Some good points made by various posters, amongst all the piling on.
Here's one suggestion which, curiously, I don't see having been made by anyone yet. This is a good illustration of how putting "set -u" at the top of the script can help you. It would have prevented this catastrophe, actually. "Set -u" causes any use of an undefined variable to abort before executing the command, and the script will be terminated on the spot with a diagnostic identifying the particular variable as an "unbound variable".
It certainly won't prevent ALL rm boo-boos. but it would have prevented this one. It works in POSIX/BSD sh as well as bash.
You just won't have the govenmemt communistically, central planningly setting rates for things
Got it. Boogeyman bad. But you're perfectly OK with Comcrap and Asinine Telephone & Telegraph monopolistically dictating utility rates in their respective fiefdoms.
Half-wit morons have effectively censored my post. They can eat shit.
Here it is reproduced so people can see it.
You nailed it. IDIOTS are pushing this. Void of any comprehension of engineering realities.
There is a REASON why hybrid cars give benefits. IC automotive engines are HEAVY. Adding two intermediate conversion steps (mechanical -> electrical, then electrical back to mechanical) does not add a crippling amount of weight. And the IC engines in straight-IC cars operate at abominably inefficient settings. Most of the time that 250 hp engine is putting out not over 25 hp, and it has ghastly thermal efficiency at 10% power. In a hybrid, you can arrange it so the engine is operating either not at all (batteries filling in), or at an efficient cruise power setting (charging the batteries AND running the car, whether purely mechanically or mechanical->electric->mechanical does not make a huge difference in efficiency under these conditions).
Aircraft are completely different beasts. Their IC engines are much lighter in kg/kW (lb/hp) than are automotive engines, which is a good thing because they have to be vastly more powerful. And they operate all the time at pretty much the optimum efficiency setting. A little higher on takeoff but only for a very brief time, and around 75% of full power during cruise. Never at 10%. There is no efficiency gain from going hybrid, and there is a crippling weight penalty from the batteries, and a not at all inconsiderable weight penalty from the mechanical->electric and electric->mechanical steps.
Electric Vehicles are just playing a sly shell game with gas & particulate emission, shuffling it across town to the coal fired electric plant
No, actually that is incorrect. As of 2015, 31% of all electrical power generated in the USA was generated by zero emission sources (nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, and geothermal). Another 33% was from natural gas, which generates very little particulate emissions, substantially reduced CO2, and reduced NOX. Only 34% was from coal and petroleum.
Petroleum's share is actually down to a minuscule 1%, and coal is shrinking all the time.
So gas and particulate emissions are greatly cut for every car converted from gasoline or diesel to battery-electric.
When I briefly looked at BSD quite a number of years ago, what turned me off was the spiteful, angry people who used BSD. These people were not shy about expressing themselves and they told me straight where I could go. I got the message loud and clear. Despite any technical advantages BSD might have had, I have a big problem with joining up with a bunch of raging assholes.
Odd; I never found them so; anything but. I did find the community a bit OCD - look how they run the FreeBSD forum. I can only suspect that you sounded off presumptuously on how they should run their project, in which case they would have been quite proper telling you to forget about it.
P.S. - sorry, when I wrote "long live eval", I obviously meant "long live expr". For some reason I have a mental block against keeping the two tool names straight.
*BSD are nice, organized, predictable, maintainable OSes with good clean utilities that work in reliable and predictable ways.
GNU is a piss pot of everything doing everything THEY want and not giving one flying fuck about how anyone else might like it
Look, I have the utmost respect for BSD; I have used it for a long time and continue to use it every day. But let's face it, the Gnu tools and utilities are much richer and more versatile than BSD's.
Want to know how large your files are? 'ls -l' makes it way too hard to count the digits when the files are big. 'ls -hl' is stupid. You can't compare file sizes in a list, because it keeps switching between B and K and M and G for individual files in the list. But you can easily do it in Gnu ls. I use an alias: alias dir="ls -l --color=auto --block-size=\'1" and as long as my LANG is set to en_US.utf8, which I make sure it always is, my size numbers are nicely printed with thousands-separators.
ls -l -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 4310695936 May 7 2015 CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503-01.iso dir -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 4,310,695,936 May 7 2015 CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503-01.iso Now, which output would your aching eyes prefer to be looking at all day?
Now, in FreeBSD you can install the package gnuls, which gives you/usr/local/bin/gnuls, or (Gnu) coreutils, which gives you/usr/local/bin/gls (pretty much the same thing), as well as a lot more like gdf, gdu, gcp, gmv, etc, etc. So my alias in FreeBSD looks like: alias dir="LC_NUMERIC=en_US.UTF-8 gnuls -l --color=auto --block-size=\'1" and everything is hunky dory. I also have similar convenient aliases for dirk, dirm, and dirg, as well as dfk, dfm, dfg, duk, dum, and dug, plus some others, in both linux and FreeBSD (with coreutils).
It goes a lot further. For example in BSD's POSIX awk (even in nawk) there are no bit operators at all. In (Gnu) gawk (package available for FreeBSD) there is a full set. And BSD's POSIX sh is excellent; I wouldn't think of using anything else for my shell scripts[*]; but for interactive command sessions I do prefer (Gnu) bash, which adds significant functionality and convenience.
I like that my reliable, stable BSD tools and utilities are sitting undisturbed in/bin and/usr/bin, but I also like that I have my Gnu stuff available in/usr/local/bin. Best of both worlds. And both worlds do have wonderful contributions to make.
[*] Actually for best portability I do prefer using the heirloom Bourne sh and tools for scripting, in both FreeBSD and linux. But it would be absolute torture to use interactively. There is no command line editing or recall, or even a "history" command. Otherwise, for scripting, I don't miss any of the fancy schmancy added constructs in the newer shells. I consider [[ logical math ]] and (( arithmetic math )) to be diseases; long live eval. And I am perfectly happy using back ticks instead of $() for command output capture. Now, the more modern variable string manipulation macros are very nice, but I can live without them in favor of portability.
You nailed it. IDIOTS are pushing this. Void of any comprehension of engineering realities.
There is a REASON why hybrid cars give benefits. IC automotive engines are HEAVY. Adding two intermediate conversion steps (mechanical -> electrical, then electrical back to mechanical) does not add a crippling amount of weight. And the IC engines in straight-IC cars operate at abominably inefficient settings. Most of the time that 250 hp engine is putting out not over 25 hp, and it has ghastly thermal efficiency at 10% power. In a hybrid, you can arrange it so the engine is operating either not at all (batteries filling in), or at an efficient cruise power setting (charging the batteries AND running the car, whether purely mechanically or mechanical->electric->mechanical does not make a huge difference in efficiency under these conditions).
Aircraft are completely different beasts. Their IC engines are much lighter in kg/kW (lb/hp) than are automotive engines, which is a good thing because they have to be vastly more powerful. And they operate all the time at pretty much the optimum efficiency setting. A little higher on takeoff but only for a very brief time, and around 75% of full power during cruise. Never at 10%. There is no efficiency gain from going hybrid, and there is a crippling weight penalty from the batteries, and a not at all inconsiderable weight penalty from the mechanical->electric and electric->mechanical steps.
Rigorous obedience to the Constitution of the United States; Respect for the dignity of all those we protect; Compassion; Fairness; Uncompromising personal integrity and institutional integrity; Accountability by accepting responsibility for our actions and decisions and the consequences of our actions and decisions; Leadership, both personal and professional; and Diversity.
I [name] do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Perhaps, but I think it is entirely legal to do so.
"Legal" in terms of governmental activity and policies is simply defined by whatever laws that government has passed to authorize its actions and policies. Please don't get hung up on the concept of legality when evaluating governmental actions and policies. It was perfectly "legal" for the Nazis to round up arbitrarily-selected victims and work them to death as slave labor, or murder them in extermination facilities. It was "legal" because they passed laws and authorized authorities to make it so.
That does not make it acceptable. The legal system is supposed to flow from morality.
In this sense, I think it is entirely legal to do what they are doing. To me that means that there needs to be a law that controls that more closely.
This is bass-ackwards logic. What is needed is not laws that restrict improper government behavior. It is the absence of laws that authorize improper government behavior. Most of them are blatantly unconstitutional anyway. Respect for rights and propriety has to flow from the people, as it did in 1776. The people are the reason government exists. Government is not the reason people exist. When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.
Whether we like it or not Flat and minimalism is in as gradients and skuemorphism where objects and icons look like objects are very outdated to the millennials today and the art professors who teach this stuff to students.
Oh, sorry then, Professor Knuckle Under. I forgot we were supposed to gobble up every stupid fad that gets pushed on us. Please slap me twice in the face, and I will try to be a good sheep from now on.
I looked up their hipster web site and was so repulsed by their brain-dead stupid eye-destroying low-contrast color scheme that I was instantly prejudiced against them. My snap impression was then reinforced by their stupid pandering column on the San Bernardino iPhone controversy.
This is a bit of a carp, but I find this kind of thinking, and the whole concept of distro "flavors", mildly annoying. The number of "officially supported" DEs equals the number of DEs packaged in the official repos, period. I don't know precisely what that number is, because there is a lack of descriptive indexing of exactly what is in the repos, but there is certainly no dependence on having a "flavor" differentiated
Not sure what posting rule of Slashdots that I broke such that my comment was removed.
Your comment wasn't removed at all, but you screwed up the formatting. You quoted the entire thing so it looks exactly like you're just parroting somebody without adding anything. How did you let that get past the preview?
Where did you pull 8 more years out of? CentOS6 only gets full updates through 2017. Security errata and SELECT mission critical bug fixes through 2020. That's emphatically NOT support for new hardware.
with everyone going to per core licensing this is just going to be another money pit
In what dreary, greedy, thieving, get-rich-quick capitalistic world is "everyone" going to per core licensing? Debian does not cost per core. Apache does not cost per core. PostgreSQL does not cost per core. In fact none of them cost you anything at all.
If the licence had been BSD then much of that code might never have seen the light of day
Did you go to special school in order to say things that stupid? BSD is much more free than GPL, but both of them flat out guarantee that code released under them stays free forever.
This was probably a bullshit fucking push poll worded to elicit a certain response. But whether it was or it wasn't, here's a hearty disdainful BAAA BAAA BAAA to the fucking sheep who made up the 71%.
Slashdot Mirror
Would you care to rephrase that thought intelligibly?
Some good points made by various posters, amongst all the piling on.
Here's one suggestion which, curiously, I don't see having been made by anyone yet. This is a good illustration of how putting "set -u" at the top of the script can help you. It would have prevented this catastrophe, actually. "Set -u" causes any use of an undefined variable to abort before executing the command, and the script will be terminated on the spot with a diagnostic identifying the particular variable as an "unbound variable".
It certainly won't prevent ALL rm boo-boos. but it would have prevented this one. It works in POSIX/BSD sh as well as bash.
Got it. Boogeyman bad. But you're perfectly OK with Comcrap and Asinine Telephone & Telegraph monopolistically dictating utility rates in their respective fiefdoms.
Orders of magnitude more understanding than you. Look, I don't mind people being ignorant, but arrogant denial of one's own ignorance ticks me off.
Quite evidently.
Half-wit morons have effectively censored my post. They can eat shit.
Here it is reproduced so people can see it.
You nailed it. IDIOTS are pushing this. Void of any comprehension of engineering realities.
There is a REASON why hybrid cars give benefits. IC automotive engines are HEAVY. Adding two intermediate conversion steps (mechanical -> electrical, then electrical back to mechanical) does not add a crippling amount of weight. And the IC engines in straight-IC cars operate at abominably inefficient settings. Most of the time that 250 hp engine is putting out not over 25 hp, and it has ghastly thermal efficiency at 10% power. In a hybrid, you can arrange it so the engine is operating either not at all (batteries filling in), or at an efficient cruise power setting (charging the batteries AND running the car, whether purely mechanically or mechanical->electric->mechanical does not make a huge difference in efficiency under these conditions).
Aircraft are completely different beasts. Their IC engines are much lighter in kg/kW (lb/hp) than are automotive engines, which is a good thing because they have to be vastly more powerful. And they operate all the time at pretty much the optimum efficiency setting. A little higher on takeoff but only for a very brief time, and around 75% of full power during cruise. Never at 10%. There is no efficiency gain from going hybrid, and there is a crippling weight penalty from the batteries, and a not at all inconsiderable weight penalty from the mechanical->electric and electric->mechanical steps.
No, actually that is incorrect. As of 2015, 31% of all electrical power generated in the USA was generated by zero emission sources (nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, and geothermal). Another 33% was from natural gas, which generates very little particulate emissions, substantially reduced CO2, and reduced NOX. Only 34% was from coal and petroleum.
Petroleum's share is actually down to a minuscule 1%, and coal is shrinking all the time.
So gas and particulate emissions are greatly cut for every car converted from gasoline or diesel to battery-electric.
Odd; I never found them so; anything but. I did find the community a bit OCD - look how they run the FreeBSD forum. I can only suspect that you sounded off presumptuously on how they should run their project, in which case they would have been quite proper telling you to forget about it.
P.S. - sorry, when I wrote "long live eval", I obviously meant "long live expr". For some reason I have a mental block against keeping the two tool names straight.
Look, I have the utmost respect for BSD; I have used it for a long time and continue to use it every day. But let's face it, the Gnu tools and utilities are much richer and more versatile than BSD's.
Want to know how large your files are? 'ls -l' makes it way too hard to count the digits when the files are big. 'ls -hl' is stupid. You can't compare file sizes in a list, because it keeps switching between B and K and M and G for individual files in the list. But you can easily do it in Gnu ls. I use an alias:
alias dir="ls -l --color=auto --block-size=\'1"
and as long as my LANG is set to en_US.utf8, which I make sure it always is, my size numbers are nicely printed with thousands-separators.
ls -l
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 4310695936 May 7 2015 CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503-01.iso
dir
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 4,310,695,936 May 7 2015 CentOS-7-x86_64-DVD-1503-01.iso
Now, which output would your aching eyes prefer to be looking at all day?
Now, in FreeBSD you can install the package gnuls, which gives you /usr/local/bin/gnuls, or (Gnu) coreutils, which gives you /usr/local/bin/gls (pretty much the same thing), as well as a lot more like gdf, gdu, gcp, gmv, etc, etc. So my alias in FreeBSD looks like:
alias dir="LC_NUMERIC=en_US.UTF-8 gnuls -l --color=auto --block-size=\'1"
and everything is hunky dory. I also have similar convenient aliases for dirk, dirm, and dirg, as well as dfk, dfm, dfg, duk, dum, and dug, plus some others, in both linux and FreeBSD (with coreutils).
It goes a lot further. For example in BSD's POSIX awk (even in nawk) there are no bit operators at all. In (Gnu) gawk (package available for FreeBSD) there is a full set. And BSD's POSIX sh is excellent; I wouldn't think of using anything else for my shell scripts[*]; but for interactive command sessions I do prefer (Gnu) bash, which adds significant functionality and convenience.
I like that my reliable, stable BSD tools and utilities are sitting undisturbed in /bin and /usr/bin, but I also like that I have my Gnu stuff available in /usr/local/bin. Best of both worlds. And both worlds do have wonderful contributions to make.
[*] Actually for best portability I do prefer using the heirloom Bourne sh and tools for scripting, in both FreeBSD and linux. But it would be absolute torture to use interactively. There is no command line editing or recall, or even a "history" command. Otherwise, for scripting, I don't miss any of the fancy schmancy added constructs in the newer shells. I consider [[ logical math ]] and (( arithmetic math )) to be diseases; long live eval. And I am perfectly happy using back ticks instead of $() for command output capture. Now, the more modern variable string manipulation macros are very nice, but I can live without them in favor of portability.
Are you trying to spell Cthulhu? If so, back to the drawing board.
Diesel-electric trains have no batteries and are not hybrids. A hybrid is not the same thing as an electric transmission. Sheesh.
What makes sense to you may not make sense to anyone with a modicum of engineering knowledge.
BTW, diesel fuel is most assuredly NOT cheaper than jet fuel. Jet fuel is just kerosene.
You nailed it. IDIOTS are pushing this. Void of any comprehension of engineering realities.
There is a REASON why hybrid cars give benefits. IC automotive engines are HEAVY. Adding two intermediate conversion steps (mechanical -> electrical, then electrical back to mechanical) does not add a crippling amount of weight. And the IC engines in straight-IC cars operate at abominably inefficient settings. Most of the time that 250 hp engine is putting out not over 25 hp, and it has ghastly thermal efficiency at 10% power. In a hybrid, you can arrange it so the engine is operating either not at all (batteries filling in), or at an efficient cruise power setting (charging the batteries AND running the car, whether purely mechanically or mechanical->electric->mechanical does not make a huge difference in efficiency under these conditions).
Aircraft are completely different beasts. Their IC engines are much lighter in kg/kW (lb/hp) than are automotive engines, which is a good thing because they have to be vastly more powerful. And they operate all the time at pretty much the optimum efficiency setting. A little higher on takeoff but only for a very brief time, and around 75% of full power during cruise. Never at 10%. There is no efficiency gain from going hybrid, and there is a crippling weight penalty from the batteries, and a not at all inconsiderable weight penalty from the mechanical->electric and electric->mechanical steps.
You left out some vital stuff.
Their avowed core values:
Only the last of those is gag-worthy.
Their solemnly sworn oath:
"Legal" in terms of governmental activity and policies is simply defined by whatever laws that government has passed to authorize its actions and policies. Please don't get hung up on the concept of legality when evaluating governmental actions and policies. It was perfectly "legal" for the Nazis to round up arbitrarily-selected victims and work them to death as slave labor, or murder them in extermination facilities. It was "legal" because they passed laws and authorized authorities to make it so.
That does not make it acceptable. The legal system is supposed to flow from morality.
This is bass-ackwards logic. What is needed is not laws that restrict improper government behavior. It is the absence of laws that authorize improper government behavior. Most of them are blatantly unconstitutional anyway. Respect for rights and propriety has to flow from the people, as it did in 1776. The people are the reason government exists. Government is not the reason people exist. When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.
Oh, sorry then, Professor Knuckle Under. I forgot we were supposed to gobble up every stupid fad that gets pushed on us. Please slap me twice in the face, and I will try to be a good sheep from now on.
I looked up their hipster web site and was so repulsed by their brain-dead stupid eye-destroying low-contrast color scheme that I was instantly prejudiced against them. My snap impression was then reinforced by their stupid pandering column on the San Bernardino iPhone controversy.
This is a bit of a carp, but I find this kind of thinking, and the whole concept of distro "flavors", mildly annoying. The number of "officially supported" DEs equals the number of DEs packaged in the official repos, period. I don't know precisely what that number is, because there is a lack of descriptive indexing of exactly what is in the repos, but there is certainly no dependence on having a "flavor" differentiated
Your comment wasn't removed at all, but you screwed up the formatting. You quoted the entire thing so it looks exactly like you're just parroting somebody without adding anything. How did you let that get past the preview?
Where did you pull 8 more years out of? CentOS6 only gets full updates through 2017. Security errata and SELECT mission critical bug fixes through 2020. That's emphatically NOT support for new hardware.
In what dreary, greedy, thieving, get-rich-quick capitalistic world is "everyone" going to per core licensing? Debian does not cost per core. Apache does not cost per core. PostgreSQL does not cost per core. In fact none of them cost you anything at all.
Everyone whose soul is not sold out stopped reading right there. You could have saved yourself a lot of hot air.
Darl. DARL. His name is Darl, not Daryl. Jeeze.
Did you go to special school in order to say things that stupid? BSD is much more free than GPL, but both of them flat out guarantee that code released under them stays free forever.
This was probably a bullshit fucking push poll worded to elicit a certain response. But whether it was or it wasn't, here's a hearty disdainful BAAA BAAA BAAA to the fucking sheep who made up the 71%.