If you want to go cheaper, got fo an NSLU from Linksys (http://nslu2-linuxorg). It's a 100 dollar ARM board w/ Ethernet, and two USB ports. It comes running Linux, but there has been some work with getting NetBSD running on it according to the mailing lists. It's a 233MHz ARM, 32MB RAM, 8MB Flash. It also has 1 1/2 serial port which you can solder on with little effort. The 1/2 serial port is only pinned out for an RX, no way to transmit with it, so it's kinda useless in that regard.
How the hell do these things really get past Beta testing? And what the hell are the programmers/testers doing with the Golden Masters that are sent to the pressing company?
Slashdot Mirror of Text:
---
PHP's anti-Apache2 FUD
My biggest objection to PHP is the anti-Apache2 FUD that they spread. Indeed, they seem to be the ones primarily responsible for the anti-Apache2 FUD. This is unfortunate, since there are few remaining legitimate reasons for avoiding Apache2, and it's a shame that they feel the need to manufacture one.
So, to quote the PHP docs:
Do not use Apache 2.0.x and PHP in a production environment neither on Unix nor on Windows.
This is further clarified in the FAQ with a long description which starts, unfortunately, with a misconception, namely:
The major feature that draws people to Apache 2 is threading.
It then goes on to explain why threading is, potentially, a problem with PHP, why this is not, technically, PHP's fault, and so PHP cant fix it. All very correct, really. And, so, very logically, it concludes that there's no reason to move to Apache 2, and that everyone should stick with Apache 1.3.
This argument suffers from one main flaw. That is, that the initial assumption, from which everything flows, is just plain wrong.
Yes, threading is cool, and is a major shinyness with Apache 2. However, it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the only, or even the main, reason for moving to Apache 2.0. There are a *lot* of other much better reasons for moving to Apache 2.0, none of which pose any threat to PHP. I've covered those in my OnLamp article, and so won't repeat them here. Apache 2.0, running with a prefork MPM, works great with PHP, and gives you all those other benefits.
The additional benefit is a little more subtle. Apache 1.3 is becoming "legacy". Meaning that the real developers are focusing more on 2.0. The 2.0 docs are better. 2.0 (and 2.1) gets the new features, the documentation improvements, and the newly clarified directives and error messages. Thus, 1.3 becomes harder and harder to support. So, increasingly, the PHP questions are coming from folks that are running 1.3, and the solutions offered just don't work, because they are things added in 2.0 to solve exactly the irritations that these folks are having.
So, I entreat the PHP folks to remove this incorrect anti-Apache 2.0 tirade from their documentation, and replace it with a more balanced and correct explanation of the issues involved, and the recommended solution. Namely, that people go ahead and move to Apache 2.0, but stick with a Prefork MPM. This gives them most of the benefits of Apache 2.0, but removes the irritating threading issues. Nobody blames PHP for those threading issues (at least, people who have taken the trouble to actually understand the issue don't), so there's no slight on the PHP developers implied here. I'd be glad to participate in this to any degree that you like. I actually enjoy writing documentation, and I'm increasingly using PHP for my own work.
Please?
The problem that PHP can be linked against non-threadsafe libraries, and this causes issues with Apache 2 when it's using the Worker MPM. However, if PHP died and takes the thread with it Apache simple restarts it. I had Apache2 and PHP in this configuration for almost a year, and expect for threads randomly restarting because of PHP, I had no issues. If you want to solve the thread problem, change the MPM to prefork (which is the default last I looked), which emulates the Apache1 behavior, and stops that problem.
The Savane project is another SourceForge-based product. It's what's currently powering Savannah, and it features MySQL compatiable, localization, and a simple setup and configuration system. Although it lacks some of GForge's featuers, most of the same functionality is there and Savane is, IMHO, easier to setup on systems when you can't use apt-get to install gforge. It's definately worth a look.
Microsoft need to get there act togeter, because the fact that a machine could be "0wned" while installed a system upgrade is just poor design. They don't care about anyone expect the side of there wallets, and quite frankly it digestioning how insecure Windows really is.
Linux makes it very easy to install new packages and upgrade packages from sources father away from the vendor. If a vendor tried to release a patch using delta versioning, it could totally wreck a system. Since neither RPM nor DPKG are designed to handle checking md5sum hashs against each file, and making sure the patch can be installed safely, it will have to wait until this feature is incomporaited into either system.
Open-Xchange is a very promising M$ Exchange replacement, but until they have an upgrade path from Exchange, we can't upgrade. If programs to convert away from Exchange were to exist, it would break our M$ lockin here.
I don't really see this stopping hackers that are determined. I use my own cell phone as a modem to transfer data all the time. Since it lets celluar signals through, it would be very easy to just connect to the net like this.
The articles claims it to be the "biggest" Linux based supercomputer with over 500 terabytes of storage and 1000 gigabytes of memory per Altix node.
Imange all the p0rn I could store on that thing !
Actually, if you enable the root user, and then log out, you can get Mac OS X to log you in by using the username: System Administrator and the root password.
Slashdot Mirror
It means On the other hand
If you want to go cheaper, got fo an NSLU from Linksys (http://nslu2-linuxorg). It's a 100 dollar ARM board w/ Ethernet, and two USB ports. It comes running Linux, but there has been some work with getting NetBSD running on it according to the mailing lists. It's a 233MHz ARM, 32MB RAM, 8MB Flash. It also has 1 1/2 serial port which you can solder on with little effort. The 1/2 serial port is only pinned out for an RX, no way to transmit with it, so it's kinda useless in that regard.
How the hell do these things really get past Beta testing? And what the hell are the programmers/testers doing with the Golden Masters that are sent to the pressing company?
Slashdot Mirror of Text: --- PHP's anti-Apache2 FUD My biggest objection to PHP is the anti-Apache2 FUD that they spread. Indeed, they seem to be the ones primarily responsible for the anti-Apache2 FUD. This is unfortunate, since there are few remaining legitimate reasons for avoiding Apache2, and it's a shame that they feel the need to manufacture one. So, to quote the PHP docs: Do not use Apache 2.0.x and PHP in a production environment neither on Unix nor on Windows. This is further clarified in the FAQ with a long description which starts, unfortunately, with a misconception, namely: The major feature that draws people to Apache 2 is threading. It then goes on to explain why threading is, potentially, a problem with PHP, why this is not, technically, PHP's fault, and so PHP cant fix it. All very correct, really. And, so, very logically, it concludes that there's no reason to move to Apache 2, and that everyone should stick with Apache 1.3. This argument suffers from one main flaw. That is, that the initial assumption, from which everything flows, is just plain wrong. Yes, threading is cool, and is a major shinyness with Apache 2. However, it is not, by any stretch of the imagination, the only, or even the main, reason for moving to Apache 2.0. There are a *lot* of other much better reasons for moving to Apache 2.0, none of which pose any threat to PHP. I've covered those in my OnLamp article, and so won't repeat them here. Apache 2.0, running with a prefork MPM, works great with PHP, and gives you all those other benefits. The additional benefit is a little more subtle. Apache 1.3 is becoming "legacy". Meaning that the real developers are focusing more on 2.0. The 2.0 docs are better. 2.0 (and 2.1) gets the new features, the documentation improvements, and the newly clarified directives and error messages. Thus, 1.3 becomes harder and harder to support. So, increasingly, the PHP questions are coming from folks that are running 1.3, and the solutions offered just don't work, because they are things added in 2.0 to solve exactly the irritations that these folks are having. So, I entreat the PHP folks to remove this incorrect anti-Apache 2.0 tirade from their documentation, and replace it with a more balanced and correct explanation of the issues involved, and the recommended solution. Namely, that people go ahead and move to Apache 2.0, but stick with a Prefork MPM. This gives them most of the benefits of Apache 2.0, but removes the irritating threading issues. Nobody blames PHP for those threading issues (at least, people who have taken the trouble to actually understand the issue don't), so there's no slight on the PHP developers implied here. I'd be glad to participate in this to any degree that you like. I actually enjoy writing documentation, and I'm increasingly using PHP for my own work. Please?
The problem that PHP can be linked against non-threadsafe libraries, and this causes issues with Apache 2 when it's using the Worker MPM. However, if PHP died and takes the thread with it Apache simple restarts it. I had Apache2 and PHP in this configuration for almost a year, and expect for threads randomly restarting because of PHP, I had no issues. If you want to solve the thread problem, change the MPM to prefork (which is the default last I looked), which emulates the Apache1 behavior, and stops that problem.
NetBSD 2.0 is dead !
REASON - NFS used with in 10 words of the word secure.
But you just used NFS within 10 words of the word secure.
" It's quite bigger and noisier than a standard projector, but most of our living rooms look like electronic junkyards anyway, don't they?"
I don't have a living room you insentive clod !
And once people said that 1200 bps was all they needed ...
The Savane project is another SourceForge-based product. It's what's currently powering Savannah, and it features MySQL compatiable, localization, and a simple setup and configuration system. Although it lacks some of GForge's featuers, most of the same functionality is there and Savane is, IMHO, easier to setup on systems when you can't use apt-get to install gforge. It's definately worth a look.
I suspose that's one way to have an outer space experience ...
... that human error can happen even in the most expensive projects.
Closed Source vs. Open Source flamewar starting in three, two, one ...
Close Encounters Of the Thrid Kind anyone ?
Going up ?
Microsoft need to get there act togeter, because the fact that a machine could be "0wned" while installed a system upgrade is just poor design. They don't care about anyone expect the side of there wallets, and quite frankly it digestioning how insecure Windows really is.
In responce to your sig, maybe bread was the best thing before sliced bread ?
Linux makes it very easy to install new packages and upgrade packages from sources father away from the vendor. If a vendor tried to release a patch using delta versioning, it could totally wreck a system. Since neither RPM nor DPKG are designed to handle checking md5sum hashs against each file, and making sure the patch can be installed safely, it will have to wait until this feature is incomporaited into either system.
Open-Xchange is a very promising M$ Exchange replacement, but until they have an upgrade path from Exchange, we can't upgrade. If programs to convert away from Exchange were to exist, it would break our M$ lockin here.
PC Load Letter: Primary Castette Load Letter Sized Paper .... What, I actually read printer manuals (the HP LaserJet 4 has that same message)
I didn't relieze it took 20 minutes to /. a site, I thought it took less.
I don't really see this stopping hackers that are determined. I use my own cell phone as a modem to transfer data all the time. Since it lets celluar signals through, it would be very easy to just connect to the net like this.
The articles claims it to be the "biggest" Linux based supercomputer with over 500 terabytes of storage and 1000 gigabytes of memory per Altix node. Imange all the p0rn I could store on that thing !
When I tryed to access this article when it hit the mainpage, I first got:
503 Service Unavailable
Then I got:
500 Internal Server Error
Maybe a creepy message of things to come, or maybe it's just coinicende. I leave it to the jury to decide
Actually, if you enable the root user, and then log out, you can get Mac OS X to log you in by using the username: System Administrator and the root password.