On the other hand, I am told it is much easier to become a Linux developer, so Linux is more open.
On the other other hand, there are fewer license restrictions on what I can do with BSD software, so BSD is more open.
On the other other other hand, Linux's license promotes open-source software, so Linux is more open.
On the other other other other hand, "open" is a word with a lot of meanings and a lot of connotations, and perhaps there are better things to do than worry about which project is "most open".
--
Re:Sun is a hardware vender first Unix vender seco
on
A Praise To Unix
·
· Score: 1
No, Solaris doesn't "waist" the power of the hardware it runs on; quite to the contrary, some of Sun's best work (IMHO) has been in optimizing their operating system for many processes running on multiple CPUs.
What, you never heard of information hiding, one of the most important principles of software engineering, including user interface design?
I won't try to address your first sentence, as I can't make heads or tails of it.
If you don't believe that a unix or unix-like substrate can support a highly functional, user-friendly environment, feel free to come by and use my NeXT for a few minutes. You may change your mind.
> the second that money changes hands, it's no longer
> their software - it's now my software
Not really. You haven't bought the software, you've just licensed it. And Microsoft and other software vendors are pushing legislation through Congress that would make the terms of the license agreement enforceable, no matter how arbitrary they are, no matter how underhandedly they get you to agree to them.
Does a teacher sell teaching? Does a lawyer sell valuable chunks o' law? Whence comes this idee' fixe that programmers must sell programs?
If a programmer is any good, they will be good at debugging and documenting and designing and all sorts of nifty things that are not coding. Programmers are valuable for their talent and skill. Code is one thing you can get out of programmers, but it's not necessarily the most important. IMHO it's over-emphasized because it's relatively easy to understand.
I believe that open source software and Linux in particular have been in the public eye since some time in 1995. Tell me, in the last five years, have there been fewer jobs for programmers? Is the work generally available for programmers now less interesting or lucrative than it was before? How many people do you know who've been put out of work by the open source movement?
I can't off the top of my head think of a way to do that with sendmail alone (I could do it with Postfix though).
However, you can run sendmail out of inetd, and do it that way. You need the "-a" option to inetd, and since that is a per-inetd option, you may need to run two instances of inetd, one with "-a 127.0.0.1" and one without. Obviously they will need separate configuration files.
If you weren't so concerned with one-upmanship, you might have noticed that we were talking about how to keep outgoing mail flowing while avoiding the risks inherent in running sendmail on the network.
The way I do that is to run sendmail in queue-processing-only mode.
By default, on FreeBSD (and probably other OSs too), sendmail is run with the arguments "-bd -q30m". "-bd" tells it to daemonize and listen on port 25; "-q30m" tells it to process the queue every 30 minutes.
So if I want to avoid relaying or other network-related problems with sendmail, I take out "-bd" but leave in "-q30m" (adjusting the interval if appropriate). I believe this is a fairly standard practice. Hope this helps.
Yeah -- what do those bastards think they're doing, providing a useful, free, unusually reliable search engine? And making money at it too?! They should be shot.
It's funny... I'm a big FreeBSD fan, I run it on my desktop and on a whole bunch of servers. I am definitely a FreeBSD bigot, but I try to be open about what I consider its weaknesses as well as its strengths, in part so that Linux fans will know that I'm not a religious fanatic.
In this forum, I've been getting responses as if i were attacking FreeBSD... maybe I need to put "ecumenical BSD freak" in my sig or something.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Not everyone runs Linux, you know. Those are implementation quirks, nothing more.
--
On the other hand, I am told it is much easier to become a Linux developer, so Linux is more open.
On the other other hand, there are fewer license restrictions on what I can do with BSD software, so BSD is more open.
On the other other other hand, Linux's license promotes open-source software, so Linux is more open.
On the other other other other hand, "open" is a word with a lot of meanings and a lot of connotations, and perhaps there are better things to do than worry about which project is "most open".
--
No, Solaris doesn't "waist" the power of the hardware it runs on; quite to the contrary, some of Sun's best work (IMHO) has been in optimizing their operating system for many processes running on multiple CPUs.
What makes you think that Solaris is inefficient?
--
What, you never heard of information hiding, one of the most important principles of software engineering, including user interface design?
I won't try to address your first sentence, as I can't make heads or tails of it.
If you don't believe that a unix or unix-like substrate can support a highly functional, user-friendly environment, feel free to come by and use my NeXT for a few minutes. You may change your mind.
--
I'm puzzled by your last comment. You don't like standard unix shells? Or you don't like the ni* programs? Or what?
--
> the second that money changes hands, it's no longer
> their software - it's now my software
Not really. You haven't bought the software, you've just licensed it. And Microsoft and other software vendors are pushing legislation through Congress that would make the terms of the license agreement enforceable, no matter how arbitrary they are, no matter how underhandedly they get you to agree to them.
Where have you been?
--
What do you mean by "opaque"?
> companies who really know how to manage bandwidth and links.
Sure, if we can *find* any.
Just about everybody who writes software, period. Programmers are no exception to Sturgeon's Law.
Does a teacher sell teaching? Does a lawyer sell valuable chunks o' law? Whence comes this idee' fixe that programmers must sell programs?
If a programmer is any good, they will be good at debugging and documenting and designing and all sorts of nifty things that are not coding. Programmers are valuable for their talent and skill. Code is one thing you can get out of programmers, but it's not necessarily the most important. IMHO it's over-emphasized because it's relatively easy to understand.
I believe that open source software and Linux in particular have been in the public eye since some time in 1995. Tell me, in the last five years, have there been fewer jobs for programmers? Is the work generally available for programmers now less interesting or lucrative than it was before? How many people do you know who've been put out of work by the open source movement?
Furrfu,
> the supreme court just said if the companys selling the software used s > shrinkwraped licencse, there weren't accountable.
The Supreme Court of the State of Washington, not the Supreme Court of the United States. Come on.
How come nobody is bringing up the idea of commercial support for free software?
NT looks more like VMS under the hood than like unix.
If you make "backups" to the same filesystem that stores the originals, then you are asking for trouble anyway.
I really like Postfix a lot.
I can't off the top of my head think of a way to do that with sendmail alone (I could do it with Postfix though).
However, you can run sendmail out of inetd, and do it that way. You need the "-a" option to inetd, and since that is a per-inetd option, you may need to run two instances of inetd, one with "-a 127.0.0.1" and one without. Obviously they will need separate configuration files.
If you weren't so concerned with one-upmanship, you might have noticed that we were talking about how to keep outgoing mail flowing while avoiding the risks inherent in running sendmail on the network.
Am I a bad person for thinking "Tina Marie found a fun way to indirectly DoS Hotmail"?
;-)
Hmm.
The way I do that is to run sendmail in queue-processing-only mode.
By default, on FreeBSD (and probably other OSs too), sendmail is run with the arguments "-bd -q30m". "-bd" tells it to daemonize and listen on port 25; "-q30m" tells it to process the queue every 30 minutes.
So if I want to avoid relaying or other network-related problems with sendmail, I take out "-bd" but leave in "-q30m" (adjusting the interval if appropriate). I believe this is a fairly standard practice. Hope this helps.
Yeah -- what do those bastards think they're doing, providing a useful, free, unusually reliable search engine? And making money at it too?! They should be shot.
(Sheesh.)
To the best of my knowledge, people are still searching for good responses to this sort of attack.
Check out this BUGTRAQ post for an announcement about a technical get-together where people plan to brainstorm about DDoS's.
Easy! Just su to root, and then run
"ping -f 127.0.0.1"
You should see results fairly quickly.
"[P]oor daytrader"?
;-)
Does not compute.
You want a Usenet 2?
... all right. I spent a few minutes on it just now and whipped one up for you.
Oh
Uh, none?
It's funny ... I'm a big FreeBSD fan, I run it on my desktop and on a whole bunch of servers. I am definitely a FreeBSD bigot, but I try to be open about what I consider its weaknesses as well as its strengths, in part so that Linux fans will know that I'm not a religious fanatic.
... maybe I need to put "ecumenical BSD freak" in my sig or something. ;-)
In this forum, I've been getting responses as if i were attacking FreeBSD