Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #378455 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-10-30 11:24 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-11-01 12:56 -0400 |
| Articles | 19 on this page of 79 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 11:24 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 06:14 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-30 09:39 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 06:50 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 06:54 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:12 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 10:30 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:40 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 12:49 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 18:41 +0000
You are not fooling anyone, Mr. Maggot. John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 15:21 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 10:27 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 09:49 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-30 13:49 +0000
Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 06:57 -0700
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:11 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 15:35 +0100
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-30 10:38 -0400
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:45 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 12:50 -0400
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 18:42 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 17:31 -0400
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-11-01 10:58 -0700
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-30 16:11 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 19:46 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-30 16:04 -0400
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-10-30 20:52 +0000
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 21:54 +0100
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-30 22:42 +0100
Re: Melzzzzz must be just some kind of a Linux idiot ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-10-31 18:08 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 15:33 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-30 12:47 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 18:38 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-30 10:14 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:24 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-30 10:26 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-31 07:32 -0500
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 12:59 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 15:26 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 14:31 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-30 16:09 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 21:47 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 20:50 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-30 22:06 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-30 21:09 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-30 18:58 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 00:51 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 00:15 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-31 09:19 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 13:53 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-31 12:29 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 16:52 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 12:01 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 18:05 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 18:12 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-31 15:08 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-31 19:27 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 23:44 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 20:25 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-31 22:43 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-11-01 17:17 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-11-01 19:21 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-11-01 16:46 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-11-01 17:33 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-11-02 08:05 -0400
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 20:24 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-10-31 06:22 -0700
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 13:29 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 12:02 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 18:10 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-31 19:46 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-31 18:58 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-31 21:25 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-11-01 03:49 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-31 13:54 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-10-31 12:02 -0600
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-31 01:10 +0100
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-31 10:50 +0000
Re: kernel 4.8 still bugged ;( DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-11-01 12:56 -0400
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-01 17:17 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nvb7om$vhl$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378786 |
On 10/31/16 20:43, Marek Novotny wrote: > On 2016-11-01, GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >> On 10/31/16 13:08, Marek Novotny wrote: >>> On 2016-10-31, Melzzzzz<Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>> Is it true that new mac book does not have ESC and function keys? No more vi >>>> for mac users ;) >>> >>> They make a 13" that has the normal function keys. >>> >> >> The 15" model has this glass strip, but didn't really notice any >> function keys missing. The glass strip is supposed to replace the dock. >> But unless one gets the i7 version, they are just too slow to use IMO. > > It doesn't replace the dock. It acts like context-based functions. As > you might remember I was saying how I had decided to go back to the Mac > for Adobe apps rather than using the Windows based Dell XPS 15" I bought > for that purpose. > > I watched the whole show Apple put on for this release. I'm not at all > surprised that I am the only one disappointed. I will not be buying one > of these. I don't like the new product at all. > > Funny how Apple only compared the new MacBook to the older one. Fact is > that this machine's graphics is already well behind what the PC has to > offer. Likely around 4 times slower than the newest nVidia already > shipping. 16GBs of RAM as a max build out is also pretty lame. They got > rid of all the ports, meaning there are dongles in the future of anyone > who buys these. > > As usual I'm far from impressed with anything Apple does. > I had to download Sierra OS on my wifes iMac, and it helped a little, but not much. It looks like Apple is slowly losing it in the os arena. Now if Jobs were still around, things would possibly be better.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-01 19:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nvb80h$2de$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378991 |
On 2016-11-01 7:17 PM, GreyCloud wrote: > On 10/31/16 20:43, Marek Novotny wrote: >> On 2016-11-01, GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>> On 10/31/16 13:08, Marek Novotny wrote: >>>> On 2016-10-31, Melzzzzz<Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>> Is it true that new mac book does not have ESC and function keys? >>>>> No more vi >>>>> for mac users ;) >>>> >>>> They make a 13" that has the normal function keys. >>>> >>> >>> The 15" model has this glass strip, but didn't really notice any >>> function keys missing. The glass strip is supposed to replace the dock. >>> But unless one gets the i7 version, they are just too slow to use IMO. >> >> It doesn't replace the dock. It acts like context-based functions. As >> you might remember I was saying how I had decided to go back to the Mac >> for Adobe apps rather than using the Windows based Dell XPS 15" I bought >> for that purpose. >> >> I watched the whole show Apple put on for this release. I'm not at all >> surprised that I am the only one disappointed. I will not be buying one >> of these. I don't like the new product at all. >> >> Funny how Apple only compared the new MacBook to the older one. Fact is >> that this machine's graphics is already well behind what the PC has to >> offer. Likely around 4 times slower than the newest nVidia already >> shipping. 16GBs of RAM as a max build out is also pretty lame. They got >> rid of all the ports, meaning there are dongles in the future of anyone >> who buys these. >> >> As usual I'm far from impressed with anything Apple does. >> > I had to download Sierra OS on my wifes iMac, and it helped a little, > but not much. It looks like Apple is slowly losing it in the os arena. > Now if Jobs were still around, things would possibly be better. Apparently, the new MacBooks are so unimpressive to people that System76's sales went up; people would rather pay less for excellent hardware and a shoddy operating system than more for outdated hardware and a consistent but slow operating system. -- Silver Slimer Islam is a disease Proud libertarian, unapologetic nerd, author, gamer, beast-mode teacher and silver-tongued heel Fingerprint: e58428b2633833a3b0c9bb7e40819166642245b7 Gab.ai: @silverslimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-01 16:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D43E7767.81928%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #378995 |
On 11/1/16, 4:21 PM, in article nvb80h$2de$1@dont-email.me, "Silver Slimer" <.m@nsn.s> wrote: >>> Funny how Apple only compared the new MacBook to the older one. Fact is >>> that this machine's graphics is already well behind what the PC has to >>> offer. Likely around 4 times slower than the newest nVidia already >>> shipping. 16GBs of RAM as a max build out is also pretty lame. They got >>> rid of all the ports, meaning there are dongles in the future of anyone >>> who buys these. >>> >>> As usual I'm far from impressed with anything Apple does. >>> >> I had to download Sierra OS on my wifes iMac, and it helped a little, >> but not much. It looks like Apple is slowly losing it in the os arena. >> Now if Jobs were still around, things would possibly be better. > > Apparently, the new MacBooks are so unimpressive to people that > System76's sales went up; people would rather pay less for excellent > hardware and a shoddy operating system than more for outdated hardware > and a consistent but slow operating system. People were waiting around to either get a Mac OR go to System76? Somehow I doubt it. With that said I have no real opinion on the new Macs... disappointed they STILL have not updated the iMacs or minis... and the new touch bar seems OK but nothing amazing. Maybe once I get a chance to use it or read about it more I will be more impressed... and there are times I think it would be good to have, esp. with full screen programs where the toolbar is hidden. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-01 17:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <165c9e92-c788-49cb-9563-5e232c6c1b38@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #378995 |
On Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 5:21:17 PM UTC-6, Silver Slimer wrote: > On 2016-11-01 7:17 PM, GreyCloud wrote: > > On 10/31/16 20:43, Marek Novotny wrote: > >> On 2016-11-01, GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > >>> On 10/31/16 13:08, Marek Novotny wrote: > >>>> On 2016-10-31, Melzzzzz<Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> wrote: > >>>>> Is it true that new mac book does not have ESC and function keys? > >>>>> No more vi > >>>>> for mac users ;) > >>>> > >>>> They make a 13" that has the normal function keys. > >>>> > >>> > >>> The 15" model has this glass strip, but didn't really notice any > >>> function keys missing. The glass strip is supposed to replace the dock. > >>> But unless one gets the i7 version, they are just too slow to use IMO. > >> > >> It doesn't replace the dock. It acts like context-based functions. As > >> you might remember I was saying how I had decided to go back to the Mac > >> for Adobe apps rather than using the Windows based Dell XPS 15" I bought > >> for that purpose. > >> > >> I watched the whole show Apple put on for this release. I'm not at all > >> surprised that I am the only one disappointed. I will not be buying one > >> of these. I don't like the new product at all. > >> > >> Funny how Apple only compared the new MacBook to the older one. Fact is > >> that this machine's graphics is already well behind what the PC has to > >> offer. Likely around 4 times slower than the newest nVidia already > >> shipping. 16GBs of RAM as a max build out is also pretty lame. They got > >> rid of all the ports, meaning there are dongles in the future of anyone > >> who buys these. > >> > >> As usual I'm far from impressed with anything Apple does. > >> > > I had to download Sierra OS on my wifes iMac, and it helped a little, > > but not much. It looks like Apple is slowly losing it in the os arena. > > Now if Jobs were still around, things would possibly be better. > > Apparently, the new MacBooks are so unimpressive to people that > System76's sales went up; people would rather pay less for excellent > hardware and a shoddy operating system than more for outdated hardware > and a consistent but slow operating system. I saw this after I did the very thing the article mentioned. For the first time I've been looking at something other than an Apple. My youngest just bought an inexpensive laptop for web development and it is now dual booting Ubuntu. I think this is the model he bought: <https://www.amazon.com/K501UX-15-6-inch-Gaming-Processor-Windows/dp/B0146DD02G> He paid $650 for it, I believe it was open box or some such, but it looks like it was never touched.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-02 08:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nvckov$j77$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #379015 |
On 2016-11-01 8:33 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 5:21:17 PM UTC-6, Silver Slimer wrote: >> On 2016-11-01 7:17 PM, GreyCloud wrote: >>> On 10/31/16 20:43, Marek Novotny wrote: >>>> On 2016-11-01, GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>>>> On 10/31/16 13:08, Marek Novotny wrote: >>>>>> On 2016-10-31, Melzzzzz<Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Is it true that new mac book does not have ESC and function keys? >>>>>>> No more vi >>>>>>> for mac users ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> They make a 13" that has the normal function keys. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The 15" model has this glass strip, but didn't really notice any >>>>> function keys missing. The glass strip is supposed to replace the dock. >>>>> But unless one gets the i7 version, they are just too slow to use IMO. >>>> >>>> It doesn't replace the dock. It acts like context-based functions. As >>>> you might remember I was saying how I had decided to go back to the Mac >>>> for Adobe apps rather than using the Windows based Dell XPS 15" I bought >>>> for that purpose. >>>> >>>> I watched the whole show Apple put on for this release. I'm not at all >>>> surprised that I am the only one disappointed. I will not be buying one >>>> of these. I don't like the new product at all. >>>> >>>> Funny how Apple only compared the new MacBook to the older one. Fact is >>>> that this machine's graphics is already well behind what the PC has to >>>> offer. Likely around 4 times slower than the newest nVidia already >>>> shipping. 16GBs of RAM as a max build out is also pretty lame. They got >>>> rid of all the ports, meaning there are dongles in the future of anyone >>>> who buys these. >>>> >>>> As usual I'm far from impressed with anything Apple does. >>>> >>> I had to download Sierra OS on my wifes iMac, and it helped a little, >>> but not much. It looks like Apple is slowly losing it in the os arena. >>> Now if Jobs were still around, things would possibly be better. >> >> Apparently, the new MacBooks are so unimpressive to people that >> System76's sales went up; people would rather pay less for excellent >> hardware and a shoddy operating system than more for outdated hardware >> and a consistent but slow operating system. > > > I saw this after I did the very thing the article mentioned. For the first time I've been looking at something other than an Apple. My youngest just bought an inexpensive laptop for web development and it is now dual booting Ubuntu. I think this is the model he bought: > > <https://www.amazon.com/K501UX-15-6-inch-Gaming-Processor-Windows/dp/B0146DD02G> > > He paid $650 for it, I believe it was open box or some such, but it looks like it was never touched. So for less than $800, he gets a laptop which can play games (the 950m is a decent chip) whereas for double the price, he can get a MacBook with a bare-bones GPU which can't play anything but the simplest games. Gee, I wonder why he'd pick the PC! -- Silver Slimer Islam is a disease Proud libertarian, unapologetic nerd, author, gamer, beast-mode teacher and silver-tongued heel Fingerprint: e58428b2633833a3b0c9bb7e40819166642245b7 Gab.ai: @silverslimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 20:24 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nv8uc2$n15$14@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378684 |
On 10/31/16 12:12, Melzzzzz wrote: > On 2016-10-31, Jim Polaski<jpolaski@linuxmail.org> wrote: >> On 2016-10-31, GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>> On 10/31/16 10:52, Jim Polaski wrote: >>>> On 2016-10-31, Silver Slimer<> wrote: >>>>> On 2016-10-31 9:53 AM, Jim Polaski wrote: >>>>>> On 2016-10-31, Silver Slimer<> wrote: >>>>>>> On 2016-10-30 8:15 PM, Jim Polaski wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2016-10-30, Melzzzzz<mel@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 18:58:34 -0400 >>>>>>>>> Chris Ahlstrom<OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Melzzzzz wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 30 Oct 2016 20:50:12 GMT >>>>>>>>>>> Jim Polaski<jpolaski@linuxmail.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2016-10-30, Melzzzzz<mel@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 11:24:32 +0000 (UTC) >>>>>>>>>>>>> Melzzzzz<Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have tried kernel 4.8.5 in orther to switch from trusty 4.7, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but alas got BUG softlockup on CPU(s) during rsync. Have to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hard reset, switched back to 4.7... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hm, it seems that it is zfs bug after all. Just had messages >>>>>>>>>>>>> regarding zfs on 4.7 ;( >>>>>>>>>>>>> Returned to 4.8 to test further, but it seems kernel is ok as I >>>>>>>>>>>>> had problems with rsync from zfs on 4.7 either.... >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sometimes I think you Linux dweebs would be bored if Linux >>>>>>>>>>>> actually worked. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It does work. I use it for about 90% of my computing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems are >>>>>>>>> expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two instances >>>>>>>>> of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So then you can't be using Linux for anything important. >>>>>>>> Unless tinkering with Linux is important to you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Constant fun flatfish! ;) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> He should go somewhere else and promote Windows. Or maybe help >>>>>>>>>> out the Gates Foundation. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> He promotes Window alright ;) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> People can choose to use Linux if they desire to. >>>>>>>> They don't. >>>>>>>> The reason is Linux sucks as a desktop system and all the lying and half >>>>>>>> truths told by the Linux herd can't change that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When something given away for free is shunned by some 99 percent of >>>>>>>> computer users it's time to reevaluate that product and make changes in >>>>>>>> order to make the product more appealing to the market. >>>>>>>> It will never happen though. Linux will continue to fragment, cause >>>>>>>> division of the users (can you say systemd?) and so forth. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Use GTK or use QT? Use Mir or use Wayland? It never ends with the >>>>>>> controversies in the Linux camp. >>>>>> >>>>>> Th infighting is harming Linux as a whole. If anything it makes the >>>>>> Linux users and developers look like spoiled babies. >>>>>> And they are. >>>>> >>>>> The "advocates" will tell you that it doesn't matter whether you prefer >>>>> QT or GTK as the programs of one will work in the environment of the >>>>> other as long as the dependencies are installed. Those dependencies, >>>>> however, don't prevent programs from one library from looking completely >>>>> off in the environment of the other. These programs usually ignore >>>>> personalization choices and any other settings your system might have. >>>>> As or Wayland vs. Mir, this is a situation where both camps would >>>>> clearly have benefited from working together rather than competing for >>>>> what is essentially the same thing. If they had, we'd have a finished >>>>> product instead of two shoddy, unstable and unfinished ones. >>>> >>>> Exactly. >>>> Linux does a lot of different things. >>>> The problem is it doesn't do them well. >>>> Linux has 15 crappy, inconsistent DE vs one quality, consistent DE like >>>> OSX or Windows. >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> And with complete idiots like Chris Ahlstrom, William Poaster, 7, chrisv >>>>>>>> and many others like them "advocating" Linux, Microsoft has nothing to >>>>>>>> worry about. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> At the very least, Linux will appear to be the choice of closet >>>>>>> homosexuals, transsexuals and idiots. >>>>>> >>>>>> Someone should create a Linux distribution for sexually confused Linux >>>>>> users and call it : >>>>>> >>>>>> "TrannyLinux" >>>>>> >>>>>> Or "TransLix". >>>>> >>>>> You seem to be suggesting that there is such a thing as a Linux user who >>>>> _isn't_ sexually confused. >>>> >>>> Better yet! >>>> The distribution will be at the top of Distrowatch in no time! >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> For Microsoft it's like a war against 5 different armys where one has >>>>>>>> the guns, another has the bullets, another has the maps, another the >>>>>>>> petrol and the last has the trucks to transport the troops. The problem >>>>>>>> is none of the armys talk to each other. >>>>>>>> That's Linux. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Like the Soviet army during the Second World War. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> And that's why Linux has been stagnating as a desktop system since the >>>>>>>> day it was born. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To be fair, it's improved but it's still a gigantic distance from where >>>>>>> it should be. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sure Linux has improved. It's where Windows XP's last version was about >>>>>> 10 years ago. >>>>>> And that's a maybe. >>>>> >>>>> Mind you, XP was ridiculously stable AND fast which is one of the many >>>>> reasons people still hold onto it to this day. Linux is not stable >>>>> though it is very fast if you choose the right desktop environment. So >>>>> it still doesn't compare too well to Windows XP. >>>> >>>> And then there is that pesky topic of applications. >>>> >>> >>> There is one thing I noticed about OS X... they have violated their own >>> GUI guidlines. In TextEdit, there used to be "Save As...", but it is >>> now gone in El Capitan. Now there is just "Save". So how does one save >>> an Untitled file with a new name? You have to use the menu item Move. >>> Really dumb one. >>> >> Apple is realling going down the drain these days. >> Look at the prices on their recent MBP models. >> Way overpriced for the power you are getting. >> > Is it true that new mac book does not have ESC and function keys? No more vi > for mac users ;) > Last I looked the ESC key is still there. vi is still there. The whole system is still slow tho.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fr314159@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 06:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1ad74a83-0210-49b3-acf9-4b6bc9c5693f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #378573 |
On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: > > He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems are > expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two instances > of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... > I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of adjustment, that's all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 13:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nv7h03$o41$5@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #378615 |
On 2016-10-31, fr314159@gmail.com <fr314159@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: > >> >> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems are >> expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two instances >> of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >> > > I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? > > So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? > > Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. > But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of > adjustment, that's all. > > I reproduced same thing on 4.7 and this time dmesg showed problem in zfs module... I can't see how your suggestion could improve situation... -- press any key to continue or any other to quit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 12:02 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nv80un$kjm$10@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378619 |
On 10/31/16 07:29, Melzzzzz wrote: > On 2016-10-31, fr314159@gmail.com<fr314159@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: >> >>> >>> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems are >>> expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two instances >>> of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >>> >> >> I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? >> >> So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? >> >> Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. >> But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of >> adjustment, that's all. >> >> > > I reproduced same thing on 4.7 and this time dmesg showed problem in zfs > module... I can't see how your suggestion could improve situation... > Do you have EEC memory in your PC? If you don't, as Peter noted, zfs can really screw things up.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 18:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nv81eb$erj$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #378671 |
On 2016-10-31, GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > On 10/31/16 07:29, Melzzzzz wrote: >> On 2016-10-31, fr314159@gmail.com<fr314159@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems are >>>> expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two instances >>>> of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >>>> >>> >>> I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? >>> >>> So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? >>> >>> Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. >>> But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of >>> adjustment, that's all. >>> >>> >> >> I reproduced same thing on 4.7 and this time dmesg showed problem in zfs >> module... I can't see how your suggestion could improve situation... >> > > Do you have EEC memory in your PC? > If you don't, as Peter noted, zfs can really screw things up. > That's bullshit. Why zfs, why not ext4? Faulty memory can cause problems in any file system.. Besides, this is bug in zfs module, clearly some race condition surfaces as rsync processes got stuck in kernel, when executing more then one in parallel.. -- press any key to continue or any other to quit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 19:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nv83i1$481$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378681 |
Melzzzzz wrote: > On 2016-10-31, GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >> On 10/31/16 07:29, Melzzzzz wrote: >>> On 2016-10-31, fr314159@gmail.com<fr314159@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems >>>>> are expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two >>>>> instances of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >>>>> >>>> >>>> I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? >>>> >>>> So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? >>>> >>>> Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. >>>> But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of >>>> adjustment, that's all. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I reproduced same thing on 4.7 and this time dmesg showed problem in zfs >>> module... I can't see how your suggestion could improve situation... >>> >> >> Do you have EEC memory in your PC? >> If you don't, as Peter noted, zfs can really screw things up. >> > > That's bullshit. No, it is not. With ZFS, a mem error can make you lose the *entire* disk contents with a little bad luck > > Why zfs, why not ext4? Faulty memory can cause problems > in any file system.. Yes: But a faulty memory with EXT4 can cause you (at worst) to lose a directory. Normally just a file might be faulty. And since EXT4 is a journaling FS (it is standard ON), you will very rarely lose something > Besides, this is bug in zfs module, clearly some race condition surfaces > as rsync processes got stuck in kernel, when executing more then one in > parallel.. > ZFS is not yet ready for all situations. BTRFS is better, and has several options which are quite advanced. Even so, I use EXT4 normally. It is also the fastest FS of all out there
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 18:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nv8484$erj$9@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #378700 |
On 2016-10-31, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: > Melzzzzz wrote: > >> On 2016-10-31, GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>> On 10/31/16 07:29, Melzzzzz wrote: >>>> On 2016-10-31, fr314159@gmail.com<fr314159@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems >>>>>> are expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two >>>>>> instances of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? >>>>> >>>>> So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? >>>>> >>>>> Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. >>>>> But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of >>>>> adjustment, that's all. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> I reproduced same thing on 4.7 and this time dmesg showed problem in zfs >>>> module... I can't see how your suggestion could improve situation... >>>> >>> >>> Do you have EEC memory in your PC? >>> If you don't, as Peter noted, zfs can really screw things up. >>> >> > That's bullshit. > > No, it is not. With ZFS, a mem error can make you lose the *entire* disk > contents with a little bad luck Care to explain how? ZFS checksums everything what it writes so I guess checksum can get bad data. In my experience memory fault caused bad files which were detected. This is because I had overclocked memory too far without testing. I had to clear zpool and restore faulty files. > >> > Why zfs, why not ext4? Faulty memory can cause problems >> in any file system.. > > Yes: But a faulty memory with EXT4 can cause you (at worst) to lose a > directory. Normally just a file might be faulty. And since EXT4 is a > journaling FS (it is standard ON), you will very rarely lose something I had memory corruption due suspend/resume which produced corrupted ext4 which had to be repaired with fsck , journaling didn't help. > >> Besides, this is bug in zfs module, clearly some race condition surfaces >> as rsync processes got stuck in kernel, when executing more then one in >> parallel.. >> > > ZFS is not yet ready for all situations. BTRFS is better, and has several > options which are quite advanced. Even so, I use EXT4 normally. It is also > the fastest FS of all out there BTRFS and ZFS are not fast, simply because they don't have destructive update... but they are good for keeping snapshots and doing backups. For databases? forget them... > -- press any key to continue or any other to quit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 21:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nv89ap$qg6$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378703 |
Melzzzzz wrote: > On 2016-10-31, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: >> Melzzzzz wrote: >> >>> On 2016-10-31, GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>>> On 10/31/16 07:29, Melzzzzz wrote: >>>>> On 2016-10-31, fr314159@gmail.com<fr314159@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems >>>>>>> are expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two >>>>>>> instances of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? >>>>>> >>>>>> So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? >>>>>> >>>>>> Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. >>>>>> But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of >>>>>> adjustment, that's all. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I reproduced same thing on 4.7 and this time dmesg showed problem in >>>>> zfs module... I can't see how your suggestion could improve >>>>> situation... >>>>> >>>> >>>> Do you have EEC memory in your PC? >>>> If you don't, as Peter noted, zfs can really screw things up. >>>> >>> > That's bullshit. >> >> No, it is not. With ZFS, a mem error can make you lose the *entire* disk >> contents with a little bad luck > > Care to explain how? ZFS checksums everything what it writes so I guess > checksum can get bad data. In my experience memory fault caused bad files > which were detected. This is because I had overclocked memory too far > without testing. I had to clear zpool and restore faulty files. > Just getting a faulty file with ZFS is being lucky Due to the internal structure of ZFS a memory error can lead to a broken link, losing everything behind >> >>> > Why zfs, why not ext4? Faulty memory can cause problems >>> in any file system.. >> >> Yes: But a faulty memory with EXT4 can cause you (at worst) to lose a >> directory. Normally just a file might be faulty. And since EXT4 is a >> journaling FS (it is standard ON), you will very rarely lose something > > I had memory corruption due suspend/resume which produced corrupted ext4 > which had to be repaired with fsck , journaling didn't help. Point being that you can do fsck on EXT4. A corrupted ZFS can be beyond any repair >> >>> Besides, this is bug in zfs module, clearly some race condition surfaces >>> as rsync processes got stuck in kernel, when executing more then one in >>> parallel.. >>> >> >> ZFS is not yet ready for all situations. BTRFS is better, and has several >> options which are quite advanced. Even so, I use EXT4 normally. It is >> also the fastest FS of all out there > > BTRFS and ZFS are not fast, simply because they don't have destructive > update... but they are good for keeping snapshots and doing backups. > For databases? forget them... >> > So take BTRFS and forget about ZFS unless you have ECC mem
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-01 03:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nv93c2$o9u$2@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #378705 |
On 2016-10-31, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: > > So take BTRFS and forget about ZFS unless you have ECC mem I can't. I like ZFS more for doing parallel compilation of huge projects (btrfs hangs my system during huge writes) and mysql on ZFS is much faster then on BTRFS. What I use BTRFS for is on external HDD keeping backups, as using ZFS for that is pointless, as there is no guarantee (if I have to restore) that I will have ZFS module ready. > > -- press any key to continue or any other to quit
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 13:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <e7p0phFi8psU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #378615 |
On 2016-10-31, fr314159@gmail.com <fr314159@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: > >> >> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems are >> expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two instances >> of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >> > > I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? > > So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? > > Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. > But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of > adjustment, that's all. Rationalization at it's best.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 12:02 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <nv80vo$kjm$11@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378625 |
On 10/31/16 07:54, Jim Polaski wrote: > On 2016-10-31, fr314159@gmail.com<fr314159@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sunday, October 30, 2016 at 7:52:02 PM UTC-4, Melzzzzz wrote: >> >>> >>> He simply neglects that I run bleeding edge everything, so problems are >>> expected ... I think I have found culprit. It's if i ran two instances >>> of rsync bug happens. And it is zfs related... >>> >> >> I told you to adjust the watchdog_threshhold, didn't I? >> >> So why didn't you do it? Why don't you listen to me? >> >> Instead you just run around screaming that 4.8 has a bug. >> But it's not a bug. Your stupid system just needs a bit of >> adjustment, that's all. > > Rationalization at it's best. > Ask him what adjustments does he recommend?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 01:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nv624i$v36$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378569 |
Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > Melzzzzz wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> On 30 Oct 2016 20:50:12 GMT >> Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> wrote: >> >>> On 2016-10-30, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>> > On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 11:24:32 +0000 (UTC) >>> > Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >> I have tried kernel 4.8.5 in orther to switch from trusty 4.7, but >>> >> alas got BUG softlockup on CPU(s) during rsync. Have to hard reset, >>> >> switched back to 4.7... >>> > >>> > Hm, it seems that it is zfs bug after all. Just had messages >>> > regarding zfs on 4.7 ;( >>> > Returned to 4.8 to test further, but it seems kernel is ok as I had >>> > problems with rsync from zfs on 4.7 either.... >>> >>> Sometimes I think you Linux dweebs would be bored if Linux actually >>> worked. > > It does work. I use it for about 90% of my computing. Make that 99.9% in my case I run *everything* under linux. Except compiling programs for windows/OSX Even though compiling them for windows works just fine under Wine
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | William Poaster <wp@dev.null> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-31 10:50 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p7kjed-0o2.ln1@debian.machineone.org> |
| In reply to | #378577 |
On 31/10/2016 00:10 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter Köhlmann posted: > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> Melzzzzz wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> On 30 Oct 2016 20:50:12 GMT >>> Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2016-10-30, Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>> > On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 11:24:32 +0000 (UTC) >>>> > Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> I have tried kernel 4.8.5 in orther to switch from trusty 4.7, but >>>> >> alas got BUG softlockup on CPU(s) during rsync. Have to hard reset, >>>> >> switched back to 4.7... >>>> > >>>> > Hm, it seems that it is zfs bug after all. Just had messages >>>> > regarding zfs on 4.7 ;( >>>> > Returned to 4.8 to test further, but it seems kernel is ok as I had >>>> > problems with rsync from zfs on 4.7 either.... >>>> >>>> Sometimes I think you Linux dweebs would be bored if Linux actually >>>> worked. >> >> It does work. I use it for about 90% of my computing. > > Make that 99.9% in my case 100% in my case. > I run *everything* under linux. Except compiling programs for windows/OSX > > Even though compiling them for windows works just fine under Wine -- What IS remarkable, is that a well developed ape has come to realise that he lives on a planet, circling a sun, in a planetary system, within a galaxy, within a universe. - Professor Michio Kaku - Theoretical Physicist -
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-11-01 12:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nvahek$9uo$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #378602 |
On 10/31/2016 6:50 AM, Dumb Willie wrote: > 100% in my case. Did you hear 100% of +1 = +1 ? That's some powerful computing you're doing with Linux.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web