ru.linux

 
 - RU.LINUX ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 From : Sergey Lentsov                       2:4615/71.10   06 Dec 2001  17:11:57
 To : All
 Subject : URL: http://www.lwn.net/2001/1206/letters.php3
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 

    [1][LWN Logo] 
    
                                [2]Click Here 
    [LWN.net]
    
    Sections:
     [3]Main page
     [4]Security
     [5]Kernel
     [6]Distributions
     [7]Development
     [8]Commerce
     [9]Linux in the news
     [10]Announcements
     [11]Linux History
     Letters
    [12]All in one big page
    
    See also: [13]last week's Letters page.
    
 Letters to the editor
 
    Letters to the editor should be sent to [14]letters@lwn.net.
    Preference will be given to letters which are short, to the point, and
    well written. If you want your email address "anti-spammed" in some
    way please be sure to let us know. We do not have a policy against
    anonymous letters, but we will be reluctant to include them.
    December 6, 2001
    
    
 From:    Eric Kidd <eric.kidd@pobox.com>
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: Evolution notes
 Date:    29 Nov 2001 12:24:18 -0500
 
 First, a minor nit:
 
 "There does not, however, appear to be any straightforward way of
 creating a contact entry from a mail message; one must start from the
 beginning and type it all in."
 
 Right click on an e-mail address and you'll be pleasantly surprised. :-)
 
 Now, on to some arguably more substantial thoughts.
 
 I've abandoned a highly customized Mutt setup (among other things, I'm
 the author of Emacs mutt-mode), and switched to Evolution.  Why?
 
 The Drawbacks of Mutt
 ---------------------
 
 * Mutt can't handle big folders efficiently.  I have some mail folders
 with 25,000 messages or more, and mutt insists on rebuilding the indexes
 every time I switch folders.  And since mail files tend to be highly
 fragmented, this can take close to 30 seconds on a 1.4 GHz box.
 
 * Mutt is inherently modal.  I can't, say, compose two messages at once,
 read a third, and poke around in a mailbox at the same time.
 
 * Mutt can't search message bodies.
 
 * Mutt can't read the HTML-only e-mails that some people insist on
 sending me through Hotmail, unless I screw around with mimecap files.
 And even then, it's pretty clunky.
 
 The Advantages of Evolution
 ---------------------------
 
 * Serious support for huge quantities of mail: lightening full-text
 search, virtual folders based on queries, support for mailboxes with
 tens of thousands of messages.
 
 * Support for receiving HTML e-mail.
 
 * Excellent integration between the mail reader, contact database, and
 my Pilot.
 
 The main drawbacks of Evolution are poor integration with the
 traditional Unix environment, and mediocre PGP support.
 
 In particular,  evolution (1) is bad at noticing PGP errors, (2) doesn't
 support rules like "always encrypt mail to so-and-so" and (3) replies to
 encrypted messages with quoted, unencrypted bodies by default (a
 *serious* security hole that it shares with Mutt).
 
 I hope some of these bugs get fixed in 1.x.  But it's a dynamite mailer
 in many ways.
 
 Cheers,
 Eric
 
    
 From:    tom poe <tompoe@renonevada.net>
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: SVG and ADOBE
 Date:    Fri, 30 Nov 2001 21:19:34 -0800
 
 Hi:  Just saw the announcement for Mozilla and Adobe and SVG.
 
 Criteria for Letters to the Editor:
 Short, to the point, and possibly well-written.
 
 These criteria don't leave much room for "What the h%^&  is our W3C.org
 standards committee trying to pull?"  rants.  By all means, folks, go over to
 Adobe and download their proprietary product so you can view Open Source
 Standards on Linux, because our W3C.org standards committee thinks SVG should
 be a proprietary standard for all.  What happened to Batik?  Oh, that's
 right.  Adobe views Batik as second class citizens, and has no interest in
 Open Sourcing their work in collaboration.  Maybe someone has a clearer
 understanding as to why anyone would want to use proprietary products as a
 standard for Open Source.  thanks, Tom
 
    
 From:    Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@cbbrowne.com>
 To:      letters@lwn.net
 Subject: SourceForge Concerns
 Date:    Wed, 05 Dec 2001 14:02:22 -0500
 
 The concerns about Sourceforge.net are hardly new; people have long expressed
 all sorts of paranoia about all sorts of unfortunate possible scenarios.
 
 I'm not overly concerned, but commend that people make sure that they're not
 putting "all their eggs in one basket."
 
 There certainly are a number of negative outcomes that could lead to
 significant inconvenience.  I always like to characterize it with the idea of
 a large meteoroid striking Silicon Valley, as that takes a certain amount of
 "sting" out what might otherwise become accusations.  (The Python people have
 their classic line about Guido getting hit by a bus; same sort of story; I
 guess I am more into bad Sean Connery movies :-).)
 
 Whatever the potential reasons for a loss of service, it is very important for
 people to have some backup plans should a "Big Gulp" happen.  It is already
 highly likely that interesting CVS archives will be widely mirrored, simply
 because ocean-crossing links can be slow.
 
 Those that are running projects that they consider important should certainly
 seek to mirror the code elsewhere.
 
 The following are a whole bunch of possible alternatives:
 Savannah, GBorg, Berlios.de, Tuxfamily.org, Serveur Libre, SunSITE.dk, Vhffs,
 Subversions - GNU Project, SEUL: Hosted Projects, freepository, Lusis.org,
 SourceFubar, tigris
 
 It would seem logical for those projects that are actually active (most
 Sourceforge projects are NOT active) to consider mirroring at one or another
 of these sites.
 
 Note that such mirroring is also systematically useful for keeping the folks
 at Sourceforge.net from being tempted to "do ill."  I remember many arguments
 taking place yesteryear with just _extreme_ paranoia that Red Hat (the typical
 "punching bag" for paranoid concerns) might be just about to do something
 horribly proprietary.  The presence of alternatives that are conspicuously
 free of "we might try to take this private" interests represents a powerful
 quencher of temptation.  Debian is a crucial alternative, in the distribution
 arena; even if you never use it, the fact that it's out there helps to keep
 Linux distributions freely available.
 
 If you care about your project, mirror it, and the risks dissipate.
 --
 (concatenate 'string "cbbrowne" "@ntlug.org")
 [15]http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/linux.html
 Any programmer who fails to comply with the standard naming, formatting,
 or commenting conventions should be shot.  If it so happens that it is
 inconvenient to shoot him, then he is to be politely requested to recode
 his program in adherence to the above standard.
 -- Michael Spier, Digital Equipment Corporation
    
    
                                                                          
    
    [16]Eklektix, Inc. Linux powered! Copyright Л 2001 [17]Eklektix, Inc.,
    all rights reserved
    Linux (R) is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds
 
 References
 
    1. http://lwn.net/
    2. http://ads.tucows.com/click.ng/pageid=pageid=132-000-001-001
    3. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/
    4. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/security.php3
    5. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/kernel.php3
    6. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/dists.php3
    7. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/devel.php3
    8. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/commerce.php3
    9. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/press.php3
   10. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/announce.php3
   11. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/history.php3
   12. http://lwn.net/2001/1206/bigpage.php3
   13. http://lwn.net/2001/1129/letters.php3
   14. mailto:letters@lwn.net
   15. http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/linux.html
   16. http://www.eklektix.com/
   17. http://www.eklektix.com/
 
 --- ifmail v.2.14.os7-aks1
  * Origin: Unknown (2:4615/71.10@fidonet)
 
 

Вернуться к списку тем, сортированных по: возрастание даты  уменьшение даты  тема  автор