It is my understanding that the argument of substance in favor of systemd is not that it is a better init system per se, but that it is something fundamentally new: a flexible and powerful asynchronous actor on events.
Heh, I would have phrased it a bit differently: "Until I threw my prudent caution about relying only on binary log files to the wind". But as long as I don't employ you in IT, it is only a preference. And hey, I don't rule out that I might evolve to the same preference.
The amount of tab-completion with everything is just so nice. Try "jou (TAB) -F (TAB)" and it will show all possible values.
Can you elaborate on this? I am on Arch with systemd, typing in a bash cl, and tried exactly your "jou (TAB) -F (TAB)" example. Just as I expected would happen, the first tab filled in "rnalctl ". So far so good. Every arbitrary command has done this for years. And, just as I expected would happen, the second tab did nothing until I repeated it a second time, and then offered me a list of every file and every directory in the current directory. A useless list, as a filename is not appropriate as an arguent to the -F option to journalctl. How could it do anything else? Are you suggesting you can make it offer a lift of fields appropriate to the -F option?
Are you using some magic shell which understands the syntax of every executable command line in the system? I want me one of those.
And because the log is structured in db form [lists pluses]
And because it is a db file, it can also get corrupted. And a corrupted db is almost impossible to extract anything useful from. A corrupted text file, which is only appended and never positioned ahead of EOF, can be read perfectly up to the point of corruption, and with some work can be read after the end of the corrupted section too.
All that aside, I grant the pluses of the journal, and as long as I can run syslog in parallel, I guess I don't have any sunstantial issues. It should never be mandatory to have the journal though.
In general, distributions embracing this become increasingly opaque to admins.
Essentially all important server distros have caved at this point. RHEL7 is systemd. Pretty sure SuSE and Mageia are (or soon will be) systemd, if there are any of those left. Arch for the server dangerous-livers is systemd. Now Debian.
I would call all of them lemmings (except Red Hat, which is the actual instigator), except realistically what were they to do? Get left by the wayside? The writing on the wall is clear. For me it's enough to pay a lot more attention to BSD.
I got the warning, previewed beta for a heads up, was horrified, and replied using beta. My reply isn't even visible using the classic interface, so I am copying it here. You can stuff the "redundant" mods. Send them to beta.slashdot.
I'll probably be gone if this beta abortion becomes the only available interface. I mean WHAT THE FUCK?! This nazi piece of shit just imperiously throws away all of my paragraph breaks!
Come on, slashdot. Really? Admit failure. Fire whoever needs to be fired, and get back on track.
I mean jesus christ. Maybe I will even start a site to compete. One whose design is not brain dead and whose management will never become brain dead.
I'll probably be gone if this beta abortion becomes the only available interface. I mean WHAT THE FUCK?! This nazi piece of shit just imperiously throws away all of my paragraph breaks!
Come on, slashdot. Really? Admit failure. Fire whoever needs to be fired, and get back on track.
I mean jesus christ. Maybe I will even start a site to compete. One whose design is not brain dead and whose management will never become brain dead.
Congratulations to India for leading the world on a big step away from fossil fuels. This is what all the world should be doing if we are going to reduce the effects of global warming and climate change
India has an installed capacity of 234 GW. I'm not sure that adding solar power of less than 2% of that figure counts as a "big step away from fossil fuels". Necessary beginning step, sure. Commendable, arguably. Significant, maybe. Precursor to "big", possibly.
You leave out a number of critical factors (such as atmospheric absorption including weather, and angle of incidence) reducing that peak 1300 w/m^2 figure. Rather than try to identify them all, as well as errors in the factors you do consider...
All the data collection and math for solar energy received at ground level, averaged night and day for a year, has already been done. The best locations in the continental US (by far) are around El Paso TX, southern NM, large parts of AZ, and some of southern CA. The cream of the cream receives 6.4-6.8 kWh/m^2/day (2300-2500 kWh/m^2/year). This represents an average power of 260-290 W/m^2. For 77 km^2 that would total 20-22 GW total. The figures assume solar cells statically tilted at the best fixed angle.
Factor in a solar cell efficiency of 20% (about par for the course), and you get 4-4.4 GW. There are further minor reductions due to less than 100% transparency of the protective covering over the solar cells, dirt on same, power busing and conversion of voltage and DC to AC, a small percentage of the billions of solar cells being defective at any given time, less than 100% coverage of the surface with solar cells, etc.
But overall, assuming they can find a place in India essentially matching the best locations in the continental US, the quoted figure of "over 4 GW" for average appears to be a valid achievable performance. The peak output would be very roughly 4 times that.
It is a fair point. Perhaps a better question is, "do you expect to be better off if the policies favored by this shithead are implemented? - compared to those of the preceding guy, or the new prospect's opponents".
when all you're given is a choice between Obama and Romney, what difference would it make?
That is a perverse and nonsensical suggestive / rhetorical question. From what anyone who was paying the slightest attention in 2008 knew, one was a statist extremist with zero management experience or talent and zero willingness to work with people having diverse political views, and the other an at least half hearted libertarian-conservative with well demonstrated management experience and talent, and demonstrated willingness to work with people having diverse political views.
The two alternatives may not encompass your, or anyone's ideals, but the choice most certainly makes a large difference.
We all know the Black population for example voted for Obama whole heartedly simply because he was Black. I really have no issue with that its understandable. Even today 85% of Blacks polled still support Obama which makes my point that even though Black unemployment is higher now then when Obama took office, and more Black are on welfare just proves a point that its not really about performance.
The traditional cynical way of finishing the thought is that it's not about performance, it's about feelings. It does matter if he is doing well by them, he is SAYING what they want to hear.
A more analytical view is that the point itself exposes a fallacy, which is this: if you have not gained ground with your man in power, that does not mean that it is guaranteed you would have gained ground had his opponent won. The following considerations apply:
1) The opponent might have done even worse by you, or at the very least, no better.
2) Your guy might not have the power to implement what he desires.
3) Conditions have been such that neither your guy nor his opponent have any chance to fix things.
if people didn't have the vote then very, very evil people would take control
People have the vote in most places, and very, very evil people have taken control widely anyway.
Before the objection, let me add this. I take this to mean, not that the vote does not matter, but that the vote alone is not enough. A good constitution (e.g., US) is a safeguard, but only if it is observed. The evil people who have seized control are in open defiance of the constitution (they are nothing if not reasonably clever in terms of preservation of their own power). That could be fought if the people themselves really believed in, and cared about, the constitution, but not enough of them do.
In the long run, the presumption is that a sufficiently energized minority of patriots championing liberty and right will rise up periodically against tyranny and refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants (and, concomitantly and sadly, of patriots).
What is needed is a correctional force that kicks in before things get to that stage. Theoretically the supreme court has much that as one of its functions, but since it has been coopted by the evil power structure, that is not working. I guess a >200 year run for the design set up in 1787 isn't all that bad. The first 100 years was on the whole exemplary; the second 100 years less so; likely the third 100 years will be the breakdown.
There is no Ubuntu 13.1. There is 13.04 and 13.10. Hint: in Ubuntu the.04 stands for April and the.10 stands for October. It's the same as any software rev numbering, though..10 comes after.9, not before.2. I still remember back when I asked my boss how software rev numbering worked and he said "it's like a floating point number", and I said "no it's not, first of all there can be n decimal points (1.27.4.5), and further.1 is not the same as.10 or.100000..."
Your conception that a laptop is somehow fundamentally different in work flow from a desktop strikes me as eccentric. I don't perceive any difference.
Your mod points are safe though. First, neither point is mod-worthy, and further it's interesting material; I'd rather have a conversation than try to give a knuckle rap.
Linux users just haven't fell victim to the mass hysteria of solving a problem, which never existed. Apple designed an appealing desktop, and as their market share increased, Microsoft began throwing UI designs against the wall. Then people started buying phones and tablets, so designers decided no one wanted a functional desktop anymore. Gnome 3 decided to screw everything up, then Ubuntu decided they wanted everything screwed up in a different way. KDE made the same traditional desktop demand more resources
You started off so well. I mean it. All this is clear and insightful.
, making it unusable.
Bullshit. You don't know what you are talking about. Yeah, it uses more "resource" (singular, RAM, and not all that much of it). It can be configured not to use any more CPU, and how much disk space it does or does not use is completely irrelevant, as it is so ridiculously far below what every computer has.
Bullshit on the resistance to oils. There is no magic to make them go away. They can't do anything but sit there. It's just that some weirdos have hardly any oil on their skin. Probably no tears in their eyes or snot in their nose either. Fine for freaks of nature, sheesh. Not so great for the rest of us.
As for the fat ugly finger on the display: it is about the crudest instrument that can be imagined. A mouse pointer is just a much more precise "finger" on the display, one that can't smear. Any drag or gesture you can make with your finger can be made much more precisely with a mouse, without a big hand getting in the way of visibility. It doesn't do much for two-finger gestures, but those feel as awkward as the vulcan live-long-and-prosper sign to me. I cam't do either one.
Somebody who doesn't bend over to Obama's speeches and cry in ecstasy?
Find me this mythical person if he exists. We need to cut him open and find out the part of his brain that doesn't exist or has atrophied in the rest of the electorate's brains.
Except for the BULLSHIT MINDLESS charge of racism, which you have absolutely no foundation for and contributes nothing, that is a damn good thoughtful reply to a post which also made me think.
But, duh, just because it has been resting on the ground does not mean it "hasn't [been exposed to] the Martian atmosphere for perhaps billions of years".
GPS Pilot said it all. Dr. Squyres sounds like an idiot.
Why on earth would you have that impression? Venus is 0.949 Earth diamaters and 0.82 Earth masses; Mars is only 0.532 Earth diamaters and 0.11 Earth masses. More to the point, did you not read all the Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom (Mars) novels by age 10?
Slashdot Mirror
Ah yes, the appeal to labels rather than substance. So unlike the poster you reply to.
It is my understanding that the argument of substance in favor of systemd is not that it is a better init system per se, but that it is something fundamentally new: a flexible and powerful asynchronous actor on events.
A system rescue shell that doesn't accept keyboard input is pretty blatantly busted. One wonders how it could possibly make it through a test suite.
Heh, I would have phrased it a bit differently: "Until I threw my prudent caution about relying only on binary log files to the wind". But as long as I don't employ you in IT, it is only a preference. And hey, I don't rule out that I might evolve to the same preference.
Can you elaborate on this? I am on Arch with systemd, typing in a bash cl, and tried exactly your "jou (TAB) -F (TAB)" example. Just as I expected would happen, the first tab filled in "rnalctl ". So far so good. Every arbitrary command has done this for years. And, just as I expected would happen, the second tab did nothing until I repeated it a second time, and then offered me a list of every file and every directory in the current directory. A useless list, as a filename is not appropriate as an arguent to the -F option to journalctl. How could it do anything else? Are you suggesting you can make it offer a lift of fields appropriate to the -F option?
Are you using some magic shell which understands the syntax of every executable command line in the system? I want me one of those.
And because it is a db file, it can also get corrupted. And a corrupted db is almost impossible to extract anything useful from. A corrupted text file, which is only appended and never positioned ahead of EOF, can be read perfectly up to the point of corruption, and with some work can be read after the end of the corrupted section too.
All that aside, I grant the pluses of the journal, and as long as I can run syslog in parallel, I guess I don't have any sunstantial issues. It should never be mandatory to have the journal though.
Essentially all important server distros have caved at this point. RHEL7 is systemd. Pretty sure SuSE and Mageia are (or soon will be) systemd, if there are any of those left. Arch for the server dangerous-livers is systemd. Now Debian.
I would call all of them lemmings (except Red Hat, which is the actual instigator), except realistically what were they to do? Get left by the wayside? The writing on the wall is clear. For me it's enough to pay a lot more attention to BSD.
It's not working very well.
dig altslashdot.org
Got answer:
HEADER opcode: QUERY, status: SERVFAIL, id: 26206
flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
(Stupid slashdot renders garbage if I try to paste the entire output, no matter if I use <pre> or anything else).
I got the warning, previewed beta for a heads up, was horrified, and replied using beta. My reply isn't even visible using the classic interface, so I am copying it here. You can stuff the "redundant" mods. Send them to beta.slashdot.
I'll probably be gone if this beta abortion becomes the only available interface. I mean WHAT THE FUCK?! This nazi piece of shit just imperiously throws away all of my paragraph breaks!
Come on, slashdot. Really? Admit failure. Fire whoever needs to be fired, and get back on track.
I mean jesus christ. Maybe I will even start a site to compete. One whose design is not brain dead and whose management will never become brain dead.
You comparison is way off. 4 GW is the average output. The number of hours in a year is 8766. That works out to 35 TWh/y for the solar plant.
India has an installed capacity of 234 GW. I'm not sure that adding solar power of less than 2% of that figure counts as a "big step away from fossil fuels". Necessary beginning step, sure. Commendable, arguably. Significant, maybe. Precursor to "big", possibly.
You leave out a number of critical factors (such as atmospheric absorption including weather, and angle of incidence) reducing that peak 1300 w/m^2 figure. Rather than try to identify them all, as well as errors in the factors you do consider ...
All the data collection and math for solar energy received at ground level, averaged night and day for a year, has already been done. The best locations in the continental US (by far) are around El Paso TX, southern NM, large parts of AZ, and some of southern CA. The cream of the cream receives 6.4-6.8 kWh/m^2/day (2300-2500 kWh/m^2/year). This represents an average power of 260-290 W/m^2. For 77 km^2 that would total 20-22 GW total. The figures assume solar cells statically tilted at the best fixed angle.
Factor in a solar cell efficiency of 20% (about par for the course), and you get 4-4.4 GW. There are further minor reductions due to less than 100% transparency of the protective covering over the solar cells, dirt on same, power busing and conversion of voltage and DC to AC, a small percentage of the billions of solar cells being defective at any given time, less than 100% coverage of the surface with solar cells, etc.
But overall, assuming they can find a place in India essentially matching the best locations in the continental US, the quoted figure of "over 4 GW" for average appears to be a valid achievable performance. The peak output would be very roughly 4 times that.
It is a fair point. Perhaps a better question is, "do you expect to be better off if the policies favored by this shithead are implemented? - compared to those of the preceding guy, or the new prospect's opponents".
That is a perverse and nonsensical suggestive / rhetorical question. From what anyone who was paying the slightest attention in 2008 knew, one was a statist extremist with zero management experience or talent and zero willingness to work with people having diverse political views, and the other an at least half hearted libertarian-conservative with well demonstrated management experience and talent, and demonstrated willingness to work with people having diverse political views.
The two alternatives may not encompass your, or anyone's ideals, but the choice most certainly makes a large difference.
The traditional cynical way of finishing the thought is that it's not about performance, it's about feelings. It does matter if he is doing well by them, he is SAYING what they want to hear.
A more analytical view is that the point itself exposes a fallacy, which is this: if you have not gained ground with your man in power, that does not mean that it is guaranteed you would have gained ground had his opponent won. The following considerations apply:
1) The opponent might have done even worse by you, or at the very least, no better.
2) Your guy might not have the power to implement what he desires.
3) Conditions have been such that neither your guy nor his opponent have any chance to fix things.
People have the vote in most places, and very, very evil people have taken control widely anyway.
Before the objection, let me add this. I take this to mean, not that the vote does not matter, but that the vote alone is not enough. A good constitution (e.g., US) is a safeguard, but only if it is observed. The evil people who have seized control are in open defiance of the constitution (they are nothing if not reasonably clever in terms of preservation of their own power). That could be fought if the people themselves really believed in, and cared about, the constitution, but not enough of them do.
In the long run, the presumption is that a sufficiently energized minority of patriots championing liberty and right will rise up periodically against tyranny and refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants (and, concomitantly and sadly, of patriots).
What is needed is a correctional force that kicks in before things get to that stage. Theoretically the supreme court has much that as one of its functions, but since it has been coopted by the evil power structure, that is not working. I guess a >200 year run for the design set up in 1787 isn't all that bad. The first 100 years was on the whole exemplary; the second 100 years less so; likely the third 100 years will be the breakdown.
No sense at all. And the article makes damn little sense either.
There is no Ubuntu 13.1. There is 13.04 and 13.10. Hint: in Ubuntu the .04 stands for April and the .10 stands for October. It's the same as any software rev numbering, though. .10 comes after .9, not before .2. I still remember back when I asked my boss how software rev numbering worked and he said "it's like a floating point number", and I said "no it's not, first of all there can be n decimal points (1.27.4.5), and further .1 is not the same as .10 or .100000..."
Your conception that a laptop is somehow fundamentally different in work flow from a desktop strikes me as eccentric. I don't perceive any difference.
Your mod points are safe though. First, neither point is mod-worthy, and further it's interesting material; I'd rather have a conversation than try to give a knuckle rap.
You started off so well. I mean it. All this is clear and insightful.
Bullshit. You don't know what you are talking about. Yeah, it uses more "resource" (singular, RAM, and not all that much of it). It can be configured not to use any more CPU, and how much disk space it does or does not use is completely irrelevant, as it is so ridiculously far below what every computer has.
What horse shit. So some bird brain thinks they died because they heard a scary sound.
Just WTF.
Bullshit on the resistance to oils. There is no magic to make them go away. They can't do anything but sit there. It's just that some weirdos have hardly any oil on their skin. Probably no tears in their eyes or snot in their nose either. Fine for freaks of nature, sheesh. Not so great for the rest of us.
As for the fat ugly finger on the display: it is about the crudest instrument that can be imagined. A mouse pointer is just a much more precise "finger" on the display, one that can't smear. Any drag or gesture you can make with your finger can be made much more precisely with a mouse, without a big hand getting in the way of visibility. It doesn't do much for two-finger gestures, but those feel as awkward as the vulcan live-long-and-prosper sign to me. I cam't do either one.
Find me this mythical person if he exists. We need to cut him open and find out the part of his brain that doesn't exist or has atrophied in the rest of the electorate's brains.
Except for the BULLSHIT MINDLESS charge of racism, which you have absolutely no foundation for and contributes nothing, that is a damn good thoughtful reply to a post which also made me think.
But, duh, just because it has been resting on the ground does not mean it "hasn't [been exposed to] the Martian atmosphere for perhaps billions of years".
GPS Pilot said it all. Dr. Squyres sounds like an idiot.
Why on earth would you have that impression? Venus is 0.949 Earth diamaters and 0.82 Earth masses; Mars is only 0.532 Earth diamaters and 0.11 Earth masses. More to the point, did you not read all the Edgar Rice Burroughs Barsoom (Mars) novels by age 10?