That's one of the differences between UNIX-like systems and WindowsNT systems: you can debug the kernel on the machine you're running on UNIX, but on NT (and hence 2k and XP) you need another machine. I've seen debugging on Linux plus a System VR4-based kernel.
Kernel debugger are just that : compiled into the kernel (or have hooks compiled in). They exist in kernel space only and do not interface with any high-level stuff like GUIs. They let you do things like examine the CPU registers (and alter them), look at the page tables, look at the kernel stack, and the kernel data structures in general. For example you can follow the pointers in a process structure, find vnodes and inodes, all kinds of things. You don't want to be going out to a GUI and all the way back down into the kernel to do that (you'll alter the state of the kernel for a start).
I was trying to make the point that Windoze people generally have a very stranfe, preverse view of computing. Why the hell should an operating system kernel have a GUI in it just so you can debug it?
Yes, and if they built new nuclear powerstations at Berkeley, Oldbury and Hinckley Point they could power a hell of a lot more too without producing any CO2. Not that I'm bitter about the decline of the Bristish nuclear industry or anything...
You don't have a clue, do you? Do you know what hexadecimal is? Do you understand what a compiler does? Do you know how virtual memory works? Virtual to physical address translation? Process scheduling? Well do you? Do you know what a kernel is? Do you know the difference between an OS kernel and a GUI? Probably not since you sound like Windows is all you know.
...is that the radiactivity and hence dose rate from a nuclear reactor is pretty negligible until it has gone critical (i.e. started) for the first time. I'm assuming this thing would be launched into earth orbit using conventional rockets (i.e. chemicals), or built in orbit, and the nuclear engine would not be started until it was at a safe distance from earth (or until escape velovity had been achieved). I imagine that at that sort of distance the gamma rays from the engine would be barely detectable from the earth's surface, if at all. Compared to what you recieve naturally from the Sun, space and the earth, that truly is a negligible amount. I was a nuclear engineer.
Its a shame no braindead scripting language comes with windows now
It's a shame that people are still using Windows.
Re:Why can't I get Java working on my RH8 box?
on
Sun's Last Stand
·
· Score: 1
How this got modded +3 Insightful is completely beyond me. This is not 1998 - the mentality that Java == web page animations and other shitty little animations is one of the oldest, yet most prevailing myths in the tech industry today.
Hear, hear! The myths are usually strongest amongst Windoze people: "Java is for writing web pages." Dad, are you reading this?
What crack are you smoking? If you compare a 4-way V480 with 8Gbytes of RAM, it's a bit cheaper than that IBM (and comes with an enterprise class OS too): $34,995.00 ...and you'd probably be running Solaris 9 on it nowadays, not Solaris 8.
Back in the day, I used to tell people that 16 bits was plenty and 24-bits of addressable memory was more than enough. I can't wait for 64-bit consumer stuff. We have proper operating systems and portable software nowadays.
NASA knows how to put people into space, they also have nuclear technology, and more importantly, nuclear rocket technology. Why don't they just go right ahead and put people on Mars? The Chinese are going to put a base on the moon...
Much of the time I like to reinvent the wheel. There are several reasons. First, it's a learning exercise, second Iown the code I write and third I do it my way. This may seem petty, but if there are bugs, I'm the only one to blame, and I learn by doing. If I was doing something in the course of my paid work, then I would use the conventional resources.
Isn't that exactly what is wanted? To have resolutions high enough that the eye won't be able to easily distinguish pixels?
Indeed it is. I was under the impression that the limiting resolution of the human eye was about 1 arc second. When I was younger I could quite easily see the pixels on 300dpi laser printer output.
today's processors have plenty of power for what 95% of people use them to do
True, but the other 5% are designing cars, running large databases (on many-way boxes) and simulating neutron stars and black hole formation. For these people, accurate and meaningful measurement of all aspects of a computer's performance are relevant. I'd like to see you try designing an anti-cancer drug on your piddling little single-processor Pentium IV 2.8GHz.
As 3D continues to become more important, one day we'll have 3D GUIs. To fully utilise their potential, we'll need very high-resolution displays (to take advantage of the depth information). A 29 inch flat screen is cool, but what we really need is much higher resolution at current sizes, e.g. an 18 inch display that does 12800 by 10240.
I see what you mean. People look at me funny when I write nice, simple HTML in a text editor. Not only that, but someone told me that nowadays it must be XML, not HTML. I'm all for progress, but I also believe in horses for courses.
You are so right. Unfortunately, to many people, including "environmentalists" the facts are irrelevant since they contradict their political opinions and goals. I used to work in Reactor Physics and a nuclear power station. The amount of prejudice I recieved from people was incredible. They said things like, "Oh well, it's very dangerous and bad for the environment but I suppose you're making lots of money out of it." People used to say things like "I hope you can live with yourself producing all the radioactive waste and polluting the environment" and "what about all the bombs you make?" Also "Aren't you worried that you're going to get cancer," as they smoked their filterless, roll-up cigarrettes. It's impossible to educate the public. The media are against us, and people don't want to know the facts. They don't want to listen. They'd rather believe that it's all an evil right-wing capitalist conspiracy to make vast amounts of money and weapons at the expense of the environment and everyone's health. The UK government is spineless as will not commit to developing new nuclear power, so with no future prospects I left the industry. Nuclear power does so much good and could do so much more if only it were allowed.
What do you mean by "radioactivity produced"?
Do you mean the induced activity in the fuel and reactor components caused by operation of the reactor, or the radiation dose to the environment cause by leakage of fission products and coolant or do you mean the total activity of any leaking substances?
Slashdot Mirror
That's one of the differences between UNIX-like systems and WindowsNT systems: you can debug the kernel on the machine you're running on UNIX, but on NT (and hence 2k and XP) you need another machine. I've seen debugging on Linux plus a System VR4-based kernel.
I have yet to be convinced.
Kernel debugger are just that : compiled into the kernel (or have hooks compiled in). They exist in kernel space only and do not interface with any high-level stuff like GUIs. They let you do things like examine the CPU registers (and alter them), look at the page tables, look at the kernel stack, and the kernel data structures in general. For example you can follow the pointers in a process structure, find vnodes and inodes, all kinds of things. You don't want to be going out to a GUI and all the way back down into the kernel to do that (you'll alter the state of the kernel for a start).
No, I'm a zealot. I stopped using Windoze in 1996 and haven't looked back.
I was trying to make the point that Windoze people generally have a very stranfe, preverse view of computing. Why the hell should an operating system kernel have a GUI in it just so you can debug it?
Yes, and if they built new nuclear powerstations at Berkeley, Oldbury and Hinckley Point they could power a hell of a lot more too without producing any CO2. Not that I'm bitter about the decline of the Bristish nuclear industry or anything...
You don't have a clue, do you? Do you know what hexadecimal is? Do you understand what a compiler does? Do you know how virtual memory works? Virtual to physical address translation? Process scheduling? Well do you? Do you know what a kernel is? Do you know the difference between an OS kernel and a GUI? Probably not since you sound like Windows is all you know.
...is that the radiactivity and hence dose rate from a nuclear reactor is pretty negligible until it has gone critical (i.e. started) for the first time. I'm assuming this thing would be launched into earth orbit using conventional rockets (i.e. chemicals), or built in orbit, and the nuclear engine would not be started until it was at a safe distance from earth (or until escape velovity had been achieved). I imagine that at that sort of distance the gamma rays from the engine would be barely detectable from the earth's surface, if at all. Compared to what you recieve naturally from the Sun, space and the earth, that truly is a negligible amount. I was a nuclear engineer.
It's a shame that people are still using Windows.
Hear, hear! The myths are usually strongest amongst Windoze people: "Java is for writing web pages." Dad, are you reading this?
What crack are you smoking? If you compare a 4-way V480 with 8Gbytes of RAM, it's a bit cheaper than that IBM (and comes with an enterprise class OS too): $34,995.00
...and you'd probably be running Solaris 9 on it nowadays, not Solaris 8.
Back in the day, I used to tell people that 16 bits was plenty and 24-bits of addressable memory was more than enough. I can't wait for 64-bit consumer stuff. We have proper operating systems and portable software nowadays.
NASA knows how to put people into space, they also have nuclear technology, and more importantly, nuclear rocket technology. Why don't they just go right ahead and put people on Mars? The Chinese are going to put a base on the moon...
Much of the time I like to reinvent the wheel. There are several reasons. First, it's a learning exercise, second Iown the code I write and third I do it my way. This may seem petty, but if there are bugs, I'm the only one to blame, and I learn by doing. If I was doing something in the course of my paid work, then I would use the conventional resources.
Indeed it is. I was under the impression that the limiting resolution of the human eye was about 1 arc second. When I was younger I could quite easily see the pixels on 300dpi laser printer output.
True, but the other 5% are designing cars, running large databases (on many-way boxes) and simulating neutron stars and black hole formation. For these people, accurate and meaningful measurement of all aspects of a computer's performance are relevant. I'd like to see you try designing an anti-cancer drug on your piddling little single-processor Pentium IV 2.8GHz.
Yes. Printed materials are too low res, and I'm a perfectionist. Antialiasing annoys me. It makes things look blurred.
As 3D continues to become more important, one day we'll have 3D GUIs. To fully utilise their potential, we'll need very high-resolution displays (to take advantage of the depth information). A 29 inch flat screen is cool, but what we really need is much higher resolution at current sizes, e.g. an 18 inch display that does 12800 by 10240.
I see what you mean. People look at me funny when I write nice, simple HTML in a text editor. Not only that, but someone told me that nowadays it must be XML, not HTML. I'm all for progress, but I also believe in horses for courses.
What's wrong with plain ASCII?
You are so right. Unfortunately, to many people, including "environmentalists" the facts are irrelevant since they contradict their political opinions and goals. I used to work in Reactor Physics and a nuclear power station. The amount of prejudice I recieved from people was incredible. They said things like, "Oh well, it's very dangerous and bad for the environment but I suppose you're making lots of money out of it." People used to say things like "I hope you can live with yourself producing all the radioactive waste and polluting the environment" and "what about all the bombs you make?" Also "Aren't you worried that you're going to get cancer," as they smoked their filterless, roll-up cigarrettes. It's impossible to educate the public. The media are against us, and people don't want to know the facts. They don't want to listen. They'd rather believe that it's all an evil right-wing capitalist conspiracy to make vast amounts of money and weapons at the expense of the environment and everyone's health. The UK government is spineless as will not commit to developing new nuclear power, so with no future prospects I left the industry. Nuclear power does so much good and could do so much more if only it were allowed.
What do you mean by "radioactivity produced"? Do you mean the induced activity in the fuel and reactor components caused by operation of the reactor, or the radiation dose to the environment cause by leakage of fission products and coolant or do you mean the total activity of any leaking substances?
No, it's the aliens, silly! In return for the secret of their anti-gravity super-luminal space-warp drive, the got a UNIX license from SCO.
The more I find out about the Romans, the more they sound like a bunch of evil, twisted bastards.
I thought it was in Hangar 18