The voices are poor imitations of their originals.
The writing is pretty bad, nothing witty or zinging about it.
They don't bad mouth it properly, even when an act was amazing on the Muppet Show they'd hate it. With this they're playing it too soft.
I think it would be hard for them to have come up with a worse idea, except maybe if it were to get into extremely bad racist jokes, violence and sexual content. That's about the only thing they could have done to make this a worse desecration of my childhood.
I'm sorry to read about that Anonymous Coward, man pages assume you have a basic understanding of Unix and what you don't understand can be learnt from most other man pages.
Start with manning man, then man sh, then from there you should be manning anything you don't know how to use.
With OpenBSD since 2.2 and with the new 2.0 release of NetBSD there is a man page you read to start things off, afterboot. That sucker is the best place to start and is available online.
Most of what appears in the two afterboot pages can be used to extrapolate a good start with FreeBSD.
If you find the documentation of FreeBSD to be of poorer quality than OpenBSD, this makes some sense; that is due to OpenBSD's more dedicated (read; hardcore) stance regarding documentation. But you cannot say that the man pages for GNU and Linux tools are anything short of garbage and have me hear anything more out of you but hot air.
This is because most of the time the man pages aren't even there, there are random HOWTOs you are expected to use on the Internet. The people writing these are the *USERS* and thus lack any actual information, just details on how to make exactly what they have.
Searching through the man pages none contain the strings version and compile together and non that contain either read as you describe.
Perhaps you are confused.
I don't see what's wrong with using ipfw on FreeBSD when the documentation is there, were you missing a function that you found particularly intetesting or useful?
No, there were Christian Churhes before it became the major religion of Rome. It just so happens that the Romans decided to unite Christianity under one doctrine and leadership.
The Roman Church destroyed the other churches.
Before the uniting, there was a great deal of debate as to what Jesus was and how Mary played into all this and what the Bible meant to everyone.
So the Holy Roman Church is the oldest remaining church of Christianity, not the first.
We know Jesus did exist and he was probably killed, there are no major records talking about any of his supposed deeds, but there are records of his name from that era. He did want a new religion, he wanted the Jews to stop being a Race and become a Religion alone. He wanted everyone to be Jews and to be good people to everyone.
The Jews didn't like the idea, so there was a split.
He probably did not intend for much of what has happened and I highly doubt the Rabbis that wrote the Torah and mass of the Tanakh thought some wackos were going to come along and start another religion based on it all.
Such is life though, you cannot take back a word that is said or a deed that is done.
You don't need to go insulting people's mythology just because you don't like it.
While I can understand trying to limit the number of groups applying, it did seem kinda strange to give such a short notice for anyone interested in this.
Had you given 3 days I bet you'd have gotten a much larger turn out for proposals, probably would have taken you 3 days to sort through them too.
Meh, I suppose I would have preferred a technical limitation to groups over a time limitation.
Uh, why would Google rewrite an HFS+ implentation on NetBSD from scratch? And why would that increase it's market value?
You're paranoid, no doubt about it. A bit delusional as well. The BSD projects they are sponsoring don't need to be rewritten, but why would any of them be of use to Google for making money? I cannot see how most of them would.
tmpffs' idea is a more efficient way to do memfs, or at least it is in theory; fewer copies, disable buffer cache and try to use as little memory as possible.
wcurses' wide-character support is useful for multiple languages that use characters that are outside the normal ascii character set. Pretty much anything that doesn't use Roman letters; Russian, Japanese, Korean, etc... So, if you're not a native English speaker this could be handy.
bpg's just like gnupgp, only BSD licensed. - This one may actually be useful, adding pgp to Gmail.
zeroconf would be a daemon that automatically assigns IPv4 link-level addresses and probably a Multicast DNS responder and a BSD-licensed Multicast DNS library.
regress is an automated testing the system.
userfs would probably be for allowing unprivileged users to manipulate parts of the filesystem.
ndis is an attempt at a standard nic api, developed by 3com and Microsoft, though Windows have their own "extended" versions.
hfs+ would be that filesystem Apple likes so much - the Hierarchical File System.
So, only one thing has really any use to Google and they don't even need to rewrite it. This is only out of the NetBSD projects, but I am sure the FreeBSD ones will be much more profitable.
Or.. like how NetBSD 2.0 manages to keep up for a whopping 12 hours on average on my quad hypersparc machine before crashing?
And you've submitted a bug report and are talking to the sparc maintainers to try to troubleshoot this issue?
You seem to be wrapped up in your own reality, where you are on your own.
People port software to hardware, hardware developers do not make hardware for software. That's how it works.
You just don't add some "feature" to your operating system and then wait for hardware vendors to cream over it and support you. You write software to work with what the vendors give you.
There are already sound drivers in kernels and basic video support in kernels. The further video drivers go with X, not the kernels.
There is always something to code son, always. Code is never perfect, it is never absolutely clean and flawless. If people use AMD64s for the next 20 years developers will still have things to do to the codebase.
Users be damned son, if they cannot download a codec then they need to learn how to use a computer. The kernel has nothing to do with a codec.
ogg and vorbis support are in the ports systems for the BSDs, there is nothing kernel-relelated involved here.
The proposal information for each project is on their own website, the ones accepted you will not know until Google releases more information, as noted in the link. "We'll post the applications and have further data early next week."
It's an anti-troll troll, thus a troll. You're copy and pasting this shit over and over with no reason to do so, it's not like anyone buys into the other trolls.
You just keep adding to the mess.
I read at -1 because the moderation system on Slashdot is worse than useless, it is fickle and run by morons. I don't trust the opinions of random Joes to be correct.
I've seen a few times where you weren't the only one posting it and it never needed to be posted in the first place.
When somone makes an actual post with some depth and character to it, it's alright, when someone copies the same stupid post every damned story it irritates.
That the afore mentioned morons who are ignorant get to moderate and choose to moderate that highly doesn't mean someone who actually has some concept of what's going on thinks it's worth reading.
So you're saying it's not the responsibility of the people doing the coding to make sure it was coded properly?
Testing something should be a part of developing it and should always be treated as such. Or is it no longer tcpdump's developers' reponsibility to test their code because they want operating systems to integrate it in the system? No longer postfix's reponsibility to test their stuff?
Will you people never cut that shit out? Noone cares about the bullshit from either side's trolls, but I sure don't like having twice the number of troll posts just because people are insecure about how their operating system of choice looks on a forum obviously already rent apart by this rampant nonsense.
I mean, God people, just stop posting stupid crap noone wants to see and the site will be a better place.
Son, I don't think there is any way to be clearer here - the kernel is seperate from the userland, it is developed by other people. It cannot get much further apart.
That isn't hiding behind a concept, it's not being involved.
The Linux kernel developers have nothing to do with it, they are making the kernel not the userland.
There is no such operating system son, sorry to break that one to you.
The web browser and the kernel are unrelated, you seem to have no concept of reality.
Kernels and operating systems do not tune themselves to programmes - programmes tune themselves to operating systems.
Documentation does seem to be one of the greatest strengths of the BSDs, noone involved in actual projects for Linux and GNU stuff bother to document - they need to start up seperate projects for it.
Son, are you blind or stupid? I don't think you've been sharpened in a while cause you seem very dull indeed.
de Raadt has no interest what so ever in toadying up to idiots, if the person cannot understand how to use the operating system they are to learn or use another, hand holding leads to the idiocy that is the average Windows user.
Theo doesn't care about media plugins, which are a concern for the programme using the plugin, not the underlying operating system.
He doesn't care about the end user, the end user is nothing to Theo de Raadt, nothing. He also doesn't seem to really care about his status in the press or the public opinion - else he would not be so blunt and coarse with people who piss him off.
de Raadt could probably make Linux more secure, but that isn't something he cares about, he has his own operating system to work on. He doesn't propose to change Linux code, he proposes that Linux developers learn from the successes of OpenBSD and change the code based on those successes.
Theo de Raadt (note the "de" son, it's part of the name) does not want something like Windows XP or Mac OS X Tiger.
Theo wants exactly what OpenBSD is; OpenBSD is an operating system that works how Theo says it is to work, thus it shall remain how he likes it.
Automatically? You mean you want it to come with a virus? Hmmm, OpenBSD already allows one to surf the web with it's default install and it's drivers are already installed as a part of the kernel. man ports if you want to watch videos, if you cannot read then that's not the fault of the programmers. Your nonsense about posting websites I do not understand, ftp, scp, and sftp are available, is there anything else you would ever need?
Theo has not worked on Linux for two reasons that I know of.
1. Because Theo started working with BSD code before there was a Linux and has not stopped since then.
2. Because he does not believe in the complete bullcrap that the Free Software Foundation touts to the masses - however, he is perfectly fine with Linux people using his code. So the question may be more like, "why hasn't Linus looked into OpenBSD to see the better solution in action?"
I think you needed to proof read your post Dave, cause you didn't come off making too much sense.
So just because it is not the AT&T ksh it is suddenly not the ksh that Microsoft puts out for Windows?
Damn, I better tell the OpenBSD people that their sh isn't their official sh version! Cause hey, it's ksh, no wait, not even that! ksh isn't the ksh they release because it's pdksh! Hell, it's not even pdksh anymore, it's been patched to add additional functionality and repair bugs, so it's not even their pdksh release!
Microsoft releases it and calls it ksh bXTr, therefore it is the official release from Microsoft. It's the one that Microsoft says is for Windows, last I checked they were the ones making the operating system.
OpenBSD has nothing to do with the developement of OpenSSL. Let me say it again as this seems to be brought up every OpenBSD story: nothing.
OpenSSH flaws are pretty much entirely in the portable version, which is done by a seperate team of people that add the so-called portability goop - things like PAM support are not in the OpenBSD version.
OpenSSL is done by other people under an apache-like license and OpenSSH is done by OpenBSD under a modern BSD license. If you want another SSL make your own, if you want another SSH use lsh.
And your true free comment is something that doesn't belong here, take it to a GNU discussion - BSD users don't care.
Hans, I've always kinda wondered about this one;does your dual release system of fee-based unrestricted source and GPL-licensed source work well for you?
I've never really thought that anyone would choose to license it when they could just grab a copy of the source and submit a few patches - but I guess some people really want to avoid anything GPL.
Do you think a MIT or BSD-licensed release would hurt the Reiser filesystem work? I know that a fair number of NetBSD and FreeBSD people were whining that they either want ReiserFS, XFS or JFS - none of which are quite liberal enough for inclusion within the base and would have to be rewritten.
If enough people do license it, I think that a MIT/BSD release would probably cause problems for you.
Sorry for the lack of coherency, this can be summed up as; do you think the dual licensing has been a success and do you think a release for the BSD operating systems would damage that success?
In general vi has basic commands that are standard, I have yet to encounter anything using the OpenBSD vi that did not work on any Linux system I've worked on. Redhat uses vim, Slackware elvis and some systems use vile. These are all four extensions to the original vi, the functionality that is in vi is in all four extended clones, but each has since extended their functionality, but done it in it's own way.
So you're pretty much complaining that ksh88 doesn't support the stuff that bash does in the same way.
jed? That shit is disgusting.
You will never, ever, under any situation, find something that ugly and retarded in the base of OpenBSD. Maybe FreeBSD, but definately not OpenBSD, they've got more sense.
mg and nvi are the editors in base for OpenBSD, they're liberally licensed and not bloated hunks of garbage. nvi is of course the light vi and mg the light emacs, they are cleaner and smaller than the their kin.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait a second, who the fuck moderated this a Troll?
It failed with Enterprise, but I'm sure more people liked the Muppets than StarTrek.
A pity I'm too lazy to even consider contacting Disney for a price that we'd have to meet to get the rights away from them.
The writing is pretty bad, nothing witty or zinging about it.
They don't bad mouth it properly, even when an act was amazing on the Muppet Show they'd hate it. With this they're playing it too soft.
I think it would be hard for them to have come up with a worse idea, except maybe if it were to get into extremely bad racist jokes, violence and sexual content. That's about the only thing they could have done to make this a worse desecration of my childhood.
Start with manning man, then man sh, then from there you should be manning anything you don't know how to use.
With OpenBSD since 2.2 and with the new 2.0 release of NetBSD there is a man page you read to start things off, afterboot. That sucker is the best place to start and is available online.
Most of what appears in the two afterboot pages can be used to extrapolate a good start with FreeBSD.
If you find the documentation of FreeBSD to be of poorer quality than OpenBSD, this makes some sense; that is due to OpenBSD's more dedicated (read; hardcore) stance regarding documentation. But you cannot say that the man pages for GNU and Linux tools are anything short of garbage and have me hear anything more out of you but hot air.
This is because most of the time the man pages aren't even there, there are random HOWTOs you are expected to use on the Internet. The people writing these are the *USERS* and thus lack any actual information, just details on how to make exactly what they have.
Searching through the man pages none contain the strings version and compile together and non that contain either read as you describe.
Perhaps you are confused.
I don't see what's wrong with using ipfw on FreeBSD when the documentation is there, were you missing a function that you found particularly intetesting or useful?
The Roman Church destroyed the other churches.
Before the uniting, there was a great deal of debate as to what Jesus was and how Mary played into all this and what the Bible meant to everyone.
So the Holy Roman Church is the oldest remaining church of Christianity, not the first.
We know Jesus did exist and he was probably killed, there are no major records talking about any of his supposed deeds, but there are records of his name from that era. He did want a new religion, he wanted the Jews to stop being a Race and become a Religion alone. He wanted everyone to be Jews and to be good people to everyone.
The Jews didn't like the idea, so there was a split.
He probably did not intend for much of what has happened and I highly doubt the Rabbis that wrote the Torah and mass of the Tanakh thought some wackos were going to come along and start another religion based on it all.
Such is life though, you cannot take back a word that is said or a deed that is done.
You don't need to go insulting people's mythology just because you don't like it.
Had you given 3 days I bet you'd have gotten a much larger turn out for proposals, probably would have taken you 3 days to sort through them too.
Meh, I suppose I would have preferred a technical limitation to groups over a time limitation.
You're paranoid, no doubt about it. A bit delusional as well. The BSD projects they are sponsoring don't need to be rewritten, but why would any of them be of use to Google for making money? I cannot see how most of them would.
Let's run down NetBSD's Summer of Code projects, shall we?
tmpffs' idea is a more efficient way to do memfs, or at least it is in theory; fewer copies, disable buffer cache and try to use as little memory as possible.
wcurses' wide-character support is useful for multiple languages that use characters that are outside the normal ascii character set. Pretty much anything that doesn't use Roman letters; Russian, Japanese, Korean, etc... So, if you're not a native English speaker this could be handy.
bpg's just like gnupgp, only BSD licensed. - This one may actually be useful, adding pgp to Gmail.
zeroconf would be a daemon that automatically assigns IPv4 link-level addresses and probably a Multicast DNS responder and a BSD-licensed Multicast DNS library.
regress is an automated testing the system.
userfs would probably be for allowing unprivileged users to manipulate parts of the filesystem.
ndis is an attempt at a standard nic api, developed by 3com and Microsoft, though Windows have their own "extended" versions.
hfs+ would be that filesystem Apple likes so much - the Hierarchical File System.
So, only one thing has really any use to Google and they don't even need to rewrite it. This is only out of the NetBSD projects, but I am sure the FreeBSD ones will be much more profitable.
Or.. like how NetBSD 2.0 manages to keep up for a whopping 12 hours on average on my quad hypersparc machine before crashing? And you've submitted a bug report and are talking to the sparc maintainers to try to troubleshoot this issue?
People port software to hardware, hardware developers do not make hardware for software. That's how it works.
You just don't add some "feature" to your operating system and then wait for hardware vendors to cream over it and support you. You write software to work with what the vendors give you.
There are already sound drivers in kernels and basic video support in kernels. The further video drivers go with X, not the kernels.
There is always something to code son, always. Code is never perfect, it is never absolutely clean and flawless. If people use AMD64s for the next 20 years developers will still have things to do to the codebase.
Users be damned son, if they cannot download a codec then they need to learn how to use a computer. The kernel has nothing to do with a codec.
ogg and vorbis support are in the ports systems for the BSDs, there is nothing kernel-relelated involved here.
The proposal information for each project is on their own website, the ones accepted you will not know until Google releases more information, as noted in the link. "We'll post the applications and have further data early next week."
You just keep adding to the mess.
I read at -1 because the moderation system on Slashdot is worse than useless, it is fickle and run by morons. I don't trust the opinions of random Joes to be correct.
I've seen a few times where you weren't the only one posting it and it never needed to be posted in the first place.
When somone makes an actual post with some depth and character to it, it's alright, when someone copies the same stupid post every damned story it irritates.
That the afore mentioned morons who are ignorant get to moderate and choose to moderate that highly doesn't mean someone who actually has some concept of what's going on thinks it's worth reading.
Testing something should be a part of developing it and should always be treated as such. Or is it no longer tcpdump's developers' reponsibility to test their code because they want operating systems to integrate it in the system? No longer postfix's reponsibility to test their stuff?
I mean, God people, just stop posting stupid crap noone wants to see and the site will be a better place.
That isn't hiding behind a concept, it's not being involved.
The Linux kernel developers have nothing to do with it, they are making the kernel not the userland.
There is no such operating system son, sorry to break that one to you.
The web browser and the kernel are unrelated, you seem to have no concept of reality.
Kernels and operating systems do not tune themselves to programmes - programmes tune themselves to operating systems.
Fuck! Shit! Cock! Ass! Shitty boner bitch! Muff! Pussy! Cock! Butthole! Barbara Streisand!
de Raadt it critizing a kernel's quality, there is no usability involved in this, this is a simple concept you are obviously unable to grasp.
Perhaps son, you should learn how to read some time - it might make your arguments worth reading and make sense.
Remember this son, no one ever said a damn thing about usability - this was a slight at the quality of the kernel.
Documentation does seem to be one of the greatest strengths of the BSDs, noone involved in actual projects for Linux and GNU stuff bother to document - they need to start up seperate projects for it.
That's what's called a joke son.
de Raadt has no interest what so ever in toadying up to idiots, if the person cannot understand how to use the operating system they are to learn or use another, hand holding leads to the idiocy that is the average Windows user.
Theo doesn't care about media plugins, which are a concern for the programme using the plugin, not the underlying operating system.
He doesn't care about the end user, the end user is nothing to Theo de Raadt, nothing . He also doesn't seem to really care about his status in the press or the public opinion - else he would not be so blunt and coarse with people who piss him off.
de Raadt could probably make Linux more secure, but that isn't something he cares about, he has his own operating system to work on. He doesn't propose to change Linux code, he proposes that Linux developers learn from the successes of OpenBSD and change the code based on those successes.
Theo wants exactly what OpenBSD is; OpenBSD is an operating system that works how Theo says it is to work, thus it shall remain how he likes it.
Automatically? You mean you want it to come with a virus? Hmmm, OpenBSD already allows one to surf the web with it's default install and it's drivers are already installed as a part of the kernel. man ports if you want to watch videos, if you cannot read then that's not the fault of the programmers. Your nonsense about posting websites I do not understand, ftp, scp, and sftp are available, is there anything else you would ever need?
Theo has not worked on Linux for two reasons that I know of.
1. Because Theo started working with BSD code before there was a Linux and has not stopped since then.
2. Because he does not believe in the complete bullcrap that the Free Software Foundation touts to the masses - however, he is perfectly fine with Linux people using his code. So the question may be more like, "why hasn't Linus looked into OpenBSD to see the better solution in action?"
I think you needed to proof read your post Dave, cause you didn't come off making too much sense.
Damn, I better tell the OpenBSD people that their sh isn't their official sh version! Cause hey, it's ksh, no wait, not even that! ksh isn't the ksh they release because it's pdksh! Hell, it's not even pdksh anymore, it's been patched to add additional functionality and repair bugs, so it's not even their pdksh release!
Microsoft releases it and calls it ksh bXTr, therefore it is the official release from Microsoft. It's the one that Microsoft says is for Windows, last I checked they were the ones making the operating system.
Why is everyone immediately saying cygwin? Windows Services for Unix is the official release of ksh for Windows.
Yes, we need more Rails, a Pike on Rails would be excellent. Hmmm, I wonder how close Maypole is to a Perl on Rails.
OpenSSH flaws are pretty much entirely in the portable version, which is done by a seperate team of people that add the so-called portability goop - things like PAM support are not in the OpenBSD version.
OpenSSL is done by other people under an apache-like license and OpenSSH is done by OpenBSD under a modern BSD license. If you want another SSL make your own, if you want another SSH use lsh.
And your true free comment is something that doesn't belong here, take it to a GNU discussion - BSD users don't care.
I've never really thought that anyone would choose to license it when they could just grab a copy of the source and submit a few patches - but I guess some people really want to avoid anything GPL.
Do you think a MIT or BSD-licensed release would hurt the Reiser filesystem work? I know that a fair number of NetBSD and FreeBSD people were whining that they either want ReiserFS, XFS or JFS - none of which are quite liberal enough for inclusion within the base and would have to be rewritten.
If enough people do license it, I think that a MIT/BSD release would probably cause problems for you.
Sorry for the lack of coherency, this can be summed up as; do you think the dual licensing has been a success and do you think a release for the BSD operating systems would damage that success?
So you're pretty much complaining that ksh88 doesn't support the stuff that bash does in the same way.
jed? That shit is disgusting.
You will never, ever, under any situation, find something that ugly and retarded in the base of OpenBSD. Maybe FreeBSD, but definately not OpenBSD, they've got more sense.
mg and nvi are the editors in base for OpenBSD, they're liberally licensed and not bloated hunks of garbage. nvi is of course the light vi and mg the light emacs, they are cleaner and smaller than the their kin.
Sounds like you need to learn how to map keys.