Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #8765 > unrolled thread

Ubunto

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Ubunto Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-13 10:44 -0700
    Re: Ubunto Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-13 22:27 +0200
      Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-14 01:08 +0000
      Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-14 14:21 +0100
        Re: Ubunto B1ll Gat3s <wm.g4t3s@m1cr0s0f7.c0m> - 2011-10-14 17:00 -0400
          Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-14 22:20 +0000
            Re: Ubunto B1ll Gat3s <wm.g4t3s@m1cr0s0f7.c0m> - 2011-10-15 01:16 -0400
              Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-15 12:21 +0000
                Re: Ubunto B1ll Gat3s <wm.g4t3s@m1cr0s0f7.c0m> - 2011-10-15 15:42 -0400
                  Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-16 00:23 +0000
                Re: Ubuntu Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-15 13:01 -0700
                  Re: Ubuntu Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-10-15 16:49 -0400
                  Re: Ubuntu Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-16 00:57 +0000
                    Re: Ubuntu Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-17 00:51 +0100
                      Re: Ubuntu Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-10-16 22:12 -0400
                        Re: Ubuntu Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-17 21:21 +0000
                          Re: Ubuntu blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-18 14:50 +0000
                            Re: Ubuntu Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-18 08:59 -0700
                              Re: Ubuntu Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-18 18:19 +0200
                                Re: Ubuntu blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-18 17:43 +0000
                                  Re: Ubuntu Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-10-18 22:18 +0200
                                    Re: Ubuntu blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-19 13:26 +0000
                                  Re: Ubuntu Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-19 00:18 +0000
                                    Re: Ubuntu blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-19 13:27 +0000
                                      Re: Ubuntu Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-19 19:39 +0000
                                        Re: Ubuntu blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 14:15 +0000
                                          Re: Ubuntu David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-10-20 12:24 -0400
                                            Re: Ubuntu Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-20 20:53 +0100
                                              Re: Ubuntu blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-21 16:24 +0000
                                                Re: Ubuntu Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-22 20:38 +0100
                                                  Re: Ubuntu blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-25 07:03 +0000
                                                    Re: Ubuntu Eight of Seventeen <eights17@gmail.com> - 2011-10-25 23:23 -0700
                                            Re: Ubuntu blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-21 16:24 +0000
                                        Java 7 javadocs (was Re: Ubuntu) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 14:16 +0000
                                          Re: Java 7 javadocs (was Re: Ubuntu) David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-10-20 12:27 -0400
                                          Re: Java 7 javadocs (was Re: Ubuntu) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-06 15:44 -0500
                          Re: Ubuntu Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-20 20:53 +0100
                            Re: Ubuntu Eight of Seventeen <eights17@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 17:05 -0700
                  Re: Ubuntu Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-17 00:32 +0100
              Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-15 15:06 +0100
                Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-15 15:59 +0000
                  Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-15 17:15 +0100
                    Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-15 16:48 +0000
                      Re: Ubunto B1ll Gat3s <wm.g4t3s@m1cr0s0f7.c0m> - 2011-10-15 15:45 -0400
                        Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-16 00:17 +0000
                      Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-16 23:40 +0100
                        Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-16 23:50 +0000
                Re: Ubunto B1ll Gat3s <wm.g4t3s@m1cr0s0f7.c0m> - 2011-10-15 15:46 -0400
                  Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-16 23:44 +0100
                    Re: Ubunto B1ll Gat3s <wm.g4t3s@m1cr0s0f7.c0m> - 2011-10-16 20:41 -0400
                      Re: Ubunto Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-10-16 17:48 -0700
                        Re: Ubunto B1ll Gat3s <wm.g4t3s@m1cr0s0f7.c0m> - 2011-10-16 20:59 -0400
      Re: Ubunto Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-10-16 11:39 +0300
        Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-16 11:22 +0000
          Re: Ubunto Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-10-16 10:58 -0300
        Re: Ubunto Dancing Fingers <batymahn@gmail.com> - 2011-10-21 01:51 -0700
    Re: Ubunto Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-10-13 22:54 -0400
    Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-14 14:20 +0100
      Re: Ubunto Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-10-15 13:04 -0700
        Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-16 01:03 +0000
          Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-17 00:31 +0100
            Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-17 00:29 +0000
              Re: Ubunto Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-10-16 22:03 -0400
                Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-17 15:08 +0100
                  Re: Ubunto Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-06 15:49 -0500
                Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-17 21:29 +0000
                  Re: Ubunto Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-06 15:47 -0500
                    Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-11-06 22:49 +0000
                      Re: Ubunto Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-06 17:13 -0800
                        Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-11-07 23:49 +0000
                          Re: Ubunto markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-07 21:07 -0800
              Re: Ubunto Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-10-17 16:47 +0100
            Re: Ubunto B1ll Gat3s <wm.g4t3s@m1cr0s0f7.c0m> - 2011-10-16 20:55 -0400
              Re: Ubunto Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-10-17 21:37 +0000
            Re: Ubunto Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-10-16 22:14 -0400

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#8964 — Re: Ubuntu

On 10/18/2011 07:43 PM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> In article<9g5n98F5upU1@mid.individual.net>,
> Robert Klemme<shortcutter@googlemail.com>  wrote:

>> I have always found X11 across a network to be extremely slow and hence
>> don't use it.  IMHO RDP is significantly more efficient especially for
>> remote connections, VNC's protocol could be as well.
>
> There is that (the performance issue).  My experience has been that
> over a fast local network, it's good enough for most applications,
> though I seem to remember that there are exceptions (though not what
> they are).  Over a not-so-fast network, yeah, it can be too slow to
> be usable.

I think the last I tried remotely via X was Firefox.  It was awful even 
though it was a LAN IIRC.

> Strongly agreed about the value of "screen" -- I've even been known
> to use it locally, for its cut-and-paste features.
>
> Nice to know that there are at least a few other shell fans out there?

Count me in. :-)

Cheers

	robert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8992 — Re: Ubuntu

In article <9g659dFt8U2@mid.individual.net>,
Robert Klemme  <shortcutter@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 10/18/2011 07:43 PM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> > In article<9g5n98F5upU1@mid.individual.net>,
> > Robert Klemme<shortcutter@googlemail.com>  wrote:
> 
> >> I have always found X11 across a network to be extremely slow and hence
> >> don't use it.  IMHO RDP is significantly more efficient especially for
> >> remote connections, VNC's protocol could be as well.
> >
> > There is that (the performance issue).  My experience has been that
> > over a fast local network, it's good enough for most applications,
> > though I seem to remember that there are exceptions (though not what
> > they are).  Over a not-so-fast network, yeah, it can be too slow to
> > be usable.
> 
> I think the last I tried remotely via X was Firefox.  It was awful even 
> though it was a LAN IIRC.

Hm!  It almost surely depends on the speed of the network; for me
Firefox over a local network works reasonably well.  Well, except
that X doesn't seem to have a way to forward sound.  Often that's
not a problem, but sometimes it is.  I wonder if there's some way
around that ....  well, probably not a question for this group.

[ snip ]

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8966 — Re: Ubuntu

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:43:56 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:

> There is that (the performance issue).  My experience has been that over
> a fast local network, it's good enough for most applications, though I
> seem to remember that there are exceptions (though not what they are). 
> Over a not-so-fast network, yeah, it can be too slow to be usable.
>
Same here - which is what I was speaking about.
 
> Strongly agreed about the value of "screen" -- I've even been known to
> use it locally, for its cut-and-paste features.
>
I've never gotten around to using screen, though I do normally use the 
microEmaxs editor everywhere - its multi-screen abilities combined with 
shelling out over the top of it do almost everything I need.

Everything else is easily met with a few more ssh sessions in Gnome 
terminal windows, since its not a lot harder to cut 'n paste between 
those than it is within a multi-windowed terminal application.
  
> Nice to know that there are at least a few other shell fans out there?
>
Most of my programming activity is command-line oriented regardless of 
whether I'm driving a local or remote system, which I do with ssh and X11 
forwarding: use of the latter boils down to developing Swing programs 
with much lower use of it to run remote copies of GIMP, LibreOffice progs, 
and firing up Opera remotely if I want to proof read Javadocs.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8993 — Re: Ubuntu

In article <j7l4vv$ctc$1@localhost.localdomain>,
Martin Gregorie  <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:43:56 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> 
> > There is that (the performance issue).  My experience has been that over
> > a fast local network, it's good enough for most applications, though I
> > seem to remember that there are exceptions (though not what they are). 
> > Over a not-so-fast network, yeah, it can be too slow to be usable.
> >
> Same here - which is what I was speaking about.
>  
> > Strongly agreed about the value of "screen" -- I've even been known to
> > use it locally, for its cut-and-paste features.
> >
> I've never gotten around to using screen, though I do normally use the 
> microEmaxs editor everywhere - its multi-screen abilities combined with 
> shelling out over the top of it do almost everything I need.

For me the other benefit of "screen" is the one previously mentioned
by the person who first mentioned this tool -- it sets up something
that persists even if the network connection is broken, deliberately
or not.  For me examples of both kinds of breakage do arise -- it's
useful to be able to set something up under "screen" at work, detach
the screen session, and reattach it later from home, or vice version,
and it's also useful to be able to set up something that will persist
even if the ssh session under which it was started times out.

> Everything else is easily met with a few more ssh sessions in Gnome 
> terminal windows, since its not a lot harder to cut 'n paste between 
> those than it is within a multi-windowed terminal application.
>   
> > Nice to know that there are at least a few other shell fans out there?
> >
> Most of my programming activity is command-line oriented regardless of 
> whether I'm driving a local or remote system, which I do with ssh and X11 
> forwarding: use of the latter boils down to developing Swing programs 
> with much lower use of it to run remote copies of GIMP, LibreOffice progs, 
> and firing up Opera remotely if I want to proof read Javadocs.

Once upon a time you could proofread javadocs with a frames-capable
text-mode browser (such as elinks).  Not so much with Java 7,
alas ....  Maybe a rant for another thread, but at least a return
from topic drift?

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9008 — Re: Ubuntu

On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:27:30 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:

> In article <j7l4vv$ctc$1@localhost.localdomain>,
> Martin Gregorie  <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:43:56 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
>> 
>> > There is that (the performance issue).  My experience has been that
>> > over a fast local network, it's good enough for most applications,
>> > though I seem to remember that there are exceptions (though not what
>> > they are). Over a not-so-fast network, yeah, it can be too slow to be
>> > usable.
>> >
>> Same here - which is what I was speaking about.
>>  
>> > Strongly agreed about the value of "screen" -- I've even been known
>> > to use it locally, for its cut-and-paste features.
>> >
>> I've never gotten around to using screen, though I do normally use the
>> microEmaxs editor everywhere - its multi-screen abilities combined with
>> shelling out over the top of it do almost everything I need.
> 
> For me the other benefit of "screen" is the one previously mentioned by
> the person who first mentioned this tool -- it sets up something that
> persists even if the network connection is broken, deliberately or not. 
> For me examples of both kinds of breakage do arise -- it's useful to be
> able to set something up under "screen" at work, detach the screen
> session, and reattach it later from home, or vice version,
> and it's also useful to be able to set up something that will persist
> even if the ssh session under which it was started times out.
> 
>> Everything else is easily met with a few more ssh sessions in Gnome
>> terminal windows, since its not a lot harder to cut 'n paste between
>> those than it is within a multi-windowed terminal application.
>>   
>> > Nice to know that there are at least a few other shell fans out
>> > there?
>> >
>> Most of my programming activity is command-line oriented regardless of
>> whether I'm driving a local or remote system, which I do with ssh and
>> X11 forwarding: use of the latter boils down to developing Swing
>> programs with much lower use of it to run remote copies of GIMP,
>> LibreOffice progs,
>> and firing up Opera remotely if I want to proof read Javadocs.
> 
> Once upon a time you could proofread javadocs with a frames-capable
> text-mode browser (such as elinks).  Not so much with Java 7,
> alas ....  Maybe a rant for another thread, but at least a return from
> topic drift?
>
Have you any idea why? 

I prefer just tried lynx, which I prefer to elinks, on a Java 6 javadocs 
set. It did a reasonable job despite insisting on the non-frames set of 
pages. Apart from that, the worst you can say about it is that its 
formatting of method parameters with long fully qualified types is 
somewhat untidy. 


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9027 — Re: Ubuntu

In article <j7n915$u76$1@localhost.localdomain>,
Martin Gregorie  <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:27:30 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> 
> > In article <j7l4vv$ctc$1@localhost.localdomain>,
> > Martin Gregorie  <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 17:43:56 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> >> 
> >> > There is that (the performance issue).  My experience has been that
> >> > over a fast local network, it's good enough for most applications,
> >> > though I seem to remember that there are exceptions (though not what
> >> > they are). Over a not-so-fast network, yeah, it can be too slow to be
> >> > usable.
> >> >
> >> Same here - which is what I was speaking about.
> >>  
> >> > Strongly agreed about the value of "screen" -- I've even been known
> >> > to use it locally, for its cut-and-paste features.
> >> >
> >> I've never gotten around to using screen, though I do normally use the
> >> microEmaxs editor everywhere - its multi-screen abilities combined with
> >> shelling out over the top of it do almost everything I need.
> > 
> > For me the other benefit of "screen" is the one previously mentioned by
> > the person who first mentioned this tool -- it sets up something that
> > persists even if the network connection is broken, deliberately or not. 
> > For me examples of both kinds of breakage do arise -- it's useful to be
> > able to set something up under "screen" at work, detach the screen
> > session, and reattach it later from home, or vice version,

For the record --

s/vice version/vice versa/

(pointed out via e-mail by an alert fellow poster)

*No* idea how that one happened!

> > and it's also useful to be able to set up something that will persist
> > even if the ssh session under which it was started times out.

[ snip ]

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9032 — Re: Ubuntu

On 20/10/2011 10:15 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> For the record --
>
> s/vice version/vice versa/
>
> (pointed out via e-mail by an alert fellow poster)
>
> *No* idea how that one happened!

An auto-correct you didn't notice?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9049 — Re: Ubuntu

On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, David Lamb wrote:

> On 20/10/2011 10:15 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
>> For the record --
>> 
>> s/vice version/vice versa/
>> 
>> (pointed out via e-mail by an alert fellow poster)
>> 
>> *No* idea how that one happened!
>
> An auto-correct you didn't notice?

Nah, that's just the typical sort of error you get when using screen.

tom

-- 
Kein Mehrheit Fur Die Mitleid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9071 — Re: Ubuntu

In article <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110202053320.27998@urchin.earth.li>,
Tom Anderson  <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, David Lamb wrote:
> 
> > On 20/10/2011 10:15 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> >> For the record --
> >> 
> >> s/vice version/vice versa/
> >> 
> >> (pointed out via e-mail by an alert fellow poster)
> >> 
> >> *No* idea how that one happened!
> >
> > An auto-correct you didn't notice?
> 
> Nah, that's just the typical sort of error you get when using screen.
> 

A joke that whooshed over my head?

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9093 — Re: Ubuntu

On Fri, 21 Oct 2011, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:

> In article <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110202053320.27998@urchin.earth.li>,
> Tom Anderson  <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, David Lamb wrote:
>>
>>> On 20/10/2011 10:15 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
>>>> For the record --
>>>>
>>>> s/vice version/vice versa/
>>>>
>>>> (pointed out via e-mail by an alert fellow poster)
>>>>
>>>> *No* idea how that one happened!
>>>
>>> An auto-correct you didn't notice?
>>
>> Nah, that's just the typical sort of error you get when using screen.
>
> A joke that whooshed over my head?

Oh, there was something elsethread about "crud like foo^]]E^]]D^Hquux" 
which i thought might have explained the error.

tom

-- 
The sky above the port was the colour of television, tuned to a dead
channel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9161 — Re: Ubuntu

In article <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110222037370.4024@urchin.earth.li>,
Tom Anderson  <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> 
> > In article <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110202053320.27998@urchin.earth.li>,
> > Tom Anderson  <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, David Lamb wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 20/10/2011 10:15 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> >>>> For the record --
> >>>>
> >>>> s/vice version/vice versa/
> >>>>
> >>>> (pointed out via e-mail by an alert fellow poster)
> >>>>
> >>>> *No* idea how that one happened!
> >>>
> >>> An auto-correct you didn't notice?
> >>
> >> Nah, that's just the typical sort of error you get when using screen.
> >
> > A joke that whooshed over my head?
> 
> Oh, there was something elsethread about "crud like foo^]]E^]]D^Hquux" 
> which i thought might have explained the error.
> 

:-)

(I think this time I'll let someone else attempt to convince the
person who posted that comment about "screen" of the error of
his/her/its ways.)

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9194 — Re: Ubuntu

On Oct 25, 3:03 am, blm...@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myreal...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> (I think this time I'll let someone else attempt to convince the
> person who posted that comment about "screen" of the [insult deleted]
> of his/her/[implied insult deleted] ways.)

No. None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me
are at all true.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9070 — Re: Ubuntu

In article <7XXnq.11089$UI7.7537@newsfe11.iad>,
David Lamb  <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> wrote:
> On 20/10/2011 10:15 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> > For the record --
> >
> > s/vice version/vice versa/
> >
> > (pointed out via e-mail by an alert fellow poster)
> >
> > *No* idea how that one happened!
> 
> An auto-correct you didn't notice?

Heavens, no!  I'm not sure vim (which of course is what I use to
compose posts :-) ) even *has* a notion of auto-correction, and if
it did I doubt I'd enable it.  Automatic detection of (supposed)
spelling errors is one thing, and useful in its way, but automatic
"correction" ....  No thanks.  I suppose this is a YMMV thing, because
I do know at least one smart and capable person who apparently thinks
auto-correction is just swell, but to me it just seems too likely to
produce nonsense results.

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9028 — Java 7 javadocs (was Re: Ubuntu)

In article <j7n915$u76$1@localhost.localdomain>,
Martin Gregorie  <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:27:30 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> 
> > In article <j7l4vv$ctc$1@localhost.localdomain>,
> > Martin Gregorie  <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:

[ snip ]

> >> and firing up Opera remotely if I want to proof read Javadocs.
> > 
> > Once upon a time you could proofread javadocs with a frames-capable
> > text-mode browser (such as elinks).  Not so much with Java 7,
> > alas ....  Maybe a rant for another thread, but at least a return from
> > topic drift?
> >
> Have you any idea why? 

Why what?  Why "not so much"?  because that may be a bit of an
exaggeration -- but the HTML produced by the Java 7 "javadoc" tool
has a fairly different look from what was produced by previous 
versions, and it explicitly complains if you use a browser that
doesn't support Javascript, and .... :

> I prefer just tried lynx, which I prefer to elinks, on a Java 6 javadocs 
> set. It did a reasonable job despite insisting on the non-frames set of 
> pages. Apart from that, the worst you can say about it is that its 
> formatting of method parameters with long fully qualified types is 
> somewhat untidy. 

Generally I also prefer lynx, but it doesn't support frames, and 
elinks does, and to me that makes a difference for this use case.

Anyway, try either one on on a Java 7 javadocs set -- both still
display the content, but IMO the formatting is noticeably less
satisfactory than for Java 6,

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9033 — Re: Java 7 javadocs (was Re: Ubuntu)

On 20/10/2011 10:16 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> In article<j7n915$u76$1@localhost.localdomain>,
> Martin Gregorie<martin@address-in-sig.invalid>  wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:27:30 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
>>
>>> In article<j7l4vv$ctc$1@localhost.localdomain>,
>>> Martin Gregorie<martin@address-in-sig.invalid>  wrote:
>
> [ snip ]
>
>>>> and firing up Opera remotely if I want to proof read Javadocs.
>>>
>>> Once upon a time you could proofread javadocs with a frames-capable
>>> text-mode browser (such as elinks).  Not so much with Java 7,
>>> alas ....  Maybe a rant for another thread, but at least a return from
>>> topic drift?
>>>
>> Have you any idea why?
>
> Why what?  Why "not so much"?  because that may be a bit of an
> exaggeration -- but the HTML produced by the Java 7 "javadoc" tool
> has a fairly different look from what was produced by previous
> versions, and it explicitly complains if you use a browser that
> doesn't support Javascript, and .... :

Eeek.  I use NoScript and try to keep my set of "allowed" sites minimal; 
I suppose  should be able to trust the Oracle website (or mine, if I 
make a local copy for some reason) but it still seems to me like a bad 
design decision.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9671 — Re: Java 7 javadocs (was Re: Ubuntu)

On 10/20/2011 10:16 AM, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
> In article<j7n915$u76$1@localhost.localdomain>,
> Martin Gregorie<martin@address-in-sig.invalid>  wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 13:27:30 +0000, blmblm@myrealbox.com wrote:
>>> Once upon a time you could proofread javadocs with a frames-capable
>>> text-mode browser (such as elinks).  Not so much with Java 7,
>>> alas ....  Maybe a rant for another thread, but at least a return from
>>> topic drift?
>>>
>> Have you any idea why?
>
> Why what?  Why "not so much"?  because that may be a bit of an
> exaggeration -- but the HTML produced by the Java 7 "javadoc" tool
> has a fairly different look from what was produced by previous
> versions, and it explicitly complains if you use a browser that
> doesn't support Javascript, and .... :
>
>> I prefer just tried lynx, which I prefer to elinks, on a Java 6 javadocs
>> set. It did a reasonable job despite insisting on the non-frames set of
>> pages. Apart from that, the worst you can say about it is that its
>> formatting of method parameters with long fully qualified types is
>> somewhat untidy.
>
> Generally I also prefer lynx, but it doesn't support frames, and
> elinks does, and to me that makes a difference for this use case.
>
> Anyway, try either one on on a Java 7 javadocs set -- both still
> display the content, but IMO the formatting is noticeably less
> satisfactory than for Java 6,

I am not anti-JS in any way.

But I must admit that I think the old Java doc format was better
than the new one.

The old one was simply more readable.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9048 — Re: Ubuntu

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Martin Gregorie wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 22:12:26 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> On 10/16/2011 7:51 PM, Tom Anderson wrote:
>>
>>> Less pedantically, mainstream Linux seems to be heading away from X
>>> too:
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayland_%28display_server_protocol%29
>>
>> We will see.
>>
>> I am a bit skeptical about that happen.
>
> The lack of network transparency in Wayland would be a major showstopper 
> for me: my preferred way of working and of organising data and tasks 
> across a network more or less depends on this feature of X11.

Stealing links from wikipedia, there is a chance it may become remotable:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2010-November/000097.html
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-November/145306.html

I avoid the term "network transparent", because that term is palpable 
nonsense. I have a couple of years of day-in, day-out experience of X (in 
fact, NX) being significantly less than transparent over a network.

> That said, I'm uncertain how unusual this way of working appears to 
> others.

The specific X way of working (program on one machine, window system 
entirely elsewhere) is probably fairly niche these days. But the 
VNC/RDP/NX way of working, where the remote program thinks it is talking 
to a local window system, which is actually a stub which is sending its 
updates across the network, is very common.

There is a thing called SPICE:

http://spice-space.org/

Which is basically a remote windowing protocol that plugs into a virtual 
machine (as long as it's QEMU), rather than into a window server; that is, 
it's sort of a virtual VGA cable, of which nothing above the level of the 
VM itself (so not even the guest OS - although maybe it needs special 
drivers?) is aware. You could presumably run a Wayland server on that, and 
have apps talk to Wayland talk to the VM talk to a SPICE client over the 
network. I have no idea if that would be a good thing or not.

tom

-- 
Kein Mehrheit Fur Die Mitleid

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9059 — Re: Ubuntu

On Oct 20, 3:53 pm, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
> There is a thing called SPICE:
>
> http://spice-space.org/
>
> Which is basically a remote windowing protocol that plugs into a virtual
> machine (as long as it's QEMU), rather than into a window server; that is,
> it's sort of a virtual VGA cable

Wow, you people just love to create problems with the clipboard, don't
you?

Whereas with a remote app and a local window system you can copy from
the remote app and paste into a local one, or a remote one that isn't
on the same remote machine as the first remote one, with a "virtual
VGA cable" obviously the copy and paste will take place on the machine
with the first remote app -- you won't be able to copy from it and
paste into a local app, or a differently-remote one.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8878 — Re: Ubuntu

On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, Roedy Green wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:21:27 +0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie
> <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
> someone who said :
>
>> On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:16:47 -0400, B1ll Gat3s wrote:
>>
>>> Just because it's no longer available at the same time as the OS with a
>>> one-stop shop doesn't mean it's impossible to get and install it,
>>> period, you know.
>>>
>> Maybe, maybe not.
>>
>> I've read, from more than one source, that G2 will no longer work on
>> Ubuntu, hence its removal though admittedly this also has a lot to do
>> with the Ubuntu folks deciding they hated G3 and going off down the Unify
>> track: maybe they've decided that Unify is now stable enough that
>> alternatives aren't needed.
>>
>> With F16 Fedora moves to Kernel 3.x and completes its transition from
>> using System V init to control boot-up and services to using systemd. As
>> a result systemctl replaces 'service'. This in turn means that the daemon
>> scripts in /etc/init.d become toast and are replaced by systemd service
>> unit definitions. With G2 no longer being maintained (not that gnome.org
>> was doing much to support it for the last year or two) and the relatively
>> large number of fundamental changes going into F16 I wouldn't be
>> surprised if it stops working under F16 too. At a minimum, a lot of stuff
>> in the 'System' menu won't work any more.
>
> I am a puzzled by the Unix folk having so many ways of handling the
> GUI.  I have heard of Gnome 1 2 3, KDE, X-Windows, Xfce, Unify

Unix folk have so many ways of handling everything! Count the numbers of 
mail daemons, text editors, web servers, pagers, mail clients, package 
managers ...

> When you write a C program do you have to pick one? or do they share a 
> common core API?

Not on your nelly.

tom

-- 
So the moon is approximately 24 toasters from Scunthorpe.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8818

On Sat, 15 Oct 2011, B1ll Gat3s wrote:

> On 14/10/2011 6:20 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:00:40 -0400, B1ll Gat3s wrote:
>> 
>>> On 14/10/2011 9:21 AM, Tom Anderson wrote:
>>>> It's utterly vile. We got GNOME 3 with Fedora 15, and switched over to
>>>> XFCE after about five minutes.
>>>> 
>>>> XFCE is quite a step down from GNOME 2, but it's miles better than
>>>> GNOME 3. I am counting my blessings that i recently bought a Mac!
>>> 
>>> What is wrong with GNOME 3?
>
> [much stuff]
>
>> - as you do other things this sensitive area tends to grow as time
>>    passes and to overlap application windows including the one that
>>    has focus. It gets bloody big too - something like a quarter circle
>>    with its centroid in the top left corned and a raduis of half the
>>    screen height.
>
> This sounds like a bug. They'll probably fix it soon.

Hopefully. The outright bugs should be fixed in a few months. The missing 
features (like there being no way to change the font size) will be 
supplied over a year or so. The mistakes will probably be rectified in a 
couple of years.

Sadly, i need a computer *now*. Hence, goodbye GNOME 3.

>>> And if you prefer GNOME 2 to both GNOME 3 and XFCE, why not just
>>> use GNOME 2?
>> 
>> Because G2 been removed from the latest Ubuntu release and AFAIK the same
>> will happen with the release of Fedora 16.
>
> Then get it directly from the GNOME folks, or wherever else it might be.

Oh, that sounds like an easy and straightforward thing to do.

I mildly prefer GNOME 2 to XFCE. But i strongly prefer package-managed 
software to build-it-yourself. I want a tool, not a hobby.

> If enough people are displeased with GNOME 3 there WILL be SOMEwhere 
> where GNOME 2 is preserved for people that prefer it to download and 
> install.

A couple of people are maintaining forks, or things that look vaguely like 
forks:

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=121162
http://k3rnel.net/2011/05/26/project-bluebubble/

The history of GNOME forks is not an encouraging one, though. These two 
won't last through the winter.

> Just because it's no longer available at the same time as the OS with a 
> one-stop shop doesn't mean it's impossible to get and install it, 
> period, you know.

We know. But it's largely irrelevant.

tom

-- 
Rip and tear your guts! You are huge! That means you have huge guts! Rip
and tear! -- The Doomguy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web