To use your own IRC client, join channel #boycottnovell in FreeNode.
| balzac | photoshop, flash, dreamweaver *and* ASP, MS SQL, windows server administration | Apr 05 00:00 |
|---|---|---|
| balzac | not to mention 3dsmax | Apr 05 00:00 |
| Balrog_ | well, of all those, photoshop and flash and 3dsmax are probably still viable | Apr 05 00:00 |
| balzac | i was going to learn to use all of that | Apr 05 00:00 |
| balzac | i don't use any of it anymore | Apr 05 00:00 |
| Balrog_ | although 3dsmax is considered very messy | Apr 05 00:00 |
| oiaohm | I went a different path. | Apr 05 00:01 |
| oiaohm | I added up the cost of closed source of what I do said O boy cannot aford that. | Apr 05 00:01 |
| oiaohm | Then found open source tools that did it all for free. | Apr 05 00:01 |
| balzac | I thought I'd be able to buy licenses after I got a great job in some special-effects shop | Apr 05 00:01 |
| MinceR | i didn't have any income nor the means to even buy most of the sw i used | Apr 05 00:02 |
| balzac | until then, I was just thrilled to have copies of it with dongle-cracks | Apr 05 00:02 |
| Balrog_ | balzac: much of that software is timed-licence | Apr 05 00:02 |
| balzac | now I wouldn't pay one nickel for a collection of proprietary software binaries | Apr 05 00:02 |
| Balrog_ | so you rent it, not buy it | Apr 05 00:02 |
| oiaohm | I have had to yes dongle-cracks | Apr 05 00:02 |
| oiaohm | yes/use | Apr 05 00:02 |
| oiaohm | Because dongles broke. | Apr 05 00:02 |
| Balrog_ | I can get proprietary software legally from several sources | Apr 05 00:02 |
| MinceR | well now i can too | Apr 05 00:03 |
| MinceR | but i don't really need it | Apr 05 00:03 |
| oiaohm | Now you can. | Apr 05 00:03 |
| oiaohm | Proprietary are getting desprate. | Apr 05 00:03 |
| MinceR | at least commodity sw | Apr 05 00:03 |
| oiaohm | All I have to do is enrol in a course and I get all of MS and Adobe for nothering. | Apr 05 00:03 |
| Balrog_ | the big problem with open sourcing a lot of proprietary sw is shared code | Apr 05 00:04 |
| MinceR | operating systems, office apps, stuff like that | Apr 05 00:04 |
| oiaohm | And claim the course back on my tax return. | Apr 05 00:04 |
| Balrog_ | and patents | Apr 05 00:04 |
| Balrog_ | oiaohm: where are you located? | Apr 05 00:04 |
| oiaohm | Australia | Apr 05 00:04 |
| MinceR | oiaohm: do people exploit that? :) | Apr 05 00:04 |
| oiaohm | MS and Adobe is basically dumping software on education at the monent. Hell yes. | Apr 05 00:05 |
| Balrog_ | well, MS more | Apr 05 00:05 |
| Balrog_ | here, we have to PAY for adobe software for education | Apr 05 00:05 |
| Balrog_ | less than retail, but still a few hundred at least | Apr 05 00:05 |
| oiaohm | That was last year. | Apr 05 00:05 |
| balzac | oiaohm: met a new bartender from australia in one of the bars I frequent | Apr 05 00:05 |
| Balrog_ | they changed it? | Apr 05 00:05 |
| balzac | I had to ask her for a Fosters | Apr 05 00:06 |
| oiaohm | Here they did. | Apr 05 00:06 |
| Balrog_ | oiaohm: are you sure they're not paying for a site license? | Apr 05 00:06 |
| balzac | Also asked if I could call her "Sheila". | Apr 05 00:06 |
| oiaohm | Education licence includes home usage balzac | Apr 05 00:06 |
| balzac | "put another shrimp on the barbie", I said. She said they call em prawns. | Apr 05 00:07 |
| MinceR | but not usage for profit? | Apr 05 00:07 |
| Balrog_ | oiaohm: but you have to pay for an educational license ..... | Apr 05 00:07 |
| oiaohm | Course last 12 months exactly the same ammount of time as the tax. | Apr 05 00:07 |
| oiaohm | Nop Balrog_ | Apr 05 00:07 |
| Balrog_ | where? j/w | Apr 05 00:07 |
| Balrog_ | (URL) | Apr 05 00:07 |
| oiaohm | Software is provided as part of studing. | Apr 05 00:07 |
| oiaohm | Tafe system and Uni systems. Most campes here. | Apr 05 00:08 |
| Balrog_ | hrm. that's probably an MSDN-AA style arrangement, where the school is paying | Apr 05 00:08 |
| oiaohm | Yep | Apr 05 00:08 |
| oiaohm | On a per student base. | Apr 05 00:08 |
| oiaohm | No matter how many machines are installed with it. | Apr 05 00:08 |
| MinceR | we have that too | Apr 05 00:08 |
| MinceR | campus, msdn -- and the taxpayers are paying. | Apr 05 00:08 |
| Balrog_ | we have that, except that my school has two computer departments | Apr 05 00:08 |
| Balrog_ | one gets it, the other doesn't | Apr 05 00:08 |
| oiaohm | Australians | Apr 05 00:09 |
| Balrog_ | (a general computer services department, and the computer science department) | Apr 05 00:09 |
| oiaohm | If there is a way to get cheep software they do. | Apr 05 00:09 |
| oiaohm | Its really funny. | Apr 05 00:11 |
| oiaohm | Under the MSDN-AA its under 100 AUD per year to give students access to all MS software. | Apr 05 00:12 |
| oiaohm | Yet buying educuational versions of the same software would set you back over 1000 dollars for a single machine. | Apr 05 00:12 |
| oiaohm | MS pricing is crap. | Apr 05 00:13 |
| Balrog_ | the whole school pays 100AUD per year? or is that per student? | Apr 05 00:13 |
| oiaohm | per student. | Apr 05 00:13 |
| Balrog_ | hrm. | Apr 05 00:13 |
| oiaohm | I am allowed to claim upto 500 dollars are year on training through the tax system. | Apr 05 00:14 |
| oiaohm | And I can enrol and claim just before I have to do tax return. | Apr 05 00:14 |
| oiaohm | Basically goverment is paying for everything. | Apr 05 00:14 |
| oiaohm | Kinda makes it hard to get open source off the ground here. | Apr 05 00:15 |
| Balrog_ | :( | Apr 05 00:16 |
| oiaohm | So not as lucky where you are Balrog_ | Apr 05 00:16 |
| Balrog_ | I see. | Apr 05 00:17 |
| Balrog_ | Here the IT people hate MS | Apr 05 00:17 |
| oiaohm | I hate MS | Apr 05 00:17 |
| Balrog_ | but they can't get rid of it : | Apr 05 00:17 |
| Balrog_ | :( | Apr 05 00:17 |
| oiaohm | Same | Apr 05 00:17 |
| oiaohm | Linux is just missing key bits to take over a business network. | Apr 05 00:17 |
| *_Hicham_ (n=liveuser@41.249.2.52) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 00:18 | |
| oiaohm | Until then least money going to microsoft the better is my idea Balrog_ | Apr 05 00:18 |
| Balrog_ | yes. Here they use 95% linux servers though | Apr 05 00:18 |
| Balrog_ | yes, I'm not purchasing any MS products | Apr 05 00:18 |
| oiaohm | Its bit like the stupid question how much does 10 copyies of vista cost. | Apr 05 00:19 |
| oiaohm | Basically as much as you are dumb enough to pay. | Apr 05 00:19 |
| _Hicham_ | oiaohm : everybody pays for Vista | Apr 05 00:20 |
| oiaohm | I have seen a copy of Vista volume for under 15 dollars. | Apr 05 00:20 |
| _Hicham_ | where that oiaohm? | Apr 05 00:20 |
| _Hicham_ | there in Australia? | Apr 05 00:21 |
| oiaohm | Supprising how much threating to switch to Linux and being able to for a business made the Vista price just drop. | Apr 05 00:21 |
| _Hicham_ | Vista price is null now | Apr 05 00:22 |
| _Hicham_ | Vista is a null pointer | Apr 05 00:22 |
| oiaohm | Remember a vista volume includes the right to install XP. | Apr 05 00:22 |
| oiaohm | Instead. | Apr 05 00:22 |
| oiaohm | You are normally not buying them for Vista. | Apr 05 00:23 |
| oiaohm | Yet MS classes every Vista volume licence as a Vista sale. | Apr 05 00:23 |
| _Hicham_ | Vista is dead | Apr 05 00:24 |
| Balrog_ | yes :/ | Apr 05 00:24 |
| Balrog_ | web stats are more accurate, probably | Apr 05 00:24 |
| oiaohm | Worse | Apr 05 00:24 |
| oiaohm | Windows 7 is designed to upgrade from Vista no XP | Apr 05 00:24 |
| oiaohm | Things are going to get interesting to say the least. | Apr 05 00:25 |
| Balrog_ | http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/200... | Apr 05 00:25 |
| oiaohm | I am expecting lot of upset people before end of year. | Apr 05 00:25 |
| Balrog_ | firefox 3 has surpassed IE 7 in Europe | Apr 05 00:25 |
| Balrog_ | IE 6 is still used a lot | Apr 05 00:25 |
| MinceR | they deserve to be upset if they still want to use windows :> | Apr 05 00:25 |
| oiaohm | Hmm that looks very much like the SSL sites graphic. | Apr 05 00:27 |
| oiaohm | I think we have a converance. | Apr 05 00:27 |
| oiaohm | More firefox usage more servers using Linux. | Apr 05 00:27 |
| Balrog_ | IE is steadly losing ground | Apr 05 00:28 |
| _Hicham_ | vive Firefox | Apr 05 00:28 |
| oiaohm | So is windows server in the SSL market | Apr 05 00:28 |
| MinceR | gn | Apr 05 00:28 |
| oiaohm | http://news.netcraft.com/archives/... << I like that netcraft has had to make a new benchmark | Apr 05 00:29 |
| oiaohm | The old ones have been stuffed by qq.com. | Apr 05 00:29 |
| DaemonFC | Firefox is crap, but IE is beyond crap | Apr 05 00:30 |
| DaemonFC | so yay Firefox | Apr 05 00:30 |
| oiaohm | At the rate qq.com is growning domains it will be the most dominate domain holder by end of year. | Apr 05 00:30 |
| oiaohm | And no one knows what OS qq.com is using. | Apr 05 00:30 |
| _Hicham_ | I still have to use IE from time to time | Apr 05 00:30 |
| Balrog_ | isn't qq.com using modified apache? | Apr 05 00:30 |
| oiaohm | We are not even sure of that Balrog_ | Apr 05 00:31 |
| Balrog_ | hrm. | Apr 05 00:31 |
| oiaohm | modified apache is a guess. | Apr 05 00:31 |
| oiaohm | http://www.acme.com/software/thttpd/ Performance shape matches a non appache | Apr 05 00:31 |
| _Hicham_ | oiaohm : u never recovered data for them? | Apr 05 00:32 |
| oiaohm | Not yet. If I do get a chance it will be interesting to find out. | Apr 05 00:32 |
| oiaohm | MS has depended on just buying domains to keep there netcraft numbers up. | Apr 05 00:33 |
| oiaohm | qq.com is also doing the same thing. | Apr 05 00:33 |
| balzac | http://www.buzzfeed.com/expreside... | Apr 05 00:34 |
| oiaohm | I like that only about 19 percent of sites people visit are IIS | Apr 05 00:34 |
| oiaohm | And 66 percent are appache. | Apr 05 00:34 |
| oiaohm | MS is for sure not the most dominate in webspace. | Apr 05 00:34 |
| DaemonFC | that's cause all they can do is ape things that have nearly impenatrable mindshare | Apr 05 00:35 |
| DaemonFC | and can't subvert them with hidden APIs and other dirty tricks | Apr 05 00:35 |
| DaemonFC | cause they're web-based | Apr 05 00:35 |
| DaemonFC | Apache runs on Windows too | Apr 05 00:37 |
| DaemonFC | Microsoft is also a member of the Apache foundation | Apr 05 00:37 |
| oiaohm | I think that is more that MS is waking up they have lost the war there. | Apr 05 00:37 |
| DaemonFC | they've given up trying to fight Linux as a platform and instead have focused on getting its killer apps running great on Windows | Apr 05 00:38 |
| DaemonFC | which is a good move, for them | Apr 05 00:38 |
| DaemonFC | customers were not moving to Linux cause it's cheaper | Apr 05 00:38 |
| DaemonFC | cause it's not | Apr 05 00:38 |
| DaemonFC | they were going there cause the apps they wanted were there | Apr 05 00:39 |
| oiaohm | Its both. | Apr 05 00:39 |
| Balrog_ | hrm ... Linux is not cheaper? Maintenance wise, it is | Apr 05 00:39 |
| DaemonFC | RHEL is more expensive to roll out than Windows | Apr 05 00:39 |
| Balrog_ | we use Fedora | Apr 05 00:39 |
| oiaohm | MS Cal system is the problem. | Apr 05 00:39 |
| oiaohm | In large networks. | Apr 05 00:39 |
| DaemonFC | well, Fedora is stupid to use on anything important | Apr 05 00:39 |
| DaemonFC | it regularly has bugs getting introduced and then fixes | Apr 05 00:40 |
| DaemonFC | and there's no support for it | Apr 05 00:40 |
| oiaohm | RHEL slight more expensive is very quicky undone when you get over 100 cals. | Apr 05 00:40 |
| DaemonFC | *fixed | Apr 05 00:40 |
| DaemonFC | Fedora is not something you want to have to trust | Apr 05 00:40 |
| Balrog_ | well somehow we survive with Fedora | Apr 05 00:40 |
| Balrog_ | :) | Apr 05 00:40 |
| oiaohm | Large end have major problems with MS pricing. | Apr 05 00:40 |
| Balrog_ | :) | Apr 05 00:40 |
| Balrog_ | :) | Apr 05 00:40 |
| oiaohm | Low end yes its the apps | Apr 05 00:41 |
| DaemonFC | you should be using CentOS | Apr 05 00:41 |
| DaemonFC | if you don't need paid support | Apr 05 00:41 |
| Balrog_ | I don't make these decisions | Apr 05 00:41 |
| oiaohm | MS basically has two problems. | Apr 05 00:41 |
| Balrog_ | DaemonFC: Fedora works good. | Apr 05 00:41 |
| oiaohm | Other thing ever tried clustering windows. | Apr 05 00:41 |
| oiaohm | Things are not fun. | Apr 05 00:42 |
| DaemonFC | Fedora has lots of bugs | Apr 05 00:42 |
| _Hicham_ | I am using Fedora right now | Apr 05 00:42 |
| _Hicham_ | Fedora just rocks | Apr 05 00:42 |
| DaemonFC | they get fixed about as often as new ones appear | Apr 05 00:42 |
| DaemonFC | it's not a stable platform | Apr 05 00:42 |
| oiaohm | TCO on a cluster Linux wins. | Apr 05 00:42 |
| DaemonFC | they'll even tell you that | Apr 05 00:42 |
| Balrog_ | well, somehow having all the critical servers running fedora works for us. | Apr 05 00:42 |
| _Hicham_ | it is bleeding edge | Apr 05 00:42 |
| _Hicham_ | lot of servers run fedora | Apr 05 00:42 |
| DaemonFC | meh, good for them? | Apr 05 00:42 |
| DaemonFC | It's not a headache I want | Apr 05 00:43 |
| oiaohm | There is worse. | Apr 05 00:43 |
| _Hicham_ | what distro do u use? | Apr 05 00:43 |
| oiaohm | Server build from gentoo is worse. | Apr 05 00:43 |
| _Hicham_ | DaemonFC never said its favorite distro | Apr 05 00:43 |
| Balrog_ | I use gentoo and it works fine. | Apr 05 00:44 |
| DaemonFC | right now I'm on Ubuntu's development branch with a kernel I built from GIT | Apr 05 00:44 |
| DaemonFC | and it's mroe stable than anything I've used from Fedora | Apr 05 00:44 |
| oiaohm | As long as you don't have one person tweek a incorrect build option Balrog_ | Apr 05 00:44 |
| DaemonFC | distribution kernels are the devil | Apr 05 00:45 |
| *PetoKraus has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) | Apr 05 00:45 | |
| DaemonFC | if you don't do anything else, get rid of that | Apr 05 00:45 |
| *PetoKraus (n=pk@fsf/member/petokraus) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 00:45 | |
| *_Hicham_1 (n=liveuser@41.249.35.189) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 00:50 | |
| *_Hicham_1 has quit (Remote closed the connection) | Apr 05 00:56 | |
| *_Hicham_1 (n=hicham@41.249.35.189) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 01:04 | |
| _Hicham_1 | oiaohm : did u use fedora ? | Apr 05 01:04 |
| Balrog_ | oiaohm: we don't rebuild kernels | Apr 05 01:05 |
| _Hicham_1 | Balrog_ : why? | Apr 05 01:05 |
| _Hicham_1 | lack of time? | Apr 05 01:05 |
| Balrog_ | no need | Apr 05 01:05 |
| _Hicham_1 | why no need? | Apr 05 01:06 |
| _Hicham_1 | it can be optimized for ur needs | Apr 05 01:06 |
| Balrog_ | yes I know | Apr 05 01:07 |
| *_Hicham_ has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) | Apr 05 01:08 | |
| oiaohm | I have used Fedora | Apr 05 01:09 |
| _Hicham_1 | oiaohm : how do u rank yum compared to apt? | Apr 05 01:09 |
| oiaohm | For basic web server fine for more complex stuff where many servers are involved it becomes trouble some. | Apr 05 01:09 |
| oiaohm | Because the likes of ldap are not aways properly tested under Fedora | Apr 05 01:10 |
| oiaohm | So can lead to interesting and strange problems. | Apr 05 01:10 |
| *mib_rbt0aj (i=ad191cb9@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-72cf81a57a291c9c) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 01:10 | |
| oiaohm | Centos is blood releation is fine. | Apr 05 01:10 |
| oiaohm | yum and apt both sux in there own way. | Apr 05 01:10 |
| _Hicham_1 | apt sucks? | Apr 05 01:10 |
| oiaohm | Really goes down to the package format. | Apr 05 01:11 |
| oiaohm | deb allowes configure on install rpm does not | Apr 05 01:11 |
| oiaohm | Depending on what you are doing sometimes you want the configure on install. | Apr 05 01:11 |
| _Hicham_1 | apt is faster than yum | Apr 05 01:11 |
| _Hicham_1 | according to my experience | Apr 05 01:11 |
| *mib_rbt0aj has quit (Client Quit) | Apr 05 01:11 | |
| oiaohm | apt on deb | Apr 05 01:11 |
| _Hicham_1 | yes | Apr 05 01:12 |
| oiaohm | With configure on install messages comming up. | Apr 05 01:12 |
| oiaohm | Can be a minor pain in but at times. | Apr 05 01:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | yes | Apr 05 01:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | like showing licenses | Apr 05 01:12 |
| oiaohm | Yep | Apr 05 01:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | for examples Sun Java license | Apr 05 01:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | or configuring new kernels | Apr 05 01:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | allowing u to choose what to do to menu.lst | Apr 05 01:13 |
| oiaohm | Nothing is perfect. | Apr 05 01:13 |
| _Hicham_1 | I know | Apr 05 01:13 |
| oiaohm | I really wish deb and rpm would just bit the bullet and merge. | Apr 05 01:13 |
| _Hicham_1 | but deb format is very simple compared to rpm | Apr 05 01:13 |
| oiaohm | Taking the best features from both. | Apr 05 01:13 |
| oiaohm | Neither is techically better than the othr. | Apr 05 01:14 |
| Balrog_ | rpm is very powerful | Apr 05 01:14 |
| _Hicham_1 | it will never happen | Apr 05 01:14 |
| Balrog_ | and yum makes it even more powerful | Apr 05 01:14 |
| _Hicham_1 | Balrog_ : depends on what powerful means | Apr 05 01:14 |
| oiaohm | rpm5.org is heading down the path to merge. | Apr 05 01:14 |
| oiaohm | Single package manager handling either rpm or deb packages. | Apr 05 01:14 |
| oiaohm | Last bit is really unify the file formats. | Apr 05 01:15 |
| _Hicham_1 | Debian won't ever let down deb format | Apr 05 01:15 |
| oiaohm | Balrog_ There have been years of debates of RPM vs DEB in LSB packaging mailing list. | Apr 05 01:15 |
| _Hicham_1 | it is the basement of Debian | Apr 05 01:15 |
| oiaohm | Debian as already said they would drop deb. | Apr 05 01:16 |
| _Hicham_1 | LSB recommends rpm | Apr 05 01:16 |
| oiaohm | If the replacement provided the same feature set. | Apr 05 01:16 |
| oiaohm | RPM does not. | Apr 05 01:16 |
| _Hicham_1 | oiaohm : when did Debian said that? | Apr 05 01:16 |
| _Hicham_1 | said/say | Apr 05 01:16 |
| oiaohm | 2002 first and about 6 time since in packaging talks at LSB. | Apr 05 01:16 |
| oiaohm | Deb is not exactly important to them. | Apr 05 01:17 |
| oiaohm | Its the features. | Apr 05 01:17 |
| _Hicham_1 | then the new format will be backwards compatible | Apr 05 01:17 |
| oiaohm | Like call the package manager activate the programs configurations tools. | Apr 05 01:17 |
| oiaohm | No they don't care about backwards compatible. | Apr 05 01:18 |
| oiaohm | They made that more than clear. | Apr 05 01:18 |
| _Hicham_1 | but rpm still doesn't provide configure on install | Apr 05 01:18 |
| oiaohm | If the package format has all the features they use + more they would drop theres in a hart beat. | Apr 05 01:18 |
| oiaohm | It would basically become a legacy format only. | Apr 05 01:18 |
| oiaohm | Debian is not the road block on packaging as such. | Apr 05 01:19 |
| oiaohm | As some RPM people try to make out. | Apr 05 01:19 |
| _Hicham_1 | then rpm should provide all the features of deb | Apr 05 01:20 |
| oiaohm | Debian even has a exact list they want meet for them to drop deb for good. | Apr 05 01:20 |
| _Hicham_1 | what did LSB say? | Apr 05 01:20 |
| oiaohm | Reason why LSB allows packaging as RPM and DEB at this stage. | Apr 05 01:20 |
| oiaohm | Both can be offical marked as LSB binaries. | Apr 05 01:21 |
| _Hicham_1 | so rpm is trying to provide what Debian requires? | Apr 05 01:21 |
| oiaohm | rpm5.org is going a different path. | Apr 05 01:21 |
| _Hicham_1 | how ? | Apr 05 01:22 |
| oiaohm | First make a package manager that don't care what is feed in ie deb or rpm it will install both. | Apr 05 01:22 |
| oiaohm | So legacy support exists. | Apr 05 01:22 |
| oiaohm | then worry about merging the formats. | Apr 05 01:22 |
| oiaohm | Why I say I wish the merge would just happen. | Apr 05 01:22 |
| oiaohm | So we can say by by to rpm and deb. | Apr 05 01:22 |
| _Hicham_1 | yes, that would be great | Apr 05 01:23 |
| _Hicham_1 | especially for commercial applications | Apr 05 01:23 |
| oiaohm | LSB is also working on plan B | Apr 05 01:23 |
| _Hicham_1 | packaging is one of the blocking roads to Linux Unification | Apr 05 01:23 |
| oiaohm | Embed dynmaic link loader in executable. | Apr 05 01:23 |
| oiaohm | So binary installer can always work. | Apr 05 01:24 |
| oiaohm | If we cannot get package manger developers to agree by pass the bastards. | Apr 05 01:24 |
| _Hicham_1 | so u r proposing a method like Windows? | Apr 05 01:24 |
| _Hicham_1 | rely on the binary installer? | Apr 05 01:25 |
| oiaohm | That is plan b if plan a is not quick enough. | Apr 05 01:26 |
| oiaohm | Binary installer will have the means to use the package database if allowed to register and install through. | Apr 05 01:27 |
| oiaohm | Basically something is going to happen to the packaging problem one way or the other. | Apr 05 01:27 |
| oiaohm | LSB is not mucking around any more. | Apr 05 01:27 |
| _Hicham_1 | Plan B will never happen | Apr 05 01:28 |
| _Hicham_1 | personally, I can't trust a binary installer | Apr 05 01:28 |
| oiaohm | Plan B code is over 70 percent complete. | Apr 05 01:28 |
| _Hicham_1 | this will make Linux another Windows | Apr 05 01:28 |
| oiaohm | Plan A is no where near there. | Apr 05 01:29 |
| oiaohm | If package manager makers cannot get along they leave no other option. | Apr 05 01:29 |
| _Hicham_1 | no distro will abide by that | Apr 05 01:30 |
| _Hicham_1 | there is already autopackage | Apr 05 01:30 |
| _Hicham_1 | did u use autopackage? | Apr 05 01:30 |
| _Hicham_1 | autopackage brings Windows approach to Linux | Apr 05 01:30 |
| oiaohm | Package so far developed by LSB does not need any Distribution dependancies other than the Linux kernel. | Apr 05 01:30 |
| oiaohm | So Distrobutions have not a single word they can say to stop plan B | Apr 05 01:30 |
| oiaohm | It is the out come if they don't get there backsides in order. | Apr 05 01:31 |
| oiaohm | LSB is not playing. | Apr 05 01:31 |
| oiaohm | 8 years of trying to get distributions to agree on packages they are sick of it. | Apr 05 01:31 |
| oiaohm | If making it worse is required so be it. | Apr 05 01:32 |
| _Hicham_1 | will they force the distros to? | Apr 05 01:32 |
| oiaohm | LSB binarys after the alterations are able to operate completely indendpant to what the distribution provides. | Apr 05 01:33 |
| oiaohm | So distribtions will really not have a say. | Apr 05 01:33 |
| oiaohm | ISV want a install everywhere solution and they will get it. | Apr 05 01:33 |
| oiaohm | Either Distrobutions step up to plate and do it or be disreguard. | Apr 05 01:34 |
| _Hicham_1 | it is very hard | Apr 05 01:34 |
| oiaohm | LSB has tried nice for 8 years. | Apr 05 01:35 |
| _Hicham_1 | can they force distros to? | Apr 05 01:35 |
| oiaohm | They don't need to. | Apr 05 01:35 |
| _Hicham_1 | how? | Apr 05 01:35 |
| oiaohm | The packages only depend on one thing the Linux kernel. | Apr 05 01:35 |
| oiaohm | After that they are able to do there own thing. | Apr 05 01:36 |
| _Hicham_1 | it is autopackage then | Apr 05 01:36 |
| oiaohm | Linux kernel has always had this feature designed in. | Apr 05 01:36 |
| _Hicham_1 | did u use autopackage? | Apr 05 01:36 |
| oiaohm | Not exactly. | Apr 05 01:36 |
| _Hicham_1 | how? | Apr 05 01:36 |
| oiaohm | autopackage wraps into a native package. | Apr 05 01:36 |
| oiaohm | These installers don't. | Apr 05 01:36 |
| DaemonFC | AutoPackage is a bad idea | Apr 05 01:36 |
| DaemonFC | creates conflicts with your distributions package manager | Apr 05 01:37 |
| _Hicham_1 | is this ready? | Apr 05 01:37 |
| oiaohm | If distribution does not provide a registration interface of package kit they will not know what files have been installed. | Apr 05 01:37 |
| oiaohm | As I say this will make a mess. | Apr 05 01:37 |
| oiaohm | LSB don't care any more. | Apr 05 01:37 |
| DaemonFC | And like I said yesterday, LSB simply introduces more bugs into distros when they try to work around bugs in the LSB test suite | Apr 05 01:37 |
| oiaohm | LSB applications will be able to operate in there own directory independant to what distrobution provides. | Apr 05 01:38 |
| _Hicham_1 | is there any available LSB apps? | Apr 05 01:38 |
| oiaohm | Yes there are _Hicham_1 | Apr 05 01:38 |
| _Hicham_1 | give me one for example | Apr 05 01:39 |
| oiaohm | Orcale database. | Apr 05 01:39 |
| oiaohm | And its support tools. | Apr 05 01:39 |
| oiaohm | StarOffice. | Apr 05 01:39 |
| oiaohm | There are quite a few. | Apr 05 01:39 |
| _Hicham_1 | do they work on major distros? | Apr 05 01:39 |
| oiaohm | Even the way openoffice Linux binaries are packaged are to LSB standard. | Apr 05 01:40 |
| oiaohm | Yes they do _Hicham_1 | Apr 05 01:40 |
| oiaohm | As long as LSB support packages are installed. | Apr 05 01:40 |
| oiaohm | Distributions refused to install they by default. | Apr 05 01:40 |
| oiaohm | You are away DaemonFC that LSB on any distribution has its own dynamic linker so there is no need to alter main packages to match LSB. | Apr 05 01:41 |
| oiaohm | To pass LSB tests. | Apr 05 01:41 |
| oiaohm | Basically it a load of crap that distributions have to break support with there native applications to support LSB. | Apr 05 01:42 |
| oiaohm | Its a nice big myth so distributions don't have to make it work. | Apr 05 01:42 |
| oiaohm | There is no reason why if distributions worked with each other why they could not provide LSB support as a common shared runtime. | Apr 05 01:42 |
| _Hicham_1 | so LSB packages will exist with native packages | Apr 05 01:43 |
| _Hicham_1 | ? | Apr 05 01:43 |
| oiaohm | They can. | Apr 05 01:44 |
| oiaohm | Always has been able to. | Apr 05 01:44 |
| _Hicham_1 | then I won't develop LSB Applications | Apr 05 01:44 |
| _Hicham_1 | I will stick to deb format | Apr 05 01:44 |
| oiaohm | Its only true requirement has been that its support libraries be installed. | Apr 05 01:44 |
| oiaohm | Binary installer makes that optional. | Apr 05 01:45 |
| _Hicham_1 | I don't like binary installers | Apr 05 01:45 |
| oiaohm | It also goes after the out edge distributions who don't want to standardise with any other distribution. | Apr 05 01:45 |
| _Hicham_1 | I try to avoid them as much as possible | Apr 05 01:45 |
| _Hicham_1 | rpm won't even offer configure during install | Apr 05 01:46 |
| _Hicham_1 | is there something like Debconf on rpm? | Apr 05 01:46 |
| oiaohm | Binary installer is design if distrobution support it that binary installer can be run in a limited account. | Apr 05 01:46 |
| oiaohm | And all installed files be approved. | Apr 05 01:46 |
| DaemonFC | LSB has their head so far up Red Hat/Novells ass | Apr 05 01:46 |
| _Hicham_1 | LSB choosed rpm | Apr 05 01:47 |
| DaemonFC | mmhm | Apr 05 01:47 |
| oiaohm | No rpm is one of those things. | Apr 05 01:47 |
| DaemonFC | even though Dpkg is older and better | Apr 05 01:47 |
| oiaohm | Everyone sat down at a table LSB officals ask everyone to vote on it. | Apr 05 01:47 |
| oiaohm | by an agreed method. | Apr 05 01:47 |
| _Hicham_1 | merge rpm with deb | Apr 05 01:48 |
| oiaohm | Debian did not place object to vote before vote. | Apr 05 01:48 |
| _Hicham_1 | yes to that | Apr 05 01:48 |
| _Hicham_1 | provide all the features of both, yes | Apr 05 01:48 |
| oiaohm | Only after so LSB tried to force it so there other votes could not be disreguard | Apr 05 01:48 |
| oiaohm | Yes biggest LSB mistake in its history. | Apr 05 01:48 |
| oiaohm | Never been forgoten. | Apr 05 01:49 |
| _Hicham_1 | they have been bribed by RedHat/Novell | Apr 05 01:49 |
| oiaohm | No | Apr 05 01:49 |
| _Hicham_1 | that is why they choose rpm | Apr 05 01:49 |
| _Hicham_1 | why not merge? | Apr 05 01:49 |
| _Hicham_1 | they can work on that | Apr 05 01:49 |
| *Balrog_ has quit () | Apr 05 01:49 | |
| _Hicham_1 | bring Debian devs and RedHat devs to work on a solution together | Apr 05 01:50 |
| oiaohm | You are aware that LSB specifuation RPM format basically does not work. | Apr 05 01:50 |
| oiaohm | You built a package by that it will not install. | Apr 05 01:50 |
| _Hicham_1 | the specification is not respected by RedHat? | Apr 05 01:50 |
| oiaohm | Simple fact LSB has refused to keep on updating it if merge work does not happen. | Apr 05 01:51 |
| oiaohm | LSB has resisted in placed. | Apr 05 01:51 |
| oiaohm | Problem is they cannot just dump a vote without risking invalidating other votes. | Apr 05 01:51 |
| _Hicham_1 | Binary Installers = Obscurity | Apr 05 01:52 |
| _Hicham_1 | we well go again to Windows | Apr 05 01:52 |
| _Hicham_1 | well/will | Apr 05 01:53 |
| _Hicham_1 | Binary installers with spyware and so on | Apr 05 01:53 |
| _Hicham_1 | and the system is fucked | Apr 05 01:53 |
| oiaohm | You can install spyware with deb and rpm as well. | Apr 05 01:55 |
| oiaohm | You should be aware that release of binary only installers line up with real-time virus scanning support being added to Linux kernel. | Apr 05 01:55 |
| oiaohm | Yes hello windows. | Apr 05 01:56 |
| _Hicham_1 | wow | Apr 05 01:57 |
| _Hicham_1 | great | Apr 05 01:57 |
| _Hicham_1 | we will end up with Windows problems | Apr 05 01:57 |
| _Hicham_1 | and call for MS for some help :D | Apr 05 01:58 |
| oiaohm | Not all | Apr 05 01:59 |
| oiaohm | If distrobutions provide interface applications cannot install everywhere. | Apr 05 01:59 |
| oiaohm | And cannot be installed in away that is not uninstallable. | Apr 05 02:00 |
| oiaohm | Now distrobutions who don't take part will have there distribution reduced to being as bad as windows. | Apr 05 02:00 |
| _Hicham_1 | what about certified packages? | Apr 05 02:00 |
| DaemonFC | yeah, LSB is nothing more than a system of threats for cash | Apr 05 02:01 |
| oiaohm | LSB provides certified packages. | Apr 05 02:01 |
| _Hicham_1 | the packages will be certified by LSB? | Apr 05 02:01 |
| _Hicham_1 | even commercial certified packages? | Apr 05 02:01 |
| oiaohm | Yes. | Apr 05 02:01 |
| _Hicham_1 | that will be great | Apr 05 02:01 |
| _Hicham_1 | finally we can have native pirated photoshop on Linux | Apr 05 02:02 |
| _Hicham_1 | or native pirated macromedia flash | Apr 05 02:02 |
| oiaohm | Its about getting rid of the reason why companies will not release packages on Linux. | Apr 05 02:02 |
| _Hicham_1 | like we have native pirated nero | Apr 05 02:02 |
| _Hicham_1 | there is already solutions for that | Apr 05 02:03 |
| _Hicham_1 | binary installers like those of Real Player | Apr 05 02:03 |
| _Hicham_1 | and Google | Apr 05 02:03 |
| oiaohm | Look closer at googles. | Apr 05 02:03 |
| oiaohm | Were do you think the design for this new system is coming from. | Apr 05 02:03 |
| oiaohm | Ie plan b. | Apr 05 02:03 |
| _Hicham_1 | but Debian resists | Apr 05 02:04 |
| _Hicham_1 | there is a deb creator for googleearth | Apr 05 02:04 |
| _Hicham_1 | and a deb creator for sun java | Apr 05 02:04 |
| _Hicham_1 | and everything works well | Apr 05 02:04 |
| oiaohm | They can and they are slowly kiling themselfs. | Apr 05 02:04 |
| _Hicham_1 | so we don't have to fuck our package management system | Apr 05 02:05 |
| _Hicham_1 | why killing themselves? | Apr 05 02:05 |
| oiaohm | All the extra maintaining time wasted on duplicating work. | Apr 05 02:05 |
| oiaohm | That could go into more useful things. | Apr 05 02:05 |
| _Hicham_1 | we can create a wrapper around binary installers to create deb packages | Apr 05 02:05 |
| oiaohm | Reason why part of this solution is a clean interface to distribution. | Apr 05 02:05 |
| oiaohm | To do equal to having a deb rpm or what ever else package. | Apr 05 02:06 |
| oiaohm | for registration in package database. | Apr 05 02:06 |
| _Hicham_1 | clean interface means abondon of native package management | Apr 05 02:06 |
| _Hicham_1 | why not stick with the installers? | Apr 05 02:06 |
| _Hicham_1 | who is having this problem, commercial entities, right? | Apr 05 02:06 |
| oiaohm | And open source entities | Apr 05 02:07 |
| _Hicham_1 | no | Apr 05 02:07 |
| oiaohm | Anyone want to release packages for all distributions. | Apr 05 02:07 |
| oiaohm | Is having hell. | Apr 05 02:07 |
| _Hicham_1 | open source entities don't have this problem | Apr 05 02:07 |
| _Hicham_1 | because the distros do it | Apr 05 02:07 |
| oiaohm | There are many that have the problem. | Apr 05 02:07 |
| _Hicham_1 | example? | Apr 05 02:07 |
| oiaohm | Take wine. | Apr 05 02:07 |
| oiaohm | Ubuntu ships a wine package that is custom altered. | Apr 05 02:08 |
| oiaohm | Same with many other distributions. | Apr 05 02:08 |
| _Hicham_1 | it is their right | Apr 05 02:08 |
| oiaohm | So errors happen. So wine is forced to do there own package as well. | Apr 05 02:08 |
| oiaohm | To work out if its the distribution alteration or a real fault. | Apr 05 02:08 |
| _Hicham_1 | u mean upstream/downstream cooperation? | Apr 05 02:08 |
| oiaohm | Its costing massive ammounts of time. | Apr 05 02:08 |
| oiaohm | There is not any cooperation from distributions. | Apr 05 02:08 |
| oiaohm | For lots of them. | Apr 05 02:09 |
| _Hicham_1 | well, the major ones do | Apr 05 02:09 |
| oiaohm | Ubuntu don't. | Apr 05 02:09 |
| oiaohm | Debian don't | Apr 05 02:09 |
| oiaohm | Both think they have the right to patch anything and not have to take repsonablity for it. | Apr 05 02:09 |
| oiaohm | So yes Open source project are harmed. | Apr 05 02:10 |
| oiaohm | They want a unifined installer of some form to get out of distribution hell. | Apr 05 02:10 |
| oiaohm | And reduce there overheads. | Apr 05 02:10 |
| oiaohm | Ubuntu will even complete disreguard instructions not to back port particular patches because they are broken. | Apr 05 02:11 |
| oiaohm | You really need to get up close and personal with distrubitons to know how bad this is. | Apr 05 02:12 |
| *oiaohm has quit (Remote closed the connection) | Apr 05 02:12 | |
| _Hicham_1 | DaemonFC : are u still here? | Apr 05 02:16 |
| DaemonFC | I really don't care is LSB takes off because it's a scam anyway | Apr 05 02:17 |
| DaemonFC | so they can charge a fortune to certify something as Linux | Apr 05 02:17 |
| DaemonFC | it'll be effectively as bad as UNIX | Apr 05 02:17 |
| _Hicham_1 | what do u say about upstream/downstream cooperation? | Apr 05 02:17 |
| _Hicham_1 | DaemonFC : where is ur trolling talent? | Apr 05 02:20 |
| _Hicham_1 | not even a troll now | Apr 05 02:23 |
| _Hicham_1 | schestowitz is already asleep | Apr 05 02:24 |
| DaemonFC | I wouldn't cooperate with a group trying to blackmail me | Apr 05 02:25 |
| DaemonFC | if I had a distro | Apr 05 02:25 |
| DaemonFC | why should Ubuntu or Debian? | Apr 05 02:25 |
| _Hicham_1 | I am talking about upstream/downstream cooperation | Apr 05 02:27 |
| DaemonFC | no blackmail isn't really the word | Apr 05 02:27 |
| DaemonFC | so much as extortion | Apr 05 02:27 |
| _Hicham_1 | it is not blackmail | Apr 05 02:27 |
| DaemonFC | yeah it is | Apr 05 02:27 |
| DaemonFC | they want huge licensing fees | Apr 05 02:27 |
| DaemonFC | to get to say you're LSB-compliant | Apr 05 02:27 |
| _Hicham_1 | do u agree that upstream should cooperate with downstream? | Apr 05 02:27 |
| _Hicham_1 | I am not talking about LSB now | Apr 05 02:28 |
| _Hicham_1 | I agree with u, LSB is suspicious | Apr 05 02:28 |
| DaemonFC | yeah, I agree they should work together instead of tugging on each other | Apr 05 02:28 |
| DaemonFC | Ubuntu's notify-osd daemon is an example of them not being friendly with upstream | Apr 05 02:28 |
| _Hicham_1 | but the fact is that the distros make it harder | Apr 05 02:28 |
| _Hicham_1 | exactly | Apr 05 02:29 |
| _Hicham_1 | now u get me | Apr 05 02:29 |
| _Hicham_1 | there is a real problem in there | Apr 05 02:29 |
| DaemonFC | I chewed them out about it and they got defensive | Apr 05 02:29 |
| _Hicham_1 | it is a huge work for upstream to set repos for each distro | Apr 05 02:29 |
| DaemonFC | yet they admit that without Ubuntu-specific patches, GNOME won't even build or work on Ubuntu now | Apr 05 02:29 |
| _Hicham_1 | wow | Apr 05 02:30 |
| _Hicham_1 | that is not good at all | Apr 05 02:30 |
| DaemonFC | you can't get upstream GNOME to build or run | Apr 05 02:30 |
| _Hicham_1 | they are not playing good | Apr 05 02:30 |
| _Hicham_1 | unlike fedora policy | Apr 05 02:30 |
| _Hicham_1 | they try to stay close to upstream | Apr 05 02:30 |
| _Hicham_1 | which I really like | Apr 05 02:30 |
| DaemonFC | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam... | Apr 05 02:31 |
| DaemonFC | "We currently do not have the infrastructure to provide a real "pure" GNOME environment, since some patches will even be required just to build and work at all under Ubuntu." | Apr 05 02:31 |
| DaemonFC | :) | Apr 05 02:31 |
| DaemonFC | so to preempt anyone accusing me of trolling | Apr 05 02:31 |
| DaemonFC | UBUNTU said it | Apr 05 02:31 |
| _Hicham_1 | so they messed GNOME really bad | Apr 05 02:32 |
| _Hicham_1 | because there is no Debian build for 2.26 | Apr 05 02:32 |
| DaemonFC | GNOME isn't messed up | Apr 05 02:33 |
| _Hicham_1 | that is why they are stumbling upon | Apr 05 02:33 |
| DaemonFC | Ubuntu is messed up | Apr 05 02:33 |
| DaemonFC | and they have to patch GNOME against their specific GNOME patches | Apr 05 02:33 |
| _Hicham_1 | that is what I meant | Apr 05 02:33 |
| _Hicham_1 | they did a bad job | Apr 05 02:33 |
| _Hicham_1 | not like debian one | Apr 05 02:33 |
| _Hicham_1 | debian tries to stay close to Gnome | Apr 05 02:34 |
| DaemonFC | now maybe they do good work and maybe they don't, but GNOME should not be made totally incompatible with GNOME in any event ;) | Apr 05 02:34 |
| DaemonFC | I happen to like notify-osd from a user perspective | Apr 05 02:34 |
| DaemonFC | but if it creates incompatibility with upstream GNOME, it should not be used | Apr 05 02:35 |
| DaemonFC | I have a suspicion that Ubuntu is trying to strongarm GNOME into taking notify-osd | Apr 05 02:35 |
| DaemonFC | like it or not | Apr 05 02:35 |
| DaemonFC | :) | Apr 05 02:35 |
| _Hicham_1 | good suggestion | Apr 05 02:37 |
| _Hicham_1 | but that means further cooperation with GNOME | Apr 05 02:37 |
| _Hicham_1 | but Ubuntu don't work closely with Upstream | Apr 05 02:37 |
| _Hicham_1 | unlike Fedora | Apr 05 02:37 |
| _Hicham_1 | Fedora ships the latest GNOME always | Apr 05 02:38 |
| DaemonFC | Ubuntu doesn't have to work closely with upstream | Apr 05 02:38 |
| _Hicham_1 | why? | Apr 05 02:38 |
| DaemonFC | they're a second tier rebranding of Debian | Apr 05 02:38 |
| _Hicham_1 | but people don't have to report bugs to upstream | Apr 05 02:38 |
| _Hicham_1 | just launchpad | Apr 05 02:38 |
| DaemonFC | from their perspective, they only need to maintain patches on top of whatever Debian pumps out | Apr 05 02:38 |
| _Hicham_1 | bad perspective | Apr 05 02:39 |
| DaemonFC | that's why Ubuntu contributes very few patches upstream | Apr 05 02:39 |
| _Hicham_1 | Debian didn't pump out GNOME 2.26 | Apr 05 02:39 |
| DaemonFC | you won't see that happen unless they just get frustrated at dealing with the same bug | Apr 05 02:39 |
| DaemonFC | every time they pull Debian packages | Apr 05 02:39 |
| _Hicham_1 | this time unfortunately, they have to be on their own | Apr 05 02:40 |
| DaemonFC | yeah, cause nobody else uses notify-osd | Apr 05 02:40 |
| DaemonFC | which should give them more incentive to ask GNOME to make it official | Apr 05 02:40 |
| DaemonFC | so that they don't have to fix it every time GNOME does something that breaks it | Apr 05 02:40 |
| DaemonFC | unfortunately, I don't think that they think like that | Apr 05 02:41 |
| _Hicham_1 | notify-osd is not that big invention | Apr 05 02:42 |
| _Hicham_1 | they should have done sthg useful | Apr 05 02:42 |
| DaemonFC | the new notifications are definitely less of an annoyance | Apr 05 02:42 |
| DaemonFC | and provide a good deal of usability improvement | Apr 05 02:42 |
| _Hicham_1 | so u liked notify-osd? | Apr 05 02:42 |
| DaemonFC | well, yes I do | Apr 05 02:42 |
| DaemonFC | you don't have to bother closing them, you can't close them | Apr 05 02:43 |
| DaemonFC | they go away on their own | Apr 05 02:43 |
| DaemonFC | with no timer counting down | Apr 05 02:43 |
| DaemonFC | and you can click through them | Apr 05 02:43 |
| DaemonFC | they become transparent if you need to mouse over them | Apr 05 02:43 |
| _Hicham_1 | it is not that big invention though | Apr 05 02:43 |
| _Hicham_1 | it can be merged in GNOME | Apr 05 02:43 |
| *tessier (n=treed@unused-105-40-113.ixpres.com) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 02:44 | |
| DaemonFC | it's much less of a shock to receive a notification from something now | Apr 05 02:44 |
| DaemonFC | and you don't have to feel like you need to do something with it | Apr 05 02:44 |
| DaemonFC | on its own it's not a huge thing | Apr 05 02:44 |
| _Hicham_1 | at least Ubuntu contributes | Apr 05 02:45 |
| DaemonFC | it's one of those "if we make a dozen things more user-friendly, our system becomes easier to maintain as a whole" | Apr 05 02:45 |
| DaemonFC | like greasing a squeaky wheel | Apr 05 02:45 |
| _Hicham_1 | no it won't | Apr 05 02:46 |
| _Hicham_1 | if they don't stick to upstream | Apr 05 02:46 |
| _Hicham_1 | they need Debian anyway | Apr 05 02:46 |
| _Hicham_1 | that is what I like in Fedora, their involvment with Upstream | Apr 05 02:47 |
| DaemonFC | the way they explained it, the notify-osd system is invoked the same way as the old notifications system | Apr 05 02:47 |
| DaemonFC | and their version has actually flushed out bugs in apps that don't conform to the freedesktop.org specs | Apr 05 02:48 |
| DaemonFC | and Ubuntu has patched them to comply | Apr 05 02:48 |
| DaemonFC | that's what they told me anyway | Apr 05 02:48 |
| DaemonFC | I dunno, one way of looking at Ubuntu is that what's good for Ubuntu is good for Linux | Apr 05 02:49 |
| DaemonFC | and Shuttleworth has said he has no interest in backalley deals with MS or acknowledging any of their patent claims | Apr 05 02:50 |
| DaemonFC | so I'm sort of comfortable with them, for now | Apr 05 02:50 |
| DaemonFC | Right now Ubuntu and Fedora are leaders in the Linux world, nothing else is attracting that many users | Apr 05 02:51 |
| _Hicham_1 | Ethically, Ubuntu isn't very much FOSS Leader | Apr 05 02:52 |
| _Hicham_1 | take for example launchpad | Apr 05 02:52 |
| _Hicham_1 | malone, rosetta | Apr 05 02:52 |
| _Hicham_1 | they are all closed source | Apr 05 02:52 |
| _Hicham_1 | that means a lot | Apr 05 02:52 |
| _Hicham_1 | the entity is trying to be profitable | Apr 05 02:53 |
| DaemonFC | Bazaar is open source | Apr 05 02:53 |
| _Hicham_1 | who created bazaar? | Apr 05 02:53 |
| DaemonFC | Canonical | Apr 05 02:53 |
| DaemonFC | and Upstartd is open sourced | Apr 05 02:53 |
| DaemonFC | and is now used by Fedora too | Apr 05 02:53 |
| _Hicham_1 | Fedora uses Bazaar? | Apr 05 02:54 |
| DaemonFC | like I said, they're greasing a lot of wheels that have been squeaking | Apr 05 02:54 |
| DaemonFC | no | Apr 05 02:54 |
| DaemonFC | Fedora uses Upstart | Apr 05 02:54 |
| DaemonFC | which was made by Canonical | Apr 05 02:54 |
| DaemonFC | Upstart is a replacement for init, it could also replace cron and anacron but nobody is using it for that, yet | Apr 05 02:55 |
| DaemonFC | it is backwards compatible with SysVInit though | Apr 05 02:55 |
| _Hicham_1 | Upstart is used by Ubuntu too? | Apr 05 02:55 |
| DaemonFC | so you can run it with the exact same scripts if you like | Apr 05 02:56 |
| DaemonFC | yep | Apr 05 02:56 |
| _Hicham_1 | didn't know that... | Apr 05 02:56 |
| DaemonFC | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upstart | Apr 05 02:56 |
| _Hicham_1 | but why launchpad isn't open-sourced? | Apr 05 02:56 |
| DaemonFC | I don't even see why it wouldn't work with Solaris or FreeBSD | Apr 05 02:56 |
| DaemonFC | unless there's a license issue for some reason | Apr 05 02:56 |
| _Hicham_1 | does it improve boot time? | Apr 05 02:58 |
| DaemonFC | Canonical is releasing Launchpad under free software licenses | Apr 05 02:58 |
| DaemonFC | Storm was the first component released as free software | Apr 05 02:58 |
| DaemonFC | it can | Apr 05 02:58 |
| DaemonFC | Upstart can be multi-threaded | Apr 05 02:58 |
| _Hicham_1 | Upstart is licensed to Canonical? | Apr 05 02:59 |
| DaemonFC | so you can have it use multiple CPU cores to do its work at boot time | Apr 05 02:59 |
| DaemonFC | but faster boot wasn't the main reason for it | Apr 05 02:59 |
| DaemonFC | it's smarter than SysVInit | Apr 05 02:59 |
| DaemonFC | it can be triggered to do things by event | Apr 05 03:00 |
| DaemonFC | rather than by script | Apr 05 03:00 |
| DaemonFC | no, Upstart is GPL licensed | Apr 05 03:00 |
| DaemonFC | version 2 or later I believe | Apr 05 03:00 |
| _Hicham_1 | by the way, the guy who created Upstart, was an ex-debian dev | Apr 05 03:01 |
| DaemonFC | yeah | Apr 05 03:01 |
| DaemonFC | but he's a Canonical employee now | Apr 05 03:01 |
| DaemonFC | that's where they head hunt | Apr 05 03:01 |
| DaemonFC | I usually read the Official Ubuntu Book whenever they republish it | Apr 05 03:01 |
| DaemonFC | it's a decent walkthrough on all the new features | Apr 05 03:02 |
| _Hicham_1 | by stealing debian devs? | Apr 05 03:02 |
| DaemonFC | not really | Apr 05 03:04 |
| DaemonFC | by employing them | Apr 05 03:04 |
| _Hicham_1 | and blocking them from contributing to debian? | Apr 05 03:04 |
| DaemonFC | no | Apr 05 03:04 |
| DaemonFC | plenty of things that started in Ubuntu end up in Debian | Apr 05 03:05 |
| DaemonFC | if they don't it's usually cause Debian's policy turned it down | Apr 05 03:05 |
| DaemonFC | a lot of the user-friendliness of Debian Lenny comes from things they cherry picked out of Ubuntu | Apr 05 03:05 |
| _Hicham_1 | example? | Apr 05 03:06 |
| DaemonFC | software updates, add/remove programs, just lots of little stuff | Apr 05 03:06 |
| DaemonFC | I believe dash is /bin/sh | Apr 05 03:06 |
| DaemonFC | Ubuntu started that a couple years ago | Apr 05 03:06 |
| DaemonFC | they still use SysVInit though | Apr 05 03:07 |
| DaemonFC | that's their loss | Apr 05 03:07 |
| DaemonFC | Upstart also makes for a more reliable system | Apr 05 03:08 |
| _Hicham_1 | u mean the gnome-app-install package? | Apr 05 03:08 |
| DaemonFC | because it can respawn daemons that die for whatever reason | Apr 05 03:08 |
| DaemonFC | where SysVInit cannot | Apr 05 03:08 |
| _Hicham_1 | well, they need time to prove it is stable | Apr 05 03:09 |
| DaemonFC | Ubuntu has been using it since October 2006 | Apr 05 03:09 |
| DaemonFC | Fedora has been using it since Fedora 9 | Apr 05 03:09 |
| _Hicham_1 | Debian has its own policy | Apr 05 03:10 |
| DaemonFC | which is why Ubuntu exists | Apr 05 03:10 |
| _Hicham_1 | I know | Apr 05 03:10 |
| DaemonFC | Debian releases are slow and unpredictable | Apr 05 03:10 |
| _Hicham_1 | I don't say that Ubuntu shouldn't exist | Apr 05 03:10 |
| DaemonFC | and their policies are ludicrous in some ways | Apr 05 03:10 |
| _Hicham_1 | I agree | Apr 05 03:10 |
| _Hicham_1 | but it is the price for freedom | Apr 05 03:10 |
| DaemonFC | Debian isn't free | Apr 05 03:11 |
| _Hicham_1 | how? | Apr 05 03:11 |
| DaemonFC | by free software standards it's not | Apr 05 03:11 |
| DaemonFC | that's why the FSF does not recommend Debian | Apr 05 03:11 |
| DaemonFC | it ships with non-free blobs | Apr 05 03:11 |
| _Hicham_1 | in the non-free repo yes | Apr 05 03:11 |
| DaemonFC | and has easy access to a store of non-free components | Apr 05 03:11 |
| DaemonFC | no | Apr 05 03:11 |
| DaemonFC | it has non-free stuff by default | Apr 05 03:12 |
| DaemonFC | in the kernel | Apr 05 03:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | the firmwares? | Apr 05 03:12 |
| DaemonFC | yeah | Apr 05 03:12 |
| DaemonFC | those make it non-free as a distribution | Apr 05 03:12 |
| DaemonFC | according to the FSF | Apr 05 03:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | well, I had to install a lot of firmwares by hand | Apr 05 03:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | for the wireless card | Apr 05 03:12 |
| DaemonFC | the FSF has a script that you can run on Linux kernel source | Apr 05 03:12 |
| DaemonFC | to strip out the blobs | Apr 05 03:12 |
| _Hicham_1 | for the sound card I had to compile them | Apr 05 03:13 |
| DaemonFC | but good luck getting a lot of stuff to work after that | Apr 05 03:13 |
| _Hicham_1 | that is the problem | Apr 05 03:13 |
| _Hicham_1 | that is why they created gNewSense | Apr 05 03:13 |
| _Hicham_1 | to make ur life more difficult | Apr 05 03:13 |
| DaemonFC | and gNewSense doesn't work right, and is crippled | Apr 05 03:13 |
| DaemonFC | even where it has no reason to be | Apr 05 03:13 |
| _Hicham_1 | basically, the Ubuntu approach is perfect | Apr 05 03:14 |
| DaemonFC | gNewSense removed GLX even though GLX is free software | Apr 05 03:14 |
| DaemonFC | because it wasn't free "enough" | Apr 05 03:14 |
| _Hicham_1 | wow | Apr 05 03:14 |
| DaemonFC | and kept it out even after SGI revised the license | Apr 05 03:14 |
| DaemonFC | to remove the parts they complained about | Apr 05 03:14 |
| DaemonFC | so that crippled GPUs like Intel and some AMD/ATI Radeons | Apr 05 03:15 |
| _Hicham_1 | gNewSense should be horrible | Apr 05 03:15 |
| DaemonFC | which have free drivers that can use the 3d acceleration of GLX | Apr 05 03:15 |
| _Hicham_1 | worse than Fedora in its early days | Apr 05 03:15 |
| DaemonFC | Well, Fedora really only limits things based on if someone will sue them | Apr 05 03:16 |
| DaemonFC | lol | Apr 05 03:16 |
| DaemonFC | kind of like Ubuntu | Apr 05 03:16 |
| _Hicham_1 | Fedora now is more cutting edge than Ubuntu | Apr 05 03:16 |
| DaemonFC | so like my wifi card works in either one, but I have to go find an mp3 codec | Apr 05 03:17 |
| _Hicham_1 | with their release of Fedora 11 | Apr 05 03:17 |
| DaemonFC | B-) | Apr 05 03:17 |
| _Hicham_1 | Fedora also have the gnome-codec-install package by default | Apr 05 03:17 |
| DaemonFC | Fedora is just stupid sometimes | Apr 05 03:17 |
| DaemonFC | it still can't boot on Ext4 | Apr 05 03:17 |
| Hi | Apr 05 03:17 | |
| DaemonFC | or XFS | Apr 05 03:17 |
| _Hicham_1 | Fedora 11? | Apr 05 03:17 |
| DaemonFC | Not cause GRUB can't boot them | Apr 05 03:17 |
| DaemonFC | because Fedora won't allow you | Apr 05 03:18 |
| here's a LOL article from Computer World http://blogs.computerworld.com/anot... | Apr 05 03:18 | |
| DaemonFC | yeah, Fedora 11 | Apr 05 03:18 |
| DaemonFC | Ubuntu Jaunty can boot Ext4 or XFS | Apr 05 03:18 |
| it ends, -> At the beginning, this guy said he wanted "Portability, Battery and Power". He got a 16-inch laptop that isn't considered very portable to say the least. It has the same processor as an entry level MacBook. The battery is substandard at best. He got none of what he wanted Congratulations G. You are a PC. | Apr 05 03:18 | |
| DaemonFC | without a separate /boot | Apr 05 03:18 |
| _Hicham_1 | Maybe because they don't trust Ext4 yet | Apr 05 03:19 |
| DaemonFC | Telling the user to make a separate /boot even though GRUB supports /boot on Ext4 or XFS is just stupid | Apr 05 03:19 |
| Why do you want a journaled file system for binaries? | Apr 05 03:19 | |
| DaemonFC | maybe I don't like to make a lot of unnecessary partitions? | Apr 05 03:20 |
| DaemonFC | Maybe I like booting a couple seconds quicker | Apr 05 03:20 |
| DaemonFC | maybe I don't want to guess at how much space to allocate | Apr 05 03:20 |
| Ext2 works for my /usr and /var | Apr 05 03:20 | |
| DaemonFC | Maybe I want one type of fs | Apr 05 03:20 |
| DaemonFC | and one type only | Apr 05 03:21 |
| DaemonFC | If I make /boot on Ext3 I have to give my kernel Ext3 support | Apr 05 03:21 |
| if you want speed, you don't want a journal but I don't think there's that big of a difference. | Apr 05 03:21 | |
| DaemonFC | My kernel onl ysupports Ext4 | Apr 05 03:21 |
| DaemonFC | cause it's all I use | Apr 05 03:22 |
| DaemonFC | the Ext4 driver can mount Ext3 volumes just fine | Apr 05 03:22 |
| DaemonFC | as Ext4 | Apr 05 03:22 |
| DaemonFC | and if you don't enable Extents, it stays compatible with Ext3 | Apr 05 03:22 |
| DaemonFC | B-) | Apr 05 03:22 |
| If you can compile your own kernel, it should not be too difficult for you to make FC do what you want. | Apr 05 03:22 | |
| DaemonFC | not if the setup won't let you | Apr 05 03:22 |
| DaemonFC | and won't let you override it | Apr 05 03:23 |
| DaemonFC | I've have to dump the fresh install onto an external hard disk | Apr 05 03:23 |
| DaemonFC | then mkfs.xfs | Apr 05 03:23 |
| DaemonFC | then restore onto the new XFS volume | Apr 05 03:23 |
| DaemonFC | that's more workthan it's worth | Apr 05 03:23 |
| why don't you modify the install? | Apr 05 03:24 | |
| DaemonFC | Anaconda is just a python app, I probably could force it to not be stupid if I wanted to bother running Fedora | Apr 05 03:24 |
| DaemonFC | but there's little point in that | Apr 05 03:24 |
| then why complain? | Apr 05 03:25 | |
| DaemonFC | cause they're file system nazis | Apr 05 03:25 |
| DaemonFC | :P | Apr 05 03:25 |
| DaemonFC | :) | Apr 05 03:25 |
| Ok | Apr 05 03:25 | |
| What else is going on? | Apr 05 03:25 | |
| I have not had much time to look at news today. | Apr 05 03:26 | |
| DaemonFC | RPM Fusion's Nvidia driver is also corrupt | Apr 05 03:26 |
| DaemonFC | so you have to use Nvidia's .run script | Apr 05 03:26 |
| DaemonFC | which defeats the purpose of having a package manager | Apr 05 03:26 |
| nvidia is corrupt but I'm told that's changing :-D | Apr 05 03:26 | |
| DaemonFC | and at this point I may as well jsut maintain the kernel myself too | Apr 05 03:26 |
| DaemonFC | and that means building RPMs, yuck | Apr 05 03:27 |
| DaemonFC | and so on.... | Apr 05 03:27 |
| DaemonFC | B-) | Apr 05 03:27 |
| DaemonFC | Fedora does not reward you for poking around with it | Apr 05 03:27 |
| DaemonFC | trying to make it work super well | Apr 05 03:27 |
| _Hicham_1 | better buy Intel cards | Apr 05 03:28 |
| _Hicham_1 | or ATI, as their drivers are getting open sourced | Apr 05 03:28 |
| DaemonFC | Inhtel does not make cards | Apr 05 03:29 |
| DaemonFC | they make integrated chipsets | Apr 05 03:29 |
| DaemonFC | they perform badly | Apr 05 03:29 |
| DaemonFC | and you can't upgrade them with a better Intel chip | Apr 05 03:29 |
| DaemonFC | without replacing the motherboard | Apr 05 03:29 |
| _Hicham_1 | ATI will be open source soon | Apr 05 03:30 |
| DaemonFC | not really | Apr 05 03:31 |
| DaemonFC | they released some specs of their hardware | Apr 05 03:31 |
| DaemonFC | and the community has built a better driver than the company that has access to ALL the specs cause they BUILT the hardware | Apr 05 03:31 |
| DaemonFC | lol | Apr 05 03:31 |
| DaemonFC | and did it all in under 2 years | Apr 05 03:32 |
| _Hicham_1 | they can't release the complete code | Apr 05 03:32 |
| *twitter (n=willhill@ip72-203-149-158.br.br.cox.net) has left #boycottnovell | Apr 05 03:36 | |
| _Hicham_1 | DaemonFC : still here? | Apr 05 03:43 |
| DaemonFC | sure | Apr 05 03:43 |
| _Hicham_1 | it is not that easy to open source the code | Apr 05 03:44 |
| _Hicham_1 | the original code is not under a single license | Apr 05 03:45 |
| _Hicham_1 | usually there is more than one license in the original code | Apr 05 03:45 |
| _Hicham_1 | so open source ATI drivers is not that easy | Apr 05 03:47 |
| _Hicham_1 | where do u leave DaemonFC? | Apr 05 03:48 |
| _Hicham_1 | leave/live | Apr 05 03:48 |
| *_Hicham_1 (n=hicham@41.249.35.189) has left #boycottnovell | Apr 05 03:52 | |
| *_Hicham_1 (n=hicham@41.249.35.189) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 04:04 | |
| *_Hicham_1 (n=hicham@41.249.35.189) has left #boycottnovell | Apr 05 04:05 | |
| *zer0c00l (n=zer0c00l@117.97.155.181) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 05:50 | |
| zer0c00l | Gadgets that make u look like a jerk -> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/... | Apr 05 05:51 |
| zer0c00l | poor microsoft attacks gnu/linux | Apr 05 05:51 |
| zer0c00l | linux is not a gadget :P ..probably written by some 14 year old jerk | Apr 05 05:52 |
| *Omar87 has quit (Remote closed the connection) | Apr 05 06:03 | |
| DaemonFC | it says in the article that MSNBC is owned by Microsoft, lol | Apr 05 06:04 |
| DaemonFC | as they are ridiculing their competition | Apr 05 06:05 |
| *zer0c00l (n=zer0c00l@117.97.155.181) has left #boycottnovell ("Leaving") | Apr 05 06:33 | |
| schestowitz | hey | Apr 05 06:37 |
| schestowitz | I missed this funny about Fleury.. http://www.infoworld.com/d/open-s... | Apr 05 07:08 |
| schestowitz | This article is wrongly suggesting that Google is "open-source": http://news.alibaba.com/articl... No mention of OOo? 0_o | Apr 05 07:30 |
| *mib_r8tuo9 (i=44e625da@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-a6d539022abdb1ad) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 07:31 | |
| *mib_r8tuo9 has quit (Client Quit) | Apr 05 07:31 | |
| schestowitz | Another company that thinks "open source" means exploiting a community.. http://mybroadband.co.z... | Apr 05 07:32 |
| schestowitz | http://www.webwire.com/View... "Past OSCON sponsors and exhibitors included Intel, Microsoft, Sun..." | Apr 05 07:48 |
| schestowitz | Germany invests €500 million in FOSS http://www.information-age.com/channels/... | Apr 05 08:08 |
| schestowitz | "This surprising move means not only that the list of signatories is shrinking further--I have confirmation that Google has refused to sign, along with the already well-known Amazon and Microsoft declinations" This suggests that Microsoft just simply snubbed it again. just like it did with ODF... | Apr 05 08:40 |
| schestowitz | Microsoft apologist: http://government.zdnet.com/?p=4553 | Apr 05 08:57 |
| schestowitz | Critics slam Microsoft bridge as waste of stimulus money < http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/... > | Apr 05 09:13 |
| schestowitz | http://technologizer.com/2009/03/29/i... "The Zune for all intents and purposes has been anything but a success for Microsoft. Redmond saw that Apple was wildly successful in controlling the experience from the top down, and decided to try to duplicate it." | Apr 05 09:24 |
| *Eruaran (n=quassel@183.110.208.203.cable.dyn.gex.ncable.com.au) has joined #boycottnovell | Apr 05 09:32 | |