German government has indeed started a project on open document formats - IMHO a misguided project, they should rather work with the OASIS open office formats project. But it's certainly better than nothing.
I don't like many things about the current german government, and especially Schily seems to have some serious issues with some aspects of the constitution like some basic civil rights, but one has to admit that their IT strategy is better than one would expect. At least if you don't ask about software patents.
I'm running 4-STABLE on two servers, and 5.1 on some workstations, but I didn't notice any stability problems yet (and the STABLE boxes do identify themselves as 4.9-PRERELEASE, so I guess they should be affected). What is the problem?
The PAE manpage says it's about having more than 4GB of memory. What does that have to do with USB support? If there are known problems, do they affect systems with < 4GB? Pointers to PRs and mailing lists appreciated.
I'm a happy postfix user myself, but it should be noted for fairness reasons that the last postfix-related advisories are about two weeks old... Face it, some software may be better than others, but no matter what you are running, you'll always have to keep your systems up to date. Looking down on others because the software they run is oh so insecure and yours is perfect is the first step to being rooted.
Patches are already available, for example from the FreeBSD CVS web. Personally, I'd rather apply it now than waiting for a detailed analysis of the exploit...
With C, you still have all the bugs you would have in a program written in a safer language, plus buffer overflows and format-string errors. Nobody said that all programs written in a language with, say, bounds-checking would automatically be completly safe (well, probably someone has, but still...), but removing one common source of bugs without introducing new ones simply is a good idea.
Did you try it with Solaris 9 8/03 (i.e. the first version to actually include it by default, rather than as a separate download), or a system patched up to a similar level? If not, you should try again, it has gotten a lot better since the beta releases. It's still a pretty bare Gnome 2.0 though, and personally I found it less nicely integrated with the system in a few areas than CDE (for example, the "suspend system" menu item is only available in a "CDE" submenu of the Gnome applications menu, rather than right next to "log out" etc. in "Actions"; packages that automatically add an item to the CDE main panel don't show up in the Gnome menu structure; etc.), but I for one have not chosen the CDE desktop option once after installing Sol9 8/03 on my dabbling box. YMMV, of course - especially if you want lean and mean, neither Gnome nor CDE will make you happy, ever.
Let's wait what Mad Hatter will be like. After all, more information - or probably even a relase - should be available later this week. I wonder if Solaris 10 will ship with it by default, or with a "stock" Sun-branded Gnome - I don't remember any specific statements on that.
Sun is embracing open source in a lot of areas. Like, they actually sell Linux boxes. Their Mad Hatter desktop will be available in a Linux- and a Solaris-based version, the Linux one probably being released first. Solaris will switch to Gnome (to which they have contributed a lot) for the default UI, the current Solaris 9 already installs it by default along with CDE. They started some projects, like the xmlroff XSL FO formatter, that are probably primarily of internal interest to them (almost all Solaris documentation is written in docbook, up to the manpages), and put them on sourceforge. OpenOffice.org wouldn't exist if they wouldn't think Open Source would be a good idea.
Basically, Sun is a pretty cool company, including their OS strategy. If only they would tell their marketing department! (And that Scott McNealy is a stupid jerk doesn't help either.) The most important difference to IBM seems to be that Sun doesn't brag a lot in public about how much they contribute and how much they use and support OS software.
Without plugins we can rely on more integral browser support for
proper standards like SVG, CSS, and the DOM.
Funny how you did not actually mention a single "proper standard". All of your examples are basically just informal recommendations of a software vendor consortium.
A consortium, one might add, that has a dubious take on things like software patents (was an issue with SVG and some Adobe patents), and frequently failed when they started designing things on their own (like in most of the recs written in this millenium), too much proprietary interests influencing technical decisions being a common complaint (like the influence of a certain well-known database vendor on the mess that is XML Schema, and its inclusion in every spec written since then), not to mention lack of public control and democratic process.
For some reason, I have yet to see a proper HyTime-enabled SGML browser. But then, ISO HTML isn't exactly the future either, so I better not complain.
Re:...because they predate Firebird...
on
Gnome 2.4 Release(d)
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Both Galeon and Epiphany use Gecko, the Mozilla rendering engine. It's unlikely that they are much older than Mozilla itself.
The biggest annoyance is that newer GCCs treat multiline string literals (i.e. strings with embeded newline characters as opposed to \n) as errors, instead of just issuing a warning. This is actually conforming behaviour, so packages should really be fixed upstream. Other than that, I never had any problems beyond simple warnings, but of course, YMMV.
Given that GCC got better and better in terms of ISO/ANSI C conformance, most problems are probably bugs that just didn't show up yet because they went with a matching GCC bug. So fixing them will only increase conformance, and hence portability to other compilers.
As long as you don't intend visiting the USA... Think Sklyarov
But visiting the USA as a software developer (or living there in the first place) seems to be a bad idea anyway these days, kinda like visiting iran as a rabbi.
Fortunatly, similar to the DMCA, I can't help but seeing lots of non-USA-citizen developers of P2P apps being rather unimpressed by that for now. As well as users in other countries, for that matter.
Sorry to all you US people, guess it sucks to be you. But really, what can I say? It's your government, only you can get rid of it and try to get a sane one for a change. And given that the US served as a bad example for other legislations way too many times now, please, please do! We have our own music industry looney to fight against, we don't need them being able to point to you and say "but everybody else does it that way".
After months of illegally invading the privacy of random filesharers, the RIAA has found, to its great relief, that people generally do not trade copyrighted music files with so-called "peer-to-peer" applications, but mainly pornographic pictures inserted to the network by the copyright owners themselves. "Most of our members are not in the porn business," a RIAA spokesperson explained, "so this is none of our business. This obviously was a false alarm, we will leave that pervs alone."
He also explained that their clients will now look for other explanations for their lost profits and ways to stop them, starting with beating up school children that play loud music in parks and other public places, and breaking into houses of people believed to sing under the shower.
On the other hand, it would be news to me that the RIAA represents the porn industry. So, if most P2Pers are looking not for music, but for that nasty pictures, how do they justify sniffing around their private files, and batch-suing them?
Why don't these people just put some effort in reiserFS?
Because some people value their data
Because some people think "free software" doesn't mean "software you are free to modify as long as it doesn't interfere with Hans Reisers business interests"
The one thing I personally don't like about most Linux systems is that they seem to think that they are smarter than the upstream developers. The problem with heavily patched packages and funky custom installation layouts is that all the documentation, from howtos to security advisories, must first be "translated" to your local system. The BSD packages, and I guess this is true for gentoo and some other Linux-based systems as well, is that they mostly keep stuff as it was meant to be by the authors, except for patches neccessary to make it run at all.
I'm not sure about Debian, I haven't used it for some time now. But I do remember some horribly overengineered stupidities (like the "alternatives" system), so I wouldn't be surprised if they were guilty of that, too.
Thankfully, it's FreeBSD you're talking about, and not another unnamed BSD system that I am aware of:-)
Yeah, that FreeBSD that ships with two packet filters out of the box (three if you count the one that comes with the ppp daemon), and the unnamed one in the ports - of course, without the slightest hint on which to use in what situation in the docs...;-)
The problem with this is that some ports (e.g. ghostscript and php) have curses based front-end for selecting make flags. This causes portupgrade to wait for user input
Use portupgrade -m "BATCH=yes", and no user input will be required. You can also set the variables that you want your ports to be built with in/etc/make.conf, or, more flexibly, in/usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf, based on the ports name (including wildcards). This is a good idea anyway, because you don't have to remember all these options, they will be the same on every update.
The only problem is finding the options you can use. The best approach is currently to simply examine the port's makefile, say by grepping for "^\.if", but that doesn't always work (for example, the postfix ports use a different mechanism). So learning to read and understand makefiles is a good idea, and reading the porter's handbook also pays off. A standardized mechanism to query a port for all available options would be definitly a Good Thing (it would also make writing graphical frontends for the ports tree way easier, for example) - there have been some ideas how this could be done, but nothing has worked good enough yet, and of course, switching ~8000 ports to a new system would be a lot of work.
Microsoft at least used to have this type of contracts. They cannot really prevent OEMs from offering dual booting machines, of course, but they could arrange it so that these would get worse contracts, making competition with MS-only vendors hard. This was a major part of of the Be, Inc. vs. Microsoft case.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't like many things about the current german government, and especially Schily seems to have some serious issues with some aspects of the constitution like some basic civil rights, but one has to admit that their IT strategy is better than one would expect. At least if you don't ask about software patents.
The PAE manpage says it's about having more than 4GB of memory. What does that have to do with USB support? If there are known problems, do they affect systems with < 4GB? Pointers to PRs and mailing lists appreciated.
So does copyright.
I'm a happy postfix user myself, but it should be noted for fairness reasons that the last postfix-related advisories are about two weeks old... Face it, some software may be better than others, but no matter what you are running, you'll always have to keep your systems up to date. Looking down on others because the software they run is oh so insecure and yours is perfect is the first step to being rooted.
Patches are already available, for example from the FreeBSD CVS web. Personally, I'd rather apply it now than waiting for a detailed analysis of the exploit...
With C, you still have all the bugs you would have in a program written in a safer language, plus buffer overflows and format-string errors. Nobody said that all programs written in a language with, say, bounds-checking would automatically be completly safe (well, probably someone has, but still...), but removing one common source of bugs without introducing new ones simply is a good idea.
Let's wait what Mad Hatter will be like. After all, more information - or probably even a relase - should be available later this week. I wonder if Solaris 10 will ship with it by default, or with a "stock" Sun-branded Gnome - I don't remember any specific statements on that.
Basically, Sun is a pretty cool company, including their OS strategy. If only they would tell their marketing department! (And that Scott McNealy is a stupid jerk doesn't help either.) The most important difference to IBM seems to be that Sun doesn't brag a lot in public about how much they contribute and how much they use and support OS software.
A consortium, one might add, that has a dubious take on things like software patents (was an issue with SVG and some Adobe patents), and frequently failed when they started designing things on their own (like in most of the recs written in this millenium), too much proprietary interests influencing technical decisions being a common complaint (like the influence of a certain well-known database vendor on the mess that is XML Schema, and its inclusion in every spec written since then), not to mention lack of public control and democratic process.
For some reason, I have yet to see a proper HyTime-enabled SGML browser. But then, ISO HTML isn't exactly the future either, so I better not complain.
Both Galeon and Epiphany use Gecko, the Mozilla rendering engine. It's unlikely that they are much older than Mozilla itself.
Given that GCC got better and better in terms of ISO/ANSI C conformance, most problems are probably bugs that just didn't show up yet because they went with a matching GCC bug. So fixing them will only increase conformance, and hence portability to other compilers.
Dude, you could at least read the story title... This is about NetBSD.
But visiting the USA as a software developer (or living there in the first place) seems to be a bad idea anyway these days, kinda like visiting iran as a rabbi.
Sorry to all you US people, guess it sucks to be you. But really, what can I say? It's your government, only you can get rid of it and try to get a sane one for a change. And given that the US served as a bad example for other legislations way too many times now, please, please do! We have our own music industry looney to fight against, we don't need them being able to point to you and say "but everybody else does it that way".
He also explained that their clients will now look for other explanations for their lost profits and ways to stop them, starting with beating up school children that play loud music in parks and other public places, and breaking into houses of people believed to sing under the shower.
On the other hand, it would be news to me that the RIAA represents the porn industry. So, if most P2Pers are looking not for music, but for that nasty pictures, how do they justify sniffing around their private files, and batch-suing them?
It will have a display that says "Keyboard Error - Press F11 to continue" whenever you try to restart it.
He did so because he saw how successfull Microsoft was after integrating VBA and the Office programs in the XP kernel.
I'm not sure about Debian, I haven't used it for some time now. But I do remember some horribly overengineered stupidities (like the "alternatives" system), so I wouldn't be surprised if they were guilty of that, too.
The only problem is finding the options you can use. The best approach is currently to simply examine the port's makefile, say by grepping for "^\.if", but that doesn't always work (for example, the postfix ports use a different mechanism). So learning to read and understand makefiles is a good idea, and reading the porter's handbook also pays off. A standardized mechanism to query a port for all available options would be definitly a Good Thing (it would also make writing graphical frontends for the ports tree way easier, for example) - there have been some ideas how this could be done, but nothing has worked good enough yet, and of course, switching ~8000 ports to a new system would be a lot of work.
Microsoft at least used to have this type of contracts. They cannot really prevent OEMs from offering dual booting machines, of course, but they could arrange it so that these would get worse contracts, making competition with MS-only vendors hard. This was a major part of of the Be, Inc. vs. Microsoft case.