Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Irony not lost on me (Score 1) 191

Has Oracle/Sun also adapted LLVM/Clang for Solaris, or are they staying w/ GCC?

If you mean "as their official compiler", the answer to both questions is "no"; they have, instead, Sun^WOracle Solaris Studio's compilers. If you mean "in their package system", they could offer both, but currently only appear to offer GCC 3 and GCC 4.5.

How about IBM in AIX,

If you mean "as their official compiler", the answer to both questions is "no"; they have, instead, IBM XL C/C++.

or HP in HP/UX?

If you mean "as their official compiler", the answer to both questions is "no"; they have, instead, HP C/aC++.

Comment Re:Apple done fucked up good (Score 1) 158

Out of curiosity I've just tried

If you're trying, you're probably doing it slowly and carefully enough that you don't hit the window border drag region. This happens (on occasion, not particularly often, but often enough to be a small irritation) when I'm doing a quick select-and-copy (or, when not on a Mac, a quick select-and-paste-current-selection).

Comment Re:Apple done fucked up good (Score 1) 158

If I ever did that, I'd stop working and have my eyes and brain checked for: 1.Not seeing the cursur icon

Sorry I didn't notice the cursor image change in the few milliseconds between hitting the region where selecting grabs the border and clicking the trackpad.

2.Using mouse when working with a terminal

In which desktop environments can I copy text from a terminal window without using a pointing device?

Comment Re:GCC still has a long way to go... (Score 1) 191

It's crazy expensive. But it's good. It's the most typical compiler for BlueGene machines, for example. But you can buy a few gcc licenses for the same price.

You can buy an infinite number of GCC licenses for the same price, unless you mean something other than "a right to use the software" by "license". Do you mean "a few GCC support contracts"?

Comment Re:Apple done fucked up good (Score 1) 158

How are you unintentionally clicking your mouse

I don't have a mouse, but presumably you meant "mouse or trackpad".

on the window border while trying to select text?

By having the pointer a slight bit to the left of the left-hand edge of the text in the window.

ust hovering over it doesn't do it, just dragging over it doesn't do it ... not sure what your problem is but you have to actually click the border to drag it.

Wrong. The cursor changes from the text cursor (meaning it'll select text if you drag it) to the horizontal resize cursor (meaning it'll drag the border) before you hit the border.

Do you have pulsy or something?

No.

Comment Re:Apple done fucked up good (Score 1) 158

I decided not to go beyond 10.6 the moment I saw "Edge Resize" in 10.7 :-((

As OS X users finally get the power to unintentionally resize their terminal emulator windows when trying to select text that goes right up to the margin, just as other UN*X users have had for ages. :-)

(Yes, I've done that on a number of times on FreeBSD/Linux/Solaris/etc. inside $PICK_YOUR_TERMINAL_EMULATOR, but didn't feel the joy of doing that on OS X until Lion.)

Comment Re:Debugging brick wall. (Score 1) 314

Price isn't the issue for me. The issue is that with Linux, you can always dig deeper when debugging and hacking. With Windows, OSX, or any other system without full source, the debugging will hit a brick wall at system calls.

Actually, with OS X, you can go below the system call layer (but not down to the device driver layer, as most of those are part of the non-open-source part of the kernel-mode code, and not down to some file systems such as AFP, as the AFP client isn't open-source either). The big problem would be with debugging stuff sufficiently far above the system call layer, such as problems in the Cocoa Framework and AppKit layers.

Comment Re:for about impact for unix command line devs? (Score 1) 222

Also, if Apple is deprecating all GPL3 software that they have, be it GCC, Samba, then why are they offering bash?

mavericks.local$ sw_vers
ProductName: Mac OS X
ProductVersion: 10.9
BuildVersion: 13A603
mavericks.local$ bash --version
GNU bash, version 3.2.51(1)-release (x86_64-apple-darwin13)
Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

And that version is GPLv2.

Comment Re:for about impact for unix command line devs? (Score 1) 222

Does OS X still include GCC, or have they - like FBSD 10 completely deprecated it in favor of LLVM/Clang?

Well, I'm not sure more recent versions of OS X "include" a compiler in the sense that you have the compiler available on the machine as delivered, but, in Mavericks, if you try to run a developer command-line tool, it pops up a window asking if you want to install Xcode or just the command-line developer tools. As of the current version of Xcode (5), they have nothing using GCC's front end, just clang. Xcode 4.2 through 4.6.x included only llvm-gcc (GCC front end, LLVM back end) and clang.

Also, does OS-X include X at all

As of Mountain Lion, no, although if, for example, you try to run xterm from the command line, it pops up a window telling you that you need to install X and offering to open up the Xquartz Web site to download and install it.

I thought that one advantage that they'd have is that they wouldn't be undergoing the X => Wayland/Mir transition?

If you mean an advantage of not basing their GUI on X (it isn't, in fact, based on X; the X server runs on top of the native GUI), yes, that would be an advantage.

I also thought it would have something to just provide terminal & unix shell services if needed.

Presumably something other than a terminal emulator window (which is provided with Terminal.app). You can ssh in if you've enabled it, and, at least on some versions of OS X, you can log in at the login screen with a user name of ">console", at which point it shuts down the window system and puts you at a getty prompt on the system console. No virtual terminals, however.

Incidentally, which shell does OS X come w/?

Shells, plural - bash, tcsh, ksh (starting in, I think, Tiger), zsh. I think bash is the default; it might have been tcsh in earlier releases.

Comment Re:for about impact for unix command line devs? (Score 1) 222

But just to be precise (and this precision matters if you are building some piece of software that relies on the leniency of the GNU compiler collection), gcc (as well as g++) has been a symbolic link to clang for quite some time.

That was not true until Xcode 5.

You don't get the real gcc with Mac OS X out of the box. This is not the worst move because clang has superior error reporting (even making suggestions that are actually helpful)

What you got as "gcc", prior to Xcode 4.2, was GCC. What you got, from Xcode 4.2 to 4.6.3, was llvm-gcc, which had GCC's front end and an LLVM-based back end, so it wasn't fully the real GCC but it also didn't use clang as the front end and didn't give clang's error reporting. What you got, starting with GCC 5.0, was clang.

Comment Re:for about impact for unix command line devs? (Score 2) 222

10.6 to 10.8 was a pretty difficult transition. different X, command line compiler tools hidden in a couple of directories underneath XCode, signed applications, grudging support for java, different open source package manager.

as someone who should probably be running linux, how difficult is this going to make my life?

X: just like 10.8, you need XQuartz. At least it's not different from 10.8.

Command-line compiler tools: if, for example, you just type "gcc" at the command line just for the lulz, it'll pop up a window (so your command line had better be in a Terminal window on the machine on which you're running your shell) asking whether you want Full Frontal Xcode or just the command-line tools. If you select the latter, it'll plop them in an obscure directory under /Library but will plant stuff in /usr/bin that runs those commands. If you select the former, I suspect it'll plop them under /Applications/Xcode.app but will plant stuff in /usr/bin that runs those commands. (Having installed the command-line tools on my Mavericks VM, and then installed Xcode, I don't know what happens if you start by installing Xcode. I do know that if you do both, you get two count 'em two separate copies of, at minimum, the clang program.)

Signed applications, Java: not much, if anything, has changed there from 10.8.

Open source package manager: OS X doesn't come with one, so no change.

Comment Re:Its a full desktop OS... (Score 1) 558

Mac OS X is a desktop operating system - OpenBSD.

Presumably you don't mean "Mac OS X is a desktop operating system, and the operating system in question is (based on) OpenBSD", given that the latter is not true. OS X is based on Mach 3, various flavors of BSD in the kernel and UNIX-layer userland, and a fair bit of Apple-devloped code in the kernel and UNIX-layer userland; most of the BSD in the kernel and UNIX-layer userland comes from FreeBSD and NetBSD, not OpenBSD.

The power management stuff is largely Apple-developed.

And no, I don't experience any lag as things "wake up". So now what do you say? Windows simply doesn't consider power management as a priority. Why does it keep polling every connected hard drive? It's an antiquated core with features continuously layered on. It needs a rewrite from ground up.

If you view modern Windows's NT core, dating back to the early '90's, as "an antiquated core with features continuously layered on", requiring "a rewrite from the ground up", then do you view, say, OS X's core, dating back at least to the late '90's, and back to the late '80's/early '90's if you go all the way back to NeXTStEP, as not being "an antiquated core with features continuously layered on" and not requiring "a rewrite from the ground up"? What about Linux (dating back to the early '90's, again) or the *BSDs (ditto)?

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of the Turing Tar-pit in which everything is possible but nothing of interest is easy.

Working...