Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Those outside of Greece will have an impact (Score 1) 359

If you look at deficit as a percentage of GDP it's not too bad:

Might want to look at total governmental debt instead of deficit. Deficit just marks the extent to which the debt is increasing year by year.

Or even look at current accounts deficit - the deficit ignoring interest on outstanding debt.

The comment I was replying to was discussing spending more money than taking in, which is the definition of deficit. My point is that compared to other industrialized countries, Greece is about middle of the pack regarding its deficit, so you need to look further than this simple explanation of Greece's woes.

Comment Re:Those outside of Greece will have an impact (Score 1) 359

At the end of the day, you just can't keep spending more than you take in. It's going to collapse at some point. Greece is one of the most notorious countries at doing this, and so they're the canary in the coal mine.

This is actually not true. If you look at deficit as a percentage of GDP it's not too bad:

USA: 5.8%
UK: 5.7%
France: 4.0%
Greece: 3.5%
Netherlands: 2.3%
Canada: 1.8%
Switzerland: 0.0%
Germany: -0.7% (surplus!)

What is unusual about Greece is that the GDP per capita has fallen for the past 6 years, under the fiscal policies imposed by the IMF. For comparison, the US had GDP per capita fall one year, Germany two, Holland three.

Fundamentally Greece had some corrupt government officials who lied. Sadly the financial wonks decided to use this opportunity to impose "reforms" to the Greek economy based on neoconservative economic pseudo-science, using latent racism and repressed notions of group punishment to motivate European societies with large lending institutions. :(

Comment Tool for checking metadata (Score 1) 321

I know it's not really an answer to your question since it's not done, but I started a tool to save and check metadata of files:

Right now it just outputs a file with all of the meta-data (including SHA-224 hash of the file contents). If you think this seems interesting, I can whip up the part that uses that file to check the meta-data this weekend.

Comment edlin (Score 1) 362

phillistines. ms-dos edit and then dos2unix when done

I remember learning the edlin command set pretty well. My roommate mocked me, but I defended this use of time by saying "every computer will always have edlin on it".

I can still feel the scorn of his laughter when MS-DOS 5.0 replaced my trusty edlin with that monstrous "edit" bloatware. :'(

I'm happy to see that the FreeDOS project includes a GPL-licensed version of my beloved edlin...

"edit" indeed!

Comment Re:Cool... (Score 1) 165

This is somewhat disingenuous. Physics is physics and rocket technology hasn't improved much since the Centaur (hydrogen rocket) engine in the mid-1960s because they're already getting close to the theoretical maximum energy from chemical rockets. This is sort of like saying we shouldn't develop spoons and forks at the turn of the last millennium because by 1935 we'll have developed the spork. Cutlery has been a mature technology for about two thousand years now, and you can't really improve on it. Short of FTL travel we're looking at scramjets and multigenerational probes.

Cutlery has changed significantly, even in the 700 year period we were discussing:

Slate article

I'm not sure how it affects your argument, but perhaps you should try to find an example of something that hasn't changed significantly in the past 700 years.

Comment PowerDNS (Score 1) 172

Actually, we did have a look at PowerDNS. I did a project with it at my last job. PowerDNS is not perfect, but it has a few good things that we want to also have in BIND 10. The generic back-ends is one, the fact that the code can be understood and fixed by a skilled programmer within a few hours instead of a few days is another. I also like a few "nice" things from the command line tools - although of course some choices are a bit broken.

While administrators will have to choose the best DNS software to fit their needs, I don't actually view it as a competition. In fact, a diverse code base is good for the Internet ecosystem. It limits the impact of bugs, exploits, and general design artifacts.

But be sure to use BIND 10 when it's ready for production. ;)

[ disclaimer - I am the BIND 10 project manager ]

Comment Re:The unit tests are a bad joke - age and sex (Score 4, Informative) 172

One of the ideas of BIND 10 is to allow modules to be added to an already running system. Also, we want administrator tools to be able to ask the modules themselves what functionality is available. This allows relatively simple administrative tools to work with changing systems.

In order to do this, we need to have a mechanism for modules to report their capabilities. So, for example "I have a command called 'notify' which can be used to send a notify to my secondary servers, and it takes the parameter 'domain' which specifies the domain to send it from, and an optional parameter 'secondaries' which you can use to limit to a set of secondary servers".

The test code here exercises this generic capability.

[ disclaimer - I am the BIND 10 project manager ]

Comment Generic back-end (Score 1) 172

The design for BIND 10 allows for generic back-ends. We implemented SQLite as the first one, simply because it was the easiest. One of our early goals for the second year of development is to support additional database back-ends (we call them "data sources"), including MySQL, PostgreSQL, and an in-memory 'database' (for performance-critical environments).

In the end we'll also support more exotic back-ends, like BDB, LDAP, directories, and possibly even the tinydns data format.

[ disclaimer - I am the BIND 10 project manager ]

Comment Why BIND 10 is a rewrite (Score 5, Informative) 172

Joel has a lot of followers, but you shouldn't take what he says as holy writ. In fact, this very article is all about how we should still be using the old Netscape browser and not have started this crazy Mozilla project... you know, the one that resulted in Firefox?

I view the BIND 10 project in some ways as the DNS version of the Mozilla project - it is an ambitious rewrite, and will take a while to reach maturity. Luckily BIND 9 is still an excellent piece of software, so we have the luxury of enough time to get there.

BIND 9 is 10 years old, and was designed and implemented when the computing and Internet worlds were different than they are today. The architecture of BIND 9 - a monolithic, multithreaded program - does not lend itself well to today's DNS needs. So a new architecture is needed.

Originally we had planned on reusing a lot of the BIND 9 code. After all, like Joel says, it has been field-tested and is known to be high-quality in handling real-world DNS needs. However, the BIND 9 code has very, very high coupling. In order to make a small change or use an excerpt of code, you need to use the BIND 9 memory management system, and the BIND 9 task model, and the BIND 9 socket library, and so on. One of the reasons that BIND 9 needs to be rewritten is to make it possible to use the parts of the software you need to solve your problems without having to understand the entire system.

My theory is that the architectural problems would have been resolved over the decade of active use for BIND 9, as users submitted their patches and the developers periodically refactored the code. Unfortunately the BIND 9 project does not have an active community, either as developers or users. There are lots of people using BIND 9 (surveys put BIND 9 at about 80% of DNS servers on the Internet), but they have no group identity as BIND 9 users, and the direction and development of the software comes almost entirely from within ISC. This means it is an open source project that has resources limited in ways similar to proprietary software. If there was a BIND 9 community, then I think the software would have evolved with the times and a rewrite would not have been necessary.

For BIND 10, we want it to be an actual open source project, not just open source software. We have tried hard to be open and transparent about how BIND 10 is developed, and are trying to make it easy to participate in BIND 10. Hopefully this will be the last time a major rewrite is necessary, and the code base can evolve in any direction it needs to in the future, by maintaining a good connection with the people who actually use it.

[ disclaimer - I am the BIND 10 project manager ]

God doesn't play dice. -- Albert Einstein