The real question is... is it semver?
Well technically yes, because of semver 2.0's rule #4: "Anything may change at any time. The public API should not be considered stable."
Nope. 0.6 cannot be a correct semver number, as it lacks a patch level.
GNU Hurd 0.6 released
81–90 of 118 posts
Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#82I'm sure there will be a few people chuckling at the news that the Hurd is still under development. Yesterday I learned from one of my colleagues that the newer versions of OSX will only run kernel extensions signed by Apple. The need for the GNU project is as great now as it was in the 1980s.
Not really, the opportunity cost means something else isn't getting done. Emacs, for instance, has had 440 years of development. https://www.openhub.net/p/emacs If the FSF wants to make more of an impact, perhaps they should build software in a higher level language.
I dream of an OS written in Rust.
Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that the weirdest UX feature of HN. In the age of mobile, having two 10px high buttons with opposite meaning separated by 5pixel is absurd.
Do you need a minimum karma level for that? I don't ever have any down arrows and have always wondered. I'm near 500 karma so kinda surprised. Probably in some faq that I'm too lazy to lookup
AFAIK it's 500. You are close :)
Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Windows code signing is performed using a certificate available from the usual certificate authorities (Verisign, Thawte, etc, etc) that you pay to verify your identity and issue you a signing certificate. Apple is the only one that enables OSX signing and it's done in conjunction with your Apple ID that you pay Apple a yearly fee to enable developer abilities on.
Windows SSL cert costs 267$ a year: https://www.digicert.com/friends/sysdev/ (click start) Apple certificate costs 99$. Indeed, you won't be able to sign anything else, but it is still more that 2 times cheaper.
That one random CA you quoted costs $267 a year.
As far as I can see the requirement is that the CA is cross-signed by Microsoft, and that's quite a large list [0].
I'm only familiar with one of them (StartCom), and that one charges $59 a year for unlimited domain certificates and 1 code signing certificate.
[0]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/dn...
Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#85Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#86I'm sure there will be a few people chuckling at the news that the Hurd is still under development. Yesterday I learned from one of my colleagues that the newer versions of OSX will only run kernel extensions signed by Apple. The need for the GNU project is as great now as it was in the 1980s.
The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition). I think it would be better if the GNU project put their full weight behind Linux rather than trying to work on their own kernel which isn't getting any traction.
Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you need a minimum karma level for that? I don't ever have any down arrows and have always wondered. I'm near 500 karma so kinda surprised. Probably in some faq that I'm too lazy to lookup
AFAIK it's 500. You are close :)
The power... THE POWER!!!!!!!!!!!
Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#88I'm sure there will be a few people chuckling at the news that the Hurd is still under development. Yesterday I learned from one of my colleagues that the newer versions of OSX will only run kernel extensions signed by Apple. The need for the GNU project is as great now as it was in the 1980s.
The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition). I think it would be better if the GNU project put their full weight behind Linux rather than trying to work…
> The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition)
In 2017 or 2018 Microsoft releases "Microsoft Linux with containerized Office-by-wine-who-cares-how and selected applications available from the App Store"
Then Microsoft ships another version of Microsoft Linux and breaks user-space, breaks ABI, other libraries, and brings in encryption-which-only-runs-Microsoft-signed-libraries-and-tools and other hassles which is effectively a fork of Linux kernel + most other tools.
Microsoft becomes just like Apple - a leech on GNU and FOSS.
Confusion is total, people are working on "free you see but not free" software. "Well free for me, developer, my employer, not for you user."
Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition). I think it would be better if the GNU project put their full weight behind Linux rather than trying to work…
> The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition) In 2017 or 2018 Microsoft releases "Microsoft Linux with containerized Office-by-wine-who-cares-how and se…
What does Hurd do to solve that problem? It has the same licence as Linux, so Microsoft could release 'Microsoft Hurd' in the same way.
Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was Linksys not Netgear. re: GPL/LGPL being the most successful software licenses, that seems to be changing in favour of permissive licenses like MIT/BSD/Apache Back in 2013, Aaron Williamson of the Software Freedom Law Center did an analysis of licenses used on Github. The MIT license outnumbered all variations of GPL + LGPL licenses combined, second to MIT on the list was BSD (of course, it should be mentione…
Richard Fontana analyzed Debian packages... guess what? Mostly GPL. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.
It seems perfectly plausible that debian packages are mostly GPL while github is mostly MIT. (Eg Github first became popular in the ruby/rails community which tends to skew more MIT and corporate-friendly). I don't at all see the implication that the difference means someone's trying to lie with statistics.