As an example, behold the behavior of leftist and activist Gays in California over the Prop 8 dispute. Despite the fact that Mormons make up less than 3% of the CA voting bloc that voted Prop 8 in, and Blacks and Latinos voted FOR Prop 8 in overwhelming numbers, the gays are ONLY targeting the Mormons.
The Mormon church provided millions of dollars to help swing the vote, which is generally what "the gays" are upset about... although "targeting" is a unique way of putting it. Probably reading some right wing news sources, like the new york times, would help you out.
They are threatening to burn down churches, have sent white powder-filled envelopes to LDS headquarters, and have already attacked and beaten both Mormons, and elderly people.
But then this goes way past half-truths and misinformation... stop listening to Fox News, it makes you look like an idiot.
Oh, you mean the totally truthiness website that declared Nov. 22nd "victory in Iraq" day. Oh, yeh, I'm sure to believe whatever they say... damn libral media are all liars. </sarcasm>
Let's get over this idea that there are "no victims" in the crime of prostitution.
Selling things is legal, sex is legal, but if we combine the two it should be illegal/immoral/create-victims.
The victims are the prostitutes. [...] Prostitutes are preyed upon daily by pimps, johns, drug dealers, human traffickers, and sadists.
Sure, and I'm "preyed" upon daily by the bank that owns my mortgage, my boss, the people I buy food from... people I buy NYSE shares from, and those who I sell it too. Bonus for me, all of those things are legal entities... human traffickers, not so much.
Deregulating immorality does NOT work.
So you don't eat swine, or allow your wife to speak/vote/show-her-face... right? Or maybe you just mean the made up morality of your particular religion is what we should all follow? -- feel free to FOAD.
I administer both a Debian cluster (which I set up) and a mixed Fedora/RedHat cluster (which I inherited) for a large university
It doesn't take much insight to see that the bits in brackets might well be the important bits here. You are allowed to prefer Debian, noone is saying otherwise, but that doesn't make everything about it objectively better.
Yum is in no way a superset of apt-get.
[...]
On an equivalent system, yum runs much slower than apt-get,
This is like saying vim is not a superset of ed, because in the cases where their functionality overlaps ed is faster. This is not the common usage of the word superset. Also 1) From what you say above I'd bet that you are using an older version of yum, 3.2.19 is almost everywhere by now and is at least as fast as apt (on the same data). 2) You are probably confused by "equivalent system", as I said in my reply debian.dpkg/Fedora.rpm have different goals stds. wrt. packaging. The Debian model shifts a lot more burden onto the packager and a lot less onto the tools, IMNSHO this is the wrong thing to do... but meh.
apt-get has always blown other package management solutions out of the water
Even if you irrationally hate rpm/yum/etc. and are happy with the limited functionality... this is still an indefensible argument as smart has a better depsolver than apt does, and works with rpm/dpkg. Much more likely is that you like ed, and don't like change... which is fine, but is hardly the same thing.
Unless you are a real company actually cares about downtime of their live servers. A dist-upgrade is much less downtime and less error prone because you can do it yourself to remote servers rather than having to trust a data center monkey with an rhel upgrade via cd/dvd.
The "real companies" I meant are the ones that don't do cross major version updates on a production box, at all. They might have kickstart/etc. to semi-automate installing the next major version, but even if they don't it's not a big time difference as the process/testing to put new machine(s) into production on a new major version and take out the older ones is much more involved than just installing the machine (and has simple outcomes like, if X happens back everything out to the old boxes again).
A single major advantage: It's Debian-based, but more current, better honed
"more current" in relation to Debian stable, maybe. In relation to the competition it is always subjective, given that RHEL/CentOS have 7+ year support lifetimes. I don't think anyone has done a "newness" and "correctness" metric for LTS vs. RHEL... my guess is that they are about equal at GA.
but deb package management is far better than Red Hat's rpm, and that can be a huge advantage.
This is hard to qualify statement, rpm is a super set of dpkg and it's hard to argue that yum is anything but a superset of apt-get (in terms of features, UI and speed). You could probably argue that Debian packaging is stricter than Fedora/RHEL/EPEL, mostly due to the above (which also means it's harder on the packager, but somewhat easier on the tools). Maybe you just mean that Debian/Ubuntu "offically support" apt-get dist-upgrade, whereas Fedora/RHEL/CentOS don't, yet, for various reasons... which while valid is much less so in a real company setting, IMO.
So there are weaknesses in Debian, but do they compare with rpm hell,
I can only assume that you haven't used rpm/yum recently... or that you have seen cases where bad external packages are imported into rpm case but not in the dpkg case (as the resulting dpkg hell is often much worse).
or with the many adventures with Red Hat's aggressive patching of its kernels? If you're running Red Hat and compile your own generic kernels, that's not a problem. With Red Hat you really should. With Ubuntu I haven't yet had a problem running their kernel versions.
I can only assume this is some kind of weird joke, or maybe you are trolling. Ubuntu is infamous for kludging their kernels and not working upstream... and personally if you are not running the distro. kernel on RHEL then you might as well set fire to your money instead.
Don't dismiss the message because of the messenger. This is the most basic (and pathetic) form of ad hominem attack. 'You suck therefore you're wrong' is not an argument.
The argument is more like "You're cluseless, so you're probably wrong", which I would certainly not classify as an Ad Hominem attack.
Look at e-mail spam. Do you like it? Do you not get any? Google sure deals with a lot of it. Tons of places do. Why? Because SMTP is not authenticated by default. Imagine if all e-mail sending AND receiving required a username and password. It wouldn't matter anymore if you were on your ISP's network or not, you could always send mail, AND no one could send mail to you except through their own ISP's servers.
You are confused, the reason email is so useful is because anyone can freely send me an email... the reason you get spam is because anyone can freely send me an email. Your suggestion, like many others, fails to take the first point into account... and if I didn't want that aspect then I could just only allow email from gpgsigned parties I know (or not read email, as it'd be roughly the same).
But even if someone came up with a change in how email worked such that you could keep all the positive attributes of what we have with none of the negative attributes... that would likely not require a new protcol, SMTP has evolved and could likely evolve to what people wanted from it. Saying "the protocols just need to be better" just shows the ignorance of the speaker, and naturally provokes people who do have a clue to say "don't bother listening to X they have no idea what they are talking about".
Ever notice how people will drive for hours and stand in line just to pay the moron tax when the PowerBall lotteries announce that the next payout is going to be tens of millions?
Err, no. You can buy powerball tickets pretty much everywhere. Also your assumption in the above is that all dollars are worth the same amount, which I would disagree with (for sure you shouldn't put your 401k money into the lottery, but putting up $1 a week to win $100+ million is not the same equation).
Why, does that matter? Most of the git work I do there is a central repo. that everyone with privs pushes to. So instead of "svn commit" you have "git push"... except with git you can create local branches, work disconnected, don't need to give commit privs. out as much, and it's much faster.
Why would it matter if it were an SI unit or not? "Mega", in its modern usage is based on the decimal system. So, why would you use it for a binary unit?
That's just not true. In any computer context apart from "the number on the packaging for a HD", the usage of MB or Megabyte means 1024*1024 is much more than 50% of contexts (and that was bascially 100% until a few years ago when some people decided it'd be awesome to change over 35 years of usage).
Given that, most people will never see "mega" used outside of a computer related usage so to most people mega means 1024*1024... except for PR BS, and the recent morons who want everyone to use a different word to mean the same thing.
But, hey, feel free to keep confusing people if it makes you feel superior.
So - when your ISP says, you can have 1 shared IP, but if you want a static one it'll cost you $10 a month.. you'll start
hahaha, $10 a month I laugh at you! I pay abou $80 a month, so I can get a/29... I used to pay that to get a/26 a few years ago (although at much lower speeds). I'd happily move to all IPv6 with a shared IPv4 to get rid of that cost. But noone is offering it, my ISP has had zero requests for it (apart from me) and it would cost them more to offer IPv6 than it does to offer IPv4.
Realistically I hold out no hope at all that we won't hit peak IPv4, and have to suffer through the chaos for a few years while everyone scrambles to move. But then it'll be a lot less painful than peak Oil, and I see only slimmers of hope that'll go well.
I think you'd be rightly pissed off if you wrote a book, it didn't really sell, and then ten years later Fox released a profoundly successful blockbuster hit based on it
And the alternative is what? That it's never famous and you never make any more or get any recognition... along with dragging society down into a neverending cespit of "I thought of 2+2 before you did, and so deserve a dollar".
Furthermore, since python's preferred script magic is "#!/bin/env python", rather than, "#!/bin/python",
It's possible that some of the python maintainers prefer that, but the distributions sure as hell don't. "Grab a random python binary that you hit first in my path" does not make for a reliable system. It destroys any idea of security (SELinux, setuid, consolehelper, etc. etc.), and I've seen more than a couple of bugs where applications stupidly used it and then someone wanted to try a newer python in/usr/local... oops, random stuff starts breaking.
Theoretically with the stock market, the money you invest in the companies is used to grow the company, meaning there is a chance for everybody to win because you have helped to create wealth by letting the company become more profitable.
At the expense of another company, whose stock must then go down as the stock you own goes up. And when you come to sell your stock, for that profit, there has to be someone who is buying at the price you are selling (minus the cost of the trade, for both of you).
Given the last couple of weeks (or months/years), we'd probably all be better off if the mutual fund managers just got together and played poker.
We already have that. We have Red Hat (RPM) based distros and Debian (APT) based distros. Just about any major distro can fall into that category, CentOS, RHEL, Fedora, Yellow Dog, and even openSUSE can be considered to be with Red Hat based (RPM) distros. On the other hand, Ubuntu, Debian, KNOPPIX, Xandros, DSL, etc.
RPM != APT... RPM == DPKG. APT is more commonly used with DPKG based distributions, but apt-rpm has been around a long time now. SuSE uses Zypper instead of APT, RHEL uses yum. Which is to say we are most certainly not down to two flavours of package mangement atm. (which isn't that bad given how much all of them need to improve).
Why most people don't standardize on APT, though... it's beyond me.
Have you asked anyone? And I don't mean in a stupid Debian fan boi way of asking "Don't you guys still install everything by hand using rpm?"
Personally I find apt a horrible user interface, the fact it splits the user operations up between a bunch of different commands seems totally insane... and don't get me started on the whole "each user much manually synchronize their metadata" snafu.
But then I think all of the package management interfaces could best be described as "a long way to go before they are finished"... picking a std. now and stopping development would be like giving up when you had the penny farthing. Not that some consolidation wouldn't be helpful, feel free to suggest Debian uses rpm's and yum... they are both supersets in functionality of the Debian tools (but feel free not to CC on the NIH flamewar that ensues).
when dealing in the volume of shares that they are dividens just don't make sence.. they sound nice.. but they don't add any value to the company.
A couple of problems: 1) MSFT already has a dividend, so they already have all the cons. 2) Pretty much all large companies (which mostly have large numbers of shares) give a dividend.
Also historically dividend producing companies tend to perform better, on average, than non dividend producing companies.
No, I'm thinking in terms of the real world. Yes, you can probably think of data coming from the network as "an infiite list of bytes"... but that is a terrible model with which to represent that data. Yes, it might make your life easier... just as doing open(filename).readlines() is "easy" in python, but they don't not treat the machine resources as what they are (limited).
As a concrete example, think of a HTTP "message". Now you could represent this as an infinite list of bytes, that get transformed into an infinite list of lines (ignoring uploaded data for now)... however you still need to handle someone connecting and sending a continuous stream of NIL bytes.
Sure they do. How many lines in the next web page?
And these are all terrible things to create infinite lists for, those aren't notational convenience... you actually need to inspect them. To be fair firefox often do that well on this, as if you give it a 100MB xml file it'll happily try and use it without warning. But that doesn't mean "eat all the resources on the machine and die" is a best practise.
Actually, when you're able to do it naturally in your language, it becomes a very useful thing to do. For example, when you want fresh variables in a compiler
How is that better than doing (or basically the same in Java/C/perl/ruby/etc.):
Really? Ruby forge has a fairly similar number of projects available. PyPi has only a small amount more. Last time I checked with the guys who manage hackage, they're getting 100 submissions of new projects/versions every *day*.
Are you still compiling your entire OS from source? Following every project on your system for updates? No you use a package management system (or at least sane people do). Ok, now goto a Fedora box and type "yum search haskell" and "yum search python"... "fairly similar" is so off the mark it isn't even funny.
Also I'm not sure what "100 submissions a day" is supposed to be measuring, but it sure better not be "new packages" and anything else doesn't seem relevant to the discussion.
Of course you don't, because why let reality intrude?
You can only deduct medical expenses upto a certain point, and after a certain threshold... and only if you itemize your tax return. And you still have to pay it now and claim it back 6 months from now.
Yeah and most "sensible" countries also have a 50-60% tax rate.
For a normal working person in the US, you can easily be paying 50-60% in "tax". It's just instead of the govt. taking one big chunk, you pay Income Tax, SS Tax, Medicare, State Income Tax, 401k, Medical "insurance", Medical co-pays, PMI, costs associated with not having mass transit etc. etc. etc.
Meanwhile, here comes Canonical. They truly keep the distribution and support model independent. They have rapid release cycles, but denote a more 'enterprise-friendly' LTS cycle underscoring things. Regardless, the distribution is free to download and distribute.
Exactly, so Canonical does exactly the same thing as SuSE/OpenSuSE or RHEL/Fedora... except they brand it with the same name (just putting a LTS sub-brand on the realistically supported version). They also don't support their LTS for as long as RH/Novell do their versions... oh, and they also don't make any money or do any significant work to advance upstream.
If Canonical can keep making it as easy as possible to not pay them any money, and actually make money (and presumably contribute something back), it'll be a very interesting comparison (and I would expect them to win, long term, assuming RH/Novell continue their current model)... but atm. it could just as easily be that Canonical are still in the "give stuff away, until enough people are using our stuff" mode for their long term support products.
You make an interesting argument, and it's certainly more compelling than the usual "but drugs are bad, mmmkay". But I see a couple of holes:
Wrestling is a bad litmus test, because not only do the athletes probably take drugs. But the entire thing is scripted. I mean there's a big different between going to a basketball game where all the players are on drugs, and on in which the outcome is predetermined. In fact I'd assume the opposite would happen.
What do you do about the "angle shots", like oxygenating blood etc? Or just generally any kind of enhancement which can't be detected well. I've also read arguments that, for instance, highly competetive pistol shooters have considered surgically removing fingers. Or you going to disallow that?
You're argument pre-supposes that having as large a "viewing public" as is possible is the whole point of the sports in the first place. While I'm sure Fox would agree, it's not quite so clear cut. Certainly at one point "what is possible for a human to do" was the main reason.
Slashdot Mirror
The Mormon church provided millions of dollars to help swing the vote, which is generally what "the gays" are upset about ... although "targeting" is a unique way of putting it. Probably reading some right wing news sources, like the new york times, would help you out.
But then this goes way past half-truths and misinformation ... stop listening to Fox News, it makes you look like an idiot.
Oh, you mean the totally truthiness website that declared Nov. 22nd "victory in Iraq" day. Oh, yeh, I'm sure to believe whatever they say ... damn libral media are all liars. </sarcasm>
Selling things is legal, sex is legal, but if we combine the two it should be illegal/immoral/create-victims.
Sure, and I'm "preyed" upon daily by the bank that owns my mortgage, my boss, the people I buy food from ... people I buy NYSE shares from, and those who I sell it too. Bonus for me, all of those things are legal entities ... human traffickers, not so much.
So you don't eat swine, or allow your wife to speak/vote/show-her-face ... right? Or maybe you just mean the made up morality of your particular religion is what we should all follow? -- feel free to FOAD.
It doesn't take much insight to see that the bits in brackets might well be the important bits here. You are allowed to prefer Debian, noone is saying otherwise, but that doesn't make everything about it objectively better.
This is like saying vim is not a superset of ed, because in the cases where their functionality overlaps ed is faster. This is not the common usage of the word superset. Also 1) From what you say above I'd bet that you are using an older version of yum, 3.2.19 is almost everywhere by now and is at least as fast as apt (on the same data). 2) You are probably confused by "equivalent system", as I said in my reply debian.dpkg/Fedora.rpm have different goals stds. wrt. packaging. The Debian model shifts a lot more burden onto the packager and a lot less onto the tools, IMNSHO this is the wrong thing to do ... but meh.
Even if you irrationally hate rpm/yum/etc. and are happy with the limited functionality ... this is still an indefensible argument as smart has a better depsolver than apt does, and works with rpm/dpkg. Much more likely is that you like ed, and don't like change ... which is fine, but is hardly the same thing.
The "real companies" I meant are the ones that don't do cross major version updates on a production box, at all. They might have kickstart/etc. to semi-automate installing the next major version, but even if they don't it's not a big time difference as the process/testing to put new machine(s) into production on a new major version and take out the older ones is much more involved than just installing the machine (and has simple outcomes like, if X happens back everything out to the old boxes again).
"more current" in relation to Debian stable, maybe. In relation to the competition it is always subjective, given that RHEL/CentOS have 7+ year support lifetimes. I don't think anyone has done a "newness" and "correctness" metric for LTS vs. RHEL ... my guess is that they are about equal at GA.
This is hard to qualify statement, rpm is a super set of dpkg and it's hard to argue that yum is anything but a superset of apt-get (in terms of features, UI and speed). You could probably argue that Debian packaging is stricter than Fedora/RHEL/EPEL, mostly due to the above (which also means it's harder on the packager, but somewhat easier on the tools). Maybe you just mean that Debian/Ubuntu "offically support" apt-get dist-upgrade, whereas Fedora/RHEL/CentOS don't, yet, for various reasons ... which while valid is much less so in a real company setting, IMO.
I can only assume that you haven't used rpm/yum recently ... or that you have seen cases where bad external packages are imported into rpm case but not in the dpkg case (as the resulting dpkg hell is often much worse).
I can only assume this is some kind of weird joke, or maybe you are trolling. Ubuntu is infamous for kludging their kernels and not working upstream ... and personally if you are not running the distro. kernel on RHEL then you might as well set fire to your money instead.
The argument is more like "You're cluseless, so you're probably wrong", which I would certainly not classify as an Ad Hominem attack.
You are confused, the reason email is so useful is because anyone can freely send me an email ... the reason you get spam is because anyone can freely send me an email. Your suggestion, like many others, fails to take the first point into account ... and if I didn't want that aspect then I could just only allow email from gpgsigned parties I know (or not read email, as it'd be roughly the same).
But even if someone came up with a change in how email worked such that you could keep all the positive attributes of what we have with none of the negative attributes ... that would likely not require a new protcol, SMTP has evolved and could likely evolve to what people wanted from it. Saying "the protocols just need to be better" just shows the ignorance of the speaker, and naturally provokes people who do have a clue to say "don't bother listening to X they have no idea what they are talking about".
Err, no. You can buy powerball tickets pretty much everywhere. Also your assumption in the above is that all dollars are worth the same amount, which I would disagree with (for sure you shouldn't put your 401k money into the lottery, but putting up $1 a week to win $100+ million is not the same equation).
Why, does that matter? Most of the git work I do there is a central repo. that everyone with privs pushes to. So instead of "svn commit" you have "git push" ... except with git you can create local branches, work disconnected, don't need to give commit privs. out as much, and it's much faster.
That's just not true. In any computer context apart from "the number on the packaging for a HD", the usage of MB or Megabyte means 1024*1024 is much more than 50% of contexts (and that was bascially 100% until a few years ago when some people decided it'd be awesome to change over 35 years of usage).
Given that, most people will never see "mega" used outside of a computer related usage so to most people mega means 1024*1024 ... except for PR BS, and the recent morons who want everyone to use a different word to mean the same thing.
But, hey, feel free to keep confusing people if it makes you feel superior.
hahaha, $10 a month I laugh at you! I pay abou $80 a month, so I can get a /29 ... I used to pay that to get a /26 a few years ago (although at much lower speeds). I'd happily move to all IPv6 with a shared IPv4 to get rid of that cost. But noone is offering it, my ISP has had zero requests for it (apart from me) and it would cost them more to offer IPv6 than it does to offer IPv4.
Realistically I hold out no hope at all that we won't hit peak IPv4, and have to suffer through the chaos for a few years while everyone scrambles to move. But then it'll be a lot less painful than peak Oil, and I see only slimmers of hope that'll go well.
And the alternative is what? That it's never famous and you never make any more or get any recognition ... along with dragging society down into a neverending cespit of "I thought of 2+2 before you did, and so deserve a dollar".
Sounds awesome.
It's possible that some of the python maintainers prefer that, but the distributions sure as hell don't. "Grab a random python binary that you hit first in my path" does not make for a reliable system. It destroys any idea of security (SELinux, setuid, consolehelper, etc. etc.), and I've seen more than a couple of bugs where applications stupidly used it and then someone wanted to try a newer python in /usr/local ... oops, random stuff starts breaking.
At the expense of another company, whose stock must then go down as the stock you own goes up. And when you come to sell your stock, for that profit, there has to be someone who is buying at the price you are selling (minus the cost of the trade, for both of you).
Given the last couple of weeks (or months/years), we'd probably all be better off if the mutual fund managers just got together and played poker.
RPM != APT ... RPM == DPKG. APT is more commonly used with DPKG based distributions, but apt-rpm has been around a long time now. SuSE uses Zypper instead of APT, RHEL uses yum. Which is to say we are most certainly not down to two flavours of package mangement atm. (which isn't that bad given how much all of them need to improve).
Have you asked anyone? And I don't mean in a stupid Debian fan boi way of asking "Don't you guys still install everything by hand using rpm?"
Personally I find apt a horrible user interface, the fact it splits the user operations up between a bunch of different commands seems totally insane ... and don't get me started on the whole "each user much manually synchronize their metadata" snafu.
But then I think all of the package management interfaces could best be described as "a long way to go before they are finished" ... picking a std. now and stopping development would be like giving up when you had the penny farthing. Not that some consolidation wouldn't be helpful, feel free to suggest Debian uses rpm's and yum ... they are both supersets in functionality of the Debian tools (but feel free not to CC on the NIH flamewar that ensues).
A couple of problems: 1) MSFT already has a dividend, so they already have all the cons. 2) Pretty much all large companies (which mostly have large numbers of shares) give a dividend.
Also historically dividend producing companies tend to perform better, on average, than non dividend producing companies.
No, I'm thinking in terms of the real world. Yes, you can probably think of data coming from the network as "an infiite list of bytes" ... but that is a terrible model with which to represent that data. Yes, it might make your life easier ... just as doing open(filename).readlines() is "easy" in python, but they don't not treat the machine resources as what they are (limited).
As a concrete example, think of a HTTP "message". Now you could represent this as an infinite list of bytes, that get transformed into an infinite list of lines (ignoring uploaded data for now) ... however you still need to handle someone connecting and sending a continuous stream of NIL bytes.
And these are all terrible things to create infinite lists for, those aren't notational convenience ... you actually need to inspect them. To be fair firefox often do that well on this, as if you give it a 100MB xml file it'll happily try and use it without warning. But that doesn't mean "eat all the resources on the machine and die" is a best practise.
How is that better than doing (or basically the same in Java/C/perl/ruby/etc.):
Are you still compiling your entire OS from source? Following every project on your system for updates? No you use a package management system (or at least sane people do). Ok, now goto a Fedora box and type "yum search haskell" and "yum search python" ... "fairly similar" is so off the mark it isn't even funny.
Also I'm not sure what "100 submissions a day" is supposed to be measuring, but it sure better not be "new packages" and anything else doesn't seem relevant to the discussion.
Of course you don't, because why let reality intrude?
You can only deduct medical expenses upto a certain point, and after a certain threshold ... and only if you itemize your tax return. And you still have to pay it now and claim it back 6 months from now.
For a normal working person in the US, you can easily be paying 50-60% in "tax". It's just instead of the govt. taking one big chunk, you pay Income Tax, SS Tax, Medicare, State Income Tax, 401k, Medical "insurance", Medical co-pays, PMI, costs associated with not having mass transit etc. etc. etc.
Exactly, so Canonical does exactly the same thing as SuSE/OpenSuSE or RHEL/Fedora ... except they brand it with the same name (just putting a LTS sub-brand on the realistically supported version). They also don't support their LTS for as long as RH/Novell do their versions ... oh, and they also don't make any money or do any significant work to advance upstream.
If Canonical can keep making it as easy as possible to not pay them any money, and actually make money (and presumably contribute something back), it'll be a very interesting comparison (and I would expect them to win, long term, assuming RH/Novell continue their current model) ... but atm. it could just as easily be that Canonical are still in the "give stuff away, until enough people are using our stuff" mode for their long term support products.
You make an interesting argument, and it's certainly more compelling than the usual "but drugs are bad, mmmkay". But I see a couple of holes: