Re: why do errors stop during backup

>> i have an old pci analog video capture card that uses bttv >> it fills the log with timeout errors, 1 or 2 per minute >> bttv: 2: timeout: drop=725178 irq=4905870/4927747, risc=2014e424, bits: HSYNC >> each night i run a backup with rsync >> during that backup time there are no bttv errors >> th

re: why do errors stop during backup

> i have an old pci analog video capture card that uses bttv > it fills the log with timeout errors, 1 or 2 per minute > bttv: 2: timeout: drop=725178 irq=4905870/4927747, risc=2014e424, bits: HSYNC > each night i run a backup with rsync > during that backup time there are no bttv errors > the came

why do errors stop during backup

i have an old pci analog video capture card that uses bttv it fills the log with timeout errors, 1 or 2 per minute bttv: 2: timeout: drop=725178 irq=4905870/4927747, risc=2014e424, bits: HSYNC each night i run a backup with rsync during that backup time there are no bttv errors the cameras continue

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

On Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 02:31:42AM +0800, hlyg wrote: > Thank tomas! actually i am amateur on this subject You are welcome :-) We all are amateurs (amateur is French and means you love something, so... :) > but at my local market, usb devices aren't as colorful as Ritter describe, > blue indicat

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

Thank tomas! actually i am amateur on this subject but at my local market, usb devices aren't as colorful as Ritter describe, blue indicates usb3

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

Le 13/11/2024 à 00:07, Dan Ritter a écrit : hlyg wrote: easiest way to identify usb3 is look at color, both connector and connectee shall be blue As it turns out, that's not a requirement. USB A ports can be white, black, blue, red, yellow, green, teal or purple... or pretty much any other col

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 06:07:48PM -0500, Dan Ritter wrote: > hlyg wrote: > > > > easiest way to identify usb3 is look at color, both connector and connectee > > shall be blue > > As it turns out, that's not a requirement. Just a recommendation: "USB 3.0 Type-A and B connectors are usually b

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

hlyg wrote: > > easiest way to identify usb3 is look at color, both connector and connectee > shall be blue As it turns out, that's not a requirement. USB A ports can be white, black, blue, red, yellow, green, teal or purple... or pretty much any other color in the future. It's normal for a ma

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

easiest way to identify usb3 is look at color, both connector and connectee shall be blue after i install freebsd and reboot, POST can't finish, i have to unplug power cord it's easy to explain why booting is bug-prone, it involves 2 parties, bios maker and OS developer

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

On 11/12/24 1:52 PM, David Wright wrote: [snip] I don't know how one tells USB2 and USB3 sticks apart,... https://html.duckduckgo.com/html?q=%22identify%22%20%22USB2%22%20%22USB3%22 https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/112143/which-usb-slot-is-2-0-or-3-0-how-do-i-know https://forums.t

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

On Tue 12 Nov 2024 at 22:52:09 (+0800), hlyg wrote: > > /var/log/installer/syslog might not be helpful, because everything > proceeds smoothly and normally during installation Agreed. The idea was to see the verbose context in which any Grub-install error and warning messages would be discovered.

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

Thank Wright! /var/log/installer/syslog might not be helpful, because everything proceeds smoothly and normally during installation it is easy to reproduce my problem, pc with 2 hard disks, 2 free usb disks(one for installation disk, the other installation target), i don't use uefi actuall

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

On Mon 11 Nov 2024 at 13:29:07 (+0800), hlyg wrote: > Thank Curley! i have found out on my own > > i install again on another pc with 1 hard disk, it succeeds > > problem is with pc with 2 hard disks, 1 usb disk for installation > media, 1 target usb disk > > this situation is so special that bo

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

Thank Curley! i have found out on my own i install again on another pc with 1 hard disk, it succeeds problem is with pc with 2 hard disks, 1 usb disk for installation media, 1 target usb disk this situation is so special that both debian and freebsd fail to install boot loader properly?

Re: why this new stick fail to boot

On Mon, 11 Nov 2024 06:57:23 +0800 hlyg wrote: > this usb stick has 2 interfaces: usb type A and C, for pc and cell > phone > > i install bullseye on it, installation finish without error > > but booting fails, it is ignored, boot from hard disk, not usb disk > > freebsd has same problem Both

why this new stick fail to boot

this usb stick has 2 interfaces: usb type A and C, for pc and cell phone i install bullseye on it, installation finish without error but booting fails, it is ignored, boot from hard disk, not usb disk freebsd has same problem

Re: Why does "apt-get upgrade {package}" upgrade all packages instead of error?

Actually the english version of "man apt-get" in the case of "upgrade" writes the following: upgrade    upgrade is used to install the newest versions of all packages currently installed on the system from the sources enumerated in /etc/apt/sources.list. Packages currently    i

Re: Why does "apt-get upgrade {package}" upgrade all packages instead of error?

On Thu 24 Oct 2024 at 13:19:13 (-0400), Daniel Roberts wrote: > I've run into this a few times over the years and it can be a headache to > resolve. > > Passing a package name to "apt-get update" results in the response "E: The > update command takes no arguments". However, passing a package name

Why does "apt-get upgrade {package}" upgrade all packages instead of error?

Hello, I've run into this a few times over the years and it can be a headache to resolve. Passing a package name to "apt-get update" results in the response "E: The update command takes no arguments". However, passing a package name to "apt-get upgrade" results in the argument being ignored and a

Re: Why does "apt-get upgrade {package}" upgrade all packages instead of error?

Daniel Roberts composed on 2024-10-24 13:19 (UTC-0400): > I've run into this a few times over the years and it can be a headache to > resolve. > Passing a package name to "apt-get update" results in the response "E: The > update command takes no arguments". However, passing a package name to > "a

Re: Why does "apt-get upgrade {package}" upgrade all packages instead of error?

Hello Daniel, # man apt-get (german translation) doesn't tell anything else. apt-get upgrade upgrades ALL installed packages. Kind regards Frank Daniel Roberts: Hello, I've run into this a few times over the years and it can be a headache to resolve. Passing a package name to "apt-get

Re: why some -dev packages depend on pkgconf and not others?

Patrice Duroux (12024-10-17): > That is not clear to me why certain -dev depends on pkconf whereas (a > lot of) others with a .pc file don't. I guess it would depend on whether the only supported and documented way to link with the library in the package is to use pkg-config or whet

why some -dev packages depend on pkgconf and not others?

, version 26.2.20 -- Checking for module 'fluidsynth>=2.1.0' -- Found fluidsynth, version 2.3.6 That is not clear to me why certain -dev depends on pkconf whereas (a lot of) others with a .pc file don't. Regards, Patrice

Re: Why (not?) Mozilla [was: Refugee from [x]ubuntu, a few initial questions]

On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 03:00:06AM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: [...] > You might like this one, too. Mozilla just bought an ad company and > cut-in code in Firefox for targeted advertising: "Privacy-Preserving" > Attribution: Mozilla Disappoints Us Yet Again, >

Re: Why (not?) Mozilla [was: Refugee from [x]ubuntu, a few initial questions]

On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 2:07 AM wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 04:55:28PM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > [...] > > > Lol... That's been the course for years now. Mozilla almost lost their > > non-profit status because they were making so much money from their > > Google partnership: > >

Why (not?) Mozilla [was: Refugee from [x]ubuntu, a few initial questions]

On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 04:55:28PM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: [...] > Lol... That's been the course for years now. Mozilla almost lost their > non-profit status because they were making so much money from their > Google partnership: >

Why (not?) Mozilla [was: Refugee from [x]ubuntu, a few initial questions]

n worse, > > https://michael.kjorling.se/blog/2024/staying-with-firefox-for-now/ Good writing. This is, more or less, my feeling. That's, more or less, why I still stay with Firefox. With quite a grudge, mind you. Basically, the way the ideals of free software are being beaten into submiss

Re: Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

>> > options snd_hda_intel id=[HDMI,PCH] index=1,0 >> Might be you need to write with dashes, as the module files is named >> with dashes. > Thank you for the reply. However, dashes and underscores can be > interchanged in these files. FWIW: That's been my experience for the `modprobe` command arg

Re: Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 10:00:20AM +0700, Max Nikulin wrote: > > Have you read log messages reported by journalctl? There is a systemd unit > to load modules, but I expect that this one should be autoloaded in response > to an udev event. Yes, I did try to find anything relevant using journalctl.

Re: Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 08:52:26PM +0200, Franco Martelli wrote: > > I am running debian testing, updated daily. > I'm on stable, so I can't help much > > > > > After yesterday's update, the kernel module snd_hda_intel is being > > loaded with the wrong (default) parameters. > Have you verified t

Re: Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

On 03/09/2024 22:51, ael wrote: I have /etc/modprobe.d/snd-hda.conf which specifies: options snd_hda_intel id=[HDMI,PCH] index=1,0 [...] Maybe there are some release notes that I have failed to read? Can anyone point me in the right direction? (If the direction is Devuan, I have already moved

Re: Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

Hi, On 03/09/24 at 17:51, ael wrote: Hello, I am running debian testing, updated daily. I'm on stable, so I can't help much After yesterday's update, the kernel module snd_hda_intel is being loaded with the wrong (default) parameters. Have you verified this by running the following command

Re: Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 04:51:02PM +0100, ael wrote: > Hello, > > I am running debian testing, updated daily. > > After yesterday's update, the kernel module snd_hda_intel is being > loaded with the wrong (default) parameters. > > I have /etc/modprobe.d/snd-hda.conf > which specifies: > options

Re: Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 08:33:54PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > ael (12024-09-03): > > options snd_hda_intel id=[HDMI,PCH] index=1,0 > > Might be you need to write with dashes, as the module files is named > with dashes. Thank you for the reply. However, dashes and underscores can be interchang

Re: Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

ael (12024-09-03): > options snd_hda_intel id=[HDMI,PCH] index=1,0 Might be you need to write with dashes, as the module files is named with dashes. Might be brackets are not the correct syntax for an array option. Regards, -- Nicolas George

Why are module parameters under /etc/modprobe.d not respected?

Hello, I am running debian testing, updated daily. After yesterday's update, the kernel module snd_hda_intel is being loaded with the wrong (default) parameters. I have /etc/modprobe.d/snd-hda.conf which specifies: options snd_hda_intel id=[HDMI,PCH] index=1,0 The details are very unlikely to b

Re: Why is Firefox crashing so much lately?

> I'm running Debian/Trixie on an AMD64 system, using the Plasma 5 over X > desktop. Firefox 115.12.0esr is crashing multiple times per day. It > frequently happens when page I'm transfers to another page that creates > a PDF or just has a complicated link. It's annoying. > > To visit some pages, I

Re: Why is Firefox crashing so much lately?

On 2024-08-17 22:47, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Sat, Aug 17, 2024 at 9:07 PM Gary Dale wrote: [...] Out of frustration with this and another problem, I did a complete fresh install yesterday - first to Bookworm then a full-upgrade to Trixie. I started with a new profile for Firefox then synced it

Re: Why is Firefox crashing so much lately?

Aug 18, 2024, 01:07 by g...@extremeground.com: > Firefox ESR is still crashing intermittently. Again, I can trigger it fairly > consistently just by visiting some pages (usually ones that try to generate a > PDF, for example). At other times it just crashes for no apparent reason. > You're usi

Re: Why is Firefox crashing so much lately?

On Sat, Aug 17, 2024 at 9:07 PM Gary Dale wrote: > [...] > Out of frustration with this and another problem, I did a complete fresh > install yesterday - first to Bookworm then a full-upgrade to Trixie. I > started with a new profile for Firefox then synced it to restore my > passwords and bookmar

Re: Why is Firefox crashing so much lately?

On 2024-07-19 11:19, Gary Dale wrote: On 2024-07-19 11:09, Gary Dale wrote: On 2024-07-19 10:42, The Wanderer wrote: On 2024-07-19 at 10:34, Gary Dale wrote: On 2024-07-18 09:52, Gary Dale wrote: Thanks for the tips guys, but I'm not going to switch to XFCE, I'm using an old AMD graphics car

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Children are taught in elementary school that computer == Windows. -- John Hasler j...@sugarbit.com Elmwood, WI USA

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 10:44:37AM +0800, hlyg wrote: [...] > PS: i am aware that linux has more success in server market ... and the mobile market. Android is, on its underbelly, Linux after all. So Linux might have the most installations out there, I guess. Not that Microsoft didn't try -- th

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

i realize i have asked hard question: why free OS hasn't beaten M$ in past 30 years? there's no easy answer, it requires years of experience in Windows and Linux 1st, programmers from proprietary software company are as clever as best from open source community. perhaps they

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share? [Dvorak]

On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 07:55:29PM -0600, Shawn Jefferds wrote: Your final statement makes me curious about learning Dvorak. Shawn Jefferds ??n ??f?rdz Noli fovere canem ardentum Vote Vader 2024! On Sun, Jul 21, 2024, 11:37 Russell L. Harris wrote: On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 04:48:19PM +080

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On Sun, Jul 21, 2024, 10:03 AM Joe wrote: > > > Basically, I think that with many more users, we would see more Windows > users and they would be less secure in their habits. We've already seen > this to some extent with Ubuntu. I don't think it's any more difficult > to write a virus for Li

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share? [Dvorak]

On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 04:48:19PM +0800, hlyg wrote: On 7/21/24 02:33, Russell L. Harris wrote: The same reasons the standard typewriter keyboard is QWERTY rather than Dvorak: = The precedent set by the first to market is powerful. = The influence of advertising upon a populace lacking in di

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 12:19 PM Hans wrote: > > I do not agree to this. Updates should be installed as soon as they are > available. Especially security updates. It shows , that within 24 hours after > the release of an update, an exploit is available for this security hole. I think you may be c

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

Stefan Monnier wrote: > > - software updates that run as root (including Debian updates) > > can run anything else as root > > So, maybe a more relevant discussion is: what will happen when a Debian > stable security update comes with a "big blunder" that crashes the most > machines in earl

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

hlyg writes: > why free OS hasn't gained more share even after 30 years of development? But it has. The internet and what connects to it now mostly run Linux, other than Microsoft's single niche. Mobile phones run a Linux variant. The PC desktop is the only exception where they ha

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

t;> organization deciding which of the most recent three versions each >> of their computers will get) but just with a data-files update >> (which, as we have seen here, appears to go out to all clients >> regardless of version). > > At minimum, it is negligence. Agreed.

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

I do not agree to this. Updates should be installed as soon as they are available. Especially security updates. It shows , that within 24 hours after the release of an update, an exploit is available for this security hole. But you should do it corrdectly, like some hospitals did: First check wi

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

gt;> >> Their is essentially no one in the linux arena to sue if things go >> south, so it doesn't take more than an eighth grade education to >> see why they won't ever recommend linux no matter how superior it >> may be at the end of a P&L report. They hav

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

Dan Ritter writes: > Richmond wrote: >> Jeffrey Walton writes: >> >> Yes the updates should be tested at every stage. Maybe people think that >> they cannot stop updates, but they can use Group Policy to stop Windows >> Update. Or maybe they are afraid if they don't allow virus updates then >>

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Joe (12024-07-21): > And the important phrase there is 'if you want to'. The point is that > many people, especially those accustomed to running with admin > privileges on their Windows computers, would continue to do that. No, they will not. They will continue to follow the system default, whate

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Alain D D Williams (12024-07-21): > I only needed root as it was for another user. Exactly. On a computer with only one user account, once the pirate have access to that account, they can do everything that matters. Including spy the root password next time it is typed, but why waste the t

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

gle (but not keystrokes I think), MS Edge does likewise - which is why I stick to Firefox. But if you have root access it is easy, I did it on a Unix system V machine in the late 1980s, a few minutes work. I only needed root as it was for another user. -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Joe (12024-07-21): > I accept what you say, the point I was making is that the more users, > and they will be less IT-competent users, the more will login as root. No, they will not. And it does not matter, because on a personal computer the root account is not what matters, what matters is the u

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

d it takes a bit of fiddling to set up an unprivileged user and *always* *use* *it*. It's inconvenient to keep entering the admin password (there's still no sudo, as far as I know), so people prefer to run with admin privileges. In most cases, nobody has ever told them why they shouldn

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

> - software updates that run as root (including Debian updates) > can run anything else as root So, maybe a more relevant discussion is: what will happen when a Debian stable security update comes with a "big blunder" that crashes the most machines in early boot? Admittedly, the wider vari

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

Richmond wrote: > Jeffrey Walton writes: > > Yes the updates should be tested at every stage. Maybe people think that > they cannot stop updates, but they can use Group Policy to stop Windows > Update. Or maybe they are afraid if they don't allow virus updates then > they will allow a virus? Th

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

Jeffrey Walton writes: > This is alarming (to me) from the YC post: > > "we push software to your machines any time we want, > whether or not it's urgent, without testing it" seems to be > core to the model... > > Updates need to be tested inside an organization's lab, and then > test

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On Sun, Jul 21, 2024, 12:40 AM wrote: > On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 03:27:17PM -0400, gene heskett wrote: > > [...] > > > And even you Hans, leave out the major, all encompassing, reason for the > > lack of market share, which is that most business that have a > computerized > > system to run things

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Contrary to popular belief, the QWERTY layout was not designed to slow the typist down, but rather to speed up typing. Indeed, there is evidence that, aside from the issue of jamming, placing often-used keys farther apart increases typing speed, because it encourages alternation between the ha

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

hlyg (12024-07-21): > is it possible to remap keyboard to Dvorak in X Window? Yes, of course. https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=Debian+dvorak > does anyone use it > to speed up typing? No, only to feel smug. # Later experiments have shown th

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On 7/21/24 02:33, Russell L. Harris wrote: The same reasons the standard typewriter keyboard is QWERTY rather than Dvorak: = The precedent set by the first to market is powerful. = The influence of advertising upon a populace lacking in discernment and addicted to novelty is deadly. Add to t

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

was Linux deployed on > those machines. And nothing would be different if Crowdstrike didn't > exist, as some other equally useless vendor would be involved. > > There is a need to examine why companies are putting high privilege > junk software on their machines. It's got nothing to do with Linux > vs Windows. Jeff

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 08:17:54AM +0800, jeremy ardley wrote: > The CrowdStrike outage emulated the very thing it is alleged to protect > against - a zero day exploit. It was also a demonstration of a huge vulnerability. If $EvilActor were to get an agent employed at CrowdStrike/whoever then the

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

arch will tell you what to do but not why, I have sometimes found that the recommendation is wrong and that enabling something else is a better solution. -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 https://www.phcomp

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 03:27:17PM -0400, gene heskett wrote: [...] > And even you Hans, leave out the major, all encompassing, reason for the > lack of market share, which is that most business that have a computerized > system to run things also value what their MBA says. And since there is no

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

ing in this story would be different if it was Linux deployed on those machines. And nothing would be different if Crowdstrike didn't exist, as some other equally useless vendor would be involved. There is a need to examine why companies are putting high privilege junk software on their machine

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

On 21/7/24 10:07, Jeffrey Walton wrote: All this points to an incompetent board. If someone's head is going to be taken (figuratively), then it should start with the CEO and other executives. Yes. But, the people who should be sacked, with loss of benefits, are the board members and the CE

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

goes through a release cascade, with > each organization deciding which of the most recent three versions each > of their computers will get) but just with a data-files update (which, > as we have seen here, appears to go out to all clients regardless of > version). At minimum, it is neg

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On 21/7/24 07:28, Nicholas Geovanis wrote: Again lacking data center experience? Every server in your data center that is outward-facing will be contacted by intruders on its open ports. That includes your Debian servers. If your apache server or application server running on Debian is vulne

Re: CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

On 21/7/24 06:38, The Wanderer wrote: The first would be poor institutional practice; the others would be potentially-questionable software design, although it's hard to know without seeing the internal architecture of the software in question and understanding*why* it's designe

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Windows For this specific issue, if Linux were used at the same scale and for the same purposes as these affected Windows machines, then a similar issue would affect Linux sooner or later. The reason why this is the case is that the current motivation for the use of Crowdstrike's softwa

CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

ual new client version (which goes through a release cascade, with > each organization deciding which of the most recent three versions each > of their computers will get) but just with a data-files update (which, > as we have seen here, appears to go out to all clients regardless of > ver

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On Sat, Jul 20, 2024, 2:09 PM Joe wrote: > > You missed one: Linux is virtually a virus-free environment, and a > large user base would mean many more people running as root, and it > would become worth the time of malware writers to target Linux. Linux > would become as virus-ridden as Windows.

CrowdStrike and drivers (was Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?)

with a data-files update (which, as we have seen here, appears to go out to all clients regardless of version). The first would be poor institutional practice; the others would be potentially-questionable software design, although it's hard to know without seeing the internal architecture

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Thank Clug and all that reply ! On 7/20/24 18:36, George at Clug wrote: Do you think Windows is not reliable? Why is that? Windows used to crash often, i rarely use it now, they say it's more stable these day Do you use Linux yourself? surely i use as this is debian user list Hav

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Andy Smith (12024-07-20): > And yes here in the UK where we allowed the Post Office to pay > billions to Fujitsu to develop the Horizon IT system that > incorrectly accused hundreds of postmasters of fraud, resulting in > criminal prosecutions and at least one case of suicide. That was not a bug,

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Hi, On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 09:44:52PM +0100, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote: > It seems clear to me that what's needed is a change in the law. At the > moment here in the UK we have national news services explaining that > airline passengers won't be able to get compensation because the > 'even

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

e reliable than Windows > > For this specific issue, if Linux were used at the same scale and > for the same purposes as these affected Windows machines, then a > similar issue would affect Linux sooner or later. > > The reason why this is the case is that the current motivation

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

I would think linux is better as server OS due to reasons of security, performance and Operability etc. Once aol mail was running on windows. But now aol is merged into yahoo mail which was originally run on freebsd but now linux mostly. And the initial hotmail was running on freebsd too IIRC

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

sed at the same scale and for the same purposes as these affected Windows machines, then a similar issue would affect Linux sooner or later. The reason why this is the case is that the current motivation for the use of Crowdstrike's software on those Windows machines would be exactly the sam

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

> You missed one: Linux is virtually a virus-free environment, and a > large user base would mean many more people running as root, and it > would become worth the time of malware writers to target Linux. Linux > would become as virus-ridden as Windows. > > It would also become a target for data h

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

take more than an eighth grade education to see why they won't ever recommend linux no matter how superior it may be at the end of a P&L report. They have to have someone to sue. Bill Shakespear said it best when he wrote "first, we kill all the lawyers." But MBA's

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 15:59:14 +0200 Hans wrote: > Hello, > > well, the thing is: Do we really want to go to more market share? > > Let's imagine, Debian becomes market relevant, what will happen? > Sure, more developers get paid, what is very nice. But not all > developers will. > > Many good d

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

The same reasons the standard typewriter keyboard is QWERTY rather than Dvorak: = The precedent set by the first to market is powerful. = The influence of advertising upon a populace lacking in discernment and addicted to novelty is deadly. Add to that extortion and bribes and a compromised leg

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On Sat, Jul 20, 2024, 12:16 AM wrote: > On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 02:45:37PM +1000, David wrote: > > On Sat, 2024-07-20 at 11:54 +0800, hlyg wrote: > > [...] > > > > why free OS hasn't gained more share even after 30 years of > > > development? > >

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Which is not quite correct. As a hamradio (I am one), you are allowed to develop your very owh rf-devices. Transceivers, measure equipment, whatever you like. Many things, we are using today in consumer devices are first developed by radio amateurs (example shorthand "packet radio", which is da

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On 7/20/24 09:58, Larry Martell wrote: I’ve never owned a machine running windows in my life. I've owned one. I needed a lappy I could use with a gps for roadmap, had the then new XP on it, cleared the disk a week later and put mandrake on it because XP had no drivers that could run the broadco

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

gene heskett (12024-07-20): > > If they were, you'd have support for software-defined radio signal > > processing in FFmpeg, for example. > Which the current rules for such does not allow, by FCC edicts, only sealed > FCC approved blobs are allowed to play in the rf field. > So don't blame the code

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On Saturday, 20-07-2024 at 23:59 Hans wrote: > Hello, > > well, the thing is: Do we really want to go to more market share? > > Let's imagine, Debian becomes market relevant, what will happen? Sure, more > developers get paid, what is very nice. But not all developers will. > > Many good dev

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On 7/20/24 04:28, Nicolas George wrote: hlyg (12024-07-20): Thank David! market share is important though it isn't "reliable recommendation for quality": more users attract more programmers, who develop more apps, The programmers who are attracted by market share are not necessarily the ones w

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

Hello, well, the thing is: Do we really want to go to more market share? Let's imagine, Debian becomes market relevant, what will happen? Sure, more developers get paid, what is very nice. But not all developers will. Many good developers will not be paid and when the market will rule things,

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

I’ve never owned a machine running windows in my life.

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On 20/7/24 18:35, George at Clug wrote: On Saturday, 20-07-2024 at 13:54 hlyg wrote: > crowdstrike makes news headlines, many Windows become blue screens The CrowdStrike issue was not a Windows issue, it was a CrowdStrike issue. The problem did not affect our Windows computers as we have no

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

My reason to keep windows is that I can’t play Starcraft under Linux. -- Jeff Pang jeffp...@aol.com

Re: why reliable linux hasn't gained more market share?

On 2024-07-20, Michael Kjörling wrote: > On 20 Jul 2024 16:57 +0800, from hlyg2...@outlook.com (hlyg): >> statistics about market share might come from web servers and game servers, >> they know how many users use linux and Windows. > > No. They at most can know what platform user agents report.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >