You don't know very much about linux do you? I read that there's only three things that you need to restart linux with. One of them would be updating the kernel (surprise surprise). Installing a new bootsplash or changing the boot settings is another (though I'm not sure that actually counts - you aren't forced to restart if you don't want to). I suspect there may be one or two more though I haven't found them in my years of using a linux system.
Firstly, no changing video settings in KDE doesn't require restarting the X-server. It behaves just like windows in that area (even has the same "accept settings" dialog with the same 15 second timelimit).
Secondly, restarting the X-Server takes about 5 seconds (depending on system load - it can take as much as 15 seconds or as little as two if you're using fluxbox) and is done using cntrl alt backspace. You also don't lose the contents of your session.
Thirdly I have had many cases where I've tried not restarting windows and it crashed on me, most notably installing office XP. I'd rather be safe than sorry with an winXP box.
Forthly, I don't see "You're running too much software" as an excuse for needing to restart. I understand that if you have the same computer doing the same thing without installing any programs you won't need to restart Windows XP or NT.
Finally, no there's no reason why if you made games in linux you'd require reboots. I've installed many games on linux without any need for rebooting. I've altered huge amounts of system files without need for restart.
Please actually use linux before you write posts like that. Ignorance is not an excuse.
I don't know that it's the same. I've had my desktop computer on for weeks running linux. I can't say the same for my windows box. As soon as I install a new application I'm surprised if it doesn't say "you have to restart your computer". Pretty much every game does.
I've had to restart my computer in linux to recompile my kernel. Hey wait, that's 50% isn't it?
Definitely. There was a gambling agency that people ripped alot of money off from other people cause they seeded the generator with the amount of milliseconds since midnight and used a public lookup table to generate the random number. Not only is this a stupid way of doing it - it's only security through obscurity cause you only need a few queries to syncronise your clock with the agency's clock, but the idiots actually published their code!!!
Now consider this example - random number generators are anything but secure.
In the stonecutters episode, for example, their house was next to the furthest car-parking space in the power plant carpark. I was wondering about that as I was clicking the link - I was bitterly disappointed!
What about places where you can't have guns, and other relevant laws? At least in Australia, although it's pretty stupid, if you injure someone who's breaking into your house you can go to jail for a long time.
I'm talking about software transparency. Hardware transparency has been available through the NVIDIA drivers for just as long. In fact, I use it with XFree86 v4.3 on Debian.
Ah yes, you're right - though for the MIT thing I was meaning that they still use the MIT versioning system as opposed to MIT controlling what version releases what, which is true. That and the slackware thing. (/me fingers the hypothetical "edit" button)
No, it's just you. The Australian election hasn't been like that, where current issues are headline tv news, as opposed where the candidate is at a particular moment, or who did what fifteen years ago. Even Mark Latham's very "checkered" past blew over in a week or so, and it just got down to issues.
The main problem isn't that people are looking for a correct answer, but that his "facts" (and I use the term loosly in some cases) are projected in a way that is quite blatently deceptive. I have agreed with the intentions behind both of his movies. I don't like George Bush, especially in the way he has handled the situations that have arisen, and I absolutely detest guns and gun ownership. However I also detest his methods of using terminology that is technically correct but encourage connotative thoughts that are factually wrong. I definitely detest the attempted expediency of his methods.
really? I think I'm just getting mixed up with the hoo-haa cause Slackware is usually quite conservative and it was a surprise that they converted to X.Org. All I know is that my distro Debian still hasn't changed over!
Perhaps a better way of thinking about it is to embrace a traditional client-server sence instead of thinking about it as "just a piece of software". Imagine your computer was split up into several other computers. You had one computer controlling the graphics, which has a cool video card in it, another computer controlling the sound, and another computer controlling the internet stuff, etc. The computer that you use would transfer messages over the network saying, for example, "I want you do display this now", and it would display it on the screen. You would naturally say that the computer controlling the graphics is a graphics server, and the computer controlling the sound is the sound server, and the internet controller is the internet server.
Linux is modelled off networks, and that is where the server concept comes from. You are right in that the X server controls the display but it is actually a server in the traditional UT2K3 sense. All the programs actually send messages to it, but instead of sending them over the network like in the example before, they just send it through the system directly to the software. The cool part is that the server doesn't need to be on the computer, it can be over the network - the messages will be sent to the X Server along a different path, so instead of going directly there you'll go along wires and cables, but they're still just messages sent to the server, like the "Give me HTML" messages your browser is sending through the internet.
There is actually nothing really "missing" out of X. 3D accelerators are the driver manufacturer's problem, and so far NVIDIA are brilliant at supporting everything, while ATI are crap. It's just accepted now-a-days. X can probably do everything that Windows can, infact even more, though slightly slower in most cases. They're just now getting into the nitty-gritty eye candy like the shadowing and cool transparency, which incidentely I don't think is supported in Windows (Avalon will support it though I'm sure).
I'm not satisfied with the above answers, so I'm going to try one myself.
The X Windowing System was originally an MIT project for unix (not linux specifically, it works with linux because linux carries on with the unix specification) that was made open source and turned into open source. X is just the name of the system, the 11 is the current version of the specification. 11 has been active since 1988.
The XFree86 organization managed the X-Window-System until version v4.3. Earlier this year, though, they released v4.4 under a license that was thought incompatible with the GPL, which caused a split. Alot of politics went on and alot of people got angry, which caused the birth of the X.Org foundation, which is now industry backed and also backed now by most major distributions such as Slackware (I think they were the first?) and Mandrake, Redhat, Gentoo. Others such as Debian still use XFree86 v4.3 instead of updating to 4.4.
The first version of X.Org was version 6.7 (which carried on the MIT X versioning system), which was released on March 31 this year. Now X11R6.8 has been released, carrying along again with the numbering system.
I know on all university papers a billion means 10^9. They list it's definition at the start of many courses.
But for everything else, we speak English, you speak American. Everything else, incidentely, except for colour in my course of software engineering, which is always spelt color.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't know very much about linux do you? I read that there's only three things that you need to restart linux with. One of them would be updating the kernel (surprise surprise). Installing a new bootsplash or changing the boot settings is another (though I'm not sure that actually counts - you aren't forced to restart if you don't want to). I suspect there may be one or two more though I haven't found them in my years of using a linux system.
Firstly, no changing video settings in KDE doesn't require restarting the X-server. It behaves just like windows in that area (even has the same "accept settings" dialog with the same 15 second timelimit).
Secondly, restarting the X-Server takes about 5 seconds (depending on system load - it can take as much as 15 seconds or as little as two if you're using fluxbox) and is done using cntrl alt backspace. You also don't lose the contents of your session.
Thirdly I have had many cases where I've tried not restarting windows and it crashed on me, most notably installing office XP. I'd rather be safe than sorry with an winXP box.
Forthly, I don't see "You're running too much software" as an excuse for needing to restart. I understand that if you have the same computer doing the same thing without installing any programs you won't need to restart Windows XP or NT.
Finally, no there's no reason why if you made games in linux you'd require reboots. I've installed many games on linux without any need for rebooting. I've altered huge amounts of system files without need for restart.
Please actually use linux before you write posts like that. Ignorance is not an excuse.
I don't know that it's the same. I've had my desktop computer on for weeks running linux. I can't say the same for my windows box. As soon as I install a new application I'm surprised if it doesn't say "you have to restart your computer". Pretty much every game does.
I've had to restart my computer in linux to recompile my kernel. Hey wait, that's 50% isn't it?
But since the apple building merged with the unix building, there's only two buildings. The Microsoft building and the Everyone Else building.
Then they would chant "Give me a vowel!" and there would be laughs all around the stadium.
Definitely. There was a gambling agency that people ripped alot of money off from other people cause they seeded the generator with the amount of milliseconds since midnight and used a public lookup table to generate the random number. Not only is this a stupid way of doing it - it's only security through obscurity cause you only need a few queries to syncronise your clock with the agency's clock, but the idiots actually published their code!!!
Now consider this example - random number generators are anything but secure.
In the stonecutters episode, for example, their house was next to the furthest car-parking space in the power plant carpark. I was wondering about that as I was clicking the link - I was bitterly disappointed!
nope vapourware :P
yep, the BS needle is moving to "high"
What about places where you can't have guns, and other relevant laws? At least in Australia, although it's pretty stupid, if you injure someone who's breaking into your house you can go to jail for a long time.
Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" until you can find a rock.
Not every leader that does something we don't like is labelled "Insane", just the ones who are insane.
As a sidenote, sorry for acting the troll.
South Park is popular outside the US. Jeoperdy is not.
His pointing out that he isn't American was on-topic. Your idiotic post was not.
Yes. It is located behind this 1 megabit encryption.
Just let me read the article before I say "yes"
I'm talking about software transparency. Hardware transparency has been available through the NVIDIA drivers for just as long. In fact, I use it with XFree86 v4.3 on Debian.
Ah yes, you're right - though for the MIT thing I was meaning that they still use the MIT versioning system as opposed to MIT controlling what version releases what, which is true. That and the slackware thing. (/me fingers the hypothetical "edit" button)
No, it's just you. The Australian election hasn't been like that, where current issues are headline tv news, as opposed where the candidate is at a particular moment, or who did what fifteen years ago. Even Mark Latham's very "checkered" past blew over in a week or so, and it just got down to issues.
The main problem isn't that people are looking for a correct answer, but that his "facts" (and I use the term loosly in some cases) are projected in a way that is quite blatently deceptive. I have agreed with the intentions behind both of his movies. I don't like George Bush, especially in the way he has handled the situations that have arisen, and I absolutely detest guns and gun ownership. However I also detest his methods of using terminology that is technically correct but encourage connotative thoughts that are factually wrong. I definitely detest the attempted expediency of his methods.
really? I think I'm just getting mixed up with the hoo-haa cause Slackware is usually quite conservative and it was a surprise that they converted to X.Org. All I know is that my distro Debian still hasn't changed over!
Perhaps a better way of thinking about it is to embrace a traditional client-server sence instead of thinking about it as "just a piece of software". Imagine your computer was split up into several other computers. You had one computer controlling the graphics, which has a cool video card in it, another computer controlling the sound, and another computer controlling the internet stuff, etc. The computer that you use would transfer messages over the network saying, for example, "I want you do display this now", and it would display it on the screen. You would naturally say that the computer controlling the graphics is a graphics server, and the computer controlling the sound is the sound server, and the internet controller is the internet server.
Linux is modelled off networks, and that is where the server concept comes from. You are right in that the X server controls the display but it is actually a server in the traditional UT2K3 sense. All the programs actually send messages to it, but instead of sending them over the network like in the example before, they just send it through the system directly to the software. The cool part is that the server doesn't need to be on the computer, it can be over the network - the messages will be sent to the X Server along a different path, so instead of going directly there you'll go along wires and cables, but they're still just messages sent to the server, like the "Give me HTML" messages your browser is sending through the internet.
There is actually nothing really "missing" out of X. 3D accelerators are the driver manufacturer's problem, and so far NVIDIA are brilliant at supporting everything, while ATI are crap. It's just accepted now-a-days. X can probably do everything that Windows can, infact even more, though slightly slower in most cases. They're just now getting into the nitty-gritty eye candy like the shadowing and cool transparency, which incidentely I don't think is supported in Windows (Avalon will support it though I'm sure).
I'm not satisfied with the above answers, so I'm going to try one myself.
The X Windowing System was originally an MIT project for unix (not linux specifically, it works with linux because linux carries on with the unix specification) that was made open source and turned into open source. X is just the name of the system, the 11 is the current version of the specification. 11 has been active since 1988.
The XFree86 organization managed the X-Window-System until version v4.3. Earlier this year, though, they released v4.4 under a license that was thought incompatible with the GPL, which caused a split. Alot of politics went on and alot of people got angry, which caused the birth of the X.Org foundation, which is now industry backed and also backed now by most major distributions such as Slackware (I think they were the first?) and Mandrake, Redhat, Gentoo. Others such as Debian still use XFree86 v4.3 instead of updating to 4.4.
The first version of X.Org was version 6.7 (which carried on the MIT X versioning system), which was released on March 31 this year. Now X11R6.8 has been released, carrying along again with the numbering system.
I hope that explains it for you.
I know on all university papers a billion means 10^9. They list it's definition at the start of many courses.
But for everything else, we speak English, you speak American. Everything else, incidentely, except for colour in my course of software engineering, which is always spelt color.
Don't worry, I'll take the money for him (if it's for the good of maths!)
As extensions go, nothing beats adblock.