There's just one guy who has a bad day and keeps trolling. We see people like him doing this in every BSD related story. (Errm. This isn't really BSD related, except that daemonnews did the review.)
Maybe he's an MSCE and just got fired because his company switched from NT to FreeBSD. Ignore his comments. He's just a troll.
> Ahhh the glory days.... Yes, I remember them too.
One thing that made the timing so difficult was that the VIC was regularly halting the CPU for its memory accesses. Eg. every 8th line (to read bitmap data), if the screen (the interior) is enabled. And it get's even more complicated, if there are sprites.
That's why most "no border demos" work either below or over the display area, where timings were easier.
BTW: If anybody is interested, how this works:
The VIC normally displays 40x25 characters (or 320x25 (Multicolour 160x25) pixels.). But you can make the screen somewhat smaller, i.e. reduce the size to 24 vertically and/or 38 horizontally. (The purpose of that was nice scrolling, so that one lines of chars can smothly vanish behind (say) the top boarder an a new one can appear from the bottom.)
The trick to switch of the vertical boarder goes now like this: The VIC normally (i.e. 25 line screen) starts the display area at raster line 50 and the vertical boarder at line 250, with an 24 character lines screen at ~246 (I'm not shure).
If you reduce the screen to 24 lines shortly befor line 250, the VIC "thinks" it has already switched the boarder on at line 246. Now you have an area, where you can play around with sprites, or display patterns:
One of the strangest things of the VIC was, that if it doesn't have any character/bitmap information anymore (i.e. around the display area, where normally the boarders are), it repeats displaying a pattern of black and the background colour of the display area, controlled by the contents of byte $3FFF (the last byte) in the active bank. I guess it was a hardware bug... well, not a bug, because it normaly shows the boarders then.
Ahh, it was fun playing with this little bastard...
No, I guess kibi was for 1024 to avoid the confusion, that kilo really stands for 1000 (as in 1kilometer = 1000meter) and not 1024 (as in 1kilobyte=1024bytes).
Harddisc producers make use of this and label their harddisc by using the factor 1000 instead of 1024, because it makes their discs sound larger. That's why 1074 "harddisc megabytes" are 1074*10^6 bytes wich is just aboute 1 "gigabyte as we are used to" (=1024^3 Bytes). You see the confusion here?
As we all know Chandra was not the first X-ray sattelite: The very first X-Ray observations were made on board of spacestations like Skylab (and I guess Saljut as well) then 1979(?) came the Einstein Observatory, 1990 was ROSAT launched, the most successfull X-Ray telescope so far.
And of course Chandra will not be the last one: The ESA is going to launch XMM early next year, even better than Chandra (0.25 vs 0.5 arcsec resolution).
I haven't figured it out by now, but i'm quite sure that they have quite different mission profiles - in times of low funding there's no rivalry between different space agencies. In fact I've noticed that the Max Planck Institut that was responsible for most of ROSAT is working at both projects (Chandra and XMM) as well.
One of ROSAT's homepages: http://wave.xray.mpe.mpg.de/rosat/
Two of XMM's homepages: http://sci.esa.int/missions/xmm/ http://astro.estec.esa.nl/XMM/xmm_top.html
Max-Planck-Institut für extraterrestrische Physik http://wave.xray.mpe.mpg.de/
> As for NP-completeness, it is heretical to their belief that computers cannot do everything. They ignore it totally, and throw > more computational power when it program runs too slowly...
Of course computers can't do everything.
When it comes to NP problems and N gets bigger you may never find the best solution but you can still try to get a sufficient good one (by optimizations and other techniques). And the more computer power and time you spend on the problem, the better the solution gets.
> And Linux is the most common target of net attackers? I would have thought it was Win95/98/NT.
There are not that many servers on the net that run on top of Windows 95/98. And most private or small companies' sites don't run NT. But exactly those (often poorly managed) little sites are the target of skript kiddies.
He mentioned that some Linux security holes were found and people were hammering his box, but there are plenty of *BSD holes too. Just because Linux exploits didn't work on a *BSD box, doesn't mean that BSD is any more (or less) secure. Most NT/Solaris/Irix/AIX/HP-UX/etc. exploits won't work on *BSD boxes either:)
Well, he says, his box was not cracked, because it runs NetBSD. Reading your words I see you agree with him, it probably would have been cracked if he had Linux on it. And this is what counts IMHO.
BTW: Simson Garfinkel is one of the few people in the I would believe when he says "X is more secure then Y". Together with Gene Spafford he has written the "safe book" (Practical Unix & Internet Security, O'Reilly of course) perhaps the best book about general Unix security ever written. At least I guess it's the most popular. (And some parts are really quite funny written:-).
But your answers were not very satisfying for me, neither X11 nor wxWindows is Linux specific. (wxWindows even runs on Win32).
Ok. I've downloaded the sources and all I can tell now: There's nothing that qualifies it as "Linux" version, so talking of a new "linux port" is very missleading IMHO. On Unix systems you now have the choice of a command-line only, a Glk (if this library/toolkit is available for Unix...) or a wxWindows versions. That's it.
I'm currently trying to build wxWindows/gtk (for hewx) on my machine. But after ages of compiling I had to see that it doesn't like gtk-1.2.4 I have on my system:-(. So I've install gtk-1.0.6 as well and started over.
But then I noticed that hewx needs wx/caret.h wich wxWindows 2.01 (the latest stable release) doesn't have. }:-( - Argh! (The BUILD file of hewx tells you that it was developed with wxWindows 2.1 snapshot 8).
Since I'm too lazy and tired now to get a newer developement snapshot of wxWindows and (try to) compile it a third time (it really needs a lot of cycles!) I give up for today...
I really hope that my time was not completely wasted and this keeps other people from falling into the same pitfalls like me:-)
I'm curiuos: If there's already a "Unix version" where's the difference to the Linux version? Isn't Linux "Unix" enough for a unified Unix port? I really doubt that there are special Linux features that make sense to support for this kind of application.
Sorry that I'm too lazy to download the different sources and make a comparison on my own:-)
BTW: It's really cool that there's an Acorn port. Long live RISC OS! Reminds me of mame where sometimes the Acorn port was more uptodate than the Windows one.
> There are more diferences between Red Hat and Slackware than any of the *BSD. > Please, the kernel is just a piece of the engine, for the average user it is invisible and userland and configuration counts a lot.
Yes, the other big point people flaming *BSD miss is that there is a lot of direct and indirect cooperation between the three BSDs, e.g.:
If OpenBSD finds and fixes a Bug, the other *BSDs will do the same with their code. FreeBSD has invented the package (they call it "ports") system all *BSDs now have and NetBSD brought USB to the *BSD world.
The *BSDs help each other *MUCH* more than they "fight". *BSDs diversity is on of its strengths and no weakness.
You left out China, which actually does have missiles with sufficient range to hit the Lower 48.
Indeed. In fact China is about to launch it's first manned mission in a few months, please browse Mark Wade's excellent Encyclopedia Astronautica for more information. AFAIK, most other nuclear powers ('sides Russia) don't have land-based ballistic missiles of sufficient range, and generally don't need to (as their arsenals are mostly aimed at their immediate neighbors).
Well, India has launched some satellites on it's own, so I guess they can nuke whoever and whereever they want - even with heavy warheads.
> This is obviously needed, but really it's just giving Russia a sneak peak at our top secret > early-warning system, since they aren't smart enought to build a good one themselves.
Do you really thing, there's something that they don't know already?!? (Hint: The KGB was not as dump as James Bond movies make you think.)
I have been surprised how little coverage it has gotten.
/me too.
It virtualizes the screen, sound, microphone and 4 USB ports (only supports keyboards and mice at the moment) back to a centralized server. It looks very slick with the smart card based access (you can just use a user id/password if you want.)
Especially the smart cart feature is interesting: You can pull the card out of one box go to the next room, plug it into another ray and you can immediatly continue the session exactly where you've left it.
(Even if you treat your Ray with your Beaked Axe of *Slay* Hardware (2,6) (+8,+11) (+2) very badly you just have to get a new one and haven't lost even your last keypress.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't it strange that astrologists don't agree when Aquarius ends and Pisces starts?
In most horoscopes I see Aquarius ends 19th February, but in others 20th or 18th (like in
this one).
It tends to... Aha. So can you give us asome examples when this has happened?
Explain what?
There's just one guy who has a bad day and keeps
trolling. We see people like him doing this in every BSD related story.
(Errm. This isn't really BSD related, except that
daemonnews did the review.)
Maybe he's an MSCE and just got fired because his
company switched from NT to FreeBSD. Ignore his
comments. He's just a troll.
> Ahhh the glory days....
Yes, I remember them too.
One thing that made the timing so difficult was that the VIC was regularly halting the CPU for its memory accesses. Eg. every 8th line (to read bitmap data), if the screen (the interior) is enabled. And it get's even more complicated, if there are sprites.
That's why most "no border demos" work either below or over the display area, where timings were
easier.
BTW: If anybody is interested, how this works:
The VIC normally displays 40x25 characters (or 320x25 (Multicolour 160x25) pixels.). But you can
make the screen somewhat smaller, i.e. reduce the size to 24 vertically and/or 38 horizontally. (The purpose of that was nice scrolling, so that one
lines of chars can smothly vanish behind (say)
the top boarder an a new one can appear from the
bottom.)
The trick to switch of the vertical boarder goes
now like this: The VIC normally (i.e. 25 line screen) starts the display area at raster line 50
and the vertical boarder at line 250, with an
24 character lines screen at ~246 (I'm not shure).
If you reduce the screen to 24 lines shortly befor line 250, the VIC "thinks" it has already switched
the boarder on at line 246. Now you have an area,
where you can play around with sprites, or display
patterns:
One of the strangest things of the VIC was, that if it doesn't have any character/bitmap
information anymore (i.e. around the display area, where normally the boarders are), it repeats displaying a pattern of black and the background colour of the display area, controlled by the contents of byte $3FFF (the last byte) in the active bank. I guess it was a hardware bug...
well, not a bug, because it normaly shows the boarders then.
Ahh, it was fun playing with this little bastard...
> After all, ROM wasn't built in a day. :-)
Wich ROM? 8)
I have the strong feeling that some ROMs of my hardware were coded in less than a single day...
8)
Ok, step 2:
Repeat after me:
*BSD is your friend!
> OpenBSD uses IPFilter (ipf) and ipnat for it's NAT implementation.
> I'm not sure what NetBSD ships with, but IPFilter is available.
IPFFilter as well.
No, I guess kibi was for 1024 to avoid the confusion, that kilo really stands for 1000 (as in 1kilometer = 1000meter) and not 1024 (as in 1kilobyte=1024bytes).
Harddisc producers make use of this and label their harddisc by using the factor 1000 instead of 1024, because it makes their discs sound larger. That's why 1074 "harddisc megabytes" are 1074*10^6 bytes wich is just aboute 1 "gigabyte as we are used to" (=1024^3 Bytes). You see the confusion here?
Pull something 1 Meter with the force of 1 Newton in one second. Now you've done the work of 1 Joule with the power of 1 Watt.
And now do this with feet, pond, calories or whatever...
And a DIN A0 sheet covers exactly 1 squaremeter.
As we all know Chandra was not the first X-ray sattelite: The very first X-Ray observations were made on board of spacestations like Skylab (and I guess Saljut as well) then 1979(?) came the Einstein Observatory, 1990 was ROSAT launched, the most successfull X-Ray telescope so far.
And of course Chandra will not be the last one: The ESA is going to launch XMM early next year, even better than Chandra (0.25 vs 0.5 arcsec resolution).
I haven't figured it out by now, but i'm quite sure that they have quite different mission profiles - in times of low funding there's no rivalry between different space agencies. In fact I've noticed that the Max Planck Institut that was responsible for most of ROSAT is working at both projects (Chandra and XMM) as well.
One of ROSAT's homepages: http://wave.xray.mpe.mpg.de/rosat/
Two of XMM's homepages:
http://sci.esa.int/missions/xmm/
http://astro.estec.esa.nl/XMM/xmm_top.html
Max-Planck-Institut für extraterrestrische Physik
http://wave.xray.mpe.mpg.de/
> As for NP-completeness, it is heretical to their belief that computers cannot do everything. They ignore it totally, and throw
> more computational power when it program runs too slowly...
Of course computers can't do everything.
When it comes to NP problems and N gets bigger you may never find the best solution but you can still try to get a sufficient good one (by optimizations and other techniques). And the more computer power and time you spend on the problem, the better the solution gets.
> And Linux is the most common target of net attackers? I would have thought it was Win95/98/NT.
There are not that many servers on the net that run on top of Windows 95/98. And most private or small companies' sites don't run NT. But exactly those (often poorly managed) little sites are the target of skript kiddies.
Well, he says, his box was not cracked, because it runs NetBSD. Reading your words I see you agree with him, it probably would have been cracked if he had Linux on it. And this is what counts IMHO.
BTW: Simson Garfinkel is one of the few people in the I would believe when he says "X is more secure then Y". Together with Gene Spafford he has written the "safe book" (Practical Unix & Internet Security, O'Reilly of course) perhaps the best book about general Unix security ever written. At least I guess it's the most popular. (And some parts are really quite funny written :-).
But your answers were not very satisfying for me, neither X11 nor wxWindows is Linux specific. (wxWindows even runs on Win32).
Ok.
I've downloaded the sources and all I can tell now: There's nothing that qualifies it as "Linux" version, so talking of a new "linux port" is very missleading IMHO. On Unix systems you now have the choice of a command-line only, a Glk (if this library/toolkit is available for Unix...) or a wxWindows versions. That's it.
I'm currently trying to build wxWindows/gtk (for hewx) on my machine. But after ages of compiling I had to see that it doesn't like gtk-1.2.4 I have on my system :-(. So I've install gtk-1.0.6 as well and started over.
But then I noticed that hewx needs wx/caret.h wich wxWindows 2.01 (the latest stable release) doesn't have. }:-( - Argh! (The BUILD file of hewx tells you that it was developed with wxWindows 2.1 snapshot 8).
Since I'm too lazy and tired now to get a newer developement snapshot of wxWindows and (try to) compile it a third time (it really needs a lot of cycles!) I give up for today...
I really hope that my time was not completely wasted and this keeps other people from falling into the same pitfalls like me:-)
If there's already a "Unix version" where's the difference to the Linux version? Isn't Linux "Unix" enough for a unified Unix port? I really doubt that there are special Linux features that make sense to support for this kind of application.
Sorry that I'm too lazy to download the different sources and make a comparison on my own :-)
BTW: It's really cool that there's an Acorn port. Long live RISC OS! Reminds me of mame where sometimes the Acorn port was more uptodate than the Windows one.
> Now I'm wondering, will I be able to use the GLX 3d driver for my TNT card
0 4/0008.html
I can give you a definite "YES" to this question though I haven't tried it myself (don't have a TNT and don't run FreeBSD).
Here's a step-by-step instruction:
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-i386/1999/07/
It's for NetBSD but better than nothing in case you don't find any HowTo for FreeBSD.
> i don't get why Linux users are agsinst BSD users and vice versa, just because of their OS?
It's the typical stupid "my d*ck is longer" or "my daddy's car is faster" game kids play in kindergarden.
I try to care not too much about it but sometimes when I'm in this special mood I join the game.
*BSD or Linux?
The answer is: Yes!
> There are more diferences between Red Hat and Slackware than any of the *BSD.
> Please, the kernel is just a piece of the engine, for the average user it is invisible and userland and configuration counts a lot.
Yes, the other big point people flaming *BSD miss is that there is a lot of direct and indirect cooperation between the three BSDs, e.g.:
If OpenBSD finds and fixes a Bug, the other *BSDs will do the same with their code. FreeBSD has invented the package (they call it "ports") system all *BSDs now have and NetBSD brought USB to the *BSD world.
The *BSDs help each other *MUCH* more than they "fight". *BSDs diversity is on of its strengths and no weakness.
You left out China, which actually does have missiles with sufficient range to hit the Lower 48.
Indeed. In fact China is about to launch it's first manned mission in a few months, please browse Mark Wade's excellent Encyclopedia Astronautica for more information. AFAIK, most other nuclear powers ('sides Russia) don't have land-based ballistic missiles of sufficient range, and generally don't need to (as their arsenals are mostly aimed at their immediate neighbors).
Well, India has launched some satellites on it's own, so I guess they can nuke whoever and whereever they want - even with heavy warheads.
> This is obviously needed, but really it's just giving Russia a sneak peak at our top secret
> early-warning system, since they aren't smart enought to build a good one themselves.
Do you really thing, there's something that they don't know already?!? (Hint: The KGB was not as dump as James Bond movies make you think.)
/me too.
It virtualizes the screen, sound, microphone and 4 USB ports (only supports keyboards and mice at the moment) back to a centralized server. It looks very slick with the smart card based access (you can just use a user id/password if you want.)
Especially the smart cart feature is interesting: You can pull the card out of one box go to the next room, plug it into another ray and you can immediatly continue the session exactly where you've left it.
(Even if you treat your Ray with your Beaked Axe of *Slay* Hardware (2,6) (+8,+11) (+2) very badly you just have to get a new one and haven't lost even your last keypress. :-)