Slashdot Mirror


User: Telent

Telent's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
29
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 29

  1. Re:Why I don't use openbsd. on OpenBSD 3.2 Available · · Score: 1
    He means you don't use it to do tons of things on one server.

    Usually because you can't run it on large hardware (lack of SMP support).

    Oh, you CAN of course, it's a solid bsd... but you smack into scaling problems on any kind of volume.

    Really? Is that so? I know several large corporate users, Adobe Systems amongst them that would disagree with you.

    As a firewall and a router, it is NOT as functional as Linux

    Indeed. Filtering by MAC (unless you use it as a bridge, which is the only real place for MAC filtering), and filtering based on packet (unless you run a proxy, as the networking gods intended for higher-level functions such as content-based filtering.) It's been discussed before. I try to keep away from Linux/BSD comparison flamewars, but I will say that it does every function that several large companies want it to, or they wouldn't be using it.

    and there are things it simply will not do that linux will.

    <cheapshots>No, it won't get hacked within ten seconds (no exaggeration) of putting an unpatched install on the Net like Linux will. No, it won't crash on you because of some deadly library conflict or rpm chicken-and-egg hell. No, it won't be vulnerable to $BUFFER_EXPLOIT_OF_THE_HOUR like Linux.</cheapshots>

    (Yeah, I'll get modded down to the depths of Hell for this. No, I'm not a BSD bigot. I configure Linux for people all the time. But arguing that it's worse for firewalls, a VERY security-based application, than Linux... sorry, that's just stupid.)

  2. Re:FreeBSD on OpenBSD 3.2 Available · · Score: 2, Insightful
    To sum, you have a stripped down no-nonsense OS with all of the unnecessary crap tossed out of the default installation and available as ports and packages to those who want it. The perfect OS for those who want a secure router, and/or single/few-function server. This isn't an appropriate choice if you need more than a commandline, really, and there's a fair amount of pride amongst the user community over that.

    Uhhhh... I hate to be rude, but what crack are you smoking?

    "Few-function"? Right now, off the top of my head, I use OpenBSD for:

    • POP3/IMAP4/SMTP mail
    • FTP
    • Samba backups for Windows clients at my place of employment
    • Apache web server with PHP, Perl, CGI, FrontPage includes, and all those other nifty modules
    • IRC server
    • Firewall (NAT'ing)
    • Router

    This is all on my servers, both at my work and at my home. These do not even have a GUI installed... but if you want more than a command line, that has it, too. I mean, it's *really* difficult to install the x* .tgz bundles when you're installing, then configure your X server and install your favorite window manager from ports. Took me all of five minutes, last time I did it.

    That brings me to my desktop. I use my computer for a lot of stuff. Mail, web surfing, 3D modelling, test compiles, image editing, HTML editing, writings (technical and otherwise), media playing (Flash, DVD's, mp3's, CD's), and much, much more. This computer, a PIII 850 laptop, runs single-boot OpenBSD 3.1-stable, soon to be 3.2 (after I write this post.) I use Enlightenment, and damn, but it *flies*.

    No, if you need your hand held on every single little thing, or you're scared off by a text installer (which, by the way, is easier than any GUI installer I've ever used), then PLEASE stay away. But if you can handle changing a few of the ways you think, give OpenBSD a try as a desktop. You may just like it.

    (And just as a data point, I started out with OpenBSD. My first *nix experience, except for a tiny bit of Red Hat several months before, which I *hated* - not flaming, just saying it wasn't for me. I managed to get to the point where I am with it without getting flamed on the lists once, and it's because when I have a problem, I RTFM and STFW. If you're capable of doing the same, it's a refreshing change from the other user communities.)

  3. We-ell... Not really high-tech... on Neat Homebrew Halloween Tech? · · Score: 3, Interesting
    ...but maybe you'll find it interesting anyway.

    I'm going as a blowfish. For the spikes, I hacked up some large foam cones from a craft store, carved the pieces into spike-shapes, and used a file on them to get them smooth. I'll spray-paint them yellow, then use skin glue from a costume store to affix them to my yellow-painted face and the yellow bathing cap I'll have over my long hair (yes, I am female).

    Proper dress? Oh, probably bluejeans and a blue turtleneck (simulated water)... or maybe this. Cripes, I love Halloween... what other day of the year do you have a chance to dress up as Puffy without a free trip to the mental asylum?

  4. MIE = Unschooling on Web-Surfing Indian Slum Kids Ask: "What's a Computer" · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article:

    Minimally Invasive Education (MIE) is a pedagogic method and derives its name partly from the medical term minimally invasive surgery. MIE believes that in the absence of any directed input, any learning environment that provides adequate level of curiosity can cause learning.

    This is not a new theory, ./'ers. People have been teaching themselves all along - indeed, our school system is the newcomer to the scene. Read, oh, "A People's History of the United States"... but I'm drifting off my topic...

    An education system such as this already exists in the States. It's called "unschooling". Give the child materials to learn with, help learning when they need it, and said child will actually teach themselves.

    Children are supposedly "lazy" and "not wanting to learn" because they've been forced into it by repetitive cookie-cutter education. This study just gives an old technique a new and more politically-correct name - "unschooling" pisses off the NEA.