pedrocr

219 ms·

1891.
by pedrocr 15y ago
There's a line there somewhere. Clearly udev is very tightly linked to the kernel and it was built to replace devfs which was inside the kernel. On the other extreme maybe the filesystem programs (e.g., reiserfsprogs or xfsprogs) aren't a
1892.
by pedrocr 15y ago
You're thinking of Debian. Ubuntu doesn't have non-free or contrib.
1893.
by pedrocr 15y ago
Pretty much everything that is in Ubuntu is also in Debian. What Ubuntu "main" means is those packages are actually built by Ubuntu with their own patches and quality control. Wheres "universe" has everything that is not in main and is repa
1894.
by pedrocr 15y ago
Things in other are basically all individual projects. So they're not included in any overarching project or grouping. And I actually find that very interesting as it means that development is highly fragmented and distributions do an essen
1895.
by pedrocr 15y ago
I tried hard to not make it about that but about the fragmentation of the sources of software in a modern distribution. But to your point, now with llvm we're increasingly at a point where libc, gcc, ld, make and many other gnu staples actu
1896.
by pedrocr 15y ago
I tried hard to avoid too much of that controversy getting in the way of looking at the data and overshadowing what I thought were more interesting conclusions. But I was of course aware of the naming controversy and it was part of why I ha
1897.
by pedrocr 15y ago
That should be an easy change. Do you happen to know how where to look up the list of default packages? I'd assume the percentage of GNU would go down as gcc and gdb are probably not in the default install. The interpretation is a little mo
1898.
How much GNU is there in GNU/Linux?(pedrocr.net)
125 points by pedrocr 15y ago|126 comments
1899.
by pedrocr 16y ago
> You just did it again: the "home runs" are not necessarily the most profitable authors. Those authors that need development very often turn out to be the most profitable in the end. They're also far more common than the "home runs," m
1900.
by pedrocr 16y ago
> You are making the mistake of conflating "the most successful authors" with "authors who achieve major success with their first books." No I'm not. What I'm saying is that the home-runs will move over to self-publishing, reducing the
1901.
by pedrocr 16y ago
> I want a system in place that will help them realize their potential. There are plenty of authors who are now considered iconic, who had very rough starts and only realized their potential because someone in the publishing industry s
1902.
by pedrocr 16y ago
and right now there are no mechanisms in place to safely build up to that point outside of the traditional publishing industry This is the bit that is still in [citation needed] in all this discussion. Maybe the new world order is that mo
1903.
by pedrocr 16y ago
That didn't seem like a thorough deconstruction at all, just a bunch of mostly incoherent rambling that manages to confront Konrath's previous position with his new one and saying "look it has changed". And when part of the argument involve
1904.
by pedrocr 16y ago
Globalization could be argued to be a market solution for war. If your economies are interdependent you're much less willing or able to enter war. Seems to have worked in Western Europe.
1905.
by pedrocr 16y ago
I've been following this blog: http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/ It's by a traditionally published author that used to hold much of the same opinion as you and has now moved to self-publishing and argues that newcomers should do the same. If
1906.
by pedrocr 16y ago
Self-published authors will get more and more frequent feedback from their actual customers. They can build direct relationships with fans. And it's not only about the support for individual authors it's also that more of them will try and
1907.
by pedrocr 16y ago
Linux development doesn't actually seem to be "dominated by a few big corporations". See: https://lwn.net/Articles/395961/ "None" and "Unknown" are still very large and there's a very wide bunch of companies that participate.
1908.
by pedrocr 16y ago
>People who jump right into self-publishing and experience dramatic success are way out in the narrow part of the tail. The same is true for traditional publishing. Both mediums are very hard to break into, it's just that in the dead tr
1909.
by pedrocr 16y ago
You seem to have a standard monetization strategy (ads+paid version) yet the app is released as GPLv3? Has no one simply recompiled the app without the ads and put that on the market?
1910.
by pedrocr 16y ago
Flattr could create a bookmarklet to flattr any webpage. Then if enough people have done so for a given domain they can contact the owner saying "Hey, you have 5$ to collect at flattr, why not sign-up?". This is basically what paypal does,
1911.
by pedrocr 16y ago
Do your users run 14day jobs with no checkpointing whatsoever? I'd be afraid of a bug in my code crashing the computation 90% of the way through. The MapReduce setup seemed much more resilient to things like this for example.
1912.
by pedrocr 16y ago
Here's a counterexample. Sequence is [1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10] so m = 5 and d = 6 diff = 5-6 = -1 xor = 5^6 = 3 1-2 = -1 1^2 = 3 5-6 = -1 5^6 = 3 9-10 = -1 9^10 = 3 So three different combinations, within N, th
1913.
by pedrocr 16y ago
This seems to work (in Ruby): def find_missing_duplicate(seq) sum = seq.reduce(0, :+) corrsum = (seq.size*(seq.size+1))/2 sumpow = seq.map{|i| i*i}.reduce(0, :+) corrsumpow = (1..seq.size).map{|i| i*i}.reduce(0, :+)
1914.
by pedrocr 16y ago
>note that m XOR d is basically m + d without the carry bit This isn't true. XOR is addition without any carry bits so there are several solutions that have the same XOR and difference
1915.
by pedrocr 16y ago
I'm guessing you're referring to packed objects. If I understand them correctly they are just there for space efficiency of the filesystem that is git . They're not first order concepts on which git the DVCS builds upon, just an implemen
1916.
by pedrocr 16y ago
The really big insight Linus had that Brahm apparently still doesn't want to recognize is that if that if you design what essentially a snapshotted filesystem, the merge algorithm is just a convenience. Any better merge algorithms can be ad
1917.
by pedrocr 16y ago
The soviet shuttle imitation did this in its only flight back in 1988: The automated landing took place on a runway at Baikonur Cosmodrome where, despite a lateral wind speed of 61.2 kilometres per hour (38.0 mph), it landed only 3 metres
1918.
by pedrocr 16y ago
This case is clearly not over the line but it seems to me that the minimum can't be a direct use of code. If someone did enough documentation of the architecture and algorithms used in the Linux kernel and handed that off to someone else wh
1919.
by pedrocr 16y ago
If all you're doing is test-driving applications there won't be any useful data on them. You could just firewall the instances from any other useful stuff and respawn them from scratch every hour. What potential damage do you imagine could
1920.
by pedrocr 16y ago
The case where code is used would make it clear cut that you need to GPL it. You can relicense BSD (without advertisement clause) to GPL but not the other way around. My doubt is at what point would you need to GPL it even though you haven'

More ›