Re: [SLUG] 40 Years of Unix

> I am trying to figure out where Bash etc fits into Linux. Does Gnome/KDE > run in a Bash shell? They are forked from a shell, mostly because startup scripts are all shell scripts. GDM (which in turn starts X) is spawned from a shell script. On pretty much every Linux distro, when you log in o

[SLUG] Let's agree to sue each other! Not.

> Having someone to sue is already in the set of criteria used by decision > makers. It's not. Show me an agreement which gives a client the opportunity to sue a vendor -- aside from breach of contract or negligence, neither of which are matters of contract. The "decision makers" you speak of a

Re: [SLUG] 40 Years of Unix

Dion wrote: On 22/08/09 10:29, Marghanita da Cruz wrote: Can you throw light on the demise of the "unix shell"? Marghanita I'm guessing 'contextually', that you're asking about the demise of the original Thompson shell that shipped with Unix? Since replaced by Bash, Csh et al? Possibly, m

Re: [SLUG] BBC News: 40 Years of Unix

2009/8/21 Rick Welykochy : > Speaking of data theft, Albert Gonzalez was caught stealing about > 130 MILLION credit card details from Internet servers. Wonder how > he got in? > > > > Too often in the p

Re: [SLUG] 40 Years of Unix

2009/8/23 jam > On Sunday 23 August 2009 10:00:05 slug-requ...@slug.org.au wrote: > > > > > > > > >> Can you throw light on the demise of the "unix shell"? > > > > > > Demise?! :-) > > > > I have to agree with Jeff: the only places I have really seen the shell > > vanish it has been moving — alb

Re: [SLUG] 40 Years of Unix

jam writes: > On Sunday 23 August 2009 10:00:05 slug-requ...@slug.org.au wrote: >> > >> > >> >> Can you throw light on the demise of the "unix shell"? >> > >> > Demise?! :-) >> >> I have to agree with Jeff: the only places I have really seen the shell >> vanish it has been moving — albeit painful

Re: [SLUG] 40 Years of Unix

On Sunday 23 August 2009 10:00:05 slug-requ...@slug.org.au wrote: > > > > > >> Can you throw light on the demise of the "unix shell"? > > > > Demise?! :-) > > I have to agree with Jeff: the only places I have really seen the shell > vanish it has been moving — albeit painfully slowly at times — to

Re: [SLUG] BBC News: 40 Years of Unix

Have major problems with Firefox 3.5 myself - LinuxMint 7 (32 bit). As per an earlier post I copied over all of my ./mozilla folder and got Ffox 3.5 to see the profile, plugins, addons etc. Problem - none of the plugins/addons run, nor am I able to access their preferences etc. Back to Fire

Re: [SLUG] BBC News: 40 Years of Unix

< Quote who: Amos > > > http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/program/414471 > This is on 32 bit Ubuntu 9.04 with flash-plugin 10.0.32 (I install all > updates on this system). > Has anyone managed to get it to play? I'm running an older FF ver: 3.0.13 on 32 bit 9.04 with the same flash-plugin as yours 10

Re: [SLUG] BBC News: 40 Years of Unix

Another one (care of reddit) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8211355.stm Might have to save some of this stuff and memorise bits of it because it sort of says what I feel. I had a win 2003 small business server (SBS) from my old place of work. I was using it as a windows file server and as

Re: [SLUG] 40 Years of Unix

On Sat, Aug 22, 2009, Daniel Pittman wrote: > > Demise?! :-) > > I have to agree with Jeff: the only places I have really seen the shell vanish > it has been moving ??? albeit painfully slowly at times ??? to being replaced > by a > more powerful programming model, universal scripting. > > For

Re: [SLUG] 40 Years of Unix

On 22/08/09 10:29, Marghanita da Cruz wrote: Can you throw light on the demise of the "unix shell"? Marghanita I'm guessing 'contextually', that you're asking about the demise of the original Thompson shell that shipped with Unix? Since replaced by Bash, Csh et al? D. -- "Never ascribe to