that the New York Times and Chicago Tribune et al should be forced to build paper recycling plants nationwide. This is unfair and ludicrous.
Where does it stop? If I am a small buisiness owner making $30,000 a year profit manufacturing widgets that use mercury, should I be forced to bild a wdiget recycling plant? I would much rather see some sort of tax impossed on new PC sales to have PC drop-off places around the nation. I for one cannot recycle my old PCs 'cause I have no earthly idea where the hell to send them. This is never mentioned to anyone who buys a PC, and down here in the Georgia swamps, most people can't afford to ship a heavy metal box hal-way across the State or country.
Why doesn't Microsoft wake up and just apply the "mozilla patch"? :^)
2.4.18 and 2.5.18
The Anaheim Angels could play the Macon Braves (single A minor league baseball team) and it wouldn't be considered competition. That another alternative exists does not inherently qualify it as a competitor. If this recent paltry mention of Linux means Microsoft now has competition, why didn't Apple qualify as competition long ago?
More importantly, what is a sound business model, and who gets to decide what a sound business model is? It's one thing to say RedHat or Caldera don't have sound business models because they are loosing money, but what about the Linux distribution that's always in the black? How can MS say Slackware has a bad business model, when it's been a successful business for 10 years?
Additionally what effect will MS's right to charge have on OSS? Can MS only charge for developers to see the code or are they entitled to charge royalties for the implementation of the code? (Can you legally reverse engineer a software having seen the code?)
And what are they allowed to charge? Can Microsoft arbitrarily set it's own price, or is that somehow limited? If RedHat, SuSE, et al are unable to meet the requirements as a successful business, what's to stop Microsoft from high balling Slackware or other small companies that might be successful businesses? And what of community businesses like Debian? Debian is developed independently completely by volunteers with no real company behind it. What's to stop the OSS community from taking up a collection for Debian to buy the right to view these APIs? Also, if the community were to buy the APIs in such a way, would it then be public domain (doubtful)?
Funny?"
:-)
FUNNY?!
This should be modded INSIGHTFUL!
I'd say yes, and no. Since MS doesn't have to disclose code, APIs, etc for authentication and other security related issues, Samba cleary won't be getting any help from MS. With that said, the settlement seems to say to me that MS can't prevent ISV's or OEM from competing with it. In other words, doesn't this make the WinXP EULA forbidding usage of XP with Samba invalid? If not, please correct me as I really want to know.
Didn't you get the memo? BSD is dying, in fact, it's already dead. ;-)
I hear a lot of bitchin' about installations and configurations that newbies can't do. These rants are generally given by people who have some experience with *nix and Linux in particular. They assume that the newbie will be unable to do something, and bail. If the point of a review is to see what newbies can or can not do with the installer, why the hell don't newbies install the distro and tehn write the review? Why must it always be some second party speaking of a third party's capabilities, or lack thereof? Please people, stop the newbie this and newbie that until you actually find a fuckin' newbie and ask him/her.
Thank you.
Competent, or just wealthy?
In our legal and judicial system is there a difference?
The thing is that Apple users have heard all the anti-Apple flack for years and know where their loyalties lie. The average Windows user doesn't know that anything else exists. It's easy to convert or at least influence a Windows user who hasn't developed any real loyalties.
You just missed the entire point of this article. Microsoft knows they're not going to convince hardcore Apple users to switch. This copy of Apple's switch campaing, is for MS users who might be tempted to switch. If a user is considering switching to Apple, then sees that some other people are switching from Apple to MS, the user might very well decide to stay right where he is. The theory of course, is that a user who is easily persuaded to try Apple could be easily persuaded not to try Apple; get it?
If you leave your front door wide open and a neighbor comes over and uses your bathroom, then leaves is it a crime ?
:^)
Only if your neighbor stops up your toilet.