I put NetBSD on most of my Sparc hardware. Because then I can run and build from the same exact source tree of packages as I use on my Intel boxes. And run a kernel built from exactly the same source.
Which brings up a point: both NetBSD/Sparc and NetBSD/Sparc64 will run on an Ultra 1, which is a 64 bit machine. Why doesn't somebody install each NetBSD port on two seperate Ultra 1 machines. Then the benchmark comparision can be between the normal apps that build on both systems, running in parallel on two identical systems. Its exactly the same codebase except for the 32 or 64 bittedness.
slowly replacing the ones spawned during the Windows 9x days.
As an aside: I remember the old days, when new Linux-users often acted like a dog that had gotten out of it's yard for the first time. "I'm freeeeeee" etc. etc. Until they wandered out into the 'road' of some cracker getting root on their box. (Slackware, for instance, didn't assign a root password in the install script, or warn the user in any way they should, until version 4.0). Whomp! Just like the doggie.
These days people get just as chained to big bloated forced-hardware-upgrade loops, re: KDE and Gnome. And the din about BSOD and 'machine locked up' has faded because Microsoft's software has gotten better. Only the weird old fart who hasn't used a Microsoft product since Windows 95 carries on about that anymore.
Well, Microsoft also 'knew' that infanticide was 'big' in China, but they let it happen. Does this mean that Microsoft condoned infanticide in China, or does it mean that they had as much chance of enforcing anti-baby-killing laws as they had anti-software-piracy laws?
Oooooh, now I've gotten them started. The slashbots will quote me out of context: "Microsoft is nothing but a bunch of baybee killers!!"
Anti-Microsoft zealots (as opposed to the rest of us, who may dislike Microsoft somewhat, but don't froth about it) will cling to that 'Monopoly' ruling for the rest of their lives. Which is their right, but they're using up a lot of credibility by overusing it as their arguement.
IBM faced the same 'Monopoly' charges, and was at least, if not more, guilty of the same thing. But IBM is now good because they equate Linux to a naive little blond-haired kid in ads during football games. So IBM doesn't generate the same level of wrath with the zealots.
When did '$50 OEM bundle' become free? I want to visit this computer shop you're talking about where they give away $50 for free with each hardware purchase.
You can't have it both ways. Either admit that it wasn't free, or you're not permitted to participate in the next 'Windows Refund Day' rally. (ESR will be there, playing his flute, and wearing his Darth Vader outfit, so I recommend you stay away anyhow.)
Well, Microsoft also 'knew' that infanticide was 'big' in China, but they let it happen. Does this mean that Microsoft condoned infanticide in China, or does it mean that they had as much chance of enforcing anti-baby-killing laws as they had anti-software-piracy laws?
Oooooh, now I've gotten them started. The slashbots will quote me out of context: "Microsoft is nothing but a bunch of baybee killers!!"
'Write' is a misnomer. The best software projects start out with a design, not a bunch of hackers slinging code, with a vague sense of how it should work, who actually refuse to pay for a printed copy of the POSIX standard.
I'm not talking about the Amiga Workbench in preceeding paragraph, in case someone misinterprets it that way.
Well, for most consumer purposes, the HP desktop machines with 400 MHz Pentium II processors that I bought at auction last month for $15 each were 'the best value.' For people who don't hang out at used hardware auctions, 'the best value' is letting nimrod dorks buy the 'latest, greatest' bullshit and buying their old boxes on eBay.
And that used gear is almost never running an AMD part, because fanboy gear is vastly outnumbered by the mainstream gear that gets decomissioned and sold off in cubicle-at-a-time quantities.
Well, I suppose Apple could have tried to keep the clock speed of their system a trade secret, but someone would have eventually figured it out.
Although you probably mean 'GHz' on their marketing materials.
Me, I've got things like static 12-bit Harris 6100 processors that run the PDP-8 instruction set. Since they're all static registers inside, I can run them at.05 Hz if I wish. Or just sit there at the table by the circuit board using a knife switch to clock through the instructions at an arbitrary rate.
You try that with any of the fancy-schmancy new-fangled processors and they stall, with their dynamic registers.
Since the documents reveal a deep vein of racist sentiment against the Latino community ("they're getting close to breaking off the reservation again, we'd better oppose this judicial nominee at ALL COSTS"), I would say that the Democrats have the most to LOSE from the documents becoming public.
As to who would benefit.... dunno. The Republicans already know what slimes the Liberals are. Nothing new revealed here.
Are you claiming there are people within the Democratic party who have ideals of anti-racism, who would find a racist campaign against a Latino judicial nominee reprehensible enough to betray their own party?
Hmmmm. Michael, you'd better start modding down some of these 'off topic' comments.... Your check from the DNC might be late otherwise.
Hmmm, I dunno. It would have to be set up on a case-hardened floor, lined with asbestos. Yes, the 'cleanup bill' afterwards (for the 'hazard' all that inert asbestos creates) would be horrendous, but we've gotta funnel money to the 'environmentalist industry' somehow..
I think it would probably qualify for superfund site status. Or is bile more of a biohazard than a pollutant?
That may prove to be the 'poisoned-pill' of this whole issue that keeps the Democrats from making this into a big thing. Nobody likes being identified as racist, particulary where it concerns a constituency (the Hispanic community) that has values that contradict the DNC party line in many regards.
It's repellant that you try to turn this into a partisan political matter.
Many people who vote Republican are strongly on the side of Linux, and consider the SCO matter more of the same litigiousness that big-government types seem to relish.
Nope. A precedent of legality has been established with regard to BSD. IBM isn't accused of adding in SCO-owned code to a BSD code base. I am not trying to back up SCO's arguement, just pointing out that their claims are focused on the Linux Kernel at rev. 2.4 and nothing more.
SCO isn't a 'monster' who will demand more once they've devoured Linux. They're litigious bastards, but they know what they have their hooks sunk into. (Perhaps not how deep the hooks are sunk in, hopefully they'll deal IBM a surface scratch as the hooks slip loose and they slide into the lava pit.)
Please stop trying to spread the FUD to BSD. Are you trying to establish a climate that discourages people from switching to BSD?
However, we can save some of these people from the power that corrupts their morals. It would be quite easy to do so. By drastically reducing the power of their positions.
Cut back on the power of government, and the 'power' that 'corrupts' will wither away.
We're left with tax bills to pay for all this garbage.
The easy solution: cut back the goverment aggressively. If the powers of goverment are drastically limited, there won't be as much of the 'power' as cited in the phrase: 'power corrupts' to do the corrupting.
However, this goes against the meddlesome tendencies of a lot of busybodies...
Slashdot Mirror
I put NetBSD on most of my Sparc hardware. Because then I can run and build from the same exact source tree of packages as I use on my Intel boxes. And run a kernel built from exactly the same source.
Which brings up a point: both NetBSD/Sparc and NetBSD/Sparc64 will run on an Ultra 1, which is a 64 bit machine. Why doesn't somebody install each NetBSD port on two seperate Ultra 1 machines. Then the benchmark comparision can be between the normal apps that build on both systems, running in parallel on two identical systems. Its exactly the same codebase except for the 32 or 64 bittedness.
Which of my computers do you refer to? I've got four on my KVM switch, and they're all running different software.
I don't have an AIX box anymore, because I sold my RS/6000 box last week on eBay.
Are you still blaming Microsoft because your USB Scanner isn't supported in Linux? Or are you just intent on turning this into an off-topic thread?
slowly replacing the ones spawned during the Windows 9x days.
As an aside: I remember the old days, when new Linux-users often acted like a dog that had gotten out of it's yard for the first time. "I'm freeeeeee" etc. etc. Until they wandered out into the 'road' of some cracker getting root on their box. (Slackware, for instance, didn't assign a root password in the install script, or warn the user in any way they should, until version 4.0). Whomp! Just like the doggie.
These days people get just as chained to big bloated forced-hardware-upgrade loops, re: KDE and Gnome. And the din about BSOD and 'machine locked up' has faded because Microsoft's software has gotten better. Only the weird old fart who hasn't used a Microsoft product since Windows 95 carries on about that anymore.
Well, Microsoft also 'knew' that infanticide was 'big' in China, but they let it happen. Does this mean that Microsoft condoned infanticide in China, or does it mean that they had as much chance of enforcing anti-baby-killing laws as they had anti-software-piracy laws?
Oooooh, now I've gotten them started. The slashbots will quote me out of context: "Microsoft is nothing but a bunch of baybee killers!!"
(and no, dork, it's not 'off-topic.')
Anti-Microsoft zealots (as opposed to the rest of us, who may dislike Microsoft somewhat, but don't froth about it) will cling to that 'Monopoly' ruling for the rest of their lives. Which is their right, but they're using up a lot of credibility by overusing it as their arguement.
IBM faced the same 'Monopoly' charges, and was at least, if not more, guilty of the same thing. But IBM is now good because they equate Linux to a naive little blond-haired kid in ads during football games. So IBM doesn't generate the same level of wrath with the zealots.
In my experience, you don't (usually) get legally bound to Microtwonk Software, you usually get locked into it by some critical peripheral software -
Translation: Linux still has shitty driver support.
And people like you blame it on Microsoft.
What a hoot.
When did '$50 OEM bundle' become free? I want to visit this computer shop you're talking about where they give away $50 for free with each hardware purchase.
You can't have it both ways. Either admit that it wasn't free, or you're not permitted to participate in the next 'Windows Refund Day' rally. (ESR will be there, playing his flute, and wearing his Darth Vader outfit, so I recommend you stay away anyhow.)
Well, Microsoft also 'knew' that infanticide was 'big' in China, but they let it happen. Does this mean that Microsoft condoned infanticide in China, or does it mean that they had as much chance of enforcing anti-baby-killing laws as they had anti-software-piracy laws?
Oooooh, now I've gotten them started. The slashbots will quote me out of context: "Microsoft is nothing but a bunch of baybee killers!!"
if I remember correctly
Wouldn't it be better to provide a cite? Or just be honest and say: 'I've made this number up, but it sounded good to me.'
Or, even, just not say anything, if you don't know?
'Write' is a misnomer. The best software projects start out with a design, not a bunch of hackers slinging code, with a vague sense of how it should work, who actually refuse to pay for a printed copy of the POSIX standard.
I'm not talking about the Amiga Workbench in preceeding paragraph, in case someone misinterprets it that way.
Well, for most consumer purposes, the HP desktop machines with 400 MHz Pentium II processors that I bought at auction last month for $15 each were 'the best value.' For people who don't hang out at used hardware auctions, 'the best value' is letting nimrod dorks buy the 'latest, greatest' bullshit and buying their old boxes on eBay.
And that used gear is almost never running an AMD part, because fanboy gear is vastly outnumbered by the mainstream gear that gets decomissioned and sold off in cubicle-at-a-time quantities.
somewhere in the world there is a family of niche devices that do things in weird ways for their own reasons.
It's a 'weird way' for a chip's I/O bus to run at the same clock rate as the central processor?
Goodness, times have changed!
Well, I suppose Apple could have tried to keep the clock speed of their system a trade secret, but someone would have eventually figured it out.
.05 Hz if I wish. Or just sit there at the table by the circuit board using a knife switch to clock through the instructions at an arbitrary rate.
Although you probably mean 'GHz' on their marketing materials.
Me, I've got things like static 12-bit Harris 6100 processors that run the PDP-8 instruction set. Since they're all static registers inside, I can run them at
You try that with any of the fancy-schmancy new-fangled processors and they stall, with their dynamic registers.
"There is no right or wrong. Everything is relative. We must achive our end with whatever means is necessary."
The Democrats need to read the slogan engraved on the coin they each carry in their pocket before accusing anybody else of anything...
Since the documents reveal a deep vein of racist sentiment against the Latino community ("they're getting close to breaking off the reservation again, we'd better oppose this judicial nominee at ALL COSTS"), I would say that the Democrats have the most to LOSE from the documents becoming public.
As to who would benefit.... dunno. The Republicans already know what slimes the Liberals are. Nothing new revealed here.
Are you claiming there are people within the Democratic party who have ideals of anti-racism, who would find a racist campaign against a Latino judicial nominee reprehensible enough to betray their own party?
Hmmmm. Michael, you'd better start modding down some of these 'off topic' comments.... Your check from the DNC might be late otherwise.
The power of a beowulf cluster of Howard Deans.
Hmmm, I dunno. It would have to be set up on a case-hardened floor, lined with asbestos. Yes, the 'cleanup bill' afterwards (for the 'hazard' all that inert asbestos creates) would be horrendous, but we've gotta funnel money to the 'environmentalist industry' somehow..
I think it would probably qualify for superfund site status. Or is bile more of a biohazard than a pollutant?
That may prove to be the 'poisoned-pill' of this whole issue that keeps the Democrats from making this into a big thing. Nobody likes being identified as racist, particulary where it concerns a constituency (the Hispanic community) that has values that contradict the DNC party line in many regards.
Go ahead and request.
Don't stand there and bray like a donkey if nobody answers your request.
It's repellant that you try to turn this into a partisan political matter.
Many people who vote Republican are strongly on the side of Linux, and consider the SCO matter more of the same litigiousness that big-government types seem to relish.
Nope. A precedent of legality has been established with regard to BSD. IBM isn't accused of adding in SCO-owned code to a BSD code base. I am not trying to back up SCO's arguement, just pointing out that their claims are focused on the Linux Kernel at rev. 2.4 and nothing more.
SCO isn't a 'monster' who will demand more once they've devoured Linux. They're litigious bastards, but they know what they have their hooks sunk into. (Perhaps not how deep the hooks are sunk in, hopefully they'll deal IBM a surface scratch as the hooks slip loose and they slide into the lava pit.)
Please stop trying to spread the FUD to BSD. Are you trying to establish a climate that discourages people from switching to BSD?
However, we can save some of these people from the power that corrupts their morals. It would be quite easy to do so. By drastically reducing the power of their positions.
Cut back on the power of government, and the 'power' that 'corrupts' will wither away.
Makes too much sense to be implemented, tho, eh?
Yes, it came out a couple of months ago. It was 'cached' in the Slashdot queue. Today was the slow news day on which it was released.
All this topic on Slashdot signifies is that nothing could be contrived about SCO today compelling enough to get people loading those banner ads.
Time to just pull the power plug on the server.
There.
Problem solved.
(and no whining from you kids because your toys were taken away)
But, sadly, we are not left with nothing.
We're left with tax bills to pay for all this garbage.
The easy solution: cut back the goverment aggressively. If the powers of goverment are drastically limited, there won't be as much of the 'power' as cited in the phrase: 'power corrupts' to do the corrupting.
However, this goes against the meddlesome tendencies of a lot of busybodies...