- Here is a good rant about bug triagers. Yes freetards, even if a bug is years old, you should not close it without testing to make sure the problem is actually fixed!
- Distrowatch has a good vindication of LH's argument that most Linux distros could be achieved by simply reconfiguring another distro. The amount of wheel reinvention going on is amazing even to me!
- Lusers have been flipping out over someone suggesting ten ways Ubuntu could improve. Most of these suggestions, especially the inclusion of a media center are pretty good fucking ideas, which means lusers are going to get pissed over anyone bringing them up. A particularly freetarded response tried to take the author to task for his suggestions and just ended up making a fool of himself. Most of his nipticks boil down to 'oh, there is this utility you can install that kinda sorta does what you want, but you first have to know that it exists and then jump through hoops installing and configuring it', or 'that feature is in development and will be available in Zesty Zebra' or 'media center, we don't need no stinkin' media center!' He ends with a bang, though,
So I’m unimpressed. Ubuntu already has the majority of those features (or a close-enough analogue), that guy failed miserably in doing his homework before posting that, and even the things that Ubuntu doesn’t have are Linux/GNOME/KDE/Nautilus/Dolphin deficiciencies, not Ubuntu problems.
Yes, that loser totally did not do the proper fifty hours of research to make Linux do what he wanted. He just sat down and expected it to function properly, the moron! Plus, all those problems are the fault of the ISVs not the fault of the distro, whose job it is to take all the various pieces of software and integrate them into a polished, cohesive whole. The freetard is strong in this one! - A reddit luser asks what idiot designed the GTK File Dialog. As usual, comments are required reading.
- Linux Kernel 2.6.28.7, a.k.a. Erotic Pickled Herring, has been released. Way to show the world how mature you are, guys!
- A luser asks why do you use Linux? He mostly seems to like Ubuntu's nice file dialogs, its resistance to viruses, Gedit and Grsync. So basically, you like it because of a text-editor and a syncing application. Dude, just buy a Mac! You will like its interface, Time Machine and TextMate better. You know why I use Linux? Because it is the only way to keep up on the hilarious stuff you freetards have come up with to torture yourselves and the idiots you convince to join your cult.
- Some luser thinks a bunch of cheap (mostly proprietary) office clones spell the death of Microsoft Office. Yeah, in your dreams, lusers! What you lusers don't seem to understand is that people are perfectly knowledgeable about alternatives, and if they are provided with a cheaper alternative that still lets them do what they want to do, they will switch in droves. OpenOffice is an inferior product to Microsoft Office, and people who value their productivity more than $200 will find it cheaper to remain with Microsoft. You mention the recession, but you forget that recessions also cause investment funds to abandon wild-eyed schemes and focus on profitability, and last I heard, RedHat was the only major open source distro that was profitable.
- TechRadar has a good post on how to make your LUG not suck. I was once part of a LUG at my university. It fell apart after several meetings after it was clear that few people were interested in Linux.
- Apparently, multihead support is still broken in Linux. Business as usual, I know.
- Here is another article detailing stupid tricks you can do with the bash shell. I almost did not want to post this, but the opening is just too good not to reproduce here.
If you've ever used GNU/Linux, chances are good that you've used bash. Some people hold the belief that using a GUI is faster than using a CLI. These people have obviously never seen someone who uses a shell proficiently.
Yes, I have had to use Bash. Yes, I also regret all the time I spent learning to put up with its bullshit. - Some luser is pissed that he cannot remove Evolution without removing the entire Ubuntu desktop! The failure goes all around this time. First, there is the luser himself who wants to replace a broken email client with one that appears to have died several years ago and nobody noticed. Attention Luser! Install Thunderbird, delete the Evolution icons from your Applications bar and auto-launcher (you can do that in the wonderfully configurable GNOME desktop, can't you?) and get on with your life. We're talking about <5MB here! Then, there is the distro itself, which takes all the thousands of claims by lusers, "well, Ubuntu is better than Windows because of its customizability", and shoves them up its ass!
- Here is a Reddit discussion on how to read the contents of RAM in a human-readable way. The thread itself isn't very funny or enlightening, but one of the (probably serious) comments certainly is.
Or you can write a progam in C that traverses the ram, writes it to a file and then use a hex editor (Emacs in hex mode, for example
M-x hexl-modeto look through that.
Soon, I may make another tutorial for you guys (although no one gave ANY feedback, positive or negative, on the last one). Until then, have fun recompiling your new kernel!
17 comments:
"Yes, I have had to use Bash. Yes, I also regret all the time I spent learning to put up with its bullshit."
A challenge for the idiotic CLI only crowd: Without resorting to some kind of script, copy 10+ items from one directory to another. Said items are of disparate file types and naming conventions, so no regexes here. Oh, and Midnight Commander is off limits.
This challenge takes about 10 seconds in a GUI, as you can control/shift select items.
CLI is a good thing for repetitive tasks, but it's quite useless for most of creative tasks -- you can't write a novel, edit a photo, make a painting, compose or edit music or even write a software. It also doesn't help much with watching the movies. Basically, it's only useful for system administration and fiddling with the computer. That's why most of the people don't need it. That's also why Linux users love it, since they constantly have to tweak and nudge their machines to make them work.
Now now, you could totally write a novel with the CAT command.
If you were an idiot.
Now now, you could totally write a novel with the CAT command.
Oh, well... you could do it on Windows too, using cmd propt:
copy con mynovel.txt
But, I'm not an idiot :)
>you can't write a novel, edit a photo, make a painting, compose or edit music or even write a software.
Novel: Wordgrinder (description)
Photo: You got me
Music: Lilypond
Write software: Um, are you kidding me?!?! Forget that the vast majority of pre-1990 software was written from a console. Forget that your beloved GUI was written form a console. What about staples like Vim, Emacs and Nano?
On features Ubuntu should implement:
My response
Signed,
A freetard luser
(By the way, what's up with the no pingbacks?)
@Timmy
What is the matter with you? Can't you read? I sad CLI, not an editor started from CLI. So, Vim, Emacs & Nano don't count.
FYI, Borland Turbo C & Pascal were released in late '80s, so, people were using IDEs before '90s. I was using Emacs earlier than that, and even my small school project in the late 70s was written in some kind of editor.
So, please stop BSting about software being written in CLI.
Anonymous, to be fair, Thompson and Ritchie wrote much of Unix using 'ed'. This explains quite a bit.
Anonymous, to be fair, Thompson and Ritchie wrote much of Unix using 'ed'. This explains quite a bit.
True. But, this was in the 70s.
Of course, I don't know what tools other people used to write some software in the 80s, but me and the people I worked with used editors and IDEs on DOS, Apollo and HP-UX. I simply can't believe that the vast majority of software in the '80s was written using line editors.
It is my recollection that we used punch cards to write software in the early 80's because the editors at that time were too much of a PITA to use.
http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.28/Makefile
It took you this long to find that 2.6.28.x code name is Erotic Pickled Herring. If you go back through there kernels there is a Herring and Pickled Herring. Ok think the NAME in only in the Makefile never gets exported. So programmers cannot insert a joke. Even Windows 7 has a hidden joke if you know where to find it.
Sometimes the joke is not that funny.
It's the same kind of 'joke' that GIMP is. One of those that makes your product itself look like a joke.
Let me know when Ubuntu Dirty Sanches Swift comes out - the brown UI would compliment that release nicely.
the brown UI would compliment that release nicely.
Hm, what's the problem with brown UI? I see similar comments all around and really don't see what's the problem. Personally, I think that it's a nice change from blue/ aqua/ brushed metal/ plastic crap.
Kyle Eggs are Eggs. http://www.eeggs.com/tree/5935.html
At least its not like XP egg that can make particular text unreadable.
Gimp program name is one of those things that happen. Good name other than 1 section of the world using it as a insult.
By the way "It's as erotic as pickled herring" is a term a reviewer coined in 2008 for a movie that was not that erotic. As I not all jokes are funny if you don't get them. The Joke is basically referring to that nothing that special happened in 2.6.28.
Basically the joke it too high up in the culture world for most people to get it. Bad selection they joke is perfectly related if you get the joke.
Linus has the bad habit of picking jokes that take research to get. Normally something that happened in the 3 months that that kernel version was in development. The reviewers comment was in November 2008 if you want to go looking for it.
Reason for the erotic bit directly relegate to a insult used against open source development. Lack of research here is Linus poking fun at it and its so far above you guys that you don't get it.
Bad taste in colors is the least of Linux's problems.
I have to answer a very stale question about Snapter, for a couple of months ago. I was asked if I would do a whole book that way.
I just used a 8mp super zoom camera, flash and auto focus to do a 32 page book, in under a half an hour of my time. Computer is still post processing the images. Judging by the results so far, absolutely, yes I would rather do a 100+ page book this way than with a traditional scanner.
Post a Comment