The Ghost In The Machine

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Paul Hovnanian P.E.
<paul@hovnanian.com>
wrote
on Sat, 24 Nov 2007 20:37:40 -0800
<4748FC14.7BCF215F@hovnanian.com>:
> krotch.kricket@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> If installing Ubuntu be careful for hdisk corruption. It will also
>> over write your Windows partition
> [snip]
>
> Good.
>
> Now, your point is what exactly?
>

Actually, I'd quibble with that.

[1] Of course one should be careful regarding partitioning.
Any existing data is at risk if the system installer's
sloppy, regardless of whether it's Windows, DOS, Linux,
FreeBSD, or a special homebrew affair one is tinkering
with.

[2] Because Windows is horrid, one might as well take out
the partition. That is a good thing, but...

[3] Because Windows is horrid, user data tends to end
up on the same partition as the Windows system in most
OEM installations. This is *not* a good thing.

[4] I would posit that Linux distros should be smart
enough to repartition the drive, keeping the Windows data
(defragmenting/compressing it as necessary) in its own
partition and installing Linux on the newly available
free space. Tools such as 'ntfsresize' are readily
available, if a bit clumsy to use. I'll admit I've not
researched the issue, and Gentoo's a little peculiar in
that area anyway (as an analogy, Gentoo's a stick shift in
a world of automatics -- but once one gets the hang of it,
it shifts very smoothly IMO :-) ).

[5] If one has a brand new system, why does it have Windows
on it anyway? Preloads means Microsoft gets paid whether
one wanted the OS or not. Ideally, one would be required
to choose at the time of purchase -- and I'll admit I'm not
at all sure exactly how to structure this, mostly because
the default will probably end up being Windows again if
we're not careful.

It is also a little strange that OEMs haven't figured out
that one should put the Windows swap file in its own little
confined area, as opposed to allowing it to default to the
system partition. (In Linux, that's the rough equivalent
of putting a swap file in /usr or /var. I'd posit that
many Linux users never bother to create swapfiles, but
just let the installer create a default swap partition.)

The fact that Windows allows autoadjustment of the swap
file invites massive fragmentation of the system drive;
at least if it's confined to its own partition, the
fragmentation is minimal unless the user decides to put
stuff there for some strange reason. But are the OEMs
being stupid here, or is Microsoft instructing them to
set it up this way and thereby encouraging just enough
bit rot for the consumers to go out and buy a new Vista
'puter for Xmas?

One wonders.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #23291:
void f(item *p) { if(p != 0) delete p; }

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

dennis@home

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
news:83ir15-fan.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...


> The fact that Windows allows autoadjustment of the swap
> file invites massive fragmentation of the system drive;
> at least if it's confined to its own partition, the
> fragmentation is minimal unless the user decides to put
> stuff there for some strange reason. But are the OEMs
> being stupid here, or is Microsoft instructing them to
> set it up this way and thereby encouraging just enough
> bit rot for the consumers to go out and buy a new Vista
> 'puter for Xmas?
>
> One wonders.

One wonders why they include a defragger if your theory were true.

Gordon

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
news:83ir15-fan.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>
> It is also a little strange that OEMs haven't figured out
> that one should put the Windows swap file in its own little
> confined area, as opposed to allowing it to default to the
> system partition. (In Linux, that's the rough equivalent
> of putting a swap file in /usr or /var. I'd posit that
> many Linux users never bother to create swapfiles, but
> just let the installer create a default swap partition.)
>
> The fact that Windows allows autoadjustment of the swap
> file invites massive fragmentation of the system drive;

In fact that tends to be irrelevant these days: with machines having > 1GB
RAM the swap file (or pagefile) usage is pretty minimal.....

Peter Köhlmann

Gordon wrote:

> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in
> message news:83ir15-fan.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>>
>> It is also a little strange that OEMs haven't figured out
>> that one should put the Windows swap file in its own little
>> confined area, as opposed to allowing it to default to the
>> system partition. (In Linux, that's the rough equivalent
>> of putting a swap file in /usr or /var. I'd posit that
>> many Linux users never bother to create swapfiles, but
>> just let the installer create a default swap partition.)
>>
>> The fact that Windows allows autoadjustment of the swap
>> file invites massive fragmentation of the system drive;
>
> In fact that tends to be irrelevant these days: with machines having > 1GB
> RAM the swap file (or pagefile) usage is pretty minimal.....

It is not, and has never been.

Just ask Erik Funkenbusch. A few weeks ago he explained in lenghty detail
why windows starts to use swap very early.
Which is quite idiotic, but thats the way windows is set up.
--
The probability of someone watching you is proportional to the
stupidity of your action.

The Ghost In The Machine

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, dennis@home
<dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net>
wrote
on Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:44:58 -0000
<#FtLdWHMIHA.1164@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>:
>
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote in message
> news:83ir15-fan.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net...
>
>
>> The fact that Windows allows autoadjustment of the swap
>> file invites massive fragmentation of the system drive;
>> at least if it's confined to its own partition, the
>> fragmentation is minimal unless the user decides to put
>> stuff there for some strange reason. But are the OEMs
>> being stupid here, or is Microsoft instructing them to
>> set it up this way and thereby encouraging just enough
>> bit rot for the consumers to go out and buy a new Vista
>> 'puter for Xmas?
>>
>> One wonders.
>
> One wonders why they include a defragger if your theory were true.
>

Probably because someone complained. :-) Nor is it clear
how well the defragger can deal with a chopped-up paging
file (which is in use during defragmentation unless the
user closes all open apps, resets his virtual memory and
reboots, defrags, resets it again and reboots), as it is
open during system operation.

Still, a good point. I'm not sure there's an explicit
conspiracy here, admittedly ("never attribute to malice
that which can be attributed to stupidity"), but it's
not particularly good engineering IMO.

--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
Useless C++ Programming Idea #7878218:
class C { private: virtual void stupid() = 0; };

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

the wharf rat

In article <20080127210817.65D601C00084@mwinf6202.orange.nl >,
Clogwog <BWAHAHAHAAA@BWAHAHAHAAA.LOL> wrote:
>
>Allows a system administrator to *delegate* authority, why do you ask?
>

Let's try the Socratic method.


Does sudo delegate adminstrative rights?
Does such a delegation imply that the recipient of that
delegation is using administrative rights at least for that task?
Does using sudo for a task imply that you are using administrative
rights for that task?
Does using administrative rights for a task imply that administrative
rights are needed?

Does my having to use 200 words to rephrase a simple observation to
work around your need to impress the world with your smartass inanities
imply that you should be fitted for a glass navel?

Clogwog

"the wharf rat" <wrat@panix.com> schreef in bericht
news:fnj2ac$2ag$1@reader2.panix.com...
> In article <20080127210817.65D601C00084@mwinf6202.orange.nl >,
> Clogwog <BWAHAHAHAAA@BWAHAHAHAAA.LOL> wrote:
>>
>>Allows a system administrator to *delegate* authority, why do you ask?
>>
>
> Let's try the Socratic method.


Sudo is under active development, you fucked in the head lintard!
http://www.gratisoft.us/sudo/

<The sewer rats crap snipped unread>

the wharf rat

In article <20080128162437.DD8A71C00082@mwinf6204.orange.nl >,
Clogwog <BWAHAHAHAAA@BWAHAHAHAAA.LOL> wrote:
>>
>> Let's try the Socratic method.
>
>Sudo is under active development, you fucked in the head lintard!

Well, it looks like the only part of the Socratic method that's
applicable here is the hemlock. Somebody mail this boy some.

das

"TONY TROMBOLI" wrote:

>
> <krotch.kricket@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:a95a95db-cd2f-4cba-ba4c-c4b09bb07855@w28g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> > If installing Ubuntu be careful for hdisk corruption. It will also
> > over write your Windows partition rendering your data unrecoverable.
> >
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s....20/+bug/84603
> >
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s....15/+bug/53102
> >
> > Linux, the operating system that keeps you busy.
>
>
> TRUE. I tried a Ubuntu "Live CD" not too long ago to see what all the hype
> was about. It booted fine in my AMD 3.4Ghz + 1-Gig RAM machine that
> currently has Windows XP installed. I played around with Ubuntu and it ran
> OK. It was running from the CD so I could understand why it wasn't very
> zippy. The video was pretty slow using the generic driver from the CD but I
> could probably fix that eventually if I wanted to. It saw my NTFS drive
> which was neat at the time.
>
> So I'm done playing with Ubuntu and tell it to shutdown and it does. It
> tells me to remember to remove the Live CD which I do. The next time that I
> reboot my computer it simply doesn't boot. The boot sector or something was
> hosed. In the end I had to re-install Windows to FIX whatever it was that
> Ubuntu Live CD screwed up.
>
> Yeah - That's a serious "bug" they have there.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>
>

This is nonsense Mr Tony Coz i have tried the Ubuntu in systems without hard
disk
Its working v fine


and Mr Bill Yanaire

Its not a Toy Os
Before telling some thing u should at least hav basic idea of tat

I was using Windows before 2 years but now i completely switched in to Ubuntu

and installing the latest versions of it

and i am enjoying using tat..

if u r trying tat u will also will like It..
and "No headache OF VIRUSES"

edspyhill01@yahoo.com

On Mar 24, 7:46*am, das <d...@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> "TONY TROMBOLI" wrote:
>
> > <krotch.kric...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:a95a95db-cd2f-4cba-ba4c-c4b09bb07855@w28g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> > > If installing Ubuntu be careful for hdisk corruption. It will also
> > > over write your Windows partition rendering your data unrecoverable.
>
> > >https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s....20/+bug/84603
>
> > >https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s....15/+bug/53102
>
> > > Linux, the operating system that keeps you busy.
>
> > TRUE. I tried a Ubuntu "Live CD" not too long ago to see what all the hype
> > was about. It booted fine in my AMD 3.4Ghz + 1-Gig RAM machine that
> > currently has Windows XP installed. I played around with Ubuntu and it ran
> > OK. It was running from the CD so I could understand why it wasn't very
> > zippy. The video was pretty slow using the generic driver from the CD but I
> > could probably fix that eventually if I wanted to. It saw my NTFS drive
> > which was neat at the time.
>
> > So I'm done playing with Ubuntu and tell it to shutdown and it does. It
> > tells me to remember to remove the Live CD which I do. The next time that I
> > reboot my computer it simply doesn't boot. The boot sector or something was
> > hosed. In the end I had to re-install Windows to FIX whatever it was that
> > Ubuntu Live CD screwed up.
>
> > Yeah - That's a serious "bug" they have there.
>
> > --
> > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
>
> This is nonsense Mr Tony Coz i have tried the Ubuntu in systems without hard
> disk
> Its working v fine
>
> and Mr Bill Yanaire
>
> Its not a Toy Os
> Before telling some thing u should at least hav basic idea of tat
>
> I was using Windows before 2 years but now i completely switched in to Ubuntu
>
> and installing the latest versions of it
>
> and i am enjoying using tat..
>
> if u r trying tat u will also will like It..
> and "No headache OF VIRUSES"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I installed Ubuntu early this morning on an old Dell PC with a 600 mhz
cpu (!). It created a new partition and preserved the XP OS partition
and installed cleanly, without any problems. I used a CD I ordered
from Ubuntu. From the lack of Vista support I'm running into it looks
like I will be setting up my Vista PC with Ubuntu.