using netpgp with mutt
Is there anyone listening (reading) who has gotten netpgp working with mutt? I've been trying to sort out how to get it working as a replacement for GnuPG, and have thus far failed to sort out how to make it fit, and failed to find anything like a guide to using it for such purposes on the web. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: day light saving time happened today
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 08:49:45AM -0400, Fbsd8 wrote: Ran this little test. Last night before turning off my system I used the date command to set the date to 3/9 with the correct DST. This morning when I turned on my system the time had advanced by one hour. So this proves that the time zone setting does have DST in it and every thing worked as expected. Even though the system is now on DST the date command still displays EDT. Does the date command ever show DST? As noted by others, EDT is Eastern Daylight Time, which is what should be showing during DST in the Eastern (US) time zone. When it's not DST, what should be showing in the Eastern time zone is EST instead. From what you said, though, it seems you had set it to EDT when it was not yet daylight saving time. I wonder if this might be the cause of the actual problem. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: fetchmail/sendmail: Domain of sender address does not exist
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 09:40:47AM +, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: I'm running sendmail, and using fetchmail to fetch my mail from the university IMAP server. I sometimes see fetchmail complain: fetchmail: SMTP error: 553 5.1.8 ad...@system.mail... Domain of sender address ad...@system.mail does not exist And this is doubled in /var/log/maillog: sm-mta[14642]: r270BO3L014642: ruleset=check_mail, arg1=ad...@system.mail, relay=localhost [127.0. 0.1], reject=553 5.1.8 ad...@system.mail... Domain of sender address ad...@system.mail does not exist How do I set fetchmail and sendmail to fetch such emails? You might want to try out the mail/fdm port instead of fetchmail. I have found fetchmail to be obtuse and cantankerous; I stopped using it a long time ago. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Fun Scripting Problem
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 03:13:06PM -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote: here's a one-liner: rm ` \ stat -f %SB %B %N * \ | sort -k5nr \ | cut -c1-7,17-20,32- \ | awk 'BEGIN {a=;b=0;c=0} $1==a $2==b $3=c {print $4;}{a=$1;b=$2;c=$3}' \ I'm never comfortable calling something like that a one-liner. If it runs over 80 columns of width, that (to me) doesn't really qualify as a one-liner. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: FreeBSD Release Date Challenge, plus other stuff the project needs
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 01:52:04AM -0500, Anonymous wrote: We, the users of FreeBSD, *do hereby challenge* the FreeBSD project to meet its future release dates. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for 9.1-RELEASE to be finalized. I desperately want it as soon as possible for a laptop currently running such a piece of shit OS (Debian -- used to be good, but after half a dozen years away it went significantly downhill) that I'm about ready to pull out my hair. It needs hardware support not available with FreeBSD until now, and I want stable, -RELEASE software on it to suit my needs. That having been said, I don't challenge the FreeBSD project to meet future release dates. This isn't Ubuntu; it's FreeBSD. I'd rather they get it *right* than get it out *quickly*. Hell, even before I stopped using Debian, when I thought it was still good, there were signs of its impending slide into crappiness -- and they all happened around the time the Debian project started trying to meet release dates on a faster development schedule. No . . . I don't want to push the FreeBSD core team to sacrifice the things that make FreeBSD valuable just to meet arbitrary release date guesstimates. Screw that. Why: Because the FreeBSD project has not met a significant number of its release dates. It's an apalling state of affairs and makes you, the project, look silly. Business and personal users plan elements of their schedules, budgets and capabilities around OS updates. And the continual failure of FreeBSD to deliver causes us to have no alternative but to look at our bosses and just shrug. We've taken to padding it out a week, two weeks, a month, two months... just to cover the random slippage. Since there seems to be no public statements about this ongoing situation, we might as well pad it to a quarter or a half... FreeBSD's already a half behind on status reports. Here you make a point I'd like to see addressed. I wish we had a simple way to find out what's going on with the wait. That doesn't mean I want anyone prioritizing speed over quality, though. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Help! Firefox + acroread costs me $$$$
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 05:16:12PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: This problem has been annoying me for some time now, but until now it was never really an issue that I could not easily work-around. I was just trying to download a PDF document off of the Pacer[tm] federal courts web site. These are not free. They cost ten cents per page. I tried to download a 29 page document and it downloaded into firefox just fine and then was displayed in a new firefox tab which was apparently using acroread8 to display the document. I know from past experience that acroreadN runs like crap on FreeBSD... often using up enormous amounts of CPU % for no apparently good reason. But this time it really got my goat. I clicked on the little acroread icon for printing the current document, a pop-up dialog box for printing came up, but before I could hit the print button on that, everything relating to firefox... all open tabs and all open windows... froze up solid. Now, having wasted three bucks for no good reason (and STILL not having a hardcopy of the document I wanted), I am motivated to finally get this sorted out. So, on FreeBSD, how does one get firefox and/or opera to use, for example, evince or some other PDF displayer instead of using this goddamn lousey buggy *^%$#@ acroread ? The first thing to do should simply be to uninstall acroread. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: List all hard drives on system (with capacities)... How?
On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 04:23:54PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: if ($bytes = (1024 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024)) { You know about the exponentiation operator in Perl -- right? if ($bytes = (1024 ** 4)) { I don't think typing 1024 four times with * between each pair is really a helpful form of verbosity. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: a metric for number of users
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:57:49PM +0200, C. P. Ghost wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: Is there some way I could get the number of unique IPs hitting FreeBSD servers for software updates? I'm curious about the direct comparison of numbers between FreeBSD, Ubuntu, Fedora, and SUSE for this metric. You could ask for this, but beware of drawing wrong conclusions. Where I'm currently working, we're fetching sources, ports and distfiles only once, rebuild, test, and then mirror internally to a couple of 10k machines. And I'm sure we're not alone doing this: it's certainly not such an uncommon scenario out there. I'm familiar with the problems of trying to accurately measure users. I just want a kind of ballpark comparison of some metrics between different systems, even if the way the numbers hash out make direct comparisons wildly inaccurate, to satisfy my own curiosity. I'm not sure who I'd ask, by the way. That's part of the problem. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: suggest pdf viewer for pdf version 1.6 with annotations
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 03:45:30PM +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote: On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 08:50:16 +0100 (BST) Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk wrote: I got sent a pdf file, version 1.6, with annotations. xpdf can view the file, but not the annotations. Please suggest a pdf viewer from ports that might help. evince? Did you try it? I do not have it installed at the moment, so I am not able to tell you. Zathura might be worth a try, too. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Warning - FreeBSD (*BSD) entanglement in Linux ecosystem
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 09:42:32AM -0500, Mark Felder wrote: Those in on the core teams here are very well aware. Did you notice we've survived this long without ALSA? :-) However, this is very good reading for anyone who hasn't looked at Linux lately, and it's worth mentioning that this is snowballing quickly. I used to really like some Linux distros. I've been working closely with FreeBSD for 3 years now and after watching Linux change in those 3 years from this distance I'm not sure I want to go back. Everything that originally excited me about *nix operating systems is gone; it's a big convoluted mess now. This isn't a good sign and I hope someone has the sense enough to stand their ground and tell RedHat/Poettering NO. TEAR DOWN THIS WALL, MR GORB^H^H^H^HPOETTERING Hallelujah. Poettering and his ilk represent the gravest threat to the Linux ecosystem I've ever seen. I switched from Debian to FreeBSD in late 2005 or early 2006, having not touched FreeBSD much before that. Early the year before last year, I got a laptop and discovered that I should have paid more attention to what I was buying, because at the time FreeBSD didn't support the laptop's graphics. I thought Well, Debian isn't as nice as FreeBSD, but it was pretty good, so I'll use that. Ever since then, I've spent uncounted hours writing hackish wrapper code to paper over the disaster area that is system management in the Linux world now. I wrote an article for TechRepublic about some of my experiences (and other gripes about the Linux world after five years away from it) titled NetworkManager, the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalinux. The more we can avoid code written by Poettering and anything remotely like it, the better off we will be, I'm sure. Luckily, he wants to help us; he has stated that he believes writing quality, portable code somehow hinders innovation, and as such he goes out of his way to avoid portability concerns. Good riddance. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Patent hit - MS goes after Linux - FreeBSD ?
On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 12:25:31PM -0400, Robert Huff wrote: Jerry writes: I agree up to the point about financial incentive. For myself, I like making money. I don't apologize for that. Most engineers, software / hardware designers also enjoy receiving a monetary reward for their hard work. Simple giving away our hard work, sweat and time to some socialist just because they feel they have the right to the hard work of others is repulsive. Would you call Jeff Bezos (CEO of Amazon) a socialist? Some years ago, he was giving an interview and was asked Jeff, Amazon has applied for a patent for the One-Click system. If Amazon had known before it started there was no chance of receiving a patent - would it have created One-Click anyway? [While I'm paraphasing, the essential content is preserved.] There was a long pause, during which you could tell Bezos understood _precisely_ what the real question was ... ... and (to his credit) answered Yes. The programmers got paid. Amazon gets paid in the form of more expedient processing and (presumably) more sales due to ease of check-out. Why, as a society, should we deny other innovators the ability to use that technology to develop - hopefully - even better stuff? Patents don't encourage innovation. They primarily do three things: 1. They direct innovative effort away from non-patentable things and toward patentable things, even when the patentable things are less actually innovative or useful. 2. They favor large corporations with the resources to pursue patent litigation and build gigantic patent portfolios, thus creating hurdles for smaller business endeavors to become successful. 3. They encourage more time and resources to be spent on patent filing than on actual research and development. 4. They support a specialized lawyer class, which naturally evolves into an entire industry of patent trolling. 5. They make small organizations and individuals afraid to innovate because they fear they might run afoul of patents, and make large organizations waste a bunch of time and money buying other companies just for their patent portfolios so they have more ammunition with which to defend themselves against other patent-holders in a kind of mutually assured destruction arms race deterrence scheme. I guess three wasn't enough to list the major negatives of the patent system. I could come up with more, given a little time. Ultimately, the patent system is in many ways the opposite of a free market. In fact, the socialistic labor theory of value is a much more effective basis for justifying a patent system than any concepts of economic schools of thought more oriented toward free market capitalism, because patents are designed to protect a labor resources investment in the patentable invention, rather than any kind of actual proprietary investment. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Patent hit - MS goes after Linux - FreeBSD ?
On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 07:57:34AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Do lawyers not use the law to their clients' advatage -- often abusing it -- just because they're wrong in the final analysis? seems you never worked long with lawyers, or you are lucky and have really fair one. If the word fair can be used for lawyers at all. Most often they just want court cases to have work. I'm not sure you understood what I said, because what *you* said here seems irrelevant to what I said. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Patent hit - MS goes after Linux - FreeBSD ?
On Sun, Aug 05, 2012 at 09:33:20AM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 08:48:56 -0400 Robert Huff articulated: Patents are - or should be - the means, not the end. The end is encourage people to create new stuff; the means of encouragement is to give them exclusive rights for a limited time. As long as the idea gets out there, we should be indifferent as to whether they make money. I agree up to the point about financial incentive. For myself, I like making money. I don't apologize for that. Most engineers, software / hardware designers also enjoy receiving a monetary reward for their hard work. Simple giving away our hard work, sweat and time to some socialist just because they feel they have the right to the hard work of others is repulsive. I'm okay with that statement. If a monetary reward were removed from the equation, we would probably still be using an abacus in the dark. Cockamamie nonsense -- or, if you prefer, [citation needed]. While we certainly should be indifferent to the financial incentive and monetary reward someone receives; in all too many cases that is just not so. The socialists still feel they are entitled to something for nothing. . . . which need not have *anything* at all to do with a discussion of whether a system of patents is a good or bad idea. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: compare zfs xfs and jfs o
On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 03:46:53PM -0500, Marco Muskus wrote: Hi Ashkan, I think that XFS JFS are more mature filesystems than ZFS, but the feature set of ZFS i ahead in the future. For a NFS server first I'll go with ZFS because the consistence in disk and speed will gonna be the differentiator. The idea that ZFS is faster than XFS is certainly a new one for me. Do you have some benchmarks for that? -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Patent hit - MS goes after Linux - FreeBSD ?
On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 01:39:21PM +, Traiano Welcome wrote: even if not it's just matter to add proper licence to right ports in port tree and require user to accept it. Probably won't even have to do that. People can download, compile and run whatever they want on a base operating system, but as long as the base operating system (FreeBSD in our case) remains legally un-encumbered with patented code, nobody really cares. If individual users decide they want to compile and run copyrighted software on FreeBSD (or linux) it will be a matter between M$ and the particular user in question, not the community providing the base OS and user space tools. The SCO-IBM debacle some years ago triggered a huge review of open source copyrights in the linux (and *bsd) community. SCO failed to get anything back then, and it's hard to imagine how M$ will get anything now that there's broader awareness in the community around software patent infringement. Unfortunately, patent law and copyright law are very different environments. The truth is that probably every nontrivial piece of software created infringes several patents, and the only question that remains is whether those patents would hold up in court under close scrutiny. The greater the disparity in legal expertise and funding behind the two parties, the greater the likelihood that the case will be found in favor of the party with the greater resources. This is the reason software patents comprise such a blight on the world of software development. Even a frivolous patent that would not hold up through completion of litigation may serve its purpose by bankrupting a defendant before the case is concluded. It is possible that Microsoft is going the way of SCO -- into its grave, having hung all its hopes on litigation. Along the way, though, it will probably do a lot of damage to a lot of people, projects, and businesses, and I just hope it doesn't get as far as the FreeBSD project or any FreeBSD users before things come crashing down. (disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. Et cetera.) -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: how to speed up port make??
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:04:27PM -0700, Ryan Noll wrote: Hello, On Jul 25, 2012 7:34 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: You kids have got it easy. I used to have to compile by hand with a pair of tweezers, bar copper wire, a magnifying glass, and a potato with two pieces of metal stuck in it as a power source. Ha-ha... Ah those were the days..., but does anyone remember the old way of building the kernel in the 2.2.8 days? I was just getting started doing the basic system setup/admin things in those days. Back then (1998 or so) I did not have access to broadband, so I did not even update the sources back then, but I knew that it was a good idea to remove devices from the GENERIC kernel that I did not have--thanks to the book by Greg Lehey. (Even though the version of The Complete FreeBSD I bought is so out of date I cannot bring myself to throw it away--it was my guide back in those days.) Does anyone else remember The Complete FreeBSD? I have the fourth edition. I imagine that's not as old as yours. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: help about free bsp version netcat to work it on ubuntu
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 07:18:13PM +0800, lei yang wrote: Aha,I just want to learn want to know how to build the netcat for freebsd version on a no-freebsd platform I'm really curious, now: Why? -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: how to speed up port make??
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 08:41:15PM -0400, kpn...@pobox.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 01:06:33AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:59:56 -0400, Sean Cavanaugh wrote: Got you beat. Compiled world on a 100MHz Pentium with 40 MB of RAM. I think I can: FreeBSD 4 on a Pentium 1 with 64 MB EDO RAM. The make buildworld took 24 hours. The kernel itself, if I remember correctly, required 3-5 hours, of course without much tweaking. :-) Luxury! I once compiled a custom kernel of NetBSD/i386 on a 486 with 8MB of RAM. I was stuck with the GENERIC kernel which took up over 6MB just to boot. It took over 40 days to finish. To be fair it didn't help that I had to move out of my apartment in the middle. So it took some time for make to refigure out where had been in the build. Heck, we used to compile gcc and watch movies. It took three movies to get through a full recursive compile of gcc. Yep, 6 hours. And then there was that occasion one night watching a guy logged into an Ultrix box: Raise your hand if you've ever seen 'ps' report that it had itself been swapped out. Yep, again. Ah, good times. I think I still have some memory _chips_ (zip scrams, not dips) around here somewhere You kids have got it easy. I used to have to compile by hand with a pair of tweezers, bar copper wire, a magnifying glass, and a potato with two pieces of metal stuck in it as a power source. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: how to speed up port make??
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 08:33:36PM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: You kids have got it easy. I used to have to compile by hand with a pair of tweezers, bar copper wire, a magnifying glass, and a potato with two pieces of metal stuck in it as a power source. s/bar/bare/ Now let me tell you how we used to have to do our regexing. . . . -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: backup tools
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 09:46:02AM -0400, Jorge Luis Gonzalez wrote: Wojciech Puchar wrote: what exactly deficiences and requirements not met by rsync are you talking about? Perhaps deficiencies was too strong a word. I think the OP required--or perhaps desired--a WOL function. I'm not aware of any such capability in rsync proper. I meant, too, that dirvish, which was the alternative that I recommended, presents an elegant and easily-comprehended way to manage rsync's considerable abilities, not that it provides features that can't be managed directly by rsync. Actually, a Wake-On-LAN feature is not at all necessary for me in this case. It's a simple enough task to just trigger a backup manually at the command line via a script that automates the process. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: backup tools
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 11:17:36AM +0200, herbert langhans wrote: On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 11:10:06AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: lftp does work incremental. Take a look at Chad's posting again and read what he needs. And of course, ftp via ssh is nothing new ... still - any ftp client will no go faster than ftp protocol allows. That's sure. But I think it's an option for the laptops what Chad mentioned. Such scripts for backup are set up in minutes and it happily copies the files to the server. If there are already user accounts on the server, it could be really easy. I think it depends on the scale of the network. It does appear to meet my needs, at first glance, with any capabilities it does not already have that I might need easily scripted. I'm having a difficult time finding any reference to licensing, though. Matt Dillon's explanation of cpdup suggests it is probably some kind of BSD-licensed, given its inclusion in DragonFly BSD base utilities, but that's not *necessarily* the case. Reference: http://apollo.backplane.com/FreeSrc/ I'm going to try emailing Dillon for clarification, too. In any case, I'll take a closer look at cpdup. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
backup tools
I'm setting up a new backup server using FreeBSD. It will be used for backing up laptops, which will not be connected to the network by any kind of schedule, so backups will be initiated manually rather than by cron or other scheduled procedures. I'm trying to decide on what tools to use for managing backups. In the past I have used rsync, which has worked reasonably well, but fails one of my desired criteria for the new backup procedures, and is less than ideal for others. My criteria for procedures are: 1. They should minimize the need for additional software beyond the base system as much as reasonably possible. This means not only that I do not want to have to specify the installation of a bunch of stuff, but also that I do not want a bunch of dependencies pulled in with something I choose to install (if anything). Ideally, I should be able to do this with just the base system, though that seems unlikely at this point. 2. They should require only copyfree licensed or public domain tools -- no copyleft licensed tools, no proprietary licensed tools, no noncommercial or nonderivative licensed tools, and no permissively licensed tools where the license comes with annoying restrictions such as the Apache License requirements for specific bookkeeping procedures. I might bend on the requirement for non-copyfree permissive licenses if I have to, but I'd rather not; bending on any of the others would probably involve just giving up and going back to rsync. 3. They should provide for incremental backups. 4. They should provide for the ability to quickly and easily test backup integrity without restoring the backups anywhere, which most likely means some kind of checksum comparisons akin to what rsync provides. 5. They should allow for transferring data from the system to be backed up to the backup server via SSH. 6. They should use tools as simple as possible, preferably command line tools. 7. There should be documentation somewhere out there for how to set something like this up, someone willing to help me figure out how to get it set up, or an obvious path to setting it up so that I do not spend a week just figuring it all out, if at all possible. 8. They should preferably not require creating a local archive on the laptop before copying to the backup server if it can reasonably be avoided, so that a big chunk of empty HDD space will not need to be maintained for backups to work. Any help figuring out what tools would work for these purposes would be appreciated. I might be able to make exceptions for some parts of this if there are suitable alternative approaches. Thanks in advance for any help I can get in figuring this out. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 08:28:17AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: biggest problem with what you propose, though, is that it would destroy the social factors in development of the FreeBSD system that make it what it is, and thus destroy FreeBSD itself, as far as I am concerned. I am not sure, as long as clients would be treated seriously! I look at large corporate software vendors and see them treating customers seriously maybe 2% of the time at best. In this case, most of the developers and project managers of FreeBSD are also customers, which changes things significantly. I would have thought that even you should be able to understand that without help. another personal attack? I though i talk with adults. 1. It's a comment on your tendency to ignore substantive arguments from other people, including probably half a dozen (so far) lengthy explanations of factors you refuse to consider written by *me*. 2. You're a hypocrite, pretending you're an innocent victim of personal attacks, given the way you go around making personal attacks on everyone else with a broad brush. I've commented on that, too, but -- like much of the rest of what I've said -- you simply ignored it. Turning it into a commercial enterprise rather than an open source project would probably turn it into a project that is driven about 60% by corporate politics and 40% by marketing BS, with no room left over for quality except as needed to support the minimum credibility its CEO deems necessary to support those two concerns. It depends solely on development team. I take it you don't know anything at all about how public corporations manage their development teams. That, or you're being disingenuous. It depends on the development team, and the priorities they choose to pursue first, right now. Under the stewardship of a publicly traded corporation, it would depend on the CEO, the board of directors, marketing, PR, and the accounting department, and the priorities *they* choose to pursue first, instead. For now - as we see - it's decision are driven by money. But not all users money but few selected large users. It's not *just* a decision driven by money. Money applies, certainly, but not as much as it would if FreeBSD were a for-profit public corporation rather than a community-driven open source project. When you say this, by the way, you ignore something like 90% of the perfectly reasonable additional motivating factors that have been brought up. I suppose I should not expect any different by now, given the strong track record you've managed to establish just in this one extended discussion. Worse based on a couple of very narrowly applicable metrics derived There will be IMHO soon good compiler available. it's highly probable that pcc would improve a lot, for now it is small, quick but doesn't produce good code for new CPUs. But it probably will improve. CLANG is already great bloat, and will be worse. Binary size and minuscule benchmark variations are all you see. It is ludicrous to watch you close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears, and shout lalalalalalalala so consistently to prevent any other factors involved in compiler choice from entering your mind -- such as good output from a compiler that will be stable and do what you expect. No amount of money will fix it, actually too much money will hurt. . . . and yet you want to turn the FreeBSD project over to Microsoft (or the equivalent). You contradict yourself. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 01:16:09PM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote: Chad Perrin wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 01:06:12PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: i already proposed (but not publically) to turn FreeBSD into commercial system. REALLY i would not see a problem to pay say 100$ per server licence. I would see a problem with that -- not because I don't think FreeBSD is worth it. I do, and I think it is worth more than that, in fact. The biggest problem with what you propose, though, is that it would destroy Hi Chad etc, I admire the perserverance, but maybe Don't feed the troll ? Yeah. . . . -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:24:57AM -0500, Reid Linnemann wrote: On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 11:27 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: I disagree with the assessment by others that FreeBSD is in some way effectively a subsidiary of its corporate users, but it does have corporate users, as well as non-corporate users. Just as it must reasonably see to the needs of the individuals who use it, so must it also reasonably see to the needs of those corporate users, especially when some of those corporate users' employees are key developers for the base system (to the significant benefit of the rest of us). Thus, saying that a particular set of conditions having an impact on commercial sponsors of FreeBSD has zero bearing on FreeBSD itself is just . . . incorrect. And I would like to stress on this point that, when I referred to corporate sponsorship in an earlier post, I was thinking specifically about the sponsorship of employing developers that keep the system moving forward, not necessarily monetary donations. The foundation does need money, but the software is doomed if no one is gainfully employed to maintain and enhance it. I think there is an altruistic fiction that many people subscribe to that free software is merely the result of the generosity of developers producing code of their own volition and on their own spare time and giving it away, and from that viewpoint the act of considering concerns of a sponsoring entity amounts to selling out. The reality is much different and much more complex, as you well know. Indeed. When I contribute to an open source project, as an individual, much the same factors apply. I do not do it to help someone like Michel Talon, or even Reid Linnemann; I do it to help myself, by improving software I like, or to help people who in turn work to improve software I like. I have selfish goals that are served by my support of well- designed copyfree software, whether that support is financial in nature, a contribution of development effort, or something less direct. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: backup tools
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 08:47:40PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 10:09:03AM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: I'm setting up a new backup server using FreeBSD. It will be used for backing up laptops, which will not be connected to the network by any kind of schedule, so backups will be initiated manually rather than by cron or other scheduled procedures. What are the laptops running? FreeBSD, Debian, and/or Ubuntu. There's at least one of each. I apologize for not mentioning that sooner. I had a feeling I'd overlook something. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: backup tools
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 08:14:34PM -0500, Adam Vande More wrote: On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: I'm setting up a new backup server using FreeBSD. It will be used for backing up laptops, which will not be connected to the network by any kind of schedule, so backups will be initiated manually rather than by cron or other scheduled procedures. I'm trying to decide on what tools to use for managing backups. In the past I have used rsync, which has worked reasonably well, but fails one of my desired criteria for the new backup procedures, and is less than ideal for others. One's I use or have used: sysutils/rdiff-backup sysutils/tarsnap misc/amanda-server Unfortunately, one of those is GPL, another is subject to proprietary licensing, and the last has a bunch of (otherwise unnecessary on the server) GNU project dependencies. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:25:22AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: You're being paid to write a program for a customer. You i don't talk that case, but if i am hired to write some part of program as an employer in software company. There are basically four circumstances that might apply here, as far as I'm aware: 1. Your work is considered work for hire, where you are just a cog in the corporate machine and the corporation is the creator or author of record (and thus the default copyright holder). This means you would have to get permission (license) to use the work outside of your function as an employee. 2. Your work can be used by the employer under exclusive license, which means you cannot use the work yourself except under strictly limited conditions specified in law. 3. Your work can be transfered to the employer, so that though you are the default copyright holder an agreement (possibly an employment agreement, but generally requiring a distinct agreement separate from the employment agreement itself for this case) establishes the legal transfer of copyright from you to the employer. 4. Your work is provided to the employer under a non-exclusive license, which means you can then license it to others as well. By far the most common case for a standard employment relationship is case 1. Pathological edge-cases may adjust these circumstances. My assumptions in writing this are based on my experience with US copyright law. I am not a lawyer, and this does not constitute legal advice, but only an explanation of my understanding and perspective with regard to copyright law. BUT - as everyone is free to obtain, modify and re-issue GPL source code, I'm not sure such a consensus could be reached. by creating a BSD licenced fork - constructed from parts written by all developers that - as you said - have personal right to their code. This is pretty much exactly what happened with the Pentadactyl extension for Firefox. The people who had been doing the majority of development work for the Vimperator extension for a while, but were not the project owner, took the code they had created and rewrote (from scratch) any additional code needed to make it work, creating the Pentadactyl project. The original Vimperator project used a copyleft license (the GPL), and the new Pentadactyl project used a copyfree license (I don't recall which, probably either the Simplified BSD License or the MIT/X11 License). -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 05:50:24AM -0400, Thomas Mueller wrote: Snippet from Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl: I successfully predicted the fall of linux (in quality point of view) years ago, then netbsd - after this and my prediction were good. Now i predict FreeBSD will fall within 2015 time frame. What i mean fall - that it would be better to use older version as long as possible because newer are worse. For now - FreeBSD 6 was an improvement - FreeBSD 7 was an improvement, except first releases but that's normal - FreeBSD 8 was a big improvement in performance and quality. FreeBSD 9 as for now: - have similar performance at most - have some improvement and important functionality like TRIM support. - have some useful functionality like softdep journalling, but risky. Still - forcing full check reveals some inconsistencies now and then. FreeBSD 10 will unlikely be better, but for sure slower unless you will force gcc build that MAYBE will work. possibly not. My experience with NetBSD suggests you may be right there, but Linux? I'll have to build a new Linux installation and see for myself! I'm still inclined to say FreeBSD 9.0 is an improvement over 8.2; I never got to 8.3. I can definitely vouch for his estimate of the quality of Linux-based OSes, at least in the majority of cases. I primarily used Debian for a while, then went through a transitional period where I gradually phased out Debian, until about half a dozen years was spent entirely Linux-free (apart from the Linux kernel on a couple of embedded consumer devices), during which time I used FreeBSD for everything. Over the course of the last -- well, more than a year, less than 1.5 years -- I have been forced to use a Linux-based system again to get halfway decent graphics support on a laptop I bought without checking hardware compatibility carefully enough. In the meantime, however, I have provided some support for other people using Linux-based systems. During that time, I had occasion to see a Slackware installer hose an entire system (luckily with backups) that was initially intended to be set up as a multi-boot with FreeBSD and MS Windows; Ubuntu get cursed at great length with words like If I wanted to deal with this crap, I'd use Windows!; and similar issues crop up. Even so, installing Debian on my new laptop early last year (and trying to install Arch Linux on it -- which didn't hose anything up, but did fail to detect the free space on the hard drive, and thus failed to install, before I decided it was easier to skip Arch) and using it since then on a regular basis has been an eye-opener. Myriad little stupidities have crept into the system, including such wonders of engineering brilliance as some documentation to the effect that basic system network management tools were no longer guaranteed to work. I have some pretty strong opinions about the way things are getting broken in the Linux world, and some of the reasons this sort of problem is growing, but they're increasingly off-topic for this venue. Suffice to say that I could write a short book about the subject, and still leave a lot of problems unaddressed. Anyway, switching from GCC to Clang has essentially nothing to do with the kinds of problems we increasingly see in the Linux world. In fact, one of the biggest problems in the Linux world is the fact that GNU projects have a tendency to degrade in quality over time and pretty thoroughly undermine the Unix philosophy in egregious ways, which means that the sooner we can divest ourselves of GNU tools (including GCC) the better off we will probably be (though I would still advocate a measured approach to replacing GNU tools, rather than a headlong rush without any forethought). -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 06:11:46AM -0400, Thomas Mueller wrote: Snippet from Antonio Olivares olivares14...@gmail.com: I have some friends that develop software. They had released it under GNU umbrella. Later on, other folks were taking advantage and not giving back as the license requires. There was little to no way to enforce the license, he decided to move to other license that protects his work and let others use it was well with little to no strings attached. He know uses the CDDL which is also an Open Source License. He can give you many reasons as to why the GPLv3 is the wrong way to go. I can ask him for these and other reasons at your request. Yes, that would be a good idea, not so much for me as for others who want to better understand the licensing issues of GCC compared to Clang. That would help explain why FreeBSD is switching to Clang. Related (perhaps somewhat indirectly): Advancement Through License Simplicity http://univacc.net/?page=license_simplicity -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:40:11AM +0200, Michel Talon wrote: Le 21 juin 2012 à 03:52, kpn...@pobox.com a écrit : All of this may seem stupid to a reasonable person outside of law. I'll agree that it probably does look stupid. But it is also the reality of the legal systems we must live with today. I can only praise kpneal for this very well argumented post. However some remarks. The whole argument revolves around FUD, fear, uncertainty and doubt. But there will never be any shortage of lawyers trying to spread FUD on any subject to please their clients, and if companies bend over instead of fighting FUD they will promptly be paralyzed. It was actually a fairly sober assessment of legal conditions, especially in light of the rather unreasonable expenses often attendant to legal battles. In any case, it pays to play things safe when your options are: * Take the idiots on, head-on, over their copyleft licensing zeal, and see if you get sued. * Play it safe by using a compiler built on a better architecture that provides better development features, more correct output, and other advantages, with a copyfree license instead of a copyleft license. Last time a company tried to use such tactic against Linux, it did not turn out a bright idea. Second, FreeBSD is not a commercial company, and while this argument may have a merit for commercial sponsors of FreeBSD, it has zero bearing on FreeBSD itself. I disagree with the assessment by others that FreeBSD is in some way effectively a subsidiary of its corporate users, but it does have corporate users, as well as non-corporate users. Just as it must reasonably see to the needs of the individuals who use it, so must it also reasonably see to the needs of those corporate users, especially when some of those corporate users' employees are key developers for the base system (to the significant benefit of the rest of us). Thus, saying that a particular set of conditions having an impact on commercial sponsors of FreeBSD has zero bearing on FreeBSD itself is just . . . incorrect. If FreeBSD appears as a subsidiary of some commercial company (say Juniper) i am not sure this will be good for its further development. This being said, i agree with you that the FreeBSD binaries will not see a big performance degradation through the use of clang, so, as long as gcc is in the ports to be used with performance critical stuff, it is no big deal. Anyways as a long time FreeBSD user i have seen clang presented as an experiment by two or three people, and then suddenly stuffed without any discussion in the base system, apparently for political reasons that i don't share (i mean this stupid obsession of GPL free system, which has replaced the previous focus on quality and performance). How much were you around in the mailing lists and other relevant venues for discussion of changes to the base system? You are presumably aware this list doesn't really count, being a general-questions list that is not exactly the official place to discuss things like base system choices of library and userland development (for instance), or even ports system development. It's possible all you saw of the discussion was the parts that escaped into the wild, as it were; the more in-depth discussion of the matter surely happened elsewhere. This might give you a mistaken impression that there was not much discussion of the matter. . . . and thanks for calling the concerns of everyone who wants to be able to use FreeBSD as the basis of other projects without having to deal with problematic licensing restrictions as stupid and obsessed. That's not very nice (or accurate). -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 01:06:12PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: for commercial sponsors of FreeBSD, it has zero bearing on FreeBSD itself. If FreeBSD appears as a subsidiary of some commercial company (say Juniper) i am not sure this will be good I think any project that size is actually a subsidiary and must be. I just don't like that it isn't stated openly! It is nothing wrong, unless one can feed using zero point energy, everyone needs money to stay alive. Wouldn't it be smarter to openly say Juniper request as to get rid o GPL as soon as we can because they are fed up with this shit and law mess. instead of personal attacks, messing with my (and others) sentences and posting evident lies just to explain the decision. It is a difference between honest people and fools. i already proposed (but not publically) to turn FreeBSD into commercial system. REALLY i would not see a problem to pay say 100$ per server licence. I would see a problem with that -- not because I don't think FreeBSD is worth it. I do, and I think it is worth more than that, in fact. The biggest problem with what you propose, though, is that it would destroy the social factors in development of the FreeBSD system that make it what it is, and thus destroy FreeBSD itself, as far as I am concerned. Eliminating the copyfree licensed, open source development model of FreeBSD would undermine the majority of the technical benefits supported by that development model. I would have thought that even you should be able to understand that without help. There is nothing to prevent giving source with system. Non-Free software doesn't have to be binary only. Read-only source, or even modifiable but non-distributable source, does not provide the social benefits of an open source development model that encourage the kind of participation FreeBSD needs to remain FreeBSD, rather than becoming Oracle Solaris or MS Windows Server 2010: Race Condition Odyssey. For paying this i would like FreeBSD to be maintained with quality and performance being the only reason, not politics. Turning it into a commercial enterprise rather than an open source project would probably turn it into a project that is driven about 60% by corporate politics and 40% by marketing BS, with no room left over for quality except as needed to support the minimum credibility its CEO deems necessary to support those two concerns. Every trendy or otherwise requested feature could be added separately or even charged separately, as long as it doesn't have any effects on base system. ZFS being example. Nothing against Juniper (the make truly good working hardware), but if they enforce decision because of their personal likes then it must be stopped. You seem to think this is all about Juniper. I wonder where you get that idea. Why didn't you pluck iXsystems out of thin air as your whipping boy, or Yahoo, or some other corporate user? GPLv3 based C compiler does not prevent making closed source software like JunOS for example. In most cases, this may be true, *if* the license exceptions apply as described if/when tested in court. There are some cases where even the optimistic explanation of the license exceptions particular to GCC mentions that the GPLv3 might apply to generated code. It is only i hate GNU type decision. No, it's not only that. It's *also* that, and with good reason. Good job ignoring a whole lot of information people have tried to bring to your attention, including lengthy messages from me to which you have not substantively responded. Are you unable, or simply unwilling, to have an honest discussion on the matter? Ironically, your possibly dishonest intention in this matter occurs even as you pretend that potentially mistaken statements by one or two people make *everyone* into malevolent liars who deserve your ire and insults. I hate too, and in spite of this am against removing gcc and replacing it with much worse product. Worse based on a couple of very narrowly applicable metrics derived from specific, very particular use case conditions, whose measures are of negligible scale for most purposes, ignoring a shit-ton of additional information about why Clang is better based on information that you have not only admitted not knowing about but proclaimed you have no interest in learning. You *refuse* to educate yourself about some of the subject matter that pertains to other benefits, then proclaim everyone else at fault for the fact you cannot see past your nose to note that the whole world does not revolve around some dubious benchmarks. I doubt you're convincing anyone of anything you seem to think we should all accept as gospel. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail
Re: Why Clang
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 07:30:23PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Because there's no reason to do that. It's an asinine suggestion. Clang is here to stay. Most of us are happy about that decision. GCC Because most that are not already stopped and ignored thing. and use GCC. Politics won. Development benefits are not politics. Easier distribution is not politics. More responsive upstream developers are not politics. You ignoring all of these points and more that have been brought up, some by me, *is* evidently politics -- because you are seeking a political capitulation to your willfully ignorant demands. Politics *lose*, so far, and for that I am grateful. . . . but if it makes you feel better to whisper to yourself that all opposition to your position (even when you ignore it and have not bothered to actually read and understand it) is just politics, go ahead, as long as it doesn't perpetuate this wholly unnecessary griping on the mailing list. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:14:09PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: And why you think it's not better then gcc? because - as you already should know - test shows otherwise. You just ignored everything Volodymyr Kostyrko said about the other factors that are also important for a compiler being considered better. Good job. I have a hint to share with you, though: Ignoring an argument does not make it wrong. As well as FreeBSD running predictable with gcc anyway. . . . for some use cases, evidently including yours. In my case, Clang's stability and predictability is better than GCC's, and in some other cases it may be *much* better. In the cases where it isn't, that's a case of standards-noncompliant code in a port causing problems, and it is a problem that is being fixed prior to FreeBSD 10 release with Clang as the sole compiler in the base system (last I heard). This is what happens when you use a more standards-compliant compiler: you get more stable and predictable behavior. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 02:16:43PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: speed estimates. there are a difference between speed estimate and actual speed - and i talk about the latter only. You're talking about poorly managed benchmarks that are imprecise and prone to fluctuation, applying only to very specific cases that are not necessarily very broadly representative, but you are talking about them as though they are perfectly representative of all cases. That is, at best, speed estimates. Besides, NetBSD and OpenBSD has already selected and using pcc now. And they are fine with that one. their problem. No -- it's their solution. It would be a problem only if the previous statement said and they are *not* fine with that one. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Attaching a monitor via vga
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 07:27:33AM -0600, Warren Block wrote: Adding a new mode should not be needed for most monitors. I do this to set up the external video: xrandr --output VGA --above LVDS That's to span a single desktop over both monitors. Some desktop environments have their own ideas about which monitors are attached and what part of the desktop is shown, and that must be changed in the DE's settings. My use case involves putting everything on one monitor at a time -- the larger desktop LCD when it's plugged in, and the laptop display when the external monitor is *not* plugged in. From the sound of the request, that is the use case the orignial querent in this thread had in mind as well. Your tip could well be useful for some use cases, though. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:06:31PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: I have some friends that develop software. They had released it under GNU umbrella. Later on, other folks were taking advantage and not isn't it that once you release your own work as GPL you don't really own this and even you cannot use it in closed source software? When you license something, you still own the copyright. You can then release it under other licenses as well, and for versions you have modified you can release it under another license *only* if you choose, thus no longer having the GPL attached to those version. The old version's license, though, cannot be rescinded for those who have already received it under those terms, which then allows them to pass it on to others under the same license. This means that you can simultaneously offer a piece of software for which you own the copyright both under the GPL and as a paid-license product for those who want different license terms than the GPL, so yeah, you *can* use it in closed source software even when distributing it under the GPL at the same time if *you* own the copyright or if you get a separate license from whoever owns the copyright. The people who are restricted from using it in a closed-source project are those who do not own the copyright, do not pay the copyright holder for a different license, and acquire it under the GPL. In short, the people most restricted in such circumstances are the people who make up the open source development community. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:07:09PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: email elided for purposes of courtesy wrote: Will i be able to compile FreeBSD base system with gcc after some time? not sure. Why is that so important for you? if you would read even less than carefully the topic you will get the answer. I'll try to help out, here. Christer Solskogen: I think the reason that is so very important to Wojciech Puchar is the fact that he is incapable of imagining: 1. other concerns that might apply 2. that things appear highly likely to change 3. that a negligible performance difference is . . . negligible I'm pretty sure he's not running compute clusters on FreeBSD, after all. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: CLANG vs GCC tests of fortran/f2c program
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 08:40:56PM +0400, Евгений Лактанов wrote: 20.06.2012 18:47, Mark Felder пишет: On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:43:14 -0500, Wojciech Puchar email address elided for purposes of courtesy wrote: [attribution lost by Wojciech Puchar and I'm too lazy to check] Why not make FreeBSD better for everyone by cooperating with the CLANG project? because we already have great compiler - GCC. In spite of using GPL licence. GCC performs well, but it is a very messy undocumented codebase which makes maintaining it a nightmare. Just ask Google -- you'll find many others saying the same thing. It would take MORE work to get FreeBSD devs up to speed on the GCC codebase to add the features we want than it is to cooperate with the CLANG community and help them make their compiler better than GCC in every test case. It is the classic developer/user argument. It is also stupid. The user side simply doesn't have the same needs, it can't understand how freaking hard it is sometimes to debug a large and complex program in a badly documented environment or worse with undocumented features. If it works faster ergo it is better - that is the only criteria to really have a meaning to a user. It's bikeshed painting. Someone who doesn't understand the many factors that apply, and doesn't even *want* to know, picks one thing he thinks he understands and argues about it in an attempt to make the entire project change course. Well, dammit, I *like* blue, and he can take his bucket of red paint home with him to paint his *own* bikeshed. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
You should really configure your email client to attribute quoted commentary properly (or, as a first step, at all). On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:51:00AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: be more exact. I believe Robert Bonomi (you didn't include attribution for the previous email, I notice) *was* more exact, in that the rest of his email explained what he thought of your glossing over the various factors that might contribute to binary size. I notice you ignored most of it in your response, too. or maybe missed. So please tell me finally what is wrong in measuring speed by measuring time of execution doing same things? What i should measure? time in heavens? He didn't say anything about your measurement of time being faulty. He said your measurement of size was faulty. I can generally puzzle out what caused various GCC warning and error messages when trying to compile my own code, given comparison of what's strange but i don't have a problem - and i always set -Wall when using gcc as 99% of warnings are actually errors. I guess you're either some kind of rare genius or suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Everyone I've encountered with something to say about warning and error reporting with regard to Clang vs. GCC has remarked about how much nicer it is with Clang. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:06:49PM +0200, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote: GPL protects the freedom of the programmer who licensed his code under those licenses: He wants it to be free for use, but not to be turned into closed source products. What a lying sonofabitch. That is not called freedom. That is called forcible, viral open source. I think we can all see the difference. Open your motherfucking eyes, communist goofball... Give him a break. His heart is in the right place, though his choice of phrasing may have been imperfect in this case. He was, it seems to me, trying to take an even-handed approach to describing the positions of both sides of a contentious matter, and letting the reader make up his or her own mind about it. In fact, if there's any bias showing in what he said, I think it leans toward copyfree licenses like the various BSD licenses, rather than toward copyleft licenses such as the various GNU licenses. There are better targets than Polytropon for your ire. A programmer who does not want to raise this barrier will typically use the BSD license which is more free. No, it's just plain free. This would seem like a much more reasonable statement if it was not preceded by your immediately prior invective. BSDL in opposite is often criticized a rape me license. No, it is not, except perhaps by lying atheist Marxist bastards and his religious adherents. Yes, it is often criticized that way -- by people who, in my considered opinion, have their heads up their asses -- and the fact that Polytropon pointed out this simple fact does not make him a bad person. It's also worth noting that a lot of the people who make such ridiculous comments about copyfree licenses are often not atheists, Marxists, or bastards. They're often just nuts. . . . and what's wrong with being an atheist? I'm not an atheist (more of an agnostic Taoist), but if someone wants to believe he or she has absolute knowledge of the (non-)existence of any god, that's his or her prerogative. I would judge such a person no more harshly than a devoted monotheist. Your beliefs are your own affair; only your behavior, as it affects other people, is of particular concern to me. In the particular venue of a FreeBSD mailing list, my interest narrows further to exclude things that have nothing to do with FreeBSD and associated software, community, and so on. I don't see how atheist is a meaningful insult, especially when we're talking about software, or how it can be gleaned from someone's licensing preferences. It explicitely (!) allows creating derivates in a closed source manner. This means that parts of BSD licensed code can be a key component in a proprietary closed source product that is for sale (e. g. a firewall appliance), and nobody will find out about that fact. Now you got it! GPL is about forcing people to do what /you/ want and BSD is about letting them do what /they/ want. Let's see if you can guess which one of those licenses is about freedom. Hint: freedom is not defined as forcing people to do what you want. This would probably be a better-received statement if the rest of your commentary in the same email was not mostly about (probably entirely inaccurate) insults flung at someone for failing to use the specific phrasing you prefer when referring to the crazies who believe using software distributed under a copyfree license is an act of pure evil. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Attaching a monitor via vga
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 08:52:58PM -0400, David Tilbrook wrote: I have a thinkpad t61p running freebsd9.0. The window size is 1680x1050 -- a reasonable size -- but the screen itself is 38cm. (15) which is irritatingly small for my old eyes. So I want to attach an external monitor via a vga cable, which I have been doing with my RedHat thinkpad A31P for years. I tried attaching Asus VE228H (1920x1080) but it would display only part of the window (the top-left corner). I get a similar behaviour with a Samsung SyncMaster. When I tried to xinit with the monitor attached, it displays an even smaller part of the screen. (On my previous thinkpad with a Samsung, to get a reasonable full window I had to unplug the vga, start xinit, and then plug in the vga, but I can live with that.) My questions: 1) What can I do to display the whole window on an external monitor? 2) Is there a monitor out there that would better support such use? 3) Would a Samsung T220HD 22 which claims to support 1680x1050 work, and is there someone in Toronto who sells it and would let me test it? (Craigs list doesn't qualify). You probably want to look into using the xrandr command to configure output for connected monitors. Try this first: xrandr --auto If that does not work, you may have to do something more sophisticated. For instance, I have a shell script that looks like this for when I connect my laptop to an external monitor: #!/bin/sh xrandr --auto xrandr --output LVDS1 --off xrandr --newmode 1680x1050_60.00 146.25 1680 1784 1960 2240 1050 1053 1059 1089 -hsync +vsync xrandr --addmode VGA1 1680x1050_60.00 xrandr --output VGA1 --mode 1680x1050_60.00 xli -onroot -border black -center /path/to/enso_16x9.png You should use this to find out the name of the display you identify in the --output line: xrandr -q You'll need to get information about your monitor's display parameters for the --newmode line, and the --addmode and --mode lines uses the same resolution string as in the --newmode line. The xli line is there just to re-apply my background image, because it gets a little out of whack when I change monitors like that. When I'm going to disconnect from the external monitor, I run xrandr --auto before disconnecting to get the laptop to recognize my laptop's built-in display again, then run xrandr --auto one more time after disconnecting the external monitor to get it to forget about the settings for the external monitor so my laptop display won't act funny because it thinks there's a larger external monitor still attached. I hope that helps. Let me know if you want any more information about how this works. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why Clang
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:30:23PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: scratch and this resulted with thing 5 times larger, *YOUR* measurement of sizes was faulty. grin be more exact. I believe Robert Bonomi (you didn't include attribution for the previous email, I notice) *was* more exact, in that the rest of his email explained what he thought of your glossing over the various factors that might contribute to binary size. I notice you ignored most of it in your response, too. I'm sure that you _also_ are aware that a larger program size does *NOT* necessarily mean 'bloat'. of course. really i can write programs. and really - i don't understand all this fuss about better error reporting. Really i don't have problems to read gcc error messages when i compile my programs. I can generally puzzle out what caused various GCC warning and error messages when trying to compile my own code, given comparison of what's going on in the messages with what's going on in my code and reasoning through the connections between different parts of the code. That sort of thing is required probably 70% of the time, in my experience. With Clang, by contrast, I find that's required only about 20% to 30% of the time. Otherwise, the warning and error messages tend to get me a lot closer to the actual point of failure than GCC. *That* is what all this fuss about 'better error reporting' is about. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Uptime [OT]
On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 09:20:19PM -0600, Steve Bertrand wrote: I still have non-root access to a box from my old job... it is non-available and doing nothing, so updates are irrelevant: %uptime 9:01PM up 1142 days, 5:29, 1 user, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 Hmm. My longest uptime system right now -- basically just an SSH-accessible store of digital audio files ripped from CD and attached to speakers in the living room -- is at 500 days uptime today. My oldest build date on a running system is Sun May 7 04:32:43 UTC 2006. Obviously, neither of these is set up for public access. They're just neglected single-purpose machines. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Uptime [OT]
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 07:49:49AM -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote: Heh. check out -this- one: % uname -a ** *** ** *** Kernel #0: Thu Mar 20 16:40:01 CST 1997 :/usr/src/sys/compile/LOCAL i386 The build date _is_ accurate, the hardware it's running on is old enough to vote. wry grin It's publicly accessible on the Internet, It's not quite as ridiculous as it looks, the (limited) apps running on it _are_ up-to-date. Uptime is nothing to brag about -- no UPS, combined with 'unreliable' public utility power, does have an impact. No power conditioning (implied by no UPS) is nothing to brag about. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Uptime [OT]
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:47:55PM +, David Brodbeck wrote: On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: No power conditioning (implied by no UPS) is nothing to brag about. If your utility power is very -- common now in places with buried utilities -- a UPS of the non-enterprise variety can actually make reliability *worse*. I've found that standby-type UPSs (like the popular APC BackUPS and SmartUPS units) will drop the load at the slightest power blip once the batteries go bad, while machines connected directly to utility power will often ride out short blips. It's especially insidious on the BackUPS units because the only way to test the battery is to hit the test button and see if the load drops. ;) These bargain-basement throw-away UPSes you mention are not the kinds of UPSes that give you power conditioning, and thus (I hope) obviously not the kinds of UPSes I meant. When I lived in a place that had a power outage once a week, I used a UPS. Now that I live in a place where I get maybe one power outage a *year*, I'm better off without out. I don't consider the ability to stay up for a few minutes when there's a brief blackout to be the most important function of a good UPS, even though that's kinda the reason the things were invented in the first place. The most important function of such a thing is power conditioning, which eliminates the problems of spikes and brownouts in the supply of power from the utility company even when nothing dramatic enough happens to actually crash a running machine right away. Such variability in power can be bad for both hardware and consistent, stable running of software. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 07:23:20AM -0400, Jerry wrote: It is fairly easy to understand both sides in this discussion. When Microsoft supporters refer to open-source software as open-sore or socialist-software the FOSS community becomes enraged. However, when the open-source community retaliates it is considered acceptable. Quite frankly I read far more Microsoft based forums than open-source based ones and I can say without a doubt, at least in my experience, Microsoft proponents never attack open-source with the venomous hatred that open-source attacks Microsoft. In fact, the majority of Microsoft users that I know could not care less about what they consider an overly burdensome (geeky) open-source operating system. The whole argument can probably be boiled do to this: Disparaging other operating systems (Microsoft) and pointing out its failures is beneficial, constructive and therapeutic. Pointing out problems and failures regarding your own OS is destructive and flame bait. Perhaps you're spending too much time in the community venues of open source software projects. In communities devoted to use of software peddled by Microsoft, the reverse would be true, and this seems to me not the least bit surprising, or even particularly inappropriate. When you stroll into a venue where it can reasonably be assumed there is a general consensus position of favoring one thing over another (such as a sports bar in Colorado, which would likely favor the Broncos over the Raiders), then start loudly proclaiming the evils of the favored thing relative to the unfavored (such as talking about how much better the Raiders are than the Broncos, and how the Broncos fans are all a bunch of pansy whiners, as you tend to do about open source software users and advocates while you're hanging out here on a FreeBSD mailing list), what you are contributing to the discussion may quite understandably be called flamebait. Expressing surprise that someone would apply such a label in these circumstances is, in my estimation, at least disingenuous if not wholly ludicrous, directly deceptive, and/or frankly dumb. I, for one, generally try to avoid saying nonfactually disparaging things about Microsoft or (especially) users of software peddled by Microsoft in venues like this mailing list, in part because it's a bit unsportsmanlike, and in part because it doesn't really contribute anything positive. It's kind of mind-boggling that people like you make no evident effort to avoid saying disparaging things about FreeBSD and its users in venues like this mailing list, where it's trollish, does not contribute anything positive, and directly offends large numbers of people subscribed to the list. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: OT - enjoy it
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 06:26:16AM +, jb wrote: Chinese advertising of soccer championship Euro 2012 http://avaxnews.com/wow/Chinese_Advertising_UEFA_Euro_2012.html That . . . was nuts. What just happened? -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:59:46PM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 10:11:11 -0600 Chad Perrin articulated: On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 07:23:20AM -0400, Jerry wrote: It is fairly easy to understand both sides in this discussion. When Microsoft supporters refer to open-source software as open-sore or socialist-software the FOSS community becomes enraged. However, when the open-source community retaliates it is considered acceptable. Quite frankly I read far more Microsoft based forums than open-source based ones and I can say without a doubt, at least in my experience, Microsoft proponents never attack open-source with the venomous hatred that open-source attacks Microsoft. In fact, the majority of Microsoft users that I know could not care less about what they consider an overly burdensome (geeky) open-source operating system. The whole argument can probably be boiled do to this: Disparaging other operating systems (Microsoft) and pointing out its failures is beneficial, constructive and therapeutic. Pointing out problems and failures regarding your own OS is destructive and flame bait. Perhaps you're spending too much time in the community venues of open source software projects. In communities devoted to use of software peddled by Microsoft, the reverse would be true, and this seems to me not the least bit surprising, or even particularly inappropriate. When you stroll into a venue where it can reasonably be assumed there is a general consensus position of favoring one thing over another (such as a sports bar in Colorado, which would likely favor the Broncos over the Raiders), then start loudly proclaiming the evils of the favored thing relative to the unfavored (such as talking about how much better the Raiders are than the Broncos, and how the Broncos fans are all a bunch of pansy whiners, as you tend to do about open source software users and advocates while you're hanging out here on a FreeBSD mailing list), what you are contributing to the discussion may quite understandably be called flamebait. Expressing surprise that someone would apply such a label in these circumstances is, in my estimation, at least disingenuous if not wholly ludicrous, directly deceptive, and/or frankly dumb. Your paranoia is kicking in again isn't it Chad. Anyway, to address your sports analogy, if I walk into a NY City bar and enter into a discussion regarding the pros and cons of the Jets VS Giants, which in itself is ridiculous since neither is actually located in NY, and blatantly scream out that the (Jets of Giants -- you pick) are a bunch of mother-fucking, wife beating pedophiles, I think you would agree, unless you happen to belong to that group, that I have gone way over the top in my team assessment. There is a major difference between criticizing and defamation. Perhaps someday you will learn the difference. For the record, I have never heard of anyone using the term mafia while referring to the FOSS. Then again, the Mafia is a highly organized operation. I might also add that many people of Italian descent consider the term mafia offensive. I'm going to actually ignore your completely irrelevant and hilariously unfounded attempt at psychiatric diagnosis beyond this sentence, and get to the point: Ignoring for the moment http://linuxmafia.com it is true that I have generally not heard of open source software or its community referred to as mafia, but I have heard of such things referred to as being socialist, fascist, or otherwise pejoratively accused of inapplicable political, criminal, or generally objectionable (in at least someone's eyes) character. Three guesses who comes first to mind as having made such statements, and the first two guesses don't count. I, for one, generally try to avoid saying nonfactually disparaging things about Microsoft or (especially) users of software peddled by Microsoft in venues like this mailing list, in part because it's a bit unsportsmanlike, and in part because it doesn't really contribute anything positive. It's kind of mind-boggling that people like you make no evident effort to avoid saying disparaging things about FreeBSD and its users in venues like this mailing list, where it's trollish, does not contribute anything positive, and directly offends large numbers of people subscribed to the list. When was this election held Chad? I am referring to the one that appointed you list spokesperson. In any case, you make an interesting statement without offering any documentation. Are you a politician Chad? I was inquiring because you seem to like making sound bites sans substance. I referred to no election. I am not list spokesperson, nor do I pretend to be or act as one, any more than you are the spokesperson for capitalism. I'm simply pointing out that you are an insufferable, trollish jackass, initially in a polite manner. The fact you avoid actually engaging my
Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 02:46:49PM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:44:11 -0600 Chad Perrin articulated: On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:59:46PM -0400, Jerry wrote: Your paranoia is kicking in again isn't it Chad. Anyway, to address your sports analogy, if I walk into a NY City bar and enter into a discussion regarding the pros and cons of the Jets VS Giants, which in itself is ridiculous since neither is actually located in NY, and blatantly scream out that the (Jets of Giants -- you pick) are a bunch of mother-fucking, wife beating pedophiles, I think you would agree, unless you happen to belong to that group, that I have gone way over the top in my team assessment. There is a major difference between criticizing and defamation. Perhaps someday you will learn the difference. For the record, I have never heard of anyone using the term mafia while referring to the FOSS. Then again, the Mafia is a highly organized operation. I might also add that many people of Italian descent consider the term mafia offensive. I'm going to actually ignore your completely irrelevant and hilariously unfounded attempt at psychiatric diagnosis beyond this sentence, and get to the point: Ignoring for the moment http://linuxmafia.com it is true that I have generally not heard of open source software or its community referred to as mafia, but I have heard of such things referred to as being socialist, fascist, or otherwise pejoratively accused of inapplicable political, criminal, or generally objectionable (in at least someone's eyes) character. Three guesses who comes first to mind as having made such statements, and the first two guesses don't count. I love the way you make a statement, then add a qualifier to the statement making it virtually impossible to attack as well as giving yourself a way out. I'll explain further in my reply near the end of this post. This is interesting coming from someone whose immediately preceding comment was an Internet diagnosis of paranoia coupled with a hypocritical accusation of inappropriate phrasing directed at a third party. I, for one, generally try to avoid saying nonfactually disparaging things about Microsoft or (especially) users of software peddled by Microsoft in venues like this mailing list, in part because it's a bit unsportsmanlike, and in part because it doesn't really contribute anything positive. It's kind of mind-boggling that people like you make no evident effort to avoid saying disparaging things about FreeBSD and its users in venues like this mailing list, where it's trollish, does not contribute anything positive, and directly offends large numbers of people subscribed to the list. When was this election held Chad? I am referring to the one that appointed you list spokesperson. In any case, you make an interesting statement without offering any documentation. Are you a politician Chad? I was inquiring because you seem to like making sound bites sans substance. I referred to no election. I am not list spokesperson, nor do I pretend to be or act as one, any more than you are the spokesperson for capitalism. I'm simply pointing out that you are an insufferable, trollish jackass, initially in a polite manner. The fact you avoid actually engaging my points, in favor of simply bleating about transgressions I haven't even made, does a fairly good job of supporting my statements. As stated above in my latest response, it is difficult to counter a statement by you since you don't really state anything. You say, I have heard of such things referred to as being socialist, fascist, ... (truncated by me) etcetera. Well who the hell hasn't. News flash -- that isn't one. Then you add the (in at least someone's eyes) qualifier making it impossible to argue with. A good politician's trick by the way. Are you sure you are not into politics? If it were not for your paranoia, you could probably be a good one. You say nothing and speak volumes. Seriously, look over your postings for the past year. Your transgressions I haven't even made and similar statements are reproduced in an alarming number of them. The obvious implication here is that you are one of those people who makes comments insinuating (or outright claiming) socialist or fascist ethics dominating open source communities. I make no bones about the fact I made implicative reference to you in that statement, so you don't need to play dumb and pretend you don't know I was pointing out your own hypocrisies. The at least in someone's eyes parenthetical remark was in reference to the presumably pejorative character of some remarks people like you often make. Nice job pretending I meant something else with that parenthetical remark, though. Your tendency to (intentionally, I think) misrepresent the context of my statements when you fail to find a concrete argument to present proves you're a real class act. What
Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 04:53:11PM -0400, Jerry wrote: . . . You obviously aren't serious. I can't believe I let you string me along with this fantasy for so long. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:42:37PM +0200, Damien Fleuriot wrote: On 6 Jun 2012, at 21:52, Dave U. Random anonym...@anonymitaet-im-inter.net wrote: Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:47:11 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: Having to pay Verisign instead of Microsoft makes no difference: the point is why should I have to pay anything to a third party in order to run whatever OS I want on a piece of hardware I own? It's time to dump the Intel/Microshaft mafia forever. FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, and even Linux have ports to many platforms. Why stay on Intel? It's an overgrown ugly mess. We need to stop buying Intel mafiaware with preinstalled Microshaft mafiware and run a free (or in the case of Linux apparently free) OS on free hardware. There are increasing numbers of SBCs and plenty of used servers on Ebay. They're all built better than commodity Intel mafiaware. Good riddance! You have no idea what you're talking about. This kind of religious propaganda post is neither constructive nor helpful. It should be noted that your tone is neither constructive nor helpful, to say nothing of your contentless response. Do you have anything useful to say in response to what Dave U. Random contributed -- perhaps a thoughtful refutation of some specific point(s)? I hope you have more of value to contribute than your obvious disdain for people who disagree with you about something (without even specifying on what points you disagree). -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 02:23:20PM +0200, Damien Fleuriot wrote: I agree with the whole post except that last bit about ICANN Matthew. The US already has enough dominance as is, without involving ICANN, a supposedly neutral body (yeah right...) any further. Indeed. The last thing we need is some self-appointed authority purporting to have the last word on what qualifies as secure. There is no need for a third-party certification of secure booting. If there is need for such a secure booting mechanism at all, it is a need for the ability of end-of-chain device owners to be able to set their own keys, without the involvement of any third parties, and an out-of-band key verification mechanism. Once again, I feel it incumbent upon me to point to examples like OpenPGP's keyserver network as the counter-proposal to a cetifying authority charging money to allow people to control their own system security in what amounts to a vacant lot scam. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of?]
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 03:05:00PM -0400, Jerry wrote: I don't know of any user personally who purchased a new PC and then threw FreeBSD on it. Most users that I have come into contact with use 2+ year old units that have been replaced by shiny new Windows units. I don't see that changing anytime soon. I have immediately installed FreeBSD on the last four or five laptops I purchased, and I get most of my laptops direct from Lenovo. While my Significant Other has been installing Debian on her laptops, also acquired from Lenovo, she is probably going to start using FreeBSD instead next time. I know several other people who install FreeBSD on their new primary-use systems when they get them, including a couple of developers who do MS Windows development (among other things). This doesn't even take into account the servers many of us use, which are even more likely to get FreeBSD installed, and none of this has anything to do with corporate accounts or bulk purchases. Yes, my evidence is anecdotal, but I think your notions of the frequency of FreeBSD use other than in a corporate setting are also based on anecdotal observations, so we're even. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: UFS Crash and directories now missing
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 06:29:05PM -0700, Edward M wrote: On 05/10/2012 03:45 PM, Alejandro Imass wrote: Regarding Nemeth's I am undecided between the 4th (Unix Linux) or the 3rd. Please advise. i purchased the third edition because I took a look in the 4th the table of contents and it appears anything FreeBSD related was remove and it only focuses on: Solaris Linux( red hat ubuntu) and AIX. However third edition mentions BSDs From the index of my copy of the third edition, I see these entries: 4.4BSD 2 . . . BSD (Berkeley UNIX) 2 . . . FreeBSD 4 From the index of my copy of the fourth edition, I see these entries: BSD Printing 1054-1065 see also printing architecture 1054-1055 configuration 1059-1065 lpc command 1057-1059 lpd daemon 1056 lpq command 1056-1057 lpr command 1056 lprm command 1057 printcap file 1059-1065 PRINTER environment variable 1054 BSD UNIX 8, 12, 1268-1273 . . . FreeBSD 8 . . . NetBSD 8 . . . OpenBSD 8 Page 8 of the fourth edition mentions various BSD Unix systems in the section Friction Between UNIX and Linux. Page 12's mention of BSD Unix in the fourth edition appears to correspond to page 3's un-indexed mention of FreeBSD in the third edition (specifically FreeBSD 3.4), in reference to the example Unix OSes they chose to use when discussing various OSes, though FreeBSD is not mentioned specifically in the fourth edition on that page and BSD Unix is largely referred to in a historical context. This appears to be a legitimate case of BSD Unix being phased out of part of the text as a relevant OS, but it is not a section that actually says anything of specific technical value. Pages 1268-1273 in the fourth edition correspond to the bulk of the section A Brief History of System Administration in the back of the book. The third edition's equivalent is the end of page 2 and a little over half of page 3, The Sordid History of UNIX. The fourth edition's index mentions jail, chroot which, when investigated in the text, has nothing at all to do with FreeBSD jails; it's just about chroot. The third edition also contains information about chroot, but does not mention it under the J section of the index. It looks to me like the fourth edition probably presents quite a bit more historical information particular to BSD Unix systems than the third edition, judging by the index. In the table of contents, I see that the third edition has a section set aside for BSD printing, despite lack of mention in the index. It looks like the table of contents section for BSD and AIX printing in the fourth edition (the first edition to include coverage of AIX, apparently) goes into a fair bit more detail about what's in the equivalent section. It looks to me, at a glance, like the fourth edition probably kept all of the BSD Unix related stuff from the third, probably updated slightly but not expanded outside of historical information. While a failure to expand technical information on BSD Unix systems would result in a reduction of the percentage of the book that covers BSD Unix technical matters, given the growth in size between third and fourth editions, the quantity of technical information about BSD Unix systems does not appear to have shrunk at all, from what I've seen. Of course, I might easily have overlooked something. Is there something else I should try to find in the index or table of contents that would be in the third edition but not the fourth? Can you give me some examples of the sorts of things you'd expect to find in the table of contents that is lacking in the fourth edition but present in the third? -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: UFS Crash and directories now missing
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:11:48PM -0700, Edward M wrote: So far I think I found a few that may make a difference. According to the table of contents in the 4th edition in the chapter called Booting and shuting down it only shows entries for: red hat, HP-UX, AIX, SUSE,Ubuntu. However in the third edition, show entries for FreeBSD's Booting and shuting down process. And another example is in the 4th edition the chapter called Adding new users, only mentions how to add users for: SUSE, Redhat Solaris HP-UX and AIX. However in the 3rd edition, explains how to add users on FreeBSD and how FreeBSD's master.passwd file, login.conf. work,etc The third edition's chapter called Drivers and the kernel shows how to build a freebsd kernel, create a BSD config file, tuning the freebsd kernel, add freebsd device drivers,etc. I was not able to find those entries in the the 4th editions Drivers and the kernel. chapter.the 3rd editions TCP/IP chapter shows network config for freebsd. However in the table of contents of the 4th edition does not. I'm searching for a website that contains the 3rd edition table of contents so one can compare between the two editions for better judgement. unfortunate, those were a few examples i have time to point out. I think may make a great difference. Okay, thanks. You've provided a pretty good representative selection, I think. I guess there are two problems: the third edition index is woefully incomplete, and the fourth edition text has for some reason basically traded FreeBSD for AIX -- which makes little sense to me. I appreciate the time you put into this. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: UFS Crash and directories now missing
On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 12:58:10AM -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote: Reading _both_ of McKusick's Design of .. books, and the 'Unix System Admininstration Handbook', by Nemeth, et al. is a good _start_. Both? I'm aware of at least three (FreeBSD, 4.3BSD, and 4.4BSD) that are probably within the realm of what you're talking about (learning about the workings of a BSD Unix system), all of which seem a little redundant -- just different editions of the same book, from the look of it. What do you mean by both of McKusick's books? I think there's an answer book for at least one of those, too. Do you perhaps mean the main book and the answer book? Do you mean to include the general-purpose open source book as one of the books (Open Sources: Voices from the Open Source Revolution)? Having a bunch of the books from O'Reilley Assoc. (http://www.ora.com), especially for 'standard' tools that you need to get the most out of, is also highly recommended. Disclaimer: I know a lot of the authors of those books, persoally. If you have a decent ebook reader, I recommend just getting on the O'Reilly mailing list for its periodic announcements of ebook discount deals and picking up an occasional good book from those deals. It's easy to get far more excellent books than you have time to read that way, for really good prices. In fact, O'Reilly has a 50% off deal for a few ebooks about C programming right now: http://shop.oreilly.com/category/deals/c-programming.do O'Reilly's ebook deals are about the only way I've found to get good technical books from a major publisher in digital formats at a reasonable price, considering most of the publishing world still thinks it's okay to charge more for ebooks than for hardcopy books for some asinine reason. O'Reilly is, in fact, pretty far ahead of competitors on its handling of ebooks. For instance, if you have a hardcopy O'Reilly book, you can register it by ISBN with O'Reilly, then get an ebook copy of it for about five bucks. By contrast, The Pragmatic Bookshelf (which produces very high quality books as well) at *best* gives you the opportunity to get a hardcopy book plus a PDF book at the same time for about 150% of the cover price of the hardcopy alone, *only* if you buy them together from the Pragmatic website itself, and if you only have the ebook or the hardcopy book you have no way to get a discount on the other; you have to pay full price. Pragmatic does offer ebooks at slightly lower price than hardcopy, which is at least better than the standard industry practice for science fiction, but it's a ridiculous price for a bundle of bits in a digital file. O'Reilly offers some kind of discount on hardcopies for people who have the ebooks, too, I think. I'm not sure -- I've never taken advantage of that discount, because I only started collecting ebook copies of O'Reilly books after getting an e-ink reader, which I find every bit as good for many (though not all) reading purposes as a physical dead tree format book. Your mileage may vary, I suppose. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:23:47PM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Sun, 29 Apr 2012 17:01:56 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 08:01:13AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:36:13 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 06:00:51PM -0400, Jerry wrote: I have been told by several people in HR that the trend to give preference to those all ready working as opposed to the unemployed is based on the philosophy that if no one else will hire them, then why should we. While we could argue whether that logic is flawed, it is never-the-less presently in use. However, it doesn't really pertain to entry level openings. With the glut of individuals entering the job market, for an applicant to not be proficient in the skills being advertised for by the prospective employer is just a waste of time. If the employer is looking for skill A and B, crying to him/her that you have skill C is just a waste of both your times. It *does* pertain to entry level positions, because (from what I have seen) most entry level positions come with an experience requirement of at least two years. But then this would invalidate ENTRY level. How exactly is an applicant supposed to get a job from that entry level pool when he doesn't have previous experience because he simply wants to ENTER that field of profession? Yes -- that is *exactly* the question that comes up. These are not jobs that are entry level in terms of requirements, even if they are entry level in terms of pay and actual skill required to do the job to a reasonable level of competence. Consider examples like first-level call center jobs that require a college degree and a couple years expericence, as pretty much the canonical example. Seems to exactly that way in Germany. I did talk to a HR guy last week and he explained that those requirements are typical. I think he wasn't honest about the reasons. One may be the continuous degrading of school education and the recent loss of quality in university education (due to european processes). This may be an honest reason, but it is not a good reason. It's the thinking that if schools are worse, you have to require more schooling to get the same effect -- and schools *are* getting worse, in large part to satisfy the demand for more formal education to get even the most mundane and easiest of skilled jobs, resulting in a vicious circle. People may honestly believe increasing the education requirement is a good answer to a bad problem, so that the problem is not their honesty but rather their reasoning. Obviously, if autodidacts with degrees are much better than anti-intellectual lumps on a log with degrees (and they are), autodidactism is of great value. In many cases, that value greatly outstrips the value of the degree itself, so that autodidacts without degrees are better than anti-intellectual lumps on a log with degrees. The approach to hiring that says we must require ever-more diploma carrying education on the resume selects for anti-intellectual lumps on a log quite often. Another reason might be that companies need to be _certified_ theirselves in order to get orders from other companies, and for that kinds of certification, it seems they have to show that they employ lots of highly qualified personnel in order to justify their prices. I have never seen a company that lists all of its tech support people and their degrees. In fact, the most I've ever seen for people in entry level positions is that they have CompTIA A+ Tech certifications, or something equivalent, which is easily acquired with a heavy weekend course and a single test. For autodidacts, you don't even need the coursework -- just get a $40 book and some practice test software. This might be worth some marketing, when a company can say all its support people are certified experts or specialists of some sort, but it's a heckuva lot less onerous than demanding bachelor's degrees in computer science just to get a twelve dollar per hour job answer the telephone and reading from a script, and more prone to selecting for autodidactism skills. Offer people flexible schedules if they want to take college classes while they're working, and you're even more likely to get people who can think critically, learn quickly, and do good work, because people who try to pay their way through college while working in a technical field are far more likely to be good at such jobs than people who breezed through college on a sports scholarship or parental support and have never really learned anything on their own. In fact, I'm generally of the opinion (based on my experience and what I've observed in others) that the only way to really learn anything useful in college is to be an autodidact, doing the coursework mostly to get a piece of paper and get ideas of *what* stuff to learn on your own time, rather
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 08:01:13AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:36:13 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 06:00:51PM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 14:33:29 -0700 David Brodbeck articulated: Again, this is one of the reasons credit scoring is becoming so popular -- it's an almost automatic way to narrow down the pile. Another method in common use right now is to throw out applications from anyone who's currently unemployed, and only look at ones who already have a position and are looking to change jobs. I have been told by several people in HR that the trend to give preference to those all ready working as opposed to the unemployed is based on the philosophy that if no one else will hire them, then why should we. While we could argue whether that logic is flawed, it is never-the-less presently in use. However, it doesn't really pertain to entry level openings. With the glut of individuals entering the job market, for an applicant to not be proficient in the skills being advertised for by the prospective employer is just a waste of time. If the employer is looking for skill A and B, crying to him/her that you have skill C is just a waste of both your times. It *does* pertain to entry level positions, because (from what I have seen) most entry level positions come with an experience requirement of at least two years. But then this would invalidate ENTRY level. How exactly is an applicant supposed to get a job from that entry level pool when he doesn't have previous experience because he simply wants to ENTER that field of profession? Yes -- that is *exactly* the question that comes up. These are not jobs that are entry level in terms of requirements, even if they are entry level in terms of pay and actual skill required to do the job to a reasonable level of competence. Consider examples like first-level call center jobs that require a college degree and a couple years expericence, as pretty much the canonical example. In some cases, these jobs may simple be advertised this way so hiring managers can use the lack of qualified applicants to help justify offshoring jobs. In other cases, this is just an example of how HR best practices have gotten ridiculously out of control, where everybody tries to copy what everyone else is doing because if everyone else is doing it you can't get in trouble for doing the same thing. The end result, of course, is that you only get people with experience who nobody else wants to hire or people who lie well -- but on paper it looks like you went to great lengths to hire the right person, and thus you (hopefully) can't be blamed for hiring turkeys. You speak as though you think they're correctly identifying the skills they actually need from their employees. A big part of this entire discussion has been about the fact that many responsible parties in the hiring process are utterly without capacity for correctly identifying the skills they actually need to optimally fill the open positions. Correct, at least that's my experience. To give you _few_ examples which are more the norm than exceptions: good MS standart knowledge (Yavoll mein Hare Heiny Standart-Leader von Sowercrowd!) programming knowledge in established programming languages, e. g. OS2 (cc hello.os2, and it's OS/2 with slash) modern Microsoft operating systems (Windows 98 and XP) (yes, _very_ modern and current; hey, it's more than 10 years old!) extended basic knowledge (so what, basic or extended?) autonomous team-oriented working (maybe as a one man team!) It's funny when you encounter job offers by recruiters and HR services who _fail_ to properly spell our native language, but think they are in a positition to place _you_ (as a professional) into a good job! Okay, it's NOT funny. It's also not funny if you have to explain to such a senior consultant permanent placement how to open a PDF file containing your application documents, and it's even worse when they try to trick you to do their work, e. g. enter all your data again into their (!) HR database. As I said, the problem of the unclear expression _what_ skills actually are needed can make it hard to properly apply for a job. This problem isn't only present for written application, it's also there if you get invited to an interview and the guy across the table is simply asking the wrong questions, or unable to understand your answers. I think a far worse problem than the failure to understand what skills are needed is the failure to understand things like 1. what skills can be learned easily in a very short period of time so that focus on other necessary skills already existing can be employed in selecting candidates 2. why disqualifying candidates for stupidities that have nothing to do with their skills and other actually suitable qualities for the job is counterproductive
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 06:43:06PM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:52:56 -0600 Chad Perrin articulated: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 02:45:53PM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote: Generic skills aren't recognized because they're hard to judge and test for. People want quantifiable, objective things to weed out applicants. This is also why credit scoring has become so popular -- sure, someone's credit score may not tell whether they'd be a good employee or not, but it's a convenient, objective way to throw out a bunch of resumes. Indeed -- and the employer who bucks this trend does him/her self a huge service, because large numbers of very skilled and/or talented people are being rejected on entirely arbitrary criteria that have little or no correlation to their ability to do the job. People who use such critera are forcing themselves to compete with everyone else in the industry using the same criteria, leaving a glut of job candidates who would be great at the job waiting for someone else to give them a chance. Wouldn't it be far easier for this glut of job applicants to either become proficient in the skills stated in the job description for which they are applying or do what everyone else does; i.e. lie on their résumé. If the mountain will not come to Mahomet, Mahomet must go to the mountain. 1. Pretty much every employer has a slightly different list of keywords. I guess you think all these job candidates should learn every skill in the world. 2. Lying is bad. Go fall in a hole, now. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:32:24AM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 06:43:06PM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:52:56 -0600 Chad Perrin articulated: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 02:45:53PM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote: Generic skills aren't recognized because they're hard to judge and test for. People want quantifiable, objective things to weed out applicants. This is also why credit scoring has become so popular -- sure, someone's credit score may not tell whether they'd be a good employee or not, but it's a convenient, objective way to throw out a bunch of resumes. Indeed -- and the employer who bucks this trend does him/her self a huge service, because large numbers of very skilled and/or talented people are being rejected on entirely arbitrary criteria that have little or no correlation to their ability to do the job. People who use such critera are forcing themselves to compete with everyone else in the industry using the same criteria, leaving a glut of job candidates who would be great at the job waiting for someone else to give them a chance. Wouldn't it be far easier for this glut of job applicants to either become proficient in the skills stated in the job description for which they are applying or do what everyone else does; i.e. lie on their résumé. If the mountain will not come to Mahomet, Mahomet must go to the mountain. 1. Pretty much every employer has a slightly different list of keywords. I guess you think all these job candidates should learn every skill in the world. 2. Lying is bad. Go fall in a hole, now. I appear to have forgotten about point 3. 3. This was about employers going to the mountain, by the way, so your point is null and void in any case. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 01:57:10PM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:32:24 -0600 Chad Perrin articulated: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 06:43:06PM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:52:56 -0600 Chad Perrin articulated: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 02:45:53PM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote: Generic skills aren't recognized because they're hard to judge and test for. People want quantifiable, objective things to weed out applicants. This is also why credit scoring has become so popular -- sure, someone's credit score may not tell whether they'd be a good employee or not, but it's a convenient, objective way to throw out a bunch of resumes. Indeed -- and the employer who bucks this trend does him/her self a huge service, because large numbers of very skilled and/or talented people are being rejected on entirely arbitrary criteria that have little or no correlation to their ability to do the job. People who use such critera are forcing themselves to compete with everyone else in the industry using the same criteria, leaving a glut of job candidates who would be great at the job waiting for someone else to give them a chance. Wouldn't it be far easier for this glut of job applicants to either become proficient in the skills stated in the job description for which they are applying or do what everyone else does; i.e. lie on their résumé. If the mountain will not come to Mahomet, Mahomet must go to the mountain. 1. Pretty much every employer has a slightly different list of keywords. I guess you think all these job candidates should learn every skill in the world. No, I think they should learn the one(s) most sought after in their chosen field. If 90% of the potential openings in a specific field are requesting proficiency with MS Word, what do you think any legitimate applicants should become proficient in? Right -- because all the keywords you need will always be Microsoft Word. Admit it: you're just making up half-baked excuses to disagree now. 2. Lying is bad. Go fall in a hole, now. Yes, but it is never-the-less the norm on way too many resumes. I have read where it is estimated that 1 out of every 3 is either a gross over statement of fact or just a complete fabrication. My own (original) resume, written by a professional resume writer many years ago, absolutely astounded me. I had no idea I was as proficient and skilled in so many areas. As the writer explained, it is not what you say but how you say it. Just because I once wrote a two page article that got published in a cheap magazine does not mean that I am an accomplished author with numerous credits to my name -- or does it? No, it doesn't. Maybe an accomplished author with one credit to your name. Amusingly, that'll turn out to be a great way for employers to notice you're exaggerating with that accopmlished author bit, too. Only by lying (numerous credits) can you allay suspicions for a moment in those credulous enough to not ask for samples (which absolutely does not make it okay). -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 04:46:52PM -0400, Jerry wrote: Now you are being naive. There are numerous examples of people in both corporate and government jobs that have made out right lies as to their education, etcetera. Some of those frauds have gone undetected for years. The majority of resumes for entry level jobs are rarely if ever given more than a perfunctory look. You say that as though I somehow argued that people don't lie, or that all people who lie get caught. I made no such statements. If you're going to argue against things I didn't say, you should just send the emails to yourself and leave both me and the rest of the mailing list out of the discussion. The bottom line is if you want a job, you either learn or acquire the criteria required for the job, or find a way to BS your way into it and hope you can pull it off. No legitimate employer is going to change his criteria to accommodate your skills. Good job completely bypassing my actual statements to make a point about something else entirely. Congratulations on your irrelevance. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 06:00:51PM -0400, Jerry wrote: On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 14:33:29 -0700 David Brodbeck articulated: Again, this is one of the reasons credit scoring is becoming so popular -- it's an almost automatic way to narrow down the pile. Another method in common use right now is to throw out applications from anyone who's currently unemployed, and only look at ones who already have a position and are looking to change jobs. I have been told by several people in HR that the trend to give preference to those all ready working as opposed to the unemployed is based on the philosophy that if no one else will hire them, then why should we. While we could argue whether that logic is flawed, it is never-the-less presently in use. However, it doesn't really pertain to entry level openings. With the glut of individuals entering the job market, for an applicant to not be proficient in the skills being advertised for by the prospective employer is just a waste of time. If the employer is looking for skill A and B, crying to him/her that you have skill C is just a waste of both your times. It *does* pertain to entry level positions, because (from what I have seen) most entry level positions come with an experience requirement of at least two years. You speak as though you think they're correctly identifying the skills they actually need from their employees. A big part of this entire discussion has been about the fact that many responsible parties in the hiring process are utterly without capacity for correctly identifying the skills they actually need to optimally fill the open positions. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 02:33:29PM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote: On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: Indeed -- and the employer who bucks this trend does him/her self a huge service, because large numbers of very skilled and/or talented people are being rejected on entirely arbitrary criteria that have little or no correlation to their ability to do the job. Keep in mind in today's job market, and given Internet methods of advertising positions, the problem isn't in finding qualified people -- the problem is in whittling down the couple thousand or so resumes you get to a manageable pile. You can afford to reject some qualified applicants in that process because there are always more looking. That's not exactly true. The problem is cutting out the people who only *claim* to be qualified, and end up with the best candidate for the job (or to get as close to that as possible). The fact that most organizations' responsible parties in the hiring process just punt on that and go straight toward I don't care if he's good at the job -- I only care that I do things in a way that ensures I don't get blamed for any failures does not change that fact. That also completely ignores the fact that many employers complain that they can't find qualified candidates, ever, for skilled technical positions. Again, this is one of the reasons credit scoring is becoming so popular -- it's an almost automatic way to narrow down the pile. Another method in common use right now is to throw out applications from anyone who's currently unemployed, and only look at ones who already have a position and are looking to change jobs. . . . which just reinforces the point that most organizations are optimizing for finding people who land around the fiftieth percentile in terms of a good fit for the job, when they could benefit much more from getting somewhere up around the range of the ninety-eighth percentile. Luckily for those who buck the trends, it's a lot easier to get someone in that range than it should be, because many employers are cutting a lot of those candidates out of their job searches based on essentially arbitrary criteria. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: editor that understands CTRL/B, CTRL/I, CTRL/U
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 02:45:53PM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote: Generic skills aren't recognized because they're hard to judge and test for. People want quantifiable, objective things to weed out applicants. This is also why credit scoring has become so popular -- sure, someone's credit score may not tell whether they'd be a good employee or not, but it's a convenient, objective way to throw out a bunch of resumes. Indeed -- and the employer who bucks this trend does him/her self a huge service, because large numbers of very skilled and/or talented people are being rejected on entirely arbitrary criteria that have little or no correlation to their ability to do the job. People who use such critera are forcing themselves to compete with everyone else in the industry using the same criteria, leaving a glut of job candidates who would be great at the job waiting for someone else to give them a chance. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD's backwards webdesign / corporate identity
On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 10:16:49AM -0700, Devin Teske wrote: On Apr 8, 2012, at 5:40 AM, Tony wrote: http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/ It's like a punch-line almost. I admit to enjoying the Helvetica Trailer video linked-to above. I even admit to liking the proposed motto's. But I disagree with any sentiment that designcouncil.org.uk embodies the same clean lines and well-thought-out design that is being encouraged here. Most egregious is the mishmash of serif with sans-serif and misaligned content areas. I thought maybe you were just being snarky here, but then I took a look at the site. I actually had a minimal education in design, once upon a time, and the first thing I think when I see the Design Council site is Was that thing designed by children? It is nothing like what Tony suggests would be a good approach to the design of the FreeBSD site, which is actually a good recommendation for the design he suggests for the FreeBSD site. Gawd, it's comically bad for something called the Design Council, unless you take the name as an ironic reference to the idea that design by committee is a horrible idea. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Links the command line browser
On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 09:33:43AM -0400, Fbsd8 wrote: My mouse works as expected for copy and paste function on the xterm console. But when I launch the links command line browser the mouse pointer is OVER active. I move the mouse a hair and the pointer on the links browser screen moves 2 inches. Is there some way in links to control the mouse pointer sensitivity? I haven't used links in a long time, so I'm not sure, but it sounds like there is. You may want to have a look at other console based browsers as alternatives, if links does not behave as you prefer. Have you tried w3m or one of its enhanced brethren? /usr/ports/www/w3m /usr/ports/www/w3m-img /usr/ports/www/w3m-m17n /usr/ports/www/w3m-m17n-img -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Vivaldi Tablet
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 09:05:19PM -1000, Open Slate wrote: I position a tablet as a consumer device. Web surfing, watching video, a little texting. A student slate must support creativity, especially writing. At the same time I see the qwerty keyboard as an obstacle, hard to learn, impossible to use while holding the slate. I want HWR as good as the Newton, and buttons for a chording keyboard along the bottom on both sides. Buttons support two handed use or one handed, either side. For those who prefer classic keyboard, plug in a USB model. I think learning a chording keyboard is going to be much more of an obstacle than using a QWERTY keyboard, considering you can hunt-and-peck on a QWERTY keyboard, but you have to know the chords to do anything on a chording keyboard. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Vivaldi Tablet
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 04:24:51PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote: On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 09:19:54AM -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: I think learning a chording keyboard is going to be much more of an obstacle than using a QWERTY keyboard, considering you can hunt-and-peck on a QWERTY keyboard, but you have to know the chords to do anything on a chording keyboard. i dont have a clue what a chording keybd is; will google after a long nap1 also, i have lost track of who posted the 'fentek' page, but that is where i got my present mine. A chording keyboard is a keyboard or other button-press interface with fewer keys so it can fit on a smaller device, where many keycodes are gotten by way of combining presses of multiple keys rather than a single key as on a standard QWERTY keyboard. Thus, for instance, where on a QWERTY keyboard you get a capital A by holding the Shift key and pressing the A key, you might on a chording keyboard also get a lower-case A by holding down some key and pressing another key. This works for keyboards with fewer keys because there are many potential combinations of keys that could be used; if all keycodes are achieved by a two-button chord, all the keys on a standard 101-key keyboard, plus all Alt-, Shift-, and Ctrl-chord keycodes, could be simulated by a mere twenty keys. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Vivaldi Tablet
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 02:37:49AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:21:45 -0700, Gary Kline wrote: how about the eee-701s? they are no mo' but used to have a 70% of full size keyboard. my eee-900A had All the std keys. do we really need the F[n] keys? anyway, if not a tiny kybd, maybe a small one. Maybe I can suggest the Happy Hacking keyboard here? It's small in size and popular amnong hackers. It does not have PF keys (those can be emulated by Fn+number, comparable to Alt+number on early 3270's). Its dimensions are about 11 x 4.5 x 1.5 at less than 1.5Lb weight. However, this is an external (USB2) keyboard. I was thinking of mentioning the Happy Hacking keyboard, but I see you beat me to it. I have not used one for more than a few minutes once, though. Does the Fn+number work with Ctrl+Alt+Fnumber combination to move around between TTY consoles? -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Vivaldi Tablet
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 03:54:03AM +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 19:48:34 -0600, Chad Perrin wrote: I was thinking of mentioning the Happy Hacking keyboard, but I see you beat me to it. I have not used one for more than a few minutes once, though. Does the Fn+number work with Ctrl+Alt+Fnumber combination to move around between TTY consoles? As far as I remember, it does. I don't have a HHK here to check. From what I know, the keyboard generates the proper codes internally, so Fn+number is equivalent to PF number in any regards, and therefore any combination with Ctrl and/or Alt should also work as expected. To the computer, it should be no difference from a real keyboard. My concern in this regard would be whether the keyboard knows that the Fn key is supposed to be applied to the Fnum key, and not to the Ctrl or Alt key. If neither the Ctrl or Alt key is modifiable by the Fn key, I guess that might be a non-issue, but I'm pretty sure that (for instance) the Fn key on a ThinkPad is meant to be used with only one other key at a time. It's just not meant to make up for the lack of standard keyboard keys, so there isn't any conflict. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Vivaldi Tablet
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 07:21:51PM -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote: Considering that FreeBS positions itself 'primrily' as a _server_ OS, I would suggest that it is 'unlikely'. I suppose iXsystems and the PC-BSD project might be a place to send out feelers as well, being more interested in end-user stuff than the pretty server-sysadmin heavy crowd here. There are a lot of people in this community interested in more than just servers, though, so I don't see why the fact FreeBSD is good for servers should be an impediment to seeking out people with an interest in tablet ports. *I*, for one, would hope that porting to the 'Rasberry Pi' has higher priority. So would I. If someone decided to tackle the Vivaldi platform, though, I wouldn't complain. Now, if somebody in the 'Vivaldi' community wants to gather up _all_ the relevant 'technical data' for configuring/accessing/programming *ALL* the included hardware, and -publish- it in one EASILY ACCESSIBLE place, that would be a good start. This might be a start: http://opentablets.org/page/index.html/_/news/makeplaylive-sparknow-vivaldi-zenithink-c71-r13 If such a somebody were to _also_ provide 'funding' for a porting project, that would undoubtedly move such a project to a high position on the 'to do' list'. Otherwise, Skippy, you, -YOURSELF-. will need to find a 'guru' with the appropriate knowledge/skills *and* enough interest' in the project to tackle it. I think the point of the initial email to start this thread was to see if there were people in the community with an interest in working on this project, and might actually be a fairly logical step toward an effort to find a 'guru' to work on it. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Vivaldi Tablet
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 09:07:25AM +1000, Da Rock wrote: On 03/27/12 01:42, Chad Perrin wrote: I think the point of the initial email to start this thread was to see if there were people in the community with an interest in working on this project, and might actually be a fairly logical step toward an effort to find a 'guru' to work on it. Actually I think the point of the email was to prop up the member numbers on the site. The platform itself is just an ordinary aPad which can be hacked. As for the open source community interest, well it already runs linux natively- android- so not entirely sure what the fuss is about (might explain the population there). Android is not the same as a full-featured Unix-like OS. It's a miserably underpowered half-measure, whose only redeeming feature is that it's not Apple iOS or MS WP7. There's a bit of a difference, there. . . . not that I much care about tablets per se, right now, though it would be nice if I could get a ThinkPad X-series tablet-laptop working with FreeBSD. I just wouldn't equate Android with a general-purpose Unix-like OS, even if that OS uses a Linux kernel and gets most of the userland subtly wrong. If anyone was interested in porting FreeBSD to tablets there are plenty of dev kits out there to play with; and if the cost is excessive then grab an aPad off eBay for $50. I'm not sure how that disputes what I said. To explain the major hurdle in porting to a tablet, you'd need to probably find an alternative windowing solution then Xorg (low memory, especially in vivaldi)- I'm not 100% sure what iOS and Android use. Might be interesting... Yeah, there could be some real challenges there. The question is whether someone with the wherewithal to do the work would find the challenge attractive. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Suggestion
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:14:39PM -0400, Allen wrote: I'd like BeOS to come back, but I'm quite happy with BSD and Linux. Give the Haiku project a look. It's meant to be some kind of inheritor of the BeOS legacy. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Suggestion
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 10:20:03AM -0500, Chris wrote: ... One word that is rampant... Alligations Is that where someone makes a claim that someone else is an alligator? -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Which compiler compiled system?
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 04:49:38PM -0400, Pierre-Luc Drouin wrote: If Java is broken, then you know FreeBSD was compiled with clang... It's probably more accurate to say If Java is not broken, it's almost certainly built with GCC. If it's broken, it could go either way. (No offense to the Java maintainers at the FreeBSD project, of course. They do a great job of making it possible to get working at all.) -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Raspberry Pi
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 03:48:17PM +, Arthur Chance wrote: On 03/09/12 15:08, Bernt Hansson wrote: 2012-03-08 19:46, Chad Perrin skrev: That helps me get sort of a timeline in mind, I think. The production is halted. http://www.raspberrypi.org/archives/781 The key sentence is: There may now be a slight delay in later batches if there’s a problem sourcing enough magnetic jacks (we’ve got teams hunting them down already); all the stock of jacks we believed we had in place and ready to turn into the ethernet ports on your Raspberry Pis turn out not to be the correct part, so we’re having to start again and move through the negotiating/ordering/delivery cycle as fast as we can. Somewhat more conditional than a simple halted to my eyes. That could be me being optimistic but I hope not. The way it looks to me, it's something like The first batch will be a bit late; later batches may be more expensive, or may not happen, or maybe they'll just be a little late -- or maybe we'll have enough of a windfall of good fortune to get back on schedule. Obviously, I'm hoping for one of the latter two, rather than the former two. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Suggestion
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 01:56:25AM -0300, Bruno Comerci wrote: Hi guys. Instead of wasting your time and man power, why wont you join to the ReactOS project? It would be more beneficial to the internet community and to the users around the world who wants a free OS with similar looking and functions than Windows, if you just throw away your FreeBSD and join forces with the ReactOS team to accelerate their process. Actually there isnt any single free OS that can be fully trusted, but ReactOS seems to be that one that we all are wating for. Sincerely, Common world's citizen who dont have money to pay Windows and dont trust Linux and any other Unix-based OS. That had to be the weakest troll attempt I've ever seen. I actually think that ReactOS, if run by people who weren't tied down by some unfortunate misconceptions, might have been a really good idea -- not as a great OS in its own right, but rather as a gateway drug for Unix-like OSes. Alas, that was not to be. Instead, it looks like it will just be a never-was (and occasional grist for some very weak trolling). -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Raspberry Pi
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 08:51:03AM +, Arthur Chance wrote: On 03/07/12 21:40, Chad Perrin wrote: If anyone has more information about planned BSD Unix ports to Raspberry Pi, or comes up with more in the next few weeks, I'd appreciate it if someone would let me know (perhaps with URIs or contact information for people and projects working on this). There was a discussion about it over on hackers@ last November. The thread starts at http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/2011-November/036742.html TL;DR summary: some are wildly in favour of it, others are completely negative. I.e. the usual network response to anything :-} I'm curious about the reasoning for the negative. I'll have to go skim that thread. Thanks for pointing it out to me. Unless someone capable and willing to do the port managed to get one of the first production batch, the next lot won't be available for 7-8 weeks at the earliest. My order is currently expected to be delivered the second week in May. That helps me get sort of a timeline in mind, I think. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Raspberry Pi
On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 11:11:53AM -0500, Jeremy Faulkner wrote: The freebsd-arm@ list is where it is being discussed and progressing, don't think anybody has the hardware yet. That's another place for me to look for discussion of it. Thanks. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Raspberry Pi
Has there been any movement toward getting BSD Unix systems running on the Raspberry Pi platform? I've been searching for information along those lines, but so far have seen nothing. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Raspberry Pi
On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 04:35:47PM -0500, Sean Cavanaugh wrote: People have not had a chance to get their hands on to even start on it yet. The few boards out in public before last week were developer boards that were really hard to get a hold of. Most current devel is based on linux due to the binary blob. Okay, that makes sense. Thanks. If anyone has more information about planned BSD Unix ports to Raspberry Pi, or comes up with more in the next few weeks, I'd appreciate it if someone would let me know (perhaps with URIs or contact information for people and projects working on this). -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: which FF ad blocker?
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 06:55:44PM -0800, Gary Kline wrote: agree with noscript. i dont recall the other one, but i was blocking just too much and opened everything up. i'll try 'add block plus' I'm pretty sure the extension you want is called Adblock Plus, not Add Block Plus. It has been a little bit since I've dealt with these extensions, though, because I started using another browser that offers things like plugin and JavaScript whitelisting as a core feature. Take my memory of it for what it's worth. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Why is this Symbol in the front of your website. A humble request.
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 11:09:13AM +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote: always these complicated things. This is why life here is so much more exiting. We do not need sysctl. I guess that depends on your definition of sysctl, and I rather like it. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Software Development using Freebsd.
On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 04:37:37PM -0600, Jorge Biquez wrote: I am helping a non profit organization and giving some classes to prepare students so they can be prepared and try to get a job (they are students also and have the basics concepts already) That's admirable. I hope that works out. Anyway, I am interested in teach them to develop some simple applications. From simple ones to destktop ones that access a database, desktop ones that use internet to connect to a remote database and web based ones with a database behind. We have 6 months and the idea is to work a lot remotely. Thin is that I do not want to use any kind of Microsoft products. Some of them do not have modern machines but until now, in previous classs, we could install Freebsd, text mode, and work from there. Now we will try to have a graphical mode in Freebsd. With that we would like to be able to develop graphical applications for Windows (we all know that's the market and here some companies is what they are looking), so maybe sound crazy but I am looking to develop applications for Windows without using WIndows or Microsofot products at least. What kind of experience do you want these students to have when they leave? Do you just want them practiced in doing some general programming with cross-platform tools, including database access and simple GUI work? Do you want them to specifically work with commodity tools that will fit in with mainstream job posting requirements on a resume? Do you want them to work with tools that will enable them to most easily expand their experience on their own once they get done with the course of instruction so they can more rapidly approach general competence and create useful projects of their own very quickly, figuring they can then move on to other tools and technologies as they decide which direction they want to take their professional pursuits? Do you just want it to be as easy as possible? Your top priority should probably help you make this decision. I have been looking for this for months. First case using Windows but not Microsoft products. I found some options BUT they all were expensive on the deployment. The runtimes were not free and the amount of money to pay was not a good option. Others provide real free excutables for runtimes but the products were expensive. I am now trying to, If possible, have FreeBSD running graphically and then use open source software to develop graphical windows applications. Maybe I am wrong but until now I think my only option is to use Phyton. Is that correct? For what I have searched Python will let me create executables and will let me create Graphical solutions even for other platforms (Mac or LInux or whatever runs Python). Talking with friend, he believes that my best bet is to teach them C or C++ and use some of the options for developing graphically ( I am not a C or C++ expert but I can learn alone). Depending on your goals, anything from Ruby to C could be an excellent choice. LLVM/Clang is a great compiler suite for C; the mainstream Ruby implementation will get you far; both can use platform-independent graphical toolkits and database access libraries. PostgreSQL is a great DBMS distributed under a copyfree license, and it is well supported for both these languages. They're sorta on opposite ends of a spectrum, though, so some kind of narrowing down of goals should be done before arriving at any conclusions. I was wondering if you could give some advie and comments on this. Are you developing commercial applications (including Windows ones) using FreeBsd as your platform? Or Maybe any Linux Distribution? I've written C, C++, Ruby, Perl, and PHP on FreeBSD, for deployment in a wide range of platform circumstances. Some of my development has been commercial, some of it just for fun, some to solve my own personal problems. . . . There's nothing wrong with FreeBSD as a development platform for most purposes, especially if you want to work on portable software development. In fact, I think that for purposes of writing portable code, it's difficult to do worse than FreeBSD, because it's probably easier to move code from FreeBSD to Linux distributions, Apple MacOS, and MS Windows due to social factors involved than the other way around. Would you do that with Python or something else? I personally am not the world's biggest Python fan, but my choice would depend on the specific goals involved. If you're leaning toward the Python end of the spectrum, though, I (personally; your mileage may differ) would probably choose Ruby instead. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Software Development using Freebsd.
On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 07:36:46PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: DDa == Da Rock writes: Would you do that with Python or something else? DDa Depending on what you really need to solve decides your DDa language. Others have offered advice here, but may I suggest Perl? DDa For most data and its proven ability to handle/match string data it DDa is very useful. And using tk it will run on windows as well. At this point, there's absolutely nothing that Python can do that Perl can't, and very likely vice versa. However, from personal experience, I know that Larry Wall understands Object Oriented Programming, and Guido definitely doesn't get it. Obviously, other people have worked on both languages, but keep that in mind. I can present my evidence of how Guido doesn't get it in a longer post, if prompted. I'm definitely curious. If you don't think this is the place for it, I'd love to see your explanation in private email or by other means. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: uname ?
On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:09:00PM +0800, joeb1 wrote: It looks to me that the uname -m and uname -p always have the same value, such as i386. Is there some fine-grained difference or some un-documented difference between them or some combination were the values would be different? I don't have one handy, so I don't have any way to test this right now, but I wonder if an AMD machine might give a different answer to one of those than an Intel machine, given a 32-bit 386 instruction set processor for both. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Unable to upgrade packages on FreeBSD
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 01:52:19AM +0100, Polytropon wrote: On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 18:40:50 -0500, David Jackson wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Polytropon wrote: Other things to keep in mind are language settings. One example is OpenOffice which needs to have the language setting at compile time, especially if you're not using the english language. You could compile a version of that for each language and I think thats what Ubuntu does, or, just compile maybe top 1 or 2 most commonly used language version and then other versions could be user compiled. There are, I think... at least 10 languages available, and combine this with Gnome, KDE and CUPS support OFF or ON, and you have 10*2*2*2 = 80 packages, and still no scheme to name them. :-) Don't forget compiling for multiple architectures. That adds more options -- and, unlike some of those other options, compiling for different architectures is often actually a mutually-exclusive option set. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Unable to upgrade packages on FreeBSD
You talk a lot about how easy it is to maintain a binary package system. I would like you to convince me that it is easy, keeping in mind that it should remain compatible with the ports system. I am willing to be convinced. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Horrible installer
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 07:30:57PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: I first touched FreeBSD around 2005. The current insteller is much more appealing and useful. All the people displaying elitist attitude toward the arcaic installer which infact DID push people away from FreeBSD, I don't understand you. so may i explain you: Those who cannot install things without fancy interfaces are not ever able to manage that system afterwards. This is not a toy but best performing unix system. Thank you for (inadvertently?) making people with a legitimate need for the functionality of sysinstall look like intolerant elitists by association with you in the minds of those who don't understand their needs, just because you seem to agree with them. I miss your silence. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Horrible installer (was: Re: FreeBSD 9)
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 07:25:03PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: And IMHO sysinstall should not exist, while good documentation about installing BY HAND should be there. I agree with the part of that sentence following the comma. That is all. Someone that cannot install it him/herself will not be able to ever manage it after so why waste time. Do not forget that FreeBSD is for unix users, contrary to linux which is for windoze haters. Again i propose removing sysinstall altogether. Automation is good, provided it does not eliminate useful options and flexibility. You seem unaware of this fact in the general case, for some reason. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Clang - what is the story?
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 07:06:04PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: On 01/22/12 17:45, Chad Perrin wrote: A couple years ago, it looked like a race between PCC and TenDRA, but Clang seemed to just come out of nowhere and steal all the attention. All three of them had a lot to recommend them, but then the TenDRA modernization project evaporated and everybody jumped on the Clang wagon. At least, that's how it looked to me. Wow! I'm going to have to do some more research on compilers- I've never heard of these until now... I sound pretty stupid don't I? :P Nah. TenDRA was pretty obscure except in certain circles related to DRA, I think -- and DRA (Defense Research Agency), something like a UK equivalent to the US DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), ceased to exist in the mid-1990s, making it and anything related to it even more obscure since then. I don't know whether DERA (which replaced DRA) did anything with TenDRA. I almost forgot that in addition to the TenDRA project, there was also the Ten15 project; TenDRA had forked somewhere along the way. As far as I'm aware, Ten15 was farther out of date and less actively developed at the time I was talking to TenDRA developers and offering a little bit of help with that project. I never really got involved with Ten15 at all, so my knowledge of it is *really* scant. PCC (Portable C Compiler), meanwhile, spent many years essentially unused except in some of the dustier corners of Unix user communities before being actively developed again as more and more people started wanting a copyfree C compiler alternative to the very copyleft GCC. PCC was a big deal for a while, and I think most C compilers were based on it to some extent in the early '80s, but its influenced waned enough that GCC replaced it pretty much everywhere by about the same time DRA went away. As things stand now, I don't think anyone is actively developing TenDRA (and in fact I wonder if all the more recent work on it has been lost), but the modern PCC project reached 1.0 release last year and is reputedly building OpenBSD kernels without a hitch. There has been some talk of it being the GCC replacement for OpenBSD and maybe even NetBSD, though I seem to recall Theo de Raadt doesn't consider replacing GCC a very urgent requirement right now (which might be part of the reason AerieBSD explicitly prioritizes rejecting copyfree software after it forked from OpenBSD, though that's just speculation by me, based in part on the fact it appears PCC is in the AerieBSD base system). Another option that hasn't been mentioned -- and I don't think it was ever really considered for FreeBSD as a GCC-replacement, but I don't actually know that for sure -- is The Amsterdam Compiler Kit, sometimes called TACK or ACK. It, too, uses a BSD license, as does PCC and as did TenDRA. TACK is the base system (I'm not sure they use that word, really) for MINIX3, I think. Beyond that, and the fact it was originally available only under commercial license, I don't really know anything about it. The reason I started writing this email was just to mention that this stuff has all been pretty obscure compared to the much higher profile Clang and GCC projects. That common thread should, I hope, be clear in my descriptions of the various projects I mentioned, so no -- I don't think you sound pretty stupid for not knowing about them. In fact, to reach the level of stupid, I think you'd have to be one of the dismaying number of people in the Linux world who kludge together C code and apparently aren't aware there are any C compilers available that don't come from the GNU Project or Microsoft, or the craptons of Visual Studio developers who have never realized C can be compiled without Visual Studio. (Clarification: I'm not saying all Linux-based C hackers are stupid, nor even that all coders who use Visual Studio are stupid. There are a lot of smart people in both groups. I just don't know of anyone who doesn't realize there's more than one or two C compilers currently maintained except for some members of the above-mentioned groups.) -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Clang - what is the story?
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 05:37:48AM -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: There has been some talk of it being the GCC replacement for OpenBSD and maybe even NetBSD, though I seem to recall Theo de Raadt doesn't consider replacing GCC a very urgent requirement right now (which might be part of the reason AerieBSD explicitly prioritizes rejecting copyfree software after it forked from OpenBSD, though that's just speculation by me, based in part on the fact it appears PCC is in the AerieBSD base system). Correction: s/copyfree/copyleft/ AerieBSD favors copyfree software and chooses to reject copyleft software as much as it reasonably can. It does *not* reject copyfree software. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Clang - what is the story?
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 10:55:18PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: On 01/22/12 22:37, Chad Perrin wrote: PCC (Portable C Compiler), meanwhile, spent many years essentially unused except in some of the dustier corners of Unix user communities before being actively developed again as more and more people started wanting a copyfree C compiler alternative to the very copyleft GCC. PCC was a big deal for a while, and I think most C compilers were based on it to some extent in the early '80s, but its influenced waned enough that GCC replaced it pretty much everywhere by about the same time DRA went away. According to wiki it was the compiler for unix- particularly bsd up to 4.4 (FreeBSD's parent prior to becoming opensource). Yeah, that's pretty much the case. As things stand now, I don't think anyone is actively developing TenDRA (and in fact I wonder if all the more recent work on it has been lost), According to wiki there was one person on the job and has grown to a team now- how many I don't know :) As far as I'm aware, there was a team for a while, and a fork in the effort, and now both forks have basically died (see my above explanation). After a glance at the Wikipedia article about TenDRA, I think it was only referring to the pre-death period and not now for when there is/was a team. Well. Consider me enlightened... ;) I'm glad I could help. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Clang - what is the story?
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 01:13:49AM +1000, Da Rock wrote: On 01/23/12 00:38, Robert Bonomi wrote: Da Rockfreebsd-questi...@herveybayaustralia.com.au wrote: I personally had no idea this was going on; my impression was gcc grew out of the original compiler that built unix, and the only choices were borland and gcc. The former for win32 crap and the latter for, well, everything else. Once upon a time, there were _many_ alternatives for C compilers. Commercial -- i.e. 'you pay for it', or bundled with a pay O/S -- offerings included (this is a _partial_ list, ones _I_ have personal knowledge of): PCC -- (the original one0 medium-lousy code but the code-generator was easily adapted to new/diferent hardwre Green Hills Softwaware (used by a number of unix hardare manufacturers) Sun Microsystems developed their own (acc) Silicon Graphics, Inc Hewlett-Packard Symantic (Think C -- notable for high-performance on early Apple Mac's, significantly better than Apple's own MPW) Manx Software (Aztec C -- a 'best of breed' for MS-DOS) Microsoft Intel CCS Watcom Borland Zortech Greenleaf Software Ellis Computing (specializing in 'budget' compilers, circa $30 pricetags) Small C tcc -- the 'tiny C compiler Wow... I have some research to do... Maybe not. It depends on what you want to learn. PCC was already mentioned. Watcom C's license is overly complex and probably legally problematic. Small-C Compiler is a compiler for the Small-C language, which is only a subset of C. The Tiny C Compiler is copyleft licensed, so not as ideal a choice as Clang, PCC, and TenDRA have been at various points in time when choosing a new C compiler for a BSD Unix base system. If I'm not mistaken, everything else on that list is not even open source software. If you just want to know about C compilers, it's fun to read about all this stuff. If you specifically want to know about options that might be suitable for use as GCC-replacement in BSD Unix systems, there's far less to read. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Clang - what is the story?
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 09:33:02PM +0100, Roland Smith wrote: PCC is only a C compiler, and there is some C++ code (e.g. groff) in the base system. The FreeBSD port is marked as i386 and amd64 only, even though other architectures seem to be there in the PCC source. I had somehow forgotten there was anything in the base system written in C++. That would probably account for the choice of Clang over PCC. Personally I think it is a good thing to have different C compilers. In the past I've installed pcc just to see if my programs compiled OK. Now I tend to use clang for that. It does a great job of identifying programming errors. I have found it rather disconcerting for quite some time now that the open source development community -- normally quite clued in to the benefits of diversity and friendly, competitive collaboration for maintaining a strong software ecosystem with lots of high quality options -- has been so singularly overrun by a single C compiler (GCC), especially given the central importance of C to the development of the major open source OSes. The problem was compounded by the increasingly byzantine design of GCC itself and the proliferation of ugly edge-cases that created. I was saddened as well to see that TenDRA had vanished, because I thought it brought some important perspective (somewhat unique to its development ideals) to the selection of available compilers, as do PCC, LLVM/Clang, and even the Small-C Compiler. I hope that even if nobody else makes it the official compiler of any language, AerieBSD remains an active project with PCC as part of its base system, and that MINIX3 establishes itself reasonably well with TACK, if only to ensure more than two viable C compiler options for members of major open source Unixy OS families. Four is probably a good number, with a few less-central implementations floating around as well to explore the fringes. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Clang - what is the story?
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 03:43:13PM +, RW wrote: I was just wondering what would have happened if Apple hadn't backed clang/LLVM as BSD licensed projects. Was there a plan B (other than gcc 4.2.1) or did Apple save the *BSD world? The backup plan was probably PCC. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Clang - what is the story?
On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 05:09:52PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: On 01/22/12 17:02, Chad Perrin wrote: On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 03:43:13PM +, RW wrote: I was just wondering what would have happened if Apple hadn't backed clang/LLVM as BSD licensed projects. Was there a plan B (other than gcc 4.2.1) or did Apple save the *BSD world? The backup plan was probably PCC. Whats actually surprising is that it wasn't used as plan A (I just looked it up); It then would have come full circle ;) A couple years ago, it looked like a race between PCC and TenDRA, but Clang seemed to just come out of nowhere and steal all the attention. All three of them had a lot to recommend them, but then the TenDRA modernization project evaporated and everybody jumped on the Clang wagon. At least, that's how it looked to me. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: * Re: Horrible installer
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 08:19:32PM -0800, Devin Teske wrote: On Jan 20, 2012, at 7:43 PM, gore koggy...@comcast.net wrote: why not just use 8.x or something? I'm not being sarcastic or anything either, I really am asking why not jut go to 8.2 which I also Loved? SU+J by Kirk McKusick ?? :-D There are things 9.0 offers that earlier versions do not. I think 9.0 is the first where the entire base system builds with Clang without issues, for instance (someone correct me if I'm wrong). The big thing I wanted in 9.0 actually got pushed back to 9.1 at least, so I'm still waiting for that, but that too indicates a reason that someone might not be satisfied with 8.2. As I mentioned earlier, it seems to me (as an outsider to the installer development process) that offering a choice between sysinstall and bsdinstall for at least one RELEASE of FreeBSD might have been a good idea, to give users a transition period and ensure that if there are some unforseen show-stoppers that did not appear in testing there would still be an option for those who need it. After talking some more to people who actually know a bit about how the installers work, I still don't see why that would not be the better choice. On the other hand, bsdinstall does get the job done, at least for my purposes. It just does so in a way that feels a bit more straightjacketed, and it rubs me personally a bit the wrong way. Your mileage may vary, and it certainly has not been a show-stopper for me so far. The actual installed OS is still my favorite, and when forced to screw around with something like Debian or (heaven forfend) MS Windows, it makes me want to tear my hair out or cry or break something. In the final analysis, the worst this has done for me is make me feel just slightly inconvenienced during installation, having to restart the installation process more often when I made a misstep for instance. No biggie, I guess. It's certainly not worth giving up being able to build the whole base system with Clang instead of GCC to have sysinstall instead of bsdinstall. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org