I think that those licensing terms are only talking about MS' own code ("Distributable Code", defined as the code and text files (included in the SDK) that you are permitted to distribute). Nothing stops you implementing your own encoder/decoder and distributing it under any terms you want.
Judging by http://idssi.enyo.de/tracker/status/release/stable, I would say that Debian is handling this the same that most other distributors have, i.e., lagging badly. mozilla.com have to take a lot of the blame for this.
It is possible that/etc/localtime is a copy of the timezone info, rather than a symlink to it. If this is the case then you would have to copy the new timezone info over/etc/localtime (or re-run tzsetup and have it do it for you).
You can check/usr/share/doc/libc6/changelog.Debian.gz to see exactly what version you have, where it came from, and how old it is.
Many distros to copy the chozen zoneinfo file over to/etc/localtime rather than creating a symbolic link./etc/localtime being a symlink causes problems if the filesystem containing the target of the link is not mounted.
For example, during boot up, before/usr is mounted,/etc/localtime can not be read if it is a symlink to somewhere under/usr/share/zoneinfo.
The meeting still happens at the same time (UTC). If you want to 'correct' the meeting time to account for the DST change, then you are actually rescheduling the meeting.:)
Your points A, B and C are good--have you considered filing bugs about them so that the Nautilus developers know about these shortcomings?
For D, try dragging with the middle mousebutton. When you release the button you will get a menu offering the choice of copying, moving or creating a symbolic link.
Please do not do Gconf the disservice of comparing it to the registry.
You might as well make the same comparison for any library that gives apps a standard way to query configuration options, and that stores the data in a standard format.
This seems as good a place to ask as any... how do we know how anything was pronounced in the ancient world? Did the Romans produce a Latin dictionary with IPA transliterations for each word?
If it is a job for the app, then everyone will implement it themselves, and no one will do it right.
Re:Does Vista have anything we need?
on
Is Vista a Trap?
·
· Score: 1
I know, we are using it at the moment. But it sucks. It's buggy as hell, the interface for adding/removing/synchronising calendars if confusing and it's useless if you don't have an internet connection.
More worryingly, it seems to be dead in the water. It's been in development for many, many years and progress has been very, very slow.
Re:Does Vista have anything we need?
on
Is Vista a Trap?
·
· Score: 1
Windows Calendar?
I'd *love* a program that reads/writes iCalendar files to web sites via WebDAV (though CalDAV would be better)...
I am very much opposed to the patenting of software, business methods, mathematics and so on, but I could not bring myself to sign this petition. It sounds like it was created by a 13 year old Slashdot user!
Why [-Pthreads-] {+Windows Threads+} are better than [-Win32 threads-] {+POSIX Threads+} Clay Breshears [-2006-10-19-] {+2003-05-13+}
I've used both POSIX threads (Pthreads) and [-Win32-] {+Windows+} threads [-APIs-] {+APIs,+} and I believe that [-Pthreads-] {+Windows+} has the better programming model of the two. While each threading method can create threads, destroy threads, and coordinate interactions between threads, the reason I make this claim is the simplicity of use and elegance of design of [-Pthreads.-] {+the Windows threads API. This is all from the perspective of multithreaded code developers or maintainers.+} Let me illustrate with a few examples.
[-Separate-] {+Simplicity of+} data types. In Pthreads, each object has its own data type [-while-] {+(pthread_t, pthread_mutex_t, pthread_cond_t, etc.) while,+} in [-Win32 threads-] {+Windows threads,+} there is [-a mix of handles and separate types.-] {+pretty much just the one type: HANDLE.+} For Pthreads this means different functions are used for working with each object type. Reading and understanding Pthreads code written by someone else [-is straightforward-] {+can be straightforward. However, this does mean that the programmer must know the number, order,+} and [-less apt to lead to confusion.-] {+type of parameters for all the different functions.+} On the other hand, because of the use of the same type for different objects, [-when-] {+there is+} a [-Win32 program uses WaitForSingleObject, it may not-] {+Create* function for each different object and a corresponding Release* function for most.
Perhaps the biggest advantage of a single object data type is that there is only the one function needed to make a thread block while waiting for an object: WaitForSingleObject. Thus, only one set of parameters needs to+} be {+known regardless of whether the code is waiting on a thread, a mutex, a semaphore, or an event. The related function, WaitForMultipleObjects, is just as simple to use and easily overcomes the problem of needing to wait for multiple thread terminations one function call at a time (pthread_join) that Pthreads requires. While some may say that using a single data type for many different objects can lead to confusion when used in WaitFor* calls, programmers should set the name of the handle such that it is+} readily apparent [-if-] {+whether+} the code is expecting a thread termination, an event to be signaled, or a mutex to be released. [-This also illustrates my next point.
Unambiguous-] {+WaitForMultipleObjects+} functionality. [-I've-] {+Besides being able to block a thread waiting for multiple thread terminations in a single call, the programmer can+} actually [-seen Win32-] {+wait for any out of a set of threads to terminate. That is, even when only one thread has completed, the WaitForMultipleObjects function can be set to return and indicate which thread triggered the return. If there is specific "clean up" processing that depends on the identity of the thread that finished, this can be done before returning to wait on the remaining threads. This clean up processing will be done in the most efficient order possible, soon after each thread terminates, no matter in what order this happens. Pthreads can perform similar post-processing, but will need to wait for the threads to terminate is some fixed order. So, even if the last thread finishes first, it must wait for all the post-processing of the previous threads to be completed.
Because different objects all use the HANDLE type, a call to WaitForMultipleObjects can be set to wait for any combination of threads, mutexes, semaphores, and/or events. This feature can give the programmer a flexibility that cannot be easily (if at all) duplicated in Pthreads. As an example, I've written Windows+} code that used an array to hold both thread and [-mutex handles, then wait on those-] {+event+} handles {+to support a threaded search through data. The ideas was to signal the blocking thread if the item being looked for was found+} and [-execute differen
Slashdot Mirror
Patents.
Pray, tell us under what legal theory does that hold?
If it were true, then you would not be allowed to distribute or modify any image you created with proprietary software such as Photoshop.
It is not faster, and in addition, it is much less space-efficient.
I think that those licensing terms are only talking about MS' own code ("Distributable Code", defined as the code and text files (included in the SDK) that you are permitted to distribute). Nothing stops you implementing your own encoder/decoder and distributing it under any terms you want.
I have to use WEP because my Nintendo DS cannot do WPA.
How do make all the presently-installed python modules and extensions accessible to the new python?
Judging by http://idssi.enyo.de/tracker/status/release/stable , I would say that Debian is handling this the same that most other distributors have, i.e., lagging badly. mozilla.com have to take a lot of the blame for this.
It is possible that /etc/localtime is a copy of the timezone info, rather than a symlink to it. If this is the case then you would have to copy the new timezone info over /etc/localtime (or re-run tzsetup and have it do it for you).
/usr/share/doc/libc6/changelog.Debian.gz to see exactly what version you have, where it came from, and how old it is.
You can check
Many distros to copy the chozen zoneinfo file over to /etc/localtime rather than creating a symbolic link. /etc/localtime being a symlink causes problems if the filesystem containing the target of the link is not mounted.
/usr is mounted, /etc/localtime can not be read if it is a symlink to somewhere under /usr/share/zoneinfo.
For example, during boot up, before
The meeting still happens at the same time (UTC). If you want to 'correct' the meeting time to account for the DST change, then you are actually rescheduling the meeting. :)
Your points A, B and C are good--have you considered filing bugs about them so that the Nautilus developers know about these shortcomings?
For D, try dragging with the middle mousebutton. When you release the button you will get a menu offering the choice of copying, moving or creating a symbolic link.
Why don't you just do 'sudo -i' or 'sudo -s'?
That implies that PHP was designed in the first place.
As a library that apps can use to verify files, sure. Oh wait! That is gnutls/openssl!
Thanks for the interesting & informative post!
Please do not do Gconf the disservice of comparing it to the registry.
You might as well make the same comparison for any library that gives apps a standard way to query configuration options, and that stores the data in a standard format.
This seems as good a place to ask as any... how do we know how anything was pronounced in the ancient world? Did the Romans produce a Latin dictionary with IPA transliterations for each word?
If it is a job for the app, then everyone will implement it themselves, and no one will do it right.
I know, we are using it at the moment. But it sucks. It's buggy as hell, the interface for adding/removing/synchronising calendars if confusing and it's useless if you don't have an internet connection.
More worryingly, it seems to be dead in the water. It's been in development for many, many years and progress has been very, very slow.
Windows Calendar?
I'd *love* a program that reads/writes iCalendar files to web sites via WebDAV (though CalDAV would be better)...
I am very much opposed to the patenting of software, business methods, mathematics and so on, but I could not bring myself to sign this petition. It sounds like it was created by a 13 year old Slashdot user!
This is so true that it makes me want to weep.
I think that fork and pthread_create are both wrappers around the clone system call.
Why [-Pthreads-] {+Windows Threads+} are better than [-Win32 threads-] {+POSIX Threads+}
Clay Breshears
[-2006-10-19-]
{+2003-05-13+}
I've used both POSIX threads (Pthreads) and [-Win32-] {+Windows+} threads [-APIs-] {+APIs,+} and I believe that [-Pthreads-] {+Windows+} has the better programming model of the two. While each threading method can create threads, destroy threads, and coordinate interactions between threads, the reason I make this claim is the simplicity of use and elegance of design of [-Pthreads.-] {+the Windows threads API. This is all from the perspective of multithreaded code developers or maintainers.+} Let me illustrate with a few examples.
[-Separate-] {+Simplicity of+} data types. In Pthreads, each object has its own data type [-while-] {+(pthread_t, pthread_mutex_t, pthread_cond_t, etc.) while,+} in [-Win32 threads-] {+Windows threads,+} there is [-a mix of handles and separate types.-] {+pretty much just the one type: HANDLE.+} For Pthreads this means different functions are used for working with each object type. Reading and understanding Pthreads code written by someone else [-is straightforward-] {+can be straightforward. However, this does mean that the programmer must know the number, order,+} and [-less apt to lead to confusion.-] {+type of parameters for all the different functions.+} On the other hand, because of the use of the same type for different objects, [-when-] {+there is+} a [-Win32 program uses WaitForSingleObject, it may not-] {+Create* function for each different object and a corresponding Release* function for most.
Perhaps the biggest advantage of a single object data type is that there is only the one function needed to make a thread block while waiting for an object: WaitForSingleObject. Thus, only one set of parameters needs to+} be {+known regardless of whether the code is waiting on a thread, a mutex, a semaphore, or an event. The related function, WaitForMultipleObjects, is just as simple to use and easily overcomes the problem of needing to wait for multiple thread terminations one function call at a time (pthread_join) that Pthreads requires. While some may say that using a single data type for many different objects can lead to confusion when used in WaitFor* calls, programmers should set the name of the handle such that it is+} readily apparent [-if-] {+whether+} the code is expecting a thread termination, an event to be signaled, or a mutex to be released. [-This also illustrates my next point.
Unambiguous-] {+WaitForMultipleObjects+} functionality. [-I've-] {+Besides being able to block a thread waiting for multiple thread terminations in a single call, the programmer can+} actually [-seen Win32-] {+wait for any out of a set of threads to terminate. That is, even when only one thread has completed, the WaitForMultipleObjects function can be set to return and indicate which thread triggered the return. If there is specific "clean up" processing that depends on the identity of the thread that finished, this can be done before returning to wait on the remaining threads. This clean up processing will be done in the most efficient order possible, soon after each thread terminates, no matter in what order this happens. Pthreads can perform similar post-processing, but will need to wait for the threads to terminate is some fixed order. So, even if the last thread finishes first, it must wait for all the post-processing of the previous threads to be completed.
Because different objects all use the HANDLE type, a call to WaitForMultipleObjects can be set to wait for any combination of threads, mutexes, semaphores, and/or events. This feature can give the programmer a flexibility that cannot be easily (if at all) duplicated in Pthreads. As an example, I've written Windows+} code that used an array to hold both thread and [-mutex handles, then wait on those-] {+event+} handles {+to support a threaded search through data. The ideas was to signal the blocking thread if the item being looked for was found+} and [-execute differen
And that directory is backed up... isn't it?