On Feb 16, 2008 12:11 AM, Alan Dayley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- There is great value in experts, even true experts, writing peer
reviewed articles. There are many avenues such as journals and other
publications for their contributions. There is also great value in
allowing people with
On 2/19/08, Alex LeDonne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 16, 2008 12:11 AM, Alan Dayley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- There is great value in experts, even true experts, writing peer
reviewed articles. There are many avenues such as journals and other
publications for their contributions.
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 22:11 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 18:40 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Thank you all. I should have thought of wikipedia!
Just wondering...I occasionally run into people that dismiss wikipedia
out of hand citing a lack of
On Feb 18, 2008 10:44 AM, Craig White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 22:11 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 18:40 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Thank you all. I should have thought of wikipedia!
Just wondering...I occasionally run
On Feb 18, 2008 11:52 AM, Joshua Zeidner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Craig,
I've actually done a bit of work in the area of web-to-print media
and the situation is somewhat complex. While the inertia of habit
certainly has a lot to do with peoples tendency to favor print, there
are
On Feb 18, 2008 12:15 PM, Dazed_75 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 18, 2008 11:52 AM, Joshua Zeidner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Craig,
I've actually done a bit of work in the area of web-to-print media
and the situation is somewhat complex. While the inertia of habit
certainly
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 12:22 -0700, Joshua Zeidner wrote:
Larry, the problem though with Wikipedia is that the actual basis of
credibility on which a given article rests is virtually intractable.
There are thousands of apparent contributors all adding, deleting,
editing portions of the
Sorry, but I must beg to differ. I will not paint anything with such
a broad brush. I will continue to use it and to form my own
judgements. Of course I will err on the side of no trust when it
comes to economic, socio-political, and other soft subjects. Of
course I also do not trust the
On Feb 18, 2008 2:39 PM, Dazed_75 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, but I must beg to differ. I will not paint anything with such
a broad brush. I will continue to use it and to form my own
judgements. Of course I will err on the side of no trust when it
comes to economic, socio-political,
On Feb 18, 2008 2:34 PM, Craig White [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 11:52 -0700, Joshua Zeidner wrote:
I've actually done a bit of work in the area of web-to-print media
and the situation is somewhat complex. While the inertia of habit
certainly has a lot to do with
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 15:05 -0700, Joshua Zeidner wrote:
I have no knowledge of the amount of claims to inaccuracies of
wikipedia, nor to the extent or the grievousness of inaccuracies.
it does seem that everyone has drunk the Wikipedia Kool-aid...
are you incapable of seeing how
Personally, I love wikipedia, use it frequently and agree with Alan's
assessments.
That said, I have two qualifications:
1) I trust it hugely more for technical and purely factual information
than I do for anything soft such as biographies, history, social
events.
2) If an article even seems to
Hello Deepan.
Deepan Chakravarthy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 16, 2008 5:15 AM, Sir Light [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan,
It's either bzip or gzip.
So does the boot loader uncompress the kernel ? if not when and how does the
kernel get uncompressed ?
From what I can
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Matt Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
zImage became obsolete in the 2.4 series. Now you always get a bzImage,
which is not bzip2, but big zImage. If I'm not totally on crack, the
Ah yes, thanks for the clarification...
The Linux kernel is compressed and placed in a zImage file. What is
the compression format of that file.
I've never had to look into it before but I am now. I figure one of you
may already know.
Alan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Alan Dayley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Linux kernel is compressed and placed in a zImage file. What is
the compression format of that file.
I've never had to look into it before but I am now. I figure one of you
may already know.
zimage is just gzip
Alan,
It's either bzip or gzip.
Jon
Alan Dayley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Linux kernel is compressed and placed in a zImage file. What is
the compression format of that file.
I've never had to look into it before but I am now. I figure one of you
may already know.
Alan
Kristian Erik Hermansen wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Matt Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
zImage became obsolete in the 2.4 series. Now you always get a bzImage,
which is not bzip2, but big zImage. If I'm not totally on crack, the
Ah yes, thanks for the clarification...
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 18:40 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Kristian Erik Hermansen wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Matt Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
zImage became obsolete in the 2.4 series. Now you always get a bzImage,
which is not bzip2, but big zImage. If I'm not totally on
On Feb 16, 2008 5:15 AM, Sir Light [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan,
It's either bzip or gzip.
So does the boot loader uncompress the kernel ? if not when and how does the
kernel get uncompressed ?
--
Sudoku Solver: http://sudoku-solver.net
---
Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 18:40 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Thank you all. I should have thought of wikipedia!
Just wondering...I occasionally run into people that dismiss wikipedia
out of hand citing a lack of accuracy. Needless to say, I get a little
excited because even
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 20:19 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 18:40 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Kristian Erik Hermansen wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Matt Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
zImage became obsolete in the 2.4 series. Now you always get a bzImage,
On 2/15/08, Alan Dayley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 18:40 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Thank you all. I should have thought of wikipedia!
Just wondering...I occasionally run into people that dismiss wikipedia
out of hand citing a lack of
Errors and omissions corrected below.
Too many children, nieces and a nephew running around here. And I'm tired.
Alan
Alan Dayley wrote:
Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 18:40 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote:
Thank you all. I should have thought of wikipedia!
Just wondering...I
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:11:50 -0700 Alan Dayley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
I try to express these ideas:
- They are correct, it is likely that some of the information in
Wikipedia articles is wrong.
- Since Wikipedia requires references and places that need them get
flagged, references
Joshua Zeidner wrote:
Alan,
just curious, are you speaking from experience as someone who has
actually tried to add substantial information to Wikipedia, or are you
just enumerating the values of the Wikipedia community?
I have not contributed substantial information to Wikipedia,
Alan Dayley wrote:
I have not contributed substantial information to Wikipedia, though I
have made some corrections and small additions here and there. I also
--[clip]--
the bad of Wikipedia all rolled up.
And all of that came out of my understanding of what I see and read.
I'm sure
27 matches
Mail list logo
