Err, not quite. While I am not a devotee of RedHat as a distro, I think it's a bit unfair to dub them "evil" when they have actually put a lot of manpower into products that have been released into the public domain free of charge.
While it's not precisely altruism, they have contributed a lot to the Linux user community, and to deny that is churlish.
Save the epithets for the real baddies in Redmond.
And rather than read any facts and educate themselves, they make impulsive, rash decisions and start touting that RedHat is the "Microsoft" of the Linux community.
You seem to have missed the point of what I was saying. Or else I didn't make myself clear enough.
I was not claiming that RedHat is evil, obnoxious or whatever. All I actually meant was that a lot of people simply drop RedHat after a period of time as they get settled into working in a particular way. For instance, if you build a lot of your apps from source, you don't need rpm getting in the way. Others find the way config files are organised to be counterproductive.
This is not meant to denigrate the work that RedHat has done and made available to the community free of charge.
That's where they are staffed at all. There are all too many ISPs who appear to be happy to turn a blind eye to this type of activity, in spite of the fact that it costs them money.
Fedora will gradually become identified with the 'hippies, hackers, and poor students' crowd
Not sure about this. From what I've been reading and noticing about the hippies and hackers in my vicinity is that many have already deserted to other distributions.
A couple of years ago, for instance, lots of people were saying Slackware is dead, but there has been a big resurgence of interest in that distro (and rightly so), while lots of newbies are happy with Mandrake.
I'm not getting any responses via Netcraft ad the moment, but does anybody here have any information as to whether Spamhaus et al are even running windows boxes?
It seems a long bow to draw to assume that all of them do so.
Agreed. IANAL and all that, but common sense would dictate that the first time these guys attempt to collect on their patent, the overwhelming evidence that this is not their invention should get the case thrown out of court.
So they will have wasted their money, and it serves them right.
I can't see how this can work if the spammer sends his crap via an open relay (as, of course, 99.x% of spammers do). Who picks up the tab then? I agree that spammers should be made to pay (preferably with their lives, but that's just my opinion) but this doesn't sound workable.
There are already enough doubts about these boxes to raise the suspicions of any intelligent person.
Think about it: The USA has a president who got in after a series of shenanigans through the courts. Never mind counting the votes.
With this "black-box" technology, the option to count the votes is not even there. There is no way to publically check the output from these machines to verify concordance with the voters' wishes.
We have no recourse against an electoral candidate who has found a means to subvert these devices to their own ends, and given the unscrupulousness of (probably the majority of) politicians, sooner or later that's going to happen.
Great, now no one has to RTFA. Oh wait, I forgot this is/.
Well, I had to be patient to RTFA, but I did so and was disappointed.
OK, as a disclaimer, I admit to being a big fan of Slackware, but it seems to me that the benchmark comparisons made in the FA are invidious.
Pat V. deliberately leaves the default kernels in Slackware unpatched. The idea is that users will apply the patches that they require, and recompile kernels as appropriate, but not bulk the kernel out unnecessarily. This implies an assumption of a certain level of expertise in the user. The days when Slackware heads were equated with Satan worshippers are now well and truly past, but I would not particularly recommend Slack for the linux newbie.
This is not to belittle the efforts of the Vector distributors: There is lots to be gained by combining the simplicity of Slackware's packaging and configuration with an easy-to-use interface.
... tht if we want "a bloat free, easy to install, configure and maintain Slackware based system" then the best thing anyone can do is simply install Slackware and configure it properly.
There's no bloat in command-line based configuration and administration via the text editor of your choice.
So how is it that you can have significant differences between distros in "performance"?
Quite easily if you use them as they come out of the box.
I'll probably get flamed for saying this, but in the past when I played around with RedHat and Mandrake before going back to Slackware, I noticed a general sluggishness about those distros.
Most of that got fixed when I rebuilt the kernel my own way, but other aspects such as slow init loading never got fixed until I threw those distros out.
I haven't been able to read the article yet, since it is presumably slashdotted, but I would have thought most benchmarks against Slackware 9.1 would be irrelevant, since the majority of Slackware heads compile their own apps and kernels. In other words, it makes more sense to compare it against Slack in a way that the latter might be assumed to be implemented. Yes, I know that's hard, since Slackware fans tend to be an individualistic lot, but that's too bad.
And yes, I know Gentoo does that, but Slackware gives you a system that works so that you can compile stuff at your leisure, rather than having to leave a machine out of action for hours/days while everything gets built.
Slashdot Mirror
Well I guess it won't be worse than their trademark snot-green :-)
Err, not quite. While I am not a devotee of RedHat as a distro, I think it's a bit unfair to dub them "evil" when they have actually put a lot of manpower into products that have been released into the public domain free of charge.
While it's not precisely altruism, they have contributed a lot to the Linux user community, and to deny that is churlish.
Save the epithets for the real baddies in Redmond.
You seem to have missed the point of what I was saying. Or else I didn't make myself clear enough.
I was not claiming that RedHat is evil, obnoxious or whatever. All I actually meant was that a lot of people simply drop RedHat after a period of time as they get settled into working in a particular way. For instance, if you build a lot of your apps from source, you don't need rpm getting in the way. Others find the way config files are organised to be counterproductive.
This is not meant to denigrate the work that RedHat has done and made available to the community free of charge.
That's where they are staffed at all. There are all too many ISPs who appear to be happy to turn a blind eye to this type of activity, in spite of the fact that it costs them money.
Not sure about this. From what I've been reading and noticing about the hippies and hackers in my vicinity is that many have already deserted to other distributions.
A couple of years ago, for instance, lots of people were saying Slackware is dead, but there has been a big resurgence of interest in that distro (and rightly so), while lots of newbies are happy with Mandrake.
No scarier than the US having a say as to who gets to govern Iraq.
Well, doesn't that just go to show: the spammers can't even get that right.
It seems a long bow to draw to assume that all of them do so.
So they will have wasted their money, and it serves them right.
Redhat and Mandrake users, too: rpm can update via the internet as well, IIRC.
I can't see how this can work if the spammer sends his crap via an open relay (as, of course, 99.x% of spammers do). Who picks up the tab then? I agree that spammers should be made to pay (preferably with their lives, but that's just my opinion) but this doesn't sound workable.
At least human error can be checked.
A box producing output with no verifiable trail of its input is fraud waiting to happen.
Or doesn't it matter because they're the "good guys"?
Think about it: The USA has a president who got in after a series of shenanigans through the courts. Never mind counting the votes.
With this "black-box" technology, the option to count the votes is not even there. There is no way to publically check the output from these machines to verify concordance with the voters' wishes.
We have no recourse against an electoral candidate who has found a means to subvert these devices to their own ends, and given the unscrupulousness of (probably the majority of) politicians, sooner or later that's going to happen.
But if the original poster loses his data because (as he seems to imply) he is too lazy to do a proper backup, then he deserves everything he'll get.
... is completely off-topic. You rednecks can rant about Iraq on your own time. All this has absolutely nothing to do with Diebold.
Yes, but I seem to remember Neo was using a Microsoft Natural keyboard :-)
OK, big deal. So am I, and my machines haven't run Windows for 6 years.
Well, I had to be patient to RTFA, but I did so and was disappointed.
OK, as a disclaimer, I admit to being a big fan of Slackware, but it seems to me that the benchmark comparisons made in the FA are invidious.
Pat V. deliberately leaves the default kernels in Slackware unpatched. The idea is that users will apply the patches that they require, and recompile kernels as appropriate, but not bulk the kernel out unnecessarily. This implies an assumption of a certain level of expertise in the user. The days when Slackware heads were equated with Satan worshippers are now well and truly past, but I would not particularly recommend Slack for the linux newbie.
This is not to belittle the efforts of the Vector distributors: There is lots to be gained by combining the simplicity of Slackware's packaging and configuration with an easy-to-use interface.
There's no bloat in command-line based configuration and administration via the text editor of your choice.
Quite easily if you use them as they come out of the box.
I'll probably get flamed for saying this, but in the past when I played around with RedHat and Mandrake before going back to Slackware, I noticed a general sluggishness about those distros.
Most of that got fixed when I rebuilt the kernel my own way, but other aspects such as slow init loading never got fixed until I threw those distros out.
I haven't been able to read the article yet, since it is presumably slashdotted, but I would have thought most benchmarks against Slackware 9.1 would be irrelevant, since the majority of Slackware heads compile their own apps and kernels. In other words, it makes more sense to compare it against Slack in a way that the latter might be assumed to be implemented. Yes, I know that's hard, since Slackware fans tend to be an individualistic lot, but that's too bad.
And yes, I know Gentoo does that, but Slackware gives you a system that works so that you can compile stuff at your leisure, rather than having to leave a machine out of action for hours/days while everything gets built.
Err, remember blipverts?
:-D
That's all? Too much information :-)
At least nobody asked about Colonel Panic :-)
$ ping God
ping: unknown host God
$
Not too hard, apparently.
...but if it'll run Microsoft viruses, well, that's just damn cool :-)