'Civilised' is spelt perfectly correctly. It's only you 'uncivilized' Americans who spell it wrong.
And not all of us. I've mostly switched to the North Sea point of view for S vs Z words. I dunno, the Z seems harsh, somehow. Using an S just seems more, well, civilised.
just for final bugfixing before the actual release, correct? Like the freezing
process in Debian.
[...] it means the 1.0 release can't be more than a few weeks away.
What are you waiting for? Just use 0.9.9 and be happy. It'll only get better from here.
He's not impatient waiting for Mozilla 1.0. He's impatient waiting for Slashdot to stop posting stories about the upcoming Mozilla 1.0. Which amounts to the same thing, since that obviously won't happen until Mozilla hits 1.0.
Is freetype support for *nix releases being planned by the AOL developers?
I'm sure it is, since it basically entails switching from the Gtk+ 1.2 API to the Gtk+ 2.0 API. Note that according to the GNOME people, porting to the newer API is not trivial, so my guess is, it'll happen in the Moz 1.1 branch, not the 1.0 branch.
I don't wanna come off like a whiner here, but Mozilla is not going to find much of an audience unless
freetype support is _standard_... The days of craptastic font rendering in X are over.
Actually, the font rendering system in X is as aliased as ever - the original text API is not flexible enough to handle gray shades or alpha values, only monochrome. (Bitmaps and mouse cursors are monochrome for much the same reason - ever wonder why Xpm has always been a mere add-on to Xlib proper?)
Its the #1
reason I switched to Konqueror after having used Mozilla for nearly 3 years--Smooth AA fonts, more
control, better appearance.
Linking to the freetype lib, subverting the X server font engine and rendering fonts is not the job of the application, it is the job of the GUI toolkit. (Sure, you can do it in the browser, but it's just wrong.)
Konqueror takes advantage of the fact that recent versions of Qt have support for client-side AA font rendering. Mozilla is stuck with Gtk+ 1.2, which does not. Gtk+ 2.0 does AA just fine, but the 2.0 API is different enough that it would be silly to try and port Mozilla to it before 1.0 goes gold.
(There's an AA for fonts? "My name is Helvetica and I have jaggies." [all] "Hi Helvetica.")
This is because linux also started with the 0.9x series.
No, 0.9x came several months after 0.01, the first release - though Linus did skip from 0.12 to 0.95 when the project started to stabilise. See Riley Williams's archive for details.
C'mon, where are the obligatory Quake3/UT FPS statistics? I want to know if I'm going to get 1,000,045
FPS or 1,000,0053 FPS. Don't they read Tom's Hardware?
I'd like to see it compile a Linux kernel in, say, 0.04 seconds. Too bad neither Quake3 nor gcc are particularly well-suited to vector processing (aka SIMD, if I'm not mistaken on my terminology).
But wait! What if someone used it to write real time HDTV format to the disk on this? Maybe they should
come up with super duper Tivo box? That would be cool...
Yeah, a Tivo that costs somewhere in the 5-figure range, uses several kilowatts of 3-phase power, is water-cooled, takes up half your living room, hums with satisfaction, and isn't anywhere near the shielding requirements of a class B computing device. But the Blinkenlights are groovy, no doubt. And oh yeah, it can record thousands of HDTV channels simultaneously.
Can't uninstall Gator without losing DivX. I found an easy workaround...find the gator.exe file (unsure of EXACT name of file), rename it to gator.old. No more Gator starting up with Windows. Bye bye spy.:)
Alternative: run regedit and look for \Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run under both HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE and HKEY_CURRENT_USER. Those are basically to-do lists for when you log in. You will probably see an entry for GATOR.EXE. Delete it.
In fact you might want to do this anyway. It's amazing what stuff you'll find there sometimes, if you install much software - it's worth cleaning it out from time to time. Lets you log in faster..
(One other minor complaint, something I found on my box at work: why the hell does suidperl conflict
with lynx? I had to install lynx from source, because Debian kept removing it when I installed suidperl
for a webmail package I was testing. Anyone?)
Uhh, I dunno. 'perl-suid' and 'lynx' do not conflict on my box. (I had 'perl-suid' and 'lynx-ssl' installed - I just removed 'lynx-ssl' in favor of 'lynx' and it worked fine.) Check 'apt-cache show perl-suid lynx'. If you still can't figure it out, email me [see slashdot profile] the apt-cache output; I'll take a look.
i have worked with rpm based systems for quite a while.
one of the cool things about apt is it was designed to be independent of the package system. in fact
i've been using apt4rpm to manage redhat systems for quite a while. consequently the
same issues occure on both debian and redhat.
No, the same issues can potentially occur on both debian and redhat.
Whether they do or not depends on the quality of the packaging job. It has very little to do with apt, dpkg, or rpm. The beauty of the Debian package archive is much much deeper than the fact that it is compatible with apt. The fact is that the Debian package collection is much better maintained than the equivalent RPM packages from a lot of sources, thanks largely to the Debian policy manual, and the fact that policy violations are considered serious bugs and usually fixed pretty fast.
A lot of people seem to think apt-get is a magic bullet. It's not. It's a very nice interface to a package archive which was already a work of art.
The only problem I've had is trying to download packages that haven't been uploaded to the server yet.
You mean "that haven't propagated to the mirrors yet".
Better yet they could upload the packages before updating the package list.
Talk to the administrator of whichever mirror you use, find out what mirror software / config they use, tweak it to download the Packages files last, and submit your changes to said administrator.
Or offer to buy more bandwidth for master.debian.org and the mirrors, so the propagation delays are shorter.
I see both gcc 2.95 and gcc 3.0 are included as part of the standard packages. But my question is this:
which version of gcc will be used to compile the binary (precompiled) release of Debian 3.0?
In general, 2.95.x is used - it is more stable and produces faster code. (Yes, you heard right. 3.0 was a regression in code optimization. I guess 3.1 is better.) For some architectures, this is not the case, and 3.0 is the default compiler.
Any package which works best with a specific compiler can require that specific compiler if it wants. C++ programs in particular might have those sorts of requirements. Just remember that Debian is much bigger than i386 and "the best compiler" usually has more to do with your target architecture than your specific program.
Re:Didn't they promise to fix the release cycle?
on
Debian 3.0 (Woody) May 1?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Seriously though, we are releasing woody which is twice as big considering the number of packages than
potato. Yes, all previous Debian releases doubled the number of packages, but hey, we're up to
eight
thousand now, cut us some slack!
And also almost doubling the number of architectures. Potato supports i386, m68k, alpha, sparc, arm, powerpc. Woody supports these plus mips, mipsel, hppa, s390, and ia64. Keeping 11 sets of binary packages in sync and relatively bug-free is not as easy as it may seem.
Yeah, this sounds like it's going for the worse, but the new system (read: the "testing"
distribution) would allow us to release woody+1 by the end of the year. This wouldn't be that bad, would
it?:)
One might note that as AJ has said in the past, the long release cycle this time was due to some fundamental changes like the package pool and crypto-in-main. Still, I'll wait until woody+1 is released before I applaud the newfound efficiency of the release cycle. (:
Last time I installed Woody, about 2 months ago, the kernel was still at 2.2.20. Have they finally gone
2.4.x yet?
Woody is 2.4-ready (i.e. all the tools that care should work fine with 2.4, unlike with potato where things like modutils are too old). Many/most of us compile a custom kernel after installation anyway, so this is all we need.
In terms of pre-built kernels, woody has both 2.2.20 and 2.4.17. There are even boot floppy images for the 2.4.17 kernel which include ext3fs and reiserfs.
I've seen this sucker in action at the base of the Eiffel Tower in Paris -- and about 4 years ago at
that. I promise you that, despite what people may say in that article, it works quite well, although the
viewable angle was painfully small back then. (I would assume that that's been fixed now with the
general advances in LCD technology.) The image does appear to be true 3D.
Uhhh. Are you sure it's the same technology? I ask because another method of doing "naked eye" 3-D involves an LCD-like display which gives you different images depending on your viewing angle, so the left and right eye get different images assuming you aren't too far away from the screen. I don't know about today but in the past, having to calculate 6-9 images per frame (to cover all the viewing angles) was too hard to do in real time so they just showed still images. Or maybe they just didn't have the necessary support in popular applications for that rather odd mode of operation.
It sounds to me as though that might be what you saw in Paris.
Besides, the policy only limits government funding. Anyone could start new stem cell lines with private
funds.
<sigh>, I think you're wasting your virtual breath. There are people who simply want to believe George W Bush is a horrible religious nut out to destroy science and free society and bring back the Victorian age. I think they are the same people who, a few years ago, felt the desperate need to believe Dan Quayle was a moron simply because he believed the cue card in front of him at a spelling bee. (Actually that last bit can't be strictly true for the slashdotters - imagine the irony of spelling flames on slashdot.)
The loss of a major employer puts people out of jobs, which eliminates their income, which reduces
spending, which affects all market participants by reducing profits (due to reduced sales), which causes
them to lay off employees, which eliminates their income...
Well - I guess I've just read too much Milton Friedman. Jobs, like companies, aren't an end - they're a means. The end is useful output: goods and services. If open source software can harness a method of producing software better (i.e. cheaper and/or more desirable) than what Microsoft can do, then by Friedman's economics, Microsoft is wasteful and society is better off without them. Those people who are (still hypothetically) laid off from big software houses because the economy no longer needs their jobs - those people can go do something else productive to society, and society benefits by having more goods and services for a given amount of effort. (Which in turn translates to lower prices for the consumer versus per capita income.)
Are individual workers better off? Any societal change produces perceived winners and losers. If all you ever wanted to do in life was get paid six figures to write shrink-wrap software, and you really have no other marketable skills, then open source is quite a threat to you. But on the other hand, if you run a factory and need some custom software written, you win because the programmer-for-hire market is more competitive.
Put another way, the Microsoft "open source is unamerican" line is Luddite. Remember the Luddites? They too believed that it was better to keep everybody employed at their current jobs than to produce goods [and services] efficiently.
Of course there are other ways to look at it. In a global economy, one might say that the loss of Microsoft is bad for America because it would adversely affect the balance of trade. Depends on your perspective whether that's good, bad or indifferent.....
Besides, Microsoft has already made clear that the GPL is a threat to capitalism; hence, their desire to
have nothing to do with it.
Well, it is. Now, whethor or not a threat to capitalism is a good or bad thing is left to the reader to
determine. The bottom line is, there is still no proven way for coders to make money off of GPL's
software.
Perhaps. I think a point which many people don't get, and which Microsoft really really wants people not to get, is that open source software is at most a threat to closed-source software vendors. When they decry the GPL as "un-American" or "anti-capitalist", what they mean is "anti-software-vendor".
This is incredibly myopic, and I can't believe anyone would take such a POV seriously. If Microsoft were to shrivel up and die tomorrow because someone else (say, the open source community) produced products that were so much better that Microsoft could no longer compete - how does that hurt anyone outside of Microsoft? It could only be a good thing for the vast majority of businesses, whose livelihoods are tied up in making widgets, or selling groceries, or treating sick people, or building highways, or managing hedge funds.
Basically Microsoft wants us to think "what's good for GM is good for America" with s/GM/MS/g. I don't buy it. Companies are a means, not an end. And it is, IMHO, awfully arrogant to say otherwise.
The only way the consumer is not best served by the market making a choice that cuts out an inferior competitor - is if the market is acting on incomplete information and the inferior competitor is in fact not inferior at all. But for Microsoft to complain about being defeated by FUD would be rather... ironic...
Seriously if you've never used Links, you don't know how cool (let alone useful) texted based web
browsing can be.
Yeah! Sometimes I hear about how fast Opera is, or how fast Konq has become, etc, and I always think the same thing: I'll bet the one making the claim isn't using a Pentium-166! I don't remember the last time I ran an X server on this thing - I can run one, but X applications tend to be relative resource hogs, and text mode is so much easier on the eyes. (116x60 on a 21", baby! Thanks, svgatextmode!)
Plus, I am blissfully clueless about those so-called "huge ads" on Slashdot. What is that all about? I've never seen any huge ads on Slashdot....
You don't sound like a very open-minded person, but...
I can copy the information off of it, that information is also mine, they own the right to sell it, but
i can share it if i want to!
Depends on what you mean by "share". You are paying for a use of the material. You are not paying for distribution rights. The use you paid for is "home use", which roughly covers what you do with things in everyday life. Not reselling, and not redistributing.
If you were playing a CD on your stereo and invited friends over, and its against the law to let anyone
besides you listen to that CD, should speakers by outlawed because they allow you to break the DMCA or
whatever stupid law is in place?
That's fine, that's covered by regular "home use", and it's something you've paid for. What you can't do is charge for admission. That's "commercial use". You also can't redistribute the music for other people to make their own copies of it - that's redistribution.
Hell clubs and raves should be outlawed too, after all these people are all stealing sound.
Believe it or not, clubs and raves have to pay pretty hefty prices to do what they do. They do not just go to Rhino Records and pick out some tunes. They pay thousands of dollars per year to ASCAP and BMI, organisations who (purportedly) then compensate the copyright holders. So your analogy doesn't hold up.
Slashdot Mirror
And not all of us. I've mostly switched to the North Sea point of view for S vs Z words. I dunno, the Z seems harsh, somehow. Using an S just seems more, well, civilised.
(I still don't put the U in "flavour", though.)
You don't know much about Debian, do you?
He's not impatient waiting for Mozilla 1.0. He's impatient waiting for Slashdot to stop posting stories about the upcoming Mozilla 1.0. Which amounts to the same thing, since that obviously won't happen until Mozilla hits 1.0.
I'm sure it is, since it basically entails switching from the Gtk+ 1.2 API to the Gtk+ 2.0 API. Note that according to the GNOME people, porting to the newer API is not trivial, so my guess is, it'll happen in the Moz 1.1 branch, not the 1.0 branch.
Actually, the font rendering system in X is as aliased as ever - the original text API is not flexible enough to handle gray shades or alpha values, only monochrome. (Bitmaps and mouse cursors are monochrome for much the same reason - ever wonder why Xpm has always been a mere add-on to Xlib proper?)
Linking to the freetype lib, subverting the X server font engine and rendering fonts is not the job of the application, it is the job of the GUI toolkit. (Sure, you can do it in the browser, but it's just wrong.)
Konqueror takes advantage of the fact that recent versions of Qt have support for client-side AA font rendering. Mozilla is stuck with Gtk+ 1.2, which does not. Gtk+ 2.0 does AA just fine, but the 2.0 API is different enough that it would be silly to try and port Mozilla to it before 1.0 goes gold.
(There's an AA for fonts? "My name is Helvetica and I have jaggies." [all] "Hi Helvetica.")
No, 0.9x came several months after 0.01, the first release - though Linus did skip from 0.12 to 0.95 when the project started to stabilise. See Riley Williams's archive for details.
I'd like to see it compile a Linux kernel in, say, 0.04 seconds. Too bad neither Quake3 nor gcc are particularly well-suited to vector processing (aka SIMD, if I'm not mistaken on my terminology).
Yeah, a Tivo that costs somewhere in the 5-figure range, uses several kilowatts of 3-phase power, is water-cooled, takes up half your living room, hums with satisfaction, and isn't anywhere near the shielding requirements of a class B computing device. But the Blinkenlights are groovy, no doubt. And oh yeah, it can record thousands of HDTV channels simultaneously.
Alternative: run regedit and look for \Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run under both HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE and HKEY_CURRENT_USER. Those are basically to-do lists for when you log in. You will probably see an entry for GATOR.EXE. Delete it.
In fact you might want to do this anyway. It's amazing what stuff you'll find there sometimes, if you install much software - it's worth cleaning it out from time to time. Lets you log in faster..
Uhh, I dunno. 'perl-suid' and 'lynx' do not conflict on my box. (I had 'perl-suid' and 'lynx-ssl' installed - I just removed 'lynx-ssl' in favor of 'lynx' and it worked fine.) Check 'apt-cache show perl-suid lynx'. If you still can't figure it out, email me [see slashdot profile] the apt-cache output; I'll take a look.
No, the same issues can potentially occur on both debian and redhat.
Whether they do or not depends on the quality of the packaging job. It has very little to do with apt, dpkg, or rpm. The beauty of the Debian package archive is much much deeper than the fact that it is compatible with apt. The fact is that the Debian package collection is much better maintained than the equivalent RPM packages from a lot of sources, thanks largely to the Debian policy manual, and the fact that policy violations are considered serious bugs and usually fixed pretty fast.
A lot of people seem to think apt-get is a magic bullet. It's not. It's a very nice interface to a package archive which was already a work of art.
You mean "that haven't propagated to the mirrors yet".
Talk to the administrator of whichever mirror you use, find out what mirror software / config they use, tweak it to download the Packages files last, and submit your changes to said administrator.
Or offer to buy more bandwidth for master.debian.org and the mirrors, so the propagation delays are shorter.
Or just live with the problem. (:
In general, 2.95.x is used - it is more stable and produces faster code. (Yes, you heard right. 3.0 was a regression in code optimization. I guess 3.1 is better.) For some architectures, this is not the case, and 3.0 is the default compiler.
Any package which works best with a specific compiler can require that specific compiler if it wants. C++ programs in particular might have those sorts of requirements. Just remember that Debian is much bigger than i386 and "the best compiler" usually has more to do with your target architecture than your specific program.
And also almost doubling the number of architectures. Potato supports i386, m68k, alpha, sparc, arm, powerpc. Woody supports these plus mips, mipsel, hppa, s390, and ia64. Keeping 11 sets of binary packages in sync and relatively bug-free is not as easy as it may seem.
One might note that as AJ has said in the past, the long release cycle this time was due to some fundamental changes like the package pool and crypto-in-main. Still, I'll wait until woody+1 is released before I applaud the newfound efficiency of the release cycle. (:
Woody is 2.4-ready (i.e. all the tools that care should work fine with 2.4, unlike with potato where things like modutils are too old). Many/most of us compile a custom kernel after installation anyway, so this is all we need.
In terms of pre-built kernels, woody has both 2.2.20 and 2.4.17. There are even boot floppy images for the 2.4.17 kernel which include ext3fs and reiserfs.
Uhhh. Are you sure it's the same technology? I ask because another method of doing "naked eye" 3-D involves an LCD-like display which gives you different images depending on your viewing angle, so the left and right eye get different images assuming you aren't too far away from the screen. I don't know about today but in the past, having to calculate 6-9 images per frame (to cover all the viewing angles) was too hard to do in real time so they just showed still images. Or maybe they just didn't have the necessary support in popular applications for that rather odd mode of operation.
It sounds to me as though that might be what you saw in Paris.
<sigh>, I think you're wasting your virtual breath. There are people who simply want to believe George W Bush is a horrible religious nut out to destroy science and free society and bring back the Victorian age. I think they are the same people who, a few years ago, felt the desperate need to believe Dan Quayle was a moron simply because he believed the cue card in front of him at a spelling bee. (Actually that last bit can't be strictly true for the slashdotters - imagine the irony of spelling flames on slashdot.)
Well it should be "We need laws to make this illegal, not just illegal ... oh wait ..."
Actually Dolly Parton. Whitney Houston only covered it.
(Yes, I am ashamed to know that. (: )
So, in the future, the pen will be mightier than the 'board?
Well - I guess I've just read too much Milton Friedman. Jobs, like companies, aren't an end - they're a means. The end is useful output: goods and services. If open source software can harness a method of producing software better (i.e. cheaper and/or more desirable) than what Microsoft can do, then by Friedman's economics, Microsoft is wasteful and society is better off without them. Those people who are (still hypothetically) laid off from big software houses because the economy no longer needs their jobs - those people can go do something else productive to society, and society benefits by having more goods and services for a given amount of effort. (Which in turn translates to lower prices for the consumer versus per capita income.)
Are individual workers better off? Any societal change produces perceived winners and losers. If all you ever wanted to do in life was get paid six figures to write shrink-wrap software, and you really have no other marketable skills, then open source is quite a threat to you. But on the other hand, if you run a factory and need some custom software written, you win because the programmer-for-hire market is more competitive.
Put another way, the Microsoft "open source is unamerican" line is Luddite. Remember the Luddites? They too believed that it was better to keep everybody employed at their current jobs than to produce goods [and services] efficiently.
Of course there are other ways to look at it. In a global economy, one might say that the loss of Microsoft is bad for America because it would adversely affect the balance of trade. Depends on your perspective whether that's good, bad or indifferent.....
Perhaps. I think a point which many people don't get, and which Microsoft really really wants people not to get, is that open source software is at most a threat to closed-source software vendors. When they decry the GPL as "un-American" or "anti-capitalist", what they mean is "anti-software-vendor".
This is incredibly myopic, and I can't believe anyone would take such a POV seriously. If Microsoft were to shrivel up and die tomorrow because someone else (say, the open source community) produced products that were so much better that Microsoft could no longer compete - how does that hurt anyone outside of Microsoft? It could only be a good thing for the vast majority of businesses, whose livelihoods are tied up in making widgets, or selling groceries, or treating sick people, or building highways, or managing hedge funds.
Basically Microsoft wants us to think "what's good for GM is good for America" with s/GM/MS/g. I don't buy it. Companies are a means, not an end. And it is, IMHO, awfully arrogant to say otherwise.
The only way the consumer is not best served by the market making a choice that cuts out an inferior competitor - is if the market is acting on incomplete information and the inferior competitor is in fact not inferior at all. But for Microsoft to complain about being defeated by FUD would be rather ... ironic ...
Sounds like Pavel Machek's project for running Gtk+ over curses. (Yes, this one is for real.) That's from 1999 - I doubt he's still maintaining it....
Yeah! Sometimes I hear about how fast Opera is, or how fast Konq has become, etc, and I always think the same thing: I'll bet the one making the claim isn't using a Pentium-166! I don't remember the last time I ran an X server on this thing - I can run one, but X applications tend to be relative resource hogs, and text mode is so much easier on the eyes. (116x60 on a 21", baby! Thanks, svgatextmode!)
Plus, I am blissfully clueless about those so-called "huge ads" on Slashdot. What is that all about? I've never seen any huge ads on Slashdot....
(:
You don't sound like a very open-minded person, but...
Depends on what you mean by "share". You are paying for a use of the material. You are not paying for distribution rights. The use you paid for is "home use", which roughly covers what you do with things in everyday life. Not reselling, and not redistributing.
That's fine, that's covered by regular "home use", and it's something you've paid for. What you can't do is charge for admission. That's "commercial use". You also can't redistribute the music for other people to make their own copies of it - that's redistribution.
Believe it or not, clubs and raves have to pay pretty hefty prices to do what they do. They do not just go to Rhino Records and pick out some tunes. They pay thousands of dollars per year to ASCAP and BMI, organisations who (purportedly) then compensate the copyright holders. So your analogy doesn't hold up.