Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:And you can save even more (Score 2, Informative) 275

by oddityfds (#29572343) Attached to: How To Save $1 Trillion a Year With Open Source

Canonical:
Revenue: $30 Million
Owner(s): Mark Shuttleworth
Employees: 200+

Red Hat:
Type: Public (NYSE: RHT)
Revenue: $652.57 million USD (2009)
Net income: 78.72 million USD (2009)
Employees: 2800 (2009)

Yeah, you see, having a business model helps. Someone's gotta actually write that software that Canonical gives away for free, you know...

Comment: Re:Using a monopoly to destroy competing technolog (Score 1) 165

by oddityfds (#28400885) Attached to: Wikipedia To Add Video

Describe to me the harm that would arise against the good of humanity if Microsoft and Apple through customer demand were forced to implement Ogg Vorbis and Theora support in their browsers.

When you're done, you can continue by describing the harm that was inflicted on humanity when Microsoft was forced to start producing a web browser for Windows so that people wouldn't use non-Microsoft software.

Comment: Re:Great a notebook with a broken package manager (Score 1) 29

by oddityfds (#27892429) Attached to: Novell and Intel Team Up For Moblin On Netbooks

  • unused packages removal - ie, if a a package is only installed as a dependency, and if no package which depend on it are still installed, the package can be automatically removed.

yum install yum-utils
package-cleanup --leaves

  • suggested packages, ie., packages has a list of packages which enhances the package in quesiton.
  • recommended packages, ie, packages which are not strictly required but should normally be installed with a package.

I don't think so, but as crush mentioned PackageKit will sometimes suggest packages to install.

  • support for packages deprecating and/or providing other packages

Sure.

  • support for running configuration utilities and such during installation

No, RPM package installation is completely non-interactive by design.

Comment: Nothing to see here, move on. (Score 2, Informative) 147

by oddityfds (#27201145) Attached to: Red Hat Patenting Around Open Standards

Given the Microsoft-Red Hat deal in February, are we seeing Red Hat's 'Novell Moment?'"

Oh, you mean the one where Red Hat got exactly what they wanted: A no-patent deal with Microsoft.

It's good that people are watchful of Red Hat, but this article is just an implicit accusation taken out of thin air.

Comment: Re:It always starts out with good intentions (Score 1) 147

by oddityfds (#27201041) Attached to: Red Hat Patenting Around Open Standards

Normally: at this point RH & <evil company> would enter a cross licensing agreement, but I doubt that RH will do that, it will be interesting to see what they do do.

They might, but to be consistent with what they've done before and with their stated intentions they would have to licence the other party's patents for all open source software (or perhaps all GPL:d software). I think they'd do that, even if they have to throw some cash into the deal as well.

Put not your trust in money, but put your money in trust.

Working...