I tried a ftp install last night, but gave up after four hours and 33% completion. That's on a 1.5M connection. For a tertiary boot, that's just not worth it. I think I'll stick with Slackware until I scrounge up $29.95 from the sofa cushions.
Of all the distros, SuSE has the most polish and seems the most professional. But it's buggy as hell. They believe in the "bleeding edge" so much they even include the razor blade in the box. I think the basic problem with SuSE is that they simply have too many packages available to do proper integration testing with all of them.
Except that if all you want is a word processor, TextMaker is a fraction of the size of OpenOffice, and loads in less than a second rather than in less than a minute.
Softmaker is the Opera of office suites. Commercial but full functionality in a tiny footprint.
You're arguing over semantic details. If I release BSD code, and the derivative work does not actively forbid merging by placing the derivative bits under the GPL, I can do so.
BSD licences have no "right to merge"
I never said or implied that the BSD license grants this "right". All I said was that the license allows it. If you acquire a piece of code that's under the BSD license, you are allowed to merge from it. Period. You don't even have to say "please".
Wrong. They certainly do allow it. Stuff from NetBSD gets merged into FreeBSD all the time, and vice versa. What the license doesn't do it COMPEL the privilege of merging.
Get a whole bunch of Linux advocates in a room together with a bunch of BSD advocates. Casually mention licensing. Shortly before all hell breaks loose, one or two people will mention that Linux has not forked because it's under the GPL, while laissez-faire BSD has at least a dozen forks in it. Whereupon Alan will hit Theo over the head with a copy of the GNU Manifesto, rendering him unconscious.
On a more serious note, while this is not official dogma of the FSF, and never will be while they possess at least two brain cells, it has unfortunately become an uncommon but tenacious myth among the GNU discipleship. Peruse any Slashdot story on BSD and you're likely to discover an instance of it.
There's nothing wrong with having hundreds of forks
Unless of course the project is under the GPL, in which case the developers will smugly say that their license prevents forks while discreetly sweeping Emacs/Xemacs and gcc/egcs under the rug...
This latter one is just a temporary soloution, untill the X Server becomes ready.
I don't know about you, but I need more than an X server to run X. My personal preferences include X libraries, X clients, and X font stuff, but I guess everyone's entitled to their own working environment. Yours appears to be just an X terminal...
If they stonewall and ignore your concerns, then by all means, raise a stink.
Wrong approach. The policy is against employee-owned cell phones. So request a company-owned cellphone instead. If they balk, compromise on a company-owned pager instead. If they have even an ounce of rationality, you'll get one. If not, start circulating out your resume.
Beyond the hymns, the Bible itself is copyrighted! At least most modern translations are. The King James version is in the public domain, but I'm not aware of any other common English translations that are. Reading scripture from the pulpit might be against the law if you don't use the right translation!
Here's how the process works. To create a English new translation you pull out the original texts along with your Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic dictionaries. Find the most accurate translation. Then look at the translations done in a couple dozen other modern versions, and make sure you didn't translate it the same way. Odd are you did. So use different phrasing or synonyms. Instead of "Blessed are the peacemakers", write "Those who keep the peace will be blessed". Never mind that this can subtly change the meaning of the verse.
Copyright is a temporal law, not a spiritual law. The rules and regulations of mankind should never take precedence over the law of God.
Favorite quote: 'Ascap, which is based in New York, defends the royalties. "Songwriters are small-business people who write songs to make a living," Mr. Lo Frumento says. "The royalties allow them to send their kids to Girl Scout camp, too." '
Why should I pay any attention to Havoc? What has he really done for the desktop other than posture? Isn't this the guy that read "Usability for Dummies" then declared himself the ultimate authority on usability? Isn't this the guy that actively worked to sabotage KDE on Redhat? Isn't this the guy that cries foul everytime KDE refuses to immediately implement a FD.o suggested proposal?
Okay, okay, that's a wee bit of hyperbole in the above paragraph. I apologize. But I really want to know what this guy's resume is beyond writing a window manager and playing politics at Redhat. What makes him an expert on what programming language I should use?
Speaking as someonw who tried to write a small window manager for KDE and succeeded, there's an awful lot of tiny window managers that support wm-spec. Funny thing is, even though this standard originated on the KDE side, Gnome has adopted it as its own (as with everything on freedesktop.org) to the point that the mailing list for the spec is under the gnome.org domain.
So it's unfathomable to me why Gnome can't limit itself to this standard. Just that simple thing would double the number of supporting window managers.
Note the operate word "each", in my post. EACH of them has two different packagings. FreeBSD has FreeBSDMall and DaemonNews. NetBSD has Wasabe and DaemonNews. And those are only the major distributors.
The retail marketing of Linux and Linux applications sucks. Of course, all the naysayers are going to declare the retail marketplace dead, but for the general public it's still an important venue.
Walk into any store that carries Linux products. You see some out of date distros. Then you see some new RedDrakE boxes. But what's the difference between the purple Enterprise, magenta Professional and red Desktop editions? There's also FreeOffice in two different packagings, one seemingly generic for a variety of operating systems, and one specifically for RedDrakE which is more expensive. Then you see a copy of FubarOffice 2004, packaged in a tiny DVD box. What the fsck is that? Obviously it's not big enough to have included a manual. Along side it you see FubarPaint and FubarPro. To add to the confusion, there will be the obligatory "UltraLinux Toolkit" containing nine CDs of nine obsolete distros.
And not to pick on Linux, but if you look closely enough, there will be a FreeBSD and NetBSD, each with two different packagings from two different distributors, but containing the same software version.
Why does a printer need to be marketed towards women? Does no one see the inherent sexism in this? "Dense enough DPI for a man, but made for a woman..."
Looking at the photo, it still has buttons, just like masculine printers. And it has a rounded plastic molding, just like masculine printers. And reading the blurb, it even has cartridges, just like a masculine printer. The only difference I could see was that it had a handle.
I'm so glad I don't work for a company that divides up projects according to gender. "Oooh, better not give Holly the printer driver project, she's a woman! Put her on the team designing printer handles instead..."
A day in the life of the crapper: Twenty people used it, of which seven sprayed it down with Lysol. Six of them used the free paper "cowboy hats." Then the janitor came in and sprayed it down with industrial strength disinfectant.
Day in the life of a workstation desktop: You sneeze all over it. You coworker comes by and sneezes on it too. You spill some beans on it from you burrito and create a bacterial growth medium. Then you take your shoes off and rest your stinky feet on it. If you're lucky, a janitor wipes off the desk with plain wet rag he wiped all the other desks with.
In summary, toilets get disinfected regularly, while desks rarely do.
Linux is considerably more immune to that sort of scenario.
Considering that Linux can only run a very small number of Windows programs, and not nearly as well as on their native platform, I think you may be right.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about RAID, but the SuSE installer keeps hanging on my ICH5 SATA drives.
I tried a ftp install last night, but gave up after four hours and 33% completion. That's on a 1.5M connection. For a tertiary boot, that's just not worth it. I think I'll stick with Slackware until I scrounge up $29.95 from the sofa cushions.
Of all the distros, SuSE has the most polish and seems the most professional. But it's buggy as hell. They believe in the "bleeding edge" so much they even include the razor blade in the box. I think the basic problem with SuSE is that they simply have too many packages available to do proper integration testing with all of them.
Except that if all you want is a word processor, TextMaker is a fraction of the size of OpenOffice, and loads in less than a second rather than in less than a minute.
Softmaker is the Opera of office suites. Commercial but full functionality in a tiny footprint.
You're arguing over semantic details. If I release BSD code, and the derivative work does not actively forbid merging by placing the derivative bits under the GPL, I can do so.
BSD licences have no "right to merge"
I never said or implied that the BSD license grants this "right". All I said was that the license allows it. If you acquire a piece of code that's under the BSD license, you are allowed to merge from it. Period. You don't even have to say "please".
I've never heard anyone make such an inane argument sincerely.
Google is your friend, don't ignore him. In ten seconds of googling I found an appropriate link:
http://linuxtoday.com/developer/1999111802104PS
That's what BSD and similar licences don't allow.
Wrong. They certainly do allow it. Stuff from NetBSD gets merged into FreeBSD all the time, and vice versa. What the license doesn't do it COMPEL the privilege of merging.
Get a whole bunch of Linux advocates in a room together with a bunch of BSD advocates. Casually mention licensing. Shortly before all hell breaks loose, one or two people will mention that Linux has not forked because it's under the GPL, while laissez-faire BSD has at least a dozen forks in it. Whereupon Alan will hit Theo over the head with a copy of the GNU Manifesto, rendering him unconscious.
On a more serious note, while this is not official dogma of the FSF, and never will be while they possess at least two brain cells, it has unfortunately become an uncommon but tenacious myth among the GNU discipleship. Peruse any Slashdot story on BSD and you're likely to discover an instance of it.
so we rarely get to play around with other os's
Does your boss make you live at work? Go home and play around with other systems there!
There's nothing wrong with having hundreds of forks
Unless of course the project is under the GPL, in which case the developers will smugly say that their license prevents forks while discreetly sweeping Emacs/Xemacs and gcc/egcs under the rug...
This latter one is just a temporary soloution, untill the X Server becomes ready.
I don't know about you, but I need more than an X server to run X. My personal preferences include X libraries, X clients, and X font stuff, but I guess everyone's entitled to their own working environment. Yours appears to be just an X terminal...
</sarcasm value="off">
If they stonewall and ignore your concerns, then by all means, raise a stink.
Wrong approach. The policy is against employee-owned cell phones. So request a company-owned cellphone instead. If they balk, compromise on a company-owned pager instead. If they have even an ounce of rationality, you'll get one. If not, start circulating out your resume.
Yes, he has those "balls." Which isn't saying much because most C, C++, Java, Python, Ruby, etc, developers are saying the same thing.
Beyond the hymns, the Bible itself is copyrighted! At least most modern translations are. The King James version is in the public domain, but I'm not aware of any other common English translations that are. Reading scripture from the pulpit might be against the law if you don't use the right translation!
Here's how the process works. To create a English new translation you pull out the original texts along with your Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic dictionaries. Find the most accurate translation. Then look at the translations done in a couple dozen other modern versions, and make sure you didn't translate it the same way. Odd are you did. So use different phrasing or synonyms. Instead of "Blessed are the peacemakers", write "Those who keep the peace will be blessed". Never mind that this can subtly change the meaning of the verse.
Copyright is a temporal law, not a spiritual law. The rules and regulations of mankind should never take precedence over the law of God.
Favorite quote: 'Ascap, which is based in New York, defends the royalties. "Songwriters are small-business people who write songs to make a living," Mr. Lo Frumento says. "The royalties allow them to send their kids to Girl Scout camp, too." '
Why should I pay any attention to Havoc? What has he really done for the desktop other than posture? Isn't this the guy that read "Usability for Dummies" then declared himself the ultimate authority on usability? Isn't this the guy that actively worked to sabotage KDE on Redhat? Isn't this the guy that cries foul everytime KDE refuses to immediately implement a FD.o suggested proposal?
Okay, okay, that's a wee bit of hyperbole in the above paragraph. I apologize. But I really want to know what this guy's resume is beyond writing a window manager and playing politics at Redhat. What makes him an expert on what programming language I should use?
Speaking as someonw who tried to write a small window manager for KDE and succeeded, there's an awful lot of tiny window managers that support wm-spec. Funny thing is, even though this standard originated on the KDE side, Gnome has adopted it as its own (as with everything on freedesktop.org) to the point that the mailing list for the spec is under the gnome.org domain.
So it's unfathomable to me why Gnome can't limit itself to this standard. Just that simple thing would double the number of supporting window managers.
The problem with C++ is that it has too much power and flexibility, much of which it inherited from C.
The problem with Linux is that it has too much power and flexibility, much of which it copied from Unix.
Note the operate word "each", in my post. EACH of them has two different packagings. FreeBSD has FreeBSDMall and DaemonNews. NetBSD has Wasabe and DaemonNews. And those are only the major distributors.
The retail marketing of Linux and Linux applications sucks. Of course, all the naysayers are going to declare the retail marketplace dead, but for the general public it's still an important venue.
Walk into any store that carries Linux products. You see some out of date distros. Then you see some new RedDrakE boxes. But what's the difference between the purple Enterprise, magenta Professional and red Desktop editions? There's also FreeOffice in two different packagings, one seemingly generic for a variety of operating systems, and one specifically for RedDrakE which is more expensive. Then you see a copy of FubarOffice 2004, packaged in a tiny DVD box. What the fsck is that? Obviously it's not big enough to have included a manual. Along side it you see FubarPaint and FubarPro. To add to the confusion, there will be the obligatory "UltraLinux Toolkit" containing nine CDs of nine obsolete distros.
And not to pick on Linux, but if you look closely enough, there will be a FreeBSD and NetBSD, each with two different packagings from two different distributors, but containing the same software version.
Stable nvidia drivers to take advantage of it?
So you want to make the Linux game market just like the Windows game market? "NVidia users only, otherwise you're a putz so go away!"
Why does a printer need to be marketed towards women? Does no one see the inherent sexism in this? "Dense enough DPI for a man, but made for a woman..."
Looking at the photo, it still has buttons, just like masculine printers. And it has a rounded plastic molding, just like masculine printers. And reading the blurb, it even has cartridges, just like a masculine printer. The only difference I could see was that it had a handle.
I'm so glad I don't work for a company that divides up projects according to gender. "Oooh, better not give Holly the printer driver project, she's a woman! Put her on the team designing printer handles instead..."
And don't forget, they learned their finely honed advocacy skills on the Amiga as well!
A day in the life of the crapper: Twenty people used it, of which seven sprayed it down with Lysol. Six of them used the free paper "cowboy hats." Then the janitor came in and sprayed it down with industrial strength disinfectant.
Day in the life of a workstation desktop: You sneeze all over it. You coworker comes by and sneezes on it too. You spill some beans on it from you burrito and create a bacterial growth medium. Then you take your shoes off and rest your stinky feet on it. If you're lucky, a janitor wipes off the desk with plain wet rag he wiped all the other desks with.
In summary, toilets get disinfected regularly, while desks rarely do.
Linux is considerably more immune to that sort of scenario.
Considering that Linux can only run a very small number of Windows programs, and not nearly as well as on their native platform, I think you may be right.