Er.. didn't I say protocol ? Yes I did. ODBC is an API. Big diffrence.
ODBC loads (transparently) drivers that each know how to actually do the conversation with the database server. This is not the same as a protocol.
Wouldn't it be nice if the protocol to RDBMS'es were standarized.
Every DB server would use a standard protocol to talk to clients,
sort of LDAP, which is a protocol and vendors implement that protocol..
So what if the new fork includes numerous "cool" features ? e.g. transparancy, finishing off/redoing XrandR, add Whizbang, FastRender, Xinerama2 extensions and so on ?
Sounds incredible stupid. One wants programs, but on can't install anything ? Why on earth would that be a requirement? installing a j2re is a matter of clicking "Next" a few times. users on *nix should cope wi the fact that one must download a file an run a couple of commands to install it.
Well, given that that the JVM proviede are about 100% compatible, this is not a baad thing. One gets some diffrent speed and resource usage, and possibly some bugfixes here and there. Main thing, developer only have to care about the JVM version, not the implementation.
Both. There ar lots of C and lots of C++ code, but why not download the source and see for yourself (Yes, the source code is available)
--> http://wwws.sun.com/software/java2/
Still beats my why people want to use UML, sure its a buzzword, but that's just about it. In my experience UML makes you overdesign, and spend far to much time on things you one should rather use to do something productive. By all means, dont't start coding without thinking, just don't think and design to much. Remember, just because you do UML, doesn't mean the result is without problems. Quite the oposite imho.
Glad to see NetBSD is keeping up with the rest of the world. While (native)threading support has taken quite some time to come to NetBSD one can be assured that the implementation is done right, as always with NetBSD.
From the docs, compare with CVS. Remember that many of the Subversion deveoplers are/were CVS developers..
* Real copies and renames. The Subversion repository doesn't use
RCS files at all; instead, it implements a 'virtual' versioned
filesystem that tracks tree-structures over time (described
below). Files *and* directories are versioned. At last, there
are real client-side `mv' and `cp' commands that behave just as
you think.
* Atomic commits. A commit either goes into the repository
completely, or not all.
* Advanced network layer. The Subversion network server is Apache,
and client and server speak WebDAV(2) to one another. (See the
'design' section below.)
* Faster network access. A binary diffing algorithm is used to
store and transmit deltas in *both* directions, regardless of
whether a file is of text or binary type.
* Filesystem "properties". Each file or directory has an invisible
hashtable attached. You can invent and store any arbitrary
key/value pairs you wish: owner, perms, icons, app-creator,
mime-type, personal notes, etc. This is a general-purpose feature
for users. Properties are versioned, just like file contents.
And some properties are auto-detected, like the mime-type of a
file (no more remembering to use the '-kb' switch!)
* Extensible and hackable. Subversion has no historical baggage; it
was designed and then implemented as a collection of shared C
libraries with well-defined APIs. This makes Subversion extremely
maintainable and usable by other applications and languages.
* Easy migration. The Subversion command-line client is very
similar to CVS; the development model is the same, so CVS users
should have little trouble making the switch. Development of a
'cvs2svn' repository converter is in progress.
* It's Free. Subversion is released under a Apache/BSD-style
open-source license.
And we are going to see lots of other flaws in open source software, I'm sad to say. Luckily they will mostly be discovered long before anyone take advantages of them, in contradiction to certain other OS's
where on only hears about the holes that are massivly exploited.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows is not downloaded, unless you mean through warez channels.
And I pretty sure event that doesn't stick up against these numbers.
Sounds ... useful.. Scheme is such a nice language. Particular useful in the kernel I can imagine. ...er wait a minute!
Er.. didn't I say protocol ? Yes I did. ODBC is an API. Big diffrence. ODBC loads (transparently) drivers that each know how to actually do the conversation with the database server. This is not the same as a protocol.
Wouldn't it be nice if the protocol to RDBMS'es were standarized. Every DB server would use a standard protocol to talk to clients, sort of LDAP, which is a protocol and vendors implement that protocol..
So we all should get som Jack Daniels shares now ? - Red Hat 9 extra RPMs at http://utelsystems.dyndns.org/
So what if the new fork includes numerous "cool" features ? e.g. transparancy, finishing off/redoing XrandR, add Whizbang, FastRender, Xinerama2 extensions and so on ?
The above is legal C. Learn about function pointers.
and ... ?
Sounds incredible stupid. One wants programs, but on can't install anything ? Why on earth would that be a requirement? installing a j2re is a matter of clicking "Next" a few times. users on *nix should cope wi the fact that one must download a file an run a couple of commands to install it.
Pushing MySQL over MSSQL ? Are you *nuts* ? MySQL sucks, yet people use it. Beats me, but atleast do yourself the favor and use PostgreSQL.
Well, given that that the JVM proviede are about 100% compatible, this is not a baad thing. One gets some diffrent speed and resource usage, and possibly some bugfixes here and there. Main thing, developer only have to care about the JVM version, not the implementation.
Both. There ar lots of C and lots of C++ code, but why not download the source and see for yourself (Yes, the source code is available) --> http://wwws.sun.com/software/java2/
I sure would like to se some detailed changlog on the blackdown work. Its based on the sources from Sun, now what the heck is diffrent ?
the pkgsrc is supposed to be portable, anyone have any experience on usng it on a Linux distro ?
Still beats my why people want to use UML, sure its a buzzword, but that's just about it.
In my experience UML makes you overdesign, and spend far to much time on things you one should rather use to do something productive.
By all means, dont't start coding without thinking, just don't think and design to much. Remember, just because you do UML, doesn't mean the result is without problems.
Quite the oposite imho.
Glad to see NetBSD is keeping up with the rest of the world.
While (native)threading support has taken quite some time to come to NetBSD one
can be assured that the implementation is done right, as always with NetBSD.
From the docs, compare with CVS. Remember that many of the Subversion deveoplers are/were CVS developers..
* Real copies and renames. The Subversion repository doesn't use
RCS files at all; instead, it implements a 'virtual' versioned
filesystem that tracks tree-structures over time (described
below). Files *and* directories are versioned. At last, there
are real client-side `mv' and `cp' commands that behave just as
you think.
* Atomic commits. A commit either goes into the repository
completely, or not all.
* Advanced network layer. The Subversion network server is Apache,
and client and server speak WebDAV(2) to one another. (See the
'design' section below.)
* Faster network access. A binary diffing algorithm is used to
store and transmit deltas in *both* directions, regardless of
whether a file is of text or binary type.
* Filesystem "properties". Each file or directory has an invisible
hashtable attached. You can invent and store any arbitrary
key/value pairs you wish: owner, perms, icons, app-creator,
mime-type, personal notes, etc. This is a general-purpose feature
for users. Properties are versioned, just like file contents.
And some properties are auto-detected, like the mime-type of a
file (no more remembering to use the '-kb' switch!)
* Extensible and hackable. Subversion has no historical baggage; it
was designed and then implemented as a collection of shared C
libraries with well-defined APIs. This makes Subversion extremely
maintainable and usable by other applications and languages.
* Easy migration. The Subversion command-line client is very
similar to CVS; the development model is the same, so CVS users
should have little trouble making the switch. Development of a
'cvs2svn' repository converter is in progress.
* It's Free. Subversion is released under a Apache/BSD-style
open-source license.
Er. no. I modded down that Russian, but I didn't reply on it...
Why ? Always a pleasure modding down trolls you moron
Good old caffeine perhaps ? Lets hope they don't go back testing Speed on the soldiers like in WWII.
--
RedHat 7.3 apt repository
What are you talking about ?? Wheel mouse is handled by Qt, I have no trouble scrolling pages, dropdown boxes and so on in Opera.
Because they are not interrested ? They want people/companies to standarize on Redhat.
I have switched, when I realized mysql was pretty much a toy, and saw it didn't even understand slightly complicated SQL.
And we are going to see lots of other flaws in open source software, I'm sad to say. Luckily they will mostly be discovered long before anyone take advantages of them, in contradiction to certain other OS's where on only hears about the holes that are massivly exploited.
Someone told me a time ago that Tardis can do ntp-over-http.