 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen <aer### [at] removethis zbxtnetinvalid> wrote:
> If it wasn't Linux, it'd still most probably be OpenBSD, not Solaris.
I thought NetBSD was the more popular hacker OS.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Doctor John wrote:
>
>> Now, all you M$ cheerleaders when are we getting Vista for UltraSPARC?
>> ROTFLMAO
>
> SPARC still exists...?
>
Yes, even though my Netra X1 ain't new (actually it's so old I got it
for free).
-clip-
Sun Netra X1 (UltraSPARC-IIe 400MHz), No Keyboard
OpenBoot 4.0, 512 MB memory installed, Serial #XXXXXXXX.
-clap-
So, 400MHz and 512MiB, with EOL-lined chassis (2002). Not exactly a new
HW, but more than powerful enough for the job.
http://sunsolve.sun.com/handbook_pub/validateUser.do?target=Systems/Netra_X1/Netra_X1
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Yeah, but aren't they all just implementations of the POSIX standard
>> which basically defines exactly how everything has to work anyway?
>
> Posix defines some minimum requirements, it doesn't say what else the
> OS may also implement.
>
> Also, I don't think the posix standard says much about how the kernel
> should internally be implemented (only about some of its interfaces).
Mmm, OK.
> Yes, I know you don't read current events on almost anything.
What, you're not impressed that I have actually *heard* of Solaris? :-P
> Solaris
> has worked on Intel hardware for quite some time, and Sun made it open
> source also some time ago.
Any idea what the motivation behind this is? It seems to be quite
fashionable for people to suddenly release the sources for large
commercial applications these days, and I'm never really sure what it is
they're hoping to gain...
> The computing world consists of more than just desktop PCs. Those
> mythical big servers out there somewhere don't run by themselves, and
> they don't all have fancy graphical user interfaces (many of them don't
> have a graphics card at all).
Well, my servers have a "fancy" graphical web browser installed.
However, since that browser is *cough* Internet Explorer, I never run
it. What I do is go to the PC at my desk, use Firefox to download what I
want, and then send it to the server from my desk.
Anyway, I would think that you wouldn't need a server to physically have
graphics hardware to access it remotely and get a graphical display of
some kind...
> Of course there are also a few purist unix gurus out there in their
> caves who think that late 70's is the only real computer era and that
> current computers are just toys for kids.
Yeah - but I doubt my blog attracts any of those.
[OTOH, I do sometimes mention Haskell...]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> > Solaris
> > has worked on Intel hardware for quite some time, and Sun made it open
> > source also some time ago.
> Any idea what the motivation behind this is?
I don't know, but I guess decreased sales in the last decade.
> It seems to be quite
> fashionable for people to suddenly release the sources for large
> commercial applications these days, and I'm never really sure what it is
> they're hoping to gain...
Improving public image, hopefully also popularity. There are ways to
make money with open source software too.
> Anyway, I would think that you wouldn't need a server to physically have
> graphics hardware to access it remotely and get a graphical display of
> some kind...
Why install useless windowing software in a server that doesn't need it?
> Yeah - but I doubt my blog attracts any of those.
> [OTOH, I do sometimes mention Haskell...]
Well, there you go. Haskell *is* a pet of many unix gurus too.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks very much. So smooth. I can print it in word, for example now and save
it. I still have to think of an "image manipulation program", since I have
none that I use.
Thanks.
Vrunda
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> math_prof <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> > How do I print an image in Wndows?
>
> alt+printscreen copies the current window to the clipboard. Then just
> launch your favorite image manipulation program and past (or "acquire
> from clipboard", or whatever).
>
> --
> - Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
math_prof <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Thanks very much. So smooth. I can print it in word
I could make a comment about that, but I'll pass, just this time, to
be nice. :P
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> For some reason OpenSuse has the policy that they never upgrade the
> kernel (nor gcc) of a given distro to the newest version.
I've not found that to be the case. My OpenSuse machines at work have
three different kernels, depending on when I upgraded them.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Posix defines some minimum requirements, it doesn't say what else the
> OS may also implement.
And didn't MS manage to get NT certified as POSIX-compliant at some
point? I thought POSIX was along the lines of "here's the UNIX system
stuff you have to support", and assumed it was talking about UNIX, and
didn't really rule out (say) having completely non-standard semantics
for files and such as long as you had conforming names. :-)
> Yes, I know you don't read current events on almost anything. Solaris
> has worked on Intel hardware for quite some time,
Like ten years ago. I tried Solaris x68 about a year after it came out,
and went back to Windows when I found out it *didn't support Java.* WTF?
(At the time, I needed Java for my job, so out it went.)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> Solaris
>>> has worked on Intel hardware for quite some time, and Sun made it open
>>> source also some time ago.
>
>> Any idea what the motivation behind this is?
>
> I don't know, but I guess decreased sales in the last decade.
In particular, decreased hardware sales. Sun is a hardware company, not
a software company. Giving away software for free makes their hardware
more attractive.
The same reason they created Java and StarOffice and all the other
"Open" stuff.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
math_prof wrote:
> I still have to think of an "image manipulation program", since I have
> none that I use.
Doesn't MS Paint come with Windows and at least handle copy and paste of
images?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Like ten years ago. I tried Solaris x68 about a year after it came out,
> and went back to Windows when I found out it *didn't support Java.* WTF?
I'm not completely sure if you are aware or not, but that kind of
sentence sounds like you were bashing Solaris.
(Or perhaps you are just evil and do that on purpose, and when someone
starts defending it you point out that you weren't really attacking the
current Solaris, but just a 10yo one...)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Like ten years ago. I tried Solaris x68 about a year after it came out,
>> and went back to Windows when I found out it *didn't support Java.* WTF?
>
> I'm not completely sure if you are aware or not, but that kind of
> sentence sounds like you were bashing Solaris.
You said "quite some time ago." I clarified that means "at least ten
years." That's all.
No, it was just a WTF, since Sun created Java, but supported it on MS's
operating system before they supported it on their own.
Had Sun not created Java specifically to get people away from Windows,
it wouldn't have been a WTF.
> (Or perhaps you are just evil and do that on purpose, and when someone
> starts defending it you point out that you weren't really attacking the
> current Solaris, but just a 10yo one...)
Um, no. I wasn't bashing Solaris at all. I was pointing out that (1)
yes, it's been on Intel chips at least 10 years, (2) I tried it, and (3)
still remember how surprised I was that Sun supported Java better on the
competitor's OS than their own.
Had I not actually been developing Java for a living at the time, I
probably wouldn't have cared.
I think you read way more "bashing" into most of my statements at this
point than I intend. It's merely conversation.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Doctor John wrote:
>> 2.6.25 was released exactly 10 hours ago.
>
> ...and we care because...?
>
You know, if you want people to read your Haskell raves, you probably
shouldn't respond this way to other people's interests...
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> In fact, you know what? I challenge you to find a Google search term
> that finds my blog. :-P
"Orphi". You're #5 on the list.
Or, if I do "Orphi blog", then you're #1 :)
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:4807b194$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>> In fact, here's a screen of our viewers. I'm amazed some are still on
>> w95!!
>> Gulp!
>
> Wait, WTF? Amiga??? What are they running, IBrowse?!
Not sure, (possibly in the unknown part), but here's a list of browsers
used. Interesting that IE7 never took off.
~Steve~
>
> --
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'pop_browse.jpg' (59 KB)
Preview of image 'pop_browse.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"math_prof" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message
news:web.4807b46b40015d2d26e6f6f40@news.povray.org...
> How do I print an image in Wndows? I am told in linux there is a program
> called
> convert. How can one do this in Windows?
> Thanks
> Vrunda
LOL! Someone wants to print an image of mine... I knew I should have
rendered it! ;)
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:34:51 EDT, "math_prof" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>How do I print an image in Wndows? I am told in linux there is a program called
>convert. How can one do this in Windows?
There is a program called Snagit that will copy your screen as either
a bitmap or extract the text from the screen. A couple of years ago
when the evaluation period was finished you could still use it by
pressing the continue to use button.
http://www.softwarecasa.com/pprod/212401dd.htm?gclid=CJaAkcyL5JICFQVDMAodbg5C1g
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> It seems to be quite
>> fashionable for people to suddenly release the sources for large
>> commercial applications these days, and I'm never really sure what it is
>> they're hoping to gain...
>
> Improving public image, hopefully also popularity. There are ways to
> make money with open source software too.
Those are valid reasons I guess...
>> Anyway, I would think that you wouldn't need a server to physically have
>> graphics hardware to access it remotely and get a graphical display of
>> some kind...
>
> Why install useless windowing software in a server that doesn't need it?
OK, point taken.
>> Yeah - but I doubt my blog attracts any of those.
>
>> [OTOH, I do sometimes mention Haskell...]
>
> Well, there you go. Haskell *is* a pet of many unix gurus too.
Really? This is news...
[Although - now who was it? - somebody recently announced that they were
porting all their distro tools from Python (?) to Haskell.]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> These are some of the coolest httpd requests I get:
>
> xxx.xx.x.xx - - [05/Apr/2008:01:48:54 +0000] "GET /pics/th_screws.jpg HTTP/1.1" 200
1709 "http://warp.povusers.org/pics/" "Mozilla/4.0 (PSP (PlayStation Portable); 2.00)"
290 2004
>
> (There's a total of 1267 requests with that architecture.)
...OK, that's even more bizare than an Amiga... most impressive!
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Doesn't MS Paint come with Windows and at least handle copy and paste of
> images?
Yes and yes, but I prefer IrfanView personally...
[At least, that's what I'm using for Project Delta currently.]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > (Or perhaps you are just evil and do that on purpose, and when someone
> > starts defending it you point out that you weren't really attacking the
> > current Solaris, but just a 10yo one...)
> Um, no. I wasn't bashing Solaris at all. I was pointing out that (1)
> yes, it's been on Intel chips at least 10 years, (2) I tried it, and (3)
> still remember how surprised I was that Sun supported Java better on the
> competitor's OS than their own.
Hmm, was that a demonstration of how you would have responded if someone
had claimed you are bashing Solaris?
> I think you read way more "bashing" into most of my statements at this
> point than I intend. It's merely conversation.
Maybe you should reread what I wrote?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> In fact, you know what? I challenge you to find a Google search term
>> that finds my blog. :-P
>
> "Orphi". You're #5 on the list.
>
> Or, if I do "Orphi blog", then you're #1 :)
That's astonishing... My name actually ranks that high in Google?
Anybody would think I'd been out link-spamming or something...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers wrote:
> You know, if you want people to read your Haskell raves, you probably
> shouldn't respond this way to other people's interests...
I just find it puzzling, that's all.
I mean, if the POV-Ray team released a brand new version of POV-Ray that
was exactly like the old one but up to 3% faster in certain cases...
would anybody care? No, not really. Yet the Linux kernel apparently
generates this much interest? I find that strange.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I mean, if the POV-Ray team released a brand new version of POV-Ray that
> was exactly like the old one but up to 3% faster in certain cases...
> would anybody care? No, not really. Yet the Linux kernel apparently
> generates this much interest? I find that strange.
If you discover a new fancy way of using gonads or whatever, why should
we care? ;)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> If you discover a new fancy way of using gonads or whatever, why should
> we care? ;)
One might retort that it allows me to build a full expression parser in
less than a dozen LoC, but yeah, realistically, who cares about that? I
should just go kill myself now...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> If you discover a new fancy way of using gonads or whatever, why should
>> we care? ;)
>
> One might retort that it allows me to build a full expression parser in
> less than a dozen LoC,
Well I'm equally sure that 2.5.75.11 or whatever it was will allow some
people to do some new stuff. Otherwise it wouldn't be an update.
Just because most people don't know the details about gonads work with rear
end recursion, and you (and I) don't know the details about the
2.75.11.5.157 linux update, it doesn't mean it's not useful at all.
> but yeah, realistically, who cares about that? I should just go kill
> myself now...
What, just because you are doing something that not many others are
interested in? I'm not interested in the details of what you are doing with
Haskell, but once I understood what your logic program was doing (or rather,
what it is easily capable of doing) I was quite impressed.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> If you discover a new fancy way of using gonads or whatever, why should
> we care? ;)
>
Because, unlike Haskell or the Linux Kernel or POV-Ray, that really
would apply to most people.
And could either be considerably fun, or horrifically painful.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> For some reason OpenSuse has the policy that they never upgrade the
>> kernel (nor gcc) of a given distro to the newest version.
>
> I've not found that to be the case. My OpenSuse machines at work have
> three different kernels, depending on when I upgraded them.
I take that back. There are three different kernels, but the differences
are all in security patches. I don't know what I was thinking. I'll
blame it on the whiskey or something. ;-)
And it's not a bad thing, btw. We have 3rd party code that needs a
specific compiler, and other 3rd party device drivers that link against
the kernel. Stability in the basic infrastructure can be a good thing.
(Sadly, the compiler version the 3rd-party code needs isn't the compiler
that comes with the SuSE we're using, so that kind of sucks, but ...)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> If you discover a new fancy way of using gonads or whatever,
That's the giggle of the morning, I think. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Maybe you should reread what I wrote?
Have you stopped beating your wife?
You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
>
> I thought NetBSD was the more popular hacker OS.
>
Possibly (I already have a netbooting NetBSD for MicroSPARC (SS5)), but
OpenBSD would be the nerdiest overkill for the job of garmaugh (the
Netra) :).
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible escribió:
> I mean, if the POV-Ray team released a brand new version of POV-Ray that
> was exactly like the old one but up to 3% faster in certain cases...
> would anybody care?
I would!!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible escribió:
> ...OK, that's even more bizare than an Amiga... most impressive!
I read some of QC from my iPod, so...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> If you discover a new fancy way of using gonads or whatever, why
>>> should
>>> we care? ;)
>>
>> One might retort that it allows me to build a full expression parser
>> in less than a dozen LoC,
>
> Well I'm equally sure that 2.5.75.11 or whatever it was will allow some
> people to do some new stuff. Otherwise it wouldn't be an update.
That's just my point. They keep releasing new versions of the Linux
kernel, but as far as I can tell, none of them *do* anything new. So...
why... are they... releasing it?
>> but yeah, realistically, who cares about that? I should just go kill
>> myself now...
>
> What, just because you are doing something that not many others are
> interested in? I'm not interested in the details of what you are doing
> with Haskell, but once I understood what your logic program was doing
> (or rather, what it is easily capable of doing) I was quite impressed.
It probably doesn't come across in text, but at the point when I wrote
this, I basically felt like throwing myself off a bridge. (And I *mean*
IRL!) I am utterly ****ed off with the entire universe repeatedly
reminding me that everything I hold dear is in fact pointless,
worthless, empty, and that I am a stupid retarded idiot for even caring
about such things. Face it, *nobody* enjoys being repeatedly told
they're stupid...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 escribió:
> That's just my point. They keep releasing new versions of the Linux
> kernel, but as far as I can tell, none of them *do* anything new. So...
> why... are they... releasing it?
http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_25
Nothing new?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> I take that back. There are three different kernels, but the differences
> are all in security patches. I don't know what I was thinking. I'll
> blame it on the whiskey or something. ;-)
Yeah, the difference is only in the part after the dash, for example
"2.6.18.8-0.9" here. It indicates which security update has been applied
to the kernel "2.6.18.8".
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>
> I mean, if the POV-Ray team released a brand new version of POV-Ray that
> was exactly like the old one but up to 3% faster in certain cases...
> would anybody care? No, not really. Yet the Linux kernel apparently
>
Yes, I would :).
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
> Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
> > Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
> Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
No. Now you are nitpicking about semantics.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Eero Ahonen wrote:
>
> Possibly (I already have a netbooting NetBSD for MicroSPARC (SS5)), but
> OpenBSD would be the nerdiest overkill for the job of garmaugh (the
> Netra) :).
Looks like I might be more tempted to look after OpenBSD.
[ 12.741076] Uniform Multi-Platform E-IDE driver
[ 12.800823] ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes;
override with idebus=xx
[ 12.909583] mice: PS/2 mouse device common for all mice
[ 12.978231] usbcore: registered new interface driver usbhid
[ 13.052840] drivers/hid/usbhid/hid-core.c: v2.6:USB HID core driver
[ 13.138639] TCP bic registered
[ 13.176875] NET: Registered protocol family 1
[ 13.232926] NET: Registered protocol family 17
[ 13.293318] RPC: Registered udp transport module.
[ 13.356853] RPC: Registered tcp transport module.
[ 13.921983] IP-Config: Failed to open eth0
[ 13.972889] IP-Config: Failed to open eth1
[ 15.032961] Sending DHCP requests ...... timed out!
[ 97.102510] IP-Config: Retrying forever (NFS root)...
Yep, 2.6.25.
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>>> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
>>> Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
>
>> Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
>
> No. Now you are nitpicking about semantics.
And you aren't?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>> Warp wrote:
>>>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>>>> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
>>>> Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
>>
>>> Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
>>
>> No. Now you are nitpicking about semantics.
>
> And you aren't?
>
You two were made for each other :)
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 11:45:25 -0700, Chambers wrote:
> You two were made for each other :)
I'm glad someone said it, and that it wasn't me who did. ;-)
(I might've thought it, though - does make for entertaining reading <g> -
no offense, guys)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> Warp wrote:
> >>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >>>> You're not the only person I'm responding to here.
> >>> Who else claimed you were bashing Solaris?
> >
> >> Ah. So you *are* claiming I was bashing Solaris.
> >
> > No. Now you are nitpicking about semantics.
> And you aren't?
No. I just said that your original sentence could be easily interpreted
as if you were bashing Solaris, and if you are even aware of that. (And
then, humorously, I suggested that you are actually doing it on purpose.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
