read a music cd in, do a cddb lookup, and then burn a copy with CD-TEXT? I've been looking for something to do this forever.. I've been using cdrdao for about 3-4 years because cdrecord couldn't burn tracks without gaps, dunno if that's changed..
thanks
-o
but here's the thing, as soon as ISP's get picky about what goes on their network, they're accountable for the content on it. and then who is the riaa legally going to be going after? the isps.
there's no chance this is going to happen.
most of the congestion problems are on the internet anyway, not on isp's access networks. now it's a whole different story, however, with access methods that are shared - wireless and cable for example.
yes! Steve during some macworld keynote proclaimed that OSX was to be the premier desktop OS in terms of java support. I don't personally know the standards and so I'm not going to list the compliance here, but I do know that it has very sweet integration - you can program in Java (or objc) to the Cocoa API (full OS api which is 90% unchanged from Openstep of 1990), and when you program to Swing OSX uses native aqua gui widgets.
Basically, if you're running a cocoa app, you won't be able to tell if it's objective C or Java, and if you're running a swing app you won't be able to tell it's java by its appearance. Very nice.
and I know their packaging formats are still in active development. I'm not sure what different formats exist on the Mac platform, but the current installer package format (under osx, I'm also using 4k73 until tomorrow) is not being pushed on developers for applications, it seems currently to be only for operating system related packages (and apps by apple, of course). Nonetheless, some applications developers have been using it (tenon, for one, for their Xtools X server).
But Apple in this case will have difficulty using a drop-in replacement from the open source community, because of their multiple-forked file formats. RPM would be a great choice given it's cross platform-ness, but they'd have to extend it to support multiple forks. If it were my choice, that is what I'd do, given the active development of RPM and its ubiquity and increasing popularity on non-RedHat systems (snapdragon - very cool rpm dist for non-redhat platforms).
That being said, I haven't thought much about the licensing ramifications of bundling gpl software with a commercial os, I hear licensing was the reason that OSX final does not include openssh. Maybe that in particular was a decision by Apple possibly to use ssh.com's ssh..
sure, but do realize at all what they did? come on, porting an os is one thing. But maintaining binary compatibility with legacy apps is wholly something else. They didn't have it run in a virtual machine which trivializes the problem (relatively). Much like i386 binaries on Alpha for windows or linux (developed by Digital, very well I might add), MacOS allowed 68k apps to run alongside their PPC companions, and even the OS itself had mixed arch components.
I'm sure this is the reason (besides their being married to intel) MS will never port windows to anything non-intel. NT is actually one of the most widely ported OS's, although only 4 arch variants were ever sold. The core has been ported to tons of different architectures internally, if only for the exercise. But that experience allowed MS to port CE (the same core as NT) to lots of non-intel/alpha/mips/ppc apps.
I'm not saying that MacOS (pre-X) is a well designed OS by today's standards. But it beat the shit out of anything else that ran on a 512x384 screen with 1meg of ram in 1984. It's just a pity they didn't scrap that OS sooner.
I think you're exactly right. I don't have one myself, but the Palm is nice because you don't launch apps, they're always running. And since the storage isn't just like a filesystem, you can do global searches into the contents of the file. What systems are you talking about, that used smalltalk? I've heard that mentioned before..
bsd rc scripts may be "easy to manage," but you lose on granularity. want to stop a service without changing initlevels or having to know the proper mgmt script? sysvscripts give you that granularity, but are complex..
this is just like solaris's nca (network cache accelerator) which made its debut in 2.8, or maybe 2.7/isp pack.. it uses solaris doors to communicate with the userland web server, but I don't think any server but sun's web server works with it yet. dunno..
I just moved my qmail/courier-imap mail system from freebsd to linux (ffs to ext2) and performance is not so good when dealing with large directories.. I'd definitely recommend using an advanced fs on your mail server like sgi's xfs, ibm's jfs, or reiserfs. xfs is especially cool, because if the file is small enough, the file itself is stored in the inode and no space is allocated. That sounds great for storing messages to me! SGI also have created a redhat7/i386 installer cd, which allows for xfs-only systems (with 2.4) from the get-go. Tried it our last night, works like a champ.
as far as mta's go, does anyone know if qmail supports secure sendmail (using sasl)? I'm running an old version of postfix on my relays, time to update.
Do you understand that Apple created the Macintosh market, and frankly, cannot survive without it? Apple is a hardware company, and you fault it for cutting off greedy clone manufacturers who contributed neither to the exorbitant research and development costs nor the marketing costs of the proprietary platform (you'll be hard pressed to find another company that spends as much relatively than apple on r&d), as was stipulated in the clone contracts? Get your facts straight before you start 'Assuming.'
Jobs is being far less 'Ruthless' than the industry analysts. The Macintosh market IS apple's, don't you forget it. Just as Irix is SGI's market. Just as Solaris/sparc is Sun's market. Of course, for better or worse; but in Apple's case, for the consumer, I think for better.
for a in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ; do ssh user@host-$a rpm -Uvh http://server/software.rpm ; done
if you feel the need to compile, compile. but package after that, and you'll thank yourself if you manage more than one machine..
If you have a problem that requires 'tweaking,' your problem is most likely a configuration problem, not a packaging problem. If you have a packaging problem, make your own packages from source RPMs.
Of course, if you're like me and have redhat running on a few different architectures, I only get source RPMs and make binary RPMs from there.
and if you want to use RPM on Solaris, check out snapdragon, very cool. Also to be extended to Digital Unix and Darwin if I ever get the time!
-o
I'm looking forward to when XFree86 can be run as a rootless client of Mac OSX's display subsystem.. All those apps compile fine (for the most part) on Darwin already! Although I'm still trying to figure out how I can have XFree on one monitor, and OSX on the other..
Havok is an Irish company who have written a full newtonian physics engine for win32 and PS2. Their site has loads of information on it (not necessarily technical, but lots of demo movies and actual demos). They even have two demos which showcase cloth in particular.
I've also checked out some of their competitors (mathengine, etc) and havok seems miles ahead. Unfortunately, I don't think havok supports any open source platforms.. I can't imagine they're not working on that, though.
I'd agree with your statements if your target audience is an existing linux user who wants to run linux.
But if you're a current Mac user, your arguments miss the point. The cons you list can be grouped into three categories:
- completely subjective, and biased towards unix
- complaining about features which are obviously not perfectly functional, given the 'beta' designation
- pointing out UI issues which are relatively trivial to change, not software design flaws
really. so if I want a desktop operating system with a modern design, with a rich oo programming api with access to advanced display technologies, what are my choices:
linux and gnustep might be at an analagous point in development, check out their status page. berlin is still in heavy development. but the big difference is apple has salaried employees working on this. and the cocoa api is much more powerful than openstep/gnustep because of its access to quartz, which is like dpsng + opengl + quicktime. gnustep is a clone, and will always be catching up to cocoa.
and if you really want, install Apple's dev tools, XFree86, and be done with it, you've got a gnome-ready workstation (when it gets ported, Darwin is just another BSD). Have you seen ProjectBuilder? I've never before seen such a nice IDE that uses open-source tools (gcc, gdb, jam). And for you hard core unix guys, openssh included.
And, to top it off, you get all the OS9 applications that Mac users are used to. You get a java runtime environment whos swing interface is consistent with the MacOS interface. You get a professionally designed and polished GUI.
I would argue that ALL MacOSX needs for release is polishing. A linux system that looks like MacOSX can do nothing that MacOSX will not be able to do.
I would argue that it is (in theory) better. Because Internap buys the bandwidth, they can facilitate symmetric routing, which is something a tier 2 cannot provide you. The peering arrangements between providers are hardly ever equal, so level3 might push more traffic to sprint than sprint would push to level3. So Sprint might just not accept some traffic from level3, forcing that traffic to go through a different level3 peering arrangement.
Internap doesn't have that problem. They buy bandwidth, guaranteeing that both there and back your traffic will travel along an optimal route.
internally for optimal routes in their cache hierarchy, and also as a hook into their modified bind (or whatever named they're using) so that www.ak.customer.com always points to the "closest" ghost server to the end-user.
Akamai has many more data points from which to deduce traffic flow information, but internap has higher-quality ones.
Of course the services you can get are different, but I wouldn't be surprised if Internap started offering services akin to what Akamai currently does..
-o
is will it support that video card that came with my SGI 1600SW? I've heard (from some comment on a similar site) that it worked with DP4.. I guess I'll find out when the beta comes.
-o
Sure, but in each case the successor was significantly better. Advances in technology can really be grouped into two categories: speed/performance/convenience and features.
Tapes replaced vinyl because you could carry tapes around in your back pocket. They didn't dwell on the fact that they were considered to have lesser quality. That advancement was mainly for the form factor.
And then CDs came out, and tapes were gone. CDs are random access, and have much higher quality. But you could no longer record on them. So new functionality was the motivator for the change in public use.
Of course, now we're all working in the digital domain, random access, but we have these huge expensive players called computers. Computers are general purpose machines, so they're not tied to a certain format like CD players and turntables.
So the format matters less than having adaptable players. If we have an abundance of software players for all the major operating systems, and have format upgradeable hardware devices, we'll be set, and will be able to take advantage of the latest digital music format of choice.
-o
That's the SID, which is used within the NT domain model to provide discrete security contexts for local and domain security. So if you ghost two machines, a local account might be able to access resources on the other machine with the same account, but different password.
But the recent crop of ghosting tools know about this (I'm pretty sure) and can generate a unique one. If it's not in the actual ghosting util, there's a standalone util to change the SID on a machine.
Okay, there's MS, with this huge hotmail thing which draws lots of traffic. And that traffic is a free service, so they don't have to care if it goes down.
Great. They have one of the best testbeds in existence for stressing new technologies. Even if they swap out 20% of the current servers with something that fails miserably, they still have a working service. And since that 20% will be getting traffic that no company in their right mind would devote to win2k for a production service, they get great bugfix material, and service packs get better.
so i don't see this as anything but good. the quality of win2k will get better (although really, I've only had crashes due to a rotten video driver, and don't start the whole video/kernel debate, please), and the bsd/linux/anti-ms hooligans can berate ms when their "attempt to migrate to 2k" fails. capiche?
who cares anyway? you all get hotmail for free.. -o, mcse - 3.51
Sure, but if you're willing to have a bit more 'crap' in the kernel, you reduce the chance of being cracked. If creating an exploit for a kernel with the stack-exec patch is more of a task, there will be fewer exploits that do so. In applying that patch, you'd successfully be lowering your chances of being cracked.
Slashdot Mirror
read a music cd in, do a cddb lookup, and then burn a copy with CD-TEXT? I've been looking for something to do this forever.. I've been using cdrdao for about 3-4 years because cdrecord couldn't burn tracks without gaps, dunno if that's changed..
thanks
-o
but here's the thing, as soon as ISP's get picky about what goes on their network, they're accountable for the content on it. and then who is the riaa legally going to be going after? the isps.
there's no chance this is going to happen.
most of the congestion problems are on the internet anyway, not on isp's access networks. now it's a whole different story, however, with access methods that are shared - wireless and cable for example.
yes! Steve during some macworld keynote proclaimed that OSX was to be the premier desktop OS in terms of java support. I don't personally know the standards and so I'm not going to list the compliance here, but I do know that it has very sweet integration - you can program in Java (or objc) to the Cocoa API (full OS api which is 90% unchanged from Openstep of 1990), and when you program to Swing OSX uses native aqua gui widgets.
Basically, if you're running a cocoa app, you won't be able to tell if it's objective C or Java, and if you're running a swing app you won't be able to tell it's java by its appearance. Very nice.
But Apple in this case will have difficulty using a drop-in replacement from the open source community, because of their multiple-forked file formats. RPM would be a great choice given it's cross platform-ness, but they'd have to extend it to support multiple forks. If it were my choice, that is what I'd do, given the active development of RPM and its ubiquity and increasing popularity on non-RedHat systems (snapdragon - very cool rpm dist for non-redhat platforms).
That being said, I haven't thought much about the licensing ramifications of bundling gpl software with a commercial os, I hear licensing was the reason that OSX final does not include openssh. Maybe that in particular was a decision by Apple possibly to use ssh.com's ssh..
sure, but do realize at all what they did? come on, porting an os is one thing. But maintaining binary compatibility with legacy apps is wholly something else. They didn't have it run in a virtual machine which trivializes the problem (relatively). Much like i386 binaries on Alpha for windows or linux (developed by Digital, very well I might add), MacOS allowed 68k apps to run alongside their PPC companions, and even the OS itself had mixed arch components.
I'm sure this is the reason (besides their being married to intel) MS will never port windows to anything non-intel. NT is actually one of the most widely ported OS's, although only 4 arch variants were ever sold. The core has been ported to tons of different architectures internally, if only for the exercise. But that experience allowed MS to port CE (the same core as NT) to lots of non-intel/alpha/mips/ppc apps.
I'm not saying that MacOS (pre-X) is a well designed OS by today's standards. But it beat the shit out of anything else that ran on a 512x384 screen with 1meg of ram in 1984. It's just a pity they didn't scrap that OS sooner.
I think you're exactly right. I don't have one myself, but the Palm is nice because you don't launch apps, they're always running. And since the storage isn't just like a filesystem, you can do global searches into the contents of the file. What systems are you talking about, that used smalltalk? I've heard that mentioned before..
but wait, there's chkconfig (comes with redhat):
[root@tomato oliver]# /sbin/chkconfig --list ntpd /sbin/chkconfig --level 2345 ntpd off
ntpd 0:off 1:off 2:on 3:on 4:on 5:on 6:off
[root@tomato oliver]#
sysvinit complexity woes gone!
I think the chkconfig with redhat 7 even allows you to manage xinetd services. sweet.
this is just like solaris's nca (network cache accelerator) which made its debut in 2.8, or maybe 2.7/isp pack.. it uses solaris doors to communicate with the userland web server, but I don't think any server but sun's web server works with it yet. dunno..
like dnssec, backending into a database, etc.. try bind 9 if you want to stay with bind and alleviate yourself of the bug-ridden 8.x series..
I just moved my qmail/courier-imap mail system from freebsd to linux (ffs to ext2) and performance is not so good when dealing with large directories.. I'd definitely recommend using an advanced fs on your mail server like sgi's xfs, ibm's jfs, or reiserfs. xfs is especially cool, because if the file is small enough, the file itself is stored in the inode and no space is allocated. That sounds great for storing messages to me! SGI also have created a redhat7/i386 installer cd, which allows for xfs-only systems (with 2.4) from the get-go. Tried it our last night, works like a champ.
as far as mta's go, does anyone know if qmail supports secure sendmail (using sasl)? I'm running an old version of postfix on my relays, time to update.
cheers,
-o
ugh.
Do you understand that Apple created the Macintosh market, and frankly, cannot survive without it? Apple is a hardware company, and you fault it for cutting off greedy clone manufacturers who contributed neither to the exorbitant research and development costs nor the marketing costs of the proprietary platform (you'll be hard pressed to find another company that spends as much relatively than apple on r&d), as was stipulated in the clone contracts? Get your facts straight before you start 'Assuming.'
Jobs is being far less 'Ruthless' than the industry analysts. The Macintosh market IS apple's, don't you forget it. Just as Irix is SGI's market. Just as Solaris/sparc is Sun's market. Of course, for better or worse; but in Apple's case, for the consumer, I think for better.
if you feel the need to compile, compile. but package after that, and you'll thank yourself if you manage more than one machine..
If you have a problem that requires 'tweaking,' your problem is most likely a configuration problem, not a packaging problem. If you have a packaging problem, make your own packages from source RPMs.
Of course, if you're like me and have redhat running on a few different architectures, I only get source RPMs and make binary RPMs from there.
and if you want to use RPM on Solaris, check out snapdragon, very cool. Also to be extended to Digital Unix and Darwin if I ever get the time!
-o
I'm looking forward to when XFree86 can be run as a rootless client of Mac OSX's display subsystem.. All those apps compile fine (for the most part) on Darwin already! Although I'm still trying to figure out how I can have XFree on one monitor, and OSX on the other..
cheers,
-o
I've also checked out some of their competitors (mathengine, etc) and havok seems miles ahead. Unfortunately, I don't think havok supports any open source platforms.. I can't imagine they're not working on that, though.
cheers,
-o
I'd agree with your statements if your target audience is an existing linux user who wants to run linux.
But if you're a current Mac user, your arguments miss the point. The cons you list can be grouped into three categories:
- completely subjective, and biased towards unix
- complaining about features which are obviously not perfectly functional, given the 'beta' designation
- pointing out UI issues which are relatively trivial to change, not software design flaws
really. so if I want a desktop operating system with a modern design, with a rich oo programming api with access to advanced display technologies, what are my choices:
- *nix and gnustep
- *nix and berlin
- macosx
linux and gnustep might be at an analagous point in development, check out their status page. berlin is still in heavy development. but the big difference is apple has salaried employees working on this. and the cocoa api is much more powerful than openstep/gnustep because of its access to quartz, which is like dpsng + opengl + quicktime. gnustep is a clone, and will always be catching up to cocoa.
and if you really want, install Apple's dev tools, XFree86, and be done with it, you've got a gnome-ready workstation (when it gets ported, Darwin is just another BSD). Have you seen ProjectBuilder? I've never before seen such a nice IDE that uses open-source tools (gcc, gdb, jam). And for you hard core unix guys, openssh included.
And, to top it off, you get all the OS9 applications that Mac users are used to. You get a java runtime environment whos swing interface is consistent with the MacOS interface. You get a professionally designed and polished GUI.
I would argue that ALL MacOSX needs for release is polishing. A linux system that looks like MacOSX can do nothing that MacOSX will not be able to do.
cheers,
-o
I would argue that it is (in theory) better. Because Internap buys the bandwidth, they can facilitate symmetric routing, which is something a tier 2 cannot provide you. The peering arrangements between providers are hardly ever equal, so level3 might push more traffic to sprint than sprint would push to level3. So Sprint might just not accept some traffic from level3, forcing that traffic to go through a different level3 peering arrangement.
Internap doesn't have that problem. They buy bandwidth, guaranteeing that both there and back your traffic will travel along an optimal route.
But yes, they're crazy pricey.
-o
internally for optimal routes in their cache hierarchy, and also as a hook into their modified bind (or whatever named they're using) so that www.ak.customer.com always points to the "closest" ghost server to the end-user.
Akamai has many more data points from which to deduce traffic flow information, but internap has higher-quality ones.
Of course the services you can get are different, but I wouldn't be surprised if Internap started offering services akin to what Akamai currently does..
-o
is will it support that video card that came with my SGI 1600SW? I've heard (from some comment on a similar site) that it worked with DP4.. I guess I'll find out when the beta comes.
-o
sure can, 11 meg wireless ethernet. not sure about more wide area protocols.
Tapes replaced vinyl and CD's replaced tapes.
Sure, but in each case the successor was significantly better. Advances in technology can really be grouped into two categories: speed/performance/convenience and features.
Tapes replaced vinyl because you could carry tapes around in your back pocket. They didn't dwell on the fact that they were considered to have lesser quality. That advancement was mainly for the form factor.
And then CDs came out, and tapes were gone. CDs are random access, and have much higher quality. But you could no longer record on them. So new functionality was the motivator for the change in public use.
Of course, now we're all working in the digital domain, random access, but we have these huge expensive players called computers. Computers are general purpose machines, so they're not tied to a certain format like CD players and turntables.
So the format matters less than having adaptable players. If we have an abundance of software players for all the major operating systems, and have format upgradeable hardware devices, we'll be set, and will be able to take advantage of the latest digital music format of choice.
-o
That's the SID, which is used within the NT domain model to provide discrete security contexts for local and domain security. So if you ghost two machines, a local account might be able to access resources on the other machine with the same account, but different password.
But the recent crop of ghosting tools know about this (I'm pretty sure) and can generate a unique one. If it's not in the actual ghosting util, there's a standalone util to change the SID on a machine.
except that Galeon is not cross platform, so I'm out of luck on my current crop of desktop machines..
how's gnome on osx coming along?
Okay, there's MS, with this huge hotmail thing which draws lots of traffic. And that traffic is a free service, so they don't have to care if it goes down.
Great. They have one of the best testbeds in existence for stressing new technologies. Even if they swap out 20% of the current servers with something that fails miserably, they still have a working service. And since that 20% will be getting traffic that no company in their right mind would devote to win2k for a production service, they get great bugfix material, and service packs get better.
so i don't see this as anything but good. the quality of win2k will get better (although really, I've only had crashes due to a rotten video driver, and don't start the whole video/kernel debate, please), and the bsd/linux/anti-ms hooligans can berate ms when their "attempt to migrate to 2k" fails. capiche?
who cares anyway? you all get hotmail for free..
-o, mcse - 3.51
amen brother. /. is already biased purely by its content selection. we don't need more bias in the content itself.
sheesh.
Sure, but if you're willing to have a bit more 'crap' in the kernel, you reduce the chance of being cracked. If creating an exploit for a kernel with the stack-exec patch is more of a task, there will be fewer exploits that do so. In applying that patch, you'd successfully be lowering your chances of being cracked.
I don't see that as a bad thing.