 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
