Please could you point me to some documentation for Linux's transactional filesystem support? The last time I searched for information on the topic, I found out that it would be tremendously complicated, without any really important benefits.
I don't see a digital signature attached to that message. Parent is absolutely correct in advising that one uses caution before running unverified codce on your machines.
Debian does exactly what you describe; the most recent update to the stable release (3.1r1) rolled in all the security updates and critical bug fixes since the release of 3.1r0 last summer. So if you order a new set of CDs every few months then you can keep your machine up to date via snail-mail.:)
While you are correct, you are not being fair to the Gnome/KDE developers. FUSE has only been an option since it was merged into Linux, around version 2.6.12 IIRC. Were the developers supposed to sit on their hands until 2.6.12 came out? Are the users of Gnome and KDE supposed to wait until 2.6.12 is ubiqutous?
Even now FUSE is available, you would have a hard time if you wanted to convince the Gnome/KDE developers to ditch gnome-vfs and kio(?) in favour of the Linux-specific FUSE.
Does this not completly break the security of NFS? Though I suppose, you would also have to somehow prevent an attacker from, eg, plugging in a laptop too.
The last time there were flaws in zlib and libpng, security was an apt-get upgrade away. Compare that to Windows where most software seems to have its own private copy of those DLLs.
Microsoft released patches for the libpng that came with Windows, along with a tool that scanned your hard drive, looking for copies of libpng embedded in third party executables and libraries. Unfortunatly, it would basically only say: "you {have,have not} installed Microsoft's patch for this issue; furthermore you have third party programs on your system, please install any updates available from your vendors". I can't remember a single program that released an update merely to fix the libpng flaw; in all probability every Windows machine with some kind of third party software on it probably still has dozens of copies of libpng and zlib lurking around on it.
Your latter points are interesting. What you are describing is a mandatory access control security scheme, like the one implemented by SELinux. This has yet to catch on because it's bloody complicated--and I believe SELinux only restricts what an application can do based on the 'tag' that its executable recieves; I don't know if SELinux policies can grant permissions to a process based on the shared library that is executing at any one time, or even how SELinux policies interact with interpreters like sh, perl, python, and so on.
Nothing looks 'right' on Windows. Even after you turn off the godawful 'my first computer' style, every other app is determined to implement its own widget set.:)
Fortunatly I only boot into Windows to play the odd game, but when I do, programs that use the gtk-wimp theme don't look out of place at all.
At the end of the day, however, the only way to have a cross-platform application to feel native on any platform is to implement a completly separate, native interface. Use GTK+ for Gnome, Qt for KDE, Cocoa for Mac OS X, and whatever MS's flavour-of-the-month toolkit is for Windows.
Re:Distribution on Windows
on
Why Use GTK+?
·
· Score: 1
I'm sure GTK+'s footprint depends on the exact options enabled when it was built and, as you said, the compression used.
$ aptitude show libgtk2.0-0... Uncompressed Size: 4608k
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't one or both of those largely written in x86 assembler?
Cite please? http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url= /library/en-us/fileio/fs/portal.asp says: "[Transactional NTFS] is available in Windows Vista and Windows Server 'Longhorn'."
Is the $20 * number of drives tax-deductable?
You forgot the part where you have to go and buy special (invariably awful) DVD playing software.
Please could you point me to some documentation for Linux's transactional filesystem support? The last time I searched for information on the topic, I found out that it would be tremendously complicated, without any really important benefits.
I don't see a digital signature attached to that message. Parent is absolutely correct in advising that one uses caution before running unverified codce on your machines.
Remove gdi32.dll until your vendor sees fit to provide you with a fix.
Whether they have any choice in the matter does not affect whether their actions are good or bad.
The trusted computing module will not allow you to hack the code change retention mechanism.
Debian does exactly what you describe; the most recent update to the stable release (3.1r1) rolled in all the security updates and critical bug fixes since the release of 3.1r0 last summer. So if you order a new set of CDs every few months then you can keep your machine up to date via snail-mail. :)
They are 'bad' for cooperating with the enemy. If they told the DVD consortium to take a hike, they would be doing 'good'.
Or a web or FTP or TFTP server...
s/Everyone/Viewers of Fox News/
While you are correct, you are not being fair to the Gnome/KDE developers. FUSE has only been an option since it was merged into Linux, around version 2.6.12 IIRC. Were the developers supposed to sit on their hands until 2.6.12 came out? Are the users of Gnome and KDE supposed to wait until 2.6.12 is ubiqutous?
Even now FUSE is available, you would have a hard time if you wanted to convince the Gnome/KDE developers to ditch gnome-vfs and kio(?) in favour of the Linux-specific FUSE.
Or even better... configure --prefix=$HOME
I think you mistyped:
% uuencode myfile myfile | gpg -a --sign --encrypt --recipient bsmith | mail -s "here is the file" bsmith
Does this not completly break the security of NFS? Though I suppose, you would also have to somehow prevent an attacker from, eg, plugging in a laptop too.
The last time there were flaws in zlib and libpng, security was an apt-get upgrade away. Compare that to Windows where most software seems to have its own private copy of those DLLs.
Microsoft released patches for the libpng that came with Windows, along with a tool that scanned your hard drive, looking for copies of libpng embedded in third party executables and libraries. Unfortunatly, it would basically only say: "you {have,have not} installed Microsoft's patch for this issue; furthermore you have third party programs on your system, please install any updates available from your vendors". I can't remember a single program that released an update merely to fix the libpng flaw; in all probability every Windows machine with some kind of third party software on it probably still has dozens of copies of libpng and zlib lurking around on it.
Your latter points are interesting. What you are describing is a mandatory access control security scheme, like the one implemented by SELinux. This has yet to catch on because it's bloody complicated--and I believe SELinux only restricts what an application can do based on the 'tag' that its executable recieves; I don't know if SELinux policies can grant permissions to a process based on the shared library that is executing at any one time, or even how SELinux policies interact with interpreters like sh, perl, python, and so on.
It doesn't seem any harder than using su or sudo.
"Internet Explorer runs active X which runs with system wide permissions."
Cite please. I'm pretty sure that loading an activex control does *not* magically elevate your priviliges.
Now *that* is anti-competitive!
Why do they bother with FreeDOS at all?
Cite please?
Nothing looks 'right' on Windows. Even after you turn off the godawful 'my first computer' style, every other app is determined to implement its own widget set. :)
Fortunatly I only boot into Windows to play the odd game, but when I do, programs that use the gtk-wimp theme don't look out of place at all.
At the end of the day, however, the only way to have a cross-platform application to feel native on any platform is to implement a completly separate, native interface. Use GTK+ for Gnome, Qt for KDE, Cocoa for Mac OS X, and whatever MS's flavour-of-the-month toolkit is for Windows.
I'm sure GTK+'s footprint depends on the exact options enabled when it was built and, as you said, the compression used.
...
$ aptitude show libgtk2.0-0
Uncompressed Size: 4608k