Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

unix n00bs

Name: Anonymous 2005-05-24 16:27

unix n00bs (i.e. most of you here) make me shit my pants

for the love of god, people, using unix for a month is not enough to make you knowledgeable in its ways and give advice to others. please refrain from making yourself look like complete utter idiots (mind you, this is hard to achieve since idiots are the norm in CS) by giving horribly shitty authorative-sounding suggestions based on shit you read two days ago on linuxtoday and newsforge.

discuss.

Name: Anonymous 2005-07-14 23:18

>Use OpenBSD if it absolutely, positively has to be secure

...and you trust the word of a schizophrenic who has never wrote production code in his life, even when he's tried to.

Name: Anonymous 2005-07-15 1:26

Real security fanatics use OpenVMS.

Name: Anonymous 2005-07-15 1:49

>>81 Of course not, but I do trust OpenBSD.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 6:09

>>83
Windows gets better security review than any of the open source OSes, including OpenBSD - Microsoft actually pay hundreds of people to look for security holes, full-time.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 6:27

>>84
TAKE IT OUTSIDE MS SPOKESGOBLIN

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 9:24

http://shop.mtv.com/viewproduct.htm?productId=1450959&extid=df00033&campaign1=DEP:MTV:Google_Base

``It's, like, rockin' man, Abel and Sussman are totally dope! Duuude!''

Please explain.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 10:44

>>86
slava_pestov LOL.
I wonder if he reads /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 12:24

>>87
He submitted it to reddit http://reddit.com/info/5zbpl/comments/

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 13:54

i've used bsd for 8 years now and use it daily on my only computer as my only operating system, this is why i fail, i'm getting a macbook next month

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 15:11

>>89
Let's dump out 50 years of standardized Unix configuration conventions and implement our own arcane xml configuration, also fuck init lets make our own proprietary launchd. FUCK YEAH APPLE FTW

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 15:13

>>90
See m0n0wall for an good example of xml-only configuration.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 16:56

>>90
Where's the arcane xml configuration?

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 17:11

>>92
That would be the ``defaults'' system. The programmer only sees key/value pairs, and the user doesn't interact with it at all, but they're stored as XML plists, so I'm pretty sure that's what >>90 is talking about.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-07 20:37

>>100

Last post in this thread.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-08 1:23

>>99

Second to last post in this thread.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-08 1:31

>>101

Inevitable prediction-breaking post in this thread.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-08 6:56

>>97
Best post in this thread

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-08 8:23

>>97
I tend to disagree.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-08 8:31

>>99 is gay.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-08 8:31

GOTO >>100

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-08 9:01

considered harmful

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-09 10:53

>>93
Plists haven't been XML in ages.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-09 10:58

>>102
I'm not quite sure what you mean. XML was the default plist format around 10.3 (I don't know about earlier versions). Since 10.4 they've been binaries by default and now (10.5) it seems that plutil doesn't even support NeXT plists anymore. Your post makes it sound like even a binary configuration file is superior to XML.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-09 11:21

>>103
Binary is love.  Especially when programs manage their own configuration like any usable system.

Name: Anonymous 2008-02-09 11:47

configuration files are not part of the UNIX philosophy.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 3:31

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-03 6:12

Name: Anonymous 2012-08-10 5:44

[b][u][o]test[/b][/u][/o]

Name: Anonymous 2012-08-10 5:45

test

Name: Anonymous 2012-08-10 5:47

The Stealth Rapist

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List