Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


+ - Virtualizing an Entire Environment - Multiple Times?

Submitted by Rozine
Rozine (1345911) writes "My company is being split off from a larger, more hide-bound organization after decades. We're using this opportunity to expand our development team and to change a lot of the development processes that we've lived with for a long time. One of the areas that we'd like to change is our environment setup. Currently, we have development, QA, and production environments running. Our production environment consists of hundreds of machines running hundreds of different processes in a massively complex and scaled up system, almost all on a customized Red Hat Linux (RHEL3-5), with a few AIX and Solaris we're looking to eventually decommission, and one or two Windows boxes. Dev is always broken and lacks some major features that we develop for production. QA has most of what production has, but it's a huge task managing process rollouts that can conflict with UAT needs, especially when sometimes developers perform development in the QA environment due to lack of features or stability in dev. We've recently discussed adding more environments to the mix — a real UAT environment so that clients can have a stable onboarding experience, and multiple dev or QA environments so that we can isolate changes and eliminate wasted time dealing with stability issues. We have support from senior management where cost is "not an issue" (although I'm sure that has limits). We've run into trouble, though, because our complex software only supports the three current environments and it would be an insane task to add more. Has anyone had experience with more sophisticated environment setups in the past? Is it possible to virtualize an entire environment, so that applications think they're the only dev environment and connect to the same "machines", but are really on separate boxes? Does this scale to twenty environments easily, or should we set our sights lower? Is this the wrong approach?"

+ - Launch Your Own Nanosat Into Space-> 1

Submitted by Rozine
Rozine (1345911) writes "Ever wanted to launch your own satellite into space? Thanks to a project at the Cornell Space Science Lab, now you can. In the words of the grad student leading the project, Zac Manchester, "What better way of showing off your uber-geek credentials than having your own spacecraft?" Zac hopes that by shrinking the size of each spacecraft and using advancements in computer and solar cell technology, satellites can follow the path of the personal computer revolution, opening up space for the masses. For small donations you will receive mementos, but for $300 and up you will get your very own satellite to be launched into space. Perfect for slashdotters and school projects everywhere!"
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:To me, it's a question of mobility. (Score 1) 572

by Rozine (#32061492) Attached to: FSF Response To Steve Jobs's Letter
Huh? Zune - can you even write apps for that? Kin - you can't write apps for that, it's not a smartphone. Windows 7 mobile - since when do you need Microsoft's involvement to release an app for that? I haven't used windows 7, but previous stuff, like windows CE, was an open platform - not FOSS, but you could do whatever you wanted with what you had. Palm too, btw. That's why this new trend emanating from Apple is so devastatingly bad for freedom. Lay off the RDF.

Comment: Re:Sounds like a KDE-type cleanup (Score 1) 276

by Rozine (#31783832) Attached to: GNOME 2.30, End of the (2.x) Line

Any application, not just GNOME applications, can use filesystems mounted with GNOME's 'connect to server' feature, for instance. I think it's more desirable to write a FUSE module than a KDE-specific KIOSlave.

You say that, but if you look at the apps on the ground, most, well, don't. For instance, I can mount my network drive using GVFS all I want, but I still can't watch anything on it, since VLC has no clue about it. A nice idea, but it would be preferable if they integrated it into the rest of Linux too. That said, I use Gnome every day.


+ - Ubuntu Releases Patch for SSD-Destroying Bug->

Submitted by Rozine
Rozine (1345911) writes "Today Ubuntu released a patch for Karmic that stops the destruction of some SSDs caused by a software bug. This is great news, especially since just yesterday we sent my wife's Eee PC for warranty service due to this same issue. The kicker? The bug was first reported in October 2009! Is it time to look to other distros for the crown of easy-to-use Linux? To me, allowing a *hardware destroying* bug to sit for months, whatever the cause, is completely unacceptable. Hopefully I've applied the patch on my other computers fast enough to prevent permanent damage on them as well."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:You get what you pay for? (Score 4, Informative) 423

by Rozine (#31413594) Attached to: Jobs Says No Tethering iPad To iPhone
I understand your frustration, but you're doing it wrong. If you use the official hardware drivers program in the administration menu, kernel upgrades will not cause this behavior. (This is actually the default behavior on a new install now - it pops up and asks you). And it is supported by Canonical.

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." -- The Wizard Of Oz