I'm not so sure. I recently bought both a new video card for my Linux PC with TV-OUT, and a Dreambox DM-7000S DVB-S receiver (which runs Linux as its OS). The Dreambox is a perfectly usable product, giving top-quality picture to the TV set it is directly connected to using RGB (can also do YPrPb). The PC can only output CVBS or S-Video (anyone seen a PC Video card that outputs component video?), and even then the driver manufacturer decided that I should not use the whole screen area. If I would want, I would need to enable some "overscan" option and it does not work in the Linux driver. (I would define what they currently output as "underscan", there is a 2cm black border all around)
Even then, when I want to play a MPG or DIVX from Mplayer, it seems there is a nasty interference between the emulated framerate on the card (which is 60Hz and cannot be changed) and the 50Hz framerate output to the TV. It mainly shows on quickly moving picture content. Unusable for all day TV viewing.
Finally, running cables between the PC and TV is quite impractical. I have a 6M stretch of SCART cable (several coaxial and plain leads in a 1cm shroud) running now. In many houses an even longer cable may be required. The Dreambox neatly interfaces to the PC using UTP Ethernet. A clever interface choice because the cable can be any length required in a home (competing products often use USB which has too strict length requirements).
The price is about $400 but I prefer it any time over the cheap solution. You get PC integration without the dependancy and the hassle.
He said: on request. I agree with him that it is a big shame that a Windows CD (or a compute you buy with Windows installed) is always so much behind on fixes. They recently announced that XP SP2 has been pushed back even more! Apparently, having the systems in the field uptodate with the latest security fixes is a VERY LOW priority for Microsoft.
>I've gotten more than a halfdozen today. I'm in Sweden, although only one of my addresses is a.se. Considering I have 5 addresses I use regularly, and one guy is claiming 5000 copies of it this morning, I guess I got off lucky. For the moment.
Of course the average number of copies you get is inversely proportional to the IQ of your average friend. So it is not pure luck.
(at work, all the copies were mailed to one particular employee, who happens to get most spam as well, and most often has problems with his computer)
>The only missing feature was I needed some way to copy the file system on the NT box to the linux box and keep the ACLs.
How about installing the ROBOCOPY from the Windows 2000 Server resource kit in the NT box, and then using that (with the/SEC switch) to copy the files over. Wouldn't that work?
I use this ROBOCOPY version regularly for copying files with ACL info between NT servers. The version from the NT resource kit won't copy security info.
(The NT resource kit includes SCOPY but it is quite unreliable)
The a2000 people have found that they got blacklisted all over the world. Since a couple of months they have hired two people at their abuse desk, and changed the abuse@a2000.nl alias from/dev/null into something that is really read and handled. It appears they are now closing about 30 accounts a day due to abuse, and the Nigerian Scam people have moved on to the next provider. (Versatel)
Lastly, drivers using PTT seem to be less distracted and thus safer than on a phone. I don't know why, but I've been a passenger with the foreman when on a normal call, and a PTT call, and even though the same information is exchanged over a long conversation, he is a better driver under PTT. Not scientific, but something to consider.
That is very true. I remember this very well from using HAM radio from the car (also a PTT system) and the introduction of mobile phones. You can do a lot of chatting while actively driving around in the city. Try the same using a phone and you putting everyone around you in danger.
It is now outlawed here to make phonecalls while driving and not using a hands-free phone, but the hands-free aspect actually has very little relation to the safety. It may be a little less safe when having to handle the phone, but the big difference is in the fullduplex conversation. People are just distracted from driving while discussing something in a phone conversation. (they slow down, look only forward, indicate direction too late, break too sudden when they notice something on their path, etc)
E.g. SuSE allows you to install their enterprise version on as many machines you like. You buy as many licenses as you like. The only limitation is that you get support only for the number of machines that you licensed.
So when you want to save money you just buy licenses for a couple of the most important servers, or for each server of a certain kind. (e.g. you run 50 fileservers, you license less than that, and when there is a "problem with fileservers" you let them support one of the licensed servers and you apply the fix they supply to all 50 of them.
>While I would like nothing better than to go after these people for gross abuse of the legal system, my company, like many other companies, cannot justify the costs associated with going to court over something like this.
What? I assume that if you go to court, you win. And then you can ask for compensation of your costs for doing so. Would that not be granted in your country?
This looks good. Indeed it would be possible to use links instead of POP3 modifications, assuming your mail client is capable of following links (Mozilla certainly is).
Better would be if the software would be running at your ISP instead of some other company that will fetch all your mail and filter it.
Maybe they should sell the software to ISPs... I'm sure more people would be comfortable with an extra-charge spamfilter from their ISP than with some external party filtering all their mail.
My ISP offers spam filtering but it is based on DNS blacklists that filter on sending or relaying SMTP server address. That sucks.
What you would need a modification in POP3 for, is to classify the mail you are reading as spam/not spam. The solution your propose assumes that the knowledge about spam is already on the server. This could be done, but it probably would not be bayesian filtering.
When you could get a fence setup in the streets, with the violent people on one side and the remainder on the other, that would be a solution.
This can be compared to filtering.
Of course it is better to get rid of the problem, but just as with violence this is not realistic. No matter how many laws, there will always be people or countries who just don't care.
It would be nice if there was filtering done on the server. Then you would not need the packages that are reviewed here.
However, that means a change to the server, and a change to the POP3 protocol. The ISP would have to install a filtering plugin or a modified version of the server, and the client would subscribe to this service and train it (every client would have his own dictionary). With the first few messages there would be some special POP3 report back to the server indicating that you consider it spam, and from then on the server would filter on its own.
However, that would be difficult/impractical to roll out, so you will have to live with clientside filtering like in Mozilla.
You need a second disk for that. The proposed utility would do it in-place.
As I have all my filesystems mirrored using kernel raid-1, it should be possible to temporarily break the mirror, do the conversion from disk1 to disk2, and then re-establish the mirror copying disk2 to disk1. However, I would prefer to have some tested script for that. It did not find that, there is a description in the raid howto that things like this are possible in theory, but there are warnings about things that I don't understand and would require further study of the raid implementation.
It would be nice when tools for purposes like this are written when new filesystem releases that require conversion are released. So not every user has to re-invent the wheel.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not so sure.
I recently bought both a new video card for my Linux PC with TV-OUT, and a Dreambox DM-7000S DVB-S receiver (which runs Linux as its OS).
The Dreambox is a perfectly usable product, giving top-quality picture to the TV set it is directly connected to using RGB (can also do YPrPb).
The PC can only output CVBS or S-Video (anyone seen a PC Video card that outputs component video?), and even then the driver manufacturer decided that I should not use the whole screen area. If I would want, I would need to enable some "overscan" option and it does not work in the Linux driver.
(I would define what they currently output as "underscan", there is a 2cm black border all around)
Even then, when I want to play a MPG or DIVX from Mplayer, it seems there is a nasty interference between the emulated framerate on the card (which is 60Hz and cannot be changed) and the 50Hz framerate output to the TV. It mainly shows on quickly moving picture content. Unusable for all day TV viewing.
Finally, running cables between the PC and TV is quite impractical. I have a 6M stretch of SCART cable (several coaxial and plain leads in a 1cm shroud) running now. In many houses an even longer cable may be required.
The Dreambox neatly interfaces to the PC using UTP Ethernet. A clever interface choice because the cable can be any length required in a home (competing products often use USB which has too strict length requirements).
The price is about $400 but I prefer it any time over the cheap solution. You get PC integration without the dependancy and the hassle.
He said: on request.
I agree with him that it is a big shame that a Windows CD (or a compute you buy with Windows installed) is always so much behind on fixes.
They recently announced that XP SP2 has been pushed back even more!
Apparently, having the systems in the field uptodate with the latest security fixes is a VERY LOW priority for Microsoft.
You didn't read the article either!
Why do you post a comment?
No idea why this was marked "Troll".
It is an actual rule I have in my filter, and it works. Very well.
>Many ham ops use Linux and for a good reason the whole Linux community is very much like the Ham packet community.
:-(
Even more Ham packet operators use DOS
Or a Commodore 64.
This assumes that there would be no backup power for it, and that the persons who want to communicated are all within the blackout region.
When they want to communicate with someone outside the blackout region, but within a region with powerline communication, they would be out of luck.
>I've gotten more than a halfdozen today. I'm in Sweden, although only one of my addresses is a .se. Considering I have 5 addresses I use regularly, and one guy is claiming 5000 copies of it this morning, I guess I got off lucky. For the moment.
Of course the average number of copies you get is inversely proportional to the IQ of your average friend. So it is not pure luck.
(at work, all the copies were mailed to one particular employee, who happens to get most spam as well, and most often has problems with his computer)
Even better:
^tv.qaa?aaaaeaa.a//8aalgaaaaaaaaaqaaaaaaaaaa*
Junks everything with an executable file, no matter what the extension is.
Never used SWAT?
>The only missing feature was I needed some way to copy the file system on the NT box to the linux box and keep the ACLs.
/SEC switch) to copy the files over. Wouldn't that work?
How about installing the ROBOCOPY from the Windows 2000 Server resource kit in the NT box, and then using that (with the
I use this ROBOCOPY version regularly for copying files with ACL info between NT servers. The version from the NT resource kit won't copy security info.
(The NT resource kit includes SCOPY but it is quite unreliable)
The a2000 people have found that they got blacklisted all over the world. /dev/null into something that is really read and handled.
Since a couple of months they have hired two people at their abuse desk, and changed the abuse@a2000.nl alias from
It appears they are now closing about 30 accounts a day due to abuse, and the Nigerian Scam people have moved on to the next provider. (Versatel)
The 2650 was about the last in the Inspiron series that was a nice machine. You are lucky.
The newer models cannot even run Windows 2000!
Dell is becoming a Windows-XP-only shop, probably under pressure from Microsoft.
I did not say you can download it.
Please read the posting again.
You can also visit their website and see their licensing requirements.
Lastly, drivers using PTT seem to be less distracted and thus safer than on a phone. I don't know why, but I've been a passenger with the foreman when on a normal call, and a PTT call, and even though the same information is exchanged over a long conversation, he is a better driver under PTT. Not scientific, but something to consider.
That is very true. I remember this very well from using HAM radio from the car (also a PTT system) and the introduction of mobile phones. You can do a lot of chatting while actively driving around in the city. Try the same using a phone and you putting everyone around you in danger.
It is now outlawed here to make phonecalls while driving and not using a hands-free phone, but the hands-free aspect actually has very little relation to the safety. It may be a little less safe when having to handle the phone, but the big difference is in the fullduplex conversation. People are just distracted from driving while discussing something in a phone conversation.
(they slow down, look only forward, indicate direction too late, break too sudden when they notice something on their path, etc)
In that case, drop RedHat.
Others offer Linux without this problem.
E.g. SuSE allows you to install their enterprise version on as many machines you like. You buy as many licenses as you like. The only limitation is that you get support only for the number of machines that you licensed.
So when you want to save money you just buy licenses for a couple of the most important servers, or for each server of a certain kind.
(e.g. you run 50 fileservers, you license less than that, and when there is a "problem with fileservers" you let them support one of the licensed servers and you apply the fix they supply to all 50 of them.
That cannot be true. The Godzilla movie was showing on (Swedish) Z-TV when this happened.
>While I would like nothing better than to go after these people for gross abuse of the legal system, my company, like many other companies, cannot justify the costs associated with going to court over something like this.
What? I assume that if you go to court, you win.
And then you can ask for compensation of your costs for doing so.
Would that not be granted in your country?
This sounds like good advice to ESA as well.
Of course a decent Linux distribution has the same capability...
This looks good.
Indeed it would be possible to use links instead of POP3 modifications, assuming your mail client is capable of following links (Mozilla certainly is).
Better would be if the software would be running at your ISP instead of some other company that will fetch all your mail and filter it.
Maybe they should sell the software to ISPs... I'm sure more people would be comfortable with an extra-charge spamfilter from their ISP than with some external party filtering all their mail.
My ISP offers spam filtering but it is based on DNS blacklists that filter on sending or relaying SMTP server address. That sucks.
What you would need a modification in POP3 for, is to classify the mail you are reading as spam/not spam.
The solution your propose assumes that the knowledge about spam is already on the server. This could be done, but it probably would not be bayesian filtering.
When you could get a fence setup in the streets, with the violent people on one side and the remainder on the other, that would be a solution.
This can be compared to filtering.
Of course it is better to get rid of the problem, but just as with violence this is not realistic.
No matter how many laws, there will always be people or countries who just don't care.
It would be nice if there was filtering done on the server. Then you would not need the packages that are reviewed here.
However, that means a change to the server, and a change to the POP3 protocol. The ISP would have to install a filtering plugin or a modified version of the server, and the client would subscribe to this service and train it (every client would have his own dictionary). With the first few messages there would be some special POP3 report back to the server indicating that you consider it spam, and from then on the server would filter on its own.
However, that would be difficult/impractical to roll out, so you will have to live with clientside filtering like in Mozilla.
I think it is not very useful.
It just outputs standard warning texts when it sees the use of some function, up to ridiculous things such as:
[1] (buffer) strlen:
Does not handle strings that are not \0-terminated (it could cause a
crash if unprotected).
or:
[1] (buffer) getc:
Check buffer boundaries if used in a loop.
Yeah, sure. When you need that kind of warnings you better not program in C.
Useful warnings are about gets or sprintf, but the gcc linker even has some of those.
To be of any value, an analyzer like this needs to actually analyze something. Like string functions that are outputting to a buffer in the stack.
You need a second disk for that.
The proposed utility would do it in-place.
As I have all my filesystems mirrored using kernel raid-1, it should be possible to temporarily break the mirror, do the conversion from disk1 to disk2, and then re-establish the mirror copying disk2 to disk1.
However, I would prefer to have some tested script for that. It did not find that, there is a description in the raid howto that things like this are possible in theory, but there are warnings about things that I don't understand and would require further study of the raid implementation.
It would be nice when tools for purposes like this are written when new filesystem releases that require conversion are released. So not every user has to re-invent the wheel.