You certainly have the right to know if your Model X Brand A car doesn't have power steering, but that's up to the dealer to tell you, and up to you to find out. Not something to shout about at a car show.
Take it upon yourself to be a conscientious consumer. Research before you spend your money, or kwitchurbitchin.
That makes me feel a lot better. Matt himself says that 4.x is freakin' awesome. I was kind of buying into the "5.x sucks ass" stuff. But if history repeats itself, I guess I have nothing to worry about. (I'm kind of new to FreeBSD so I don't really know about it's major version number change leaps and stabilization process and so on from first hand experience).
The DragonFly BSD Project (TDFBSDP) is not *just* Matt. It's multiple people. It's plural. "have"
Silly American. </playfulness>
Seriously though, we don't have a verbal inflection category for collectives. Americans conjugate as though each noun were singular. Brits conjugate as though each noun were plural. It's rather arbitrary and neither one is "right" or "wrong".
In fact, the way it was before was more grammatically correct than yours. "have...their" is correct, but if you write "has...their" you're wrong; "their" is only used as a gender-neutral singular possessive for ANIMATE nouns (as opposed to "his/her". As it's an inanimate noun, if you deem that TDFBSDP is singular, you need to use "its".
You're probably using it incorrectly. Remember to set the PACKAGESITE variable to ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packa ges-4-stable/Latest/ or whatever you want your directory to be. The default is the directory of your release... which would be why it didn't seem to updated until the next release...
From http://www.kernel.org/: "These days it also runs on (at least) the Compaq Alpha AXP, Sun SPARC and UltraSPARC, Motorola 68000, PowerPC, PowerPC64, ARM, Hitachi SuperH, IBM S/390, MIPS, HP PA-RISC, Intel IA-64, DEC VAX, AMD x86-64 and CRIS architectures."
Check, check, check, check, check, dunno, check, in progress, in progress, check, check, nope (who needs Itanium?:-P), check, check, never heard of it.
From http://www.netbsd.org/Releases/formal-1.6/NetBSD-1.6.2.html: "The NetBSD operating system is a full-featured, open source, UNIX-like operating system descended from the Berkeley Networking Release 2 (Net/2), 4.4BSD-Lite, and 4.4BSD-Lite2. NetBSD runs on 52 different system architectures featuring 17 machine architectures across 11 distinct CPU families, and is being ported to more. The NetBSD 1.6.2 release contains complete binary releases for 40 different machine types."
There are certainly some that Linux supports that NetBSD doesn't, but not many. And as far as sheer number, NetBSD wins hands down.
Besides. At a certain point, you get past the serious marker, because you've exhausted all the common platforms. At that point, only one thing matters: Can I run *Nix on my Atari?
I'll be really interested to see what NetBSD 2.0 is like. It seems like FreeBSD gets all of the attention (and all of the user base); I myself use FreeBSD on my laptop. However, there are some benchmarks that place NetBSD above FreeBSD, and you certainly can't beat the hardware support! Imagine... I could put it on my SPARC and be in the exact same environment as I have on my x86 laptop!
"viable western-style democracy" by which he means "Judeo-Christian theocracy"
I'm sure I'm going to be marked Troll for this, but it needs to be said. People in the Arab world will make Arab laws, just like we make Judeo-Christian laws.
"But no! We, for example, have never dictated the mutilation of female sex organs!" you might say. No, but I distinctly remember reading that the surgeon general urged circumcision -- mutilation of male genitals -- on account of "cleanliness" (sort of like Levitical law, eh?).
"But we in the West don't treat women as inferior" you might argue. Not overtly, but women still don't make equal money for equal work. And women are still expected to take care of infants -- the natural order, whether you like it or not, seeing as how they have breasts. And there has still never been a woman President (unless Hillary counts).
It seems, from a lay person's perspective, that Arab culture seeks out strong leadership. Even in Arab families in the U.S. with whom I am familiar, the father has a very strong "traditional" leadership role.
We, also, however, seek out strong leaders. We just prefer them to ostensibly have neutral gender, namely corporations.
So in one culture, the people are oppressed by the patriarchy, and in the other, people are oppressed by patriarchal corporations.
I think you need to think about your use of the term "better."
Resizing is handled in the window manager. This is one of the 'problems' of the modularization of X. To repaint in the middle of a resize, the widget set would have to poll constantly for window size. That's a stupid waste of resources.
He's 24 in late September of '04 which means he was 12 in late September of '92. Which means he could have remained 12 until September of '93. That's two thirds of the year in question.
So what was your beef with his claim again?
A full Windows installation, compared to installing Linux, on an Enterprise Server boxen: Is nearly three hours faster; Requires 77% fewer steps
"an... boxen" is ungrammatical, even at the lower register of informal speech used within the hacker subculture. Enterprise Server is not a company that makes hardware, as far as I can tell. Where did you get your figures? I've never spent more than an hour installing a Nix-like operating system, though dealing with driver issues on Windows gives me lots of headaches.
Compared to the best known opensores webserver "Red Hat", Microsoft IIS:
Red Hat is not a webserver. "opensores" is not a word.
Reliable companies with tried and tested products, or that bedroom coder Thorwaldes who publicly admits that he is in fact A HACKER???
There is no such person as Thorwaldes. Linus Torvalds is responsible for the kernel only, and even so is not exclusively responsible for it. Linus Torvalds is not a "bedroom coder" but is employed by OSDL, and was previously employed by Transmeta. You grossly misuse the term hacker.
MCSE, MCDST, MS Office Specialist, widely respected Amigan
I fail to see a high school diploma, let alone a computer science degree, in that list.
Fact: OpenBSD has had one, count it, one remote hole in the default install in *eight years*. See http://www.openbsd.org/
Fact: Linux is a kernel, not a complete system, so without some more community-building and standardizing and code merging to come up with a base system universal to the distributions, there's no way Linux -- as opposed to individual vendors thereof -- can ever have a secure default install of a useable system.
You're an idiot. This "FUD" is obviously facetious. hence the quotes around "dead" -- showing that it was someone else's word and not his/hers. Hint: Look at my usage of the word "FUD". No wonder you posted AC.
To go from a market share of 10% to 15% you have to increase your install base by more than 50%. The 50% figure is only accurate if all of your install base is from converts, and the market has no new installations.
Example: Let's say there's a market X with 10000 installations and products A and B exclusively address that market, with A at 90% market share and B at 10% market share. If B wants 15% market share, adding five users won't do it. Then B will have 1500/10500 and A will have 900/1050, giving B a 14.28% market share.
I said it is not required *except* to the original copyright holders. If I make change X to program Y, and submit that change back to the owners of program Y, they are not required by the license under which they put program Y to give attribution in the source or documentation of program Y to me for change X. They are not required to do so. Period. You see, the thing with the BSD license is that it isn't "viral" like the GPL. It applies to the original and not to derivative works. If I want attribution like that I have to separately license my changes back to the original authors, which, depending on the size of my modifications, could be either wise or very petty. Kind of like you're being. Petty, I mean.
I realized that my wording was off as soon as I hit Submit, but I decided not to post a reply to it as most intelligent people would be able to figure out what I meant.
The BSD license _never_ required "attribution" except to the original copyright holders. There is no requirement beyond that, and never has been. For some reason I thought there had been, and I forgot to change the paragraph text after reading the license and realizing my mistake. I'm sure you've made editing mistakes as well.
As far as being a troll, I most certainly am not. A troll spouts off at the mouth trying to get emotional responses. A troll does not lay out organized lists of specific opinions and a troll does not then back up those opinions with sources. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll, specifically "Many posts may inadvertently cause strife as collateral damage, but they are not trolls."
Certain Slashdot moderators would do well to read this as well.
Umm.. I'm not anti-DFBSD and pro-FBSD, but I do think this is absolutely stupid. You want to see attribution from FreeBSD to DragonflyBSD? There are a few problems with this:
a) You don't know if they actually took code from DragonflyBSD or if they were just (gasp) updating because they felt a need to stay competitive... that being one of the main intended effects of non-monopolistic free-market economics... See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition#In_econom ics_and_business
c) Even if they did take *actual code* from DragonflyBSD, Dragonfly's TCP stack came from FreeBSD to BEGIN with, so why is it so scandalous to merge code into FBSD's tree when that code is based on the original FBSD tree? See http://www.dragonflybsd.org/main/
d) DragonflyBSD actually is *entirely* based on FBSD 4.x so it seems a little arrogant and petty to demand a shoutout from FreeBSD when DragonFlyBSD owes its very *existence* to FreeBSD. Again see http://www.dragonflybsd.org/main/
The BSD networking stack or some sort of clone thereof is in use on every modern operating system in the world. TCP/IP was originally made on BSD. Try opening ftp.exe on Windows in Notepad. Yep, there it is. Copyright Regents of the University of California. It's everywhere. Even the paradigm of sockets is everywhere. BSD defines networking.
Also, features lead to bloat, the opposite of "high-performance" so your argument needs further detail to be of any credibility.
The only problem with this is that music is a cultural, not intellectual phenomenon. Yes, it's true that composing music takes brains. But a) composers rarely get paid anything close to what RIAA officials/publishers/artists are paid; b) Performing music doesn't take particularly extraordinary intelligence and therefore shouldn't be the performer's "intellectual property"; c) The success of music -- at least the kinds the RIAA has control over -- rarely relies on the sophisticated subtlety of its interweaving harmonies but more on the catchiness of the melody, which is generally accepted as "just coming to" people, rather than being the fruits of hard mental work.
If you really look at the issue in depth, I don't think you can honestly say that a Britney Spears song really constitutes "intellectual property" more than it constitutes a "cultural entity" -- and culture, by definition, belongs to the people.
Troll? WTF. I'm tired of Moderators with axes to grind.
Debian's package management IS technologically superior to Mandrakes. Period. It's more flexible and more powerful. In Mandrake there is no way to 'purge' a package -- getting rid of the original package contents and configuration files that were generated therewith and essentially making your system as though that package were never there. There is also no way to set up different dependency levels, hence the complaints about Mandrake being 'bloated' with unnecessary dependencies -- RPM doesn't provide a way to make optional dependencies. It just doesn't.
Ports/Portage is more flexible yet, as you can specify compiler flags with -DWHATEVER in Ports or with USE flags in Portage. I use this feature very frequently, for example so I can install JED without needing to install X11 first. A 'purge' feature would be nice here too, but I guess the whole premise is that you're supposed to be familiar enough with your system using Gentoo or FreeBSD that you can decide to keep or remove configs and so on anyway. That, and Gentoo has its etc-update thing, which is handy.
There. I've backed up my opinions. If you Mod me down for saying things I have objective evidence for, well, you can just lick my salty nuts.
Slashdot Mirror
You certainly have the right to know if your Model X Brand A car doesn't have power steering, but that's up to the dealer to tell you, and up to you to find out. Not something to shout about at a car show.
Take it upon yourself to be a conscientious consumer. Research before you spend your money, or kwitchurbitchin.
That makes me feel a lot better. Matt himself says that 4.x is freakin' awesome. I was kind of buying into the "5.x sucks ass" stuff. But if history repeats itself, I guess I have nothing to worry about. (I'm kind of new to FreeBSD so I don't really know about it's major version number change leaps and stabilization process and so on from first hand experience).
Two sentences, one mistake.
The DragonFly BSD Project (TDFBSDP) is not *just* Matt. It's multiple people. It's plural. "have"
Silly American. </playfulness>
Seriously though, we don't have a verbal inflection category for collectives. Americans conjugate as though each noun were singular. Brits conjugate as though each noun were plural. It's rather arbitrary and neither one is "right" or "wrong".
In fact, the way it was before was more grammatically correct than yours. "have...their" is correct, but if you write "has...their" you're wrong; "their" is only used as a gender-neutral singular possessive for ANIMATE nouns (as opposed to "his/her". As it's an inanimate noun, if you deem that TDFBSDP is singular, you need to use "its".
You're probably using it incorrectly. Remember to set the PACKAGESITE variable to ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packa ges-4-stable/Latest/
or whatever you want your directory to be. The default is the directory of your release... which would be why it didn't seem to updated until the next release...
What? FreeBSD doesn't support chrooted Apache?
That's funny. uname must be lying to me.
A user-friendly server OS? It must be a first!
;-)
Oh wait. I forgot about OS X Server.
(fp?)
From http://www.kernel.org/:
:-P), check, check, never heard of it.
1 .6.2.html:
"These days it also runs on (at least) the Compaq Alpha AXP, Sun SPARC and UltraSPARC, Motorola 68000, PowerPC, PowerPC64, ARM, Hitachi SuperH, IBM S/390, MIPS, HP PA-RISC, Intel IA-64, DEC VAX, AMD x86-64 and CRIS architectures."
Check, check, check, check, check, dunno, check, in progress, in progress, check, check, nope (who needs Itanium?
From http://www.netbsd.org/Releases/formal-1.6/NetBSD-
"The NetBSD operating system is a full-featured, open source, UNIX-like operating system descended from the Berkeley Networking Release 2 (Net/2), 4.4BSD-Lite, and 4.4BSD-Lite2. NetBSD runs on 52 different system architectures featuring 17 machine architectures across 11 distinct CPU families, and is being ported to more. The NetBSD 1.6.2 release contains complete binary releases for 40 different machine types."
There are certainly some that Linux supports that NetBSD doesn't, but not many. And as far as sheer number, NetBSD wins hands down.
Besides. At a certain point, you get past the serious marker, because you've exhausted all the common platforms. At that point, only one thing matters: Can I run *Nix on my Atari?
I'll be really interested to see what NetBSD 2.0 is like. It seems like FreeBSD gets all of the attention (and all of the user base); I myself use FreeBSD on my laptop. However, there are some benchmarks that place NetBSD above FreeBSD, and you certainly can't beat the hardware support! Imagine... I could put it on my SPARC and be in the exact same environment as I have on my x86 laptop!
"viable western-style democracy" by which he means "Judeo-Christian theocracy"
I'm sure I'm going to be marked Troll for this, but it needs to be said. People in the Arab world will make Arab laws, just like we make Judeo-Christian laws.
"But no! We, for example, have never dictated the mutilation of female sex organs!" you might say. No, but I distinctly remember reading that the surgeon general urged circumcision -- mutilation of male genitals -- on account of "cleanliness" (sort of like Levitical law, eh?).
"But we in the West don't treat women as inferior" you might argue. Not overtly, but women still don't make equal money for equal work. And women are still expected to take care of infants -- the natural order, whether you like it or not, seeing as how they have breasts. And there has still never been a woman President (unless Hillary counts).
It seems, from a lay person's perspective, that Arab culture seeks out strong leadership. Even in Arab families in the U.S. with whom I am familiar, the father has a very strong "traditional" leadership role.
We, also, however, seek out strong leaders. We just prefer them to ostensibly have neutral gender, namely corporations.
So in one culture, the people are oppressed by the patriarchy, and in the other, people are oppressed by patriarchal corporations.
I think you need to think about your use of the term "better."
Resizing is handled in the window manager. This is one of the 'problems' of the modularization of X. To repaint in the middle of a resize, the widget set would have to poll constantly for window size. That's a stupid waste of resources.
He's 24 in late September of '04 which means he was 12 in late September of '92. Which means he could have remained 12 until September of '93. That's two thirds of the year in question. So what was your beef with his claim again?
No no no. Not at all. Ever hear of "conspicuous consumption" ? That's why we have theft.
The person who possesses many things,
but does not boast of his possessions,
reduces temptation, and reduces stealing.
-- Tao te Ching
Nothing to back them up, eh?
D .html and http://rootprompt.org/article.php3?article=832
Fact: OpenBSD has had one, count it, one remote hole in the default install in *eight years*. See http://www.openbsd.org/
Fact: Linux is a kernel, not a complete system, so without some more community-building and standardizing and code merging to come up with a base system universal to the distributions, there's no way Linux -- as opposed to individual vendors thereof -- can ever have a secure default install of a useable system.
Fact: Many people in the industry regard OpenBSD as the most secure OS generally available. This only indirectly supports the point, but nevertheless lends credibility thereto. See http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2000/08/08/OpenBS
You're an idiot. This "FUD" is obviously facetious. hence the quotes around "dead" -- showing that it was someone else's word and not his/hers. Hint: Look at my usage of the word "FUD". No wonder you posted AC.
adding five hundred users won't do it*
9000/10500*
Yeah... I fscked that one up... *blush*
To go from a market share of 10% to 15% you have to increase your install base by more than 50%. The 50% figure is only accurate if all of your install base is from converts, and the market has no new installations.
Example: Let's say there's a market X with 10000 installations and products A and B exclusively address that market, with A at 90% market share and B at 10% market share. If B wants 15% market share, adding five users won't do it. Then B will have 1500/10500 and A will have 900/1050, giving B a 14.28% market share.
I said it is not required *except* to the original copyright holders. If I make change X to program Y, and submit that change back to the owners of program Y, they are not required by the license under which they put program Y to give attribution in the source or documentation of program Y to me for change X. They are not required to do so. Period. You see, the thing with the BSD license is that it isn't "viral" like the GPL. It applies to the original and not to derivative works. If I want attribution like that I have to separately license my changes back to the original authors, which, depending on the size of my modifications, could be either wise or very petty. Kind of like you're being. Petty, I mean.
Please refrain from personal attacks.
I realized that my wording was off as soon as I hit Submit, but I decided not to post a reply to it as most intelligent people would be able to figure out what I meant.
The BSD license _never_ required "attribution" except to the original copyright holders. There is no requirement beyond that, and never has been. For some reason I thought there had been, and I forgot to change the paragraph text after reading the license and realizing my mistake. I'm sure you've made editing mistakes as well.
As far as being a troll, I most certainly am not. A troll spouts off at the mouth trying to get emotional responses. A troll does not lay out organized lists of specific opinions and a troll does not then back up those opinions with sources. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll, specifically "Many posts may inadvertently cause strife as collateral damage, but they are not trolls."
Certain Slashdot moderators would do well to read this as well.
Umm.. I'm not anti-DFBSD and pro-FBSD, but I do think this is absolutely stupid. You want to see attribution from FreeBSD to DragonflyBSD? There are a few problems with this:
m ics_and_business
p
a) You don't know if they actually took code from DragonflyBSD or if they were just (gasp) updating because they felt a need to stay competitive... that being one of the main intended effects of non-monopolistic free-market economics... See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition#In_econo
b) Even if they did take *actual code* from DragonflyBSD, the BSD license doesn't require attribution any longer. See http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.ph
c) Even if they did take *actual code* from DragonflyBSD, Dragonfly's TCP stack came from FreeBSD to BEGIN with, so why is it so scandalous to merge code into FBSD's tree when that code is based on the original FBSD tree? See http://www.dragonflybsd.org/main/
d) DragonflyBSD actually is *entirely* based on FBSD 4.x so it seems a little arrogant and petty to demand a shoutout from FreeBSD when DragonFlyBSD owes its very *existence* to FreeBSD. Again see http://www.dragonflybsd.org/main/
Don't be a troll.
Uh. This is not a Troll. This is anti-troll, via being facetious.
assert(mod == stupid);
The BSD networking stack or some sort of clone thereof is in use on every modern operating system in the world. TCP/IP was originally made on BSD. Try opening ftp.exe on Windows in Notepad. Yep, there it is. Copyright Regents of the University of California. It's everywhere. Even the paradigm of sockets is everywhere. BSD defines networking.
Also, features lead to bloat, the opposite of "high-performance" so your argument needs further detail to be of any credibility.
DRM is to protect profits...
How can you be for and against something at the same time?
You sound Black, comrade. As in out in the dark.
Soyuz nerushimiy respublik svobodnikh splotila nevyeki...
Stealing, eh?
The only problem with this is that music is a cultural, not intellectual phenomenon. Yes, it's true that composing music takes brains. But a) composers rarely get paid anything close to what RIAA officials/publishers/artists are paid; b) Performing music doesn't take particularly extraordinary intelligence and therefore shouldn't be the performer's "intellectual property"; c) The success of music -- at least the kinds the RIAA has control over -- rarely relies on the sophisticated subtlety of its interweaving harmonies but more on the catchiness of the melody, which is generally accepted as "just coming to" people, rather than being the fruits of hard mental work.
If you really look at the issue in depth, I don't think you can honestly say that a Britney Spears song really constitutes "intellectual property" more than it constitutes a "cultural entity" -- and culture, by definition, belongs to the people.
Troll? WTF. I'm tired of Moderators with axes to grind.
Debian's package management IS technologically superior to Mandrakes. Period. It's more flexible and more powerful. In Mandrake there is no way to 'purge' a package -- getting rid of the original package contents and configuration files that were generated therewith and essentially making your system as though that package were never there. There is also no way to set up different dependency levels, hence the complaints about Mandrake being 'bloated' with unnecessary dependencies -- RPM doesn't provide a way to make optional dependencies. It just doesn't.
Ports/Portage is more flexible yet, as you can specify compiler flags with -DWHATEVER in Ports or with USE flags in Portage. I use this feature very frequently, for example so I can install JED without needing to install X11 first. A 'purge' feature would be nice here too, but I guess the whole premise is that you're supposed to be familiar enough with your system using Gentoo or FreeBSD that you can decide to keep or remove configs and so on anyway. That, and Gentoo has its etc-update thing, which is handy.
There. I've backed up my opinions. If you Mod me down for saying things I have objective evidence for, well, you can just lick my salty nuts.