Re: Gates to open-source its software. What a nice guy.
SomeBloke
>
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/27/MS-open-source-Silverlight_1.html
>
> How much more philanthropic can one man be?
> Giving his IP over to the open-sauce commune so
> everyone can benefit from it. Even the thieves and
> pirates in the Linux arena can abscond with his work.
>
> This makes all the stories about the wicked, evil,
> MS empire sound like so much rasberries and
> grapejuice from those that would deny Sir William
> his well earned recognition.
You obviously didn't read all of the article or you would have discovered
that there is an ulterior motive behind this release, (Adobe et al).
Microsoft in danger of being left behind again, or is that as usual.
Still, at least Bills heart is in the right place, in his wallet!
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/27/MS-open-source-Silverlight_1.html
> How much more philanthropic can one man be?
> Giving his IP over to the open-sauce commune so
> everyone can benefit from it. Even the thieves and
> pirates in the Linux arena can abscond with his work.
All the pirates and thieves are in the WINDOWS camp you dolt.
Unless you can name one single little bit of software that the linux
"pirates" and "thieves" have stolen?
Just the one?
Anything?
At all?
Didn't think so.
> This makes all the stories about the wicked, evil,
> MS empire sound like so much rasberries and
> grapejuice from those that would deny Sir William
> his well earned recognition.
Oh yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
This is one of those "let them eat cake" moments in history no doubt.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
| in | suck is probably the day they start making |
| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Qualig
> Aunty Diluvian <AuntyDiluv...@gmail.com> did eloquently scribble:
>
> >http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/27/MS-open-source-Silverlight_...
> > How much more philanthropic can one man be?
> > Giving his IP over to the open-sauce commune so
> > everyone can benefit from it. Even the thieves and
> > pirates in the Linux arena can abscond with his work.
>
> All the pirates and thieves are in the WINDOWS camp you dolt.
> Unless you can name one single little bit of software that the linux
> "pirates" and "thieves" have stolen?
>
> Just the one?
>
> Anything?
>
> At all?
Let's start with the "weekly COLA stats" - a publically available Perl
script that Roy Culley plagiarized and now claims that he is the
author of.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
And you know this is NOT written by mr culley HOW exactly?
Have you seen the code? Or just the results?
Hell, even I wrote a newsgroup stats program a few years ago in perl.
Seemed to be the ideal thing TO write in perl.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste! |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| I can SMELL!!! KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and |
| in | get out the puncture repair kit!" |
| Computer Science | Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Smith
wrote:
> All the pirates and thieves are in the WINDOWS camp you dolt.
> Unless you can name one single little bit of software that the linux
> "pirates" and "thieves" have stolen?
>
> Just the one?
>
> Anything?
>
> At all?
VMWare.
The for-pay versions of SuSE and Redhat.
Assorted Windows apps to run under Wine or VMWae.
Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
Linux.
> Didn't think so.
Your sentence ran one word too long. Maybe you should check out the
Linux warez scene before further commenting on this subject.
--
--Tim Smith
![[H]omer's profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjWMQWyYwHeIwxhG3nGUeGWmLQD0R8TeZrvdWDiv5-2S_z3rHg=s40-c)
[H]omer
> Larry Qualig <lqu...@uku.co.uk> did eloquently scribble:
>> Let's start with the "weekly COLA stats" - a publically available Perl
>> script that Roy Culley plagiarized and now claims that he is the
>> author of.
That's pretty low even for an old washed-up ex-Microsoft Dilbert like
you, Laurence. How about a link to this "publically(sic) available Perl
script" that you know for a fact was "plagiarized"? Or were you talking
out of your arse as usual?
> And you know this is NOT written by mr culley HOW exactly?
> Have you seen the code?
Of course he hasn't. The crinkly old Troll thinks he can bait me with
insults ... he must be going senile.
Come on Larry you useless old fart ... put up or shut up ... where's the
*evidence* you obviously have of this *plagiarism*?
> Or just the results?
> Hell, even I wrote a newsgroup stats program a few years ago in perl.
> Seemed to be the ideal thing TO write in perl.
He's just fishing. The pathetic little Trolls are desperate for a new
attack vector, and Sweaty B. forgot to send them this weeks memo of
hints and tips.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| I found [Vista] to be a dangerously unstable operating system,
| which has caused me to lose data ... unfortunately this product
| is unfit for any user. - [H]ardOCP, <http://tinyurl.com/3bpfs2>
`----
Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel 2.6.20-1.2312.fc5
03:16:53 up 12 days, 49 min, 4 users, load average: 0.19, 0.19, 0.18
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> In article <6hjcg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>, spi...@freenet.co.uk
> wrote:
>> All the pirates and thieves are in the WINDOWS camp you dolt.
>> Unless you can name one single little bit of software that the linux
>> "pirates" and "thieves" have stolen?
>>
>> Just the one?
>>
>> Anything?
>>
>> At all?
> VMWare.
> The for-pay versions of SuSE and Redhat.
Most would settle for the free one.
> Assorted Windows apps to run under Wine or VMWae.
Windows apps they have ALREADY most likely, there's no reason to run windows
apps at all unless you already suffer from the lockin effect.
> Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
> Linux.
Evidence of this?
Even if you do find a few people who have, bet you'll find the proportion of
guilty to innocent in the linux community is significantly less than it is
for
> Your sentence ran one word too long. Maybe you should check out the
> Linux warez scene before further commenting on this subject.
Not an area I'm the least bit interested in.
But ooh yes, I was far too generous, only asking for one example.
How SILLY of me.
Now I'll make a more demanding... demand...
Linux "warez" scene vs windows "warez" scene.
Linux is as pure as the driven snow, compared to the pirates and thieves
amongst windows users.
Come to think of it, how can you even determine who IS a linux "warez"
scener if all they do is pirate windows software to run on vmware?
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| |
| in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Qualig
> Verily I say unto thee, that spi...@freenet.co.uk spake thusly:
>
> >> Let's start with the "weekly COLA stats" - a publically available Perl
> >> script that Roy Culley plagiarized and now claims that he is the
> >> author of.
>
> That's pretty low even for an old washed-up ex-Microsoft Dilbert like
> you, Laurence. How about a link to this "publically(sic) available Perl
> script" that you know for a fact was "plagiarized"? Or were you talking
> out of your arse as usual?
Provide the source code for the script that Roy Culley is the "author"
of then I will provide my link. If I provide my link first you'll have
the opportunity to modify the script to remove the resemblence.
This should be simple enough for you to understand.
> > And you know this is NOT written by mr culley HOW exactly?
> > Have you seen the code?
>
> Of course he hasn't. The crinkly old Troll thinks he can bait me with
> insults ... he must be going senile.
>
> Come on Larry you useless old fart ... put up or shut up ... where's the
> *evidence* you obviously have of this *plagiarism*?
The evidence is a subtle bug that exists in this publically available
Perl script. It is MOST FASCINATING that the script that Roy Culley is
the "author" of has the exact same bug.
> > Or just the results?
> > Hell, even I wrote a newsgroup stats program a few years ago in perl.
> > Seemed to be the ideal thing TO write in perl.
>
> He's just fishing. The pathetic little Trolls are desperate for a new
> attack vector, and Sweaty B. forgot to send them this weeks memo of
> hints and tips.
Sweaty... Troll... attack... Sure, keep the insults coming. But at
least I don't steal other peoples code and put my name on it then try
to peddle it as something that I wrote.
Linonut
> In article <6hjcg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>, spi...@freenet.co.uk
> wrote:
>> All the pirates and thieves are in the WINDOWS camp you dolt.
>> Unless you can name one single little bit of software that the linux
>> "pirates" and "thieves" have stolen?
>>
>> Just the one?
>> Anything?
>> At all?
>
> VMWare.
> The for-pay versions of SuSE and Redhat.
> Assorted Windows apps to run under Wine or VMWae.
> Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
> Linux.
Strong words.
>> Didn't think so.
>
> Your sentence ran one word too long. Maybe you should check out the
> Linux warez scene before further commenting on this subject.
Show us this "Linux warez scene", and show us how it is not also a
"Windows warez scene".
Idiocy worthy of Funkenbusch -- tarring all users with one brush.
Hmmmm. That makes me think of something....
First, we have the Funky Shuffle.
Now, we have the Timmy Shimmy.
--
:read ~/.signature
p5000011
> On Apr 28, 10:18 pm, "[H]omer" <s...@uce.gov> wrote:
>> Verily I say unto thee, that spi...@freenet.co.uk spake thusly:
>>
>> > Larry Qualig <lqua...@uku.co.uk> did eloquently scribble:
>> >> Let's start with the "weekly COLA stats" - a publically available Perl
>> >> script that Roy Culley plagiarized and now claims that he is the
>> >> author of.
>>
>> That's pretty low even for an old washed-up ex-Microsoft Dilbert like
>> you, Laurence. How about a link to this "publically(sic) available Perl
>> script" that you know for a fact was "plagiarized"? Or were you talking
>> out of your arse as usual?
>
> Provide the source code for the script that Roy Culley is the "author"
> of then I will provide my link. If I provide my link first you'll have
> the opportunity to modify the script to remove the resemblence.
>
> This should be simple enough for you to understand.
A bit of an impasse. Seeing as you are the one making the accusation the
onus is on you to prove it. [H]omer could make an md5 checksum of the
script and post that. You then post the link you have and details of the
subtle bug. [H]omer can then verify your plagiarism claim. As he didn't
write the script I see no reason for him to hide it if the plagiarism
is proved.
Assuming all this goes ahead why don't we have a bit of fun as well. A
little poll:
Is the COLA stats script that [H]omer uses plagiarised? Yes or No
Hadron Quark
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 07:41:56 -0700, Larry Qualig wrote:
>
>> On Apr 28, 10:18 pm, "[H]omer" <s...@uce.gov> wrote:
>>> Verily I say unto thee, that spi...@freenet.co.uk spake thusly:
>>>
>>> > Larry Qualig <lqua...@uku.co.uk> did eloquently scribble:
>>> >> Let's start with the "weekly COLA stats" - a publically available Perl
>>> >> script that Roy Culley plagiarized and now claims that he is the
>>> >> author of.
>>>
>>> That's pretty low even for an old washed-up ex-Microsoft Dilbert like
>>> you, Laurence. How about a link to this "publically(sic) available Perl
>>> script" that you know for a fact was "plagiarized"? Or were you talking
>>> out of your arse as usual?
>>
>> Provide the source code for the script that Roy Culley is the "author"
>> of then I will provide my link. If I provide my link first you'll have
>> the opportunity to modify the script to remove the resemblence.
>>
>> This should be simple enough for you to understand.
>
> A bit of an impasse. Seeing as you are the one making the accusation the
> onus is on you to prove it. [H]omer could make an md5 checksum of the
> script and post that. You then post the link you have and details of the
> subtle bug. [H]omer can then verify your plagiarism claim. As he didn't
> write the script I see no reason for him to hide it if the plagiarism
> is proved.
I can see a very good reason. The same one that has caused him not to
make the script public in the past.
I have a better idea, Homer just posts the code containing all change
history and we all have a good laugh. It is, after all, Open Source in
here. Isn't it?
>
> Assuming all this goes ahead why don't we have a bit of fun as well. A
> little poll:
>
> Is the COLA stats script that [H]omer uses plagiarised? Yes or No
If not, why so reluctant to post it?
--
Sell by date stamped on bottom.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> I can see a very good reason. The same one that has caused him not to
> make the script public in the past.
> I have a better idea, Homer just posts the code containing all change
> history and we all have a good laugh. It is, after all, Open Source in
> here. Isn't it?
And what makes you think homer has such information available to him?
Hell, I've written a few scripts and an irc bot and I don't keep a "change
history"
No need when I'm doing it for myself and the bot's no use to anyone but the
people in the irc channel I frequent so there's no point in openly
publicising it.
>>
>> Assuming all this goes ahead why don't we have a bit of fun as well. A
>> little poll:
>>
>> Is the COLA stats script that [H]omer uses plagiarised? Yes or No
> If not, why so reluctant to post it?
Why should he be brow beaten into posting something just cos of a few
trolls? Let's see if he can be bothered to post an MD5 sum shall we?
--
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
| spi...@freenet.co.uk |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
| |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
| in |good to you so far... |
| Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|
Tim Smith
Linonut <lin...@bone.com> wrote:
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
> > In article <6hjcg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>, spi...@freenet.co.uk
> > wrote:
> >> All the pirates and thieves are in the WINDOWS camp you dolt.
> >> Unless you can name one single little bit of software that the linux
> >> "pirates" and "thieves" have stolen?
> >>
> >> Just the one?
> >> Anything?
> >> At all?
> >
> > VMWare.
> > The for-pay versions of SuSE and Redhat.
> > Assorted Windows apps to run under Wine or VMWae.
> > Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
> > Linux.
>
> Strong words.
>
> >> Didn't think so.
> >
> > Your sentence ran one word too long. Maybe you should check out the
> > Linux warez scene before further commenting on this subject.
>
> Show us this "Linux warez scene", and show us how it is not also a
> "Windows warez scene".
>
> Idiocy worthy of Funkenbusch -- tarring all users with one brush.
So, who are you and what have you done with the real Linonut?
The real Linonut did not have the serious reading comprehension problems
that you do. Nowhere did I tar all users with one brush.
Also, the real Linonut knows how to use Google. The real Linonut was
also here the several times the Linux warez scene was discussed before,
and so knows about it.
--
--Tim Smith
Tim Smith
wrote:
> > Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
> > Linux.
>
> Evidence of this?
> Even if you do find a few people who have, bet you'll find the proportion of
> guilty to innocent in the linux community is significantly less than it is
> for
Just watch the Linux warez sites, or the P2P networks, and you'll see
pretty much everything releases commercially for Linux show up quickly.
...
> Come to think of it, how can you even determine who IS a linux "warez"
> scener if all they do is pirate windows software to run on vmware?
They pirate native Linux software. If you'd like some examples, do some
searching on The Pirate Bay.
--
--Tim Smith
The Ghost In The Machine
<reply_i...@mouse-potato.com>
wrote
on Sun, 29 Apr 2007 10:53:44 -0700
<reply_in_group-EDE...@news.supernews.com>:
Did the "real Linonut" post through Comcast?
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Linux. Because it's there and it works.
Windows. It's there, but does it work?
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Linonut
> So, who are you and what have you done with the real Linonut?
>
> The real Linonut did not have the serious reading comprehension problems
> that you do. Nowhere did I tar all users with one brush.
>
> Also, the real Linonut knows how to use Google. The real Linonut was
> also here the several times the Linux warez scene was discussed before,
> and so knows about it.
Hey Timmy, just fuck off, okay?
If you don't have links, STFU.
--
Free software is a matter of liberty not price. You should think of
"free" as in "free speech".
-- The Free Software Foundation http://www.fsf.org/
Linonut
> Did the "real Linonut" post through Comcast?
Tim Smith is becoming a real asshole.
--
"These changes do mean that we are not pursuing a separate delivery of
WinFS .... With most of our effort now working towards productizing mature
aspects of the WinFS project into SQL and ADO.NET, we do not need to deliver
a separate WinFS offering. -- Quentin Clark on the WinFS Team Blog
Linonut
> In article <0c7eg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>, spi...@freenet.co.uk
> wrote:
>> > Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
>> > Linux.
>>
>> Evidence of this?
>> Even if you do find a few people who have, bet you'll find the proportion of
>> guilty to innocent in the linux community is significantly less than it is
>> for
>
> Just watch the Linux warez sites, or the P2P networks, and you'll see
> pretty much everything releases commercially for Linux show up quickly.
Keeping real track, eh Tim? Why?
--
Reinvent yourself! -- Bill Gates
486box
> In article <0c7eg4-4m3....@ridcully.ntlworld.com>, spi...@freenet.co.uk
> wrote:
>
> > > Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
> > > Linux.
>
> > Evidence of this?
> > Even if you do find a few people who have, bet you'll find the proportion of
> > guilty to innocent in the linux community is significantly less than it is
> > for
>
> Just watch the Linux warez sites, or the P2P networks, and you'll see
> pretty much everything releases commercially for Linux show up quickly.
>
Hmm, a contradiction with previous statements. First the trolls say
that there is no commercial software for Linux and now you say it's
pirated.
Also, the people who pirate this stuff are probably the recently-
migrated Windows users who don't realize you can get equivalents for
free.
Tim Smith
Here's one link to get you started.
<
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
t
h
e
p
i
r
a
t
e
b
a
y
.
o
r
g
/
t
o
r
/
3
4
2
0
4
9
6
/
l
i
n
u
x
_
w
a
r
e
z
_
2
>
--
--Tim Smith
spi...@freenet.co.uk
Good catch. Or just windows users who want to pirate software "because it's
there". As a kid, I admit I used to swap spectrum games with friends.
Everyone did, it was part of the home computer culture back then.
I grew out of it. Seems that being forcefed proprietory software has kept
the windows users locked into the 1980s copy culture.
:)
I haven't pirated a single piece of software in well over 10 years.
(nay, not even unto the interweb)
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
| in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
| Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hadron Quark
Christ on a bike. Tim is right. You really have been suckered into the
COLA way. You used to be reasonable.
Linonut
> In article <Ea-dnWsycchj26jb...@comcast.com>,
> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> wrote:
>> Hey Timmy, just fuck off, okay?
>>
>> If you don't have links, STFU.
>
> Here's one link to get you started.
*plonk*
Goddam chronophage!
--
Windows XP. The operating system with a load in its pants.
Linonut
You don't even see Tim's gambit, do you?
Why?
For you, it is camoflage.
--
Refactor Windows.
Hadron Quark
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>>
>>>> In article <0c7eg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>, spi...@freenet.co.uk
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
>>>>> > Linux.
>>>>>
>>>>> Evidence of this?
>>>>> Even if you do find a few people who have, bet you'll find the proportion of
>>>>> guilty to innocent in the linux community is significantly less than it is
>>>>> for
>>>>
>>>> Just watch the Linux warez sites, or the P2P networks, and you'll see
>>>> pretty much everything releases commercially for Linux show up quickly.
>>>
>>> Keeping real track, eh Tim? Why?
>>
>> Christ on a bike. Tim is right. You really have been suckered into the
>> COLA way. You used to be reasonable.
>
> You don't even see Tim's gambit, do you?
>
My god. You are seeing things now. Time to take a break 'Nut old son.
before long you will think that MS are tapping your phones and
discrediting you like Roy thinks they are doing to him!
--
`When you say "I wrote a program that crashed Windows", people just stare at
you blankly and say "Hey, I got those with the system, *for free*".'
(By Linus Torvalds)
William Poaster
> After takin' a swig o' grog, The Ghost In The Machine belched out this bit o'
> wisdom:
>
>> Did the "real Linonut" post through Comcast?
>
> Tim Smith is becoming a real asshole.
Becoming?
Hadron Quark
And this from the Linonut who is complaining about others "insulting"
others.
I have never seen Tim Smith be anything other than polite and measured
in his responses. Responses which, by the way, contain factual evidence
to refute the wild and wonderful claims of the COLA gang. The swap file
issue being particularly amusing.But then Kelsey & Köhlmann probably
think Andrew Morton is a wintroll and arsehole. What would he know?
--
I think it's time to remove Qt and Qt-derived applications from the distributon.
By distributing it, we only encourage authors to create restrictive licenses.
-- Bruce Perens
Linonut
> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>>
>> You don't even see Tim's gambit, do you?
>
> My god. You are seeing things now. Time to take a break 'Nut old son.
>
> before long you will think that MS are tapping your phones and
> discrediting you like Roy thinks they are doing to him!
I'm not talking about MS, though. I'm talking about you and Timothy
Leary, here. Your posts are manifest and self-evident.
--
"We ... come ... in ... ... ... peace!"
Linonut
> William Poaster <w...@mykubuntu110.eu> writes:
>
>> On or about Monday 30 Apr 2007 2:32 am, Linonut issued this message:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, The Ghost In The Machine belched out this bit o'
>>> wisdom:
>>>
>>>> Did the "real Linonut" post through Comcast?
>>>
>>> Tim Smith is becoming a real asshole.
>>
>> Becoming?
>
> And this from the Linonut who is complaining about others "insulting"
> others.
There's quite a difference between saying someone is an asshole
(especially when he acts like one) and being one.
> I have never seen Tim Smith be anything other than polite and measured
> in his responses.
Bullshit. He's an insinuating, condescending, patronizing, if not to
say sneering, twat.
And deliberately so.
And it is getting worse, not better.
> Responses which, by the way, contain factual evidence
> to refute the wild and wonderful claims of the COLA gang.
Your tendency toward hyperbole undermines your argument.
> The swap file
> issue being particularly amusing.But then Kelsey & Köhlmann probably
> think Andrew Morton is a wintroll and arsehole. What would he know?
He seems to have a better grasp of the issue than do you or Tim.
http://blog.printf.net/articles/2006/03/27/swap-files-vs-swap-partitions
http://www.sunmanagers.org/pipermail/summaries/2005-November/006913.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_memory
--
:read ~/.signature
Tim Smith
>>> If you don't have links, STFU.
>>
>> Here's one link to get you started.
>
> *plonk*
>
> Goddam chronophage!
I gave you a link. I made it so that it was unlikely to be clickable,
so as to not encourage piracy of commercial Linux software. It is a
trivial matter for anyone even moderately familiar with basic Linux
command line tools to turn it into a link that can be pasted into their
browser. (One way: use tr).
Tim Smith
Linonut <lin...@bone.com> wrote:
> > The swap file
> > issue being particularly amusing.But then Kelsey & Köhlmann probably
> > think Andrew Morton is a wintroll and arsehole. What would he know?
>
> He seems to have a better grasp of the issue than do you or Tim.
>
> http://blog.printf.net/articles/2006/03/27/swap-files-vs-swap-partitions
That link quotes Andrew Morton:
In 2.6 [swap files and swap partitions] have the same reliability
and they will have the same performance unless the swapfile is badly
fragmented.
> http://www.sunmanagers.org/pipermail/summaries/2005-November/006913.html
The relevance of a discussion of Solaris swap handling to Linux is?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_memory
Quote from that:
In the Linux and *BSD operating systems, it is common to use a whole
partition of a HDD for swapping. Though it is still possible to use
a file for this, it is recommended to use a separate partition,
because this excludes chances of file system fragmentation, which
would reduce performance. Also, by using a separate swap partition,
it can be guaranteed that the swap region is at the fastest location
of the disk, generally the center cylinders between the inner and
outer edges of the disk (except for disks with fixed heads). However
with the 2.6 Linux kernel swap files are just as fast as swap
partitions, this recommendation doesn't apply much to current Linux
systems and the flexibility of swap files can outweigh those of
partitions. And since modern high capacity hard drives can remap
physical sectors you're not even guaranteed that a partition is
contiguous, and even if it were, having the swap data near the rest
of your data will reduce seek times when swapping was needed, so the
aforementioned performance claims probably do not apply to modern
Linux systems.
So let's see...you cite one link that is totally irrelevant, one citing
Andrew Morton saying what I say (which is no surprise, since I say what
I say BECAUSE I researched the issue and saw what he had to say, before
I formed an opinion), and one link that also agrees with me, and even
has a similar analysis to mine as to when you might want a swap
partition (control of placement on the disk).
So, how exactly does posting links that agree with me indicate I don't
have an adequate grasp of this issue?
Are you even actually reading these threads, or are you just citing
random links and hoping one of them actually supports you?
--
--Tim Smith
spi...@freenet.co.uk
>> > think Andrew Morton is a wintroll and arsehole. What would he know?
>>
>> He seems to have a better grasp of the issue than do you or Tim.
>>
>> http://blog.printf.net/articles/2006/03/27/swap-files-vs-swap-partitions
> That link quotes Andrew Morton:
> In 2.6 [swap files and swap partitions] have the same reliability
> and they will have the same performance unless the swapfile is badly
> fragmented.
Which is the point I brought up right at the start.
Isn't it amusing how much quirk knows about? That he can even claim such
stupid things as "swap files can't be fragmented because of the way they're
allocated" (paraphrased, can't be arsed wording it exactly)
Peter Köhlmann
> Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> did eloquently scribble:
>> In article <56mdnRqdnokSiKvb...@comcast.com>,
>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> wrote:
>>> > The swap file
>>> > issue being particularly amusing.But then Kelsey & K?hlmann probably
>>> > think Andrew Morton is a wintroll and arsehole. What would he know?
>>>
>>> He seems to have a better grasp of the issue than do you or Tim.
>>>
>>>
http://blog.printf.net/articles/2006/03/27/swap-files-vs-swap-partitions
>
>> That link quotes Andrew Morton:
>
>> In 2.6 [swap files and swap partitions] have the same reliability
>> and they will have the same performance unless the swapfile is badly
>> fragmented.
>
> Which is the point I brought up right at the start.
>
> Isn't it amusing how much quirk knows about? That he can even claim such
> stupid things as "swap files can't be fragmented because of the way
> they're allocated" (paraphrased, can't be arsed wording it exactly)
>
You don't question the verdict of the "true linux advocate" and "kernel
hacker" Hadron Quark, do you?
If he tells us that swap files can't be fragmented because of the way they
are allocated, it simply has to be that way.
Even when he is (again) full of it. Like he is usually
That twit knows bugger about linux. He is a liveCD user, just like DFS
--
Only two things are infinite,
the Universe and Stupidity.
And I'm not quite sure about the former.
- Albert Einstein
Tim Smith
wrote:
> > That link quotes Andrew Morton:
>
> > In 2.6 [swap files and swap partitions] have the same reliability
> > and they will have the same performance unless the swapfile is badly
> > fragmented.
>
> Which is the point I brought up right at the start.
>
> Isn't it amusing how much quirk knows about? That he can even claim such
> stupid things as "swap files can't be fragmented because of the way they're
> allocated" (paraphrased, can't be arsed wording it exactly)
So how would you actually get a badly fragmented swapfile on Linux,
other than deliberately setting out to make one? Remember, as we've
been told numerous times in this group, files on Linux generally don't
become fragmented--that's one of the points constantly brought up in
comparison to NTFS on Windows.
A swapfile would generally be created soon after installing the system,
when there would be plenty of disk space, so it is very unlikely that
the disk would be in that rare state in which fragmentation is forced.
--
--Tim Smith
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> other than deliberately setting out to make one? Remember, as we've
> been told numerous times in this group, files on Linux generally don't
> become fragmented--that's one of the points constantly brought up in
> comparison to NTFS on Windows.
Whoever claimed linux filesystems don't become fragmented is a total gimboid
of epic proportions.
We (well, the main members of this newsgroup at least) have NEVER claimed we
don't get fragmented filesystems.
We DO however say that we don't suffer performance degradation until the
filesystem gets above about 90% full.
And I still see no point in a swap file compared to a partition?
It's an area of disk that's going to be in use as swap throughout the
lifetime of the operating system, so what's the point of a temporary file (a
file, in fact, that could be maliciously or accidentally deleted) rather
than a permanent partition?
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| |
| in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hadron Quark
> Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> did eloquently scribble:
>> In article <56mdnRqdnokSiKvb...@comcast.com>,
>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> wrote:
>>> > The swap file
>>> > issue being particularly amusing.But then Kelsey & K?hlmann probably
>>> > think Andrew Morton is a wintroll and arsehole. What would he know?
>>>
>>> He seems to have a better grasp of the issue than do you or Tim.
>>>
>>> http://blog.printf.net/articles/2006/03/27/swap-files-vs-swap-partitions
>
>> That link quotes Andrew Morton:
>
>> In 2.6 [swap files and swap partitions] have the same reliability
>> and they will have the same performance unless the swapfile is badly
>> fragmented.
>
> Which is the point I brought up right at the start.
>
> Isn't it amusing how much quirk knows about? That he can even claim such
> stupid things as "swap files can't be fragmented because of the way they're
> allocated" (paraphrased, can't be arsed wording it exactly)
I said, you dickhead, "if you follow the correct procedure" or something.
Or are you now saying all Linux file systems are totally and "badly"
fragmented and one wont be able to get a contiguous 4gig block?
You are out of your depth. You got caught out guessing again and people
who know more put you right.
--
I just uploaded xtoolplaces-1.6. It fixes all bugs but one: It still
coredumps instead of doing something useful. The upstream author's
e-mail address bounces, Redhat doesn't provide it and I never used it.
-- Sven Rudolph <s...@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>
Peter Köhlmann
> spi...@freenet.co.uk writes:
>
>> Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> did eloquently scribble:
>>> In article <56mdnRqdnokSiKvb...@comcast.com>,
>>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> wrote:
>>>> > The swap file
>>>> > issue being particularly amusing.But then Kelsey & K?hlmann probably
>>>> > think Andrew Morton is a wintroll and arsehole. What would he know?
>>>>
>>>> He seems to have a better grasp of the issue than do you or Tim.
>>>>
>>>>
http://blog.printf.net/articles/2006/03/27/swap-files-vs-swap-partitions
>>
>>> That link quotes Andrew Morton:
>>
>>> In 2.6 [swap files and swap partitions] have the same reliability
>>> and they will have the same performance unless the swapfile is badly
>>> fragmented.
>>
>> Which is the point I brought up right at the start.
>>
>> Isn't it amusing how much quirk knows about? That he can even claim such
>> stupid things as "swap files can't be fragmented because of the way
>> they're allocated" (paraphrased, can't be arsed wording it exactly)
>
> I said, you dickhead, "if you follow the correct procedure" or something.
>
Tell us, Oh Really Stupid One, what the "correct procedure" is for setting
up a swap file which will under no conditions whatsoever be fragmented.
Be precise, imbecile.
> Or are you now saying all Linux file systems are totally and "badly"
> fragmented and one wont be able to get a contiguous 4gig block?
>
There are several scenario where you might not even get a contiguous 100MB
block
> You are out of your depth. You got caught out guessing again and people
> who know more put you right.
>
Again, show us the "correct procedure" to set it up, "true linux
advocate", "kernel hacker", "emacs user" and "outright liar" Hadron Quark
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Or are you now saying all Linux file systems are totally and "badly"
> fragmented and one wont be able to get a contiguous 4gig block?
You are the dickhead hadron.
From the start I've said any performance issues are negligable in using a
file, but there is NO reason TO use a file, when a fixed, permanent
partition is a better option all round.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste! |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| I can SMELL!!! KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and |
| in | get out the puncture repair kit!" |
| Computer Science | Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DFS
> Whoever claimed linux filesystems don't become fragmented is a total
> gimboid of epic proportions.
For sure, especially when the highest fragmentation I've ever seen (96.51%)
was on a Linux XFS filesystem
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0606.0/1550.html
John Bailo
> For sure, especially when the highest fragmentation I've ever seen (96.51%)
> was on a Linux XFS filesystem
You moron.
Linux file systems use inodes with b- trees.
Fragmentation is a non-issue.
Tim Smith
> And I still see no point in a swap file compared to a partition?
Flexibility. You can start with a big swap file, and then when you
notice that you have never come anywhere near using it, it is easy to
shrink it. With a partition, you are pretty much stuck with the initial
size, unless you jump through some very annoying hoops.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
I prefer a fair sized swap partition no-matter how much I do need.
Disk space is cheep, what's 1gig of a 160gig disk these days?
Linonut
Be sure to mark your cites properly.
Anyway, sounds like a bug.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS
Online defragmentation
Although the extent based nature of XFS and the delayed allocation
strategy it used significantly improves the file system's resistance
to fragmentation problems, XFS provides a filesystem defragmentation
utility (xfs_fsr, short for XFS filesystem repacker) that can
defragment a mounted and active XFS filesystem. Note that xfs_fsr is
usually part of xfsdump package, not xfsprogs.
One question for you: how fragmented does the DFS filesystem get?
<ROTFL> Man, I /kill/ myself!
Linonut
By the way, I wish the Windows Blue-Screen were this informative:
http://www.dgreaves.com/pics/xfs_crash.jpg
--
Where do you think you're going today?
The Ghost In The Machine
<lin...@bone.com>
wrote
on Tue, 01 May 2007 13:53:38 -0500
<SpqdnYCcVa8vEarb...@comcast.com>:
Not bad, actually -- though I do wonder how one gets the
information out of the screen and into a form which can be
used while perusing the source code (and/or the generated
assembly/machine code listing).
Best I can do is use QEMU and attempt to reproduce the
problem.
If one's lucky enough, the log file is on another
filesystem, and will be usable come reboot for diagnosis.
(Assuming this is a filesystem-related crash.)
At that, this is an improvement over the Windows stop
screen, which does not attempt to interpret the stack
frames (though I think it does try to display them).
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Does anyone else remember the 1802?
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Linonut
>> By the way, I wish the Windows Blue-Screen were this informative:
>>
>> http://www.dgreaves.com/pics/xfs_crash.jpg
>
> Not bad, actually -- though I do wonder how one gets the
> information out of the screen and into a form which can be
> used while perusing the source code (and/or the generated
> assembly/machine code listing).
You're already looking right at it!
--
Convert your Billy-box to a Linus-box today!
The Ghost In The Machine
<j8Cdnbqiko_qKqrb...@comcast.com>:
Yes. However, what I appear to be looking at is a snapshot
taken by a cellphone or camera of a screen. Useful, in its
way; the cellphone can be later used to upload the data.
The same could be done with a Windows stop screen.
However, that's a bit like expecting every car to carry a
mini tow-truck. :-) Still, one has to start somewhere,
and assuming one has additional information available
(kernel rev, relevant hardware, what one was doing at the
time of the crash) one might be able to do some debugging
of the xfs module, by viewing the source.
And cellphone cameras are so last millennium anyway. :-)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
If your CPU can't stand the heat, get another fan.
DFS
> After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> spi...@freenet.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>> Whoever claimed linux filesystems don't become fragmented is a total
>>> gimboid of epic proportions.
>>
>> For sure, especially when the highest fragmentation I've ever seen
>> (96.51%) was on a Linux XFS filesystem
>>
>> http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0606.0/1550.html
>
> Be sure to mark your cites properly.
eh?
> Anyway, sounds like a bug.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS
>
> Online defragmentation
>
> Although the extent based nature of XFS and the delayed allocation
> strategy it used significantly improves the file system's resistance
> to fragmentation problems, XFS provides a filesystem defragmentation
> utility (xfs_fsr, short for XFS filesystem repacker) that can
> defragment a mounted and active XFS filesystem. Note that xfs_fsr is
> usually part of xfsdump package, not xfsprogs.
>
> One question for you: how fragmented does the DFS filesystem get?
Very! It often splits into pieces when I'm blazing through cola posts.
> <ROTFL> Man, I /kill/ myself!
Don't give the wife so much hope...
DFS
> By the way, I wish the Windows Blue-Screen were this informative:
>
> http://www.dgreaves.com/pics/xfs_crash.jpg
Dont'cha just love all the gobbledygook Linux spits at you...
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Linonut wrote:
Compared to the gobbledegook windows spits at you?
I'd prefer linux gobbledegook any day of the week.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
| in | suck is probably the day they start making |
| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linonut
> Linonut wrote:
That goobledygook all but gives you the line of code to check!
In other words, a call stack of function names is better than a call
stack of function pointers!
--
Trust your programmers. Let them play.
Hadron Quark
Are all kernels compiled with dbg info?
--
And 1.1.81 is officially BugFree(tm), so if you receive any bug-reports
on it, you know they are just evil lies.
-- Linus Torvalds
Larry Qualig
Exactly how is this better for a user? A *user* - not a kernel
developer.
I'll agree that it is no worse than a stack trace of function pointers
but they are both equally useless for over 99% of the people in the
world.
The Ghost In The Machine
<spi...@freenet.co.uk>
wrote
on Wed, 02 May 2007 10:09:17 GMT
<r04mg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>:
> DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> did eloquently scribble:
>> Linonut wrote:
>
>>> By the way, I wish the Windows Blue-Screen were this informative:
>>>
>>> http://www.dgreaves.com/pics/xfs_crash.jpg
>
>> Dont'cha just love all the gobbledygook Linux spits at you...
>
> Compared to the gobbledegook windows spits at you?
> I'd prefer linux gobbledegook any day of the week.
Ah, but Windows *doesn't* spit gobbledygook at you.
It simply hangs or freezes. Yeah, that's an improvement,
isn't it?
:-)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Linux. Because life's too short for a buggy OS.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, spi...@freenet.co.uk
> <spi...@freenet.co.uk>
> wrote
> on Wed, 02 May 2007 10:09:17 GMT
> <r04mg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>:
>> DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> did eloquently scribble:
>>> Linonut wrote:
>>
>>>> By the way, I wish the Windows Blue-Screen were this informative:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.dgreaves.com/pics/xfs_crash.jpg
>>
>>> Dont'cha just love all the gobbledygook Linux spits at you...
>>
>> Compared to the gobbledegook windows spits at you?
>> I'd prefer linux gobbledegook any day of the week.
> Ah, but Windows *doesn't* spit gobbledygook at you.
> It simply hangs or freezes. Yeah, that's an improvement,
> isn't it?
BSODs are gobbledegook
:)
Linonut
> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>
>> In other words, a call stack of function names is better than a call
>> stack of function pointers!
>
> Are all kernels compiled with dbg info?
It is up to you!
Besides, many device drivers and modules can be loaded to provide
verbose info.
--
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day;
teach him to use the Net and he won't bother you for weeks.
Linonut
> Ah, but Windows *doesn't* spit gobbledygook at you.
> It simply hangs or freezes. Yeah, that's an improvement,
> isn't it?
It is indeed. It makes it all the more likely that you'll pony up for
the next "upgrade", in the hope that things will be better.
--
Microsoft -- Whose throat do you want to choke today?
Hadron Quark
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>>
>>> In other words, a call stack of function names is better than a call
>>> stack of function pointers!
>>
>> Are all kernels compiled with dbg info?
>
> It is up to you!
>
> Besides, many device drivers and modules can be loaded to provide
> verbose info.
It was a rhetorical question. Answer - they aren't. And it would be rare
for a distro to ship a kernel with debug on for general release.
--
QOTD:
"Are you into casual sex, or should I dress up?"
Kelsey Bjarnason
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 03:18:38 +0100, [H]omer wrote:
> Come on Larry you useless old fart ... put up or shut up ... where's the
> *evidence* you obviously have of this *plagiarism*?
On another note... assuming you did get one from somewhere and expended
significant energy making it better. Could it not have been under a
license which _allows_ you to claim ownership of the new version? For
that matter, after a certain point, is there really any sense in regarding
the new codebase the same program at all?
Nope. Far too many unanswered questions for this to be called theft.
Linonut
> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>
>>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> In other words, a call stack of function names is better than a call
>>>> stack of function pointers!
>>>
>>> Are all kernels compiled with dbg info?
>>
>> It is up to you!
>>
>> Besides, many device drivers and modules can be loaded to provide
>> verbose info.
>
> It was a rhetorical question. Answer - they aren't. And it would be rare
> for a distro to ship a kernel with debug on for general release.
Tell it to the guy that made the screenshot.
Kelsey Bjarnason
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:47:04 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
> VMWare.
I use vmplayer - free - and the VM server - also free. Is there proof of
this being pirated _at all_? Or is it just something which, in theory,
_could be_ pirated?
> The for-pay versions of SuSE and Redhat.
See above.
> Assorted Windows apps to run under Wine or VMWae.
If they actually _want_ to run a Win app, it's most likely because
they've already been using it, know it, like it and/or have to use it
because of work, etc. All of which tends to argue _against_ them pirating
it.
> Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
> Linux.
Again, you have proven these have been pirated, correct?
>> Didn't think so.
>
> Your sentence ran one word too long.
You mean you agree you didn't think? No news there.
Hadron Quark
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>>
>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>>>
>>>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> In other words, a call stack of function names is better than a call
>>>>> stack of function pointers!
>>>>
>>>> Are all kernels compiled with dbg info?
>>>
>>> It is up to you!
>>>
>>> Besides, many device drivers and modules can be loaded to provide
>>> verbose info.
>>
>> It was a rhetorical question. Answer - they aren't. And it would be rare
>> for a distro to ship a kernel with debug on for general release.
>
> Tell it to the guy that made the screenshot.
Why would I want to do that? You are getting strange. How on earth does
it matter what the screenshot shows in the context of this discussion?
--
Sex:
the thing that takes up the least amount of time and causes the
most amount of trouble.
-- John Barrymore
DFS
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o'
> wisdom:
>
>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>>
>>> In other words, a call stack of function names is better than a call
>>> stack of function pointers!
>>
>> Are all kernels compiled with dbg info?
>
> It is up to you!
I'm interested in that stuff, but it's a waste of time unless you actually
program at that level. So... starting at the top of the screen tell me
about the output:
1) EFLAGS? and I see the kernel version
2) EIP is at isolate?
3-5) values in registers?
6) Process init: the process being initialized when the panic occurred?
7-10) Stack: 24 memory addresses?
11-25) Call trace: active routines on the stack, still not finished
executing?
26-28) Code: looks like hex addresses
29) kernel panic: last thing you see before the plane goes down...
DFS
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, spi...@freenet.co.uk
> <spi...@freenet.co.uk>
> wrote
> on Wed, 02 May 2007 10:09:17 GMT
> <r04mg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>:
>> DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> did eloquently scribble:
>>> Linonut wrote:
>>
>>>> By the way, I wish the Windows Blue-Screen were this informative:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.dgreaves.com/pics/xfs_crash.jpg
>>
>>> Dont'cha just love all the gobbledygook Linux spits at you...
>>
>> Compared to the gobbledegook windows spits at you?
>> I'd prefer linux gobbledegook any day of the week.
>
> Ah, but Windows *doesn't* spit gobbledygook at you.
> It simply hangs or freezes. Yeah, that's an improvement,
> isn't it?
>
> :-)
Let us know the next time you personally get a Windows BSOD.
Thanks [long] in advance
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> [snips]
Add to that the fact the stats weren't even Roy Culley's domain. He merely
took over the job from the previous stats person.
Mr T. Porter Esq.
(whatever happened to HIM?!)
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
| in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
| Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linonut
> Linonut <lin...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>>> It was a rhetorical question. Answer - they aren't. And it would be rare
>>> for a distro to ship a kernel with debug on for general release.
>>
>> Tell it to the guy that made the screenshot.
>
> Why would I want to do that? You are getting strange.
Why, thanks!
> How on earth does
> it matter what the screenshot shows in the context of this discussion?
I'm still on the old context; you're on to the next context.
Besides, you missed what I said about the verbose drivers, and that kind
of configuration is pretty common.
--
"The reason (for) new versions is not to fix bugs. ... It's the stupidest
reason to buy a new version I ever heard. When we do a new version we put in
lots of new things that people (ask) for. And so, in no sense, is stability
a reason to move to a new version. It's never a reason." -- Bill Gates
Linonut
> Linonut wrote:
>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o'
>> wisdom:
>>
>>> Linonut <lin...@bone.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> In other words, a call stack of function names is better than a call
>>>> stack of function pointers!
>>>
>>> Are all kernels compiled with dbg info?
>>
>> It is up to you!
>
> I'm interested in that stuff, but it's a waste of time unless you actually
> program at that level. So... starting at the top of the screen tell me
> about the output:
>
> 1) EFLAGS? and I see the kernel version
> 2) EIP is at isolate?
> 3-5) values in registers?
> 6) Process init: the process being initialized when the panic occurred?
> 7-10) Stack: 24 memory addresses?
> 11-25) Call trace: active routines on the stack, still not finished
> executing?
> 26-28) Code: looks like hex addresses
Beats the hell out of the BSOD screen, and those "reports" that errant
apps want to send to Microsoft on Win XP and Win 2003 Server.
--
Don't flip the Bozo Bit.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> 2) EIP is at isolate?
> 3-5) values in registers?
> 6) Process init: the process being initialized when the panic occurred?
> 7-10) Stack: 24 memory addresses?
> 11-25) Call trace: active routines on the stack, still not finished
> executing?
> 26-28) Code: looks like hex addresses
> 29) kernel panic: last thing you see before the plane goes down...
Once you know what some of those things mean, it is possible to isolate a
problem and find a workaround or fix, even if you don't understand all the
hex code and flags stuff.
I've done it myself, knowing what process or kernel module was last seen
before the panic can indicate if it's a hardware problem, a bug in a driver
or just failing memory.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| |
| in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:47:04 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
>> VMWare.
> I use vmplayer - free - and the VM server - also free. Is there proof of
> this being pirated _at all_? Or is it just something which, in theory,
> _could be_ pirated?
>> The for-pay versions of SuSE and Redhat.
> See above.
Besides, you can copy the "for pay" SuSE and Redhat. That's not piracy.
You just can't call on their support.
The only proprietory stuff on those distros tends to be evaluationware and
opera anyway, both of which are free from their websites.
--
| |What to do if you find yourself stuck in a crack|
| spi...@freenet.co.uk |in the ground beneath a giant boulder, which you|
| |can't move, with no hope of rescue. |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|Consider how lucky you are that life has been |
| in |good to you so far... |
| Computer Science | -The BOOK, Hitch-hiker's guide to the galaxy.|
Hadron Quark
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> Linonut <lin...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>>>> It was a rhetorical question. Answer - they aren't. And it would be rare
>>>> for a distro to ship a kernel with debug on for general release.
>>>
>>> Tell it to the guy that made the screenshot.
>>
>> Why would I want to do that? You are getting strange.
>
> Why, thanks!
>
>> How on earth does
>> it matter what the screenshot shows in the context of this discussion?
>
> I'm still on the old context; you're on to the next context.
>
> Besides, you missed what I said about the verbose drivers, and that kind
> of configuration is pretty common.
Is it? Really? Then I stand corrected. Most things that crash on my
Linux system give next to no information.
--
Read the fine print.
Larry Qualig
> KelseyBjarnason <kbjarna...@ncoldns.com> did eloquently scribble:
>
> > [snips]
> > On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 03:18:38 +0100, [H]omer wrote:
> >> Come on Larry you useless old fart ... put up or shut up ... where's the
> >> *evidence* you obviously have of this *plagiarism*?
> > On another note... assuming you did get one from somewhere and expended
> > significant energy making it better. Could it not have been under a
> > that matter, after a certain point, is there really any sense in regarding
> > the new codebase the same program at all?
> > Nope. Far too many unanswered questions for this to be called theft.
>
> Add to that the fact the stats weren't even Roy Culley's domain. He merely
> took over the job from the previous stats person.
And how exactly is this relevant to the issue? It doesn't matter *who*
runs the stats if anyone at all. If the stats were merely run and
posted then there would be no issue.
The issue is that the script was modified to claim that Roy Culley is
the "author" of the script. A claim which is highly questionable at
best.
[H]omer
> Add to that the fact the stats weren't even Roy Culley's domain. He merely
> took over the job from the previous stats person.
>
> Mr T. Porter Esq.
> (whatever happened to HIM?!)
Alas dear Terrence:
Here's a trip down memory lane (6th Nov 2001):
Toplist of writers
Place Name Msgs Bytes Quoted
1. drsquare <nowh...@nowhere.co.uk> 1014 880252 20.8%
2. Mark Kent <m...@NOHAM.otford.kent 882 1427121 10.4%
3. GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> 750 1102903 6.5%
4. T. Max Devlin <t...@commercelinks 679 1496472 26.3%
5. mjcr <m...@mindspring.com> 589 909780 39.7%
6. Terry Porter <tjpor...@gronk.port 553 742997 48.2%
7. Erik Funkenbusch <e...@visi.com> 513 915219 25.5%
8. Jim Richardson <warl...@eskimo.co 501 833845 17.3%
9. Charlie Ebert <k...@charlie.ebertl 297 548151 77.9%
10. The Ghost In The Machine <e...@lex 294 583896 43.3%
11. Edward Rosten <l...@my.sig> 219 256012 46.2%
12. . <y...@mutilation.net> 218 336628 66.3%
13. Matthew Gardiner <matgar@-don't-fu 208 283000 72.4%
14. Peter Köhlmann <Peter.Koehlm...@t- 190 203240 57.3%
15. <FawnLebowitz>lebo1...@hotmail.com 189 148036 59.4%
A total of 476 people were identified.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toplist of original content per message
Place Name Orig. / Msgs = PrMsg Quoted
1. Alistair J Ross <spam<@at> 5944 / 1 = 5944 43.9%
2. Rex Ballard <r.e.ball...@usa.ne 231010 / 40 = 5775 15.0%
3. secret...@lxny.org 23108 / 5 = 4621 0.0%
4. Andrew J. Brehm <and...@netneur 4532 / 1 = 4532 33.1%
5. Nathan Mercer <nat...@mcs.co.nz> 4329 / 1 = 4329 24.7%
6. Rich Mann <rman...@hotmail.com> 4293 / 1 = 4293 9.8%
7. Mark Green <mark.gr...@reading.a 10037 / 3 = 3345 18.8%
8. Leonard Evens <l...@math.northwe 3276 / 1 = 3276 19.2%
9. <Fawn Lebowitz>lebo1...@hotmail. 3021 / 1 = 3021
10. Scott Bicknell <sbick...@prodigy 3015 / 1 = 3015 11.7%
11. Kelly Hall <h...@captusnetworks. 2775 / 1 = 2775 13.1%
12. [H]omer <u...@ftc.com> 10332 / 4 = 2583 24.4%
13. Hider <alexe...@students.cs.mu.O 4790 / 2 = 2395 33.7%
14. Aaron R. Kulkis <akulk...@yahoo 173325 / 76 = 2280 32.0%
15. Morgan <morg...@yahoo.com> 2224 / 1 = 2224
- http://tinyurl.com/2n8vza (Google Groups)
Still a few old soldiers left then, eh?
--
K.
http://slated.org
,----
| I realize that a lot of people see this as a fight. But I tell you,
| those people are missing the point. We’re not fighting. At least
| the useful people aren’t fighting. No good code ever comes out of
| people who do things because they are afraid, or because they hate.
|
| - Linus Torvalds. http://tinyurl.com/eumwb (Groklaw)
`----
Fedora Core release 5 (Bordeaux) on sky, running kernel 2.6.20-1.2312.fc5
13:22:34 up 16 days, 10:54, 4 users, load average: 0.41, 0.48, 0.39
Larry Qualig
> [snips]
>
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 03:18:38 +0100, [H]omer wrote:
> > Come on Larry you useless old fart ... put up or shut up ... where's the
> > *evidence* you obviously have of this *plagiarism*?
>
> On another note... assuming you did get one from somewhere and expended
> significant energy making it better.
Then he would have *modified* the script. It's not the same as being
the *author* of the script which is what's being claimed.
> Could it not have been under alicensewhich _allows_ you to claim
> ownership of the new version?
Which of the GPL, LGPL, BSD, etc. licencses allows someone to remove
the authors name and substitute their own name as the new "author" of
the code?
> For
> that matter, after a certain point, is there really any sense in regarding
> the new codebase the same program at all?
What a low-life scumbag statement that is. Basically you're saying
that "Hey... in my opinion I made enough changes to someone elses work
so let me remove their name and now claim myself as the "author" of
the script."
As long as the code is still *based* on the original work then the
author of the original code still deserves credit for the work. There
is no magic point at which the true author ceases to exist and you can
suddenly take full credit for the work.
> Nope. Far too many unanswered questions for this to be called theft.
But your post answers plenty of questions about your lack of ethics.
After reading your post one has to wonder just how many things you are
the "author" of where author in this context means "Enough lines of
code were changed... remove credit from the original author and
replace it with Kelsey. Gee, that was easy,"
How low can you possibly get? Somebody takes the time to develop code
most likely for free. Then this person goes ahead and posts it on the
web and donates it to the public domain. Then low-lifes like you and
Culley come along and justify stealing it and calling it your own
because you changed a few lines of code.
Licenses be damned!!! Kelsey and Culley modified a couple of lines of
code so now they declare themselves as being the "author."
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Is it? Really? Then I stand corrected. Most things that crash on my
> Linux system give next to no information.
Bet they do if you know where to look.
Even if it's only "segmentation fault" it's something.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Still a few old soldiers left then, eh?
Indeed...
Some in that list are of course gone and best forgotten...
Especially the one in the top spot.
:)
chrisv
>Here's a trip down memory lane (6th Nov 2001):
>
> Toplist of writers
>
>Place Name Msgs Bytes Quoted
> 1. drsquare <nowh...@nowhere.co.uk> 1014 880252 20.8%
> 2. Mark Kent <m...@NOHAM.otford.kent 882 1427121 10.4%
> 3. GreyCloud <m...@cumulus.com> 750 1102903 6.5%
> 4. T. Max Devlin <t...@commercelinks 679 1496472 26.3%
> 5. mjcr <m...@mindspring.com> 589 909780 39.7%
> 6. Terry Porter <tjpor...@gronk.port 553 742997 48.2%
> 7. Erik Funkenbusch <e...@visi.com> 513 915219 25.5%
> 8. Jim Richardson <warl...@eskimo.co 501 833845 17.3%
> 9. Charlie Ebert <k...@charlie.ebertl 297 548151 77.9%
> 10. The Ghost In The Machine <e...@lex 294 583896 43.3%
> 11. Edward Rosten <l...@my.sig> 219 256012 46.2%
> 12. . <y...@mutilation.net> 218 336628 66.3%
> 13. Matthew Gardiner <matgar@-don't-fu 208 283000 72.4%
> 14. Peter Köhlmann <Peter.Koehlm...@t- 190 203240 57.3%
> 15. <FawnLebowitz>lebo1...@hotmail.com 189 148036 59.4%
>
>A total of 476 people were identified.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Still a few old soldiers left then, eh?
I was posting in here back then, too. Man, time flys...
chrisv
>And how exactly is this relevant to the issue? It doesn't matter *who*
>runs the stats if anyone at all. If the stats were merely run and
>posted then there would be no issue.
>
>The issue is that the script was modified to claim that Roy Culley is
>the "author" of the script. A claim which is highly questionable at
>best.
Poor Larry.
Johan Lindquist
Larry Qualig was all like, "Dude,
> Let's start with the "weekly COLA stats" - a publically available
> Perl script that Roy Culley plagiarized and now claims that he is
> the author of.
Do you have any sort of proof that he did not, as he claims to have
done, write his "ngstats.pl" script from scratch?
I'm just curious, since a quick search only turns up a reference to
an article where mr. Culley mentions writing up a "quick hack" that
produced the same output as 'turqstat' since he thought the other was
too convoluted.
It'd be interesting to see your comparison of the two.
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
15:03:24 up 17 days, 15:22, 2 users, load average: 0.10, 0.12, 0.11
Linux 2.6.20.7 x86_64 GNU/Linux Registered Linux user #261729
Linonut
That's because you are a bonehead.
--
Microsoft are just like other totalitarian regimes: to remain at the top,
they need to exert absolute control, ruthless suppression of anything
remotely resembling competition, an army of astroturfers, and a
well-oiled propaganda machine. -- Richard Rasker, 4 Oct 2006.
chrisv
>[H]omer <sp...@uce.gov> did eloquently scribble:
>> Still a few old soldiers left then, eh?
>
>Indeed...
>Some in that list are of course gone and best forgotten...
>Especially the one in the top spot.
>:)
You think he's gone? What do you think the "D" in "DFS" stands for?
Hadron Quark
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron Quark belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> Linonut <lin...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>>
>>> Besides, you missed what I said about the verbose drivers, and that kind
>>> of configuration is pretty common.
>>
>> Is it? Really? Then I stand corrected. Most things that crash on my
>> Linux system give next to no information.
>
> That's because you are a bonehead.
This is most definitely not the old Linonut. This one is more schizo
than Roybot on speed.
--
/*
* Oops. The kernel tried to access some bad page. We'll have to
* terminate things with extreme prejudice.
*/
die_if_kernel("Oops", regs, error_code);
(From linux/arch/i386/mm/fault.c)
The Ghost In The Machine
<chr...@nospam.invalid>
wrote
on Thu, 03 May 2007 08:42:11 -0500
<rjpj33ppco0ea3ekl...@4ax.com>:
I dunno; DFS looks to be slightly more coherent than DrSquare.
He also doesn't do obnoxious ASCII art, and does not
mention Arsenal. :-)
So they're probably a little different. Plus, I don't think
DrSquare was a Windows user. (I don't know what he *was* using.)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Is it cheaper to learn Linux, or to hire someone
to fix your Windows problems?
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Peter Köhlmann
drsquare was stupid. Incredibly so.
But not as stupid as DumbFullShit. Not by a very large margin
--
Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats
you with experience...
DFS
> But not as stupid as DumbFullShit. Not by a very large margin
"Hi, I'm Peter Kohlmann, and I'm a Linux advocate."
"Nice to meet you Peter. What do you do for a living?"
"I develop Windows software."
Peter Köhlmann
Nope, DumbFullShit. I develop software. Part of it is windows software
--
To start your shiny new Pentium IV in Gameboy mode just enter
C:\win
DFS
> DFS wrote:
>
>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>>
>>> But not as stupid as DumbFullShit. Not by a very large margin
>>
>> "Hi, I'm Peter Kohlmann, and I'm a Linux advocate."
>>
>> "Nice to meet you Peter. What do you do for a living?"
>>
>> "I develop Windows software."
>
> Nope, DumbFullShit. I develop software. Part of it is windows software
You mean the 100% part, of course.
Linonut
> Linonut <lin...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>
>>>> Besides, you missed what I said about the verbose drivers, and that kind
>>>> of configuration is pretty common.
>>>
>>> Is it? Really? Then I stand corrected. Most things that crash on my
>>> Linux system give next to no information.
>>
>> That's because you are a bonehead.
>
> This is most definitely not the old Linonut. This one is more schizo
> than Roybot on speed.
Actually, this is the kinder, gentler Linonut.
You're so full of it.
--
Free software is a matter of liberty not price. You should think of
"free" as in "free speech".
-- The Free Software Foundation http://www.fsf.org/
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, chrisv
> <chr...@nospam.invalid>
> wrote
> on Thu, 03 May 2007 08:42:11 -0500
> <rjpj33ppco0ea3ekl...@4ax.com>:
>> spi...@freenet.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>>[H]omer <sp...@uce.gov> did eloquently scribble:
>>>> Still a few old soldiers left then, eh?
>>>
>>>Indeed...
>>>Some in that list are of course gone and best forgotten...
>>>Especially the one in the top spot.
>>>:)
>>
>> You think he's gone? What do you think the "D" in "DFS" stands for?
>>
> I dunno; DFS looks to be slightly more coherent than DrSquare.
> He also doesn't do obnoxious ASCII art, and does not
> mention Arsenal. :-)
He probably doesn't even know who arsenal are.
:)
Tim Smith
Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjar...@ncoldns.com> wrote:
> [snips]
>
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:47:04 -0700, Tim Smith wrote:
>
> > VMWare.
>
> I use vmplayer - free - and the VM server - also free. Is there proof of
> this being pirated _at all_? Or is it just something which, in theory,
> _could be_ pirated?
Well, there's a Linux program for generating keys for the Linux version
of VMWare Workstation that you can get from people who offer warez
bittorrents.
...
> > Pretty much every commercial for-pay game that has been published for
> > Linux.
>
> Again, you have proven these have been pirated, correct?
You are right. Those files with the same names as those games that are
readily available on Linux warez sites and lists are probably something
else, that just happened to be named the same, or something like that.
--
--Tim Smith
The Ghost In The Machine
<nospam@dfs_.com>
wrote
on Thu, 3 May 2007 11:19:17 -0500
<w_m_h.1760$0x4....@bignews4.bellsouth.net>:
Perhaps you have not considered that development of
Windows software might actually improve Peter's advocacy?
After all, he now knows what it's like to have to untangle
proprietary APIs and deal with Slightly Strange and
Suspect Logic(tm). ;-)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
Tim Smith
wrote:
> Add to that the fact the stats weren't even Roy Culley's domain. He merely
> took over the job from the previous stats person.
>
> Mr T. Porter Esq.
> (whatever happened to HIM?!)
He went insane, and started labeling people who disagreed with him on
anything as wintrolls (Kelsey, for example, was called a wintroll!). He
soon came to his senses, issued apologies to some of those people, and
apparently left.
--
--Tim Smith
spi...@freenet.co.uk
God, I wish you'd stop being so dishonest with the term "Linux warez sites".
I mean ffs, they consist mainly of windows software! It's MAINLY windows
drones who download the stuff! Just because there's maybe 1% linux software
on there you label these things "linux warez sites"?
How much software on those are for MacOSX?
Any FreeBSD stuff?
Any BEOS stuff?
Or is it alllll linux proprietory stuff?
Tim Smith
> God, I wish you'd stop being so dishonest with the term "Linux warez sites".
> I mean ffs, they consist mainly of windows software! It's MAINLY windows
Really? So Windows software is distributed as RPM files or tarballs
nowadays? I guess I haven't kept up very well with Windows.
> drones who download the stuff! Just because there's maybe 1% linux software
> on there you label these things "linux warez sites"?
So first it was Linux warez doesn't exist. Now the story is that it
does exist, but it is just a small amount of stuff, on Windows warez
sites, being downloaded by Windows people?
When I say "linux warez sites" I mean sites (or torrents, since much of
Warez is now torrents) that distribute primarly Linux software.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Warez is now torrents) that distribute primarly Linux software.
I note you still haven't bothed providing a cut'n'paste or clicky link to such.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| |
| in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> did eloquently scribble:
>> When I say "linux warez sites" I mean sites (or torrents, since much of
>> Warez is now torrents) that distribute primarly Linux software.
> I note you still haven't bothed providing a cut'n'paste or clicky link to such.
Oh, and I just checked pirate bay which was one you mentioned.
OOO, lots of linux torrents, and wow, look at ALL that illegal stuff.
First 120 or so I spotted about 10 that are naughty.
The rest were perfectly legal distros, kernel images, vmware images and open
office torrents...
Compare that to the windows side.
first 120, the reverse is true, if even that. (I couldn't spot a single
legal bit of software, but then, I'm not familiar with the windows side so
some of the stuff I didn't recognise might've been clean)
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
| in | suck is probably the day they start making |
| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Smith
>
> Oh, and I just checked pirate bay which was one you mentioned.
> OOO, lots of linux torrents, and wow, look at ALL that illegal stuff.
> First 120 or so I spotted about 10 that are naughty.
Here are a couple. I'll give the Google cache of them, since Pirate Bay
seems to be having some problems at the moment (its search is producing
no results for any search).
So, you found 10 out of 120. That kind of shoots down the claim that
there are none, doesn't it? Or when the claim was made that there were
none, was that supposed to only be for sufficiently large values of
none?
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> there are none, doesn't it? Or when the claim was made that there were
> none, was that supposed to only be for sufficiently large values of
> none?
When did I say there were none?
If there's software for sale, someone will steal it.
Re-read the original article. My challenge was to the troll who calls itself
aunty deluvial to name one piece of software the linux people have stolen.
She didn't volunteer a single one, and yet in her post she painted the
entire linux community as thieves and pirates.
Hypocrisy, thy name is aunty.
Tim Smith
wrote:
> Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> did eloquently scribble:
> > So, you found 10 out of 120. That kind of shoots down the claim that
> > there are none, doesn't it? Or when the claim was made that there were
> > none, was that supposed to only be for sufficiently large values of
> > none?
>
> When did I say there were none?
> If there's software for sale, someone will steal it.
>
> Re-read the original article. My challenge was to the troll who calls itself
> aunty deluvial to name one piece of software the linux people have stolen.
I didn't realize you were only interested in counterexamples offered by
her(?). When you wrote, in article
<6hjcg4-...@ridcully.ntlworld.com>:
> All the pirates and thieves are in the WINDOWS camp you dolt.
> Unless you can name one single little bit of software that the linux
> "pirates" and "thieves" have stolen?
>
> Just the one?
>
> Anything?
>
> At all?
I thought you were claiming no one pirates Linux software.
--
--Tim Smith
spi...@freenet.co.uk
>> Unless you can name one single little bit of software that the linux
>> "pirates" and "thieves" have stolen?
>>
>> Just the one?
>>
>> Anything?
>>
>> At all?
> I thought you were claiming no one pirates Linux software.
I was being incredibly generous with the challenge "Just the one, anything"
Because I knew it wouldn't be forthcoming with any examples.
But I stand by the windows camp being the one with the vast majority of the
"thieves". (copyright violators, copying something is not theft)
Besides, the way I read the original post was as an accusation of theft of
code included in linux software, not proprietory software itself.