I am not the most knowledgable concerning the ports systems. I have made only one port. Maybe you can try one of the macros. If you want to install elsewhere besides/usr/local, you can enter 'make install PREFIX=/usr/blotto'. I am sure there is a way to make this permanent if you desire (/etc/make.conf probably).
Also, there may be hope for you in the unification of the BSD port/package systems: Open Packages.
A very useful tool: pkg_version. Try pkg_version -l '<' to see what ports are out-of-date.
You can use it to make sure the software you have installed is up-to-date. It is a port for v3.x systems while it comes with v4.x systems.
It even has an option (-c) to output a script to upgrade your current ports. I do not know if it checks dependencies to upgrade the software that other upgrades will depend on first. I just copied and pasted what I needed.
I personally enjoyed the Foundation series and Ender's Game. I was not all that thrilled by the subsequent books following Ender's Game.
On a side note, I first read Ender's Game in Fantasy and Science Fiction in novella form. I wonder if I still have my collection somewhere in my house or maybe my parents' house. I will have to check this Thanksgiving.
No Bush people were involved as far I have heard. According to ABC News they were sample ballots handed out by volunteers. I assume they were the people helping out at the polling booths. For all we know, they were all Democrats.
Public domain software quickly can be (and is) changed to proprietary licenses, which are most certainly not free.
The public domain version is still free.
The proprietary version is not. BTW, a GPL license counts as proprietary in the group sense.
You are creating a notion of free that is impossible to attain, and then saying that GPL software doesn't live up to it.
Incorrect. I am trying to define what free speech means. By placing restrictions (akin to censorship), GNU licensed software are not free as in speech. Therefore, they should not be considered free as in speech. Calling them anti-copyright licenses (copyleft) are quite exceptable. That is what they were written for.
Those of us arguing against "free" software are arguing against GNU's notion of the word "free". I admit that I do not like GNU licenses; they are unfriendly to other open source licenses. I really detest the misuse of the word free just for appearances.
Sorry, but people who actually care about Free Software aren't willing to render themselves impotent and their actions meaningless to satisfy a few people who can't understand that freedom is something you have to fight for.
Whose freedom? The people or the software? If it is the people, then they should be able to "say" (write) any code they want. If it is the software, it should be able to be whatever it wants. This might be as a binary or an Artistic license if it so chooses. If you restrict its choice, you have restricted its freedom.
I am sorry, but you are confusing free beer with free speech. I can say whatever I want. If someone decides to say something similar or identical to what I said, they would be using the principle of free speech. No beer is involved.
As long as I do not place restrictions on what they say or how they say it, it is still free speech. Once you start going down the road of restrictions, you come upon censorship. The GPL is the equivalent of censorship in the software world.
And maybe you should read a dictionary (Webster's 2nd edition): free 1. Not under the control or power of another; having liberty; independant
Reread that definition. GPL'd software is under the control of the GPL. That is hypocracy.
Their is no such thing as "free" software in the context that the GNU uses. If it were truly free, no person or license would have any control upon it. Since it is under the control of "another", it is not free as in speech. It is free as in beer but not in speech.
What do you not understand? I am being serious; this would not intended to be sarcastic.
How is an ASP different than any other service which utilizes GPL software? Does this mean that any individual or company which makes a change to GPL'd software and provides a service using it will have to release any changes they make?
Now, technology has allowed people to circumvent the GPL and diminish freedom again. I want to see that fixed.
By fixing it, you will in turn be diminishing the freedom to actually USE software. When people use v3 GPL'd software, they will have to provide any changes to legally use the software. This hits the ASP much like Microsoft's EULA requiring NT Server to provide services instead of NT Workstation.
If GNU suspected someone was using GPL'd code without releasing the source, they would want an audit as well. This is not a shocker. Isn't this how Objective C was obtained?
Now the fines imposed by Microsoft would be a shocker. I think reasonable charges as opposed to the $100,000 I saw mentioned elsewhere in the responses.
Actually, I was really trying to point out that the source code could be compiled on the BSD systems without problems (none that I am aware of).
As for the ports, I have that in many cases a port from FreeBSD can be used on either NetBSD or OpenBSD with little or no changes required. I have heard about the port unification project. It will be very useful.
This is not necessarily true. Some binaries are dependent on files being in different locations than a distribution may have placed them. The most recent RedHat shipped with a beta gcc which will cause trouble with its binaries being run on different Linux distributions. Different libc's can cause problems if you are not careful. Do not forget that hardware platforms dictate different binaries. This is probably why RedHat dropped the sparc platform. I think that was the platform they dropped. Suse still carries it though.
can i run for example binaries compiled for nbsd on fbsd or bsd/os without any kind of emulation?
I believe you need emulation, but I do not know. Fortunately, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD prefer to build software from the source as opposed to sending binaries (i.e., RedHat). As far as I know, the source will build on any of these BSD systems if it can build on one of them.
After running Linux from v0.99.14x to v2.2.12, I have watched the ever changing file layout with much pain. I basically maintained an ancient SLS distribution all those years. I can say with 100% certainty that FreeBSD is much easier to maintain. I will no longer have to face the problems of different libc's not getting along with the compiler. It was a relief to switch.
If you look at Linux with the eyes of psychohistory, you will see the divergence taking place.:)
Though I'd rather have a native version of course.
I have jdk-1.2.2b10 installed on my system. It is native. I have tested it enough to see how stable it is, but I have heard no complaints from other people.
First make sure you have swing downloaded (/usr/ports/java/jfc). Go to/usr/ports/java/jdk12-beta and follow the directions. Enjoy.:)
They have to support RAMBUS in the P4, but do they have to only support RAMBUS? I assume they can still support other memory technologies as well. Anyone know?
Not to mention that BSD has only very very recently added SMP support whereas Linux's has been maturing for years. SMP support has been in FreeBSD (RELEASE) for about two years now. This is according to the release notes for 3.0.
Are you thinking about the advanced SMP code that is coming from BSDi?
Cerf himself, one of those often credited, describes it thus: ''I consider Bob Kahn and myself to be the principal fathers of the specific design, but we were very dependent on the work of others.'' In short, Cerf says, ''I don't think it makes sense to give any one person such a title.''
Gore can be given credit for sponsoring some bills. This is infinitesimal (sp?) with all that was poured into the Internet--I was actually taught NII (National Information Infrastructure) and GII (Global Information Infrastructure) at Purdue.
Items I consider:
How much money did the Baby Bells contribute?
How many people developed it or for it?
IMHO, the Internet would have come along even if Gore had been against it from the beginning. I consider it a group effort and nothing more.
I believe it was in Philadelphia where this happened. They had a huge drop in home burglary. Interestingly enough, they also had a huge increase in "doorknob vandalism". How do we know if those numbers are valid? It might just be another statistic (worse than a damned lie).
Even if they are true, why would you vote for a chief member of the Clinton-Gore administration which wanted the Clipper chip embedded in everything?!?
Slashdot Mirror
Why bother using a system which nobody wants.
Apple appears to want it. Yahoo also wants it.
It has no Java support.
# java -version
java version "1.2.2"
Classic VM (build jdk1.2.2-FreeBSD:root:2000/11/02-14:28, green threads, nojit)
Note: This is not the Linux version.
I am not the most knowledgable concerning the ports systems. I have made only one port. Maybe you can try one of the macros. If you want to install elsewhere besides /usr/local, you can enter 'make install PREFIX=/usr/blotto'. I am sure there is a way to make this permanent if you desire (/etc/make.conf probably).
Also, there may be hope for you in the unification of the BSD port/package systems: Open Packages.
A very useful tool: pkg_version. Try pkg_version -l '<' to see what ports are out-of-date.
You can use it to make sure the software you have installed is up-to-date. It is a port for v3.x systems while it comes with v4.x systems.
It even has an option (-c) to output a script to upgrade your current ports. I do not know if it checks dependencies to upgrade the software that other upgrades will depend on first. I just copied and pasted what I needed.
You must be a Foundation series fan. ;)
I personally enjoyed the Foundation series and Ender's Game. I was not all that thrilled by the subsequent books following Ender's Game.
On a side note, I first read Ender's Game in Fantasy and Science Fiction in novella form. I wonder if I still have my collection somewhere in my house or maybe my parents' house. I will have to check this Thanksgiving.
This is almost as bad as seeing nightly builds with a milestone number in them and then screaming "Mozilla MXX is out!!"
Does this remind anyone else of what just happened in Florida:
Gore is the winner! No he is not. Bush is the winner! No he is not.
He is speaking of irony as opposed to hypocracy.
No Bush people were involved as far I have heard. According to ABC News they were sample ballots handed out by volunteers. I assume they were the people helping out at the polling booths. For all we know, they were all Democrats.
There is a possibility that someone might start an English BSD magazine. Go here for a discussion concerning it.
Is public domain free?
Yes.
Public domain software quickly can be (and is) changed to proprietary licenses, which are most certainly not free.
The public domain version is still free.
The proprietary version is not. BTW, a GPL license counts as proprietary in the group sense.
You are creating a notion of free that is impossible to attain, and then saying that GPL software doesn't live up to it.
Incorrect. I am trying to define what free speech means. By placing restrictions (akin to censorship), GNU licensed software are not free as in speech. Therefore, they should not be considered free as in speech. Calling them anti-copyright licenses (copyleft) are quite exceptable. That is what they were written for.
Those of us arguing against "free" software are arguing against GNU's notion of the word "free". I admit that I do not like GNU licenses; they are unfriendly to other open source licenses. I really detest the misuse of the word free just for appearances.
Sorry, but people who actually care about Free Software aren't willing to render themselves impotent and their actions meaningless to satisfy a few people who can't understand that freedom is something you have to fight for.
Whose freedom? The people or the software? If it is the people, then they should be able to "say" (write) any code they want. If it is the software, it should be able to be whatever it wants. This might be as a binary or an Artistic license if it so chooses. If you restrict its choice, you have restricted its freedom.
I am sorry, but you are confusing free beer with free speech. I can say whatever I want. If someone decides to say something similar or identical to what I said, they would be using the principle of free speech. No beer is involved.
As long as I do not place restrictions on what they say or how they say it, it is still free speech. Once you start going down the road of restrictions, you come upon censorship. The GPL is the equivalent of censorship in the software world.
And maybe you should read a dictionary (Webster's 2nd edition): free 1. Not under the control or power of another; having liberty; independant
Reread that definition. GPL'd software is under the control of the GPL. That is hypocracy.
Their is no such thing as "free" software in the context that the GNU uses. If it were truly free, no person or license would have any control upon it. Since it is under the control of "another", it is not free as in speech. It is free as in beer but not in speech.
What do you not understand? I am being serious; this would not intended to be sarcastic.
How is an ASP different than any other service which utilizes GPL software? Does this mean that any individual or company which makes a change to GPL'd software and provides a service using it will have to release any changes they make?
Now, technology has allowed people to circumvent the GPL and diminish freedom again. I want to see that fixed.
By fixing it, you will in turn be diminishing the freedom to actually USE software. When people use v3 GPL'd software, they will have to provide any changes to legally use the software. This hits the ASP much like Microsoft's EULA requiring NT Server to provide services instead of NT Workstation.
If GNU suspected someone was using GPL'd code without releasing the source, they would want an audit as well. This is not a shocker. Isn't this how Objective C was obtained?
Now the fines imposed by Microsoft would be a shocker. I think reasonable charges as opposed to the $100,000 I saw mentioned elsewhere in the responses.
Actually, I was really trying to point out that the source code could be compiled on the BSD systems without problems (none that I am aware of).
As for the ports, I have that in many cases a port from FreeBSD can be used on either NetBSD or OpenBSD with little or no changes required. I have heard about the port unification project. It will be very useful.
i can run same binaries on every linux distro
:)
This is not necessarily true. Some binaries are dependent on files being in different locations than a distribution may have placed them. The most recent RedHat shipped with a beta gcc which will cause trouble with its binaries being run on different Linux distributions. Different libc's can cause problems if you are not careful. Do not forget that hardware platforms dictate different binaries. This is probably why RedHat dropped the sparc platform. I think that was the platform they dropped. Suse still carries it though.
can i run for example binaries compiled for nbsd on fbsd or bsd/os without any kind of emulation?
I believe you need emulation, but I do not know. Fortunately, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD prefer to build software from the source as opposed to sending binaries (i.e., RedHat). As far as I know, the source will build on any of these BSD systems if it can build on one of them.
After running Linux from v0.99.14x to v2.2.12, I have watched the ever changing file layout with much pain. I basically maintained an ancient SLS distribution all those years. I can say with 100% certainty that FreeBSD is much easier to maintain. I will no longer have to face the problems of different libc's not getting along with the compiler. It was a relief to switch.
If you look at Linux with the eyes of psychohistory, you will see the divergence taking place.
Though I'd rather have a native version of course.
/usr/ports/java/jdk12-beta and follow the directions. Enjoy. :)
I have jdk-1.2.2b10 installed on my system. It is native. I have tested it enough to see how stable it is, but I have heard no complaints from other people.
First make sure you have swing downloaded (/usr/ports/java/jfc). Go to
BSDi donates a lot of code back to FreeBSD. Advanced SMP code is coming from them for example.
IBM obviously holds an interest in the success of Crusoe.
They also hold an interest with the success of OS/2.
...parents' "rights" of late...
I would take it that the author believes parents deserve no rights?
They have to support RAMBUS in the P4, but do they have to only support RAMBUS? I assume they can still support other memory technologies as well. Anyone know?
Not to mention that BSD has only very very recently added SMP support whereas Linux's has been maturing for years.
SMP support has been in FreeBSD (RELEASE) for about two years now. This is according to the release notes for 3.0.
Are you thinking about the advanced SMP code that is coming from BSDi?
- Video card.
- Monitor (Got the shakes after about 30 minutes of being on)
- Hard drive (bad firmware)
- Mouse (Netrek damaged the left button
:))
- CD-ROM twice (Power died and loud operation)
- Motherboard and memory (DOD - fried)
- Memory again (thank you ECC)
Here is a link concerning PCI cards showing up twice: i386/10935. Is this the problem you are referring to?Does IBM put this NIC in their "Big Iron"?
What NE2000 do you have? From glancing at the release notes for FreeBSD, it appears FreeBSD has supported the NE2000 and clones for a long time.
Gore can be given credit for sponsoring some bills. This is infinitesimal (sp?) with all that was poured into the Internet--I was actually taught NII (National Information Infrastructure) and GII (Global Information Infrastructure) at Purdue.
Items I consider:
- How much money did the Baby Bells contribute?
- How many people developed it or for it?
IMHO, the Internet would have come along even if Gore had been against it from the beginning. I consider it a group effort and nothing more.I believe it was in Philadelphia where this happened. They had a huge drop in home burglary. Interestingly enough, they also had a huge increase in "doorknob vandalism". How do we know if those numbers are valid? It might just be another statistic (worse than a damned lie).
Even if they are true, why would you vote for a chief member of the Clinton-Gore administration which wanted the Clipper chip embedded in everything?!?
I think undisclosed would be a better term than proprietary in this case.