What you say about Fedora is not completely true. Fedora Core (the core repo) is pretty much controlled by Redhat, but the Extras repo (which is official and enabled by default), which includes about twice as many packages, is more community-oriented. If you, as a Fedora user, would like to see a package included in Extras, then you're free to package it yourself and ask for it to be included with you as the packager/maintainer. It has to conform to a few rules though, like no non-free software, I think.
There's also several other repos available (livna, freshrpms, dries come to mind) which don't have anything to do with Redhat and include packages which add things like mp3 support etc.
You must be one of those ignorant Americans. Don't you know that the UK only ever has two types of criminals? Those who hack into US military servers and those who blow up servers with emails?
You're basically saying that machines that don't have an auto-update function somehow won't be magically updated. Brilliant.
Of course, if you don't enable automatic updates on other operating systems, they will still magically discover flaws in their code and magically fix themselves as advisories are released.
Well, considering that Fedora's stock yum frontends can't do anything at this current time, that shouldn't be a problem.
What? Pirut, Pup, Yumex, and something else whose name I forgot (Smart?) all work just fine. I have no idea where you got this notion that they don't do anything.
Yum is an ongoing disaster. Inferior to apt in every single facet of its conception and design. It can't even do dist upgrades. It's also a huge resource hog. Up2date regularly hangs and crashes, so it would be easy for any apt frontend to surpass all this.
Yum can do dist upgrades, but is unsupported. You install the fedora-release rpm and then do yum upgrade. I've never tried it but have heard reports that it works and that it doesn't. God forbid you might have to actually stick in a CD and click next a couple of times for a painless upgrade! Really, 40 minutes of downtime is not that bad, especially because Fedora isn't designed for use in production servers anyways. Also, you do realize that up2date doesn't exist for FC5, right?
I've used Fedora since FC2 and I have to say that my biggest complaint throughout has been the woeful package management system. Quite frankly, just using plain rpms is often faster than trying to coax yum to work. If fact, the workaround for a lack of a dist-upgrade option is to use rpms.
Yum wasn't so great until about FC4, I think. I didn't really start using Fedora since around August last year, and by that time FC4 had been out for a while. I haven't had any yum problems since then, and yes I've used it plenty of times -- I only use Fedora. For usual tasks, what can really go wrong? yum search something, yum install somepackage, and yum update every once in a while. I've never had a problem with those.
Like a stubborn mule, Fedora won't let go of yum, lest they use apt and become "another debian os". Consequently, Fedora is a great distro, with a lousy package management system. It's a real achilles heel on an otherwise great workstation OS.
Ironically, I have always thought that yum was one of the strengths of Fedora. Oh well.
TFA also mentioned that Ubuntu "beat the shit out of Fedora" in terms of the package management GUI. Unless the package manager in Ubuntu does some really cool things that Fedora's stock yum frontends can't do (install, remove, groups, dependencies...), how can it beat really beat the shit out of anything?
He also said Ubuntu looks very professional while the latest Fedora looks like a circus act. Come on, now. Based on screenshots, Ubuntu and Fedora look very similar. I don't see how either looks more or less professional than the other at all. Surprise, surprise! They both use recent versions of Gnome! The only major, obvious difference is that Ubuntu defaults to orange while Fedora defaults to blue. Big deal.
By the way, I admit that I use Fedora daily, so I might (cough) be a little biased.
I'm not well-versed in history, so I'd like to learn a little from you. Specifically, could you please:
give me some figures on how many Mongolians were killed last time China invaded Mongolia
tell me why China invaded Korea?
tell me why China sided against South Vietnam?
Since you probably have no answers to my questions, I'll answer them for you.
I actually have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about when you say the Chinese virtually wiped out (virtually = in an MMORPG?) the Mongols. Perhaps you mean the Mongols conquered China, but lost their culture because they gradually assimilated into Chinese culture? And then the Mongols became Chinese?
As for Korea, I can only recall one major event when China killed Koreans, which was the Korean War. Why did China send troops into Korea? Because UN troops (of which the vast majority were American) led by an American general moved troops all the way up the Korean peninsula to the border with China. If Chinese troops landed in Mexico, took it over, and fought successfully up to the Rio Grande, what do you expect the US armed forces to do? Let's not forget that Macarthur was also seeking authorization to nuke about a dozen key industrial areas in China.
China didn't send large numbers of troops into Vietnam. But, again, you know who did? That's right, the US did. The Chinese military primarily served as advisors to the Communist North. Most references don't even list China as one of the combatants. Why did China side against South Vietnam and the US? Because, again, the US was encroaching up to Chinese borders.
In summary, why did the Chinese kill some Koreans and Vietnamese? Because the US sent troops first to these areas, and China did not want new US-friendly regimes on its borders. In all likelihood, in each of these wars, US troops killed many more Asians than did Chinese troops.
Slashdot Mirror
I call bollocks. Five girlfriends? What are you doing on Slashdot?
When's the last time you exploited a buffer overflow or took remote control of a user's machine to make your CSS display correctly in IE?
That was the single most ridiculous run-on I've ever read in my life.
What you say about Fedora is not completely true. Fedora Core (the core repo) is pretty much controlled by Redhat, but the Extras repo (which is official and enabled by default), which includes about twice as many packages, is more community-oriented. If you, as a Fedora user, would like to see a package included in Extras, then you're free to package it yourself and ask for it to be included with you as the packager/maintainer. It has to conform to a few rules though, like no non-free software, I think.
There's also several other repos available (livna, freshrpms, dries come to mind) which don't have anything to do with Redhat and include packages which add things like mp3 support etc.
I think you're confusing the WGA malware with the IE malware.
You know you're on Slashdot when the first two posts are marked redundant. Wait, this one is redundant too.
No, I will hopefully be running Vista by then.
Level two is knowing what "level up" means.
I thought the US Bill of Rights only apply to US citizens?
You must be one of those ignorant Americans. Don't you know that the UK only ever has two types of criminals? Those who hack into US military servers and those who blow up servers with emails?
That's because the image you see on TFA is 1/1300 of 100 million pixels. I bet that 1600x1200 high-res porn wouldn't look so great at 39x39 either.
(I'm kidding. Well, mostly.)
You're basically saying that machines that don't have an auto-update function somehow won't be magically updated. Brilliant. Of course, if you don't enable automatic updates on other operating systems, they will still magically discover flaws in their code and magically fix themselves as advisories are released.
What would happen to the GCJ and GNU Classpath projects if Java goes GPL-style open source?
3dfx is coming out with Voodoo6!
Yet somehow, MySpace still has visitors...
Your post is redundant. He already said this. See where he says "IMy friend"? That is newspeak for "I have this friend, and he..."
a post entitled "This is what we call geeks" was modded OT on /.?
what has the world come to??
Well, considering that Fedora's stock yum frontends can't do anything at this current time, that shouldn't be a problem.
What? Pirut, Pup, Yumex, and something else whose name I forgot (Smart?) all work just fine. I have no idea where you got this notion that they don't do anything.
Yum is an ongoing disaster. Inferior to apt in every single facet of its conception and design. It can't even do dist upgrades. It's also a huge resource hog. Up2date regularly hangs and crashes, so it would be easy for any apt frontend to surpass all this.
Yum can do dist upgrades, but is unsupported. You install the fedora-release rpm and then do yum upgrade. I've never tried it but have heard reports that it works and that it doesn't. God forbid you might have to actually stick in a CD and click next a couple of times for a painless upgrade! Really, 40 minutes of downtime is not that bad, especially because Fedora isn't designed for use in production servers anyways. Also, you do realize that up2date doesn't exist for FC5, right?
I've used Fedora since FC2 and I have to say that my biggest complaint throughout has been the woeful package management system. Quite frankly, just using plain rpms is often faster than trying to coax yum to work. If fact, the workaround for a lack of a dist-upgrade option is to use rpms.
Yum wasn't so great until about FC4, I think. I didn't really start using Fedora since around August last year, and by that time FC4 had been out for a while. I haven't had any yum problems since then, and yes I've used it plenty of times -- I only use Fedora. For usual tasks, what can really go wrong? yum search something, yum install somepackage, and yum update every once in a while. I've never had a problem with those.
Like a stubborn mule, Fedora won't let go of yum, lest they use apt and become "another debian os". Consequently, Fedora is a great distro, with a lousy package management system. It's a real achilles heel on an otherwise great workstation OS.
Ironically, I have always thought that yum was one of the strengths of Fedora. Oh well.
So this is a better looking version of Mandrake?
TFA also mentioned that Ubuntu "beat the shit out of Fedora" in terms of the package management GUI. Unless the package manager in Ubuntu does some really cool things that Fedora's stock yum frontends can't do (install, remove, groups, dependencies...), how can it beat really beat the shit out of anything?
He also said Ubuntu looks very professional while the latest Fedora looks like a circus act. Come on, now. Based on screenshots, Ubuntu and Fedora look very similar. I don't see how either looks more or less professional than the other at all. Surprise, surprise! They both use recent versions of Gnome! The only major, obvious difference is that Ubuntu defaults to orange while Fedora defaults to blue. Big deal.
By the way, I admit that I use Fedora daily, so I might (cough) be a little biased.
Now I see why 98 SE was released. Windows 98 SE was a Windows ME bugfix!
It's a Perl script that says "Hello, World!"
That was back 10 years ago. Today it's background mp3 music and 30 flash videos strung together with about 3 megabytes of javascript.
I'm not well-versed in history, so I'd like to learn a little from you. Specifically, could you please:
Since you probably have no answers to my questions, I'll answer them for you.
I actually have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about when you say the Chinese virtually wiped out (virtually = in an MMORPG?) the Mongols. Perhaps you mean the Mongols conquered China, but lost their culture because they gradually assimilated into Chinese culture? And then the Mongols became Chinese?
As for Korea, I can only recall one major event when China killed Koreans, which was the Korean War. Why did China send troops into Korea? Because UN troops (of which the vast majority were American) led by an American general moved troops all the way up the Korean peninsula to the border with China. If Chinese troops landed in Mexico, took it over, and fought successfully up to the Rio Grande, what do you expect the US armed forces to do? Let's not forget that Macarthur was also seeking authorization to nuke about a dozen key industrial areas in China.
China didn't send large numbers of troops into Vietnam. But, again, you know who did? That's right, the US did. The Chinese military primarily served as advisors to the Communist North. Most references don't even list China as one of the combatants. Why did China side against South Vietnam and the US? Because, again, the US was encroaching up to Chinese borders.
In summary, why did the Chinese kill some Koreans and Vietnamese? Because the US sent troops first to these areas, and China did not want new US-friendly regimes on its borders. In all likelihood, in each of these wars, US troops killed many more Asians than did Chinese troops.
Did you hit some kink in space-time and post this to the wrong article? Or am I hallucinating?