Slashdot Mirror


User: fnj

fnj's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
5,577
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 5,577

  1. Re:Too little too late? on Raspberry Pi's $25 Model A Hits Production Line · · Score: 1

    Exactly. Chips with no MMU (Cortex-M4 et al) cannot run real linux because an MMU is a fundamental requirement for real linux (or any other serious operating system). Otherwise, Cortex-M4 is ARMv7 just like Cortex-A8.

    OTOH, Freescale i.MX233 is only ARMv5 and is VERY lightweight, but does have an MMU. As a result you can run real linux on it.

    In the above I use the expression "real linux". There is also a bastardized linux called uClinux which can run without an MMU. Of necessity, there can be no memory protection between processes, and there can be no fork. There is a vfork to allow multitasking, but any program which fork's (and that's practically every non-trivial program) has to be customized compared to the version for real linux. (See Q2.5 in the above link)

  2. Re:Will MATE make it into RHEL? on Fedora Adds MATE and Cinnamon Desktops to Main Repository, Releases Beta · · Score: 1

    I keep hearing from random posters on various sites that RHEL # was forked from Fedora( core) #. Has there EVER been an official statement like that? I know fedora is a testbed, but I've never seen any evidence of a fork. I find it more likely that they take a stable kernel, and build around it stable releases of the important packages that are known to work well together.

    All right; it's a fair statement that "forked from" is an oversimplification. "Based on" might be more accurate.
    RHEL 2.1 was based on Red Hat Linux 7.2
    RHEL 3 was based on Red Hat Linux 9
    RHEL 4 was based on Fedora Core 3
    RHEL 5 was based on Fedora Core 6
    RHEL 6 was based on Fedora "12 & 13"
    I'm not sure you can find the above in so many words in Red Hat's own writings. I think you can if you search hard enough, but I can't give specific sources at this point.

    Some of us would say that RHEL 6 was a huge struggle to bring out. The fact is that it wasn't as much drawn from a single Fedora release as 4 and 5 were, and it was grossly delayed.

    Fedora was started in 2003 with a mission specifically to be the cooker for RHEL.

  3. Re:No one cares on Ask Slashdot: Good Linux Desktop Environment For Hi-Def/Retina Displays? · · Score: 1

    Yes, the retina display is a genuine advancement in display tech, period. The number of pixels is greater, and they are real pixels. The AC you are replying to is a bloody idiot. FUD city.

  4. Re:Dumb ideas never die on Is It Time For the US To Ditch the Dollar Bill? · · Score: 1

    I don't CARE if it saves anything. I don't want the filthy, smelly, crumpled dollar bills. That's not "dumb".

  5. Re:Value of $1 on Is It Time For the US To Ditch the Dollar Bill? · · Score: 1

    Wendy's and Burger King both, the last time I checked, and it wasn't that long ago. The kids like the massive mega-layer burgers but us old guys dig the 99 cent burger still.

    They count on you paying through the nose for fries and a drink. Refuse. Order just a burger.

  6. Duh on TVShack Founder Signs Deal Avoiding Extradition · · Score: 0

    I wonder what the minimum brain size is for making a pointless reply.

  7. Re:Will MATE make it into RHEL? on Fedora Adds MATE and Cinnamon Desktops to Main Repository, Releases Beta · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, that could well be the case too, since they don't include Xfce as it is. Of course the savvy user knows that he just needs to enable the EPEL repo to get Xfce.

  8. Re:never trust a republican on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    I have never understood how people come up with the idea that the goal of the Republicans is to help Democrats hold onto their wealth.

    I see you apparently subscribe to the patent falsehood that D and R are anything more than two tentacles of the same bunch of bought and paid for scoundrels.

  9. Re:House results so far in 2012: 234 R to 199 D on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    1) Stupidity of the voters.
    2) Concentration on local issues. I WANT MINE!
    3) Power of the incumbency, including gerrymandering.

    The R margin _was_ reduced, however. And I was amazed when I realized that the aggregate popular vote for all seats went Democrat.

  10. Re:On moratoria on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    And the sad truth is that neither one would do any good.

  11. Re:Damn the people who fall for this are stupid on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    Yep. There are an awful lot of stupid people. But we already knew that.

  12. Re:This is pointless on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    Yep. I am dumfounded that any less than 100% of the comments on this subject seem to realize that.

  13. Re:Sounds great... on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    Well, if the act had the least bit of substance in it, that would bother me. Actually, of course, the act is transparent Kabuki Theatre. Congress does not have the authority to bind its own hands. If this joke was somehow passed AND signed into law by the President (yeah, right), the effect would be precisely nil. The very next day, Congress would still have its authority to enact new legislation, including any legislation that would override this thing.

  14. Re:So long as... on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    It pains me to insert a negative vibe, but I have no confidence whatsoever that this would do any good at all. I don't even think writing sunset provisions into laws would do any good. The federal government is in full runaway mode with no rescue in sight.

  15. Re:My worry is... on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    As net neutrality, from Congress, would be a new law, this would block net neutrality. And that's 100% of its purpose.

    Moderation of parent needed. +1, Insightful.

  16. Re:My worry is... on US Congressman Wants To Ban New Internet Laws · · Score: 1

    It doesn't matter anyway. Such a law as proposed is nothing more than farce; mere Kabuki Theatre. Congress does not have the power to bind its own hands.

  17. Re:Why bother, XFCE is all you need on Fedora Adds MATE and Cinnamon Desktops to Main Repository, Releases Beta · · Score: 1

    Xfce 4.10 is very, very good. It has an excellent selection of applets. Automount of removable media and easy unmount support is good. You can now customize both the desktop icons and objects in the file manager to activate on single click (happens to be a must for me).

  18. Re:Will MATE make it into RHEL? on Fedora Adds MATE and Cinnamon Desktops to Main Repository, Releases Beta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would guess that it is practically a given. RHEL7 is supposedly going to be forked from F18.

  19. Re:Who the hell is Jimbo? (answer within) on TVShack Founder Signs Deal Avoiding Extradition · · Score: 1

    Citation please.

    You're not from around here, are you, son. Glad to oblige. Here is a citation for going 31 mph in a 30 mph zone. Let's go have a talk with the judge.

  20. Re:Insanity on TVShack Founder Signs Deal Avoiding Extradition · · Score: 1

    I disagree. [blah blah blah blah] i.e. it's tealing

    It doesn't matter if you disagree, you cowardly moron. Words have meaning.

  21. Re:USA citizens used to be first class on Prediction Market Site InTrade Bans US Customers · · Score: 1

    In the company of intelligent people, merely exposing an opinion they might not have thought of can be productive.

  22. Re:Even if this was true... on Is Intel Planning To Kill Enthusiast PCs? · · Score: 1

    10% or less, and I have been doing this since 1975.

  23. Woot on Supreme Court Blocks Illinois Law Against Recording Police · · Score: 1

    The Supremes get something right. Well, at least not wrong.

  24. Re:law for citizens only? on Supreme Court Blocks Illinois Law Against Recording Police · · Score: 1

    I'm not quite clear on this. Does it mean that it is illegal to pro-actively take means to record police, only? ...or is it just straight out illegal to record police working.

    Did you even read the headline? Not the story; not the summary; just the HEADLINE?

  25. Re:America's hand is being forced... on US Scientific R&D Could Face Fiscal Cliff Doom · · Score: 1

    Parent is not a troll and neither was my reply. Get a grip. Resubmitting to counteract spectacularly stupid moderation.

    into armed conflict by private banks, who, through their monetary policy are exerting undue political influence on the White House. It matters not which party sits in power, they have very little choice but to do what they are doing.

    And who created the Federal Reserve monstrosity? That's right, Congress. It was in structure an ordinary act of Congress (though in its details and effect an extraordinarily bad one). Don't tell me they now "have very little choice". What Congress has done, Congress can modify or undo.