This is not what IBM *wanted*, this is what happened because IBM didn't protect their design well enough.
And if you ever wondered why they made something kludgie like the ISA bus an "industry standard" - well, the long life of ISA was not planned and thus ISA so badly designed (DMA limits, no concept of ressource management and so on...).
> Linux isn't so monolithic these days. Its been possible to add and remove klm on a live Linux box > for quite a while now.
It still is. Yes, you can now change the size of the monolith (kernel) at runtime, but it still works "monolithic". E.g. a buggy module can crash the system.
> It's no different than AMD using RISC like features in the Thunderbird CPUs
Yes, but since there is no "reduced instruction set" they are no RISC CPUs and have to work around the problems with that weird x86 ISA (e.g. no orthogonal and small register set, different sizes of instructions and so on...)
"Virtually all users of Linux (and all other
forms of Un*x) are unkempt, longhaired, beast-bearded dirty GNU hippies, and
I am sick and tired of having to deal with them."
(This was an april fool post by Linus or someone impersonating him, quite funny I must say compared to the slashdot stories of that date or the incredible boring trolls here.)
(I know this was a lame joke and should be funny and that...)
It comes from the earth's rotation. The same energy that pushes the moon`s orbit higher and higher (as someone else already mentioned) until earth's rotation is coupled to the moon's revolution around the earth as Pluto's is to Charon's.
(I know this story was a lame joke and should be funny and that... but... err, forget it.)
No, with TCP there doesn't have to be a one to one relation between packets. Actually, with TCP you don't even have much control about wich data will be put in which packet, since the TCP/IP stack will take care of this and splits the stream into packets.
Oh, and BTW:
IP has the function to fragment large packets.
Sure, linux could go all cloistered and slow like *BSD and only release the occassional new
update, but then, this is slow precisely because there aren't thousands of users helping find the
bugs.
Actually, you are completly wrong and ignoring the fact that due to their more open developement process *BSD is "faster" since you can get a new current Kernel (and OS) every day (Or with anon-CVS every few hours...) and don't have to wait for Linus or Alan to anounce a new (test-)version.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually I do "make build" since I use NetBSD.
But that doesn't matter - it's still more complex (maybe not for the user, but the process is) and not comparable to building a kernel.
Oh, BTW: Please name me a single Linux-distribution where building the entire OS from source is an easy task!
Hello?
There has been a slashdot storie about a webserver running NetBSD/dreamcast.
http://slashdot.org/bsd/01/04/04/084213.shtml
They got it running with up to 6 CPUs.
(I think I read that on DDN.)
> I never had to read a handbook on building linux.
Building and installing a kernel is a very simple task - on Linux *and* *BSD.
But building and installing a whole OS (from source) is much more complex - you can't compare the two things.
Oh, great!
4.3BSD has been out for over 14 years now and you finished upgrading today...
This is not what IBM *wanted*, this is what happened because IBM didn't protect their design well enough.
And if you ever wondered why they made something kludgie like the ISA bus an "industry standard" - well, the long life of ISA was not planned and thus ISA so badly designed (DMA limits, no concept of ressource management and so on...).
> The US spends more on aid, and takes more
> refugees and immigrants than most of the
> developed world combined.
I'm not sure what you mean by "most of the developed world combined", but let's browse the CIA World Factbook and concentrate on the G7 countries:
Economical Aid:
France: 6.3 billion (1997) - per capita: ~106
Japan: 9.1 billion (1999) - per capita: ~72
Germany:5.6 billion (1998) - per capita: ~67
Canada: 2.1 billion (1997) - per capita: ~67
UK: 3.4 billion (1997) - per capita: ~57
USA: 6.1 billion (1997) - per capita: ~22
Italy: 1.3 billion (1997) - per capita: ~22
Net Migration Rate:
Canada: 6.20/1000 (2000 est.)
Germany:4.01/1000 (2000 est.)
USA: 3.50/1000 (2000 est.)
Italy: 1.74/1000 (2000 est.)
UK: 1.07/1000 (2000 est.)
France: 0.66/1000 (2000 est.)
Japan: 0.00/1000 (2000 est.)
Please prove us that the goals of the PDS are against the Grundgesetzt (Germany's constitution).
> Unless it's a communist party which proposes a revolution to create a communist state like in the > USSR.
No, this is wrong. The KPD was/is not allowed in Germany.
A. Darwin is a version of the BSD UNIX operating system
Q. How does Darwin relate to Mac OS X?
A. Darwin is the core of Mac OS X
> Linux isn't so monolithic these days. Its been possible to add and remove klm on a live Linux box > for quite a while now.
It still is. Yes, you can now change the size of the monolith (kernel) at runtime, but it still works "monolithic". E.g. a buggy module can crash the system.
> It's no different than AMD using RISC like features in the Thunderbird CPUs
Yes, but since there is no "reduced instruction set" they are no RISC CPUs and have to work around the problems with that weird x86 ISA (e.g. no orthogonal and small register set, different sizes of instructions and so on...)
That's why geeks buy x86 but dream about something else!
How on earth can something with x86 CPUs be an "übergeek`s dream"? Who's dreaming of lame, boring pentiums? That's not even a "geek's dream"!
(BTW: Please write ue if you don`t find the ü on your keyboard).
Also from that post:
"Virtually all users of Linux (and all other
forms of Un*x) are unkempt, longhaired, beast-bearded dirty GNU hippies, and
I am sick and tired of having to deal with them."
(This was an april fool post by Linus or someone impersonating him, quite funny I must say compared to the slashdot stories of that date or the incredible boring trolls here.)
Why?
He's such a poor soul:
No life, no friends, no future...
And he hasn't managed to get a Windows/Red Hat dual boot setup running on his Dell peecee.
> I did my own history based on a slashdot post I made some time ago. It's at
> http://www.geocities.com/connorbd/bsd.html.
Some nitpicking to your story:
NetBSD is written with an uppercase first letter, like "FreeBSD" or "OpenBSD".
Why do you keep that strange spelling through your whole article?
Another idea:
What about a "signal/noise"-meter.
Every reader can give a vote to every article if it's signal or noise and the whole stuff is calculated to a single number.
Over the months/years we will have a nice graph about slashdots decline.
> There are way too many BSD's.
No, not until everybody has his/hers very own BSD.
Or two of them.
> Are they better than Linux?
Yes!
A complete OS is always better than a lonely kernel.
> Why do I have to pay $50 to get a copy of "Free" BSD?
(Lame try for a word play.)
BTW $50 is still cheaper than Red Hat's $79 "Deluxe Workstation" or $179 "Professional Server".
> Why isn't it GNU/BSD?
Why isn't it GNU/Windows?
Why isn't it GNU/toilet paper?
Why isn't it GNU/orange juice?
I don't know it!
> Can I have a sandwich?
No, only a GNU/sandwich...
(But you have to share what you make with it with all of us.)
> Bring back CP/M.
Have you ever seen a ":\" in file paths? There you will find CP/M! At least (cloned) parts of it...
> That was a real operating system.
By most definitions I've seen for operating systems it's not. But so MAC OS 9.* or Windows ME aren't either...
(I know this was a lame joke and should be funny and that...)
It comes from the earth's rotation. The same energy that pushes the moon`s orbit higher and higher (as someone else already mentioned) until earth's rotation is coupled to the moon's revolution around the earth as Pluto's is to Charon's.
(I know this story was a lame joke and should be funny and that... but... err, forget it.)
No, with TCP there doesn't have to be a one to one relation between packets. Actually, with TCP you don't even have much control about wich data will be put in which packet, since the TCP/IP stack will take care of this and splits the stream into packets.
Oh, and BTW:
IP has the function to fragment large packets.
I whish I could. This was hilarious!
Actually, you are completly wrong and ignoring the fact that due to their more open developement process *BSD is "faster" since you can get a new current Kernel (and OS) every day (Or with anon-CVS every few hours...) and don't have to wait for Linus or Alan to anounce a new (test-)version.
See> If Bughat f*cks up, you can look to Caldera, Mandrake, Debian, Slackware and Suse.
Or FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Darwin...
Nobody forces you to run Linux.
Erm, no.
I know for sure Scotty uses the z-shell.