...he notes that the problem is largely with C/C++ and mostly because of the buffer overflow problems.
Oh, please! Every good programmer know how to handle memory allocations because *he knows how the machine works*! If we have so many buffer overflow problems today is because the great majority of the programmers out there don't understand/care about something that is the base of their work.
Think this way: you are a mechanic that builds internal combustion motors. But you don't understand how internal combustion motors works. So, will you build a good or a bad motor?
(And yes, you can build other types of motors if you don't understand/care how internal combustion motors works - and it is like using a different language).
But I gave it a shot this week and it turned to be a brainless exercise with konstruct.
Want to hear something funny? Konstruct was once part of GARNOME, the tool that can be used to build GNOME from sources. And GARNOME was created by a GNOME developer!
DE wars only happens on user wars. Developers are more interessed in solving problems that everyone will get, not fighting wars that doesn't need to be.
This will be a troublesome task! There is lots and lots of people that work on a large project and just one guy, with one patch, changed the way the program behave to make it the most useful program yet born. And they don't walk the street with "I wrote that patch" t-shirts.
Maybe some of the unsung heroes really like to remain unsung. And we all just see the PR guys in front of it.
I could list some of guys in the front of it, but I would let a lot of people that really deserve the credits because of it.
Tim Ney (X.org), Keith Packard (Eye-candy master), Havoc Pennington (DBUS hacker), Jeff Waugh (one of the guys behind the change of GNOME), Owen Tayler (GTK maintainer), Guido Von Rossum (Python).
Also all the Mozilla people, all the GCC people, all the Apache people, all the PHP people, all the people I left out in the GNOME project, all the people I left out in the Python project.
I could go on and on and on and would not list everyone that really deserves. Just expanding the people in the "All the foo project" listed above would create a really big list.
Man, you didn't get the point (or I was not clear enough).
I know you realize this answer is useless to about 95% of all computers users, right? This means nothing to me because I don't code, nor do I want to.
Well, maybe you know some guy (or gal) that really likes to code and will accept to take a look at your problem for a beer or two.
It means nothing to my customers who I manage Windows PCs for, they want to know if the manufacturer has a patch for a showstopper bug, but they don't want to hire programmers for minor annoyances.
Yeah, but they could hire a free-lance programmer to take a look at that showstopper and get a patch *before* the manufacturer ever think about fixing the problem.
The way the closed source software works today is that they always need a new version, and a new version has to have more features. So, if they sell 1 billion copies of a software and just one customer complains about a bug, that doesn't mean they will move their programmers to help that customer.
(Well, maybe something like that also happens with OSS [more feature, few people to look at bugs], but remember that you have the code and you can hire a programmer to fix that for you.)
Your contention that since I am patching more on Linux there are fewer bugs afterwards is just bunk, overall my Win XP box is less buggy and has fewer operating quirks/things I have to workaround than my Linux box
Well, then you are more lucky than I am. When I'm using Windows, I get in trouble everytime (locking, annoying ballon stuff, configurations changing). My Linux box runs fairly smooth this days and is always good when I got something to do that can be done on it (hey, work isn't fair).
But, anyway, I know people from both camps (smooth Windows, smooth Linux) but, so far, the people on Linux camp are winning (on the sums, at least):)
I spend far more time patching my Linux box and updating apps on my Linux box than I do my Win XP boxes.
Well, I bet there are many more software created by different people (or "companies") on your Linux box than your Windows box. Every one of those software has their own release circle and time. Your windows box probably has software of about 3 or 4 companies.
If you keep patching your Linux box it means that bugs are fixed faster than you Windows install. Because the developers don't care if this release will fix only a minor bug, it must be fixed. Not keep the patches pilling up until their number is large enough to issue a patch...
And, BTW, if you use an OSS, you may *never* wait for the patch. You can do it yourself or, if you don't have the time, you can pay someone to do it before the developers fix the bug.
1. Jettison the whole gconf/registry thing in favor of a tree of plain text config files in.gnome or something
Guess what, gconf is a tree of plain text files! XML is plain to me.
2. Resurrect the old GNOME control center I don't play too much time on control center to need it as a whole window opened on my screen. And, when I open it, I just want to change one thing, not the whole list of options.
3. Give me a default window manager with the ability to select focus-follows-mouse mouse
You can. Applications -> Desktop preferences -> Window.
4. Construct a usable menu editor somewhere so that I can customize my menus
Just right click inside a menu. A whole list of options to customize it will show up. Also, the new menu specification from FreeDesktop.org will make all applications add their own menu entry.
5. Choose: either a) reincorporate gecko into Nautilus for Web browsing or b) go lightweight and jettison Nautilus for the old gmc
Nautilus is a file browser, not a web browser. Mixing those two is just plain confusing. And current Nautilus is lightweight.
6. Create a base distribution of official GNOME applications from a lot of the GTK stuff out there, based on which authors agree to follow a rigidly follow a GNOME style guide and use the GNOME API rather than just GTK, so that there is more desktop consistency
The "base distribution of official GNOME applications" is the GNOME desktop itself. You can also count Fifth Toe as a distribution of unofficial GNOME applications, as some of them are there because a) they are not mature enough to desktop b) don't fit on a desktop release.
7. Add compatibility with KDE themes to GTK, since they seem superior (ability to change colors, not just widget styles, etc.)
Well, I can see this as a personal opinion, since there is just one KDE style that I think isn't bloated and so full of bell and whistles that take away my atention, and it isn't even an official one.
8. Give me an "advanced mode" to turn on all kinds of extra GUI configuration bells and whistles like keybindings, autoraise, MIME types, etc.
"The Free Software Foundation is also the creator of the GPL, the viral license that makes Linux so provocative"
Ummm... is this suposed to be sarcasim?
No, this is a speech of Gates himself (or Balmer, can't remember). The claim is that, once a GPL program "touches" another, the second becomes infected.
Now you know why they like the BSD licence so much...
Well, that's a problem with KDE [ok, fell free to bash me].
KDE is, currently, not following the freedesktop.org recomendation for menus. IIRC, KDE 4.0 will. Until then, we will have to rely on external programs to sync them.
Well, the package management is what I really love on Slackware. The lack of dependency checking is something that could be scary at first, but you learn a lot with those "error loading shared library".
That's just what Slackware is: excelent for some, missing parts for others...
xargs is a nice complement for find, IMHO (another nice tool, but not for configuration - unless you have dozen of configuration files that need to changed in the same way).
To me, my configuration tool is vi(m) (or any other variant, like elvis) [yeah, yeah, I know, Emacs is the only true editor, but it's hard to leave modal editing once you get it]. I can't configure any system without it, even with Pico, Nano and/or Emacs installed. Call me nuts.
Slashdot Mirror
...he notes that the problem is largely with C/C++ and mostly because of the buffer overflow problems.
Oh, please! Every good programmer know how to handle memory allocations because *he knows how the machine works*! If we have so many buffer overflow problems today is because the great majority of the programmers out there don't understand/care about something that is the base of their work.
Think this way: you are a mechanic that builds internal combustion motors. But you don't understand how internal combustion motors works. So, will you build a good or a bad motor?
(And yes, you can build other types of motors if you don't understand/care how internal combustion motors works - and it is like using a different language).
Too bad there are not enough female in this species, huh?
I feel your pain. Every day.
But I gave it a shot this week and it turned to be a brainless exercise with konstruct.
Want to hear something funny? Konstruct was once part of GARNOME, the tool that can be used to build GNOME from sources. And GARNOME was created by a GNOME developer!
DE wars only happens on user wars. Developers are more interessed in solving problems that everyone will get, not fighting wars that doesn't need to be.
You forgot the +5 Funny comment about how the link was slashdotted because the server was running on Windows.
And neither of you tought about posting the whole thing to do some karma whoring. Shame on you.
... 'cause everybody knows that "A hacker do for love what others wouldn't do for money".
Pfff. Everybody knows that the Javas where killed by Stormtroopers looking for stolen Empire robots.
And Aunt and Uncle where killed when Aunt decided to blow everything when she got crazy when Luke disapeared.
(Yup, I just watched "Troops" again).
This will be a troublesome task! There is lots and lots of people that work on a large project and just one guy, with one patch, changed the way the program behave to make it the most useful program yet born. And they don't walk the street with "I wrote that patch" t-shirts.
Maybe some of the unsung heroes really like to remain unsung. And we all just see the PR guys in front of it.
I could list some of guys in the front of it, but I would let a lot of people that really deserve the credits because of it.
Tim Ney (X.org), Keith Packard (Eye-candy master), Havoc Pennington (DBUS hacker), Jeff Waugh (one of the guys behind the change of GNOME), Owen Tayler (GTK maintainer), Guido Von Rossum (Python).
Also all the Mozilla people, all the GCC people, all the Apache people, all the PHP people, all the people I left out in the GNOME project, all the people I left out in the Python project.
I could go on and on and on and would not list everyone that really deserves. Just expanding the people in the "All the foo project" listed above would create a really big list.
Also...
What about MacGyver? He didn't stay all day on a lab or something like that, but he surely knew a lot about physics and chemistry.
And what about the Professor, from PowerPuff Girls? Oh, I mean, I never saw it... I mean... Damn!
Also...
What about Beakman, from "Beakman's World"?
Man, I loved that show.
That's his job, isn't it?
Man, you didn't get the point (or I was not clear enough).
:)
I know you realize this answer is useless to about 95% of all computers users, right? This means nothing to me because I don't code, nor do I want to.
Well, maybe you know some guy (or gal) that really likes to code and will accept to take a look at your problem for a beer or two.
It means nothing to my customers who I manage Windows PCs for, they want to know if the manufacturer has a patch for a showstopper bug, but they don't want to hire programmers for minor annoyances.
Yeah, but they could hire a free-lance programmer to take a look at that showstopper and get a patch *before* the manufacturer ever think about fixing the problem.
The way the closed source software works today is that they always need a new version, and a new version has to have more features. So, if they sell 1 billion copies of a software and just one customer complains about a bug, that doesn't mean they will move their programmers to help that customer.
(Well, maybe something like that also happens with OSS [more feature, few people to look at bugs], but remember that you have the code and you can hire a programmer to fix that for you.)
Your contention that since I am patching more on Linux there are fewer bugs afterwards is just bunk, overall my Win XP box is less buggy and has fewer operating quirks/things I have to workaround than my Linux box
Well, then you are more lucky than I am. When I'm using Windows, I get in trouble everytime (locking, annoying ballon stuff, configurations changing). My Linux box runs fairly smooth this days and is always good when I got something to do that can be done on it (hey, work isn't fair).
But, anyway, I know people from both camps (smooth Windows, smooth Linux) but, so far, the people on Linux camp are winning (on the sums, at least)
I spend far more time patching my Linux box and updating apps on my Linux box than I do my Win XP boxes.
Well, I bet there are many more software created by different people (or "companies") on your Linux box than your Windows box. Every one of those software has their own release circle and time. Your windows box probably has software of about 3 or 4 companies.
If you keep patching your Linux box it means that bugs are fixed faster than you Windows install. Because the developers don't care if this release will fix only a minor bug, it must be fixed. Not keep the patches pilling up until their number is large enough to issue a patch...
And, BTW, if you use an OSS, you may *never* wait for the patch. You can do it yourself or, if you don't have the time, you can pay someone to do it before the developers fix the bug.
2) the Korean flag in reverse: so what?
Just tell us how would you feel if a program showed the flag of your country in reverse.
Can you guys stop slashdoting the site? I want to download it just to show some co-workers a little "surprise"...
1. Jettison the whole gconf/registry thing in favor of a tree of plain text config files in .gnome or something
Guess what, gconf is a tree of plain text files! XML is plain to me.
2. Resurrect the old GNOME control center
I don't play too much time on control center to need it as a whole window opened on my screen. And, when I open it, I just want to change one thing, not the whole list of options.
3. Give me a default window manager with the ability to select focus-follows-mouse mouse
You can. Applications -> Desktop preferences -> Window.
4. Construct a usable menu editor somewhere so that I can customize my menus
Just right click inside a menu. A whole list of options to customize it will show up. Also, the new menu specification from FreeDesktop.org will make all applications add their own menu entry.
5. Choose: either a) reincorporate gecko into Nautilus for Web browsing or b) go lightweight and jettison Nautilus for the old gmc
Nautilus is a file browser, not a web browser. Mixing those two is just plain confusing. And current Nautilus is lightweight.
6. Create a base distribution of official GNOME applications from a lot of the GTK stuff out there, based on which authors agree to follow a rigidly follow a GNOME style guide and use the GNOME API rather than just GTK, so that there is more desktop consistency
The "base distribution of official GNOME applications" is the GNOME desktop itself. You can also count Fifth Toe as a distribution of unofficial GNOME applications, as some of them are there because a) they are not mature enough to desktop b) don't fit on a desktop release.
7. Add compatibility with KDE themes to GTK, since they seem superior (ability to change colors, not just widget styles, etc.)
Well, I can see this as a personal opinion, since there is just one KDE style that I think isn't bloated and so full of bell and whistles that take away my atention, and it isn't even an official one.
8. Give me an "advanced mode" to turn on all kinds of extra GUI configuration bells and whistles like keybindings, autoraise, MIME types, etc.
gconf-editor.
Oh, man! A 17mb Flash movie? Sure, they should be sue. It doesn't matter what the movie is, but 17mb in a flash?!?
"The Free Software Foundation is also the creator of the GPL, the viral license that makes Linux so provocative"
Ummm... is this suposed to be sarcasim?
No, this is a speech of Gates himself (or Balmer, can't remember). The claim is that, once a GPL program "touches" another, the second becomes infected.
Now you know why they like the BSD licence so much...
I smell a new poll coming up...
so we'll just treat you like five-year-olds
Believe it or not, that also happens in a lot of Asimov's Books.
Well, that's a problem with KDE [ok, fell free to bash me].
KDE is, currently, not following the freedesktop.org recomendation for menus. IIRC, KDE 4.0 will. Until then, we will have to rely on external programs to sync them.
Well, the package management is what I really love on Slackware. The lack of dependency checking is something that could be scary at first, but you learn a lot with those "error loading shared library".
That's just what Slackware is: excelent for some, missing parts for others...
xargs is a nice complement for find, IMHO (another nice tool, but not for configuration - unless you have dozen of configuration files that need to changed in the same way).
To me, my configuration tool is vi(m) (or any other variant, like elvis) [yeah, yeah, I know, Emacs is the only true editor, but it's hard to leave modal editing once you get it]. I can't configure any system without it, even with Pico, Nano and/or Emacs installed. Call me nuts.
I keep saying this, but, once more:
"We need now a 'Star Trek: Galaxy Quest'".
Yeah, Mel Brooks would be a good writer for it.