On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:55:37 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> On 10/16/2011 15:26, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> Without an API. Or transactions. And there's really no standard
>>> searchable format there besides "a text file". Tell me what standard
>>> Linux tool will give you a list of all the Document roots that Apache
>>> is serving.
>>
>> grep.
> 
> And what expression would I give to grep to give me the list of document
> roots that Apache is serving on my machine right now?

grep -ri documentroot /etc/apache2

Of course, you might've changed the apache2 config and not restarted the 
server, so then instead you would use:

/etc/init.d/apache2 restart && grep -ri documentroot /etc/apache2

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:53:41 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> On 10/16/2011 15:34, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:52:52 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>
>>>>> Oh, tremendously. But they're still a PITA compared to Windows'
>>>>> explorer, methinks.
>>>>
>>>> Depends entirely on what you're used to.
>>>
>>> Not /entirely/, no. Many things are subjective, but not all of them.
>>
>> When it comes to user selection of tools, yes, they are.  If I find
>> something easy to use, who are you to tell me "no, that's not easy"?
> 
> I think it's safe to say that there are things that are easier for the
> vast majority of people. If 99% of everyone finds A easier than B, and
> indeed if B provides a subset of the functionality of A with more work,
> then B is indeed superior to A.
> 
> For example, a UI that locks up the interface for 30 seconds each time
> you insert a CD is inferior to an interface that is identical except
> doesn't lock up when you insert a CD.

It depends on the use case in most instances.  I suppose there are 
instances where one could say "yes, shooting yourself in the foot with 
a .22 calibre pistol is more user friendly than finding an RPG to do the 
job."

However, saying that using Explorer is easier than using find or locate 
is ridiculous.  I type much faster than I use the mouse.

Similarly, using voice commands with a phone might be faster for some 
people, whereas using the touch interface might be faster for others.  
Case in point, a friend of mine and I were looking up a phone number.  He 
used his blackberry and tried to say the name of the business.  I used my 
android phone and pulled up Google Maps and entered the name of the 
business.

I got a result first.

Had he been in a quieter place, he might have gotten a result first.

If he'd been English, though, he might well not have received his results 
first no matter what (I have heard from a few Brits that voice 
recognition doesn't work so well for them).

There's no objective way to say which is "better" in this case.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 19:28:56 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> On 10/16/2011 3:39 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:44:54 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>>
>>>> A more appropriate comparison is latest against latest.
>>>
>>> I don't know how big the latest version of Windows is. I've never
>>> installed it. More to the point, I don't know of anybody who's using
>>> it yet.
>>
>> Windows 7.  You might have heard of it.
>>
>> And I've got it installed in a VM, as I'd mentioned before.
>>
>>
> Wrong. Windows 8 is now close to out on the market, and *tries* to make
> itself into a sort of cloudish, but not cloud, I wish I was a cell
> phone, instead of a desktop, type mess. At least, based on everything I
> have seen about it so far.. lol

Windows 8 isn't the latest release version.  Sorry, no cigar. ;)

"close to market" isn't "latest release".  When Win8 is released, *then* 
and only then does it become the "latest release".

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 15:50:52 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> On 10/16/2011 15:42, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 09:55:08 -0700, Darren New wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/9/2011 21:42, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>   >  Are you sure about that?
>>>
>>> Pretty sure. Certainly people like suing Microsoft more than they like
>>> suing open source projects. :-)
>>
>> You haven't been following the legal battles against Android
> 
> Android isn't open source any more. Let me rephrase and say that nobody
> sues community-developed open-source that doesn't have
> multi-billion-dollar companies backing it.

I cited a counterexample, and you changed the criteria.

>> Odd that nobody's ever sued Microsoft over that (at least not that I've
>> heard of), but somehow there's a threat of that happening with Acrobat
>> Reader, apparently.
> 
> I'm just guessing. I can't think of any upside to Microsoft trying to
> run their own repository if they don't get money from it. On the other
> hand, in places where Microsoft takes a cut (a la xbox arcade) they do
> indeed run the download servers.

They do indeed.  I'm sure they could work out a licensing arrangement for 
"approved by Microsoft" software if they wanted to, and take a cut for 
distribution.

Apple does, after all.

>> Installation directories aren't "software management elements" - things
>> like dependency resolution are.
> 
> That wasn't my point. There *are* dependency resolution things in
> installs. Look at ClickOnce or MSI for example. It's just that people
> might have stuff on their machine that did *not* come from a repository,
> and they won't necessarily know how to fix it if you delete libraries
> out from under them after 4 out of 5 applications using that library get
> uninstalled.

So, that can happen on both Linux and Windows.  I'm not sure what your 
point is.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 10/16/2011 20:12, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> And what expression would I give to grep to give me the list of document
>> roots that Apache is serving on my machine right now?
>
> grep -ri documentroot /etc/apache2

I was under the impression that
    <DocumentRoot>
       /home/me/blah
    </DocumentRoot>
was a legal declaration of a document root, right?

And that it's possible to include configurations from other files?

And that it's possible to put configuration files in /etc/apache2 which 
apache won't read?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   How come I never get only one kudo?

Post a reply to this message

On 10/16/2011 20:18, Jim Henderson wrote:
> I cited a counterexample, and you changed the criteria.

Yes. I clarified.  Why, are we keeping score?

> They do indeed.  I'm sure they could work out a licensing arrangement for
> "approved by Microsoft" software if they wanted to, and take a cut for
> distribution.
>
> Apple does, after all.

Well, as I said, so does Microsoft.

Say, here's an idea. Why don't you go work for Microsoft and explain to them 
why they're losing so much money? :-)  I mean, seriously, why are you 
arguing to *me* that Microsoft should be offering this service for a fee?

> So, that can happen on both Linux and Windows.  I'm not sure what your
> point is.

My point is that in spite of how I'm interpreting your claims, Windows does 
indeed have "software management elements" in their OS and supporting software.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   How come I never get only one kudo?

Post a reply to this message

On 10/16/2011 20:15, Jim Henderson wrote:
> However, saying that using Explorer is easier than using find or locate
> is ridiculous.  I type much faster than I use the mouse.

I didn't say everything. I just said some. Are you really going to argue 
that there's no improvement possible?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   How come I never get only one kudo?

Post a reply to this message

>> The point being, if you want to store some binary data in the middle of
>> a textual configuration file, you have to base64 encode it or something
>> (which is less efficient). If you want to stick some binary data in the
>> registry, you can just store it as binary.
>
> No, you don't have to encode it as base64.  It's perfectly legal to
> create a file with text components and binary components.  Because it's
> just a file.

It's perfectly *legal*, but nobody does it because then you wouldn't be 
able to just throw the file through grep or something and expect it to work.

Post a reply to this message

>>>> Oh, tremendously. But they're still a PITA compared to Windows'
>>>> explorer, methinks.
>>>
>>> Depends entirely on what you're used to.
>>
>> Not /entirely/, no. Many things are subjective, but not all of them.
>
> When it comes to user selection of tools, yes, they are.  If I find
> something easy to use, who are you to tell me "no, that's not easy"?

If product A is lacking a major, important feature, and product B isn't, 
then which one is better? Clearly this is objective, not subjective.

(The only way it becomes subjective is if the feature in question is 
only useful to some people.)

I'll grant you *most* things in tool selection are quite subjective. I'm 
just saying that not *all* of it is.

Post a reply to this message

On 08/10/2011 10:38 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Obviously you don't know many Linux users.  I know at least 5,000, and
> many of them not only love and use the GUI, but tend to have religious
> wars over which GUI is better.

That is another point against Linux. Why would I want to join a 
community of religious fundamentalists?
Any day now I expect a knock on my door and open it to find two smartly 
dressed penguin missionaries.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message