Actually, I have never seen Lindenlabs tell people they can't have certain content inside buildings, private sims etc. The issues you were probably talking about, most likely conflict with the 'fly-by rule' as some put it (where, objectional content shouldn't be in plain sight, but they can be say in a club, private sim).
Or, possibly having objectional content in a PG-rated simulator.
You can also get booted for harassing other players etc. which members from w-hat have been known to perform on occasion.
> You're not missing much. There is no such thing as free speech in SL, and if your work of art offends a good majority of the playerbase, you will be booted out of there.
Bullshit, people complain about the impeach bush signs almost everyday, and the creator still hasn't been booted for it.
In your situation, I would of tried using the RPM from Fedora Core 4 or such for FreeCIV.
As for binary compatability, I just grabbed the FreeCIV RPM for FC5 and installed it under Mandriva Linux (a entirely different distro). It's working fine too. *shock* *awe*
Binary compatabiltiy doesn't seem to be a issue here.
It's my personal opinion though that if you want to be able to run cutting edge new version apps, then maybe you should be using distros designed todo that.
> Ya but do you have cross- distro binary compatible packages?
There are solutions out there for such issues -- someone showed me a interesting package management solution that had a installer built into the actual package container, which would download any missing components for the app, and the actual installer stuff if it wasn't installed. Alas I forget what it's called.
In reality, just making a RPM file that contains the software which obides by the LSB standards is usually usable by all distros.
Heck, there are even tools for converting RPM packages to other types, such as ALIEN for Debian/Ubuntu packages. Which is useful when you're using a software management system which manages a vast number of computers. Although ALIEN isn't needed to install RPMs on Debian/Ubuntu, it's just a conversion tool.
I can't really think of a reason right now, why it isn't ready.
> If the world understood Linux as a whole, and that everybody had common knowledge how to tar files, how to do./installs or whatever, then this would be a moot point.
If you're using Slackware, that would be important to know.
Many of the mainstream distributions don't require that knowledge to use them as a desktop system.
> But the fact is that everybody *doesn't*. In fact, I'm fuzzy on it myself, and I've put some effort into learning at least the ropes of Linux.
Linux is a POSIX-compliant operating system kernel, that's pretty much it.
> Application installations are PAINFUL.
I find application installations on Windows more painful, I can't simualtaniously check for updates on all the software installed, I can't decide, "Okay, I want to update all my software now", and do it, it one step.
On windows I have to goto the software developer's website often, download the package and run one of the thousands of installers availible for windows that usually isn't a MSI package and often doesn't follow Microsoft's installer/uninstaller guidelines.
On many of the Linux distributions I have used, installing a program isn't really painful. I have the option of doing it through GUI, TUI or CLI. I will stick with talking about the CLI here because it's just easier than type out that describing where things are in the GUI or TUI.
I can for example, install firefox (on some of the mainstream distros I use) just by typing "urpmi mozilla-firefox" OR "apt-get firefox" OR "yast -i firefox"... Then we'll have to wait those "painful" moments as you described it, waiting for it to download and install itself.
Commercial software packages often come in RPMs, most distros these days are configured to open RPMs with the graphical RPM package for whatever distro you're using. Usually it's just clicking "install", and you have the software package installed. Heck, I installed Skype that way.
> And yes, I know about UP2DATE, Yum, Apt-get, etc... but it's as stupid as saying "Hey go to Windows Update for all your software".
Generally distributions that use such package management, usually rely on the concept that you actually use it for installing software. However, many people who are new to Linux distrobutions don't discover about alternative repositories availible, that tend to solve the need for even bothering having to "install" software "manually". That tends to include windows fonts, win32 codecs, obscure programs and even proprietary drivers.
And Windows Update is for updating windows, not software management.
> The fact of the matter is, sometimes you find a simple piece of software that seems interesting, and it's mind boggling for the new(ish) user to get it installed. You're looking for this dependancy, then that one, then another. Then you have to compile it to run.
See above, and...
So far the only application that I've had to "install" manually since I installed this Linux Distro I'm using right now, was a console MUCK connector called TinyFugue (which would probably have similar installation instructions for MacOSX). Which doesn't have the most userfriendly of interfaces when you use it.
Most desktop 'interesting software' I have encountered these days tends to have already binary builds availible, plus they're often availible in various package manager containers too.
I start to get the feeling you're poking with stuff that isn't for the desktop, and then complaining that say a server application isn't as easy as installing desktop software like instant messengers, office tools etc.
> Right now, there's only enthusiasm to support one destop OS other than Windows -- and that's Mac OSX. And why? Drag an application in, and it's installed. Self contained. Just fucking works. Drag it out, it's uninstalled. Just fucking works. It's clean, it's intuit
> What's really needed is a UNIX-based operating system Why?
> developed by a hardware supplier to be easy to use Why?
> (including configuration and, most importantly, software installation) I could go and release a tonne of applications for any platform without caring for software installation, including macosx. I could require the user to compile the applications etc. from scratch in the command line.
Heck, if people stuck to Microsoft's software installation under windows and Microsoft's guielines in making such installers. A lot of the issues in software under windows would be gone.
I'd include Linux distros having such a problem here, but many aren't because of dedicated package maintainers to a given distro, which tend to support software that they didn't author.
Software installation systems maybe part of the problem, but I haven't seen any mainstream OS in the last 6 years that didn't have a somewhat reasonable implementation. Not every person who releases software titles is going to use it. Part of the issue is getting developers to use your software installation management system.
> while still retaining the power of its UNIX underpinnings. What power? And what are underpinnings?
> This OS would ideally be able to run MS Word and Lotus Notes native. I do believe WINE offers such a execution option under x86 hardware, remember, it's not a emulator. I also did hear some years ago about some Lotus software development for Linux from IBM. Although I have no interest in Lotus notes so I didn't really keep a tab to see if there is anything for Linux.
> Oh...wait.... MacOSX isn't based on UNIX. I guess the hardware suppliers will have to urge AT&T to give up their original Unix sources, so the hardware suppliers can base a OS off Unix.
On another note, theres BSD, but that's a POSIX operating system from Berkley which did share certain sourcecode with the original Unix.
I think you might be trying to say that, MacOSX is a POSIX-like system.
I suppose me and my aquaitences (in Europe) are in the minority of people who return mobiles then that crash in Europe, then. Seriously, I don't know *anyone* in Europe who doesn't return their mobile phone if it crashes.
Well, I can't stick a asterisk server at someone's house (unless they're a geek, they probably don't want a computer running 24/7 anyway) and the services you suggested appear to be more expensive (a very good sallery in Poland can be 50USD, a month, so I do worry about costs).
Hm, I don't see any equilivant of 'skype in' for Asterisk? I mean, having a number in say the States while you're physically in Poland (your server being in Poland too) such tends to be useful.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I have never seen Lindenlabs tell people they can't have certain content inside buildings, private sims etc. The issues you were probably talking about, most likely conflict with the 'fly-by rule' as some put it (where, objectional content shouldn't be in plain sight, but they can be say in a club, private sim).
Or, possibly having objectional content in a PG-rated simulator.
You can also get booted for harassing other players etc. which members from w-hat have been known to perform on occasion.
> You're not missing much. There is no such thing as free speech in SL, and if your work of art offends a good majority of the playerbase, you will be booted out of there.
Bullshit, people complain about the impeach bush signs almost everyday, and the creator still hasn't been booted for it.
In your situation, I would of tried using the RPM from Fedora Core 4 or such for FreeCIV.
As for binary compatability, I just grabbed the FreeCIV RPM for FC5 and installed it under Mandriva Linux (a entirely different distro). It's working fine too. *shock* *awe*
Binary compatabiltiy doesn't seem to be a issue here.
It's my personal opinion though that if you want to be able to run cutting edge new version apps, then maybe you should be using distros designed todo that.
> Ya but do you have cross- distro binary compatible packages?
There are solutions out there for such issues -- someone showed me a interesting package management solution that had a installer built into the actual package container, which would download any missing components for the app, and the actual installer stuff if it wasn't installed. Alas I forget what it's called.
In reality, just making a RPM file that contains the software which obides by the LSB standards is usually usable by all distros.
Heck, there are even tools for converting RPM packages to other types, such as ALIEN for Debian/Ubuntu packages. Which is useful when you're using a software management system which manages a vast number of computers. Although ALIEN isn't needed to install RPMs on Debian/Ubuntu, it's just a conversion tool.
> Linux isn't ready for the desktop.
./installs or whatever, then this would be a moot point.
I can't really think of a reason right now, why it isn't ready.
> If the world understood Linux as a whole, and that everybody had common knowledge how to tar files, how to do
If you're using Slackware, that would be important to know.
Many of the mainstream distributions don't require that knowledge to use them as a desktop system.
> But the fact is that everybody *doesn't*. In fact, I'm fuzzy on it myself, and I've put some effort into learning at least the ropes of Linux.
Linux is a POSIX-compliant operating system kernel, that's pretty much it.
> Application installations are PAINFUL.
I find application installations on Windows more painful, I can't simualtaniously check for updates on all the software installed, I can't decide, "Okay, I want to update all my software now", and do it, it one step.
On windows I have to goto the software developer's website often, download the package and run one of the thousands of installers availible for windows that usually isn't a MSI package and often doesn't follow Microsoft's installer/uninstaller guidelines.
On many of the Linux distributions I have used, installing a program isn't really painful. I have the option of doing it through GUI, TUI or CLI. I will stick with talking about the CLI here because it's just easier than type out that describing where things are in the GUI or TUI.
I can for example, install firefox (on some of the mainstream distros I use) just by typing "urpmi mozilla-firefox" OR "apt-get firefox" OR "yast -i firefox"... Then we'll have to wait those "painful" moments as you described it, waiting for it to download and install itself.
Commercial software packages often come in RPMs, most distros these days are configured to open RPMs with the graphical RPM package for whatever distro you're using. Usually it's just clicking "install", and you have the software package installed. Heck, I installed Skype that way.
> And yes, I know about UP2DATE, Yum, Apt-get, etc... but it's as stupid as saying "Hey go to Windows Update for all your software".
Generally distributions that use such package management, usually rely on the concept that you actually use it for installing software. However, many people who are new to Linux distrobutions don't discover about alternative repositories availible, that tend to solve the need for even bothering having to "install" software "manually". That tends to include windows fonts, win32 codecs, obscure programs and even proprietary drivers.
And Windows Update is for updating windows, not software management.
> The fact of the matter is, sometimes you find a simple piece of software that seems interesting, and it's mind boggling for the new(ish) user to get it installed. You're looking for this dependancy, then that one, then another. Then you have to compile it to run.
See above, and...
So far the only application that I've had to "install" manually since I installed this Linux Distro I'm using right now, was a console MUCK connector called TinyFugue (which would probably have similar installation instructions for MacOSX). Which doesn't have the most userfriendly of interfaces when you use it.
Most desktop 'interesting software' I have encountered these days tends to have already binary builds availible, plus they're often availible in various package manager containers too.
I start to get the feeling you're poking with stuff that isn't for the desktop, and then complaining that say a server application isn't as easy as installing desktop software like instant messengers, office tools etc.
> Right now, there's only enthusiasm to support one destop OS other than Windows -- and that's Mac OSX. And why? Drag an application in, and it's installed. Self contained. Just fucking works. Drag it out, it's uninstalled. Just fucking works. It's clean, it's intuit
Because AMD have used poor buisness negotiators with Dell in the past.
In a rational world, people could be just purchasing support through Dell to get support from Mandriva, Redhat, SuSE, whatever.
What I don't understand is, is why Dell doesn't just go supporting LSB which is supported by the majority of mainstream Linux distros.
> What's really needed is a UNIX-based operating system
Why?
> developed by a hardware supplier to be easy to use
Why?
> (including configuration and, most importantly, software installation)
I could go and release a tonne of applications for any platform without caring for software installation, including macosx. I could require the user to compile the applications etc. from scratch in the command line.
Heck, if people stuck to Microsoft's software installation under windows and Microsoft's guielines in making such installers. A lot of the issues in software under windows would be gone.
I'd include Linux distros having such a problem here, but many aren't because of dedicated package maintainers to a given distro, which tend to support software that they didn't author.
Software installation systems maybe part of the problem, but I haven't seen any mainstream OS in the last 6 years that didn't have a somewhat reasonable implementation. Not every person who releases software titles is going to use it. Part of the issue is getting developers to use your software installation management system.
> while still retaining the power of its UNIX underpinnings.
What power?
And what are underpinnings?
> This OS would ideally be able to run MS Word and Lotus Notes native.
I do believe WINE offers such a execution option under x86 hardware, remember, it's not a emulator.
I also did hear some years ago about some Lotus software development for Linux from IBM. Although I have no interest in Lotus notes so I didn't really keep a tab to see if there is anything for Linux.
> Oh...wait....
MacOSX isn't based on UNIX. I guess the hardware suppliers will have to urge AT&T to give up their original Unix sources, so the hardware suppliers can base a OS off Unix.
On another note, theres BSD, but that's a POSIX operating system from Berkley which did share certain sourcecode with the original Unix.
I think you might be trying to say that, MacOSX is a POSIX-like system.
> What kind of a nimrod joins an army expecting to never have to deal with violence?
Share some stories. =)
Of course someone could come up with a reason todo things for the "greater good" for everyone. That would still be seen as 'personal use'.
I wonder if sites viewed on military networks tend to be ad-free?
> They aren't worried about the information that gets into a base, they're worried about the information that leaves it.
Typical thing I get asked by Bush patriots whenever I bring up privacy concerns with laws rolling out: What have you got to hide?
> We needed to be over there like we are needed around the world.
Aw, jeez, not this shit again.
I suppose me and my aquaitences (in Europe) are in the minority of people who return mobiles then that crash in Europe, then. Seriously, I don't know *anyone* in Europe who doesn't return their mobile phone if it crashes.
No, I didn't. I suppose if you live the capital, it isn't that bad (then again, in most countries the capitals tend to be well off).
> Software crashes is unacceptable to a large part of the market there.
I don't know anyone who'd accept that either in Europe.
You have now joined the rest of the world.
Well, I can't stick a asterisk server at someone's house (unless they're a geek, they probably don't want a computer running 24/7 anyway) and the services you suggested appear to be more expensive (a very good sallery in Poland can be 50USD, a month, so I do worry about costs).
hm, not seeing the calling in support for countries like Denmark, Sweden, Russia, Germany, Poland...
Can't be a alternative in my case.
Hm, I don't see any equilivant of 'skype in' for Asterisk? I mean, having a number in say the States while you're physically in Poland (your server being in Poland too) such tends to be useful.
What about *67?
Reading from the other posts, seems the digital broadcasts wern't much better, full of artifacts.
Pfft, just use a mail client like Thunderbird or kmail.
No! You will never stop me from "compiling linux tar file"! (Google "Lindows Rock")