You said, "KDE and Gnome require a great deal of effort to be ported to other OSs besides linux."
Your implication is you do NOT need a great deal of effort to port it to a particular Linux distro. Yet the effort Debian or Slackware spend packaging KDE is just as great as the effort spent by FreeBSD.
I knew about HURD and some other misc operating systems, but I didn't want to spoil my post with a dozen paragraphs of fine print legal disclaimer.
In terms of stable, usable, release quality operating systems with a version of at least 1.0, only Linux uses GNU libc. HURD, GNU/kFreeBSD, etc, don't count. Sorry, I don't know about Syllable.
POSIX is the standard, not GNU libc. People who write userland software requiring GNU libc (that isn't system specific) need to be slapped.
This isn't a normal RFID tag, Those only have a range for a few feet. For this to be of any use for billboards, it has to have a range of several hundred feet. Hence the much larger keyfob.
People who are worried that their new RFID tagged underwear will suddenly start broadcasting to billboards can just relax. That won't happen for a few more years yet...
I'm sure the people who spend hours making it so you can run KDE on freebsd really appreciate your gratitude.
I happen to be one of those people! There are problems getting KDE into ports, but they have little to do with linuxisms, and an awful lot to do with the fact that it's a big ass piece of software.
I'm not saying there aren't any linuxims in KDE, because there are. But a lot of stuff is simply because FreeBSD stuff needs to be done on FreeBSD. You can't expect someone developing on Solaris to write the FreeBSD backend for HAL, for example.
One of the current problems, for antoher example, is making the Qt4 port. I've been building Qt4 on my FreeBSD system with "configure; make; make install" every week for the past year. Porting it to FreeBSD is NOT the problem. Making it live gracefully with Qt3 is. That's why there isn't a Qt4 port yet.
KDE and Gnome require a great deal of effort to be ported to other OSs besides linux.
Nonsense! Get out from behind that rock and see the real world!
Building KDE under FreeBSD is as simple as "configure; make; make install". Really it is. I've done it countless times. Go look at the KDE ports and see how very very little they patch KDE. Yes, there are a few KDE apps that have "linuxisms" (kfloppy), but they are the rare exception.
I'm not a GNOME user, and every time I've built it has been a painful experience. But that's not because it's meant for Linux, it's because it has a nasty twisted dependency tree. There's a large script to build GNOME under FreeBSD, but that's no different from the large scripts used to build it for Linux distros.
Go look at those patches you talk about. They are either standard bug/exploit fixes, changes to hardcoded file paths and names, or they're changes to default values. All of these are changes that most Linux distros are going to make as well. Patches that deal with genuine linuxisms are few and far between.
GNU libc is not a standard. It's used in Linux and that's it. (Hurd doesn't count for too many reasons to go into). GNU libc is *not* used in any other Free Software operating systems, except as part of a Linux compatibility layer. BSD systems have their own libc, Solaris has it's own libc, etc.
weather not seen on the planet since before the Ice Age began, 118,000 years ago.
What the fsck? The hottest day of the year in my location was announced as "the hottest on this date in thirty years". That's a 117,970 year discrepancy.
The global warming claim is that the earth is warming up by a couple of degrees. Well WITHIN normal statistical variation. If this were the hottest year in 118K years, then it's way the hell outside of normal (or even abnormal) statistical variation.
Call me skeptical, but I want to see the weather data for the year 97,324 BC.
Wow... you don't actually know a fucking thing about Stallman, do you?
I know quite a lot, actually. I'm surprised you don't, as much of his philosophy is readily available online. For example, he has an essay entitled "Why Software Should Not Have Owners", at the very same time he encourages the use of copyright. He even that requires contributors assign copyright to GNU. Copyright is software ownership, even if you wrap it in euphemisms like "copyleft".
Liberty != no taxes. Unless you happen to be a right-wing nutjob
Are you saying Free Software is a matter of Left versus Right? Wow!
Taxation may be necessary, but it is still antithetical to freedom and liberty. It is estrictive and coercive. If you don't pay your taxes you can go to jail. Even if it's a nice warm fuzzy leftwing tax like Stallman's proposed tax on software to support Free Software development.
I'm glad he's stopped calling for that tax, but no leader of an ideology founded on voluntarism should ever have suggested it.
Of course RMS provided a technical defintion of what he meant by "Free Software."
Hah! He has four extremely broad bullet points, then dozens of essays attempting to clarify matters.
"Open Source Software" has a very specific legalistic definition while "Free Software" has a rather loose political and ideological definition, but otherwise they are synonymous. To suggest that people gravitate towards Open Source Software because it isn't as specific as Free Software is silly.
...when RMS chose a word with many meanings like "free" to describe his software.
Not only that, he went on to use a completely new definition for "free" that isn't even in the dictionary! Excuses that English has only one word for "free" miss that point that most other languages only have two. Yet my dictionary has eighteen!
Free as in......beer...speech...press...people...electron...verse...silver...end of a rope...willy
One of the biggest gripes I have with Stallman's philosophy is it's incoherence. On one hand he doesn't want software ownership, but on the other he preaches against putting your software into the public domain. He talks about liberty, but then advocates a tax to support free software developers. He talks about freedom, but wants you to place "copyleft" restrictions on your code. He says the GPL is only triggered by distribution, but then argues that dynamic and runtime linkage trigger the GPL.
Surely you've read something more entertaining in the last 8 days;) - like that story on input type=image submit buttons not working?
Yes I read that. But it was nowhere near as funny as your gaff. You should make it your sig. Just remember, we not laughing with you, we're laughing at you:-)
The GPL is incompatible with all other licenses. Deliberately and by design. When people talk about GPL compatibility, what they really mean is a license that allows relicensing under the GPL.
If those patches are under ten lines, then the copyright goes to FreeBSD, as a copyright assignment is not needed. This covers most bug fixes.The patch itself is copyright the submitter, but applying the patch does not change the copyright of the main codebase.
People who insist on retaining the copyright to their ten line patch are control freaks. I won't use their patch... not because I legally can't, but because I don't want the hassle of dealing with people like that in my life.
I've never understood why the oil and pharmaceutical industries are considered so evil. Bring electricity to a poor village in Africa and you're an evil person. Create a medicine that cures a fatal disease and you're an evil person. It doesn't make sense. Do people really want there to be no electricity and medicine?
The reason most often given for these industries' evilness is "obscene profits". But their solution in every case is a stifling regulation that drives out smaller companies, leading to ever greater concentrations of wealth, and thus more obscene profits.
Yes, it's a shame that an energy plant in Africa is pumping out soot. But halting investments in the plant will only deny electricity to the same poor people we're trying to help. It's a modern variation of "White Man's Burden", a way to feel good about ourselves while we screw over Africa yet again.
If my math is correct, it produces 110 gees of centrifugal force when spinning at 600 RPM.
But there's no way in hell you can get it to 600 RPM with a kid in it.
Re:Recommended for new *nix users?
on
The Birth of vi
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, you're right. I never use it, because I can never remember the command to quit. Perhaps that's because the command is different on EVERY system I've ever used Emacs on.
The time for dual-mode editors... is long since gone
Funny, I can enter a mode, type a cpmmand, and exit that mode, in the same time it takes an Emacs exert to wrap his fingers into the contortions necessary to type the same command.
Re:Recommended for new *nix users?
on
The Birth of vi
·
· Score: 1
vi is also on Mac OSX, whereas Emacs is not. In fact, the ONLY Unix sytems I have not seen vi on, was on a certain Linux system that decided that vi was too complicated for newbies, despite the fact that newbies would never even know it was there.
I guess you want anybody who doesn't research every single fucking product they buy for seven years to die. No, we just don't want to protect people from life itself. Kids learn that stoves are hot by burning their fingers. It's one thing to be told that the stove it hot, but if you've never experienced hot, it's just a meaningless set of words.
A few generations ago we let kids burn themselves on the stove, fall down skating and skin their knees, etc. If a certain action was too dangerous, we taught them that it was dangerous by inflicting painful corporal punishment on them. And by golly, those kids turned out all right!
Yes, some children died in years past because we didn't shelter them from the act of living. But that's been more than made up by the deaths caused by sheltered children growing up into adults with drivers licenses but no common sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if a job is created elsewhere that could have been created in the US, isn't that a job lost?
If two domestic jobs are created for one outsourced job, isn't that one job gained?
You said, "KDE and Gnome require a great deal of effort to be ported to other OSs besides linux."
Your implication is you do NOT need a great deal of effort to port it to a particular Linux distro. Yet the effort Debian or Slackware spend packaging KDE is just as great as the effort spent by FreeBSD.
I knew about HURD and some other misc operating systems, but I didn't want to spoil my post with a dozen paragraphs of fine print legal disclaimer.
In terms of stable, usable, release quality operating systems with a version of at least 1.0, only Linux uses GNU libc. HURD, GNU/kFreeBSD, etc, don't count. Sorry, I don't know about Syllable.
POSIX is the standard, not GNU libc. People who write userland software requiring GNU libc (that isn't system specific) need to be slapped.
This isn't a normal RFID tag, Those only have a range for a few feet. For this to be of any use for billboards, it has to have a range of several hundred feet. Hence the much larger keyfob.
People who are worried that their new RFID tagged underwear will suddenly start broadcasting to billboards can just relax. That won't happen for a few more years yet...
I'm sure the people who spend hours making it so you can run KDE on freebsd really appreciate your gratitude.
I happen to be one of those people! There are problems getting KDE into ports, but they have little to do with linuxisms, and an awful lot to do with the fact that it's a big ass piece of software.
I'm not saying there aren't any linuxims in KDE, because there are. But a lot of stuff is simply because FreeBSD stuff needs to be done on FreeBSD. You can't expect someone developing on Solaris to write the FreeBSD backend for HAL, for example.
One of the current problems, for antoher example, is making the Qt4 port. I've been building Qt4 on my FreeBSD system with "configure; make; make install" every week for the past year. Porting it to FreeBSD is NOT the problem. Making it live gracefully with Qt3 is. That's why there isn't a Qt4 port yet.
KDE and Gnome require a great deal of effort to be ported to other OSs besides linux.
Nonsense! Get out from behind that rock and see the real world!
Building KDE under FreeBSD is as simple as "configure; make; make install". Really it is. I've done it countless times. Go look at the KDE ports and see how very very little they patch KDE. Yes, there are a few KDE apps that have "linuxisms" (kfloppy), but they are the rare exception.
I'm not a GNOME user, and every time I've built it has been a painful experience. But that's not because it's meant for Linux, it's because it has a nasty twisted dependency tree. There's a large script to build GNOME under FreeBSD, but that's no different from the large scripts used to build it for Linux distros.
Go look at those patches you talk about. They are either standard bug/exploit fixes, changes to hardcoded file paths and names, or they're changes to default values. All of these are changes that most Linux distros are going to make as well. Patches that deal with genuine linuxisms are few and far between.
GNU libc is not a standard. It's used in Linux and that's it. (Hurd doesn't count for too many reasons to go into). GNU libc is *not* used in any other Free Software operating systems, except as part of a Linux compatibility layer. BSD systems have their own libc, Solaris has it's own libc, etc.
weather not seen on the planet since before the Ice Age began, 118,000 years ago.
What the fsck? The hottest day of the year in my location was announced as "the hottest on this date in thirty years". That's a 117,970 year discrepancy.
The global warming claim is that the earth is warming up by a couple of degrees. Well WITHIN normal statistical variation. If this were the hottest year in 118K years, then it's way the hell outside of normal (or even abnormal) statistical variation.
Call me skeptical, but I want to see the weather data for the year 97,324 BC.
Wow... you don't actually know a fucking thing about Stallman, do you?
I know quite a lot, actually. I'm surprised you don't, as much of his philosophy is readily available online. For example, he has an essay entitled "Why Software Should Not Have Owners", at the very same time he encourages the use of copyright. He even that requires contributors assign copyright to GNU. Copyright is software ownership, even if you wrap it in euphemisms like "copyleft".
Liberty != no taxes. Unless you happen to be a right-wing nutjob
Are you saying Free Software is a matter of Left versus Right? Wow!
Taxation may be necessary, but it is still antithetical to freedom and liberty. It is estrictive and coercive. If you don't pay your taxes you can go to jail. Even if it's a nice warm fuzzy leftwing tax like Stallman's proposed tax on software to support Free Software development.
I'm glad he's stopped calling for that tax, but no leader of an ideology founded on voluntarism should ever have suggested it.
Of course RMS provided a technical defintion of what he meant by "Free Software."
Hah! He has four extremely broad bullet points, then dozens of essays attempting to clarify matters.
"Open Source Software" has a very specific legalistic definition while "Free Software" has a rather loose political and ideological definition, but otherwise they are synonymous. To suggest that people gravitate towards Open Source Software because it isn't as specific as Free Software is silly.
...when RMS chose a word with many meanings like "free" to describe his software.
...beer ...speech ...press ...people ...electron ...verse ...silver ...end of a rope ...willy
Not only that, he went on to use a completely new definition for "free" that isn't even in the dictionary! Excuses that English has only one word for "free" miss that point that most other languages only have two. Yet my dictionary has eighteen!
Free as in...
One of the biggest gripes I have with Stallman's philosophy is it's incoherence. On one hand he doesn't want software ownership, but on the other he preaches against putting your software into the public domain. He talks about liberty, but then advocates a tax to support free software developers. He talks about freedom, but wants you to place "copyleft" restrictions on your code. He says the GPL is only triggered by distribution, but then argues that dynamic and runtime linkage trigger the GPL.
Etc, etc, etc.
He said that Lotus 1-2-3 was killed, in part, by Microsoft encouraging Lotus's programmers to use the Windows API
OMG! That is soooo Evil!
Surely you've read something more entertaining in the last 8 days ;) - like that story on input type=image submit buttons not working?
:-)
Yes I read that. But it was nowhere near as funny as your gaff. You should make it your sig. Just remember, we not laughing with you, we're laughing at you
Why not just use a BSD system instead?
The GPL is incompatible with all other licenses. Deliberately and by design. When people talk about GPL compatibility, what they really mean is a license that allows relicensing under the GPL.
Besides which, a recompile every month or so is good for your system.
That's the funniest thing I've read all year!
If those patches are under ten lines, then the copyright goes to FreeBSD, as a copyright assignment is not needed. This covers most bug fixes.The patch itself is copyright the submitter, but applying the patch does not change the copyright of the main codebase.
People who insist on retaining the copyright to their ten line patch are control freaks. I won't use their patch... not because I legally can't, but because I don't want the hassle of dealing with people like that in my life.
I've never understood why the oil and pharmaceutical industries are considered so evil. Bring electricity to a poor village in Africa and you're an evil person. Create a medicine that cures a fatal disease and you're an evil person. It doesn't make sense. Do people really want there to be no electricity and medicine?
The reason most often given for these industries' evilness is "obscene profits". But their solution in every case is a stifling regulation that drives out smaller companies, leading to ever greater concentrations of wealth, and thus more obscene profits.
Yes, it's a shame that an energy plant in Africa is pumping out soot. But halting investments in the plant will only deny electricity to the same poor people we're trying to help. It's a modern variation of "White Man's Burden", a way to feel good about ourselves while we screw over Africa yet again.
If my math is correct, it produces 110 gees of centrifugal force when spinning at 600 RPM.
But there's no way in hell you can get it to 600 RPM with a kid in it.
Yeah, you're right. I never use it, because I can never remember the command to quit. Perhaps that's because the command is different on EVERY system I've ever used Emacs on.
The time for dual-mode editors... is long since gone
Funny, I can enter a mode, type a cpmmand, and exit that mode, in the same time it takes an Emacs exert to wrap his fingers into the contortions necessary to type the same command.
vi is also on Mac OSX, whereas Emacs is not. In fact, the ONLY Unix sytems I have not seen vi on, was on a certain Linux system that decided that vi was too complicated for newbies, despite the fact that newbies would never even know it was there.
I guess you want anybody who doesn't research every single fucking product they buy for seven years to die.
No, we just don't want to protect people from life itself. Kids learn that stoves are hot by burning their fingers. It's one thing to be told that the stove it hot, but if you've never experienced hot, it's just a meaningless set of words.
A few generations ago we let kids burn themselves on the stove, fall down skating and skin their knees, etc. If a certain action was too dangerous, we taught them that it was dangerous by inflicting painful corporal punishment on them. And by golly, those kids turned out all right!
Yes, some children died in years past because we didn't shelter them from the act of living. But that's been more than made up by the deaths caused by sheltered children growing up into adults with drivers licenses but no common sense.
Bullshit.