We've found unbelievable bugs in Solaris, and we are not heavy users.
From the top of my head: we have some scripts that combine diff/patch/ed to reduce the amount of data transfered between an e10k and an IBM mainframe. I don't remember the exact number, I think it was a 30 megabytes file that could not be patched correctly, ed failed without notice. This was a Solaris 9 installation. The solution? We overwrote ed with gnu's implementation.
The other one I remember was a show-stopper for us. We upgraded an e10k, the power up became a nightmare. After 10 or 15 minutes into the startup, it rebooted automatically, and again, and again... nobody knew what was going on. The only thing that was different was that it had more processors. The problem, what ever it was, happened before any diagnostics messages showed up in the ssp console. Sun's technicians were horrified.
Making a long story short, Sun had found that some tape drives connected to a specific port, or the corresponding device driver, were causing problems, so when one of this tape drives was detected in that port during startup, the system was automatically rebooted. Unplugging the damn drive let the system boot without problem.
The language is already forcing you to catch every posible exception the preparation could throw. You already have the tools to identify the different causes.
Many have mentioned that if SCO showed some illegally copied code in the kernel, it would be replaced in no time. I wonder who could re-implement those parts in a safe way, I mean as in "a cleanroom implementation". Wouldn't every kernel developer be contaminated? Linus would, he must have seen SCO's code when he received the "illegal patches".
If this is true, it would be a really big problem, wouldn't it?
I am slightly curious whether this "web server add-on" is available to consumers, and also whether it is a fully-featured web server. If not, and this is just a hack, that might cast a pall of illegitimacy. Anyone have the inside scoop?
If this is a hack, it could show what we all know is one of the strongest points of OpenSource: that you can hack (or pay somebody to do it) an application to suit your needs.
INTERBASE 6.0 BETA TEST FOR LINUX LICENSE STATEMENT AND LIMITED WARRANTY
... You acknowledge that the Software in source code form remains a confidential trade secret of Inprise and/or its suppliers and therefore you agree not to modify the Software or attempt to reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software, except and only to the extent that such activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation.
First, I'm not familiar with the differences between Mesa and OpenGL. Now I'm wondering, if they are thinking about merging both sources, is there any chance that what's different in Mesa could influence OpenGL's specification?
Next year the olimpic games will be held in Sidney, won't they? Well, guess who will get most of the gold medals? Prepare for some strange statistics:)
If we use a french "word" to express a concept as "deja vú" because there is no other easy way to do that in english, why can't we do the same to reference "free software"? I think we should call it "software libre".
Slashdot Mirror
That's certainly not true. The single factor that has influenced the majority of actions is SEX.
/. doing to my Firefox?
"Todo lo que el hombre hace es para levantar minas" - Alejandro Dolina (Everything a man does, he does it to pick up women)
-- What the hell is
Time to invade Europe!!!!!!
We've found unbelievable bugs in Solaris, and we are not heavy users.
From the top of my head: we have some scripts that combine diff/patch/ed to reduce the amount of data transfered between an e10k and an IBM mainframe. I don't remember the exact number, I think it was a 30 megabytes file that could not be patched correctly, ed failed without notice. This was a Solaris 9 installation. The solution? We overwrote ed with gnu's implementation.
The other one I remember was a show-stopper for us. We upgraded an e10k, the power up became a nightmare. After 10 or 15 minutes into the startup, it rebooted automatically, and again, and again... nobody knew what was going on. The only thing that was different was that it had more processors. The problem, what ever it was, happened before any diagnostics messages showed up in the ssp console. Sun's technicians were horrified.
Making a long story short, Sun had found that some tape drives connected to a specific port, or the corresponding device driver, were causing problems, so when one of this tape drives was detected in that port during startup, the system was automatically rebooted. Unplugging the damn drive let the system boot without problem.
We know they don't go for a "it barely works"
The language is already forcing you to catch every posible exception the preparation could throw. You already have the tools to identify the different causes.
But good C people isn't enough, they should also be good kernel developers.
Many have mentioned that if SCO showed some illegally copied code in the kernel, it would be replaced in no time. I wonder who could re-implement those parts in a safe way, I mean as in "a cleanroom implementation". Wouldn't every kernel developer be contaminated? Linus would, he must have seen SCO's code when he received the "illegal patches".
If this is true, it would be a really big problem, wouldn't it?
He's going in for the people...
USA is doing this only to free the oppressed people, nobody cares about the oil...
enough said.
If this is a hack, it could show what we all know is one of the strongest points of OpenSource: that you can hack (or pay somebody to do it) an application to suit your needs.
In Gnome's site there's a document (book) called "Gnome & Corba". It's really good.
...nobody trusts their security to RedHat.
Maybe we should start recognizing the docs writers as we do with the software writers. Awards or something.
Quote form the License.txt file:
INTERBASE 6.0 BETA TEST FOR LINUX
LICENSE STATEMENT AND LIMITED WARRANTY
...
You acknowledge that the Software in source code form remains a confidential trade secret of Inprise and/or its suppliers and therefore you agree not to modify the Software or attempt to reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software, except and only to the extent that such
activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation.
Doesn't sound like Open Source to me.
It's Open Source, if you can't modify it you can always contract some capable programer to do what you want/need.
please
First, I'm not familiar with the differences between Mesa and OpenGL.
Now I'm wondering, if they are thinking about merging both sources, is there any chance that what's different in Mesa could influence OpenGL's specification?
They were who distributed the secret in the first place, only they didn't get to keep it secret.
Nothing else to say...
Next year the olimpic games will be held in Sidney, won't they? Well, guess who will get most of the gold medals? Prepare for some strange statistics :)
I think this one represents exactly the concept of hacking.
It's: "Su camión está en mi baño...", maybe you can cut&paste this :).
If we use a french "word" to express a concept as "deja vú" because there is no other easy way to do that in english, why can't we do the same to reference "free software"? I think we should call it "software libre".
PEOPLE UNDER 18 HAVE NO RIGHTS!
So, you mean your brother doesn't have the right to live...