I used my mad Lunix skillz (I wrote it so I know my way around a Lunix shell LOL!) to check that the demo was being run on a Lunix server with Apache (I must ask Alan if I wrote Apache - I think I did) but I found out it used a server called GoAhead-Webs. Is this something to do with Debian?
I see you are talking about XML-RPC. I asked Alan Cox about this and he told me that it is not a colonel module (in Lunix which I wrote) so perhaps you should update the article to reflect that? Maybe suggest using GNU-RPC or LNX-RPC.
Oh, not the second one because LNX is too much like LNUX - even I laugh at LNUX when I check the ticker.
You've said that in the real server world it would be on a low power device. You didn't mention that it would use my OS called Lunix, as this takes less power than others. Perhaps you could rephrase?
I noticed you say that Flash applications can use a small amount of memory. I wrote Lunix and Lunix uses a small amount of memory, not Flash. If you could work that into the article please I would be grateful.
Many of the distributions are already very good at this, as they present a professional face with professional support. This is what the PHB wants to see.
Just as we laugh at Microsoft for slinging their anti-Linux FUD, we must be careful not to sling it back. If we present a professional image, and are perceived as a helpful community (I know how tempting it is to yell RTFM!) then we can only attract more people who are becoming disillusioned with Microsoft's insecure and unscalable offerings.
Well actually we have been discussing this recently on the kernel mailing lists. I am currently deciding whether this should be incorporated into the main tree, but am concerned that it may lower throughput.
Alan has suggested I include both patches into the next 2.5 release (though there is quite a lot going on there so it may not make it in until the next one after that) and it will be fun to see the effects on latency and throughput, especially with the new I/O subsystem, in widespread use on various architectures; Clark Williams only compared the patches on single processor machines for example, where we have to pay special attention to the various SMP archtectures out there.
But remember! Linux is not a RTOS and I have no intention of making it one, although there are forked kernels that do exactly that.
Slashdot Mirror
But I am so very, very lonely. Please keep me company. I cry myself to sleep.
I used my mad Lunix skillz (I wrote it so I know my way around a Lunix shell LOL!) to check that the demo was being run on a Lunix server with Apache (I must ask Alan if I wrote Apache - I think I did) but I found out it used a server called GoAhead-Webs. Is this something to do with Debian?
Is ActionScript part of Lunix?
Oh, not the second one because LNX is too much like LNUX - even I laugh at LNUX when I check the ticker.
You've said that in the real server world it would be on a low power device. You didn't mention that it would use my OS called Lunix, as this takes less power than others. Perhaps you could rephrase?
I noticed you say that Flash applications can use a small amount of memory. I wrote Lunix and Lunix uses a small amount of memory, not Flash. If you could work that into the article please I would be grateful.
I invented Lunix not Windows, so could you fix that as well TIA!
I would change it myself with my knowlege of the Lunix colonel, but I am busy begging for a redundancy package from Transmeta.
I invented Lunix not Flash. plzfxthxHTH!
Just as we laugh at Microsoft for slinging their anti-Linux FUD, we must be careful not to sling it back. If we present a professional image, and are perceived as a helpful community (I know how tempting it is to yell RTFM!) then we can only attract more people who are becoming disillusioned with Microsoft's insecure and unscalable offerings.
Well actually we have been discussing this recently on the kernel mailing lists. I am currently deciding whether this should be incorporated into the main tree, but am concerned that it may lower throughput.
Alan has suggested I include both patches into the next 2.5 release (though there is quite a lot going on there so it may not make it in until the next one after that) and it will be fun to see the effects on latency and throughput, especially with the new I/O subsystem, in widespread use on various architectures; Clark Williams only compared the patches on single processor machines for example, where we have to pay special attention to the various SMP archtectures out there.
But remember! Linux is not a RTOS and I have no intention of making it one, although there are forked kernels that do exactly that.