Upgrading from 2005 to 2006 can be done by simply setting up the correct urpmi sources and doing a urpmi --auto-select.
No "base header rpm" (what's that?) or whatnots.
From the 2006 release notes upgrade info: the only note on upgrade is about gnome-panel, which gets uninstalled during auto upgrade. You have to urpmi gnome-panel after you've done urpmi --auto-select.
More quality editorializing in slashdot news posts! Maybe the editors should start editing those out?
Well, I am French, therefore I have slightly less of a right to free speech than americans do, yet free speech is on the whole just as important a right here as it is there.
Thus I can't help but wonder how someone could suggest editing out the expression of an opinion.
Please note that I personally do not share this opinion at all, but this is not a reason to censor it.
Now back on topic: hope they named all their files $sys$whatever.
This excerpt says that one is not forced to accept the licence, and then goes about saying that accepting the licence is necessary for modifying or distributing the program (1). But the statement in the post I had replied to was not about copying, modifying and distributing, it was about running the program:
The GPL is a license relating to copying the code, it has nothing to do with usage. I can use it any way that I want, the license specifically states that you don't have to accept it to use the software.
And the excerpt quoted by the parent says nothing about running the program, which leaves us to the question : when nothing is agreed upon about running the program, can one run it? I don't think so, at least under French copyright law. Running a program is not a right per se and cannot be taken for granted jsut because the program happens to be available.
The GPL is a license relating to copying the code, it has nothing to do with usage. I can use it any way that I want, the license specifically states that you don't have to accept it to use the software.
As far as I can read, the GPL does not say that one can run the program without accepting the GPL -- but of course, I welcome a detailed quote supporting the statement.
What the GPL says is that "the act of running the program is unrestricted" (quote), which is quite a different thing: the GPL affirmatively allows running the program. Without a licence, each use of the program would be be subject to the consent of the copyright owner.
BTW, concerning OpenSSH, the license explicitely allows running the software. Why bother mentioning that if it was allowed by default?
I have not seen what part of the "Copyright" item on Wikipedia that the parent post refers to mentions any right to use software without a license from the owner -- and indeed, under French copyright law, one must have a license to use software, whatever the license may be (GPL, BSD, proprietary) unless of course the software is public domain, which amounts to a license to do whatever you want with it except claim it yours.
Can someone (possibly the parent poster elaborate?
Well, for those who like distances to *really* mean something, how about converting that to leagues? I can understand walking for one hour more than I can grasp the circumference of the Earth.:)
You probably only considered the first one (the common manner of writing). What if Simon referred to the second one (a specific to a style of poetry)?
(And even the first one might not necessarily be the opposite of what Simon thought it is: he might have wanted to stress the idea that tech people don't want to write text, as opposed to writing code.)
Once arrested, 'your' murdered as well as 'my' bank robber and mugger become effectively unable to proceed to new offences or crimes. The virus or worm, on the other hand, still harms just the same whether its author is arrested or not.
Of course, we should keep in mind the fact that unlike with bank robbers or muggers, arresting virus/worm writers once a virus or worm is out in the wild does not stop the virus/wrom from spreading.
This somehow reduces the usefulness of the MS initiative.
Everyone understands the concept of time to some degree, yet to explain why time is, is a mental puzzle that has played in the outskirts of my mind for years now.
May I refer you to Saint Augustin who lived roughly in the fourth century? See this link (sorry, French only -- ask Google for a, ahem, translation).
Here's the epigraph:
What is, indeed, time? Who could explain it clearly and briefly?... As long as nobody asks me, I know; when someone asks me and I try to explain, I do not know any more.
Trouble is, if they can tamper with the picture and md5sum, then they can clean the write-only memory and put tampered pictures and sums back in it, and trash away the original.
Come on: no proof is absolute, not even massive eye-witnessing.
A trademark is the right to use a specific term or set of terms in your business field, and prohibit competitors to use or abuse your fame by labelling their product with your trade mark.
Using a trade mark with no competition involved (eg not deceiving listeners/readers as to who really owns the trade mark) bears no risk of being dragged to court -- at least here in France.:)
The worst I've seen is the owner of the trade mark Caddie(r)TM(whatever) having it pointed out in the evening news that precisely the term Caddie(r)TM(etc) is trademarked and that the non trademarked term was Trolley ("chariot", in French).
What they meant was : "don't say Caddie(r)TM(usw) when it's not made by us; just say Trolley". What's so despiseable in this ? You don't call all cars "Prefect", do you?
Slashdot Mirror
No "base header rpm" (what's that?) or whatnots.
From the 2006 release notes upgrade info: the only note on upgrade is about gnome-panel, which gets uninstalled during auto upgrade. You have to urpmi gnome-panel after you've done urpmi --auto-select.
HTH.
Well, I am French, therefore I have slightly less of a right to free speech than americans do, yet free speech is on the whole just as important a right here as it is there.
Thus I can't help but wonder how someone could suggest editing out the expression of an opinion.
Please note that I personally do not share this opinion at all, but this is not a reason to censor it.
Now back on topic: hope they named all their files $sys$whatever.
*Blue* LEDs.
... That's what DVD region system is all about, isn't it?
Maybe then in Australia people can make personal copies of the DVDs they bought.
And the excerpt quoted by the parent says nothing about running the program, which leaves us to the question : when nothing is agreed upon about running the program, can one run it? I don't think so, at least under French copyright law. Running a program is not a right per se and cannot be taken for granted jsut because the program happens to be available.
What the GPL says is that "the act of running the program is unrestricted" (quote), which is quite a different thing: the GPL affirmatively allows running the program. Without a licence, each use of the program would be be subject to the consent of the copyright owner.
BTW, concerning OpenSSH, the license explicitely allows running the software. Why bother mentioning that if it was allowed by default?
I have not seen what part of the "Copyright" item on Wikipedia that the parent post refers to mentions any right to use software without a license from the owner -- and indeed, under French copyright law, one must have a license to use software, whatever the license may be (GPL, BSD, proprietary) unless of course the software is public domain, which amounts to a license to do whatever you want with it except claim it yours. Can someone (possibly the parent poster elaborate?
Well, for those who like distances to *really* mean something, how about converting that to leagues? I can understand walking for one hour more than I can grasp the circumference of the Earth. :)
I want cool wireframe flythroughs like they had in the TV series
IIRC, they did no rendering at that time (there was no such equipment available) and all the "computer-like" effects were... hand-made.
Well, the link gives two meanings to 'prose'.
You probably only considered the first one (the common manner of writing). What if Simon referred to the second one (a specific to a style of poetry)?
(And even the first one might not necessarily be the opposite of what Simon thought it is: he might have wanted to stress the idea that tech people don't want to write text, as opposed to writing code.)
I say bring back Power Girl by Wallace Wood.
Oh, and bring back Wally, too.
Come on, 65 milliyears is about 24 days. We'd have heard of it in the news.
... HHGTTG, aka the increasingly inaccurately named TLA that usually denotes it.
Once arrested, 'your' murdered as well as 'my' bank robber and mugger become effectively unable to proceed to new offences or crimes. The virus or worm, on the other hand, still harms just the same whether its author is arrested or not.
Of course, we should keep in mind the fact that unlike with bank robbers or muggers, arresting virus/worm writers once a virus or worm is out in the wild does not stop the virus/wrom from spreading. This somehow reduces the usefulness of the MS initiative.
... would be the efficiency of the experiment (assuming it would fail the same way as this one), not the sensitivity of the equipment used.
... on March 31st if I believe my local theater program. :)
Everyone understands the concept of time to some degree, yet to explain why time is, is a mental puzzle that has played in the outskirts of my mind for years now.
... As long as nobody asks me, I know; when someone asks me and I try to explain, I do not know any more.
May I refer you to Saint Augustin who lived roughly in the fourth century? See this link (sorry, French only -- ask Google for a, ahem, translation).
Here's the epigraph:
What is, indeed, time? Who could explain it clearly and briefly?
Saint Augustin, Confessions, XI, 14, 17
Trouble is, if they can tamper with the picture and md5sum, then they can clean the write-only memory and put tampered pictures and sums back in it, and trash away the original.
Come on: no proof is absolute, not even massive eye-witnessing.
... and there's no high building around me.
Tough luck.
...now we've got a fRying dutchman.
--
Someone had to do it.
Uhm, I beg to differ here.
:)
A trademark is the right to use a specific term or set of terms in your business field, and prohibit competitors to use or abuse your fame by labelling their product with your trade mark.
Using a trade mark with no competition involved (eg not deceiving listeners/readers as to who really owns the trade mark) bears no risk of being dragged to court -- at least here in France.
The worst I've seen is the owner of the trade mark Caddie(r)TM(whatever) having it pointed out in the evening news that precisely the term Caddie(r)TM(etc) is trademarked and that the non trademarked term was Trolley ("chariot", in French).
What they meant was : "don't say Caddie(r)TM(usw) when it's not made by us; just say Trolley". What's so despiseable in this ? You don't call all cars "Prefect", do you?