1 - The kernel team usually makes it fairly difficult to get them in
And we're glad it's that hard to put things into the main kernel. It's a question of quality, safety, stability and reliability. We don't need a driver into the kernel intrusive enough to blow our machine down. If you want an Operating System that can't get decent uptimes, choose another.
2 - Users arent neccessarily happy about their kernel getting massive updates in a "stable" series
Exactly. See, you're also glad that there's a revision process before your code goes into the main kernel.
In short, it would be nice, but its not realistic.
Unfortunately, this means that tons of open soure kernel modules are always lagging behind the released kernel, and the effort involved in maintaining it (for the developer) and installing/using it (for the end user) is much larger than it should be.
No, that means that you can have standard API's that turns driver developers work easier, specially after their first version included in the stable kernel.
Doing anything to lengthen the time that external modules could be expected to work would be a Very Good idea.
Doing anything to turn those modules into internal modules would be excelent.
All of us, developers, sysadmins, users have gone through the
upgrade my kernel
recompile alll my non included open source modules
see which ones break
try to update them
recompile....
Its a real pain and something should be done to cushion it.
Speak for yourself, I don't use non-open source modules.
GNUnet will be the trend, I think and hope, not because of it's fancy looking, but because it is the best p2p network that grants lever three anonimity...
The perfect scenario is if it gets _as_ boring as life is, no more no less. Of course that a different world, with different phisics, history, society et al will make the relative "boredom" of life impossible to compare...
The secrets to a really long-lived, goal-oriented, online game of wide appeal
I can't stop on thinking "why the hell people still want to build goal-oriented games"?
See, if the objective is (and it is, read previous/. articles on gaming) to create a Virtual World where people have to ability to do anything they want, games shouldn't have goals, but it's "citizens" (gamers, users, call them what you want) may have and must have the freedom to have their own goals.
Most of the people developing Linux couldn't care less about windows, so why bother writing up malicious code for it when they can spen that time (if coding) coding to improove the tools they use and learnt to love?
This article is written by someone who doesn't know nothing about OSS, and that quote shows it well.
Slashdot Mirror
Parent talked about poisoned seeds, and SHA-1 isn't fine to prevent them...
SHA-1? Wow, you're safe then... :-P
Maybe it's time for you to start using Anonymous p2p networks like GNUnet...
SHA-1 is not the sollution. Take a look at SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512.
SHA-1 is not the sollution. Take a look at SHA-224, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512.
SHA-1 is not the sollution.
You don't have to boycott them, but to Sue Sony.
They didn't give _him_ the money, they gave the money at his name.
If I recall well, you're only able to do that since 1998's version of net-tools' ifconfig.
Unfortunately it will be over a wrapper. Tell me about anti-trust...
If you RTFA, they want Sean to improove Gaim, not Google Talk.
Liquia replies.
Yeah, and Ulrich _says_ some distro's do it, but doesn't show any eaxmples. IMHO, this is the general whining of RedHat against the concurrence.
GNUnet will be the trend, I think and hope, not because of it's fancy looking, but because it is the best p2p network that grants lever three anonimity...
IMHO Motorola's Linux-based smartphones are the best for that task...
The perfect scenario is if it gets _as_ boring as life is, no more no less. Of course that a different world, with different phisics, history, society et al will make the relative "boredom" of life impossible to compare...
...on numbers. If it wasn't, Google (for instance) had prior art.
See, if the objective is (and it is, read previous /. articles on gaming) to create a Virtual World where people have to ability to do anything they want, games shouldn't have goals, but it's "citizens" (gamers, users, call them what you want) may have and must have the freedom to have their own goals.
What isn't right is to trying to avoid piracy using unethical methods that will damage non-pirates...
Check you grammar: my phrase is correct.
Parent talked about OSS... My reply is done to his comment, not directly to his quote.
Exactly...
Most of the people developing Linux couldn't care less about windows, so why bother writing up malicious code for it when they can spen that time (if coding) coding to improove the tools they use and learnt to love?
This article is written by someone who doesn't know nothing about OSS, and that quote shows it well.