On 2013/03/05 15:32, Tom H wrote:
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 11:09 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/03/02 15:18, Tom H wrote:
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:15 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/03/01 09:26, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 11:09 PM, jdow wrote:
> On 2013/03/02 15:18, Tom H wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:15 PM, jdow wrote:
>>> On 2013/03/01 09:26, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, jdow wrote:
> On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM,
On 03/02/2013 08:09 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/03/02 15:18, Tom H wrote:
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:15 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/03/01 09:26, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
On 02/2
On 2013/03/02 15:18, Tom H wrote:
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:15 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/03/01 09:26, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
I wou
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:15 PM, jdow wrote:
> On 2013/03/01 09:26, Tom H wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, jdow wrote:
>>> On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
> On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
>>
>> I wouldn't be
DudeJust stop. If you needed to vent about this then feel free to contact me directly and we can debate this till you feel satisfied I find this amusing but the other users on the list have a valid reason to be annoyed by it. And that goes for any one else who wants to keep this going too.This thre
On 03/02/2013 03:34 AM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
...GNU Hurd (vaporware).
Not vaporware. But the two consumer-end distros based on it are still in
Alpha. Of course one of them (Arch) is perpetually in Alpha and the
other (Debian) is perpetually frozen in its release schedule, so I don't
k
On 2013/03/01 09:29, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Konstantin Olchanski
wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 02:35:32PM -0500, Tom H wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next few
years. We'd then have to use an MS-signed shim to boot, as is now the
ca
On 2013/03/01 09:26, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, jdow wrote:
On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next
few years. We'd then
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 08:03:48PM -0800, Yasha Karant wrote:
>
> Modern BSD is a micro-kernel ("MACH") design, whereas Linux still is
> a monolithic kernel design.
>
FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, DragonFlyBSD are all original monolithic UNIX.
Linux of course is a monolithic kernel.
The only micro-k
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Konstantin Olchanski
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 02:35:32PM -0500, Tom H wrote:
>>
>> I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next few
>> years. We'd then have to use an MS-signed shim to boot, as is now the
>> case with the default Fedor
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:08 PM, jdow wrote:
> On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
>>> On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next
few years. We'd then have to use an M
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:12 PM, zxq9 wrote:
> On 03/01/2013 04:56 AM, Tom H wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
>>> On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next
few years. We'd then have to use a
On 03/01/2013 07:32 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Ken Teh wrote:
Time to stop this thread, methinks.
Yasha does drop in these little political bombshells from time to
time. Focus on the specific technical issue related to Scientifici
Linux (such as laptop instal
Well I didn't say it was a micro kernel yet.It is however moving in that direction. More and more the components and drivers are communicating via the message bus for which the user mode access is handled via a separate process.And as far as stability vs experimental well you are not wrong. Hurd is
On 01/03/13 15:06, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
> Have you run a ps -ax on a Linux box lately? You call that monolithic?
> The linux kernel has been migrating to a micro kernel slowly for the
> last decade now. In some ways its benefited from its older cousin GNU
> Hurd because the Linux Kernel develo
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Ken Teh wrote:
> Time to stop this thread, methinks.
Yasha does drop in these little political bombshells from time to
time. Focus on the specific technical issue related to Scientifici
Linux (such as laptop installation), and push the upstream
architectural issues
Time to stop this thread, methinks.
On 03/01/2013 08:06 AM, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
Have you run a ps -ax on a Linux box lately? You call that monolithic?
The linux kernel has been migrating to a micro kernel slowly for the last
decade now. In some ways its benefited from its older cousin GN
Have you run a ps -ax on a Linux box lately? You call that monolithic?The linux kernel has been migrating to a micro kernel slowly for the last decade now. In some ways its benefited from its older cousin GNU Hurd because the Linux Kernel developers had the benefit of knowing what went wrong and wh
From: Yasha Karant
"There are popular authors, many of whom have the practical skill to have a
place in a specific temporal market and even be well remunerated for their
writing, and then there are enduring authors. Only the history of the
future will tell if King's work are well read in a centu
Brevity is the soul of wit.
On 03/01/2013 01:03 PM, Yasha Karant wrote:
Modern BSD is a micro-kernel ("MACH") design, whereas Linux still is a
monolithic kernel design...
implying...
That monolithic kernel design is demonstrably primitive in every respect
to micro-kernel design and that there is a universal evolutionary
-- Forwarded message --
From: Yasha Karant
"This may not be the correct forum for this discussion..."
I am reminded of Stephen King's book "On Writing" in which he recalls
receiving a personal lecture from an English professor about why Stephen
King would never amount to anything
On 02/28/2013 08:24 PM, Victor Helsing wrote:
From: *Yasha Karant* mailto:ykar...@csusb.edu>>
"Modern BSD ... Linux ... Mac ... PCs ... OSx ... all other
things being equal..."
Apples and oranges are not equal in all other respects, but both are
nourishing and enjoyable to those who eat
From: Yasha Karant
"Modern BSD ... Linux ... Mac ... PCs ... OSx ... all other things
being equal..."
Apples and oranges are not equal in all other respects, but both are
nourishing and enjoyable to those who eat them. Comparisons and analysis
of the virtues and differences between appl
On 02/28/2013 05:21 PM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 05:58:36PM -0800, Yasha Karant wrote:
There are significant issues with a Mac.
The software issues can be addressed from the fink download site
(there are others) that provide all of the standard open systems tools
and
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 05:58:36PM -0800, Yasha Karant wrote:
>
> There are significant issues with a Mac.
>
> The software issues can be addressed from the fink download site
> (there are others) that provide all of the standard open systems tools
> and many of the environments.
>
"yum install"
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 02:35:32PM -0500, Tom H wrote:
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next few
> years. We'd then have to use an MS-signed shim to boot, as is now the
> case with the default Fedora and Ubuntu SB setups.
>
I am not worried. In a few years MS wil
On 2013/02/28 11:56, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next
few years. We'd then have to use an MS-signed shim to boot, as is
now the case with the default Fedora
On 03/01/2013 04:56 AM, Tom H wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next
few years. We'd then have to use an MS-signed shim to boot, as is
now the case with the default Fed
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Robert Blair wrote:
> On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
>>
>> I wouldn't be surprised if SB became "un-disable-able" in the next
>> few years. We'd then have to use an MS-signed shim to boot, as is
>> now the case with the default Fedora and Ubuntu SB setups.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Maybe I've missed something here. If a generic "MS signed shim" is
available what value does this add? Wouldn't such a shim make booting
anything alternative possible?
On 02/28/2013 01:35 PM, Tom H wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:48 PM, zxq9 wro
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:48 PM, zxq9 wrote:
> On 02/28/2013 12:53 AM, Dale Dellutri wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:27 AM, zxq9 wrote:
>>>
>>> There is a silver lining. The board makers themselves are out to sell
>>> boards
>>> and laptops and tablets and can be reasoned with. My company is
On 02/27/2013 03:14 PM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:46:11AM -0600, Connie Sieh wrote:
If a i386/x86_64 laptop is certified for the "Windows 8 logo" then
it has to have "secure boot" enabled in the bios(uefi) by default as
required by Microsoft. Secure boot requires a
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Paul Robert Marino
wrote:
>
> actually there a few workarounds here is one of them
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jejb/efitools.git;a=tree
> Its a signed pre-bootloader lol.
The LF work doesn't mean that SB isn't used or that LF hasn't had a
binary s
On 02/28/2013 12:53 AM, Dale Dellutri wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:27 AM, zxq9 wrote:
There is a silver lining. The board makers themselves are out to sell boards
and laptops and tablets and can be reasoned with. My company is an extremely
small player in the hardware field but we've had po
Until I can afford it, It's theoretical. Hoping to hear in a week if
I got a major real job, then it'll not only move from
theoretical--it'll move to NECESSARY.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Konstantin Olchanski
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:46:11AM -0600, Connie Sieh wrote:
>>
>> If a
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:46:11AM -0600, Connie Sieh wrote:
>
> If a i386/x86_64 laptop is certified for the "Windows 8 logo" then
> it has to have "secure boot" enabled in the bios(uefi) by default as
> required by Microsoft. Secure boot requires a 'signed by microsoft'
> program to boot. But t
actually there a few workarounds here is one of them
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jejb/efitools.git;a=tree
Its a signed pre-bootloader lol.
By the way a more sever version this was originally proposed by
Microsoft as an in bios version as part of their first trusted
computing push nea
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:27 AM, zxq9 wrote:
> On 02/27/2013 04:20 AM, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
>>
>> I have an X120e as well and simply changing the hard drive doesn't fix
>> the eufi issue.
>> the first answer to this string is correct with two cavorts RedHat got
>> two signed certs one fro RHE
On 02/27/2013 04:20 AM, Paul Robert Marino wrote:
I have an X120e as well and simply changing the hard drive doesn't fix
the eufi issue.
the first answer to this string is correct with two cavorts RedHat got
two signed certs one fro RHEL and the other for Fedora. apparently the
process was a nigh
A question -- please see below:
On 02/26/2013 02:17 PM, Connie Sieh wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Yasha Karant wrote:
My understanding is that if the machine is licensed for MS Windows, then
the release and version for which it is so licensed can legally be run
under VirtualBox (or the equiva
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Yasha Karant wrote:
My understanding is that if the machine is licensed for MS Windows, then
the release and version for which it is so licensed can legally be run
under VirtualBox (or the equivalent): Linux as the host OS, VirtualBox,
and then a fresh install from media of
My understanding is that if the machine is licensed for MS Windows, then
the release and version for which it is so licensed can legally be run
under VirtualBox (or the equivalent): Linux as the host OS, VirtualBox,
and then a fresh install from media of the licensed MS Windows. I do
however,
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Robert Blair wrote:
--090005080008010202060907
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Will FNAL or CERN get some certification to allow them to take advantage
of the secure bo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Will FNAL or CERN get some certification to allow them to take advantage
of the secure boot option? One of the weakest points of many systems is
the ability to boot unauthorized media. This option could work for us
but I gather it needs work to get c
I have an X120e as well and simply changing the hard drive doesn't fix
the eufi issue.
the first answer to this string is correct with two cavorts RedHat got
two signed certs one fro RHEL and the other for Fedora. apparently the
process was a nightmare but they will work with secure boot. for that
I never boot a new laptop into Windows. I replace the original hard drive
with a new one and install Linux on it. This way I can put the original disk
back in and never void my warranty. You can then even sell it in its
"original" state.
Of course, this works only if you don't plan to use Wind
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013, Scott_Gates wrote:
OK, If I needed a desktop, I'd just roll my own. Probably starting with=20=
something bare-bones from TigerDirect.
I'm thinking of buying a new laptop, rather than just recycling old ones,=
=20
like I have been.=20
I have HEARD there are issues with try
OK, If I needed a desktop, I'd just roll my own. Probably starting with
something bare-bones from TigerDirect.
I'm thinking of buying a new laptop, rather than just recycling old ones,
like I have been.
I have HEARD there are issues with trying to install on computers with
Windows8 already
50 matches
Mail list logo
