The new kernel also includes ALSA support for the Dreamcast sound device (for the first time - an out of mainline OSS driver did/does exist for 2.4).
More dreamcast support is on the way - expect some more stuff in 2.6.24 and 2.6.25 and I (the author of the code) would love to hear from willing testers, etc
The parent post is a troll. The facts are this: one person attempted to change the licensing terms and submitted a patch. Nobody responsible for the Linux kernel accepted the patch. Various people then went mad and started screaming "fire" in the crowded theatres of various mailing lists.
Let's be clear, I haven't commented on the Linux market - they have. But I have server logs like the rest of you and I know that Linux is a small proportion of users.
And I am not interested in trolling either. My code is in the Linux kernel mainline, so my commitment to the project is real. I'm not even paid for this, I do it for love of the idea of free software and the intellectual challenge. I am very pleased Linux use has doubled, I just wonder why it is taking so long to make it beyond such low levels.
As Net Applications measure web browsing I think I am pretty correct in identifying this as being about the desktop. Perhaps you should do more research before levelling such accusations.
My own experience is that Linux use is rising, but that it is low. For instance, in twenty plus years of working life in the public and private sectors I have nevers seen a non-DOS or Windows machine part from a few Mac used by graphic designers.
Really? I'd say the numbers were pretty accurate in my experience, at least in the sense that Linux on the desktop is about 1% of installs. Three - four per cent just doesn't ring true.
I think the key point here is that the growth rate is high.
I've been using Linux for just over six years and I am never sure if it has become easier or I've just become more profficient, though certainly hardware support is much much better.
I've also noticed that desktop users have probably doubled to about 1 - 1.5% in that time, with most of the growth in the last 18 months (Ubuntu effect I am sure). Suspect we need about 3 - 5% before we are really in the big time: that's maybe three years away yet.
Exceot that once you have released a driver under GPL v2, then anyone can hack it to remove the DRM check. Tivo-isation is about how the hardware behaves, not the software.
But maybe the reality is that we should live with the current organic growth of Linux on the desktop and not go mad about this.
I think the evidence is clear that Linux is growing on the desktop, admittedly from a very low base but it is clearly above 1% now whereas for a long time it seemed to be stuck permanently at 0.5%. OK 1% doesn't seem like a lot as a proportion, but it *is* a lot of machines.
As we creep up to 2% I think more and more hardware manufacturers will take notice and more and more drivers will be available - indeed the signs are that is already happening. And as that happens growth will accelerate. And that will be a self-sustaining process.
But I also don't think we should play the game with stuff like MP3 patents. It means Linux will forever be the power-users' OS, but that it will also be the guardian against the closed system. What's the point of free software if you have to compromise your freedom?
As on lkml the discussion here is tedious beyond belief. The whole tone of it reminds me of the letters page "Smash Hits" magazine (a teenage music mag in the UK) in the 1980s - where every letter seemed to be someone screaming at someone else because they dared to criticise their favourite band.
Anyone wanting evidence that a lot of computer nerds are poorly adjusted individuals with little social skills need only read the exchanges on lkml.
I refused to sign this petition not because I am anything other than a Linux fanatic but because it calls on the PM to instruct the BBC to do something. Short of a national emergency the PM should not have any such powers.
So, the whole thing was flawed and mis-directed.
Parent is more than a little unfair.
FSF has no locus in the case unless it is assigned the copyright. And something in the public domain has no copyright and so cannot be protected or kept free/open.
I assume Amazon aren't using Linux kernel code in this, because if they are aren't they in violation of the GPL? (seious question, i don't know - maybe because they aren't distributing it they are in the clear?)
Your argument is nonsense. Think of the typical US legal example - freedom of speech is not the same as freedom to cry "fire" in a crowded theatre. Freedom of travel is not licence to drive your car on the pavement. With freedom comes responsibility and, in software, that means acting in such a way as to ensure you do not diminish others' freedoms.
One can argue about where that balance is struck (eg the ongoing GPL v2 - GPL v3 arguments in the Linux kernel world), but claiming there is no balnce is obviously garbage.
Because if you have a worm that requires activation on port 1234 that activation is denied. Similarly, if you have a service which is vulnerable to a remote exploit then blocking incoming at least lengthens the odds.
The way the story is written the key is presumably "CTEC ASTRONOMY".
Getting the key will not make it easy to break into people's computers if the security is done properly (not unless they have some quantum computers brute forcing various keys), but it would make it easy to pretend to be part of someone's network.
I have to say I am disappointed, but maybe not too surprised at the quality of the discussion. Perhaps people need to get out of their tribal positions a bit more.
The poster who talked about Macs being seen as a rebel movement and maybe that is what attracted the left I think got close to what goes on here, though I just don't accept the point that IT people or engineers are more naturally on the right and therefore that is why more on the right use Linux. Seems like a case of a self-justifying and unthinking argument.
Maybe I should rephrase the question - why does the left see an Apple Mac as more rebellious than subverting their OEM Windows box with a linux CD.
One more thing I've noticed from my server logs - very few BSD users here - I think one out of 400 or so vistors to HateMyTory - all that "BSD is dying" stuff means the/. community is clearly losing out on insights.
You are absolutely right. I wish some of the/. ranters would stop and ask themselves why we haven't yet achieved world domination and the answer can only be because we are not good enough yet.
Anybody who has worked on any FOSS project outside the Linux kernel will know there are *never* enough developers. And this guy is right in that basic point, even if his tone is occassionally annoying.
Nobody at IBM ever got sacked for using it. I don't work in IT and so when I talk to IT vendors they think I know nothing. That's why they can feed me lines like "MySQL is a toy system" (as opposed to the MS Access crap they were selling). If I was just another manager then I'd probably believe them.
Your both wrong. Windows 3.1 was the Windows version on sale at the time (and had been since April 1992). The first version of Windows NT was badged at NT 3.1 presumably for marketing reasons - so the suits would see the two as interchangeable.
Actually these aren't anything to do with Apache or Linux, but with poorly coded php apps. Now, it happens that php is more likely to be found on Linux boxes (indeed any general web technology is) but AFAIK there is nothing specifc limiting these exploits to Linux at all. Is that a correct understanding?
On the other hand Code Red and similar junk I get in my server log is from a direct exploit of the server.
Simple one: of course I accept that Windows and Linux are a priori equally vulnerable - C programmers make mistakes. the question is which model is most likely to deliver a fix fastest. Given that the one area where Linux is probably in the lead over Microsoft's software is in the realm of the webserver - why are my server logs filled with artifacts of hacked IIS boxes but apache seems to remain pretty safe?
Slashdot Mirror
The new kernel also includes ALSA support for the Dreamcast sound device (for the first time - an out of mainline OSS driver did/does exist for 2.4).
More dreamcast support is on the way - expect some more stuff in 2.6.24 and 2.6.25 and I (the author of the code) would love to hear from willing testers, etc
The parent post is a troll. The facts are this: one person attempted to change the licensing terms and submitted a patch. Nobody responsible for the Linux kernel accepted the patch. Various people then went mad and started screaming "fire" in the crowded theatres of various mailing lists.
Let's be clear, I haven't commented on the Linux market - they have. But I have server logs like the rest of you and I know that Linux is a small proportion of users.
And I am not interested in trolling either. My code is in the Linux kernel mainline, so my commitment to the project is real. I'm not even paid for this, I do it for love of the idea of free software and the intellectual challenge. I am very pleased Linux use has doubled, I just wonder why it is taking so long to make it beyond such low levels.
As Net Applications measure web browsing I think I am pretty correct in identifying this as being about the desktop. Perhaps you should do more research before levelling such accusations.
My own experience is that Linux use is rising, but that it is low. For instance, in twenty plus years of working life in the public and private sectors I have nevers seen a non-DOS or Windows machine part from a few Mac used by graphic designers.
Really? I'd say the numbers were pretty accurate in my experience, at least in the sense that Linux on the desktop is about 1% of installs. Three - four per cent just doesn't ring true.
I think the key point here is that the growth rate is high.
I've been using Linux for just over six years and I am never sure if it has become easier or I've just become more profficient, though certainly hardware support is much much better.
I've also noticed that desktop users have probably doubled to about 1 - 1.5% in that time, with most of the growth in the last 18 months (Ubuntu effect I am sure). Suspect we need about 3 - 5% before we are really in the big time: that's maybe three years away yet.
Exceot that once you have released a driver under GPL v2, then anyone can hack it to remove the DRM check. Tivo-isation is about how the hardware behaves, not the software.
It was. Ami Pro was fantastic. Much better than Word 6
Absolutely.
But maybe the reality is that we should live with the current organic growth of Linux on the desktop and not go mad about this.
I think the evidence is clear that Linux is growing on the desktop, admittedly from a very low base but it is clearly above 1% now whereas for a long time it seemed to be stuck permanently at 0.5%. OK 1% doesn't seem like a lot as a proportion, but it *is* a lot of machines.
As we creep up to 2% I think more and more hardware manufacturers will take notice and more and more drivers will be available - indeed the signs are that is already happening. And as that happens growth will accelerate. And that will be a self-sustaining process.
But I also don't think we should play the game with stuff like MP3 patents. It means Linux will forever be the power-users' OS, but that it will also be the guardian against the closed system. What's the point of free software if you have to compromise your freedom?
As on lkml the discussion here is tedious beyond belief. The whole tone of it reminds me of the letters page "Smash Hits" magazine (a teenage music mag in the UK) in the 1980s - where every letter seemed to be someone screaming at someone else because they dared to criticise their favourite band. Anyone wanting evidence that a lot of computer nerds are poorly adjusted individuals with little social skills need only read the exchanges on lkml.
I refused to sign this petition not because I am anything other than a Linux fanatic but because it calls on the PM to instruct the BBC to do something. Short of a national emergency the PM should not have any such powers. So, the whole thing was flawed and mis-directed.
Parent is more than a little unfair. FSF has no locus in the case unless it is assigned the copyright. And something in the public domain has no copyright and so cannot be protected or kept free/open.
No jury will convict in such a case, assuming we've been given the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
I assume Amazon aren't using Linux kernel code in this, because if they are aren't they in violation of the GPL? (seious question, i don't know - maybe because they aren't distributing it they are in the clear?)
Your argument is nonsense. Think of the typical US legal example - freedom of speech is not the same as freedom to cry "fire" in a crowded theatre. Freedom of travel is not licence to drive your car on the pavement. With freedom comes responsibility and, in software, that means acting in such a way as to ensure you do not diminish others' freedoms.
One can argue about where that balance is struck (eg the ongoing GPL v2 - GPL v3 arguments in the Linux kernel world), but claiming there is no balnce is obviously garbage.
Because if you have a worm that requires activation on port 1234 that activation is denied. Similarly, if you have a service which is vulnerable to a remote exploit then blocking incoming at least lengthens the odds.
The way the story is written the key is presumably "CTEC ASTRONOMY". Getting the key will not make it easy to break into people's computers if the security is done properly (not unless they have some quantum computers brute forcing various keys), but it would make it easy to pretend to be part of someone's network.
Linux patches are also distributed as source code. Indeed, isn't this the old skool *nix way, full stop?
I have to say I am disappointed, but maybe not too surprised at the quality of the discussion. Perhaps people need to get out of their tribal positions a bit more.
/. community is clearly losing out on insights.
The poster who talked about Macs being seen as a rebel movement and maybe that is what attracted the left I think got close to what goes on here, though I just don't accept the point that IT people or engineers are more naturally on the right and therefore that is why more on the right use Linux. Seems like a case of a self-justifying and unthinking argument.
Maybe I should rephrase the question - why does the left see an Apple Mac as more rebellious than subverting their OEM Windows box with a linux CD.
One more thing I've noticed from my server logs - very few BSD users here - I think one out of 400 or so vistors to HateMyTory - all that "BSD is dying" stuff means the
So, tell me how you generate a "truly random" key? I don't believe it exists.
You are absolutely right. I wish some of the /. ranters would stop and ask themselves why we haven't yet achieved world domination and the answer can only be because we are not good enough yet.
Anybody who has worked on any FOSS project outside the Linux kernel will know there are *never* enough developers. And this guy is right in that basic point, even if his tone is occassionally annoying.
Nobody at IBM ever got sacked for using it.
I don't work in IT and so when I talk to IT vendors they think I know nothing. That's why they can feed me lines like "MySQL is a toy system" (as opposed to the MS Access crap they were selling). If I was just another manager then I'd probably believe them.
Your both wrong. Windows 3.1 was the Windows version on sale at the time (and had been since April 1992).
The first version of Windows NT was badged at NT 3.1 presumably for marketing reasons - so the suits would see the two as interchangeable.
Actually these aren't anything to do with Apache or Linux, but with poorly coded php apps. Now, it happens that php is more likely to be found on Linux boxes (indeed any general web technology is) but AFAIK there is nothing specifc limiting these exploits to Linux at all. Is that a correct understanding?
On the other hand Code Red and similar junk I get in my server log is from a direct exploit of the server.
Simple one: of course I accept that Windows and Linux are a priori equally vulnerable - C programmers make mistakes. the question is which model is most likely to deliver a fix fastest. Given that the one area where Linux is probably in the lead over Microsoft's software is in the realm of the webserver - why are my server logs filled with artifacts of hacked IIS boxes but apache seems to remain pretty safe?
I was laughing too much and getting strange looks in the office. Personally I use perl to guarantee employment, but there's a look to work on here.