>>>In comp.os.linux.misc Anthony Roberts >>><acrobert-at-ucalgary-dot...@ucalgary.ca> wrote:
>>>>>through a firewall and NAT. I informed them that there is a >>>>>security vulnerablity in SMP Linux kernels discovered by a PhD >>>>>researcher. Linus
>>>Nonsense. It's a possible information leak in all hyperthreading >>>cpus, on any operating system, windos included. Not that the leak >>>provides any usable info at all.
>>Right. But have you noticed that often things that would affect both >>Windows and Linux, like this and a recent hubbub about the horrors of >>year 2038 time overflow, are reported (in some places) as affecting >>Unix/Linux only?
>>Seems to me that Microsoft's fud machinery might be playing a part in >>this?
> Why would MS waste time worrying about an OS that has such a low market > share? PLEASE! Get a life, MS has bigger things to worry about than > Linux.
You are out of touch with reality. MS take linux very very seriously, and that is why they spend untold millions on FUD to destroy it. Money down the toilet, it would appear.
-- Blue Screen of Death is Trademark Microshite Computer Corp. For all versions of Windows. Press alt-ctrl-delete to kill your machine, and wipe your unsaved files from memory.
I'd give it an 8.2 for effort, although I think it deserved a 7.8. It's not bad, but it's apparent his story is completely fictional.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
ralph <n...@way.com> writes: > Jason Bowen wrote: > > Name the number one web server. Now name the number one operating > > system that the number one web server is running on. I'm talking about > > the number of server, not performance or design or scalability. I'm not > > going to argue that Linux is better than Solaris, but Linux is whooping > > ass when it comes to Apache installations.
> I'll argue Linux is better than solaris! I just dumped gentoo off my Sun > sparc Ultra 5 and installed Solaris 10. I can say that Package management > SUCKS in Solaris! The Java desktop is a loser as well as CDE so I am > installing KDE as I write. I'm hoping that KDE will make things a little > faster with Solaris because Gentoo outperformed solaris BIG TIME on this > device. One good thing is bash is now included so I set all the users to > use bash so I don't have to worry so much about that sucky ^H every time > you hit a back space key feature! Why can't sun have something like emerge, > apt-get or urpmi to help with Package management?
> It's so nice with Linux, so much just comes with the OS, installes and works > from the start. Everything with Solaris is a PAIN IN THE ASS to do.
Solaris looks clumsy the same way Linux did when you first worked with it. Just because you can install an OS and click on the pretty windows don't assume you can judge it technically. And its really a big mistake to judge a *nix OS on the basis of a window manager- particuarly on the basis of gnome or its clones.
Theres a reason Solaris is so baroque from a clean install- its as absolutely consistent as possible from the outset. No crazy variations in the user environment from version to version. You the user get to decide on what craziness you want to add.
FWIW, Solaris does have an apt-alike manager- it works well and its super handy for getting a consistent and useful and modern suite of tools into a new install- look at blastwave.org. THere is at least one other person working on an emerge like feature, hopefully that doesn't require the silly mid-install hand-configuration that Gentoo packages sometimes want.
OTOH, I'll freely admit you have a point with the backspace/del. Linux has finally fixed that outrageous PITA, it persists in Solaris.
> I'll argue Linux is better than solaris! I just dumped gentoo off my Sun > sparc Ultra 5 and installed Solaris 10. I can say that Package management > SUCKS in Solaris! The Java desktop is a loser as well as CDE so I am > installing KDE as I write. I'm hoping that KDE will make things a little > faster with Solaris because Gentoo outperformed solaris BIG TIME on this > device. One good thing is bash is now included so I set all the users to > use bash so I don't have to worry so much about that sucky ^H every time > you hit a back space key feature! Why can't sun have something like emerge, > apt-get or urpmi to help with Package management?
> It's so nice with Linux, so much just comes with the OS, installes and works > from the start. Everything with Solaris is a PAIN IN THE ASS to do.
This just goes to show how long you've been using an *nix of any type. If you're going to show support for Linux, do so with some real data, not garbage like:
"... I don't have to worry so much about that sucky ^H every time you hit a back space key feature..."
Had you been exposed to Unix for any length of time, you would know how to solve that problem simply. Any Linux user worth their distro SHOULD know how. Package management isn't that bad in solaris. pkgadd, patchadd, pkginfo all do what they're supposed to do. What do you think of Linux distro's that you compile everything with? (which is the way I do nearly everything with Mandrake 10, I just don't feel like bothering with it during initial setup) .
BTW, the Java Desktop is really nothing more than Gnome, the preferred desktop of many a Linux user.
I'm not saying that Solaris is better than Linux, I prefer Linux all day long. But if you're going to make derogatoy remarks, at least be educated about them.
As much as Microsoft is worried about Linux, I believe Sun is more worried. Just check out their toting of Linux applications running on Solaris 10 without modifications.
> In comp.os.linux.misc Anthony Roberts <acrobert-at-ucalgary-dot...@ucalgary.ca> wrote: >> > through a firewall and NAT. I informed them that there is a security >> > vulnerablity in SMP Linux kernels discovered by a PhD researcher. Linus > Nonsense. It's a possible information leak in all hyperthreading cpus, > on any operating system, windos included. Not that the leak provides > any usable info at all. >> > Torvalds BRUSHED OFF THE RESULTS, because he couldn't understand the >> > problem! > He seems to be an intelligent man to me. I agree. I also see no real > problem. >> > Linus, when he seems to not understand the scope of a problem, >> > often ignores engineers with 25 years of UNIX kernel experience. It > Good for him. >> > happened with Joerg Schilling and now it is happening to Colin Percival. > Oh, he's blasted off that nutter, has he? That's another notch up in my > estimation.
Looks to me as if Linus proves exactly Peter's points!
[..]
>> vulnerability, but I'm having trouble understanding why you're worried >> about a hyperthreading vulnerability on Opteron machines. > I'm not. He's a troll. Maybe you're a troll. Who knows. I see this is > crossposted to slowaris newsgroups, so somebody is trolling. I'll get > rid of the advocacy groups, at least.
So we others can enjoy it?
> Please TRIM newsgroups. These trolls are sillier than you. > I'm keeping only the crosspost to solaris just to annoy JS, who I > assume will beam in on this like a shill.
;-))
-- Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94) mail: echo zvpu...@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/' #bofh excuse 117: the printer thinks its a router.
> In comp.os.linux.misc George Jones IV <georgejone...@cox.net>: >> I'll argue Linux is better than solaris! I just dumped gentoo off my Sun >> sparc Ultra 5 and installed Solaris 10. I can say that Package management >> SUCKS in Solaris! The Java desktop is a loser as well as CDE so I am >> installing KDE as I write. I'm hoping that KDE will make things a little >> faster with Solaris because Gentoo outperformed solaris BIG TIME on this >> device. One good thing is bash is now included so I set all the users to >> use bash so I don't have to worry so much about that sucky ^H every time >> you hit a back space key feature! Why can't sun have something like > emerge, >> apt-get or urpmi to help with Package management?
>> It's so nice with Linux, so much just comes with the OS, installes and > works >> from the start. Everything with Solaris is a PAIN IN THE ASS to do. > This just goes to show how long you've been using an *nix of any type. If > you're going to show support for Linux, do so with some real data, not > garbage like:
Where does this come from? You should try at least a working newsreader, there's no line telling us who wrote the above?
> "... I don't have to worry so much about that sucky ^H every time you hit a > back space key feature..." > Had you been exposed to Unix for any length of time, you would know how to > solve that problem simply. Any Linux user worth their distro SHOULD know > how.
How on earth should any Linux user know? If you'd said any *nix admin worth his money should know, I'd agree. But alas you don't tell him to do how, so he won't get anything out of your contribution. IIRC 'stty erase ^H' or so should solve the problem.
[..]
> BTW, the Java Desktop is really nothing more than Gnome, the preferred > desktop of many a Linux user.
Yep, from what I saw some time ago during a short test it was just a customized suse, nothing more.
Anyway, if customer demand something like this to take advantage of the usually pretty good Sun support, why not?
Not really uncommon, once met a guy from Cray supercomputing, during some Linux course. Curious about the fact asked him, and he answered customers running Linux in addition to their systems would demand Linux support from them. Which is one of the great things about Linux, anyone can support it in opposite to closed source OS, where you can't chose.
> I'm not saying that Solaris is better than Linux, I prefer Linux all day > long. But if you're going to make derogatoy remarks, at least be educated > about them.
Yep, Solaris is a pretty good/reliable unix OS, the one problem it faces strong competition from Linux, which outperforms it on cheaper hardware and runs as stable.
-- Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94) mail: echo zvpu...@urvzvat.qr | perl -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/' #bofh excuse 313: your process is not ISO 9000 compliant
>>1. Get rid of the INTEL boxes because of the SMP vulnerablity. I >>recommended him some nice SUN boxes matched with Solaris 10. The >>upcoming ZFS filesystem will be a god send with their datasets.
> What specific model Sparc processors were they running? I think you're > making this crap up, but oh well...
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- > http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups > ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Anyone wonder why the WinTrolls are trying to steer people to Solaris? SInce I left my tinfoil hat at home, I'm going to guess that they see the linux juggernaut rolling, and they want to steer people towards another *nix, that may not be as good? ;-)
Then they can point and say, "See, that unix crap is no good, I told you so, here, install Windows!"
Captain Dondo wrote: > Anyone wonder why the WinTrolls are trying to steer people to Solaris? > SInce I left my tinfoil hat at home, I'm going to guess that they see > the linux juggernaut rolling, and they want to steer people towards > another *nix, that may not be as good? ;-)
> Then they can point and say, "See, that unix crap is no good, I told you > so, here, install Windows!"
> ;-)
Hardly. Anyone should try them all and make their own judgment. None are perfect, but each has it's strengths. I'm biased and will migrate from Linux to Solaris next week, but that doesn't mean I think either is inferior to the other. Like any other topic, use the right tool for the job. That's all an OS is, a tool.
In comp.os.linux.misc KJ <h...@there.net> wrote: :> ;-)
: Hardly. Anyone should try them all and make their own judgment. None : are perfect, but each has it's strengths. I'm biased and will migrate : from Linux to Solaris next week, but that doesn't mean I think either is : inferior to the other. Like any other topic, use the right tool for the : job. That's all an OS is, a tool. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
careful what you say- for many here it is a religion and you could easily get flamed for your blasphemy.
Good to hear a rational voice here every now and then. Of course I agree 100%- OS is just another tool among many.
> : Hardly. Anyone should try them all and make their own judgment. None > : are perfect, but each has it's strengths. I'm biased and will migrate > : from Linux to Solaris next week, but that doesn't mean I think either is > : inferior to the other. Like any other topic, use the right tool for the > : job. That's all an OS is, a tool. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> careful what you say- for many here it is a religion and you could > easily get flamed for your blasphemy.
> Good to hear a rational voice here every now and then. Of > course I agree 100%- OS is just another tool among many.
Yes, an OS is just a tool.. but there are tools and then there are tools.
I understand your comment about religion and I certainly agree: there are zealots for just about every OS - some have more than others, of course. I don't like zealots, whether they are pushing Jesus, Linux, or the latest fad diet.
I do have a bias, not toward a specific OS, but I admit to liking Unixish style much better than anything else. I also have a political bias toward Open Source and against software patents and traditional copyrights, but that has weaker binding than my Unix-like preference.
But for the most part, computers are just tools to accomplish some other task. Much of what I do could be done on any OS, so I find it hard to get really incensed about any of it. I dislike Microsoft much more for their corporate behaviour than for their OS features (though there's plenty there to dislike!). There are still computer hobbyists who are using their systems more or less as most of us did way back in the 70's when this all started, but those folks are a very small minority today.. and the real hobbyists are probably playing with experimental OSes much more than anything else ( see http://aplawrence.com/Unixart/hobbyos.html ).
Hi John_Bailo, You told me: While waiting to see Lenny Kravitz, I visited Elliot Bay Books and purchased " Infinity and the Mind " by Rudy Rucker. In chapter 2, he writes about the birth of our understanding of infinity. He mentions infinite sets, whose subsets are also infinite and hence equal. This reminded me of the speed of light. A beam of light must be an infinite set.
Infinity is not a number, plain and simple. Zero is a mere approximation, as the precision is always finite.
I have no idea why you think: A beam of light must be an infinite set.
Jeff_Relf wrote: > Hi John_Bailo, You told me: > While waiting to see Lenny Kravitz, I visited Elliot Bay Books > and purchased " Infinity and the Mind " by Rudy Rucker. > In chapter 2, he writes about the birth of our understanding of infinity. > He mentions infinite sets, whose subsets are also infinite and hence equal. > This reminded me of the speed of light. > A beam of light must be an infinite set.
> Infinity is not a number, plain and simple.
The Aleph is Georg Cantor's representation as such and he was able to use it in calculations as a number.
In comp.os.linux.misc John Bailo <jaba...@texeme.com> wrote:
> Jeff_Relf wrote: > > Hi John_Bailo, You told me: > > While waiting to see Lenny Kravitz, I visited Elliot Bay Books > > and purchased " Infinity and the Mind " by Rudy Rucker. > > In chapter 2, he writes about the birth of our understanding of infinity. > > He mentions infinite sets, whose subsets are also infinite and hence equal.
Well, some of them are.
> > This reminded me of the speed of light. > > A beam of light must be an infinite set.
> > Infinity is not a number, plain and simple. > The Aleph is Georg Cantor's representation as such and he was able to > use it in calculations as a number.
That's countable infinity, cardinal. I suspect he meant the first ordinal infinity by "infinity". That is, omega, which is one less than omega plus one. And very countable. He meant the limit of all finite integer speeds, which is definitely the ordinal omega.
Or maybe he meant an upper limit for all real numbers. I think that would be omega too, but we'd have to move into the surreal domain from the ordinal domain to compute it ... yes it is.
Or maybe he meant some nonstandard model of the peano axiom system? There are plenty of those, with numbers greater than any finite number. But the trouble is that anything that you say about all large finite numbers is automatically true of the extra numbers too, in such systems, so they're a bit strange. A fraction that tends to one of all of them tend to have nontrivial factors. Unforunately, nobody is going to see them all, in any case! Oh, and half of them are divisible by two.
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamt...@library.lspace.org
In article <428bd5b...@x-privat.org>, Mike Cox <mikecoxli...@yahoo.com> wrote: [snip]
>Why would MS waste time worrying about an OS that has such a low market >share?
I don't know - why do they place so many adverts trying to convince people that their OS is better than Linux? You can kid yourself all you like - Microsoft clearly are *very* worried, or they wouldn't be spending all that money.
>PLEASE! Get a life, MS has bigger things to worry about than >Linux.
So explain the spend.
John -- Wallingford, Oxfordshire, England i = (free(NULL), i++);
In comp.os.linux.misc "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamt...@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote:
> begin In <ol32m2-q17....@news.it.uc3m.es>, on 05/21/2005 > at 12:07 AM, p...@lab.it.uc3m.es (Peter T. Breuer) said: > >Or maybe he meant an upper limit for all real numbers. I think that > >would be omega too, > No. Google for "two point compactification".
Thanks, but I don''t need to. Two point compactification of what? The reals? That would be the reals plus pos/neg infinity, and the added points are the ordinal pos/neg omega, by the isomrphism of the embedded integers in the reals with the pos/neg ordinals.
And anyway, I as talking about the surreal numbers.
> >But the trouble is that anything that you say about all large finite > >numbers is automatically true of the extra numbers too, > No.
Yes. I am stating a well known model-theoretic characterisation of non-standard models of Peano arithmetic. The induction axiom has to hold. I.e. if p(0) & p(x)->p(x+1), then p holds for all numbers. How do you prove something about "all large finite numbers"? That's right - you use induction.
> Extend the reals and something has to give.
I extended Peano arithmetic, not the reals. The reals have the extra axiom that every bounded set has a supremum. If you were to add that axiom to (non-standard) Peano integers, you would be able to start distinguishing some of the extra numbers, and induction would break down.
> Some properties carry > over, some don't. The Devil is in the details.
In <n898m2-dho....@news.it.uc3m.es>, on 05/23/2005 at 08:19 AM, p...@lab.it.uc3m.es (Peter T. Breuer) said:
>Thanks, but I don''t need to. Two point compactification of what? >The reals? That would be the reals plus pos/neg infinity, and the >added points are the ordinal pos/neg omega, by the isomrphism of the >embedded integers in the reals with the pos/neg ordinals.
While you could do it that way, I haven't seen it done and there doesn't seem much point to it.
>Yes. I am stating a well known model-theoretic characterisation of >non-standard models of Peano arithmetic.
Stating it imprecisely.
>How do you prove something about "all large finite numbers"?
The term "finite" in the model doesn't mean the same as "finite" in the system used to construct the model. You need precise language when dealing with models.
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamt...@library.lspace.org
Sandlin wrote: > Tony Lawrence: > Tony Lawrence > Unix/Linux/Mac OS X resources: http://aplawrence.com
> Nice site. Have it bookmarked.
Thanks for the kind words, though my view of it is more like the junk room that never gets cleaned up.. :-) Gad, there's stuff there that dates from TRS-80 days.. but I just don't have the heart to clean it up.
