What you want is available for $99 from a third party.
Replaces the optical drive with a second SATA slot and provides you with a USB caddy for the optical drive you removed. That way you have a big drive for your a data, and an affordable, fast, SSD for the OS and your applications.
If you knew anything about RedHat, you'd realize that your comment is incorrect. They will license *any* of their patents for *free* for use in a GPL'ed application.
I suppose I'm really annoyed that anyone would think that *this* is the problem with Linux on the desktop: text configuration files. Front ends are around, and he chose not use them. There's no reason for X itself to support anything other than text configuration.
There's so much more that's actually wrong and really needs to be worked on. For instance, a more valid complaint would be that unless you use proprietary Nvidia drivers, there's no way to use both direct rendering and xinerama at the same time. And it's been that way for years, and it doesn't seem like anybody cares.
"When you want to configure a GUI like X, you should be able to use the damn GUI to configure it."
Gee, that's a brilliant solution. So when the GUI doesn't work, then you can't configure it. Wonderful. I don't really care whether you think linux is ready for the desktop-- I've been using it on the desktop since '98, and I've been using dual-head since 2000.
Go use Windows and be happy with it. I'm happy with editing an xorg.conf file with vi. To me that's a logical way to do it. Take your graphical configurations and go shove it.
Sometimes a dynamic IP isn't as bad as you might think. I've got a "dynamic" IP that hasn't changed since I first got service, 1.5 years ago. If it ever does change, I use dyndns and things would theoretically get automatically updated. I don't know, since it's never changed.
You haven't been in one of the fancy new full-motion simulators. From everyone I've talked to who's flown one, it's easy to forget you're not in a plane.
Et cetera is two words. I guess bad writing really is everywhere.
Re:Maybe you'd learn English?
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 1
You've clearly missed the point: It was funny.
But...
Eventually this medium becomes so "casual" that the content of these ideas becomes nearly incomprehensible as a result of the writer's inability to express himself. (Or perhaps the problem is merely the lack of any worthwhile content.)
I'm hardly advocating standard English as a necessity on Slashdot, but I find these gross solecisms to be most disturbing. If even this (relatively) educated segment of the population seems to be entirely unable to adequately express themselves, what does this indicate about the world as a whole?
Maybe you'd learn English?
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Curtis isn't claiming he knows the software was actually used, so how could he answer those questions? He's merely claimed that he wrote the software and delivered it to Feeney.
If the config file is an old one that you haven't changed at all, and dpkg has a new one dpkg just overwrites the old file with the new one. If it detects that the file has changed (i.e., you changed it) since the last time it messed with it, then it gives you a dialogue box. You can chose to leave the old file (in which case the new one will be saved to the same directory as filename-dpkg.new), to replace the file with the package maintainer's version (in which case the old file will be backed up to filename-dpkg.old), or you can choose to see a diff of the two files so that you can make your decision.
I can't think of a better system. I update my system every couple of days, and have to answer questions about config files every couple of weeks. I've sometimes made the wrong choice, and then had to go back and fix it, but this is easy because the files dpkg leaves behind.
I updated 3.1 from CVS when there was a big apache security hole. It was a pain, but I didn't have to spend hours in/etc. When I looked at what it was going to take to update to 3.2 when it came out, I groaned, and decided to do it later.
Part of the problem is I don't interact with this machine. It serves stuff. OpenBSD is just enough not-linux that it takes me a long time to remember how to do some fairly basic things, like upgrading with CVS. I have to read the how-to's each time.
Which is why, unless you guys manage to convince me otherwise, it's going to run Debian eventually so I don't have to worry about it.
And, no, Debian has no problem updating from anything to anything. It just does it all like magic. In fact, I still install Debian from the same base files on the same CD I made two years ago, and just run update...
I suppose that before I was a debian user, and before I'd experienced the magic of apt-get, I would have thought the same way. I used Slackware for years, and back in the real of Slackware 4, upgrading glibc was almost impossible. You had to start by compiling a compiler, so that you could eventually compile the libraries, and deal with managing concurrent libs. It's not that couldn't do it, it's just so much nicer to have the ability to let a well-built utility do it for me!
It's not that I mind getting my hands dirty, it's that it just seems like a waste of time. I am a GUI person in the sense that I use KDE. But I do it on a dual-head system, and one head runs nothing but tabbed consoles. Some things are better suited to a GUI (web browsing) others are better suited to the command line (file manipulation).
I've got OpenBSD running as a little personal webserver, DNS server and so on. It's running OpenBSD3.1, because at least back then, it was absolutely impossible to update. Every up understanddate involves going through and manually mucking with endless configuration files, etc. I use Debian for most everything, and have grown so used to the ability to run an apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade.
The inability to easily update OpenBSD, to me, nullifies any benefit one gets from it being "secure". If I'm running a two year old version of Apache because it's such a pain in the butt to update, how iss that secure? I think automatic security updates are imperative for a secure system.
And, furthermore, the automatic updating system should be secure as well.
The article is awfulyl skimpy. How do you use a telescope to determine the MOLECULAR structure of an interstellar cloud??? I'm not doubting it can be done, but I'd really like to know how.
Slashdot Mirror
What you want is available for $99 from a third party.
Replaces the optical drive with a second SATA slot and provides you with a USB caddy for the optical drive you removed. That way you have a big drive for your a data, and an affordable, fast, SSD for the OS and your applications.
http://www.mcetech.com/optibay/
This has nothing to do with ASRA reports.
If you knew anything about RedHat, you'd realize that your comment is incorrect. They will license *any* of their patents for *free* for use in a GPL'ed application.
I suppose I'm really annoyed that anyone would think that *this* is the problem with Linux on the desktop: text configuration files. Front ends are around, and he chose not use them. There's no reason for X itself to support anything other than text configuration.
There's so much more that's actually wrong and really needs to be worked on. For instance, a more valid complaint would be that unless you use proprietary Nvidia drivers, there's no way to use both direct rendering and xinerama at the same time. And it's been that way for years, and it doesn't seem like anybody cares.
"When you want to configure a GUI like X, you should be able to use the damn GUI to configure it."
Gee, that's a brilliant solution. So when the GUI doesn't work, then you can't configure it. Wonderful. I don't really care whether you think linux is ready for the desktop-- I've been using it on the desktop since '98, and I've been using dual-head since 2000.
Go use Windows and be happy with it. I'm happy with editing an xorg.conf file with vi. To me that's a logical way to do it. Take your graphical configurations and go shove it.
Whatever. If you buy decent stuff, there are no problems with DVD media or burners.
What, like a speaker?
Sometimes a dynamic IP isn't as bad as you might think. I've got a "dynamic" IP that hasn't changed since I first got service, 1.5 years ago. If it ever does change, I use dyndns and things would theoretically get automatically updated. I don't know, since it's never changed.
How does Haiku's window manager have ANYTHING to do with Linux at all? Hello?
Actually, I think he did.
Here's what Linus had to say about it today.
Uhh, yeah it does. It makes it a republic.
A barrel roll is a 1-G maneuver.
You haven't been in one of the fancy new full-motion simulators. From everyone I've talked to who's flown one, it's easy to forget you're not in a plane.
Wow. I was in Dickinson, ND a few months ago. It didn't look like you guys had the internet, much less slashdot readers:)
Spent the weekend and Buffalo Gap Ranch... Nice cheap lodging in the middle of nowhere with a bar. That's the way it should be.
Et cetera is two words. I guess bad writing really is everywhere.
You've clearly missed the point: It was funny.
But...
Eventually this medium becomes so "casual" that the content of these ideas becomes nearly incomprehensible as a result of the writer's inability to express himself. (Or perhaps the problem is merely the lack of any worthwhile content.)
I'm hardly advocating standard English as a necessity on Slashdot, but I find these gross solecisms to be most disturbing. If even this (relatively) educated segment of the population seems to be entirely unable to adequately express themselves, what does this indicate about the world as a whole?
...there are many of us whom don't have one...
...usually looking at degree's...
who, not whom.
degrees, not degree's.
Curtis isn't claiming he knows the software was actually used, so how could he answer those questions? He's merely claimed that he wrote the software and delivered it to Feeney.
If the config file is an old one that you haven't changed at all, and dpkg has a new one dpkg just overwrites the old file with the new one. If it detects that the file has changed (i.e., you changed it) since the last time it messed with it, then it gives you a dialogue box. You can chose to leave the old file (in which case the new one will be saved to the same directory as filename-dpkg.new), to replace the file with the package maintainer's version (in which case the old file will be backed up to filename-dpkg.old), or you can choose to see a diff of the two files so that you can make your decision.
I can't think of a better system. I update my system every couple of days, and have to answer questions about config files every couple of weeks. I've sometimes made the wrong choice, and then had to go back and fix it, but this is easy because the files dpkg leaves behind.
Oh, that sounds awfully promissing. I'll check it out, thanks!
I updated 3.1 from CVS when there was a big apache security hole. It was a pain, but I didn't have to spend hours in /etc. When I looked at what it was going to take to update to 3.2 when it came out, I groaned, and decided to do it later.
Part of the problem is I don't interact with this machine. It serves stuff. OpenBSD is just enough not-linux that it takes me a long time to remember how to do some fairly basic things, like upgrading with CVS. I have to read the how-to's each time.
Which is why, unless you guys manage to convince me otherwise, it's going to run Debian eventually so I don't have to worry about it.
And, no, Debian has no problem updating from anything to anything. It just does it all like magic. In fact, I still install Debian from the same base files on the same CD I made two years ago, and just run update...
I suppose that before I was a debian user, and before I'd experienced the magic of apt-get, I would have thought the same way. I used Slackware for years, and back in the real of Slackware 4, upgrading glibc was almost impossible. You had to start by compiling a compiler, so that you could eventually compile the libraries, and deal with managing concurrent libs. It's not that couldn't do it, it's just so much nicer to have the ability to let a well-built utility do it for me!
It's not that I mind getting my hands dirty, it's that it just seems like a waste of time. I am a GUI person in the sense that I use KDE. But I do it on a dual-head system, and one head runs nothing but tabbed consoles. Some things are better suited to a GUI (web browsing) others are better suited to the command line (file manipulation).
Exactly. There are what, 200 files in /etc that need to be updated by hand to get from 3.1 to 3.6?
I've got OpenBSD running as a little personal webserver, DNS server and so on. It's running OpenBSD3.1, because at least back then, it was absolutely impossible to update. Every up understanddate involves going through and manually mucking with endless configuration files, etc. I use Debian for most everything, and have grown so used to the ability to run an apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade.
The inability to easily update OpenBSD, to me, nullifies any benefit one gets from it being "secure". If I'm running a two year old version of Apache because it's such a pain in the butt to update, how iss that secure? I think automatic security updates are imperative for a secure system.
And, furthermore, the automatic updating system should be secure as well.
Wow... I don't think I'd ever stumbled across one of your posts before... /. comment-land being so big and all.
Anyway, the word "shit" is extremely versatile. I've been known to utter it, coupled with a few deep breaths, after something bad *almost* happened.
The article is awfulyl skimpy. How do you use a telescope to determine the MOLECULAR structure of an interstellar cloud??? I'm not doubting it can be done, but I'd really like to know how.