Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
Woot! I have to use OpenDNS cause Ubuntu 9.1 broke my router's firmware or something xD
Warning: Have doubt in anything I post.
GCC 4.5, Boost 1.40, Code::Blocks 8.02, Ubuntu 9.10 010001000110000101100101
1 != 10
After I got my ATI drivers working on fedora, I decided to go ahead and try ubuntu anyway, since I had already installed it in case the drivers didn't work on fedora.
After I activated the drivers on ubuntu, the card would no longer permit 1680x1050 on either platform, no matter what. So now I am stuck with 1440x900.
Best of all: when I selected "install partitions side by side" on a half empty drive, the ubuntu installer automatically resized (for absolutely no reason) ALL partions like this:
1) it shrunk sda1 by 30%
2) it shrunk sda2 by 50% -- but it did not move the starting block!
3) then it allocated itself more space than sda1+sda2 in order to take up like 60% of a 500 GB drive.
Ie, there was a huge chunk of "unusable free space" left between the first two partitions. Contemplate the work involved in fixing that little mistake.
GREAT JOB UBUNTU!
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
I have a feeling that Ubuntu is turning more and more like Windows. Not a good thing.
Now we can't even select what packages to install using the graphical installer (just like Windows).
I always used custom partitioning. My partition setup is so complex that even I have trouble making sense of it some time, so I don't even let the program try .
Last edited by Dae; 12-04-2009 at 08:49 PM.
Warning: Have doubt in anything I post.
GCC 4.5, Boost 1.40, Code::Blocks 8.02, Ubuntu 9.10 010001000110000101100101
My big big problem with this one is that resizing should be a custom/advanced option. Any other installer I have seen, resizing is not done by default -- it is available if you choose "custom".
Gotta admit tho, ubuntu has got me back into gnome. Now my new video card has eliminated the possibility of virtual sized desktops*, and I am doing all this coding and scripting anyway, etc, the appeal of fvwm2 (world's most configurable window manager!) is starting to thin. Maybe
Wrong -- I learned this when seetxt went into distribution, because the packager complained I was numbering my releases like this:
0.5
0.51
0.52
0.6
If you pay closer attention, you will notice that is not how *nix software works. It should be
0.5
0.5.1
0.6
That means x.10 is after x.9. Everything follows this convention, including Ubuntu releases. So 9.1 != 9.10 != 9.100
*I imagine video cards are the reason that trend is dying out, because it is really really functional, where it works. Hardware manufacturers probably never gave it serious consideration because it was never done in Windows, so there was no need to support it, unix hardware is it's own realm, and by the time anyone at MS might have thought of implementing it, there was too much "high end" PC hardware that wouldn't.
Last edited by MK27; 12-04-2009 at 09:23 PM.
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
Okay, but the way Ubuntu uses the convention it doesn't make any difference when talking about it. They generally have a zero release, and a ten release, for each version unit. They don't use extra decimal places, if they did, then it would matter. Since they don't, you can't say 9.1 != 9.10 because without versioning with extra decimals 9.10 could be 9.1.0. Or 9.100 could be 9.10.0. We don't know, because they simply don't use them, because they don't need them the way they do it. Learn something new every day.
Last edited by Dae; 12-04-2009 at 11:17 PM.
Warning: Have doubt in anything I post.
GCC 4.5, Boost 1.40, Code::Blocks 8.02, Ubuntu 9.10 010001000110000101100101
Okay, I thought you were being "tongue in cheek funny". Trust me on this one. Honest. Maybe they are being tongue in cheek about it, but I'm telling you from experience: the debian packagers insist on that method of sequencing, and one of their concerns is that the packages end up downstream, in freeBSD and Ubuntu, and this is the method all their maintainers have agreed upon, I believe that is important if you consider that sometimes automation may be involved keeping things organized, so x.14 must always be considered a later version than x.8. And no one needs some fool getting clever with the distro staffers. That's linux.
It is nine point ten, not nine point one. You could say "one oh" and "oh four".
Last edited by MK27; 12-04-2009 at 11:13 PM.
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
In case you haven't noticed yet (took me quite a while), "10" means October, "04" means April.
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
Heheh, but cyberfish's explanation is correct. If Ubuntu 9.1 existed, it would have been released in January 2009, and would certainly not be the same as Ubuntu 9.10.Originally Posted by Dae
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart WayOriginally Posted by Bjarne Stroustrup (2000-10-14)
Did not know that, lol. In that case what you said makes sense. I noticed they release every six months, and 10 - 4 = 6, and figured those were associated but didn't clue into the months (I barely ever know what day it is ).
Oh yeah, coincidence, sometimes my Ubuntu clock on the bar freezes so I think it's 3am when it's really going on 6
Warning: Have doubt in anything I post.
GCC 4.5, Boost 1.40, Code::Blocks 8.02, Ubuntu 9.10 010001000110000101100101
The 10-4 thing is the reason why I moved on to better things, like ArchLinux, as soon as it became possible for me to do. Let's face it, it's stupid to enforce on yourself a fixed release date. Not only you'll fail eventually, but also it makes the whole thing look time-based instead of feature-based.
If Ubuntu was a paying OS, I wouldn't notice the difference.
edit: BTW, I know it's totally OT and i'm hijacking the thread, but did you guys know google launched a free public DNS service? How about that for yet another way for them to map our web usage? Do no evil, or do it with all the best of intentions?
Last edited by Mario F.; 12-05-2009 at 08:11 AM.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
No way, really? Where'd you hear that. ^_^
Exactly my thoughts as I visited some pr0nographic world wide websites earlier. Ha ha! Yet another way for Google to track me. It must be hilarious watching that screen they got at their lounge showing all the latest searches. Now they can watch all the latest website visits (well, they've been doing that since Google Toolbar and Google Chrome and all that other ........ I'm sure).
They're public DNS is 8.8.8.8. I don't know if that's showing off or what, lol. OpenDNS is.. 208.67.222.222. Show offs shoulda used 6.6.6.0 or 6.9.6.9 or 1.1.1.1 or 1.0.0.0 unless it's reserved.
Last edited by Dae; 12-05-2009 at 08:25 AM.
Warning: Have doubt in anything I post.
GCC 4.5, Boost 1.40, Code::Blocks 8.02, Ubuntu 9.10 010001000110000101100101