You can also use the 'one window' browsing to see the address bar. Just go to about:config and toggle the setting for browser.tabs.showSingleWindowModePrefs to true. Then open up the Preferences dialog from Edit->Preferences and go to Advanced, select Tabbed Browsing, and choose to 'Force links that open new windows to open in' a new tab or the current tab.
Don't do a search and replace--do a refactoring by renaming it. Eclipse supports this, so I imagine IDEA would, too. This can also change method names, and other uses of the 'enum' variable/field.
My Dell laptop allows you to set screen brightness, CPU settings, etc, in the bios for both battery powered and AC powered modes. So there's no need to use it on battery power. Just adjust the settings.
I seem to recall that the Epic said that they had improved their engine so that it would now take less horsepower--they even included a software renderer for those without the graphics card.
The minimum specs for UT2003 were CPU: Pentium III or AMD Athlon 733MHz processor (*Pentium(R) or AMD 1.0 GHz or greater RECOMMENDED) Memory: 128 MB RAM (256 MB RAM or greater RECOMMENDED)
But I think the requirements are still the same, but with DirectX 9, according to this thread in the BeyondUnreal forums: http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t= 11 2165&highlight=requirements
Neil Gaiman can be funny--check out The Day I Swapped My Dad for 2 Goldfish, not to mention his hand in "Good Omens". Possibly also his new (but unread for me) "The Wolves in the Walls," another children's book.
When I use search engines, I look at the bit of context to see if it might be interesting. I think you could then use that context as feedback. It wouldn't be as good as actual user feedback, but better than nothing, I think.
You don't need to give up any keyboard you like, as long as you know how to touch type. I touch type dvorak just fine on QWERTY keyboards and can even switch back to QWERTY fairly easily. If you can't touch type, you can often set up a dvorak keyboard by switching the plastic key covers on your current keyboard.
This is what support contracts are for, and why, if you need long term support, you go with bigger/well known companies, like RedHat, IBM, SAP, Oracle etc. Just look at this paragraph from the article:
But in 2001 and 2002, major vendors such as Dell, HP, IBM, Oracle and Sun announced in various ways that they would begin supporting open-source products. IBM is leading the push. "We will guarantee the same [service-level agreements] for Linux that we do for proprietary OSs," says Dan Frye, director of IBM's Linux Technology Center. "Response times, fix times, uptime--we'll sign all those same contracts for Linux."
Another option is to build your own code and support it in-house. As long as your code is fairly portable, and designed well, you'll be fine. This is one of the reasons the Y2K problem needed Cobol programmers. Again, there's a quote from the article that could go here.
No, no--you don't lug around the monitor--that would be silly. But you don't entrust your data to another computer, either (as with the USB HD)--like I said, just for presentations and (maybe) LAN parties.
Well, as long as it had a VGA or DVI out, you could attach an external display to it. I don't know about the processor, but the rest is pretty standard. So it wouldn't be much more useful than for presentations or LAN parties, but might be nice for those who really need to travel light.
You're right--I should have mentioned that Andrew Morton was actually the one who did the benchmarks, and that there are more benchmarks on the list archives.
If you're really curious, you can check out the mailing list for more info. Try searching for "IO scheduler benchmarking" or "iosched". To save the mailing lists, here's a few interesting benchmarks:
Parallel streaming reads: Here we see how well the scheduler can cope with multiple processes reading multiple large files. We read ten well laid out 100 megabyte files in parallel (ten readers):
for i in $(seq 0 9)
do
time cat 100-meg-file-$i >/dev/null &
done
2.4.21-pre4:
0.00s user 0.18s system 2% cpu 6.115 total
0.02s user 0.22s system 1% cpu 14.312 total...(up to)
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 37.007 total
2.5.61+hacks:
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 2:12.00 total
0.01s user 0.15s system 0% cpu 2:12.12 total...(up to)
0.01s user 0.19s system 0% cpu 2:13.51 total
2.5.61+CFQ:
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 50.778 total
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 51.067 total...(up to)
0.01s user 0.18s system 0% cpu 1:32.34 total
2.5.61+AS
0.01s user 0.17s system 0% cpu 27.995 total
0.01s user 0.18s system 0% cpu 30.550 total...(up to)
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 34.832 total
streaming write and interactivity: It peeves me that if a machine is writing heavily, it takes *ages* to get a login prompt.
Here we start a large streaming write, wait for that to reach steady state and then see how long it takes to pop up an xterm from the machine under test with
Streaming reads and interactivity: Similarly, start a large streaming read on the test box and see how long it then takes to pop up an x client running on that box with
copy many small files: This test is very approximately the "busy web server" workload. We set up a number of processes each of which are reading many small files from different parts of the disk.
Set up six separate copies of the 2.4.19 kernel tree, and then run, in parallel, six processes which are reading them:
for i in 1 2 3 4 5 6
do
time (find kernel-tree-$i -type f | xargs cat >/dev/null ) &
done
With this test we have six read requests in the queue all the time. It's what the anticipatory scheduler was designed for.
2.4.21-pre4:
6m57.537s...(up to)
6m57.916s
2.5.61+hacks:
3m40.188s...(up to)
3m56.791s
2.5.61+CFQ:
5m15.932s...(others)
5m50.602s
2.5.61+AS:
0m44.573s...(up to)
0m53.087s
This was a little unfair to 2.4 because three of the trees were laid out by the pre-Orlov ext2. So I reran the test with 2.4.21-pre4 when all six trees were laid out by 2.5's Orlov allocator:
6m12.767s...(up to)
6m13.085s
Not much difference there, although Orlov is worth a 4x speedup in this test when there is only a single reader (or multiple readers + anticipatory scheduler)
I use the Dvorak layout for programming all the time. The braces aren't a problem. I mean, do you currently find it a problem typing the underscore, or '==' or '='? The braces and those keys just swap places. They still use the little finger of the right hand, too.
Depending on your editor, you can also use auto completion of braces, which saves you from typing one brace, and even auto typing of both braces after creating classes/methods/functions/for loops/while loops etc...
If you really like the dvorak keyboard, there are other options for those braces. But if you are really happy with whatever you're using, then there's no sense fixing what ain't broke (unless you're trying dvorak to reduce RSI, which may or may not work).
Connie Willis writes some great stuff--I especially like her short fiction.
I also liked Ted Chiang's short fiction collection.
Gardner Dozois' anthologies have been mentioned before, but also check out other anthologies--David Hartwell has one, and the Nebula awards has one each year. Also check out the short fiction collections by authors you like.
Well, you can use an initial ram disk to hold your filesystem modules. In fact, with the 2.4 series, if you have an ext3 fs and ext2 is in the kernel, but ext3 is a module, then your fs gets loaded as ext2--at least according to the startup messages. So you need both to be loaded as a module (or maybe both in the kernel--I've never tried this), and then use a ram disk to hold the modules for startup. I do this on all my machines--works great.
but when I have to WADE through 8600+ packages manually, one at a time
I made this mistake the first time I installed Debian. What you really should do is have some minimal set of packages you want (gcc, vim, emacs, mozilla, updated kernel), use dselect or apt-get for those, then as you find you need other stuff, apt-get or dselect just those packages you find you need. This way, you also avoid cluttering up your system with junk you thought might be useful 'one day'.
Slashdot Mirror
You can also use the 'one window' browsing to see the address bar. Just go to about:config and toggle the setting for
browser.tabs.showSingleWindowModePrefs
to true. Then open up the Preferences dialog from Edit->Preferences and go to Advanced, select Tabbed Browsing, and choose to 'Force links that open new windows to open in' a new tab or the current tab.
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/prelink-howto.xml
A guide for gentoo, but the prelink program should be available for whatever distro you run.
Don't do a search and replace--do a refactoring by renaming it. Eclipse supports this, so I imagine IDEA would, too. This can also change method names, and other uses of the 'enum' variable/field.
My Dell laptop allows you to set screen brightness, CPU settings, etc, in the bios for both battery powered and AC powered modes. So there's no need to use it on battery power. Just adjust the settings.
Use a backpack laptop bag. The shoulder strap bags have a single point of failure--the single shoulder strap. They also divide the weight unequally.
I have:
a zitteli bag from ebags.com (not available on amazon) which fits a big Inspiron 8500 or an 8200.
Much, much more comfortable than my old shoulder strap bag. The non-laptop pockets have less organizational doodads, but works well enough.
I can't stress how much more comfortable it is, though. $40 for this is much better than the $100 for a nice looking shoulder bag.
On a qwerty keyboard, that's: ,cdfi.l bm;,cj ,rim;l sd,mhl dvlis,!
cga;m jyll;
I'm don't think that means what you thought it meant.
http://www.eboutique.com/ebx/categories/products/d eptpage.asp?wherefrom=comingsoon&web_dept=PC%20Gam es
I seem to recall that the Epic said that they had improved their engine so that it would now take less horsepower--they even included a software renderer for those without the graphics card.
= 11 2165&highlight=requirements
The minimum specs for UT2003 were
CPU: Pentium III or AMD Athlon 733MHz processor (*Pentium(R) or AMD 1.0 GHz or greater RECOMMENDED)
Memory: 128 MB RAM (256 MB RAM or greater RECOMMENDED)
But I think the requirements are still the same, but with DirectX 9, according to this thread in the BeyondUnreal forums:
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?t
Neil Gaiman can be funny--check out The Day I Swapped My Dad for 2 Goldfish, not to mention his hand in "Good Omens". Possibly also his new (but unread for me) "The Wolves in the Walls," another children's book.
When I use search engines, I look at the bit of context to see if it might be interesting. I think you could then use that context as feedback. It wouldn't be as good as actual user feedback, but better than nothing, I think.
They're using the new NTFS drivers. Check out:
http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/
Isn't active-desktop a Windows only thing? If so, we're not talking about Macs.
But when you're playing invasion at wave >= 9, you don't have too much time to look at the figures, maps and weapons.
You don't need to give up any keyboard you like, as long as you know how to touch type. I touch type dvorak just fine on QWERTY keyboards and can even switch back to QWERTY fairly easily. If you can't touch type, you can often set up a dvorak keyboard by switching the plastic key covers on your current keyboard.
Another option is to build your own code and support it in-house. As long as your code is fairly portable, and designed well, you'll be fine. This is one of the reasons the Y2K problem needed Cobol programmers. Again, there's a quote from the article that could go here.
No, no--you don't lug around the monitor--that would be silly. But you don't entrust your data to another computer, either (as with the USB HD)--like I said, just for presentations and (maybe) LAN parties.
Well, as long as it had a VGA or DVI out, you could attach an external display to it. I don't know about the processor, but the rest is pretty standard. So it wouldn't be much more useful than for presentations or LAN parties, but might be nice for those who really need to travel light.
You're right--I should have mentioned that Andrew Morton was actually the one who did the benchmarks, and that there are more benchmarks on the list archives.
If you're really curious, you can check out the mailing list for more info. Try searching for "IO scheduler benchmarking" or "iosched". To save the mailing lists, here's a few interesting benchmarks:
/dev/null &
...(up to)
...(up to)
...(up to)
...(up to)
/dev/null ) &
...(up to)
...(up to)
...(others)
...(up to)
...(up to)
Parallel streaming reads:
Here we see how well the scheduler can cope with multiple processes reading
multiple large files. We read ten well laid out 100 megabyte files in
parallel (ten readers):
for i in $(seq 0 9)
do
time cat 100-meg-file-$i >
done
2.4.21-pre4:
0.00s user 0.18s system 2% cpu 6.115 total
0.02s user 0.22s system 1% cpu 14.312 total
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 37.007 total
2.5.61+hacks:
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 2:12.00 total
0.01s user 0.15s system 0% cpu 2:12.12 total
0.01s user 0.19s system 0% cpu 2:13.51 total
2.5.61+CFQ:
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 50.778 total
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 51.067 total
0.01s user 0.18s system 0% cpu 1:32.34 total
2.5.61+AS
0.01s user 0.17s system 0% cpu 27.995 total
0.01s user 0.18s system 0% cpu 30.550 total
0.01s user 0.16s system 0% cpu 34.832 total
streaming write and interactivity:
It peeves me that if a machine is writing heavily, it takes *ages* to get a
login prompt.
Here we start a large streaming write, wait for that to reach steady state
and then see how long it takes to pop up an xterm from the machine under
test with
time ssh testbox xterm -e true
there is quite a lot of variability here.
2.4.21-4: 62 seconds
2.5.61+hacks: 14 seconds
2.5.61+CFQ: 11 seconds
2.5.61+AS: 12 seconds
Streaming reads and interactivity:
Similarly, start a large streaming read on the test box and see how long it
then takes to pop up an x client running on that box with
time ssh testbox xterm -e true
2.4.21-4: 45 seconds
2.5.61+hacks: 5 seconds
2.5.61+CFQ: 8 seconds
2.5.61+AS: 9 seconds
copy many small files:
This test is very approximately the "busy web server" workload. We set up a
number of processes each of which are reading many small files from different
parts of the disk.
Set up six separate copies of the 2.4.19 kernel tree, and then run, in
parallel, six processes which are reading them:
for i in 1 2 3 4 5 6
do
time (find kernel-tree-$i -type f | xargs cat >
done
With this test we have six read requests in the queue all the time. It's
what the anticipatory scheduler was designed for.
2.4.21-pre4:
6m57.537s
6m57.916s
2.5.61+hacks:
3m40.188s
3m56.791s
2.5.61+CFQ:
5m15.932s
5m50.602s
2.5.61+AS:
0m44.573s
0m53.087s
This was a little unfair to 2.4 because three of the trees were laid out by
the pre-Orlov ext2. So I reran the test with 2.4.21-pre4 when all six trees
were laid out by 2.5's Orlov allocator:
6m12.767s
6m13.085s
Not much difference there, although Orlov is worth a 4x speedup in this test
when there is only a single reader (or multiple readers + anticipatory
scheduler)
I use the Dvorak layout for programming all the time. The braces aren't a problem. I mean, do you currently find it a problem typing the underscore, or '==' or '='? The braces and those keys just swap places. They still use the little finger of the right hand, too.
Depending on your editor, you can also use auto completion of braces, which saves you from typing one brace, and even auto typing of both braces after creating classes/methods/functions/for loops/while loops etc...
If you really like the dvorak keyboard, there are other options for those braces. But if you are really happy with whatever you're using, then there's no sense fixing what ain't broke (unless you're trying dvorak to reduce RSI, which may or may not work).
Connie Willis writes some great stuff--I especially like her short fiction.
I also liked Ted Chiang's short fiction collection.
Gardner Dozois' anthologies have been mentioned before, but also check out other anthologies--David Hartwell has one, and the Nebula awards has one each year. Also check out the short fiction collections by authors you like.
Here's a rebuttal to that: at urbanlegends.com and: from a Google search
Well, you can use an initial ram disk to hold your filesystem modules. In fact, with the 2.4 series, if you have an ext3 fs and ext2 is in the kernel, but ext3 is a module, then your fs gets loaded as ext2--at least according to the startup messages. So you need both to be loaded as a module (or maybe both in the kernel--I've never tried this), and then use a ram disk to hold the modules for startup. I do this on all my machines--works great.
Why don't you try NetFlix or something similar, if you plan to use it frequently?
I made this mistake the first time I installed Debian. What you really should do is have some minimal set of packages you want (gcc, vim, emacs, mozilla, updated kernel), use dselect or apt-get for those, then as you find you need other stuff, apt-get or dselect just those packages you find you need. This way, you also avoid cluttering up your system with junk you thought might be useful 'one day'.