From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Apr 22 6:18:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from freenix.no (atreides.freenix.no [217.68.117.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66FDA37B422 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 06:18:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from morten@freenix.no) Received: (from morten@localhost) by freenix.no (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3MDI9n42932; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 15:18:09 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from morten) Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 15:18:09 +0200 From: "Morten A . Middelthon" To: Kris Kennaway Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Wind River/BSDi stuff again Message-ID: <20010422151809.C42830@freenix.no> References: <20010420142314.B22297@freenix.no> <20010420133319.A94082@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010420133319.A94082@xor.obsecurity.org>; from kris@obsecurity.org on Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 01:33:19PM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE X-Warning: So cunning you could brush your teeth with it. Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 01:33:19PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 02:23:14PM +0200, Morten A . Middelthon wrote: > > > > I don't know if this has already been mentioned in any of the previous threads > > on -advocacy or -chat, so please excuse me if that's the case. > > > > Anyway, just found out that BSDi (or the part which will be called iXsystems, > > iirc) will close down it's operations in Europe. So far I've bought 6 1U boxes > > preloaded with FreeBSD from the Stockholm-office for my company, and we are > > very satisfied with them. But, if I want to contintue using iXtreme servers > > I'd have to order them directly from USA, and that's not a practical > > alternative, imho. Afaik BSDi was only vendor located in Scandinavia which > > sold FreeBSD-servers, so I think it's very sad to see them shut down like > > this. > > You probably should be voicing this concern to iXsystems, for what > little good it may do. I've already talked with the people who used to work for BSDi in Stockholm, and they are, obviously, not too happy with the situation. I think they have voiced their concerns properly. -- Morten A. Middelthon Freenix Norge http://www.freenix.no/ -- Time is an illusion; lunchtime, doubly so. -- Ford Prefect To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Apr 22 11:32:55 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ABC4037B424 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:32:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 21886 invoked by uid 100); 22 Apr 2001 18:32:49 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15075.9169.86805.82242@guru.mired.org> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 13:32:49 -0500 To: chat@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Reply-To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Click on to meet someone you Click with In-Reply-To: <200104221816.UAA72149@lurza.secnetix.de> References: <20010422120354.B26375@cec.wustl.edu> <200104221816.UAA72149@lurza.secnetix.de> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [Replies have been pointed to -chat, as this does *not* belong on -stable!] Oliver Fromme types: > Andrew Hesford wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:54:55AM -0500, Chris Byrnes wrote: > > > Perhaps it's time to make the mailing lists moderated, or unpostable > > > unless you're subscribed? > > Yes, I see more crap. And I agree we should make the list unpostable to > > those who aren't subscribed. > NO! I'm not subscribed (I'm reading the list via a news > gateway, because this is much more convenient), but I'd > still like to be able to post to it. Quite right. Questions clearly can't be so filtered. People are already having problems with the anti-spam measures on the lists; making it worse isn't a good idea. > > Being a young, firey student with time to kill, I usually send harsh > > letters back, occassionally with large binary attachments. > Very bad idea. In most cases you'll hit the wrong one. > [ ... ] That's why you don't mailbomb or otherwise harass anyone about spam. Theren's generally no good way to locate the offending mailbox. > The best thing is simply to ignore that stuff, and use > filters. I disagree. I send politely worded complaints, along with the complete text of the spam, to the administrators of any machines mentioned in body at web address or email addresses. Ditto for the machine mentioned on the first Received line added by one of my machines. If 10% of the people who got a spam followed the above practice, I think most ISPs would do everything in their power to make sure that nobody used their machines for spam or any such thing. It would be far more effective than the RBL and similar nonsense. All I have to do is get MS to add a "complain about spam" button to OutLook. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Apr 22 18:51:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from grumpy.dyndns.org (user-24-214-76-217.knology.net [24.214.76.217]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3D2637B423 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 18:51:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dkelly@grumpy.dyndns.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grumpy.dyndns.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3N1l9336314; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:47:10 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dkelly@grumpy.dyndns.org) Message-Id: <200104230147.f3N1l9336314@grumpy.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Barry Lustig Cc: Wes Peters , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 4.3-RC5 now on ftp.freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Message from Barry Lustig of "Sun, 22 Apr 2001 19:57:11 EDT." <3AE36FD7.E07D2EC6@lustig.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:47:09 -0500 From: David Kelly Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org moved to -chat. Barry Lustig writes: > Wes Peters wrote: > > > > The safest place in the USA, seismically speaking, is northwestern > > Missouri. I don't know about their electricity politics, though, > > which is rather important, too. > > > > Hmm, Missouri doesn't sound all that safe to me. > http://wwwneic.cr.usgs.gov/neis/states/missouri/missouri_history.html > > When the southeast goes, it seems to take a whole lot of area with it. Quakes documented in the above URL are in the South East corner of the state and the origial statement enumerated the North West corner where my mother was raised and I have many fond memories of visiting Grandmother and Grandfather. Dirt in that part of the state is coal black when wet. I used to be criticized by my kindergarden teacher for using my black crayon to color the ground. That part of the country harbors no fondness for their electric utility service, nor their telephone service. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Apr 22 21:31:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from firehouse.net (rdu26-60-051.nc.rr.com [66.26.60.51]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 02DDE37B423 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:31:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from abc@firehouse.net) Received: (qmail 78753 invoked by uid 1000); 23 Apr 2001 04:35:41 -0000 Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 00:35:41 -0400 From: Alan Clegg To: datazone@airmail.net Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Connection attempts Message-ID: <20010423003541.B78446@diskfarm.firehouse.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: ; from datazone@airmail.net on Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:25:00PM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Unless the network is lying to me again, datazone@airmail.net said: > > all those darn linux 6.2 system. They should be replaced with rocks. > > I did not know that there was a "linux 6.2" Didn't you hear? Linux == RedHat AlanC -- perl -le '$_="6110>374086;2064208213:90<307;55";tr[0->][ LEOR\!AUBGNSTY];print' echo "6110>374086;2064208213:90<307;55" | tr '0->' ' LEOR\!AUBGNSTY' alan@clegg.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Apr 22 21:34:30 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from threat.tjhsst.edu (threat.tjhsst.edu [198.38.16.9]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F6137B423 for ; Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:34:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from abarros@threat.tjhsst.edu) Received: (from abarros@localhost) by threat.tjhsst.edu (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f3N4YJF31256; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 00:34:19 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 00:34:19 -0400 From: Andrew Barros To: Alan Clegg Cc: datazone@airmail.net, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Connection attempts Message-ID: <20010423003419.D24869@tjhsst.edu> References: <20010423003541.B78446@diskfarm.firehouse.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8nsIa27JVQLqB7/C" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010423003541.B78446@diskfarm.firehouse.net>; from alan@clegg.com on Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 12:35:41AM -0400 X-Operating-System: Linux threat.tjhsst.edu 2.2.17 X-I-Graduate-In: 57.2020486111111 days Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --8nsIa27JVQLqB7/C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yeah, and only redhat boxes get 0wned. I mean, never in the history=20 of linux has a slackware gotten owned. (that almost made _me_ gag) -ajb On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 12:35:41AM -0400, Alan Clegg wrote: ->Unless the network is lying to me again, datazone@airmail.net said:=20 -> ->> > all those darn linux 6.2 system. They should be replaced with rocks. ->>=20 ->> I did not know that there was a "linux 6.2" -> ->Didn't you hear? Linux =3D=3D RedHat -> ->AlanC ->--=20 ->perl -le '$_=3D"6110>374086;2064208213:90<307;55";tr[0->][ LEOR\!AUBGNSTY= ];print' -> echo "6110>374086;2064208213:90<307;55" | tr '0->' ' LEOR\!AUBGNSTY' -> alan@clegg.com -> ->To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org ->with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message ---end quoted text--- --=20 Andrew Barros PGP Key Fingerprint: D3B8 0800 C45A 143E 5CF0 E112 0A1B AB36 B655 1FB8 --8nsIa27JVQLqB7/C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE647DLChurNrZVH7gRArneAJ94cbrVytf8d9SKeUhgkmOC6/9bLQCgguhc 6AmgzNcaWqDOuEgjZTkAyYU= =dlek -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --8nsIa27JVQLqB7/C-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 0:21:12 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01CD437B423 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 00:21:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=softweyr.com ident=49cba4ff19d118c473d41af6dce1d713) by softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14raeb-00023g-00; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 01:21:01 -0600 Message-ID: <3AE3D7DD.DFD03753@softweyr.com> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 01:21:01 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Kelly Cc: Barry Lustig , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 4.3-RC5 now on ftp.freebsd.org References: <200104230147.f3N1l9336314@grumpy.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org David Kelly wrote: > > moved to -chat. > > Barry Lustig writes: > > Wes Peters wrote: > > > > > > The safest place in the USA, seismically speaking, is northwestern > > > Missouri. I don't know about their electricity politics, though, > > > which is rather important, too. > > > > > > > Hmm, Missouri doesn't sound all that safe to me. > > http://wwwneic.cr.usgs.gov/neis/states/missouri/missouri_history.html > > > > When the southeast goes, it seems to take a whole lot of area with it. > > Quakes documented in the above URL are in the South East corner of the > state and the origial statement enumerated the North West corner where > my mother was raised and I have many fond memories of visiting > Grandmother and Grandfather. There have been exactly two earthquakes in northwestern Missouri in recorded history, currently almost 200 years in that area. Compare that to the average 500 earthquakes per year near where I live. http://www.seis.utah.edu/HTML/UtahsEarthquakeThreat2.html Question 7. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 6:20:41 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk (probity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FEBD37B423 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 06:20:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97] ident=root) by probity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #4) id 14rgGc-0000Jl-00 for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:20:38 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3NDKa517998 for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:20:36 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:20:33 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: credits in 4.4BSD books missing someone? Message-ID: <20010423142032.B17916@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I just got Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD operating system. Since the 4.x branch was the foundation of TCP/IP networking, shouldn't Al Gore be in the credits somewhere? ;) jm -- ------------------------------------------- Jonathon McKitrick -- jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org A fool repeats his mistakes. A smart man learns from his mistakes. A genius learns from the mistakes of others. ------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 7:17:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from gate.lustig.com (lustig.ne.mediaone.net [24.91.125.166]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD04637B424 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 07:17:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from barry@lustig.com) Received: (qmail 19092 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2001 14:17:43 -0000 Received: from gate.lustig.com (HELO lustig.com) (barry@205.246.2.242) by gate.lustig.com with SMTP; 23 Apr 2001 14:17:43 -0000 Message-ID: <3AE43987.D43FF244@lustig.com> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:17:43 -0400 From: Barry Lustig Organization: Barry Lustig & Associates, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Kelly Cc: Wes Peters , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD 4.3-RC5 now on ftp.freebsd.org References: <200104230147.f3N1l9336314@grumpy.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org It also mentioned that chimneys fell over as far away as Cincinnati Ohio. David Kelly wrote: > > moved to -chat. > > Barry Lustig writes: > > Wes Peters wrote: > > > > > > The safest place in the USA, seismically speaking, is northwestern > > > Missouri. I don't know about their electricity politics, though, > > > which is rather important, too. > > > > > > > Hmm, Missouri doesn't sound all that safe to me. > > http://wwwneic.cr.usgs.gov/neis/states/missouri/missouri_history.html > > > > When the southeast goes, it seems to take a whole lot of area with it. > > Quakes documented in the above URL are in the South East corner of the > state and the origial statement enumerated the North West corner where > my mother was raised and I have many fond memories of visiting > Grandmother and Grandfather. > > Dirt in that part of the state is coal black when wet. I used to be > criticized by my kindergarden teacher for using my black crayon to > color the ground. > > That part of the country harbors no fondness for their electric utility > service, nor their telephone service. > > -- > David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net > ===================================================================== > The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its > capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 9:28:12 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8388237B422; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:28:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.123.131]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA18485; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:27:56 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA29397; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:27:54 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate) From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15076.22538.844522.228526@nomad.yogotech.com> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 10:27:54 -0600 (MDT) To: Wes Peters Cc: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Connectivity issues (was Re: FreeBSD 4.3-RC5 now on ftp.freebsd.org) In-Reply-To: <3AE34381.C0F45B4B@softweyr.com> References: <3AE0F244.31D9B307@cvzoom.net> <83033.987782742@critter> <20010421001450.C77032@skriver.dk> <20010420152946.O19393@nexus.root.com> <200104211412.f3LECe859107@harmony.village.org> <3AE34381.C0F45B4B@softweyr.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [ Moved to -chat ] Wes Peters writes: > > : That settles it: move the machine to Kansas or Nebraska. 8-) > > > > Actaully, Colorado would have better connectivity than either Kansas > > or Nebraska :-) > > The safest place in the USA, seismically speaking, is northwestern > Missouri. I don't know about their electricity politics, though, > which is rather important, too. Actually, I would have thought that Wisconsin or Minnesota would be more safe, because of the North American granite plate they're sitting on. There's no way an earthquate would shake it, since it would be shaking alot of North America. :) Flooding on the other hand seems to be a problem. :) :) Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 9:34:41 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.opus.co.tt (mail.opus.co.tt [196.3.136.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DADB37B422 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:34:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dchulhan@uwi.tt) Received: from openaccess03 (unverified [196.3.136.186]) by mail.opus.co.tt (Vircom SMTPRS 4.3.183) with SMTP id for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:33:53 -0400 Message-ID: <000d01c0cc12$970552c0$100101c8@openaccess03> From: "Dale Chulhan - Work" To: Subject: Unanswered post(s) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:29:35 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello I asked a very serious question about a FreeBSD based version of TiVo and no one replied ... Any one care to comment? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 12:30:13 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp05.primenet.com (smtp05.primenet.com [206.165.6.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B7737B422 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:30:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA09978; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:29:56 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAA2VaO_q; Mon Apr 23 12:25:41 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA07119; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 12:26:04 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104231926.MAA07119@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux To: mwm@mired.org (Mike Meyer) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:25:55 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), dan@langille.org, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15073.19371.99471.534039@guru.mired.org> from "Mike Meyer" at Apr 21, 2001 03:58:19 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > Yup. Their lack of vision is going to drive them bankrupt. > > How would a "visionary company" fund R&D, IYHO? > > Depends on the software they're trying to produce. I've already > described a number of different business models for recovering R&D > costs, including selling services and improving staff efficiency. > > Focusing on one particular business model - whether it's > productization or improved efficiency - leads to idiotic claims like > "The GPL will reduce programmers to penury." I don't see a lot of good GPL'ed code being funded out there. I see a _lot_ of BSD based businesses springing up. Further, I see a lot of good R&D in BSD based systems, much of which ends up being given back to the community, since the people doing the work can distinguish "tactical" and "strategic". Unfortunately, the GPL model means I _must_ give my source code out, even if it happens to be for something strategic. I think people starting a new company will not start it with GPL'ed code, if they are smart, unless the code they are using happens to be entirely tactical (e.g. Whistle Communications ran SAMBA to provide SMB services, which was an entirely tactical use of the code: no intellectual property to protect, there). I have also seen companies move away from Linux and toward FreeBSD for embedded systems, particularly when there is a proprietary driver or some other performance issue at stake. For example, FreeBSD can run Gigabit networking at speed, but Linux has problems keeping up with 100Mbit in promiscuous mode just doing simple network monitoring. Really, you need to consider your exit strategy when starting a new business. For a Linux based product, the strategy is almost completely limited to IPO, and not acquisition. That's just bad business planning. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 13:44:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 59B6037B423 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:44:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 56219 invoked by uid 100); 23 Apr 2001 20:44:29 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15076.37933.231003.442843@guru.mired.org> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:44:29 -0500 To: Terry Lambert Cc: dan@langille.org, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <200104231926.MAA07119@usr08.primenet.com> References: <15073.19371.99471.534039@guru.mired.org> <200104231926.MAA07119@usr08.primenet.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert types: > > > > Yup. Their lack of vision is going to drive them bankrupt. > > > How would a "visionary company" fund R&D, IYHO? > > Depends on the software they're trying to produce. I've already > > described a number of different business models for recovering R&D > > costs, including selling services and improving staff efficiency. > > Focusing on one particular business model - whether it's > > productization or improved efficiency - leads to idiotic claims like > > "The GPL will reduce programmers to penury." > I don't see a lot of good GPL'ed code being funded out there. The restriction on "good" is another one of those "multitude of sins" type things. Everybody doing Linux development to provide better ISP services (I have the impression that a lot of the BSD development comes from that as well) is funding GPL'ed code. Tivo is as well, but they're about the only company I know of that's obvious about it. Of course, you can simply claim that's not "good" code. > Unfortunately, the GPL model means I _must_ give my source > code out, even if it happens to be for something strategic. That indeed limits the places where you can use that software. In particular, any business model based on selling software is pretty much shot. If you are stuck on making money providing software, that is indeed a heavy restriction. Fortunately for us, real people (i.e. - not us geeks) don't buy software; they buy solutions. Once you shift your focuse from "Gotta make money providing software" to "Gotta make money using software to provide solutions", it isn't nearly so bad. When I first ran into this argument in the late 70s and early 80s - as part of an argument against monopolies in general - I did a bit of research. At that time, companies that produced software to provide as part of a solution, or to improve corporate efficiency, produced more software than was produced by companies planning on selling the software. That doesn't count the software produced by the various governments in the US (state and even local governments also produce software), none of which was ever offered for sale by the government. They produced more software than all the commercial companies combined. Given that something like 80% of the software written was never offered for sale, eliminating all the jobs funded by the sale of software wouldn't make a major impact on programmers. It would make a noticable impact, but probably not as bad as the recent tech stock crash. > Really, you need to consider your exit strategy when starting > a new business. For a Linux based product, the strategy is > almost completely limited to IPO, and not acquisition. That's > just bad business planning. Acquisition seems to have worked for a number of companies doing GPL'ed code. But yes, you do need to consider those things. The question is - is the loss of the potential acquisition $'s worth the up front money required to provide the functionality you're getting from GPL'ed code? http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 14:18: 9 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-63-207-60-27.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [63.207.60.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63FC937B422 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:18:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 931F466DF6; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:18:03 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Dale Chulhan - Work Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Unanswered post(s) Message-ID: <20010423141803.D6800@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <000d01c0cc12$970552c0$100101c8@openaccess03> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4zI0WCX1RcnW9Hbu" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <000d01c0cc12$970552c0$100101c8@openaccess03>; from dchulhan@uwi.tt on Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 12:29:35PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --4zI0WCX1RcnW9Hbu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 12:29:35PM -0400, Dale Chulhan - Work wrote: > Hello I asked a very serious question about a FreeBSD based version of Ti= Vo > and no one replied ... >=20 > Any one care to comment? That usually means no-one had anything meaningful to contribute. Kris --4zI0WCX1RcnW9Hbu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE65JwLWry0BWjoQKURAicTAKDhi7tmNydTPPpAiEVUJ1vCV/awYgCeOi3N AmQCNUv0Te/SKNFOpIrojoU= =TpPJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4zI0WCX1RcnW9Hbu-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 14:39:28 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6C40737B645 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:39:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 74992 invoked by uid 100); 23 Apr 2001 21:39:17 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15076.41221.848127.562224@guru.mired.org> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:39:17 -0500 To: Dale Chulhan - Work , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Unanswered post(s) In-Reply-To: <20010423141803.D6800@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <000d01c0cc12$970552c0$100101c8@openaccess03> <20010423141803.D6800@xor.obsecurity.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Kris Kennaway types: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 12:29:35PM -0400, Dale Chulhan - Work wrote: > > Hello I asked a very serious question about a FreeBSD based version of TiVo > > and no one replied ... > > Any one care to comment? > That usually means no-one had anything meaningful to contribute. Yup. There's some discussion of some of the technology involved on -multimedia; you might ask there. If I had an audio card that could record (none of the three I have record properly with pcm, even though they all play back and at least recorded on the 3.x drivers), I might be more interested in it. The tools are all there - fxtv, and web sites for schedule information, and such like things. Most of it seems like straightforward scripting type things given those tools. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 14:44:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp05.primenet.com (smtp05.primenet.com [206.165.6.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA1A037B422 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:44:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr07.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA09895; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:44:21 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr07.primenet.com(206.165.6.207) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAABzaW6b; Mon Apr 23 14:11:08 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr07.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA25946; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:12:04 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104232112.OAA25946@usr07.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux To: mwm@mired.org (Mike Meyer) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 21:12:03 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), trevor@jpj.net (Trevor Johnson), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15073.23492.944973.214417@guru.mired.org> from "Mike Meyer" at Apr 21, 2001 05:07:00 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > > Yes. I can categorically state that your proposed revenue > > > > models require input proportional to the revenue they > > > > generate, whereas proprietary software models have revenue > > > > which is based on market valuation, not on effort input, > > > > and that the difference between those two values is the > > > > amount of money you can show as profit for shareholders, > > > > as well as applying to R&D costs. > > > > > > That adjective "effort" hides a multitude of sins. All the models have > > > a gross profit based on market valuation. In the proprietary software > > > model, the effort input is part of the fixed costs, not the per-unit > > > costs. GPL'd software has the restriction that the per-unit price > > > can't be raised to arbitrary multiples of the per-unit cost, which > > > makes it resemble most other products. > > I don't understand your use of the word "sin" here. > > Basically, that you're changing the definition of the "input" by > restricting it to "effort". That's simply playing word games. In the limit, it's human effort input. I think you are also missing the point, which is that once software has been GPL'ed, it ceases to have economic potential. Software under that license ceases to have a market valuation, since I can demand source code while giving nothing in return. > > Patent and copyright protection also permits the per-unit price to > > be raised to arbitrary multiples of the per-unit cost. > > That should be preceeded by "both", as the issue at hand is really > copyright. The GPL simply prevents authors modifying GPL'ed software > from using the copyright monopoly to advance their goals. Then again, > the GPL is using the copyright monopoly to advance goals of the > original author. Actually, it's using it as an instrumentality of the GNU manifesto, to advance the goals of Richard Stallman, as put forth in that manifesto. > > I think the thing you are apparently refusing to factor in is that > > the labor itself is not based on the per-unit *value*. > > No, I'm aware of that. It's just part of the overhead. You are arguing that it is impossible to build monuments with lasting value. I would argue that the Internet itself is entirely based on code that was capable of being commercialized, and were it not for the fact that companies like Cisco, IBM, etc. were able to commercialize the code, they would have used different code which they _could_ commercialize, and we might be using XNS of IPX instead of IP. The companies were formed to make a profit, and they would not have supported not making a profit. In fact, there are IRS rules regarding demonstration of profitability (2 years out of 5). Further, I would class the work of Jon Postel and other as being lasting monuments _in software_. > > What this means is that a J.D. Salinger may have only 6 good > > Novels in him to be written in his lifetime. The money he > > makes must therefore be 1/6th of the money he requires as his > > total lifetime income, in order to encourage him to write them. > > This has at least three assumptions that you need to prove. One is > that he had no other means of income, as otherwise you've placed the > value to high. I think perhaps you aren't familiar with Salinger's life. He has been a professional writer throughout his adult life. After leaving the army in November of 1945, he really had no other source of income. Even before that, he was a prolific short story author, making hist first sale shortly after turning 21. > Second is that he wouldn't have written them unless he > were paid for them. It was his _profession_. This is the problem with the GNU Manifesto: it claims that people will create for the act itself, and that they need not be paid professionals. In other words, it calls for the death of the professional software engineer. Personally, I would prefer that professional software engineers continue to exist. I would have a lot of trouble trusting GPL'ed avionics code, let alone the code that goes into equipment like a gamma knife or a blood gas monitor. > Harlan Ellison's description of the typical writer > discovering that you can sell your writings - "You go from writing > stories and stuffing the paper into the wall for insulation to writing > stories, selling them and stuffing the money into the wall for > insulation" (roughly - again, my books are pretty much all in story) > tends to indicate that that is false for at least some authors, so may > be false for this one. The point is that not being paid for the work, a great author could only dedicate a portion of their time to the creative act. You are effectively claiming that everything that needs to be written, could be written amatuer hobbiests. Looking at the GPL'ed code in Linux and (much worse) Fetchmail, I pretty much have to say it's generally uninspired, and lacks professional consistency. Some of these arguments can be leveled at FreeBSD code, as well, but a significant fraction of FreeBSD was written by professionals, being paid to write the code. > Finally, assuming those two things are true, > you are assuming the only way of providing that income is via the > copyright monopoly. Actually, I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who penned that part of the U.S. Constitution. The copyright and patent "monopolies" exist because they are the best way we have come up with so far to encourage progress in the useful arts and sciences. If they didn't exist, the U.S. would not be the sole remaining superpower. > > > I can't argue that there are times when GPL'ed code isn't desirable. > > Thank you. > > That doesn't mean that aren't times when it isn't a problem, > either. It exists, and any business plan that doesn't include it isn't > dealing with reality. Business plans that don't deal with reality have > a habit of failing. GPL'ed code is only useful for tactical problems. Strategic code is the value of your business. If you gave it away under the GPL, your software business would lack value. You could argue that the software is ancillary, and that a company should sell widgets, with the software as an add-on. But down that road lies commoditization of your product, since a computer is a computer, and it is the software which makes it brilliant (or useless). If I don't have a monopoly on the software, I don't have a monopoly on the widget business, since a competitor need only buy one of my widgets, and demand the software be given to them. > > This assumes that the person paying for the research is the researcher > > making the decision on the code base. > > > > The researcher makes a decision based on information available > > at the time the decision must be made. > > > > It is _completely unreasonable_ to expect a researcher to know > > all the details of the business operation, in the same way that > > it is _completely unreasonable_ to expect a business person to > > know all the details of the research operation. > > > > You are totally ignoring the concept of seperation of roles. A > > single person simply _can not_ know everything. > > True. But the GPL isn't the only thing that can cause problems like > this. Correct. To succeed in business, you must jetison everything that causes problems like this; so jettisoning the GPL is necessary, but not sufficient. > If some business model is critical to funding the research, then > it becomes part of the research problem. It's the buinsess person's > responsibility to see that the researcher has all the information > relevant to solving the problem. If they fail to provide that > information, then they have only themselves to blame if the solution > provided doesn't handle that criteria. Research needs to be portable to products, or business will not fund it. > > > It's clear from RMSs statements that he wants the GPL to cover > > > ASPs. That he wants it to is a pretty good indication that it > > > doesn't. If I were IBMs lawyers and knew that he wanted that, I'd > > > recommend against a business plan that depended on it not covering > > > that case as well, as that minimizes the risk of being shown to be > > > wrong. > > > > The problem with that is the "or later version" clause in the > > license. RMS can come out with a version 3.0 of the license > > which changes the terms out from under you. > > That only applies if the copyright owner allows it. Without some form > of warranty that the GPL will never be changed to something > restrictive, that would be a pretty silly thing to do. Of course, if > the FSF is the copyright holder, they would naturally do that. And > they are asking people to assign copyright to the FSF... Yes. This is really a back-handed way for them to state that the GPL is fine for you, but for them, they require assignment of rights. > > So do I. So I weigh the costs of extending OpenOffice (really, > > writing the thing, since it's so inferior to the Microsoft > > equivalents), and I find that it costs me significantly less to > > just buy the Microsoft software instead. > > Quite right. No single business model is applicable to all > situations. Trying to force fit one business model onto all situations > is an idiotic thing to do. But that's exactly what claims like > "Without copyright, nobody would write software because they couldn't > sell it" do. I never claimed that "nobody would write software": you would still have plenty of unprofessional amatuer programmers. > > It has nothing to do with "the microsoft virus", as you call it: > > it has to do with business not operating in a vacuum. The vast > > majority of the business software space is Microsoft. If software > > doesn't interoperate, then it's just wasted space on the hard > > drive. > > That *is* the Microsoft virus. Their software is designed to make > others have to buy Microsoft products. Virus may not be the > biologically correct phrase, but it's certainly some form of disease > or parasite. Oh well. Whether you like it or not, most people could really care less about what they are running. What they want is to be able to hire someone off the street, and have them immediately be productive with the applicaitons they are expected to use. No one is really trained up on "OpenOffice". Per seat training costs can go as high as $2,500. > I never said it was a business that was guaranteed to work. Then > again, if I had a business that was guaranteed to work, I wouldn't be > wasting time on freebsd mailling lists. > > If you want to quibble at terminology and claim that having to give > away the source for the software in your pretty packaged box means you > aren't a software company, no problem. You now own a company that > generates revenue by writing and selling software products, but it > isn't a software company. That's so wrong. Once I sell one, I can never sell another, unless your base assumption is that people are morons. > > > > > Since many of them do manage to retire as a result of the rewards > > > > > of their efforts, I'd say your final conclusion is false. > > > > "Many" != "vast majority". > > > Right - not everyone working under those conditions manage to retire > > > etc. Most startups fail, so their owners don't get to retire that way > > > either. Your conclusion is still false. > > How so? My conclusion was that there was an exception to your > > conclusion, and therefore your conclusion was false. How is it > > that your conclusion is still right, even after I have demonstrated > > a case where it isn't? > > Because I didn't make a universal claim, you did. You effectively said > "you can't retire under these conditions". A single counterexample > invalidates that. I provided a class of counterexamples, and hence > concluded "you can retire under those conditions." You've shown that > some members of that class don't retire under those conditions, but to > invalidate my claim you need to show that *no* members of the class > can retire under those conditions. How about "You can't retire to Palo Alto, California without several million dollars"; is that better? > That's going to be hard to do when I'm related to members who've > retired under those conditions. It takes ~$171,000 per $1000 of monthly inclome from an annuity intended to last only 25 years. That's $342,000 just to be able to pay rent in any place in the Silicon Valley area, and that _incorrectly_ assumes that rental rates will never go up over that 25 year period, and none of the annuity income goes to taxes. Given the tax bracket that would put you in, you would need double that amount of money to cover rent + taxes. Effectively, I can't retire at my current income level on anything less than ~$3.5 million, and if I want to support COLA and inflation adjustments, we are talking closer to $5M. So perhaps, if everyone retired to a trailer park in the South-Eastern U.S., you could make your retirement claim stick. Perhaps we should add a desirability factor for such a retirement. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 14:51:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.bfm.org (mail.bfm.org [216.127.218.26]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFEF237B42C for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:51:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from adam@whizkidtech.net) Received: from WhizKid (r42.bfm.org [216.127.220.138]) by mail.bfm.org (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-52399U2500L250S0V35) with SMTP id org for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:55:46 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010423165233.00b0b870@mail85.pair.com> X-Sender: whizkid@mail85.pair.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:52:33 -0500 To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: "G. Adam Stanislav" Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010416114300.04d00640@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 13:48 16-04-2001 -0400, Joseph Mallett wrote: >Bill Gates is hardly RMS' opposite. The GPL is every bit infectious and >virus-like as Windows. If anything, they're twins, just don't suggest it >to RMS. Bill Gates, however, would probably have the sense to realise it >was true. Personally, I think of them as two faces of the same coin. As such, they cannot exist without each other. Well, at least RMS could not exist without Bill Gates. It is interesting how a certain NASDAQ TV ad claimed that Bill Gates wrote DOS. Now RMS calls himself a principal developer of Linux. I think he feels justified because Linux relies on GNU so heavily. Linux, after all, is not an OS. It is a kernel. A kernel that runs mostly GNU shells and other GNU software. Makes me wish we did not rely on the GNU C compiler so much: Next RMS will call himself a principal FreeBSD developer! Adam --- Whiz Kid Technomagic - brand name computers for less. See http://www.whizkidtech.net/pcwarehouse/ for details. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 15:30:59 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp03.primenet.com (smtp03.primenet.com [206.165.6.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9544D37B423 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:30:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp03.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA25625; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:30:56 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp03.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAdyaqaY; Mon Apr 23 15:30:52 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA11243; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 15:31:23 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104232231.PAA11243@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Connectivity issues (was Re: FreeBSD 4.3-RC5 now on ftp.freebsd.org) To: nate@yogotech.com Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 22:31:23 +0000 (GMT) Cc: wes@softweyr.com (Wes Peters), chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15076.22538.844522.228526@nomad.yogotech.com> from "Nate Williams" at Apr 23, 2001 10:27:54 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > : That settles it: move the machine to Kansas or Nebraska. 8-) > > > > > > Actaully, Colorado would have better connectivity than either Kansas > > > or Nebraska :-) > > > > The safest place in the USA, seismically speaking, is northwestern > > Missouri. I don't know about their electricity politics, though, > > which is rather important, too. > > Actually, I would have thought that Wisconsin or Minnesota would be more > safe, because of the North American granite plate they're sitting on. > There's no way an earthquate would shake it, since it would be shaking > alot of North America. :) > > Flooding on the other hand seems to be a problem. :) :) Scottsdale, Arizona is statistically safer. That's why the Alcor cryonics facility is located there. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 16: 5:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0D20137B422 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:05:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 76962 invoked by uid 100); 23 Apr 2001 23:05:24 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15076.46388.474577.263232@guru.mired.org> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:05:24 -0500 To: Terry Lambert Cc: trevor@jpj.net (Trevor Johnson), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <200104232112.OAA25946@usr07.primenet.com> References: <15073.23492.944973.214417@guru.mired.org> <200104232112.OAA25946@usr07.primenet.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert types: > > > > > Yes. I can categorically state that your proposed revenue > > > > > models require input proportional to the revenue they > > > > > generate, whereas proprietary software models have revenue > > > > > which is based on market valuation, not on effort input, > > > > > and that the difference between those two values is the > > > > > amount of money you can show as profit for shareholders, > > > > > as well as applying to R&D costs. > > > > > > > > That adjective "effort" hides a multitude of sins. All the models have > > > > a gross profit based on market valuation. In the proprietary software > > > > model, the effort input is part of the fixed costs, not the per-unit > > > > costs. GPL'd software has the restriction that the per-unit price > > > > can't be raised to arbitrary multiples of the per-unit cost, which > > > > makes it resemble most other products. > > > I don't understand your use of the word "sin" here. > > Basically, that you're changing the definition of the "input" by > > restricting it to "effort". That's simply playing word games. > In the limit, it's human effort input. I think you are also > missing the point, which is that once software has been GPL'ed, > it ceases to have economic potential. Software under that > license ceases to have a market valuation, since I can demand > source code while giving nothing in return. Assuming we mean the same thing by the terms, such software indeed has zero market valuation. However, it can still have an economic potential that justifies the funding the development. To use a classic example, a program that allows me to accurately predict whether or not a super- or hyper-sonic airframe will explode at speed has a potential savings of several times the cost of building a wind tunnel capable of determining the same thing, as the cost of rebuilding the wind tunnel after getting a "yes" answer is most of the cost of constructing it in the first place. > > > Patent and copyright protection also permits the per-unit price to > > > be raised to arbitrary multiples of the per-unit cost. > > That should be preceeded by "both", as the issue at hand is really > > copyright. The GPL simply prevents authors modifying GPL'ed software > > from using the copyright monopoly to advance their goals. Then again, > > the GPL is using the copyright monopoly to advance goals of the > > original author. > Actually, it's using it as an instrumentality of the GNU manifesto, > to advance the goals of Richard Stallman, as put forth in that > manifesto. Only if you are foolish enough to believe that everyone who puts their software under the GPL does so without realizing that it means the code can no longer be sold commercially for profit. If you were watching free software in the late 70s and early 80s, you saw a *lot* of software come out either with licenses that said "I own this code. You can do whatever you want with it so long as you don't make money" or "This code is in the public domain. Not for commercial use" (ok, anyone who does that could probably be easily duped, but they still want what the GPL provides). The GPL succeeds not because authors of free software are a bunch of idiots that RMS has duped, but because it provides exactly what those authors want with the authority of having been written by an expert on legal matters. Personally, I figure if I've gotten the compensation I want for a program and am giving it away, then anyone who can use it commercially has my blessing - so long as I get credit for it. I usually ask for a copy of the product as lagniappe. > > > I think the thing you are apparently refusing to factor in is that > > > the labor itself is not based on the per-unit *value*. > > No, I'm aware of that. It's just part of the overhead. > You are arguing that it is impossible to build monuments with > lasting value. I would argue that the Internet itself is > entirely based on code that was capable of being commercialized, > and were it not for the fact that companies like Cisco, IBM, > etc. were able to commercialize the code, they would have used > different code which they _could_ commercialize, and we might > be using XNS of IPX instead of IP. No, I'm arguing that you can build a lasting monument without having to have the right to sell the monument. The R&D for the code that you named above was all done without being able to sell it at the end as a requirement. That it could then be used as you described is certainly an advantage. You might also note that the existence of free competition didn't stop any of those companies from developing a product that used the code in question. In the case of Cisco, the code being GPL'ed might not have meant anything to them. They sell routers, not software. The R&D for a router includes some software that they might have to surrender to the competition, but it's not clear that this provides any advantage to the competition - unless they're going to install the software on routers they bought from Cisco, in which case they're just doing marketing for Cisco. Cisco is a perfect example of focusing on selling solutions - in this case, high-quality routers - instead of selling software. > > > What this means is that a J.D. Salinger may have only 6 good > > > Novels in him to be written in his lifetime. The money he > > > makes must therefore be 1/6th of the money he requires as his > > > total lifetime income, in order to encourage him to write them. > > > > This has at least three assumptions that you need to prove. One is > > that he had no other means of income, as otherwise you've placed the > > value to high. > > I think perhaps you aren't familiar with Salinger's life. He has > been a professional writer throughout his adult life. After > leaving the army in November of 1945, he really had no other source > of income. Even before that, he was a prolific short story author, > making hist first sale shortly after turning 21. In other words, he had other income before he started wriging, so you've placed the value to high. > > Second is that he wouldn't have written them unless he > > were paid for them. > It was his _profession_. This is the problem with the GNU > Manifesto: it claims that people will create for the act itself, > and that they need not be paid professionals. In other words, > it calls for the death of the professional software engineer. Well, the GNU Manifesto is as wrong as anyone who claims that the only way you get software developed professionally is if you can get a monopoly on the sale of the software. > > Harlan Ellison's description of the typical writer > > discovering that you can sell your writings - "You go from writing > > stories and stuffing the paper into the wall for insulation to writing > > stories, selling them and stuffing the money into the wall for > > insulation" (roughly - again, my books are pretty much all in story) > > tends to indicate that that is false for at least some authors, so may > > be false for this one. > The point is that not being paid for the work, a great author > could only dedicate a portion of their time to the creative > act. You are effectively claiming that everything that needs > to be written, could be written amatuer hobbiests. No, I'm claiming there are other ways to pay professionals authors than by providing them a monopoly on the sale of their product. I can't really speak to writing fiction, as I'm not familiar with the field. Last time I checked, most software was *not* written so it could be sold under that monopoly, but was written for use in a product (like Cisco) or for use inhouse. > Looking at > the GPL'ed code in Linux and (much worse) Fetchmail, I pretty > much have to say it's generally uninspired, and lacks professional > consistency. Some of these arguments can be leveled at FreeBSD > code, as well, but a significant fraction of FreeBSD was written > by professionals, being paid to write the code. Gee, and then they gave the code away. What happened to giving code away resulting in unprofessional code, or driving software authors to penury? > > Finally, assuming those two things are true, > > you are assuming the only way of providing that income is via the > > copyright monopoly. > Actually, I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who penned that part > of the U.S. Constitution. > > The copyright and patent "monopolies" exist because they are the > best way we have come up with so far to encourage progress in > the useful arts and sciences. New Zealand did a study in the mid 70s about patent issues. Their conclusion was that patent protection did nothing to encourage progress in the useful arts and sciences, and actually had a negative impact on their economy. The impact was so small that the cost of eliminating the patent protection wouldn't be recovered for centuries, so they recommended leaving it in place anyway. My studies of copyright issue and software indicate pretty much the same thing, but they aren't so formal. > If they didn't exist, the U.S. would not be the sole remaining > superpower. True - others countries would have been able to use that technology to improve their own economies, in some cases resulting in countries that are currently fourth world poverties competing with us as superpowers. > > > > I can't argue that there are times when GPL'ed code isn't desirable. > > > Thank you. > > That doesn't mean that aren't times when it isn't a problem, > > either. It exists, and any business plan that doesn't include it isn't > > dealing with reality. Business plans that don't deal with reality have > > a habit of failing. > GPL'ed code is only useful for tactical problems. Strategic > code is the value of your business. If you gave it away under > the GPL, your software business would lack value. That's only true if your business is selling software. If you are in the business of selling solutions - which is, after all, what people buy - then it's a strategic part of your business. Witness TiVo. > You could argue that the software is ancillary, and that a > company should sell widgets, with the software as an add-on. > But down that road lies commoditization of your product, > since a computer is a computer, and it is the software which > makes it brilliant (or useless). You can't make money as a software company without commoditization of your product. If the software is the only thing in the product in question, you also have to have a monopoly on the software. > If I don't have a monopoly on the software, I don't have a > monopoly on the widget business, since a competitor need only > buy one of my widgets, and demand the software be given to them. So long as they have to buy the widgets from you in the first place, it doesn't matter. You're still selling widgets, and will probably be more than happy to give them a bulk discount. > > > This assumes that the person paying for the research is the researcher > > > making the decision on the code base. > > > > > > The researcher makes a decision based on information available > > > at the time the decision must be made. > > > > > > It is _completely unreasonable_ to expect a researcher to know > > > all the details of the business operation, in the same way that > > > it is _completely unreasonable_ to expect a business person to > > > know all the details of the research operation. > > > > > > You are totally ignoring the concept of seperation of roles. A > > > single person simply _can not_ know everything. > > > > True. But the GPL isn't the only thing that can cause problems like > > this. > > Correct. To succeed in business, you must jetison everything > that causes problems like this; so jettisoning the GPL is > necessary, but not sufficient. Nobody is forcing any business to use the GPL. Of course, competing with free software can be a problem. > > If some business model is critical to funding the research, then > > it becomes part of the research problem. It's the buinsess person's > > responsibility to see that the researcher has all the information > > relevant to solving the problem. If they fail to provide that > > information, then they have only themselves to blame if the solution > > provided doesn't handle that criteria. > > Research needs to be portable to products, or business will not > fund it. Yup. Of course, being portable to products doesn't mean you need to be able to sell the products to make a profit. If it does, then your statement is false, as business will fund research that shows a promise of seriously reducing the production costs. > > > So do I. So I weigh the costs of extending OpenOffice (really, > > > writing the thing, since it's so inferior to the Microsoft > > > equivalents), and I find that it costs me significantly less to > > > just buy the Microsoft software instead. > > Quite right. No single business model is applicable to all > > situations. Trying to force fit one business model onto all situations > > is an idiotic thing to do. But that's exactly what claims like > > "Without copyright, nobody would write software because they couldn't > > sell it" do. > I never claimed that "nobody would write software": you would > still have plenty of unprofessional amatuer programmers. So you're claiming that nobody would write software professionally because they couldn't sell it. You're still trying to force fit one business model on all situations, which is an idiotic thing to do. If a company has to have professional-quality software to put in their product, they'll write it. Even if they have to give the results away to their competition. Otherwise, they don't have a product. > > > It has nothing to do with "the microsoft virus", as you call it: > > > it has to do with business not operating in a vacuum. The vast > > > majority of the business software space is Microsoft. If software > > > doesn't interoperate, then it's just wasted space on the hard > > > drive. > > That *is* the Microsoft virus. Their software is designed to make > > others have to buy Microsoft products. Virus may not be the > > biologically correct phrase, but it's certainly some form of disease > > or parasite. > Oh well. Whether you like it or not, most people could really > care less about what they are running. What they want is to be > able to hire someone off the street, and have them immediately > be productive with the applicaitons they are expected to use. No > one is really trained up on "OpenOffice". Per seat training > costs can go as high as $2,500. Yup - the MicroSoft virus has been *much* more successful than the GPL. > > I never said it was a business that was guaranteed to work. Then > > again, if I had a business that was guaranteed to work, I wouldn't be > > wasting time on freebsd mailling lists. > > > > If you want to quibble at terminology and claim that having to give > > away the source for the software in your pretty packaged box means you > > aren't a software company, no problem. You now own a company that > > generates revenue by writing and selling software products, but it > > isn't a software company. > That's so wrong. Once I sell one, I can never sell another, unless > your base assumption is that people are morons. No, the base assumption is that people actually see value in things like a properly printed manual, support and other things you may well be able to put in the box besides software. > > > > > > Since many of them do manage to retire as a result of the rewards > > > > > > of their efforts, I'd say your final conclusion is false. > > > > > "Many" != "vast majority". > > > > Right - not everyone working under those conditions manage to retire > > > > etc. Most startups fail, so their owners don't get to retire that way > > > > either. Your conclusion is still false. > > > How so? My conclusion was that there was an exception to your > > > conclusion, and therefore your conclusion was false. How is it > > > that your conclusion is still right, even after I have demonstrated > > > a case where it isn't? > > > > Because I didn't make a universal claim, you did. You effectively said > > "you can't retire under these conditions". A single counterexample > > invalidates that. I provided a class of counterexamples, and hence > > concluded "you can retire under those conditions." You've shown that > > some members of that class don't retire under those conditions, but to > > invalidate my claim you need to show that *no* members of the class > > can retire under those conditions. > How about "You can't retire to Palo Alto, California without several > million dollars"; is that better? I'd certainly agree to that. Last time I priced empty lots there, I couldn't find one for less than a quarter of a million dollars. Of course, most of the people in the US can't afford to live there anyway, so the point is moot for them. > Effectively, I can't retire at my current income level on anything > less than ~$3.5 million, and if I want to support COLA and inflation > adjustments, we are talking closer to $5M. Building that much savings over the course of 10 to 20 years at the income levels required to live in Palo Alto should be pretty straightforward. When I still planned on living in the Bay Area, my retiremenat plan was targeted at about US$4M in 20 years. All of it based on my paltry consulting fees and my wife's wage-slave salary. Those two together did give us a household income larger than 95% of the households in the US according to the '90 census data, which is pretty much required to live in a five bedroom house in Palo Alto, much less target that kind of retirement fund. Frankly, I'd rather have that kind of retirement plan than one that depended on creating a successful software company. While the potential payout isn't as large, the chances of reaching my goals are better. If you're currently living beyond your means and hoping that your software business will rescue you - you're retirement planning pretty much sucks. I'd rate it as slightly better than buying lottery tickets. > So perhaps, if everyone retired to a trailer park in the > South-Eastern U.S., you could make your retirement claim stick. > Perhaps we should add a desirability factor for such a retirement. Well, my parents - with that union pension and a bit of intelligence - do spend a lot of time in trailers, as they travel about half the year. But they own a couple of acres as well as their house, and generate extra retirement income by selling the right to grow various crops on part of it or extract oil from other it. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 16: 7:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E22D837B422 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:07:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 77077 invoked by uid 100); 23 Apr 2001 23:07:42 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15076.46526.386033.605782@guru.mired.org> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:07:42 -0500 To: "G. Adam Stanislav" Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20010423165233.00b0b870@mail85.pair.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010416114300.04d00640@localhost> <3.0.6.32.20010423165233.00b0b870@mail85.pair.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org G. Adam Stanislav types: > At 13:48 16-04-2001 -0400, Joseph Mallett wrote: > >Bill Gates is hardly RMS' opposite. The GPL is every bit infectious and > >virus-like as Windows. If anything, they're twins, just don't suggest it > >to RMS. Bill Gates, however, would probably have the sense to realise it > >was true. > Personally, I think of them as two faces of the same coin. As such, > they cannot exist without each other. Well, at least RMS could not > exist without Bill Gates. That's about how I feel about it. Both are seeking to turn software into a commodity distributed under their control. > Makes me wish we did not rely on the GNU C compiler so much: Next RMS > will call himself a principal FreeBSD developer! I believe he did do a lot of work on the C compiler, so he has contributed a lot to FreeBSD. As for using another C compiler - did any of the other free compilers survive to this era sans the GPL? http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 16:12:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.unixathome.org (ns1.unixathome.org [203.79.82.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843F537B423 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:12:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Received: from xeon (xeon.int.nz.freebsd.org [192.168.0.18]) by ns1.unixathome.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3NNC7m93570; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 11:12:07 +1200 (NZST) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 11:12:07 +1200 (NZST) From: Dan Langille X-X-Sender: To: Dale Chulhan - Work Cc: Subject: Re: Unanswered post(s) In-Reply-To: <000d01c0cc12$970552c0$100101c8@openaccess03> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Dale Chulhan - Work wrote: > Hello I asked a very serious question about a FreeBSD based version of TiVo > and no one replied ... > > Any one care to comment? If you don't get an answer, it means nobody had anything to say. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 18:34:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp05.primenet.com (smtp05.primenet.com [206.165.6.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 369D037B422 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:34:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA12493; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:34:42 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAdPaOuy; Mon Apr 23 18:34:35 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA14612; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 18:35:09 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104240135.SAA14612@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Unanswered post(s) To: dchulhan@uwi.tt (Dale Chulhan - Work) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 01:35:08 +0000 (GMT) Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <000d01c0cc12$970552c0$100101c8@openaccess03> from "Dale Chulhan - Work" at Apr 23, 2001 12:29:35 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Hello I asked a very serious question about a FreeBSD based > version of TiVo and no one replied ... > > Any one care to comment? It's already been done by TiVo and Replay TV. I guess the question to your non-answer is that if it has already been done, why would you want to do it over again, if it's going to cost you more than a TiVo or Replay TV box, and the only difference is that it's BSD? If you want to start an Open Source project to do the deed, start by providing working code that basically does some of what you want to do. Working code is what it takes to start an Open Source project. I think that you might find yourself in the same boat as the DECSS folks, the first time someone makes some content available, like a sports game to a blacked out area. Personally, I don't think it's an interesting thing to do; the DVD playing code is interesting, but is stomped on by the paranoia police. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 23 19: 2:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp10.phx.gblx.net (smtp10.phx.gblx.net [206.165.6.140]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F1EA37B423 for ; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:02:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr08.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp10.phx.gblx.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA116840; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:02:45 -0700 Received: from usr08.primenet.com(206.165.6.208) via SMTP by smtp10.phx.gblx.net, id smtpdRE0lia; Mon Apr 23 19:02:42 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr08.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA15065; Mon, 23 Apr 2001 19:03:09 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104240203.TAA15065@usr08.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux To: mwm@mired.org (Mike Meyer) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 02:02:56 +0000 (GMT) Cc: adam@whizkidtech.net (G. Adam Stanislav), freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15076.46526.386033.605782@guru.mired.org> from "Mike Meyer" at Apr 23, 2001 06:07:42 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Makes me wish we did not rely on the GNU C compiler so much: Next RMS > > will call himself a principal FreeBSD developer! > > I believe he did do a lot of work on the C compiler, so he has > contributed a lot to FreeBSD. As for using another C compiler - did > any of the other free compilers survive to this era sans the GPL? TenDRA. No one has really adopted it though. FreeBSD uses a number of gcc-isms, including: foo( int x) { char fum[ x]; ... It is also heavily dependent on linker sets for much of its inherent modularity. Any C++ capable linker that permits automatic construction of pure virtual base classes should be capable of the same sort of thing, so long as the compiler permits escape to assembly. The real technology is in the linker itself, so using the GNU linker would be an option, if the Compaq linker couldn't provide a similar feature directly because it handles static class declaration differently than GNU LD. Intel has been talking about domating their compiler. It makes sense, from the standapoint of producing code that runs most efficiently on their processors, unless other processor manufacturers do the same thing. The Compaq OSF compiler is available in -ports. A FreeBSD kernel built with that compiler for the Alpha would probably be signifcantly faster than one built with GNU tools. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 4:35: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from proxy.tfcc.com (tfcci.com [204.210.226.249]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15FFF37B42C for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:34:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cfuhrman@tfcci.com) Received: (from mail@localhost) by proxy.tfcc.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA32479; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 07:35:01 -0400 X-Authentication-Warning: proxy.tfcc.com: mail set sender to using -f Received: from icestorm.tfcc.com(192.168.4.115) by proxy.tfcc.com via smap (V2.1/2.1a) id xma032448; Tue, 24 Apr 01 07:34:34 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 07:34:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Chris Fuhrman X-X-Sender: To: Brett Glass Cc: Neill Robins , , "Jeremy C. Reed" , Subject: Re: shipping a computer coast to coast In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010419100521.046ad5f0@localhost> Message-ID: Organization: 21st Century Communications MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Howdy, Am catching up on e-mail so my apologies for replying to a 5 day old post. My observation is that if the instructor is paid to, hmmm, "market" certain products and lock people into a Microsoft World, then that's a definite conflict of interest that should be brought up to the Department or the head of the Business school. A good argument is would you like your tuition and taxes paying for Microsoft advertising? Cheers! On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, Brett Glass wrote: > You didn't happen to go to UT Austin, did you? Not long ago, I noticed > that UT's Business School had suddenly started teaching Web design > courses which caused the students to produce Web pages that ONLY worked > with Microsoft Internet Explorer. It turned out that one of their > instructors had been named a "Microsoft Scholar" -- and was being paid > to hawk products and create courses that would lock schools and students > into Microsoft software. > > --Brett > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message > -- Chris Fuhrman | Twenty First Century Communications cfuhrman@tfcci.com | Software Engineer (W) 614-442-1215 x271 | (F) 614-442-5662 | PGP/GPG Public Key Available on Request To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 7:46:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from softweyr.com (bsdconspiracy.net [208.187.122.220]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3973737B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 07:46:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from wes@softweyr.com) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=softweyr.com ident=2c1f9d4d93063f1bb9e7f7df66d48e90) by softweyr.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14s44f-0000qE-00; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:45:53 -0600 Message-ID: <3AE591A1.837CFCA4@softweyr.com> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:45:53 -0600 From: Wes Peters Organization: Softweyr LLC X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12 i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Terry Lambert Cc: nate@yogotech.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Connectivity issues (was Re: FreeBSD 4.3-RC5 now on ftp.freebsd.org) References: <200104232231.PAA11243@usr08.primenet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert wrote: > > > > > : That settles it: move the machine to Kansas or Nebraska. 8-) > > > > > > > > Actaully, Colorado would have better connectivity than either Kansas > > > > or Nebraska :-) > > > > > > The safest place in the USA, seismically speaking, is northwestern > > > Missouri. I don't know about their electricity politics, though, > > > which is rather important, too. > > > > Actually, I would have thought that Wisconsin or Minnesota would be more > > safe, because of the North American granite plate they're sitting on. > > There's no way an earthquate would shake it, since it would be shaking > > alot of North America. :) > > > > Flooding on the other hand seems to be a problem. :) :) > > Scottsdale, Arizona is statistically safer. > > That's why the Alcor cryonics facility is located there. Probably because the really good caves in Missouri are already taken by Budweiser (ha!) and the US Gov't. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 12: 3:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk (probity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 047A237B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:03:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97] ident=root) by probity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #4) id 14s85i-000Owr-00 for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:03:14 +0100 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3OJ3DW44268 for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:03:13 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from jcm) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:03:13 +0100 From: j mckitrick To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: need some design guidance Message-ID: <20010424200313.A44150@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello all, i'm hoping to find some inspiration somewhere in BSD land for a work project. To be general, i need a tool or way of configuring a software package to handle a number of possible configurations of scientific instruments. Here is an illustration: A water system has a central pump, valves, supply and delivery lines. Some of these might need adapters, and there might be custom or specialized components as well. Not to be overlooked are electrical connections. And these can be connected in a near limitless combination. However, useful combinations reduce the figure to a more manageable one. I'm getting long winded. Let's just say lots of components will be connected to each other (physically) and to a control computer (serial, GPIB, TCP/IP) and i need a way to configure and save these properties. Any ideas on where to start? Are there any examples in the BSD tree or on the web somewhere? I'm not sure where to even look. Thanks in advance, jonathon -- ------------------------------------------- Jonathon McKitrick -- jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org A fool repeats his mistakes. A smart man learns from his mistakes. A genius learns from the mistakes of others. ------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 12:12:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from michael.checkpoint.com (michael.checkpoint.com [199.203.73.68]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B8A337B423 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:12:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mellon@pobox.com) Received: from happy.checkpoint.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by michael.checkpoint.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id WAA11105; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:12:02 +0300 (IDT) Received: (from mellon@localhost) by happy.checkpoint.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f3OJCRS10301; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:12:27 +0300 (IDT) (envelope-from mellon@pobox.com) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:12:27 +0300 From: Anatoly Vorobey To: "Thomas M. Sommers" Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux Message-ID: <20010424221227.A10177@happy.checkpoint.com> References: <3ADBACF9.E7E3419@mail.ptd.net> <20010417201150.A60285@happy.checkpoint.com> <3ADCEACD.118161C@mail.ptd.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <3ADCEACD.118161C@mail.ptd.net>; from tms2@mail.ptd.net on Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 09:15:57PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 09:15:57PM -0400, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 10:39:53PM -0400, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > > > On http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html Stallman say, "The BSD developers were inspired to make their work free software by the example of the GNU Project ... ." But > > > on http://www.gnu.org/ he also says, "The GNU Project was launched in 1984 ... ." Since the first Berkeley tape was sent out in 1978, it seems Mr. Stallman has also > > > invented time travel. > > > > The first freely redistributable BSD code was the Networking Release 1, of > > 1989. > > But that was not the first BSD release that was distributed essentially for free, even if only to those who had an AT&T license already. It is not the case, as Stallman > suggests, that the people at Berkeley were keeping their software secret until he came along, and showed them the path of righteousness. Stallman does not suggest that. He suggests that BSD developers were inspired by GNU to make their work *free software*, rather than merely free. He is not talking about cost (nor was Berkeley software distributed for free in terms of cost), he's talking about freedom of use, as he usually does; and Berkeley code was *not* free to redistribute before 1989, so it was not free software. Of course, if you are hell-bent on demonizing Stallman, you can come up with lots of entertaining theories about what he "suggests". But why do that? -- Anatoly Vorobey, mellon@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~mellon/ "Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly" - G.K.Chesterton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 16: 5:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from newgold.net (durham0-128.dsl.gtei.net [4.3.0.128]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 56B0237B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:05:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jmallett@newgold.net) Received: (qmail 5426 invoked by uid 1000); 24 Apr 2001 23:04:00 -0000 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:04:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Joseph Mallett To: Subject: ln(1) manpage Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In situations such as ln(1), where there's a symlink that makes the command perform differently, as is the case with 'link', wouldn't it make sense to move that information to link(1) manpage? Someone doing man ln probably doesn't care about what link does, and view versa, no? They could, however, have it in the '.SH SEE ALSO' section. That's what it's for, yeah? -- [ Joseph Mallett ] [ xMach Core Team xMach: Proactively Unbloated Microkernel BSD ] [ Proud Open/Free/Net/4.4BSD User; C Programmer; Mad ] [ www.xMach.org ] Those who dial will know its meaning: 6545666,555,666,6545666655654 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 16:13:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7E84A37B42C for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:13:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 51946 invoked by uid 100); 24 Apr 2001 23:13:15 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15078.2187.658770.540065@guru.mired.org> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:13:15 -0500 To: Joseph Mallett Cc: Subject: Re: ln(1) manpage In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Joseph Mallett types: > In situations such as ln(1), where there's a symlink that makes the > command perform differently, as is the case with 'link', wouldn't it make > sense to move that information to link(1) manpage? Someone doing man ln > probably doesn't care about what link does, and view versa, no? They > could, however, have it in the '.SH SEE ALSO' section. That's what it's > for, yeah? ln and link are the same command (check the inode numbers). Do you really think we ought to have two man pages for the same command when it's such a simple command? http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 16:15:12 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from newgold.net (durham0-128.dsl.gtei.net [4.3.0.128]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EF0FD37B424 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:14:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jmallett@newgold.net) Received: (qmail 27753 invoked by uid 1000); 24 Apr 2001 23:13:37 -0000 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:13:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Joseph Mallett To: Mike Meyer Cc: Subject: Re: ln(1) manpage In-Reply-To: <15078.2187.658770.540065@guru.mired.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I wasn't necessarily talking about something 'simple' as ln(1), and yes, I know that they're the same command. I was more or less using it as an example, for a general question. -- [ Joseph Mallett ] [ xMach Core Team xMach: Proactively Unbloated Microkernel BSD ] [ Proud Open/Free/Net/4.4BSD User; C Programmer; Mad ] [ www.xMach.org ] Those who dial will know its meaning: 6545666,555,666,6545666655654 On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Mike Meyer wrote: > Joseph Mallett types: > > In situations such as ln(1), where there's a symlink that makes the > > command perform differently, as is the case with 'link', wouldn't it make > > sense to move that information to link(1) manpage? Someone doing man ln > > probably doesn't care about what link does, and view versa, no? They > > could, however, have it in the '.SH SEE ALSO' section. That's what it's > > for, yeah? > > ln and link are the same command (check the inode numbers). Do you > really think we ought to have two man pages for the same command when > it's such a simple command? > > -- > Mike Meyer http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ > Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 18: 1:59 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp-1.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E4837B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:01:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dscheidt@tumbolia.com) Received: from shell-2.enteract.com (shell-2.enteract.com [207.229.143.41]) by smtp-1.enteract.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2C92647E; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:01:45 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:01:45 -0500 (CDT) From: David Scheidt X-Sender: dscheidt@shell-2.enteract.com To: Joseph Mallett Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ln(1) manpage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Joseph Mallett wrote: :In situations such as ln(1), where there's a symlink that makes the :command perform differently, as is the case with 'link', wouldn't it make There's no symlink here. david@tumbolia ~ 501$ ls -li `which ln` `which link` 87315 -r-xr-xr-x 2 root wheel 48544 Jan 21 21:30 /bin/link 87315 -r-xr-xr-x 2 root wheel 48544 Jan 21 21:30 /bin/ln :sense to move that information to link(1) manpage? Someone doing man ln :probably doesn't care about what link does, and view versa, no? They :could, however, have it in the '.SH SEE ALSO' section. That's what it's :for, yeah? It's the same binary. The manual page for a binary is supposed to describe its usage. If its usage changes based on how it's called, that should be documented. I wouldn't know link(1) existed if it weren't documented in the ln(1) man page. (I don't think I've ever used it, so that wouldn't really be a loss.) In some cases -- like tin/rtin(1) -- the correct solution presents itself by reading the usage section. I don't think it makes sense to put the same command in the "SEE ALSO" section -- it's for things like related commands, config files, system and library calls. David -- dscheidt@tumbolia.com Bipedalism is only a fad. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 18:50:27 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.86]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B9DB237B424 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:50:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tms2@mail.ptd.net) Received: (qmail 7388 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2001 01:47:14 -0000 Received: from mail1.ha-net.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([207.44.96.65]) (envelope-sender ) by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 25 Apr 2001 01:47:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 700 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2001 01:50:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([204.186.33.235]) (envelope-sender ) by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 25 Apr 2001 01:50:23 -0000 Message-ID: <3AE62D0A.39B6C58B@mail.ptd.net> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:48:59 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" Organization: None X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux References: <3ADBACF9.E7E3419@mail.ptd.net> <20010417201150.A60285@happy.checkpoint.com> <3ADCEACD.118161C@mail.ptd.net> <20010424221227.A10177@happy.checkpoint.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Anatoly Vorobey wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 09:15:57PM -0400, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 10:39:53PM -0400, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > > > > On http://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.html Stallman say, "The BSD developers were inspired to make their work free software by the example of the GNU Project ... ." But > > > > on http://www.gnu.org/ he also says, "The GNU Project was launched in 1984 ... ." Since the first Berkeley tape was sent out in 1978, it seems Mr. Stallman has also > > > > invented time travel. > > > > > > The first freely redistributable BSD code was the Networking Release 1, of > > > 1989. > > > > But that was not the first BSD release that was distributed essentially for free, even if only to those who had an AT&T license already. It is not the case, as Stallman > > suggests, that the people at Berkeley were keeping their software secret until he came along, and showed them the path of righteousness. > > Stallman does not suggest that. He suggests that BSD developers were inspired > by GNU to make their work *free software*, rather than merely free. He does indeed suggest something like that. I admit that I don't see the difference between free software and free software. > He is > not talking about cost (nor was Berkeley software distributed for free in > terms of cost), he's talking about freedom of use, as he usually does; The cost was not more than the same kind of media and shipping costs that the FSF charges. As for freedom of use, it was and is freer than GNU software. > and > Berkeley code was *not* free to redistribute before 1989, so it was not > free software. But the restrictions were not imposed by UCB. BSD code was as free as it could have been under the circumstances. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 18:52:20 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from corserv.corserv.com (corserv.corserv.com [206.180.159.81]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DCEB37B423 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 18:52:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from klyons@corserv.com) Received: from corserv.com (cancri.corserv.com [206.180.159.84]) by corserv.corserv.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA08152 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:07:44 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from klyons@corserv.com) Message-ID: <3AE62DE2.A7C19D73@corserv.com> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:52:34 -0500 From: Kevin Lyons X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472 (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: 386bsd source CD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org This is a wild shot, but does anyone know where to get the 386bsd source CD, release 1 by Jolitz? I have the "basic source code secrets" kernel book and it would be nice to have the source to experiment with. The book references www.386bsd.org, but it's dead. I've tried comp.unix.386bsd but that also appears inactive. Thanks. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 19: 9:59 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from wantadilla.lemis.com (wantadilla.lemis.com [192.109.197.80]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAD4337B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:09:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grog@lemis.com) Received: by wantadilla.lemis.com (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 27E946ACBC; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:39:54 +0930 (CST) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:39:54 +0930 From: Greg Lehey To: Kevin Lyons Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 386bsd source CD Message-ID: <20010425113954.M60938@wantadilla.lemis.com> References: <3AE62DE2.A7C19D73@corserv.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3AE62DE2.A7C19D73@corserv.com>; from klyons@corserv.com on Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 08:52:34PM -0500 Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia Phone: +61-8-8388-8286 Fax: +61-8-8388-8725 Mobile: +61-418-838-708 WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog X-PGP-Fingerprint: 6B 7B C3 8C 61 CD 54 AF 13 24 52 F8 6D A4 95 EF Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tuesday, 24 April 2001 at 20:52:34 -0500, Kevin Lyons wrote: > This is a wild shot, but does anyone know where to get the 386bsd > source CD, release 1 by Jolitz? I have the "basic source code > secrets" kernel book and it would be nice to have the source to > experiment with. The book references www.386bsd.org, but it's dead. > I've tried comp.unix.386bsd but that also appears inactive. I have a copy. As far as I can tell, I can give you a copy, but it's a lot of stuff. What do you really need? Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 19:13:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from blues.jpj.net (blues.jpj.net [204.97.17.146]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B46CC37B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:13:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from trevor@jpj.net) Received: from localhost (trevor@localhost) by blues.jpj.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3P2DER22513; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:13:14 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:13:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Trevor Johnson To: Kevin Lyons Cc: Subject: Re: 386bsd source CD In-Reply-To: <3AE62DE2.A7C19D73@corserv.com> Message-ID: <20010424220240.E21987-100000@blues.jpj.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > This is a wild shot, but does anyone know where to get the 386bsd > source CD, release 1 by Jolitz? I have the "basic source code > secrets" kernel book and it would be nice to have the source to > experiment with. The book references www.386bsd.org, but it's dead. > I've tried comp.unix.386bsd but that also appears inactive. You can download it from ftp://ftp.meiji.ac.jp/pub/386bsd/386BSD-0.1/ . It might be illegal to do so without first getting a license from Caldera: http://www.sco.com/offers/ancient.html (see ftp://ftp.std.com/obi/BSDI/ and http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO_8859-1/books/handbook/history.html if you care about the legal history). You might be interested in the CD-ROMs sold at https://www.mckusick.com/csrg/index.html too, even though 386BSD isn't on them. -- Trevor Johnson http://jpj.net/~trevor/gpgkey.txt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 20:41:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-63-207-60-27.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [63.207.60.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18C9737B423 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:41:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8C03A66DF6; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 20:41:16 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: chat@FreeBSD.org Subject: [wk@c4i.org: Key to breaking Nazi code was in the patent office] Message-ID: <20010424204116.A97781@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thought this was interesting.. Kris ----- Forwarded message from William Knowles ----- Delivered-To: kkenn@localhost.obsecurity.org Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 03:10:35 -0500 (CDT) From: William Knowles Subject: Key to breaking Nazi code was in the patent office X-Sender: wk@idle.curiosity.org To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com Organization: C4I.org - http://www.c4i.org Precedence: bulk Delivered-to: cryptography-outgoing@wasabisystems.com Delivered-to: cryptography@wasabisystems.com http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=3D004782403739693&pg=3D/et/01/4/20/ncyph20= .html By Michael Smith Friday 20 April 2001 BRITAIN'S wartime codebreakers could have cracked the German Enigma cipher machine much earlier if they had followed a diagram for the commercial version lodged with the British Patent Office in the mid-1920s, documents released to the Public Record Office show. But the codebreakers did not believe that the German army would have been so stupid as to use the same simple wiring system as the widely available commercial machine for their military equivalents. The Code and Cypher School, commonly known by its wartime home at Bletchley Park, was fully aware of how the commercial machine worked in the mid-1920s. Chiffriermaschinen Aktiengesellschaft, the German company that manufactured it, had offered the British Government commercial Enigma machines at a price of $190 each in June 1924. Britain declined to take up the offer, waiting for the Germans to register it with the British Patent Office. Then they obtained the description of how it worked from the patent officials, including detailed plans of the make-up of the commercial machine.The files show that, contrary to what had previously been thought, British codebreakers were working on the Enigma machine during the 1920s and 1930s. But they did not manage to break the military variant until early 1940 after gaining vital help from the Poles. The Enigma machine looked like a typewriter. Pressing the keys sent an electrical impulse through a series of circuits wired through rotors that moved with each tap of the key, constantly varying the cipher. British codebreakers had made a good deal of progress in breaking the military version but were held up because they could not work out the order in which the typewriter keys were wired into the internal circuits. "The Germans weren't idiots," said Peter Twinn, one of those who broke Enigma. "When they had a perfect opportunity to introduce a safeguard to their machine by jumbling it up, that would be a sensible thing to do." It was not until July 1939, when they met their Polish equivalents who had broken early versions of the machine, that they found out that it was wired alphabetically, A to the first contact, B to the second contact and so on. This was the same as in the diagram attached to the patent application but was so obvious that the codebreakers never even considered it as a possibility. Six months later, codebreakers made their first break into Enigma, something they could have done far earlier if they had only tried the alphabetical system in the patent application."It was such an obvious thing to do, really a silly thing to do, that nobody ever thought it worthwhile trying it," said Mr Twinn. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystem= s.com ----- End forwarded message ----- --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE65kdbWry0BWjoQKURAsTOAKCGZzSk5mCNXawfkJEfOxJ9xLHXNgCcDuB/ vv0Ypj3jYhx9ISSKLf3WM/g= =tSu5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 21:14:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBF6437B424 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:14:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA25810; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:14:24 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:54:45 -0600 To: "Thomas M. Sommers" , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <3AE0F352.C8065ACE@mail.ptd.net> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010418003011.045ef3b0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418064119.04710720@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418215113.04440410@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419204731.00cfb800@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419225829.04595a80@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 08:41 PM 4/20/2001, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: >Agencies do not have the power to repeal statutes; regulations must >conform to the statutes. And they do. The IRS' rules regarding unrelated business income have withstood both the test of time and legal challenges. For more, see any decent book on forming and operating a nonprofit corporation. The FSF should, again, be stripped of its nonprofit status. And should be investigated to see if it obtained it fraudulently in the first place, as I personally believe it did. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 21:14:50 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3A8237B423 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:14:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA25824; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:14:29 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424221210.04403f00@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:14:06 -0600 To: Mike Meyer , Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux Cc: dan@langille.org, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15076.37933.231003.442843@guru.mired.org> References: <200104231926.MAA07119@usr08.primenet.com> <15073.19371.99471.534039@guru.mired.org> <200104231926.MAA07119@usr08.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 02:44 PM 4/23/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: >Fortunately for us, real people (i.e. - not us geeks) don't buy >software; they buy solutions. True. >Once you shift your focuse from "Gotta >make money providing software" to "Gotta make money using software to >provide solutions", it isn't nearly so bad. Non sequitur. You make the implicit (and false) assumption that packaged or conventionally licensed software is not a "solution." --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 21:14:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD0537B42C for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:14:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA25821; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:14:26 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195603.045528b0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:57:10 -0600 To: Mike Meyer , Terry Lambert From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux Cc: dan@langille.org, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15073.19371.99471.534039@guru.mired.org> References: <200104210008.RAA14599@usr07.primenet.com> <15071.59246.855623.766901@guru.mired.org> <200104210008.RAA14599@usr07.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 02:58 AM 4/21/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: >Focusing on one particular business model - whether it's >productization or improved efficiency - leads to idiotic claims like >"The GPL will reduce programmers to penury." The GPL's goal is to do that.... Stallman says so himself. As it happens, it will not reduce ALL programmers to penury -- only the worthy ones, because their efforts to start businesses will not get off the ground. Microsoft is safe. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 21:15: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0E9637B423 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:14:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA25800; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:14:09 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424193944.0454fbe0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:40:43 -0600 To: Chris Fuhrman From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: shipping a computer coast to coast Cc: Neill Robins , , "Jeremy C. Reed" , In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010419100521.046ad5f0@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 05:34 AM 4/24/2001, Chris Fuhrman wrote: >Howdy, > >Am catching up on e-mail so my apologies for replying to a 5 day old post. > >My observation is that if the instructor is paid to, hmmm, "market" >certain products and lock people into a Microsoft World, then that's a >definite conflict of interest that should be brought up to the Department >or the head of the Business school. Yes, it should be. And I believe that the school was getting so much free stuff from Microsoft that the higher-ups did nothing. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 21:19:45 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.unixathome.org (ns1.unixathome.org [203.79.82.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D63537B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:19:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Received: from xeon (xeon.int.nz.freebsd.org [192.168.0.18]) by ns1.unixathome.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3P4Jdm02509 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 16:19:40 +1200 (NZST) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 16:19:39 +1200 (NZST) From: Dan Langille X-X-Sender: To: Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Brett Glass wrote: > The FSF should, again, be stripped of its nonprofit status. And should > be investigated to see if it obtained it fraudulently in the first > place, as I personally believe it did. What's needed to get that process started? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 21:42:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 43B3137B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:42:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 59697 invoked by uid 100); 25 Apr 2001 04:42:15 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15078.21927.481166.447365@guru.mired.org> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:42:15 -0500 To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Terry Lambert , dan@langille.org Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424221210.04403f00@localhost> References: <200104231926.MAA07119@usr08.primenet.com> <15073.19371.99471.534039@guru.mired.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20010424221210.04403f00@localhost> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass types: > At 02:44 PM 4/23/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: > > >Fortunately for us, real people (i.e. - not us geeks) don't buy > >software; they buy solutions. > > True. > > >Once you shift your focuse from "Gotta > >make money providing software" to "Gotta make money using software to > >provide solutions", it isn't nearly so bad. > > Non sequitur. You make the implicit (and false) assumption that > packaged or conventionally licensed software is not a "solution." The assumption is indeed false. Which means it's a good thing that I didn't actually make that assumption. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 21:45:46 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 83FB937B424 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 21:45:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 59867 invoked by uid 100); 25 Apr 2001 04:45:43 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15078.22135.895628.34101@guru.mired.org> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:45:43 -0500 To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Terry Lambert , dan@langille.org Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195603.045528b0@localhost> References: <200104210008.RAA14599@usr07.primenet.com> <15071.59246.855623.766901@guru.mired.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195603.045528b0@localhost> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass types: > At 02:58 AM 4/21/2001, Mike Meyer wrote: > >Focusing on one particular business model - whether it's > >productization or improved efficiency - leads to idiotic claims like > >"The GPL will reduce programmers to penury." > The GPL's goal is to do that.... Stallman says so himself. As it > happens, it will not reduce ALL programmers to penury -- only > the worthy ones, because their efforts to start businesses will > not get off the ground. Microsoft is safe. Exactly. The only programmers that the GPL will hurt are the Bill Gates wannabes. Anyone willing to consider options other than making a fortune by building a monopoly in commodity software can trivially make a living better than 90% or more of the population of the US. The ones in that category willing to take the risk of starting a business can do very well. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 24 23: 9:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from Spaz.HuntsvilleAL.COM (spaz.huntsvilleal.com [63.147.8.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8793737B422 for ; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 23:09:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@catonic.net) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by Spaz.HuntsvilleAL.COM (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3P69MV83339; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 06:09:22 GMT Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 06:09:22 +0000 (GMT) From: Kris Kirby X-Sender: kris@spaz.huntsvilleal.com To: Brett Glass Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> Message-ID: X-Tech-Support-Email: bofh@catonic.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Brett Glass wrote: > The FSF should, again, be stripped of its nonprofit status. And should > be investigated to see if it obtained it fraudulently in the first > place, as I personally believe it did. Geez, think of the implications... All the "lost" "orphaned" users. Should swell our ranks... :) ----- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR | TGIFreeBSD... 'Nuff said. | ------------------------------------------------------- "Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 11:17: 6 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from nu.binary.net (nu.binary.net [216.229.0.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C34A37B424 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:17:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nathan@binary.net) Received: from matrix.binary.net (matrix.binary.net [216.229.0.2]) by nu.binary.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30CAF9C1E1; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:17:03 -0500 (CDT) Received: by matrix.binary.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 459C88341E; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:16:53 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:16:53 -0400 From: Nathan Dorfman To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: Brooks Davis , Don Tyson , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: TeX and LaTeX [WAS: MUA stuff] Message-ID: <20010425141652.B70786@rtfm.net> References: <200104140037.RAA25643@avocet.mail.pas.earthlink.net> <20010413184931.A4752@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <20010414125434.C40759@lpt.ens.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010414125434.C40759@lpt.ens.fr>; from rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in on Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 12:54:34PM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Apr 14, 2001 at 12:54:34PM +0200, Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > I'm not suggesting it's a serious alternative to MS word for most > people. But several people wrote "there's nothing as good as MS > office". So I was just pointing out that MS Word still lags behind > Knuth's 20 year old program and Lamport's 17 year old macro package > in many respects... Word and TeX are two totally different programs with different purposes; the former is a 'word processor' while the latter is a 'typesetting system'. I like some LaTeX documentation that calls word processors "glorified typewriters." That's pretty much what they are, compared to TeX. > R -- Nathan Dorfman [http://www.rtfm.net] "The light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an approaching train." --/usr/games/fortune To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 13:57: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46CEC37B42C for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 13:57:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA04551; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:56:48 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425143835.04a83680@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:56:44 -0600 To: Dan Langille , From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 10:19 PM 4/24/2001, Dan Langille wrote: > > The FSF should, again, be stripped of its nonprofit status. And should > > be investigated to see if it obtained it fraudulently in the first > > place, as I personally believe it did. > >What's needed to get that process started? Complaint letters to the IRS. Such a letter might go something like this: Attn: Director, Exempt Organization Division Internal Revenue Service 1111 Constitution Ave NW, Room #6411 Washington DC 20224 Sir: I am a computer software developer who makes a living writing computer programs. It has recently come to my attention that an organization called the Free Software Foundation, located at 59 Temple Place Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, claims to be a 501(c)(3) tax exempt organization under the Internal Revenue Code but may not qualify as such. The stated purpose of the Free Software Foundation, as stated on its Web site at http://www.fsf.org/ on the World Wide Web, is to raise funds for work on the "GNU Project" -- a project which develops software which is given away for free to the public with the express purpose of undermining private businesses and reducing the wages of, and the demand for the services of, computer programmers such as myself. The Web site further states that a key goal of the FSF and the GNU Project is to destroy the businesses of commercial software companies (whose activities the FSF's founder, Mr. Richard Stallman, believes to be morally wrong) by distributing equivalent products for free. While there is nothing wrong with giving away one's work for free, to do so with the intent to hurt legitimate businesses is not an activity deserving of tax-exempt status. The FSF claims to be a tax exempt charitable organization. Yet, it appears that it does not meet the qualifications for a tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. It is not educational. It teaches no classes, has no formal curriculum, has no accreditation, and awards no degrees. It is not scientific. It conducts no research, publishes no scientific or scholarly papers, and makes no new scientific discoveries. The software which the FSF does create is based on well-known, existing principles of computer engineering, and is virtually always a copy of an existing computer software product. It is not charitable, in that it does not provide benefits only to those in need. The provision of computer software to the public is not a legitimate charitable activity, as is the provision of food, clothing, etc. to the poor. The organization also makes money by selling publications and clothing. According to the organization's own Web page at http://www.fsf.org/help/help.html, "Most of the FSF's funds" come from these unrelated business activities. If this statement is accurate, the organization may not qualify for tax exempt status for this reason as well. Finally, the FSF uses its Web site, as well as speaking engagements by its founder, Richard Stallman, to lobby in favor of legislation and changes in legislation that affect copyrights and patents. As I am sure you are aware, 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations are not permitted to engage in such lobbying efforts. Please review this organization's activities, which are documented on its Web sites at http://www.fsf.org and http://www.gnu.org. I think you will agree that this organization should not be allowed to claim 501(c)(3) status, and that the group may have defrauded the IRS by claiming that it has ever qualified for such status. Sincerely, J. Random Hacker 1001 Cyberspace Lane Silly Valley, CA To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 14:19:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from moran.grauel.com (usr1-29.mintel.net [63.81.123.44]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46E4337B422 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:19:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rjk@moran.grauel.com) Received: (from rjk@localhost) by moran.grauel.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f3PLJOj65513; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 16:19:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rjk) From: Richard J Kuhns MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15079.16219.554913.497437@moran.grauel.com> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 16:19:23 -0500 To: Brett Glass Cc: Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425143835.04a83680@localhost> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010425143835.04a83680@localhost> X-Mailer: VM 6.92 under 21.4 (patch 1) "Copyleft" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass writes: > > Complaint letters to the IRS. Such a letter might go something like this: > > > > Attn: Director, Exempt Organization Division > Internal Revenue Service > 1111 Constitution Ave NW, Room #6411 > Washington DC 20224 > > Sir: > > I am a computer software developer who makes a living writing computer > programs. It has recently come to my attention that an organization > called the Free Software Foundation, located at 59 Temple Place Suite > 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, claims to be a 501(c)(3) tax exempt > organization under the Internal Revenue Code but may not qualify as such. > ...and more sour grapes. Recently, huh? A nice, truthful way to start a letter like that. Congratulations -- you've just managed to get me off my duff and do some work in support of the FSF. While I'm personally more in favor of the BSD license, I admire and respect what the FSF has done. -- Richard Kuhns rjk@grauel.com PO Box 6249 Tel: (765)477-6000 \ 100 Sawmill Road x319 Lafayette, IN 47903 (800)489-4891 / To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 14:24:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.unixathome.org (ns1.unixathome.org [203.79.82.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12BB37B423 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:24:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Received: from xeon (xeon.int.nz.freebsd.org [192.168.0.18]) by ns1.unixathome.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3PLOOm05840; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:24:24 +1200 (NZST) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:24:24 +1200 (NZST) From: Dan Langille X-X-Sender: To: Richard J Kuhns Cc: Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <15079.16219.554913.497437@moran.grauel.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Richard J Kuhns wrote: > Recently, huh? A nice, truthful way to start a letter like that. If you look back, it was I who asked for an example. Brett supplied a form letter. If you want to interpret it as you have, you are free to do so. However, it was a "form letter". To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 17:18:41 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C183237B423 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:18:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tms2@mail.ptd.net) Received: (qmail 28320 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2001 23:15:07 -0000 Received: from mail1.ha-net.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([207.44.96.65]) (envelope-sender ) by smtpe.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 25 Apr 2001 23:15:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 12604 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2001 00:18:28 -0000 Received: from du211101.cli.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([204.186.211.101]) (envelope-sender ) by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 26 Apr 2001 00:18:28 -0000 Message-ID: <3AE768FA.2ECBBF51@mail.ptd.net> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 20:16:58 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" Organization: None X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010418003011.045ef3b0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418064119.04710720@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418215113.04440410@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419204731.00cfb800@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419225829.04595a80@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass wrote: > > At 08:41 PM 4/20/2001, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > > >Agencies do not have the power to repeal statutes; regulations must > >conform to the statutes. > > And they do. Not according to the statutes that I cited previously. For the fourth time, provide a citation to support your contention. > The IRS' rules regarding unrelated business income have > withstood both the test of time and legal challenges. Please provide citations. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 19: 0:11 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail4.registeredsite.com (mail4.registeredsite.com [64.224.9.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 737F637B42C for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 19:00:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tech_info@threespace.com) Received: from mail.threespace.com (mail.threespace.com [216.247.134.44]) by mail4.registeredsite.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3Q204I05037 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:00:04 -0400 Received: from CX1063714-B.threespace.com [65.14.36.167] by mail.threespace.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.05) id A11E58C000B8; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:59:58 -0400 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425215435.03be8f28@mail.brightmail.com> X-Sender: tech_info@mail.threespace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:59:46 -0400 To: FreeBSD Chat From: Technical Information Subject: vmware anyone? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Does anybody have any experience with vmware? I'm wondering about its compatibility, stability, and performance in particular. Will it run on FreeBSD pretty well? Does FreeBSD run pretty well on it? --Chip Morton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 19: 4:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu (mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu [136.142.186.35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F38B37B423 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 19:04:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pfg1+@pitt.edu) Received: from pitt.edu ("port 1320"@[136.142.89.21]) by pitt.edu (PMDF V5.2-32 #41462) with ESMTP id <01K2TZ15IKYO00339B@mb1i0.ns.pitt.edu> for chat@FreeBSD.ORG; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:04:38 EDT Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:08:10 -0400 From: "Pedro F. Giffuni" Subject: Re: vmware anyone? To: Technical Information Cc: FreeBSD Chat Message-id: <3AE7830A.7F242662@pitt.edu> Organization: University of Pittsburgh MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en,pdf,es-CO References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425215435.03be8f28@mail.brightmail.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org There are good comments about it on the emulation list (check the archives). I'm not sure if FreeBSD runs on it. but the linux version works under FreeBSD. cheers, Pedro. Technical Information wrote: > > Does anybody have any experience with vmware? I'm wondering about its > compatibility, stability, and performance in particular. Will it run on > FreeBSD pretty well? Does FreeBSD run pretty well on it? > > --Chip Morton > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 20:23:57 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A4B937B43C for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 20:23:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from res03db2@gte.net) Received: from gte.net (evrtwa1-ar4-4-34-145-186.dsl.gtei.net [4.34.145.186]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net with ESMTP ; id WAA95182410 Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:16:35 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from res03db2@localhost) by gte.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA00453; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 20:24:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from res03db2@gte.net) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 20:24:47 -0700 From: Robert Clark To: Technical Information Cc: FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: vmware anyone? Message-ID: <20010425202447.A441@darkstar.gte.net> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425215435.03be8f28@mail.brightmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425215435.03be8f28@mail.brightmail.com>; from tech_info@threespace.com on Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:59:46PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Or the other question, does anyone have a spare 300$ to spend on it? [RC] On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:59:46PM -0400, Technical Information wrote: > Does anybody have any experience with vmware? I'm wondering about its > compatibility, stability, and performance in particular. Will it run on > FreeBSD pretty well? Does FreeBSD run pretty well on it? > > --Chip Morton > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 21:28:12 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D6F37B423 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:28:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA08524; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:27:56 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425222517.048cf620@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:27:55 -0600 To: Richard J Kuhns From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux Cc: In-Reply-To: <15079.16219.554913.497437@moran.grauel.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425143835.04a83680@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010425143835.04a83680@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 03:19 PM 4/25/2001, Richard J Kuhns wrote: >Recently, huh? Many people are STILL unaware that the FSF misrepresents itself as a charity. > A nice, truthful way to start a letter like that. See above. >Congratulations -- you've just managed to get me off my duff and do some >work in support of the FSF. While I'm personally more in favor of the BSD >license, I admire and respect what the FSF has done. If you admire and respect vindictiveness and wanton destructiveness, then you are not worthy of admiration or respect yourself. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Apr 25 22: 0:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DA0137B422 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:00:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA08841; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:59:56 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010425222828.048cee30@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 22:59:55 -0600 To: "Thomas M. Sommers" , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <3AE768FA.2ECBBF51@mail.ptd.net> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010418003011.045ef3b0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418064119.04710720@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418215113.04440410@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419204731.00cfb800@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419225829.04595a80@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 06:16 PM 4/25/2001, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: >Please provide citations. You can't use a search engine? AltaVista pulls up more than 4,000 hits on the term "unrelated business income." But since you seem unwilling or unable to do so, here are some links to get you started. On the subject of unrleated business income: http://www.tgci.com/publications/97winter/structure.htm http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/plain/forms_pubs/pubs/p598toc.htm and http://ftp.fedworld.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p557.pdf (Page 13 passim) For an explanation of why the FSF is not a charity, see http://www.floridacdc.org/articles/501ques.html (in particular, the answer to question 6). Hopefully, I won't have to spoon-feed you on every point of the discussion. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 8:27:59 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 11B6437B423 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 08:27:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 7653 invoked by uid 100); 26 Apr 2001 15:27:52 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15080.15992.732520.463161@guru.mired.org> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:27:52 -0500 To: "Hervey Wilson" Cc: "Mark Giglio" , Subject: Re: hotmail converted from freeBSD In-Reply-To: <001101c0cd2b$7b7c85e0$0101a8c0@chillipepper> References: <15077.62126.88738.629586@guru.mired.org> <000d01c0cd1a$83109640$0101a8c0@chillipepper> <15078.6283.75950.909160@guru.mired.org> <007101c0cd1f$8d8afbb0$0101a8c0@chillipepper> <15078.10127.320036.450249@guru.mired.org> <001101c0cd2b$7b7c85e0$0101a8c0@chillipepper> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [Moved from -questions to -chat] Hervey Wilson types: > From: "Mike Meyer" > > > > This sounds like a the "thread per socket" model generalized so that > > > > you have multiple threads waiting on one socket. Which leads to the > > > > question - where's the context for the socket go? I.e. - if I've > > > > processed the header of an HTTP request and am waiting on the data in > > > > the request to be available, where does the context information get > > > > stored? > > > You can associate a per-file handle completion key with a completion > port > > > when you add the file handle to the port (note that socket handles are > > > treated as file handles). When a completion port is signalled you can > > > retrieve the completion key. So it's a matter of creating a hashtable > (or > > > other) data structure that maps the completion key to your context > > > information. > > > > This sounds like a "worst of both worlds" approach. You've got the > > context switches and threading problems (as you mention, not for the > > faint of heart) of the thread per socket approach, along with the > > problems of sorting out the context that come with the single thread > > w/select model. Does it really save anything besides the memory > > overhead of the threads you need for each socket? Maybe I should just > > ask for a pointer to a white paper on the subject. > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/msdn_scalabil.htm is an old > document written for NT 3.5 that examines some of the scalability issues > when writing server applications for NT. > http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/msdn_servrapp.htm is another older > document that discusses using IO Completion ports with the MFC library (not > my favourite library) but contains discussion of the overall programming > model. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/periodic/period00/Winsock.htm is a > newer document (last October) that discusses using IO completion ports with > WinSock 2.0. Some of these documents contain pointers to further > information. Unfortunately, none of these are quite as rigorous in their > treatment of the topic as one might hope. Finally, as I mentioned earlier, > Jeff Richter's various books are very good references. Actually, the first one was pretty much what I was looking for - at least at this level. It looks like completion ports give you a way to tune behavior between the single thread w/select and the thread-per-socket model, which is an interesting concept. The real use is to adopt the single thread w/select model to an SMP system. The recommended tuning on a uniprocessor system is a single thread. The only thing that the completion port model clearly saves you compared to the thread-per-socket model is memory resources. It may save you context switches compared to some approaches, but that looks to be more of a problem with the underlying platform than anything else. It does add the problems of dealing with threading to the single thread w/select model. That's pretty much the cost of using more than one CPU, though. In theory, the Unix select & thread semantics can generate this kind of behavior. I'd be surprised if it actually worked that well, though. I'd *not* be surprised if it failed in some strange way. Thanx, http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 9:48:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from blues.jpj.net (blues.jpj.net [204.97.17.146]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F0A337B424 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:48:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from trevor@jpj.net) Received: from localhost (trevor@localhost) by blues.jpj.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3QGmM128147; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:48:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:48:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Trevor Johnson To: Robert Clark Cc: Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: vmware anyone? In-Reply-To: <20010425202447.A441@darkstar.gte.net> Message-ID: <20010426124247.Z16200-100000@blues.jpj.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Or the other question, does anyone have a spare 300$ to spend on it? Alexander Langer has partially ported Plex86 to FreeBSD. His changes are under CVS at www.plex86.org. -- Trevor Johnson To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 10:21: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from po3.glue.umd.edu (po3.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.123]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C697E37B422 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:20:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from howardjp@well.com) Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:root@z.glue.umd.edu [128.8.10.71]) by po3.glue.umd.edu (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f3QHKn317043; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:20:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from z.glue.umd.edu (IDENT:sendmail@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA03325; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:20:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (howardjp@localhost) by z.glue.umd.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA03321; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:20:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: z.glue.umd.edu: howardjp owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 13:20:49 -0400 (EDT) From: James Howard X-Sender: howardjp@z.glue.umd.edu To: David Scheidt Cc: Joseph Mallett , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ln(1) manpage In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, David Scheidt wrote: > It's the same binary. The manual page for a binary is supposed to describe > its usage. If its usage changes based on how it's called, that should be > documented. I wouldn't know link(1) existed if it weren't documented in the > ln(1) man page. (I don't think I've ever used it, so that wouldn't really > be a loss.) In some cases -- like tin/rtin(1) -- the correct solution > presents itself by reading the usage section. I don't think it makes sense > to put the same command in the "SEE ALSO" section -- it's for things like > related commands, config files, system and library calls. The way things are handled, with "man link" giving the ln man page is really best. Jamie To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 10:34:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mailout04.sul.t-online.com (mailout04.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C82D337B424 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:34:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from alex@cichlids.cichlids.com) Received: from fwd03.sul.t-online.com by mailout04.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 14speb-0002cx-07; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:34:09 +0200 Received: from neutron.cichlids.com (520050424122-0001@[217.1.52.12]) by fmrl03.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 14speb-1sR6xsC; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:34:09 +0200 Received: from cichlids.cichlids.com (cichlids.cichlids.com [192.168.0.10]) by neutron.cichlids.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98ABFAB44; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:35:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cichlids.cichlids.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id F052A14A81; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:33:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:33:50 +0200 From: Alexander Langer To: Trevor Johnson Cc: Robert Clark , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: vmware anyone? Message-ID: <20010426193350.A16407@cichlids.cichlids.com> Mail-Followup-To: Alexander Langer , Trevor Johnson , Robert Clark , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat References: <20010425202447.A441@darkstar.gte.net> <20010426124247.Z16200-100000@blues.jpj.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010426124247.Z16200-100000@blues.jpj.net>; from trevor@jpj.net on Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 12:48:21PM -0400 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 44 28 CA 4C 46 5B D3 A8 A8 E3 BA F3 4E 60 7D 7F X-PGP-at: finger alex@big.endian.de X-Verwirrung: Dieser Header dient der allgemeinen Verwirrung. X-Sender: 520050424122-0001@t-dialin.net Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Thus spake Trevor Johnson (trevor@jpj.net): > > Or the other question, does anyone have a spare 300$ to spend on it? > Alexander Langer has partially ported Plex86 to FreeBSD. His changes are > under CVS at www.plex86.org. Yes, but it still doesn't work. The kernel module is ok, but the monitor-code from the plex86 folks does produce a fault in some assembler code that is written by hand, and I'm not able to fix that. Alex -- cat: /home/alex/.sig: No such file or directory To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 10:36:10 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6948937B424 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:35:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr05.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA12980; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:28:33 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr05.primenet.com(206.165.6.205) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAQ0ayuz; Thu Apr 26 10:28:27 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA24045; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:39:08 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104261739.KAA24045@usr05.primenet.com> Subject: Re: hotmail converted from freeBSD To: mwm@mired.org (Mike Meyer) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:37:46 +0000 (GMT) Cc: herveyw@dynamic-cast.com (Hervey Wilson), markgiglio@yahoo.com (Mark Giglio), chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15080.15992.732520.463161@guru.mired.org> from "Mike Meyer" at Apr 26, 2001 10:27:52 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Actually, the first one was pretty much what I was looking for - at > least at this level. It looks like completion ports give you a way to > tune behavior between the single thread w/select and the > thread-per-socket model, which is an interesting concept. The real use > is to adopt the single thread w/select model to an SMP system. The > recommended tuning on a uniprocessor system is a single thread. > > The only thing that the completion port model clearly saves you > compared to the thread-per-socket model is memory resources. It may > save you context switches compared to some approaches, but that looks > to be more of a problem with the underlying platform than anything > else. > > It does add the problems of dealing with threading to the single > thread w/select model. That's pretty much the cost of using more than > one CPU, though. > > In theory, the Unix select & thread semantics can generate this kind > of behavior. I'd be surprised if it actually worked that well, > though. I'd *not* be surprised if it failed in some strange way. The reasoning behind I/O completion ports is that it permits you to do something on completion of I/O, such as initiate yet another I/O (a "feedme" signal that is delivered reliably as an event, unlike a UNIX signal, which is merely a persistant condition). Effectively, this allows you to provide the equivalent of a multithreaded program, without having to adopt the stupidity and context switch overhead of most threads implementations (e.g Linux, SVR4, etc.) which results from the inability to implement thread group affinity in the scheduler properly, without resulting in a starvation deadlock for other processes whose threads are not in the same group ("process" == "group of threads"). If you look at the FreeBSD threads design, it doesn't suffer from these problems (barring the "KSEG == CPU affinity" silliness that pops up in discussion on -arch occasionally). This _significantly_ saves on context switch overhead; in particular, it avoid reloading of control register 3, and TLB shootdown, which would otherwise result in significant processing overhead, even when switching between threads in the same group (since you can never know what thread the scheduler is going to pick, only that you are being preempted). Windows Also does something UNIX implementations do not, which is have the concept of "kernel threads" which do not have attached to them a virtual address space. It is the address space changes which result in the need to reload CR3. In addition, there is a limitation on the number of LDT's you can use simultaneously. This approach permits Windows to support more LDTs thant a TSS using context switch based OS can use. Otherwise, there is a serious limitation on the number of simultaneous TSS based processes you can run at the same time (8192 minus the overhead for the system). FreeBSD does not use TSS based context switching. Linux used to; it may or may not, these days, but since they don't document the internals very well (an artifact of not having any historical perspective, which has evolved out of their lack of source code control), it's not worth it for me to go digging in their source tree for what they've been doing since last Tuesday. When you are running a threaded Windows program, each simultaneously running thread in user space has a kernel thread which is providing its quantum for it; the user space thread is providing the virtual address space pointer. In Windows, each user space thread runs in its own virtual addresss space; however, this address space overlaps in a complex way, based on order of thread creation, since the address space is "copy on write" based on threads being created by other threads. The upshot of all of this is that I/O completion handlers permit you to pass events between user space threads, without needing to marshall data, and thus permit tthreaded processes to scale to an arbitrarily large number of CPUs, without having to directly address the affinity issues that badly written threading system (e.g. Linux, SVR4) must address. If you actually want to move a data object between these threads, e.g. as in passing a connection context structure between threads, the object represented by the data has to be explicitly reinstanced in the target thread. This is the downside to Windows threading, and is really a legacy issue having to do with WIN32S compatability for threads support in Windows 3.x, prior to Windows 95. For more information on threading in Microsoft Windows, I suggest you sign up as an MSDN developer, after which they will provide you with much more documentation than they provide you on their web site. If you can get them to send it to you, you might also ask for their threading architecture model for their Active Server Platform (at the time I saw it, it was still named "VIPER"). You may also want to read _all_ of the documents on their web site that discuss "rental model", "apartment model", and "freethreading model" threaded application, and the increasing restrictions on how you must program for each of them. Taken together, these documents will give you a basic overview from which you can deduce a lot of their internal architecture. I also suggest that you learn a little bit more about threading, in general, and how context and task switching work in a protected mode operating system, in particular. A good reference for this is: Protected Mode Software Architecture Tom Shanley MindShare, Inc. ISBN: 0-201-55447-X I've also seen another reference recently, which is rather obtuse, but which I've decided I like, now that I've gotten into it: The Indispensible PC Hardware Book (Third Edition) Hans-Peter Messmer Addison-Wesley ISBN 0-201-40399-4 FYI: In my opinion, people who use threads for turning finite state automata into easier to program linear code execution are just being incredibly intellectually lazy, and the resulting application will run slower on everything but SMP hardware, and might even run slower there, depending on whther their judgment in algorithms was as poor as their judgement in programming models. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 10:49:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp05.primenet.com (smtp05.primenet.com [206.165.6.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78D1A37B422 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:49:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr05.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp05.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA10129; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:49:46 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr05.primenet.com(206.165.6.205) via SMTP by smtp05.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAOBaiTt; Thu Apr 26 10:49:35 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA24281; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:52:56 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104261752.KAA24281@usr05.primenet.com> Subject: Re: vmware anyone? To: alex@big.endian.de (Alexander Langer) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:52:51 +0000 (GMT) Cc: trevor@jpj.net (Trevor Johnson), res03db2@gte.net (Robert Clark), tech_info@threespace.com (Technical Information), chat@FreeBSD.ORG (FreeBSD Chat) In-Reply-To: <20010426193350.A16407@cichlids.cichlids.com> from "Alexander Langer" at Apr 26, 2001 07:33:50 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > Or the other question, does anyone have a spare 300$ to spend on it? > > Alexander Langer has partially ported Plex86 to FreeBSD. His changes are > > under CVS at www.plex86.org. > > Yes, but it still doesn't work. The kernel module is ok, but the > monitor-code from the plex86 folks does produce a fault in some > assembler code that is written by hand, and I'm not able to fix that. I assume you are talking about the locore.s code during bootstrap. It doesn't look like a hard fix, to me. FreeBSD doesn't exactly do what it says its doing in that code. Your best bet might be Bruce Evans, since he is familiar with that code (having wedged a debugger in there), and he has commit priviledges to the FreeBSD source tree. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 11:10: 6 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mailout00.sul.t-online.com (mailout00.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9AA237B423 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 11:10:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from alex@cichlids.cichlids.com) Received: from fwd02.sul.t-online.com by mailout00.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 14sqDE-0006Jt-04; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:09:56 +0200 Received: from neutron.cichlids.com (520050424122-0001@[217.1.52.12]) by fmrl02.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 14sqDE-1cJ05YC; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:09:56 +0200 Received: from cichlids.cichlids.com (cichlids.cichlids.com [192.168.0.10]) by neutron.cichlids.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C17CAB44; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:11:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cichlids.cichlids.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D69A914A81; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:09:34 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:09:34 +0200 From: Alexander Langer To: Terry Lambert Cc: Trevor Johnson , Robert Clark , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: vmware anyone? Message-ID: <20010426200934.A30882@cichlids.cichlids.com> Mail-Followup-To: Alexander Langer , Terry Lambert , Trevor Johnson , Robert Clark , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat References: <20010426193350.A16407@cichlids.cichlids.com> <200104261752.KAA24281@usr05.primenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200104261752.KAA24281@usr05.primenet.com>; from tlambert@primenet.com on Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 05:52:51PM +0000 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 44 28 CA 4C 46 5B D3 A8 A8 E3 BA F3 4E 60 7D 7F X-PGP-at: finger alex@big.endian.de X-Verwirrung: Dieser Header dient der allgemeinen Verwirrung. X-Sender: 520050424122-0001@t-dialin.net Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Thus spake Terry Lambert (tlambert@primenet.com): > > Yes, but it still doesn't work. The kernel module is ok, but the > > monitor-code from the plex86 folks does produce a fault in some > > assembler code that is written by hand, and I'm not able to fix that. > I assume you are talking about the locore.s code during bootstrap. No, I'm talking about Plex86 sourcecode, sorry. Alex -- cat: /home/alex/.sig: No such file or directory To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 14:43:41 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9400137B422 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 14:43:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA57954; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 23:43:37 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: Alexander Langer Cc: Trevor Johnson , Robert Clark , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: vmware anyone? References: <20010425202447.A441@darkstar.gte.net> <20010426124247.Z16200-100000@blues.jpj.net> <20010426193350.A16407@cichlids.cichlids.com> From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 26 Apr 2001 23:43:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20010426193350.A16407@cichlids.cichlids.com> Message-ID: Lines: 14 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Alexander Langer writes: > Thus spake Trevor Johnson (trevor@jpj.net): > > > Or the other question, does anyone have a spare 300$ to spend on it? > > Alexander Langer has partially ported Plex86 to FreeBSD. His changes are > > under CVS at www.plex86.org. > Yes, but it still doesn't work. The kernel module is ok, but the > monitor-code from the plex86 folks does produce a fault in some > assembler code that is written by hand, and I'm not able to fix that. Do you have a trace and a listing of the code surrounding the fault? DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 17:11: 4 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 06AB137B424 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:10:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 19023 invoked by uid 100); 27 Apr 2001 00:10:57 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15080.47377.734245.834332@guru.mired.org> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:10:57 -0500 To: Terry Lambert Cc: herveyw@dynamic-cast.com (Hervey Wilson), markgiglio@yahoo.com (Mark Giglio), chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: hotmail converted from freeBSD In-Reply-To: <200104261739.KAA24045@usr05.primenet.com> References: <15080.15992.732520.463161@guru.mired.org> <200104261739.KAA24045@usr05.primenet.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert types: > > Actually, the first one was pretty much what I was looking for - at > > least at this level. It looks like completion ports give you a way to > > tune behavior between the single thread w/select and the > > thread-per-socket model, which is an interesting concept. The real use > > is to adopt the single thread w/select model to an SMP system. The > > recommended tuning on a uniprocessor system is a single thread. > > > > The only thing that the completion port model clearly saves you > > compared to the thread-per-socket model is memory resources. It may > > save you context switches compared to some approaches, but that looks > > to be more of a problem with the underlying platform than anything > > else. > > > > It does add the problems of dealing with threading to the single > > thread w/select model. That's pretty much the cost of using more than > > one CPU, though. > > > > In theory, the Unix select & thread semantics can generate this kind > > of behavior. I'd be surprised if it actually worked that well, > > though. I'd *not* be surprised if it failed in some strange way. > > The reasoning behind I/O completion ports is that it permits > you to do something on completion of I/O, such as initiate yet > another I/O (a "feedme" signal that is delivered reliably as an > event, unlike a UNIX signal, which is merely a persistant > condition). The author of the paper I referenced mentions that, but goes on to state that what IO completions ports provide that some other Windows facility doesn't is the ability to control how many threads are actively dealing with the results of IO going through that port. > If you look at the FreeBSD threads design, it doesn't suffer from > these problems (barring the "KSEG == CPU affinity" silliness that > pops up in discussion on -arch occasionally). > > This _significantly_ saves on context switch overhead; in particular, > it avoid reloading of control register 3, and TLB shootdown, which > would otherwise result in significant processing overhead, even > when switching between threads in the same group (since you can > never know what thread the scheduler is going to pick, only that > you are being preempted). The author listed two savings over the "thread per socket" model: one was the memory resources used by that number of threads, and the other was the context switch overhead. I couldn't see why you would get a lot of context switch savings on a properly designed system. Glad to see FreeBSD is such a system. > For more information on threading in Microsoft Windows, I suggest > you sign up as an MSDN developer, after which they will provide > you with much more documentation than they provide you on their > web site. If you can get them to send it to you, you might also > ask for their threading architecture model for their Active Server > Platform (at the time I saw it, it was still named "VIPER"). You > may also want to read _all_ of the documents on their web site that > discuss "rental model", "apartment model", and "freethreading model" > threaded application, and the increasing restrictions on how you > must program for each of them. Taken together, these documents > will give you a basic overview from which you can deduce a lot of > their internal architecture. While I appreciate the suggestion, I'm not going to follow up on it. If I ever find myself in a situation where the only income I can get programming involves working with Windows, I'll start selling used cars for a living. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 17:30:47 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (mta7.pltn13.pbi.net [64.164.98.8]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D242537B423 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:30:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jazepeda@pacbell.net) Received: from zippy.mybox.zip ([207.214.149.252]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.03.23.18.03.p10) with ESMTP id <0GCF00J0PCW72D@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:19:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zippy.mybox.zip (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7EB96184E; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:19:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:19:18 -0700 From: Alex Zepeda Subject: What's the interest in comercial desktop apps for FreeBSD? To: chat@freebsd.org Message-id: <20010426171918.D1977@zippy.mybox.zip> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I'm not sure if this is the right place to pose this question, but here I go anyways. I've been wrestling with GNUCash in an effort to help the developers get the cvs versions (1.5.x) working on FreeBSD. But being a KDE fan, I've noticed an absence of free Qt/KDE offerings. Kapital looks interesting, and I'm sure it'd run under Linux emulation.. but I'm perhaps in a position to convince them to offer a FreeBSD binary. If they spent some time "porting" Kapital (or perhaps one of their other offerings) to FreeBSD, would anybody be interested in buying a copy? http://www.thekompany.com/products/?dhtml_ok=0 - alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 17:46:19 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from meow.osd.bsdi.com (meow.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9CEC37B422 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:46:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (john@jhb-laptop.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.241]) by meow.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f3R0jWG60373; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:45:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.0.20010426200046.03222350@mail.etinc.com> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:44:54 -0700 (PDT) From: John Baldwin To: Dennis Subject: Re: BSDI and Marketing 101 Cc: chat@FreeBSD.org Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [ moved to -chat ] On 27-Apr-01 Dennis wrote: > Your need to continuously criticize me no matter how trivial the subject is > very satisfying to me. Makes you look like even more of a loser than you are. > > db Who needs the comedy channel when we have the Dennis E-mail Archive? Ignorance must truly be bliss. :) -- John Baldwin -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 17:47:44 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [64.0.106.45]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 177A737B424 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:47:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scanner@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (scanner@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA46685; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:47:34 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 20:47:34 -0400 (EDT) From: To: Alex Zepeda Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What's the interest in comercial desktop apps for FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <20010426171918.D1977@zippy.mybox.zip> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Alex Zepeda wrote: > position to convince them to offer a FreeBSD binary. If they spent some > time "porting" Kapital (or perhaps one of their other offerings) to > FreeBSD, would anybody be interested in buying a copy? > > http://www.thekompany.com/products/?dhtml_ok=0 Depends. If it is an actuall USEABLE app I surely would. But most of these apps are so non complete and feature lacking I wouldnt waste a dime on them. And I would expect it to run stable. Another thing most of these apps do is crash more often then I care for. If i shell out 50 or 60 bucks for a financial app, which I would, I expect it to be stable, and very feature rich. None of this "feature X is in the works". But I would buy a copy yes if it meets the above requirements. ============================================================================= -Chris Watson (316) 326-3862 | FreeBSD Consultant, FreeBSD Geek Work: scanner@jurai.net | Open Systems Inc., Wellington, Kansas Home: scanner@deceptively.shady.org | http://open-systems.net ============================================================================= WINDOWS: "Where do you want to go today?" LINUX: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" BSD: "Are you guys coming or what?" ============================================================================= irc.openprojects.net #FreeBSD -Join the revolution! ICQ: 20016186 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 17:56:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E92AD37B422 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 17:56:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA18590; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:56:32 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010426185555.0458c7d0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:56:30 -0600 To: Alex Zepeda , chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: What's the interest in comercial desktop apps for FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <20010426171918.D1977@zippy.mybox.zip> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org A commercial financial management program for BSD? Yes, I'd jump at it. Wouldn't want the GPL to kill another market. --Brett At 06:19 PM 4/26/2001, Alex Zepeda wrote: >I'm not sure if this is the right place to pose this question, but here I >go anyways. > >I've been wrestling with GNUCash in an effort to help the developers get >the cvs versions (1.5.x) working on FreeBSD. But being a KDE fan, I've >noticed an absence of free Qt/KDE offerings. Kapital looks interesting, >and I'm sure it'd run under Linux emulation.. but I'm perhaps in a >position to convince them to offer a FreeBSD binary. If they spent some >time "porting" Kapital (or perhaps one of their other offerings) to >FreeBSD, would anybody be interested in buying a copy? > >http://www.thekompany.com/products/?dhtml_ok=0 > >- alex > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 18:31:10 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7441137B423 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:31:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jazepeda@pacbell.net) Received: from zippy.mybox.zip ([207.214.149.252]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9) with ESMTP id <0GCF00KI3G53QV@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for chat@freebsd.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:29:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by zippy.mybox.zip (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 728F417EF; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:29:27 -0700 From: Alex Zepeda Subject: Re: What's the interest in comercial desktop apps for FreeBSD? In-reply-to: ; from scanner@jurai.net on Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:47:34PM -0400 To: scanner@jurai.net Cc: chat@freebsd.org Message-id: <20010426182927.A3498@zippy.mybox.zip> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i References: <20010426171918.D1977@zippy.mybox.zip> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:47:34PM -0400, scanner@jurai.net wrote: > Depends. If it is an actuall USEABLE app I surely would. But most of these > apps are so non complete and feature lacking I wouldnt waste a dime on > them. And I would expect it to run stable. Another thing most of these > apps do is crash more often then I care for. If i shell out 50 or 60 bucks > for a financial app, which I would, I expect it to be stable, and very > feature rich. None of this "feature X is in the works". > But I would buy a copy yes if it meets the above requirements. Well I've found GNUCash 1.4.11 to be pretty feature complete (for my uses), and somewhat stable too. But it's help system was horridly buggy and it had display issues when I used it with BlackBox. Of course now I've gotta ask, what features are you looking for? - alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 18:34:59 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.86]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8A55137B423 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:34:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tms2@mail.ptd.net) Received: (qmail 29995 invoked from network); 27 Apr 2001 01:31:25 -0000 Received: from mail1.ha-net.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([207.44.96.65]) (envelope-sender ) by smtpf.ha-net.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 27 Apr 2001 01:31:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 22784 invoked from network); 27 Apr 2001 01:27:12 -0000 Received: from du146.cli.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) ([204.186.33.146]) (envelope-sender ) by mail.ptd.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 27 Apr 2001 01:27:12 -0000 Message-ID: <3AE8CAA3.91F0764E@mail.ptd.net> Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 21:25:55 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" Organization: None X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010418003011.045ef3b0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418064119.04710720@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418215113.04440410@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419204731.00cfb800@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419225829.04595a80@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010425222828.048cee30@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brett Glass wrote: > > At 06:16 PM 4/25/2001, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > > >Please provide citations. > > You can't use a search engine? AltaVista pulls up more > than 4,000 hits on the term "unrelated business income." > > But since you seem unwilling or unable to do so, here are > some links to get you started. On the subject of unrleated > business income: It is not my job to do your research for you. You make an assertion that is clearly contrary to the plain language of the statute, and then sneer at me when I ask you to provide proof of your assertion. What a persuasive advocate you are. No wonder you've had such brilliant success in getting the FSF's tax-exempt status yanked. I repeat, it is not my job to prove your arguments. I'll look at what you provided, although IRS Pub 557, which you mentioned before, does not say what you say it says. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 18:37:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from Spaz.HuntsvilleAL.COM (spaz.huntsvilleal.com [63.147.8.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F11D37B422; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:37:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@catonic.net) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by Spaz.HuntsvilleAL.COM (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3R1bWQ48402; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 01:37:32 GMT Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 01:37:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Kris Kirby X-Sender: kris@spaz.huntsvilleal.com To: "David O'Brien" Cc: Dennis , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSDI and Marketing 101 In-Reply-To: <20010426175041.C19809@dragon.nuxi.com> Message-ID: X-Tech-Support-Email: bofh@catonic.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > What you fail to realize is computer stores and bookstores *want* and > have requested the $129.95 product. They want even more expensive ones > than that. The really don't care for $29.95 products as the margins are > too low for their liking -- unless they feel the product is a "leader" > one. This really belongs on -chat. Really. ----- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR | TGIFreeBSD... 'Nuff said. | ------------------------------------------------------- "Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 18:44:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62C2337B423 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 18:44:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2]) by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA18970; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:43:33 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010426194130.045835b0@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:43:27 -0600 To: "Thomas M. Sommers" , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Stallman now claims authorship of Linux In-Reply-To: <3AE8CAA3.91F0764E@mail.ptd.net> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010418003011.045ef3b0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418064119.04710720@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010418215113.04440410@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419204731.00cfb800@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010419225829.04595a80@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010424195227.0454c700@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010425222828.048cee30@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 07:25 PM 4/26/2001, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: >It is not my job to do your research for you. You make an assertion >that is clearly contrary to the plain language of the statute, Not true at all. Read the revenue rulings cited in the documents to which I sent you links. They cite parts of the law of which you are obviously unaware. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 19: 6:34 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [64.0.106.45]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50D4037B422 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:06:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from scanner@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (scanner@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA47853; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 22:06:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 22:06:19 -0400 (EDT) From: To: Alex Zepeda Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What's the interest in comercial desktop apps for FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <20010426182927.A3498@zippy.mybox.zip> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Alex Zepeda wrote: > Well I've found GNUCash 1.4.11 to be pretty feature complete (for my > uses), and somewhat stable too. But it's help system was horridly buggy > and it had display issues when I used it with BlackBox. > > Of course now I've gotta ask, what features are you looking for? Ideally, a fbsd version of quickbooks :) If I could manage my entire consulting company with a good solid, invoicing, project management, payroll type app that would just make me as snug as a bug in a rug. ============================================================================= -Chris Watson (316) 326-3862 | FreeBSD Consultant, FreeBSD Geek Work: scanner@jurai.net | Open Systems Inc., Wellington, Kansas Home: scanner@deceptively.shady.org | http://open-systems.net ============================================================================= WINDOWS: "Where do you want to go today?" LINUX: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" BSD: "Are you guys coming or what?" ============================================================================= irc.openprojects.net #FreeBSD -Join the revolution! ICQ: 20016186 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 19:32:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtppop1pub.verizon.net (smtppop1pub.gte.net [206.46.170.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD56437B422 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:32:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from res03db2@gte.net) Received: from gte.net (evrtwa1-ar4-4-34-145-186.dsl.gtei.net [4.34.145.186]) by smtppop1pub.verizon.net with ESMTP for ; id VAA91396515 Thu, 26 Apr 2001 21:24:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from res03db2@localhost) by gte.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA02101 for FreeBSD-chat@FreeBSD.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:33:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from res03db2@gte.net) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 19:33:14 -0700 From: Robert Clark To: FreeBSD Chat Subject: What happened to freesoftware.com? Message-ID: <20010426193314.A2089@darkstar.gte.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org What happened to www.freesoftware.com? Hardware failure? Wind River fallout? [RC] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 23:39: 3 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from albatross-ext.wise.edt.ericsson.se (albatross-ext.wise.edt.ericsson.se [194.237.142.116]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B426C37B423 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 23:39:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Emma.Wermstrom@emw.ericsson.se) Received: from esealnt461 (esealnt461.al.sw.ericsson.se [153.88.251.61]) by albatross.wise.edt.ericsson.se (8.11.0/8.11.0/WIREfire-1.3) with SMTP id f3R6cwN08197 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:38:59 +0200 (MEST) Received: FROM esealnt742.al.sw.ericsson.se BY esealnt461 ; Fri Apr 27 08:38:58 2001 +0200 Received: by esealnt742.al.sw.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:34:16 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Emma_Wermstr=F6m_=28EMW=29?= To: "'freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.org'" Subject: ARS API libraries and includes (header files) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:38:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi! Can anyone let me know if there exists an ARS API for FreeBSD. I want to use the perl module ARSperl to extract data from an Action Request System database. I'm getting the following error message when running 'make' under FreeBSD: /usr/ar/api/lib/libar.a could no read symbols: File format not recognized. Error code 1 Thanks for any help, Emma To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 23:43:15 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-63-207-60-27.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [63.207.60.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 890CA37B422 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 23:43:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 13F9466E09; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 23:43:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 23:43:07 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Robert Clark Cc: FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: What happened to freesoftware.com? Message-ID: <20010426234307.A16739@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20010426193314.A2089@darkstar.gte.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6TrnltStXW4iwmi0" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010426193314.A2089@darkstar.gte.net>; from res03db2@gte.net on Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 07:33:14PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 07:33:14PM -0700, Robert Clark wrote: >=20 > What happened to www.freesoftware.com? >=20 > Hardware failure? >=20 > Wind River fallout? Network provider lameness. Kris --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE66RT7Wry0BWjoQKURAnoIAKD6HC4Fi+7Oi5bte99LH8652occ4QCg+L4B gCHpGmwmsaxqAZn59D2vW8U= =vvem -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6TrnltStXW4iwmi0-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 23:49:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mailout05.sul.t-online.com (mailout05.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.82]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B3F37B424 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 23:49:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from alex@cichlids.cichlids.com) Received: from fwd04.sul.t-online.com by mailout05.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 14t24L-0005Qm-03; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:49:33 +0200 Received: from neutron.cichlids.com (520050424122-0001@[217.1.52.15]) by fmrl04.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 14t24J-05mIj2C; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:49:31 +0200 Received: from cichlids.cichlids.com (cichlids.cichlids.com [192.168.0.10]) by neutron.cichlids.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B20BAB44; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:51:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cichlids.cichlids.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C82A414A81; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:49:16 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:49:16 +0200 From: Alexander Langer To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Trevor Johnson , Robert Clark , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: vmware anyone? Message-ID: <20010427084916.B1537@cichlids.cichlids.com> Mail-Followup-To: Alexander Langer , Dag-Erling Smorgrav , Trevor Johnson , Robert Clark , Technical Information , FreeBSD Chat References: <20010425202447.A441@darkstar.gte.net> <20010426124247.Z16200-100000@blues.jpj.net> <20010426193350.A16407@cichlids.cichlids.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from des@ofug.org on Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 11:43:36PM +0200 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 44 28 CA 4C 46 5B D3 A8 A8 E3 BA F3 4E 60 7D 7F X-PGP-at: finger alex@big.endian.de X-Verwirrung: Dieser Header dient der allgemeinen Verwirrung. X-Sender: 520050424122-0001@t-dialin.net Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Thus spake Dag-Erling Smorgrav (des@ofug.org): > > Yes, but it still doesn't work. The kernel module is ok, but the > > monitor-code from the plex86 folks does produce a fault in some > > assembler code that is written by hand, and I'm not able to fix that. > Do you have a trace and a listing of the code surrounding the fault? I'm sure I can create one. I'll do that this weekend. Alex -- cat: /home/alex/.sig: No such file or directory To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Apr 26 23:51:55 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from Spaz.HuntsvilleAL.COM (spaz.huntsvilleal.com [63.147.8.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3737437B424 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2001 23:51:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@catonic.net) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by Spaz.HuntsvilleAL.COM (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f3R6pbn55656; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 06:51:37 GMT Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 06:51:37 +0000 (GMT) From: Kris Kirby X-Sender: kris@spaz.huntsvilleal.com To: Kris Kennaway Cc: Robert Clark , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: What happened to freesoftware.com? In-Reply-To: <20010426234307.A16739@xor.obsecurity.org> Message-ID: X-Tech-Support-Email: bofh@catonic.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > What happened to www.freesoftware.com? > > > > Hardware failure? > > > > Wind River fallout? > > Network provider lameness. Were I that provider, I'd be *very* embarrassed. ----- Kris Kirby, KE4AHR | TGIFreeBSD... 'Nuff said. | ------------------------------------------------------- "Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 27 8:36: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from merchandisewholesale.com (ci392057-b.ruthfd1.tn.home.com [24.15.72.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0705537B42C for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:35:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cs@merchandisewholesale.com) From: "Merchandise WholeSale" To: Subject: Grand Opening Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:30:23 -0700 Reply-To: "Merchandise WholeSale" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <20010427153552.0705537B42C@hub.freebsd.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org First off I would like to Thank You for taking time to read this letter. Second of all your e-mail address was pulled from an on-line source. This is the only & last message you'll receive from us, so you don't have to worry about an unsubscribe list or spam. Nor will we give your e-mail out to any one else. I'd like to stop, and tell you about a new ON-LINE Retail store. Merchandise Wholesale, a retail store that has over 2,000 products for home,travel,jewelry,personal needs etc... Please take time out when you have it to browse our ON-LINE directory at http://www.merchandisewholesale.com Click on any images of the item to enlarge. Our site is always under constant change for the better. Thanks for your precious time, HTTP://MERCHANDISEWHOLESALE.COM promotions@merchandisewholesale.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 27 10:42:14 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from meow.osd.bsdi.com (meow.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.88]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0966437B63B for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:42:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (john@jhb-laptop.osd.bsdi.com [204.216.28.241]) by meow.osd.bsdi.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f3RHflG82291; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:41:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <001301c0cf40$8a492580$015778d8@sherline.net> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:41:04 -0700 (PDT) From: John Baldwin To: Jeremiah Gowdy Subject: Re: x86-64 Hammer and IA64 Itainium Cc: "Michael C . Wu" , chat@FreeBSD.org Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 27-Apr-01 Jeremiah Gowdy wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David O'Brien" > To: "Jeremiah Gowdy" > Cc: "Michael C . Wu" ; > > Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 5:08 AM > Subject: Re: x86-64 Hammer and IA64 Itainium > > >> On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:08:48PM -0700, Jeremiah Gowdy wrote: >> > >> > What's KA-64 ? >> >> AMD internal name for the x86-64. >> > > Cool. /me updates his vocab. > > /me realizes he's not on IRC. We're not? Isn't this just IRC with major lag and no netsplits? /me ducks -- John Baldwin -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 27 10:48:53 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp01.primenet.com (smtp01.primenet.com [206.165.6.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20BE37B423 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:48:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr07.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA23044; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:47:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr07.primenet.com(206.165.6.207) via SMTP by smtp01.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAwHaO.S; Fri Apr 27 10:47:05 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr07.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA01700; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:49:54 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104271749.KAA01700@usr07.primenet.com> Subject: Re: hotmail converted from freeBSD To: mwm@mired.org (Mike Meyer) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 17:49:48 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), herveyw@dynamic-cast.com (Hervey Wilson), markgiglio@yahoo.com (Mark Giglio), chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15080.47377.734245.834332@guru.mired.org> from "Mike Meyer" at Apr 26, 2001 07:10:57 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > The reasoning behind I/O completion ports is that it permits > > you to do something on completion of I/O, such as initiate yet > > another I/O (a "feedme" signal that is delivered reliably as an > > event, unlike a UNIX signal, which is merely a persistant > > condition). > > The author of the paper I referenced mentions that, but goes on to > state that what IO completions ports provide that some other Windows > facility doesn't is the ability to control how many threads are > actively dealing with the results of IO going through that port. The author is naieve, or is simplifying the situation intentionally. Are you in the Bay Area? I have full Microsoft documentation of the "VIPER" framework, which I could show you, but could not let you copy. You can abuse it that way, certainly, but you are doing so only in order to avoid properly marshalling objects. It turns out in the Windows model, that the virtual address spaces per thread are actually "copy on write". This effectively means that if thread "A" uses some thread local storage (all COM and DCOM objects are instances in thread local storage), and then thread "A" created thread "B", than all of the objects previously instanced in thread "A" thread local storage are accessible in thread "B", without explicit marshalling. This is not often talked about, since thread "A" could run as ADMIN, and thread "B" could do an "impersonate" prior to opening up a network connection, and you would then erroneously believe that you could only damage heap information, not instance information, if you were a malicious attacker who caused a buffer overflow in thread "B". AFAIK, there have been no attacks against NT or 2000 servers which take advantage of this, since it's really obscure, but IIS makes extensive use of this fact to avoid the need to do unnecessary marshalling, as do products from sufficiently clueful third parties. This is one of the thousands of reasons it's very hard for those companies hiring lower end talent to compete with those companies that spend the big buck on higher end, seriously clueful talent. So this "advantage" doesn't wash: I can get the same thing without completion ports by controlling my instancing and thread creation ordering, and simply knowing what the hell I am doing, instead of groping blindly based on assumption, rather than knowledge, of how things actually work. > > If you look at the FreeBSD threads design, it doesn't suffer from > > these problems (barring the "KSEG == CPU affinity" silliness that > > pops up in discussion on -arch occasionally). > > > > This _significantly_ saves on context switch overhead; in particular, > > it avoid reloading of control register 3, and TLB shootdown, which > > would otherwise result in significant processing overhead, even > > when switching between threads in the same group (since you can > > never know what thread the scheduler is going to pick, only that > > you are being preempted). > > The author listed two savings over the "thread per socket" model: one > was the memory resources used by that number of threads, and the other > was the context switch overhead. I couldn't see why you would get a > lot of context switch savings on a properly designed system. Glad to > see FreeBSD is such a system. The reason you can't get the savings on many systems is that it is nearly impossible to implement a scheduler which "perfers" a thread that doesn't require a TLB shootdown (change in virtual address space) over one that does, without shooting yourself in the foot, or strongly controlling your applications, to the point of not allowing third party code on your platform. The closest you can get is implementation of scheduler reservations -- the scheduler equivalent of implenting Djikstra's "Banker's Algorithm" as a means of livelock starvation of quantum avoidance. It turns out that Djikstra's Algorithm, if you've never heard of it, is massively conservative, to the point of commiting resources that never get consumed, but must be available "in case they are needed, since they may be needed". The only way to deal with this correctly is to decide that affinity is not a problem for the scheduler to resolve, but is instead an issue of negaffinity -- the "desire" of threads in a single thread group to run on different CPUs, and only to run on the same CPU if there is no other choice, or if overall load conditions dictate that that's a good decision. Thus the decision becomes one, not of when to schedule globally, but of when to migrate a process from the run queue of one CPU to another, due to overall run queue quantum load relative to the target run queue. NT doesn't quite achive this; their does v8 of Solaris. [ ... where to go to learn more about Windows ... ] > While I appreciate the suggestion, I'm not going to follow up on > it. If I ever find myself in a situation where the only income I can > get programming involves working with Windows, I'll start selling used > cars for a living. Not to be unkind, but I think that the reference book on Windows and threads that you have been quoting is probably no good. If nothing else, you should probably not trust it enough to influence your posts on public mailing lists. Experience is a better teacher, second only to the horse's mouth. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 27 11:38:10 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from gw.nectar.com (gw.nectar.com [208.42.49.153]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F4837B43C; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 11:38:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nectar@nectar.com) Received: from hamlet.nectar.com (hamlet.nectar.com [10.0.1.102]) by gw.nectar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1164193BD; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:37:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nectar@localhost) by hamlet.nectar.com (8.11.3/8.9.3) id f3RIbxw71926; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:37:59 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from nectar@spawn.nectar.com) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:37:59 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.org Subject: [SOLVED?] IBM ThinkPad X20 and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20010427133759.A71732@hamlet.nectar.com> Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i X-Url: http://www.nectar.com/ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [Bcc'd to -chat because there was general interest in this at one time. Please follow-up there if your message is not related to the technical content of this message. Thanks!] Hello all. This is the continuing saga of apparent incompatibilities between IBM's ThinkPad BIOS and FreeBSD. Summary for the impatient: I received a ThinkPad X20 yesterday, with BIOS version 2.12 and embedded controller program version 1.27 (the most recent available of each). It was preinstalled with Windows 2000 Professional. I shrunk the partition and installed FreeBSD. Thereafter, the BIOS would hang at boot, so that I could not boot off of any device. I downgraded to an older BIOS, and was then able to boot FreeBSD. BIOS version 2.12: The most recent. Hangs if FreeBSD is installed. version 2.10: Supposedly fixed, but unavailable for download or from tech support. version 2.07: Supposedly broken, but actually works with FreeBSD. More information: Those interested will already be aware of the BIOS problems that have plagued ThinkPads in the past 6 months or so. The issue was brought up on BSD Today [1] and Slashdot, and there was a discouraging description of the problem posted on IBM's tech support web site [2]. Later it was reported that the problem was fixed [3]. Shortly after, I ordered a ThinkPad X20 to replace my really well beaten Sony VAIO Z505. When I received the ThinkPad X20, it had two partitions: partition 1 was Windows 2000; partition 2 was the IBM Recovery Partition. Both were FAT32 formatted with partition id 28. The system worked fine under Windows 2000. There was no hibernation partition and I did not try anything to do with hibernation. After verifying the thing was in basic working order, I used PartitionMagic to shrink the Windows 2000 partition. I also installed BootMagic. This left me with pretty much the same partition table, except that the Windows 2000 partition started about 14 GB into the disk (20 GB total disk). I then verified everything still worked by rebooting a few times. Finally, I installed FreeBSD 4.2. FreeBSD was installed at the beginning of the disk in the 14 GB partition. My resulting partition table looked something like this: # ID type ~start ~size description 1 28 FAT32 14GB 4GB Windows 2000 2 28 FAT32 18GB 1GB IBM Recovery Partition 3 165 FreeBSD 0 14GB FreeBSD 4.2 Fairly simple set up. Once I rebooted after this new installation, the BIOS hung. I could not access the BIOS configuration menu, or boot off of any device. Searching the IBM web site led me to the location of BIOS and related updates [4]. One can see on the web site and in the release notes that the original problem was corrected. Here is an excerpt from the release notes for BIOS version 2.10 for the ThinkPad X20: <2.10 - 2.10(IZET90WW)> - (Fix) The system can't be booted from the hard disk drive whose partition ID is n5h (n is 1 or greater). At this point I was pretty confused, since naturally this fix should have also been in BIOS version 2.12 (the BIOS I was running). Yet the symptoms were exactly as those described in the originally reported problem and on these mailing lists. I decided that I would try downgrading to BIOS version 2.10. Only I couldn't find it for download! 2.07 and 2.12 were available, but not 2.10. This prompted me to contact IBM tech support. I was told by the (nice, helpful) tech there that version 2.10 was never made available for download and never will -- it was only factory installed. He didn't know why :-) The tech suggested downgrading to 2.07, and then back to 2.12 to see if that cleared anything up. I was skeptical, but I wanted to give support enough information so that the problem would be resolved, so I gave it a try. I removed the hard drive so I could boot of the System Program Service Diskette with BIOS version 2.07. The downgrade went smoothly. I replaced the hard drive, just to see what happened, and what-do-you-know: I could now boot normally again. As a sanity check, I went through the procedure to upgrade back to 2.12. Once this was done, my BIOS would hang at boot again. Again downgrading to 2.07 brought things back to `normal'. I reported the results back to IBM support, so that they could fix BIOS version 2.12. My ticket number for this problem is 16650354. I asked them to keep the ticket open -- I consider using the older BIOS a work-around only. If you have similar problems with your ThinkPad X20 or other ThinkPads, I encourage you to cross-reference my ticket number when contacting support. Now, if I were brave, I would create another dummy partition and mess around with different partition IDs to see if it matched the description of the bug fixed (i.e. supposedly any partition id that is a multiple of 16, plus 5 should trigger the bug). However, I don't have any way to access the ThinkPad hard drive should I get myself into a fix. If you have multiple ThinkPads or can otherwise frob your drive elsewhere to recover, I encourage you to do so and report your results here. I may report more later about how well this ThinkPad works under FreeBSD. For now I have to visit my in-laws for the weekend, and eat boiled crawfish and fried catfish. :-) Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org [1] [2] or go to IBM's web site and search for `thinkpad freebsd'. [3] [4] To find information about the bug fixes, search the *.txt files for the string `n5h'. The important files there for the ThinkPad X20 are: spsdiz88.exe Creates a bootable disk for installing BIOS v2.07 spsdiz88.txt Release notes for above. spsdiz92.exe Creates a bootable disk for installing BIOS v2.12 spsdiz92.txt Release notes for above. d2dfdfix.exe Creates a bootable disk for accessing the IBM Recovery Partition of your hard drive. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 27 15:53: 4 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from guru.mired.org (okc-65-26-235-186.mmcable.com [65.26.235.186]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2581937B422 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:53:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwm@mired.org) Received: (qmail 47710 invoked by uid 100); 27 Apr 2001 22:52:58 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15081.63562.908112.407519@guru.mired.org> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 17:52:58 -0500 To: Terry Lambert Cc: herveyw@dynamic-cast.com (Hervey Wilson), markgiglio@yahoo.com (Mark Giglio), chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: hotmail converted from freeBSD In-Reply-To: <200104271749.KAA01700@usr07.primenet.com> References: <15080.47377.734245.834332@guru.mired.org> <200104271749.KAA01700@usr07.primenet.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert types: > > > The reasoning behind I/O completion ports is that it permits > > > you to do something on completion of I/O, such as initiate yet > > > another I/O (a "feedme" signal that is delivered reliably as an > > > event, unlike a UNIX signal, which is merely a persistant > > > condition). > > > > The author of the paper I referenced mentions that, but goes on to > > state that what IO completions ports provide that some other Windows > > facility doesn't is the ability to control how many threads are > > actively dealing with the results of IO going through that port. > The author is naieve, or is simplifying the situation intentionally. Since he's discussing writing scalable network servers for NT 3.5, I'd say the latter. > Are you in the Bay Area? I have full Microsoft documentation of > the "VIPER" framework, which I could show you, but could not let > you copy. No. That - like LA - is a place I've escaped from. > So this "advantage" doesn't wash: I can get the same thing without > completion ports by controlling my instancing and thread creation > ordering, and simply knowing what the hell I am doing, instead of > groping blindly based on assumption, rather than knowledge, of how > things actually work. That was pretty much what I had assumed, and appreciate you verifying my assumption. > [ ... where to go to learn more about Windows ... ] > > > While I appreciate the suggestion, I'm not going to follow up on > > it. If I ever find myself in a situation where the only income I can > > get programming involves working with Windows, I'll start selling used > > cars for a living. > Not to be unkind, but I think that the reference book on Windows > and threads that you have been quoting is probably no good. If > nothing else, you should probably not trust it enough to influence > your posts on public mailing lists. Experience is a better teacher, > second only to the horse's mouth. It's not a book, it's a paper from MicroSoft on writing servers for NT. I don't trust it - some of the assumptions didn't mesh with my experience writing multithreaded servers on other platforms. That's why I asked about it on -chat - I wanted to know if MS's documentation was up the level of their software. I appreciate your verification that the authors assumptions were indeed bogus. The white paper that MS published on migrating Hotmail from FreeBSD to W2K makes these same assumptions, which is where this thread started. Since we're discussing proper behavior on public mailing lists, I'd suggest you read documents before critizing them publicly. The thing about the horses mouth, you know. http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 27 16: 0:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3581537B422 for ; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 16:00:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr02.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA02864; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 15:53:16 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr02.primenet.com(206.165.6.202) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAAcayJf; Fri Apr 27 15:53:10 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA13891; Fri, 27 Apr 2001 16:10:47 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200104272310.QAA13891@usr02.primenet.com> Subject: Re: hotmail converted from freeBSD To: mwm@mired.org (Mike Meyer) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 23:10:47 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), herveyw@dynamic-cast.com (Hervey Wilson), markgiglio@yahoo.com (Mark Giglio), chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <15081.63562.908112.407519@guru.mired.org> from "Mike Meyer" at Apr 27, 2001 05:52:58 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Not to be unkind, but I think that the reference book on Windows > > and threads that you have been quoting is probably no good. If > > nothing else, you should probably not trust it enough to influence > > your posts on public mailing lists. Experience is a better teacher, > > second only to the horse's mouth. > > It's not a book, it's a paper from MicroSoft on writing servers for > NT. I don't trust it - some of the assumptions didn't mesh with my > experience writing multithreaded servers on other platforms. That's > why I asked about it on -chat - I wanted to know if MS's documentation > was up the level of their software. I appreciate your verification > that the authors assumptions were indeed bogus. The white paper that > MS published on migrating Hotmail from FreeBSD to W2K makes these same > assumptions, which is where this thread started. The problem with these white papers, and most of Microsoft's code, is that the people who Know What They Are Doing are off doing much more interesting work than migrating legacy applications systems from where they used to run, to Microsoft platforms. > Since we're discussing proper behavior on public mailing lists, I'd > suggest you read documents before critizing them publicly. The thing > about the horses mouth, you know. I don't have to read the paper to know that, if it said what you said it said; I just need to know it's wrong. 8-). I got my information from the VIPER Technology Preview for IIS, and the authors of the OS, at a meeting in Redmond Washington, so I consider them to be more autoritative than hacks working on legacy code because they don't rate more interesting work. 8-). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Apr 28 9:55:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from aragorn.neomedia.it (aragorn.neomedia.it [195.103.207.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B404637B423 for ; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 09:55:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bartequi@neomedia.it) Received: (from httpd@localhost) by aragorn.neomedia.it (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f3SGtCn25934; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 18:55:12 +0200 (CEST) To: Ted Mittelstaedt Subject: RE: [going OT] Re: Any mail server software that could run on FreeBSD? Message-ID: <988476912.3aeaf5f05a015@webmail.neomedia.it> Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 18:55:12 +0200 (CEST) From: Salvo Bartolotta Cc: Mark Drayton , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.4-cvs X-WebMail-Company: Neomedia s.a.s. X-Originating-IP: 62.98.172.112 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [ I am very, very, sorry, but I REALLY could not help posting this... ] > This is like saying you'd be a better doctor if you just did the > operation first and learned about how the body worked later. Isn't this the way WindowsNT/2k people are **SUPPOSED** to work ? Oh, and they are forbidden by default -- inter alia -- to take a look at the code^H^H^H^Hbody internals. -- Salvo To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Apr 28 10:35: 2 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from aragorn.neomedia.it (aragorn.neomedia.it [195.103.207.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DA9D37B423 for ; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 10:34:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bartequi@neomedia.it) Received: (from httpd@localhost) by aragorn.neomedia.it (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f3SHXbA06443; Sat, 28 Apr 2001 19:33:37 +0200 (CEST) To: Nathan Dorfman Subject: Re: TeX and LaTeX [WAS: MUA stuff] Message-ID: <988479217.3aeafef137d36@webmail.neomedia.it> Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 19:33:37 +0200 (CEST) From: Salvo Bartolotta Cc: Rahul Siddharthan , Brooks Davis , Don Tyson , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.4-cvs X-WebMail-Company: Neomedia s.a.s. X-Originating-IP: 62.98.172.112 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Word and TeX are two totally different programs with different > purposes; the former is a 'word processor' while the latter is a > 'typesetting system'. BTW, lyx -- a program making use of LaTeX/TeX -- is "comparable" (if I may say so) to Word. It is also found in the ports. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message