Linux-Advocacy Digest #523, Volume #34 Tue, 15 May 01 07:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Economist and Open-Source (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know (GreyCloud)
Re: the Boom, Boom department (Ian Davey)
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! (GreyCloud)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing? (Donn Miller)
Re: The Economist and Open-Source ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Win 9x is horrid (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: FrontPage clone? ("Joseph T. Adams")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Economist and Open-Source
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:03:00 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > >You can't detect the bug unless you're looking for it.
> > > > > ----------------------^-------------------------------
> > > > > |
> > > > > BINGO
> > > > >
> > > > > Regression tests look for bugs just like all other tests. You just
> don't
> > > > > run the full suite of tests and concentrate on the area changed *and
> its
> > > > > interactions with other software components*. You can't possibly
> test
> > > > > every path through a program affected by a change. I always try to
> > > > > include in the subset chosen for testing some remote and subtle
> paths
> > > > > through the program. I am very happy if the test result clears the
> fixed
> > > > > bug and finds a new one, not introduced by the fix. If the fix
> > > > > introduces a new bug it is rejected.
> > > >
> > > > Isn't that what testing is about? the point of testing is to look for
> > > > bugs, try to confuse the program and cause problems by trying things
> in
> > > > different ways, isolate the bugs, fix the problem, then repeat the
> test
> > > > again. If you have written out a program, and you have no bugs, you
> > > > have obviously not tested the program properly.
> > >
> > > That's unit testing, or black box testing.
> > >
> > > Regression testing tends to be done with scripts, and is based on
> previously
> > > discovered bugs. You regression test to make sure that old bugs don't
> creep
> > > back in.
> > Pressman ("Software Engineering, A Practitioner's Approach, 3rd ed.")
> > defines regression testing as "repeating past tests to ensure that
> > modifications have not introduced faults into previously operational
> > software" and as being conducted to "ensure that new errors have not
> > been introduced". Watts Humphries("Managing the software Process") "run
> > a subset of previously executed integration and function tests to
> > ensure that program changes have not degraded the system". I could go
> > on, but note that none of the definitions say anything about previously
> > discovered bugs.
> >
> > I like to add in a few paths that weren't tested before, just in case a
> > bug was missed last time. Another thing regression tests help with is
> > what I like to call "uncovered" bugs. Those are bugs that were hidden by
> > the bug that is being fixed, but now come into play.
>
> http://www.planetit.com/techcenters/docs/management_issues/expert/PIT2000101
> 8S0033
>
> What exactly do you think the "past tests" are determined from? Previously
> reported bugs, which are incorporated into the test plans.
Sound like Mickey Soft doesn't know how to do their regression testing
properly.
Found this all too prevalent in other vendors as well. It takes TIME
stupid!
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:07:49 -0700
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> Oh, wow, another Microsoft sock puppet who has not the
> grace to use plain-text. Instead, he pastes in some
> FUD document using illegal HTML tags, and thinks
> that's enough to screw up Linux browsers.
>
> Actually, it made Netscape exit when trying to reply,
> until I turned off quoting of this stuff.
>
> Anyway, Jan, I think we're pretty much all in
> agreement that you're merely a jerk.
>
> Chris
Funny that a troll from the MS ranks comes into Linux advocacy to try
and make it stink.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:08:56 -0700
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "spam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Sun, 13 May 2001 18:32:18 GMT, "Chad Myers"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Ayende Rahien" <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:9dmgsu$n0l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >>
> > >> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> > In article <3afebc17$0$82825$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jan Johanson wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C0DBAB.BDE843E0--
> > >> > >
> > >> > <SNIP>
> > >> >
> > >> > Linux is the fastest growing OS on the planet with MS being a distant
> > >> > second.
> > >>
> > >> That *is* surprising.
> > >> Linux is small, it *has* where to grow.
> > >> MS is huge, it has little where it can grow to, and yet it manage to be a
> > >> seocnd? Impresive.
> > >
> > >BeOS grew from 5 users to 20. That was a 400% increase. BeOS has a higher
> > >growth rate than Linux! BeOS will take over the world!
> > >
> > ></Penguinista mentality>
> >
> > Hey, it worked for MS with their press releases from NT's early years.
> > They always hyped the growth rate stat.
>
> But it wasn't false. NT had, and does still have, real growth. Real
> numbers and real percentage points based on the whole.
>
> Linux has neither.
>
> -c
BUZZ OFF BUTT CRUST WINTROLL!!
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:11:18 -0700
Jon Johansan wrote:
>
> "Neil Cerutti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers posted:
> > >"Ayende Rahien" <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:9dmgsu$n0l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >>
> > >> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> > In article <3afebc17$0$82825$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jan Johanson
> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C0DBAB.BDE843E0--
> > >> > >
> > >> > <SNIP>
> > >> >
> > >> > Linux is the fastest growing OS on the planet with MS being a distant
> > >> > second.
> > >>
> > >> That *is* surprising.
> > >> Linux is small, it *has* where to grow.
> > >> MS is huge, it has little where it can grow to, and yet it manage to be
> a
> > >> seocnd? Impresive.
> > >
> > >BeOS grew from 5 users to 20. That was a 400% increase. BeOS has
> > >a higher growth rate than Linux! BeOS will take over the world!
> >
> > Ever heard the fable of the rice and the chess board?
>
> Right - it's a FABLE
BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!! A WinTroll if I ever saw one!
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:15:17 -0700
mlw wrote:
>
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> >
> > "Neil Cerutti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Jon Johansan posted:
> >> >"Neil Cerutti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> Ever heard the fable of the rice and the chess board?
> >> >
> >> >Right - it's a FABLE
> >>
> >> There are several lead-ins to the tale, but in the end, a poor
> >> beggar defeats a rich land-ownder in a game of chess. The rich
> >> land-owner is so impressed he allows the beggar to ask for
> >> anything in return. The beggar's small request: enough rice to
> >> cover one chess board in the following fashion: one kernel of
> >> rice on the first square, two on the second, four on the third, 8
> >> on the fourth, and so on.
> >>
> >> The greedy land-ownder agrees, thinking he is getting off easy
> >> with just a few bags of rice to pay.
> >>
> >> However, the land-ownder is astonished and humbled when he learns
> >> from his wise men's calculations that there is not enough rice in
> >> the entire kingdom to fulfil the beggar's request.
> >>
> >> I.e., A faster growth rate for Linux will allow it to easily
> >> catch up and surpass Microsoft's market share, not matter how
> >> great Microsoft's lead.
> >>
> >> But you can sit around being foolish, like the rich land-ownder, if
> >> you really must.
> >
> > Yeah, that's if Linux had a sustained growth rate of 200% for
> > how many years?
> >
> > Keep dreaming.
> >
> > It's at its peak now and it's barely touched the market.
>
> Why would you say it is at it's peak? All evidence I can see is that it is
> just starting to hit mainstream quite favorably.
>
> >
> > -c
> >
> >
> >
Linux is just now being accepted by the masses surrounding Seattle and
RedMond!
Barnes & Noble can't keep enough copies on the shelf! While CostCo, a
loss-leader reseller, has whole unsold pallets of Windows 98Se and ME.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 09:28:05 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Darren Wyn Rees
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy :
>
>>>>You still haven't defined gaming OS.
>>>
>>>Umm... an OS with which one can play games. [1]
>>
>>So the fact you can buy good quality games for Linux completely undermines
>>your argument. Or are you just arguing the absurd for arguments sake? If you
>>take your statement above then Linux *is* a gaming OS.
>
>Aw, pull the other leg. There is a paucity of Linux games available
>and it is untruthful, and indeed absurd, to suggest otherwise.
There's also a paucity of *good* Windows games available. Go into a shop and
glance along the shelves, 90% are crap and wind up in second hand shops
having been played only a few times. You could also say that Windows has
become too much of a gaming OS, it's getting harder to find the decent games
amongst the dross that are released merely because Windows has such a big
market share. The number of Windows games I'm interested in is actually quite
small, and as a percentage of titles available, easily a lot smaller than the
number of available Linux games I'd be interested in. Luckily quite a few of
the Windows games I would be interested in have been or are being ported. The
few exceptions being Thief, Thief 2 and Shogun Total War. There's no reason
these couldn't be ported though if there were a will.
In fact considering the relative youth of Linux as a gaming platform it's
quite surprising how many games are available.
>>>[1] Of course, the premise being, there are games available.
>>
>>Which there are.
>
>ROTFL. Next Linux comedian please.
That was *your* definition of a gaming OS. That's why I asked you to clarify.
You didn't mention anything about numbers.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 02:32:17 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <R90M6.854$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >You are certainly on the ball Charlie.
> > >
> > >You "just" discovered something that happened over a year ago and was
> fixed
> > >over a year ago. Further, there is no evidence the back door was ever
> used.
> >
> > So are you EF. It's a new one!
>
> No, it's not. Search for "Netscape Engineers are Weenies!", and it's the
> same one.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/05/14/1858201
> > >>
> > >> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/entrepreneur.html?s=smallbiz
> > >> /articles/20010514/microsoft_ackno
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Microsoft admits to screwing thousands of business owners out of the
> > >security,
> > >> to jeapordizing confidential customer information, to cheating the U.S.
> > >> government and the tax payers of their confidential security for years
> > >> without their consent!
> > >>
> > >> EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA!!!!!
> > >>
> > >> EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA!!!!!
> > >>
> > >> Microsoft has proven once again by their own admission to be
> > >> totally untrustworthy!
> > >>
> > >> They CLAIM they knew nothing about it.
> > >> They appearently don't ever do a code review,
> > >> for years yet!
> > >>
> > >> And I'll say it again! Would you quit reading CEO magazine,
> > >> pull your heads out of
> > >> your butts and install Linux servers before you get sued!!!
> > >>
> > >> You know your liable now!
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> How many god damn fucking clues do you need here folks!
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >> Charlie
> > >> -------
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Charlie
> > -------
Go read the article again you illiterate Troll!
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:10:08 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeffrey Siegal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stefaan A Eeckels wrote:
>> Far, far more transient, as the cache is flushed when the
>> processor switches tasks (hundred of times per second).
>
> Not necessarily. Most caches are physically addressed and don't need to
> be, should not be, and are not flushed merely because a task switches.
> Doing so would make task switching far, far more expensive.
There are many ways to implement caches, and this not the
forum to discuss cache technology; the fact remains that
a cache is far more transient than main memory, that it
mostly contains but parts of the program, and that processors
cannot directly address the cache. There are no instructions
to dissociate the cache from main memory, and write a snapshot
of it to somewhere.
>> I don't know a CPU that can access its cache as a separate
>> memory device (ie the CPU issues a memory address, and the
>> cache ensures the CPU gets the data as soon as possible.
>> You can't address the cache as such).
>
> I've never been convinced that the CPU being able to access the cache
> directly is relevant. The statute says with the aid of a machine or
> device; it does not say with the aid of the CPU, nor does it say with
> the aid of the machine or device of which the medium is a part.
You cannot remove a CPU and memory from the computer in
which it resides without destroying whatever information
it holds. Thus, if the computer does not provide a means
to access the data in its caches separately from the data
that is cached, it cannot qualify as a statutory copy.
>
>> No, _could_ be reproduced. You'll need to add circuitry to
>> enable you to access those components.
>
> Which is entirely consistent with what the statute says: "with the aid
> of a machine or device." It says nothing about what sort of machine or
> device. I think the intent is that the copy physically be there; how
> easy or hard it is to perceived or reproduced does not appear to be
> relevant.
But the statute says "can", and not "could", and the "machine
or device" clearly references existing machines or devices.
It's impossible to add those devices or machines to an existing
computer, it would have to be designed with that purpose in
mind. Thus, in a specific computer, the contents of the caches
cannot be accessed as such, and cannot be reproduced as such.
The fact that it is theoretically possible to build a computer
that could reproduce the direct content of its caches doesn't
make the content of any cache a statutory copy.
Why do you insist on assimilating functional units with
separate (and separable) devices?
--
Stefaan
--
How's it supposed to get the respect of management if you've got just
one guy working on the project? It's much more impressive to have a
battery of programmers slaving away. -- Jeffrey Hobbs (comp.lang.tcl)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 06:14:20 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing?
Todd wrote:
> And if you think Netscape doesn't crash, you just lost your credibility with
> those that use IE under W2k... Netscape sucks compared to IE. (I am running
> IE 6 prelease - and it hasn't crashed once - not bad for beta software).
I'm, running the Linux version of Netscape, and it's been running since
12:58 AM:
dmmiller 486 15.4 43.8 40368 25420 ?? S 12:58AM 13:58.18
/usr/local/lib/netscape-linux/communicator-linux-4.77.bin -iconic
The time is now
Tue May 15 06:12:14 EDT 2001
> I applaud Netscape for the 6.x release for its compliance with the W3C, but
> its stability is worse than 4.x.
>
> Applications under Linux have a *long* ways to go before they even begin to
> compare to Office 97, much less Office XP which is out right now.
Linux has Troff, LaTeX. If you think you need more than that...
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Economist and Open-Source
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:20:40 +0100
GreyCloud wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> Charles Lyttle wrote:
>>> I like to add in a few paths that weren't tested before, just in case a
>>> bug was missed last time. Another thing regression tests help with is
>>> what I like to call "uncovered" bugs. Those are bugs that were hidden by
>>> the bug that is being fixed, but now come into play.
[...]
>> What exactly do you think the "past tests" are determined from? Previously
>> reported bugs, which are incorporated into the test plans.
>
> Sound like Mickey Soft doesn't know how to do their regression testing
> properly. Found this all too prevalent in other vendors as well. It takes
> TIME stupid!
Speaking as someone doing software maintenance, step one of fixing a bug is
to create a test (or several tests) that exercises the bug. Only then do you
actually devote any effort to trying to correct the problem. If you've done
the test generation right (and that's why you're the maintainer, yes?) then
stopping the bug from occurring in the test suite will indicate that the
fault is fixed and no known problems have been introduced. Unknown problems
are, well, by their very nature unknown. :^)
The creation of the tests should be done with comprehensive knowledge of the
area that is failing. But that's obvious. Also, whenever new software is
created, a test suite should be written that exercises as many paths through
the code as possible (possibly with the aid of a coverage tool.) Once your
tests have coverage (you might need to add extra code to achieve this in a
controlled fashion) you can be fairly sure that faults added will be spotted
before the embarrassing stage (AKA release to the wider community...)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- US citizens? Remember, I rule the world in this scenario. They aren't
citizens of the US, unless that stands for United Stevenland.
-- Steven Odhner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.privacy.spyware
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:11:06 +0200
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> You people really amaze me. You are so paranoid about the activation
> scheme, and refuse to believe MS when they say something. If you think
> about it, if they wanted to collect information about you, they could do
> it without activation and send encrypted packets out that would be
> impossible to detect.
>
Well, they should just try *that*. Then sit back and watch the MS-Execs
going to prison in europe.
> MS doesn't need activation to spy on you if they want to, so I don't see
> the big fuss over this.
>
No, they probably do not.
But the fact remains, I will *never* ever again believe anything what MS is
telling me. They lied too often.
That is their problem now. A lot of people are now in this mood, and MS can
tell just what they want, they wont be believed anymore, even if it is true.
Well, I still need MS-products (I am a programmer), but XP is definately
out of the question. I will *never* do this braindead activation-scheme.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FrontPage clone?
Date: 15 May 2001 10:32:15 GMT
William R. Cousert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Is there anything similar to FrontPage for Linux? A coworker uses FrontPage
: on a daily basis, and would like to switch over to Linux.
I've never seen a graphical HTML editor that produced decent output,
but you could do a search on freshmeat.net for "HTML editor" and get a
number of possible matches.
Also . . someone who produces Web content on a regular basis on any
platform, whether Linux or Windows or any other, would benefit greatly
from learning to write standard HTML. It is really quite simple, and
once you know it, it is faster in most cases to produce good HTML by
hand than to use a "WYSIWYG" editor.
Joe
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
