The main reason developers wanted TFS where I worked were 2: * locking files, the most dumb (VSS) way, so other developers wouldn't change files someone else was already changing... * the "shelf", i.e. to be able to backup current code to the server without it going into the main development branch...
In other words, they wanted TFS because of its support for lame developers, not because of the cool features...
Couldn't loading Linux (or other systems) be worked around by writing a "Linux loader devide driver" or such for windows 8, and getting it properly signed to work on Windows 8, etc.?
So, lessons learned: - never use a license which has not been court-tested or at least written by a lawyer - never try to get creative about licenses - always ask for donations on your project website - everything coming from Larry Wall sucks
I guess it's hard to say "I do have economic interest in the software now that someone else is making money out of it".
But the buffer passed to those functions is not necessarily in automatic storage, in that function the compiler can't treat it as undefined behavior. At least that is how I see it.
If the compiler decides to flag this memory as read only and never modify it again then that is allowed. I can't imagine why a compiler or system would do something like this but it's allowed to. That's interesting, but care to point to the reference/spec stating it?
I dunno man- addressing your comments directly, AFAIK *nothing* uses GNOME-VFS yet (and I suspect it may die a horrid sudden death). And yeah, nothing uses GConf either (registry)- but really- those ideas are ahead of their time.
Heard of Hurd? Or maybe LUFS (http://freshmeat.net/projects/lufs/)? Or even the virtual filesystems on Midnight Commander? And KIOSlaves do just the same in an elegant, userspace, orthogonal, unix (as opposed to "let's build an entire portable OS on top of the OS"), way. And for GConf, well, it's just Windows registry in XML... and, as its cousin, seems to use a huge amount of memory just to stay quiet...
Sorry, I misread the original post. What I meant was that Bzip2 may not be worth it to be used everywhere. For the specific case of Linux, I think it could be reasonable to use only Bzip2.
Besides Hurd having most of what you said in one place, I could ask: why does Linux exists? It's an implementation of a very old idea, and in fact, other implementations of the same idea have at least the same quality and are also open source/free (i.e. *BSD).
I would say Emacs follows Hurd philosophy: a small kernel (Lisp interpreter; yes, Lisp is small), that serves as base to implement a lot of modules that interact together via a known protocol.
Reiserfs on 2.4 uses format 3.6, while (I think) 2.2 uses 3.5. But, from what I understood of the docs, using the 2.4 reiserfs on an old 2.2 filesystem does no harm, and maintains it backward compatible. You can use an option to mount it converting gradually to 3.6, in which case it will no more be backward compatible with linux 2.2 reiserfs.
I've been using a reiserfs partition interchangeably between kernels 2.2 and 2.4 with no problem at all, without the 3.5 -> 3.6 conversion.
ALSA seems to have a better design and general quality. My (crappy) onboard ESS Solo 1 barely works (only pcm playback, didn't even record, the last time I checked) with the kernel driver, and its alsa driver supports (almost?) all the features, including 3D effects and all the in/out channels.
Slashdot Mirror
Could you give some pointer to this "process descriptor support"? I'm curious.
The main reason developers wanted TFS where I worked were 2:
* locking files, the most dumb (VSS) way, so other developers wouldn't change files someone else was already changing...
* the "shelf", i.e. to be able to backup current code to the server without it going into the main development branch...
In other words, they wanted TFS because of its support for lame developers, not because of the cool features...
Couldn't loading Linux (or other systems) be worked around by writing a "Linux loader devide driver" or such for windows 8, and getting it properly signed to work on Windows 8, etc.?
You're fun in a sad way.
No... the #1 floating point rule is: do not compare for equality
Going "green" should be about using and specially wasting less energy, not about ways to better dismiss high energy usage...
I don't like Perl, but that part was a joke. ;]
So, lessons learned:
- never use a license which has not been court-tested or at least written by a lawyer
- never try to get creative about licenses
- always ask for donations on your project website
- everything coming from Larry Wall sucks
I guess it's hard to say "I do have economic interest in the software now that someone else is making money out of it".
Try to run current Linux/GNU desktop envs with such "low specs".
Nice, thanks.
But the buffer passed to those functions is not necessarily in automatic storage, in that function the compiler can't treat it as undefined behavior. At least that is how I see it.
well, the great big argument was that people just used {ie,msn,wmp} because it was installed by default, no? so... victory for the people! ;]
Heard of Hurd? Or maybe LUFS (http://freshmeat.net/projects/lufs/)? Or even the virtual filesystems on Midnight Commander? And KIOSlaves do just the same in an elegant, userspace, orthogonal, unix (as opposed to "let's build an entire portable OS on top of the OS"), way. And for GConf, well, it's just Windows registry in XML... and, as its cousin, seems to use a huge amount of memory just to stay quiet...
http://www.alltooflat.com/geeky/elgoog/
Bzip2 is *way* slower and memory hungry than Gzip, and the gain is not necessarily great ...
Singleton methods/variables to the rescue! Ahh, Ruby!
... but it's always on core ...
Besides Hurd having most of what you said in one place, I could ask: why does Linux exists? It's an implementation of a very old idea, and in fact, other implementations of the same idea have at least the same quality and are also open source/free (i.e. *BSD).
I would say Emacs follows Hurd philosophy: a small kernel (Lisp interpreter; yes, Lisp is small), that serves as base to implement a lot of modules that interact together via a known protocol.
We are the Borg!
They should not follow their hearts, but reason, instead ...
I've been using a reiserfs partition interchangeably between kernels 2.2 and 2.4 with no problem at all, without the 3.5 -> 3.6 conversion.
I don't believe it. XFS is designed totally for performance, and still it pairs with ext3!? Not even ext2!