Especially if you are being invaded by US forces and want a cheap way to make our multimilliondollar 'force fields' as effective as worm crap. Blanketing our tanks in fifty-cent beachballs or paintbombing the sensors is right out. Tank you, The Management
Bah,
Sensors should ignore low-speed objects.
And those sensors are not optical - regular paint would be useless.
And I afraid person doing it would be shot on spot.
(chinese) you have a government censor your information but you know that it is censored and therefore not the whole truth.
(western) you have media networks censor and manipulate your information at their will and benefit but you think you have an objective view about the entire state of the world?
the first is a subset of what is happening in the real world, but it doesn't contradict the whole truth.
the second claims to be the whole truth but isn't - and people happily live believe it.
The first is sensored but you do not know what exactly censored. Government adds it's oun skewed information.
The second gives your freedom to collect information from different sources. Nobody claims to own the whole truth
if it's not a church;)
It's really weird that most Chinese people don't bother it at all (I'm Chinese from mainland). In Chinese word, emperor doesn't bother but servant worries a lot. It's really fun to see this. Guess what? it's really danger to allow all Chinese open up their free mind and become democracy. Most Chinese have bad image about western invasion about 100 years ago. Chinese suffered so much. If China becomes western standard "free" country, the first thing they get to do is to take back Taiwan, invade Japan and probably launch cold war with US since government has to follow the mass opinion. It is actually communist party suppresses mass anger toward western world on Taiwan issue and US insulting Chinese face on various other issues. Trust me, current China government it the best one for both Chinese and western world!
It is just funny to read. Isn't Chinese government responsible for anti-Western propaganda? Didn't Chinese government invented Taiwan issue? What is the issue, really?
Mac OS X Server starts with Darwin, the same open source foundation used in Mac OS X, Apple's operating system for desktop and mobile computers. Darwin is built around the Mach 3.0 microkernel, which provides features critical to server operations, such as fine-grained multi-threading, symmetric multiprocessing (SMP), protected memory, a unified buffer cache (UBC), 64-bit kernel services and system notifications. Darwin also includes the latest innovations from the open source BSD community, particularly the FreeBSD development community.
Not much left for FreeBSD now that Yahoo is dropping it -- Yahoo switches to Linux.
If you read article it does not say anything about
switching from FreeBSD. Most of servers getting Linux are database servers - meaning Oracle etc.
I believe losers there are Solaris and Windows.
You should check again, the rpm specs and packages have had a requires section for dependencies since the very beginning. More recent versions have also included a build-req field to allow developers to specify what is needed to rebuild the rpm from source.
Maybe it's just a problem in people who build rpms.
It's just so frustrating to find cyclic dependencies or dependencies on nonexistent rpms. It was fun to move from rpm version 3 to version 4 while libraries where packed with rpm 4...
... and 1984 is a clear book against an extreme form of fascism.
You know, people who lived under socialism believe it's anti-communist/socialist book. There are so many things were exact on money about socialism in the book.
I remember one of Russians in 80s said:
"I understand how you can guess this and that but how he could KNOW we have a lack of razor blades???"
Splash damage. Gas giants have enough mass to hold moons in place. The shock wave of such a planet being blown up, would pulverize the nearby moons. More likely, the explosion of the planet would obliterate the moons with cosmic shrapnel. At the very least, the sudden dissipation of mass and the loss of the gravitational pull, would fling the moons off into space.
One more reason to keep/usr and/usr/local/ on different partitions is to mount/usr read-only
and have/usr/local read-write if you change additional packages often enough. YMMV
In any case, OS flavor wars are retarded and ignore the basic truth that different tools suit different uses and different users, and more importantly the meta-truth that software monoculture is bad.
So there are FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, DragonflyBSD and Darwin kernels. And they have different sets of utilities.
What are they teaching kids these days? The operating system talks to the hardware and applications talk to the aperating system. X windows and the bash shell are most definitely applications and not part of the operating system. The compiler is not part of the OS either, neither is a cute little card game or a web browser.
Did you flunk your Computer Science courses?
Operation system consists of kernel and set of utilities. Kernel talks to hardware, not OS.
Two last sentenses of yours are right. BSDs allow bash in/usr/local/bin only. But it is hard to run OS without Bourne shell.
Then put/usr/local/apcache/bin in your path variable
then put/usr/local/mysql/bin in your path
then pub/usr/local/java/bin in your path
At least Linux is doing the enthernet stuff right.
BSDs install packages' binaries into/usr/local/bin and/usr/local/sbin. So you know what to add to your path.
And config files go to the/usr/local/etc. If needed as in apache case there is/usr/local/etc/apache.
The idea is to keep base system and additional packages in different directories or better in different partitions/disks.
And about ethernet - the names are matter of convenience, nothing more. FYI FreeBSD allows to rename ethrnet controllers as you wish - call them eth0, eth1 whatever...
And the BSD control-everything mentality, while good for building secure routers, doesn't do much to encourage the hobbyists and hackers that are the backbone of the OSS movement
There is no BSD control-everything mentality. There is maybe something in OpenBSD, but FreeBSD, NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are free of that stuff.
And *cough* Linus control everything in his kernel.
I said Copyright control, not copy control. And the BSD does not allow the author to retain copyright control, since a person can copy it, and release it under different terms, possibly vetoing permission to copy that you would have otherwise granted, effectively reducing the amount of control you have over your own copyright.
Consider software A ver 1 released under BSD license and A ver 2 released under some more restrictive license. You stll in control of version 1 and you copyrighted only it, right?
With GPLed software you want to have parts of software written by other people owned by you - is it right? As Linus does - the whole Linux kernel belongs to Torvalds.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes and the truth is that you are ignorant idiot.
If you are calling names it means you are out of arguments. If you are out of arguments you are lost.
Bah,
Sensors should ignore low-speed objects.
And those sensors are not optical - regular paint would be useless.
And I afraid person doing it would be shot on spot.
That's because it is already dead.
Really? Troll is dead already?
Good! It was annoying because of it's boring stupidity...
(chinese) you have a government censor your information but you know that it is censored and therefore not the whole truth. (western) you have media networks censor and manipulate your information at their will and benefit but you think you have an objective view about the entire state of the world?
the first is a subset of what is happening in the real world, but it doesn't contradict the whole truth. the second claims to be the whole truth but isn't - and people happily live believe it.
The first is sensored but you do not know what exactly censored. Government adds it's oun skewed information. ;)
The second gives your freedom to collect information from different sources. Nobody claims to own the whole truth if it's not a church
It is just funny to read. Isn't Chinese government responsible for anti-Western propaganda? Didn't Chinese government invented Taiwan issue? What is the issue, really?
Did you mean root's shell? Don't login as root.
Use 'sudo -s'
But talking about convenient shell - use tcsh.
The problem is IT is NOT a good thing, it is piece of shit. It is dissecting a lie really.
It's mutant, really ;)
Read this blurb taken here http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/
Darwin: Kernel and BSD
Mac OS X Server starts with Darwin, the same open source foundation used in Mac OS X, Apple's operating system for desktop and mobile computers. Darwin is built around the Mach 3.0 microkernel, which provides features critical to server operations, such as fine-grained multi-threading, symmetric multiprocessing (SMP), protected memory, a unified buffer cache (UBC), 64-bit kernel services and system notifications. Darwin also includes the latest innovations from the open source BSD community, particularly the FreeBSD development community.
If you read article it does not say anything about switching from FreeBSD. Most of servers getting Linux are database servers - meaning Oracle etc. I believe losers there are Solaris and Windows.
It uses GCC, yes. It might be compiled with Intel C and Tendra C. It does not use glibc though.
Maybe it's just a problem in people who build rpms. It's just so frustrating to find cyclic dependencies or dependencies on nonexistent rpms. It was fun to move from rpm version 3 to version 4 while libraries where packed with rpm 4...
Why are distributing FUD?
You are in error or it's just intentional lies?
Check those benchmarks again -http://bulk.fefe.de/scalability/
There are a lot of smaller MMU-less processors. FreeBSD does not support them.
You know, people who lived under socialism believe it's anti-communist/socialist book. There are so many things were exact on money about socialism in the book.
I remember one of Russians in 80s said: "I understand how you can guess this and that but how he could KNOW we have a lack of razor blades???"
Good point! ;)
I could also obliterate Death Star
Yeah, if Internet connection's not required...
It depends on configuration. I agree with your's can't, but you can run those transactions, backups and feeds in parallel.
I suggest you to try FreeBSD to be your desktop..
One more reason to keep /usr and /usr/local/ on different partitions is to mount /usr read-only
and have /usr/local read-write if you change additional packages often enough. YMMV
So there are FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, DragonflyBSD and Darwin kernels. And they have different sets of utilities.
Did you flunk your Computer Science courses?
Operation system consists of kernel and set of utilities. Kernel talks to hardware, not OS. Two last sentenses of yours are right. BSDs allow bash in /usr/local/bin only. But it is hard to run OS without Bourne shell.
then put
then pub
At least Linux is doing the enthernet stuff right.
BSDs install packages' binaries into /usr/local/bin and /usr/local/sbin. So you know what to add to your path. /usr/local/etc. If needed as in apache case there is /usr/local/etc/apache.
And config files go to the
The idea is to keep base system and additional packages in different directories or better in different partitions/disks.
And about ethernet - the names are matter of convenience, nothing more. FYI FreeBSD allows to rename ethrnet controllers as you wish - call them eth0, eth1 whatever...
There is no BSD control-everything mentality. There is maybe something in OpenBSD, but FreeBSD, NetBSD and DragonflyBSD are free of that stuff.
And *cough* Linus control everything in his kernel.
Consider software A ver 1 released under BSD license and A ver 2 released under some more restrictive license. You stll in control of version 1 and you copyrighted only it, right?
With GPLed software you want to have parts of software written by other people owned by you - is it right? As Linus does - the whole Linux kernel belongs to Torvalds.
BSD understands Freedom as freedom for people to do anything with software.
GPL understands Freedom as freedom for the software.
Those points of view are SO different...