The quote continues being true. IMO the reason why Linus is dropping BK is the license and flamewars - BK is great, but maybe the free alternatives have got better in those 3 years and now they're "good enought" to use with the kernel. It'd be certainly better if bitmover would make BK free, but that's not going to happen.
..I hate how everybody has critized Linus (specially the RMS/GNU front), when he never forced people to use BK.
I mean, when Linus started to use BK he promised things would be at least as good as they were before - and it's true (they've been better in fact), people still gets -rc's in GNU diff format at kernel.org. The official way of distributing patches has always been "clean", I don't know why people whined so much about BK, it's OK for me if Linus wants to use a propietary tool himself, as long as I'm not forced to use it. I've certainly not used or needed to use it for years, and I'm one of those people who tries -mm and -rcs all the time...
(and those who claim that people should behave differently and "give example" just because they're "leaders" can go to hell)
Open Source is a movement started allmost a decade later than Free Software, by Linus Torvalds & Co. in order to STEAL the efforts of the Free Software movement, forgeting the ethical reasons that created GNU, leaving ONLY the practical advantages of the development model created by Free Software.
Oh, I see. So they're the "evil guys". IOW, if you don't give a shit about free software, RMS and GNU, automatically you're (for some reason I can't guess) not defending users' freedom.
Go read some history.
See, the fact that GNU exist does NOT means they're the "one and only" choice by any means and that they're right. I, for one, don't agree with many of GNU points of view (see for example all the trolling about linus & bitkeeper despite the fact that it was always a personal option for those who like it, and the fact that the official kernel releases are released in GNU diff format), and recent history (Debian treating the FDL as non-DFSG compliant) are just some examples. In fact one of the thinks I'd have always wanted to do is creating a parallel movement to GNU which _really_ cares about users' freedom
but Mr. Torvalds is not really against proprietary software, he actually uses propritetary software, and gives a shit about users freedom. He just used the Free Software comunity to get his project done. He really doesn't care about our philosofy.
And you obviously are quoting him from...?
It's amazing how people manages to twist things. Linus has repeatdly explained why he uses propietary software, and I don't remember him saying "it was because I hate open source". Sight...
The format is irrelevant; the point is that you're sending something that's not plain text.
Dude, it's 2005, we're not in 1950. Sylpheed (my MUA) doesn't support HTML view of mails but it can parse the text and shot it as plain text.
Besides, I like the fact of being able to use things like bold fonts instead of _imagining_ or *imagining* bold fonts. Text formatting is certainly useful, and I'm all for it even for text-based MUAs. Another problem is people abusing it and people linking images instead of attaching it but we are in 2005, not being able to write with colors in a computer with a 256 MB video card and a 21" TFT is stupid.
Besides, microsoft is doing some cool things. Like this friendly site which even has a javascript RSS reader (and one of the default feeds is slashdot!:)
In a Google vs Yahoo war, the real loser is:
(mini-dumrol)(dum-da!)
Microsoft search.
Really? Take a look to MSN 7, where they put a text field with a "search" button in the main window which suprisingly takes you to a msn search windows (which BTW don't follows system configuration and opens the window in IE even if you configured other browser as the default one for your system...) In fact, they'll probaby include their msn search bar as a default option in the messenger installer, so they'll have +90% of the computers with a msn search bar installed. They may won a big percentage of users just by doing this. They're Microsoft, they control the OS people uses to type "google.com" or "yahoo.com"
Besides, microsoft is doing some cool things. Like this friendly site which even has a javascript RSS reader (and one of the default feeds is slashdot!:)
Woah woah. Let me just stop and laugh for a moment. You're telling me that random developer X can do a better job of making a package than the people who develop the friggin' distro? Are you kidding??
They won't do "packaging" better, simply it will be better. The developer of project foo may say: "foo version 2.15-b depends on project bar version 1.1 to run properly", and everyone would follow it. Distros still could package themselves in a different way but that won't bee too common, and at that point people may tell "hey, your fedora package don't works properly in debian". My point is that a common package format
WONT SOLVE ANYTHING. Autopackage doesn't solve anything because it's a better format, but because it has a different philosophy. It doesn't matter how good are deb or rpm - they will NEVER work in another distro just because of their philoshopie
yes, but that's not the main problem IMO. Package formats are often tought as the number 1 offender when it comes to inter-distro compatibility, but that's not the main problem. The main problem is that package mainteinance happens at distro-level, instead of developer-level. What we need is to move as much mainteinance work to the developers. It's the number 1 cause of problems: A package in debian may require "libfoo", but in fedora it may depend on "foo" or "foo+randomstring". If all those things would be done at developer level, they'd be more coherent, and inter-distro compatibility would be greater. Package format would be irrelevant.
And this is why autopackage is great. It doesn't tries to replace apt/rpm/gentoo, it just tries to be a good way of distributing software, and encourages developers to create their own "autopackage packages" so they work in every distro
...or at least, it does not exist in linux 2.6 today, so it may be the same in windows
Yes, you read well. "swap files" are as fast as "swap partitions" under 2.6, altough not many people seems to have realized. I've not the link at the lkml messages from Andrew Morton explaining why at hand, but the "post halloween" 2.6 doc says it too. As I understand it, its "simple": Swap files bypass completely the filesystem layer in linux 2.6 so there is basically zero advantage in using partitions instead of files. Windows probably does the same, I guess, since it was designed from the start to have "swap files".
You still face the defragmentation problem, but that's a minor issue - it's not impossible to create a contiguous file, in fact when you install a system most of the filesytem will be almost void and the swap file probably will be contiguous. I doubt you could measure any performance improvement in using swap partitions vs swap files these days.
In short, unless you've very good reasons to use a partition, you probably should use files. Partitioning is usually the hardest problem for newbies when trying linux, and not having to use a partition for the swap can help.
...I got moderated as "funny", despite being a realistic propose.
OK, now imagine: I put the mouse over the icon. If I left there x seconds, system shows you a big (say 300x200 or something) video at the left of how the app looks when its running. Or show the video as background, or something. Sure it'll take resources, but is not a bad idea IMHO...
Why not.avi files instead of.png icons? Sure, it will eat more resources, but it'd be great to see a animation (a real animation, not just a.gif or a jumping/flash effect) each time I press or put the mouse over it.
Surprisingly enough, they have not scanned the Holy Bible yet. You think with it being the #1 best selling book of al time they would have, but I guess not.
That's probably the reason they don't bother - everyone has it. Besides, lots of people have put the bible on internet, you can't say the same with another books
In the Hurd, the operating system is implemented as a set of servers, and each runs in its own address space. Of course there are some essential system services which better not crash, or the system will reboot immediately as a last attempt to salvage the situation. But for many other services, a crash is not fatal. If a filesystem server crashes (except for the root filesystem), you can just restart it (or it is restarted automatically by the system). Dead-locks require manual interaction, and you will have to kill the hanging server to remove it from the system and release associated resources.
Unfortunately, Hurd won't save us from hangs. Drivers can hang your machine, period. A good example of that is X.org. It runs in userspace, but touching the wrong register on the graphics card will block your PCI bus. Hurd won't be different - be it in userspace or not, if you touch the wrong register you machine will hang. With no oportunity of doing anything.
We already have userspace filesystems in linux - just check FUSE in the -mm tree, or the userspace drivers infrastructure someone posted a couple of weeks ago in the lkml. If "having everything in userspace" starts having sense (which won't have, at least with today's hardware) I'd rather work in porting linux drivers to userspace (like they already did in 2.6 with libusb) than using a OS like hurd, where developers have started doing something so wrong like letting apps to do their own mm.
Slashdot Mirror
Never?
The quote continues being true. IMO the reason why Linus is dropping BK is the license and flamewars - BK is great, but maybe the free alternatives have got better in those 3 years and now they're "good enought" to use with the kernel. It'd be certainly better if bitmover would make BK free, but that's not going to happen.
Why not use CVS?
Now that's a great idea. I'm sure Linus didn't even look at that option when he decided to use a SCM!
..I hate how everybody has critized Linus (specially the RMS/GNU front), when he never forced people to use BK.
I mean, when Linus started to use BK he promised things would be at least as good as they were before - and it's true (they've been better in fact), people still gets -rc's in GNU diff format at kernel.org. The official way of distributing patches has always been "clean", I don't know why people whined so much about BK, it's OK for me if Linus wants to use a propietary tool himself, as long as I'm not forced to use it. I've certainly not used or needed to use it for years, and I'm one of those people who tries -mm and -rcs all the time...
(and those who claim that people should behave differently and "give example" just because they're "leaders" can go to hell)
Open Source is a movement started allmost a decade later than Free Software, by Linus Torvalds & Co. in order to STEAL the efforts of the Free Software movement, forgeting the ethical reasons that created GNU, leaving ONLY the practical advantages of the development model created by Free Software.
Oh, I see. So they're the "evil guys". IOW, if you don't give a shit about free software, RMS and GNU, automatically you're (for some reason I can't guess) not defending users' freedom.
Go read some history.
See, the fact that GNU exist does NOT means they're the "one and only" choice by any means and that they're right. I, for one, don't agree with many of GNU points of view (see for example all the trolling about linus & bitkeeper despite the fact that it was always a personal option for those who like it, and the fact that the official kernel releases are released in GNU diff format), and recent history (Debian treating the FDL as non-DFSG compliant) are just some examples. In fact one of the thinks I'd have always wanted to do is creating a parallel movement to GNU which _really_ cares about users' freedom
but Mr. Torvalds is not really against proprietary software, he actually uses propritetary software, and gives a shit about users freedom. He just used the Free Software comunity to get his project done. He really doesn't care about our philosofy.
And you obviously are quoting him from...?
It's amazing how people manages to twist things. Linus has repeatdly explained why he uses propietary software, and I don't remember him saying "it was because I hate open source". Sight...
No.
Why? It works for ARM - ARM doesn't makes chips, they just design them and sells the "IP" to companies who want them.
I'm going to go read The Register.
No kidding...The register is great! I just checked it and saw this entry about Jobs going to IKEA!. Or should I say iKea?
The format is irrelevant; the point is that you're sending something that's not plain text.
Dude, it's 2005, we're not in 1950. Sylpheed (my MUA) doesn't support HTML view of mails but it can parse the text and shot it as plain text.
Besides, I like the fact of being able to use things like bold fonts instead of _imagining_ or *imagining* bold fonts. Text formatting is certainly useful, and I'm all for it even for text-based MUAs. Another problem is people abusing it and people linking images instead of attaching it but we are in 2005, not being able to write with colors in a computer with a 256 MB video card and a 21" TFT is stupid.
This is frikkin' awesome!I only got 1406MB
Apparently it increases at the same rate than the javascript counter they put in the main page
"My pr0n videos don't get filtered so easily to the internet!"
Not that'd be a great cathphrase
"Talent" is not something exclusive to MIT people.
I wonder if the code behind start.com/1 is shared source. It has a nice javascript RSS reader I'd like to copy *cought*
Besides, microsoft is doing some cool things. Like this friendly site which even has a javascript RSS reader (and one of the default feeds is slashdot! :)
broken link check this one instead
In a Google vs Yahoo war, the real loser is: (mini-dumrol)(dum-da!) Microsoft search.
:)
Really? Take a look to MSN 7, where they put a text field with a "search" button in the main window which suprisingly takes you to a msn search windows (which BTW don't follows system configuration and opens the window in IE even if you configured other browser as the default one for your system...) In fact, they'll probaby include their msn search bar as a default option in the messenger installer, so they'll have +90% of the computers with a msn search bar installed. They may won a big percentage of users just by doing this. They're Microsoft, they control the OS people uses to type "google.com" or "yahoo.com"
Besides, microsoft is doing some cool things. Like this friendly site which even has a javascript RSS reader (and one of the default feeds is slashdot!
and the distro package management system handles dependencies and versions well.
Indeed. It does handle it well. If you don't give a fuck if that same package is going to work in other distro
What part of INTER-DISTRO COMPATIBILITY, do you exactly don't understand?
They won't do "packaging" better, simply it will be better. The developer of project foo may say: "foo version 2.15-b depends on project bar version 1.1 to run properly", and everyone would follow it. Distros still could package themselves in a different way but that won't bee too common, and at that point people may tell "hey, your fedora package don't works properly in debian". My point is that a common package format
WONT SOLVE ANYTHING. Autopackage doesn't solve anything because it's a better format, but because it has a different philosophy. It doesn't matter how good are deb or rpm - they will NEVER work in another distro just because of their philoshopie
yes, but that's not the main problem IMO. Package formats are often tought as the number 1 offender when it comes to inter-distro compatibility, but that's not the main problem. The main problem is that package mainteinance happens at distro-level, instead of developer-level. What we need is to move as much mainteinance work to the developers. It's the number 1 cause of problems: A package in debian may require "libfoo", but in fedora it may depend on "foo" or "foo+randomstring". If all those things would be done at developer level, they'd be more coherent, and inter-distro compatibility would be greater. Package format would be irrelevant.
And this is why autopackage is great. It doesn't tries to replace apt/rpm/gentoo, it just tries to be a good way of distributing software, and encourages developers to create their own "autopackage packages" so they work in every distro
...or at least, it does not exist in linux 2.6 today, so it may be the same in windows
Yes, you read well. "swap files" are as fast as "swap partitions" under 2.6, altough not many people seems to have realized. I've not the link at the lkml messages from Andrew Morton explaining why at hand, but the "post halloween" 2.6 doc says it too. As I understand it, its "simple": Swap files bypass completely the filesystem layer in linux 2.6 so there is basically zero advantage in using partitions instead of files. Windows probably does the same, I guess, since it was designed from the start to have "swap files".
You still face the defragmentation problem, but that's a minor issue - it's not impossible to create a contiguous file, in fact when you install a system most of the filesytem will be almost void and the swap file probably will be contiguous. I doubt you could measure any performance improvement in using swap partitions vs swap files these days.
In short, unless you've very good reasons to use a partition, you probably should use files. Partitioning is usually the hardest problem for newbies when trying linux, and not having to use a partition for the swap can help.
...I got moderated as "funny", despite being a realistic propose.
OK, now imagine: I put the mouse over the icon. If I left there x seconds, system shows you a big (say 300x200 or something) video at the left of how the app looks when its running. Or show the video as background, or something. Sure it'll take resources, but is not a bad idea IMHO...
Why not .avi files instead of .png icons? Sure, it will eat more resources, but it'd be great to see a animation (a real animation, not just a .gif or a jumping/flash effect) each time I press or put the mouse over it.
Surprisingly enough, they have not scanned the Holy Bible yet. You think with it being the #1 best selling book of al time they would have, but I guess not.
That's probably the reason they don't bother - everyone has it. Besides, lots of people have put the bible on internet, you can't say the same with another books
With all of these great works online, will the masses bother to read them?
Well, you can be sure they won't read if they don't have them...
In the Hurd, the operating system is implemented as a set of servers, and each runs in its own address space. Of course there are some essential system services which better not crash, or the system will reboot immediately as a last attempt to salvage the situation. But for many other services, a crash is not fatal. If a filesystem server crashes (except for the root filesystem), you can just restart it (or it is restarted automatically by the system). Dead-locks require manual interaction, and you will have to kill the hanging server to remove it from the system and release associated resources.
Unfortunately, Hurd won't save us from hangs. Drivers can hang your machine, period. A good example of that is X.org. It runs in userspace, but touching the wrong register on the graphics card will block your PCI bus. Hurd won't be different - be it in userspace or not, if you touch the wrong register you machine will hang. With no oportunity of doing anything.
We already have userspace filesystems in linux - just check FUSE in the -mm tree, or the userspace drivers infrastructure someone posted a couple of weeks ago in the lkml. If "having everything in userspace" starts having sense (which won't have, at least with today's hardware) I'd rather work in porting linux drivers to userspace (like they already did in 2.6 with libusb) than using a OS like hurd, where developers have started doing something so wrong like letting apps to do their own mm.
Along with the coding style (Documentation/CodingStyle), I'd recommend also reading Documentation/SubmittingDrivers
6% is quite amazing considering its short life time.