Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 84 85 86 87 [88] 89 90 91 92 ... Last
[#] Sat Dec 15 2012 19:51:04 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The existence of things like ELKS and Minix3 suggest that perhaps eliminating i386 support wasn't going quite far enough.

If they ripped out all code supporting any IA-32 processor older than an i686 (P6) ... would anyone really notice? How many people are still trying to run Linux on any Intel machine older than a Pentium Pro?

[#] Sat Dec 15 2012 22:14:02 EST from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If they ripped out all code supporting any IA-32 processor older than

an i686 (P6) ... would anyone really notice? How many people are still

trying to run Linux on any Intel machine older than a Pentium Pro?

I don't have full technical details here, but there are a few new x86 architectures that are based on the original Pentium. Ultra-dense, ultra-low-power cores tend to be 2x superscalar but in-order execution pipelines, and newer instruction set extensions are omitted. This corresponds to things like Xeon Phi.

Of course, Intel has the resources to maintain forks of older Linux kernels or subsets of/forward ports to newer ones for their embedded products.


But the technical point remains: Pentium lives!

[#] Sun Dec 16 2012 12:14:34 EST from the_mgt @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Sun Dec 16 2012 01:51:04 CET from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored
If they ripped out all code supporting any IA-32 processor older than an i686 (P6) ... would anyone really notice? How many people are still trying to run Linux on any Intel machine older than a Pentium Pro?

This depends on wether you count CMOV as belonging to the i686 spec. If you do, I really would notice.



[#] Sun Dec 16 2012 15:40:12 EST from ax25 @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Sat Dec 15 2012 07:51:04 PM EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored
The existence of things like ELKS and Minix3 suggest that perhaps eliminating i386 support wasn't going quite far enough.

If they ripped out all code supporting any IA-32 processor older than an i686 (P6) ... would anyone really notice? How many people are still trying to run Linux on any Intel machine older than a Pentium Pro?

We still have a few AMD Geode processors in use.  I would not mind moving on, but costs are not simply based on replacement of the device.  Some of the issues are with access to the locations in which they run :-)



[#] Sun Dec 16 2012 20:43:34 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Ok, so how about removal of '486 support? Anything based on that design still in use?

[#] Mon Dec 17 2012 14:38:09 EST from ax25 @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Sun Dec 16 2012 08:43:34 PM EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored
Ok, so how about removal of '486 support? Anything based on that design still in use?

Not that would not be better off being off net and running a 2.2 or 2.4 kernel.



[#] Mon Dec 24 2012 20:45:08 EST from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Installed Ubuntu 12.4 over Mint. Had a few odd problems with Mint but never really tried to solve them. Then after the last upgrade, and don't ask me how it needed over 700 updates, my xserver would no longer start. I had to reconfigure it each
time I logged in. Decided to dump Mint and give 12.4 and fallback a try.



(excuse any spelling errors, I don't have the full screen editor and spell check activated in citadel-client yet.)


[#] Fri Dec 28 2012 13:19:21 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I just love Linux and iptables. Some things are so easy.

We have a problem with an employee who spends a little too much time on Fecesbook.
So I added this lovely snippet of goodness to our firewall:

for x in `whois -h whois.radb.net '!gAS32934'`
do
iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -d $x -j DNAT --to-destination 2xx.xx.xx.x0
done

Now whenever someone tries to log on to Fecesbook, it sends them to our ticketing system instead. It's a nice subtle way of saying "Get back to work!"

As a bonus side effect, I also discovered that the problem of Fecesbook productivity drain at our workplace was larger than I thought.

[#] Tue Jan 08 2013 10:26:52 EST from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

404 Error: Page Not Found

Try this... http://goo.gl/V6aVG

[#] Tue Jan 08 2013 10:35:08 EST from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

hmmm dothebart's link does work, but you need to have your terminal window open wide enough so the
whole URL appears on one line.

[#] Tue Jan 15 2013 04:54:47 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Why not a Chromebook? The truth is, most people aren't running "specialized" software anymore. That's why phones and tablets are useful. Expect a gradual merge of Chrome OS and Android at some point.

Chromebook can start as a companion device for media consumption and casual Internet access, but I could see an enterprise version taking hold eventually.
Bigco's love to encrypt laptops which contain company data. But why put any data on the laptop at all? All the mobile worker needs is a laptop that acts like a phone/tablet but with the comfortable form factor of a full size laptop.

Internet access is everywhere, and phone tethering is easily accessible too.

[#] Tue Jan 15 2013 07:56:07 EST from Freakdog @ Dog Pound BBS II

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Tue Jan 15 2013 04:54:47 AM EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored
Why not a Chromebook? The truth is, most people aren't running "specialized" software anymore. That's why phones and tablets are useful. Expect a gradual merge of Chrome OS and Android at some point.

Chromebook can start as a companion device for media consumption and casual Internet access, but I could see an enterprise version taking hold eventually.
Bigco's love to encrypt laptops which contain company data. But why put any data on the laptop at all? All the mobile worker needs is a laptop that acts like a phone/tablet but with the comfortable form factor of a full size laptop.

Internet access is everywhere, and phone tethering is easily accessible too.

Bigco's also love to save money and as such, don't want to pay for extraneous data access or phone tethering plans. They also don't always trust available VPN solutions (with good reason in a number of cases), so transmitting data over the air isn't quite as palatable.

Fact is, though, that there are still plenty of places and situations where mobile internet access is not available or isn't sufficiently fast enough to make working remotely with centrally stored data feasible from an employee productivity/efficiency standpoint.

Another reason is storage costs. Storage at the PC/laptop level is still relatively cheap. Storage at the SAN level is not, by comparison, not to mention the additional storage needed for backup/recovery of that data. Depending on the size of your workforce and the amount of data they generate/maintain, centrally managing/backing up that storage can be daunting from a financial perspective.

Then, of course, there's the point that most Bigco's (and many Smallco's and Mediumco's) don't (or, for that matter, can't) trust their staff to be productive when working from remote (I have had to manage a number this type of employee), or prefer/require that their staff be in a company provided location (even if it would be less expensive for the company to let those employees work from home, saving the employer the facilities costs associated with having larger office spaces).



[#] Sun Jan 27 2013 23:12:31 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Come on, this is the 21st century. You can give your employees unfunded mandates now :)

[#] Sat Feb 23 2013 11:00:50 EST from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

[#] Tue Mar 05 2013 11:29:59 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Here we go again.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MirSpec

Ubuntu announces a new display server called Mir, which replaces Wayland, which was supposed to have replaced X11 if they had ever gotten around to finishing it.

So far, projects to replace X11 have had a success rate of 0%.

Less talk. Write something good and see if it sticks.

[#] Tue Mar 05 2013 13:30:21 EST from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Tue Mar 05 2013 11:29:59 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored
Here we go again.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MirSpec

Ubuntu announces a new display server called Mir, which replaces Wayland, which was supposed to have replaced X11 if they had ever gotten around to finishing it.

So far, projects to replace X11 have had a success rate of 0%.

Less talk. Write something good and see if it sticks.

GGI at least made it to become cairo nowadays...



[#] Tue Mar 05 2013 15:56:18 EST from ax25 @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Does the frame buffer count?



[#] Wed Mar 06 2013 01:13:24 EST from the8088er @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I don't really keep up with this but are we considering Xorg == X11 or is Xorg now dead?

[#] Wed Mar 06 2013 01:35:28 EST from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

there have been talks about wayland being ready to replace X, plus allowing X protocol access.

and there are even some developers working on both, disliking the architecture of x, xorg in special.

long live the dead!



Go to page: First ... 84 85 86 87 [88] 89 90 91 92 ... Last