•   Linux Today News Service
•   News for nerds, stuff that matters
•   The O'Reilly Network ONLamp Articles and Weblogs

Source: Linux Today

The DistRogue: "Gutsy is going to be another cutting-edge release, with AppArmor installed and parts of KDE 4 in Kubuntu--not to mention a full Compiz Fusion desktop by default "

Source: Linux Today

HowtoForge: "This tutorial shows how you can install Lighttpd on a Debian Etch server with PHP5 support (through FastCGI) and MySQL support "

Source: Linux Today

eWeek: "Microsoft's deals with China needn't deter open-source backers "

Source: Linux Today

TechIQ: "It's decision time again. The VAR Guy has a MacBook Pro at work and a Dell PC running Ubuntu Linux at home. He loves both systems. But now he needs another home computer for his family. Which platform will he choose ?"

Source: Linux Today

KernelTrap: "Ingo Molnar pushed a series of patches to his Completely Fair Scheduler code upstream that were merged into the mainline kernel "

Source: Linux Today

LinuxDevices: "'Linux is the launching pad you need to stand on to be productive,' said Nokia's open source director, Ari Jaaksi, at LinuxWorld Wednesday "

Source: Linux Today

ONLamp: "Mono is an open source implementation of the Microsoft .NET platform. More properly, it's an implementation of the ECMA 335 Common Language Infrastructure standard "

Source: Linux Today

Trolltech: "No, this is not a wet dream--it's all true; with Qt 4.4 you will be able to get rid of issues you have had with flickering "

Source: Linux Today

Linux-Watch: "I presume SCO will appeal. Much good it will do them. SCO may still thrash a bit, like a snake with a broken back, but it's dead and done "

Source: Linux Today

Newindpress.com: "The final-year Information Technology students at Kuttippuram MES College of Engineering have developed a new installer for GNU operating system "

Source: Linux Today

WindowsForDevices: "Microsoft is going to need a bigger room next year. That's the inevitable take-away from last night's LinuxWorld-related event, once again hosted by Windows Embedded software architect and inveterate blogger Mike Hall "

Source: Linux Today

Libervis: "In my previous article I argued that the Open Source Initiative was a bad solution because it was based on hiding of the most important part of what makes Free Software what it is, the user freedom "

Source: Linux Today

UNIX SysAdmin: Silly Is As Silly Does: "Suddenly everyone who did not see GPLv3 as the ultimate free license for Open Source (One License to rule them all) where accused of actually spreading FUD !"

Source: Slashdot: Linux

Sniper223 writes with a link to an interview on the Network World site with Linus Torvalds. Linus goes through the usual spiel about stuff like why he released the Linux OS in the first place, and how the future is open source. He also has some interesting commentary on the Microsoft/Novell deal: "I actually thought that whole discussion was interesting, not because of any Novell versus MS issues at all, but because all the people talking about them so clearly showed their own biases. The actual partnership itself seemed pretty much a nonissue to me, and not nearly as interesting as the reaction it got from people, and how it was reported I don't actually personally think the Novell-MS agreement kind of thing matters all that much in the end, but it's interesting to see the signs that the sides are at least talking to each other. I don't know what the end result will be, but I think it would be healthier for everybody if there wasn't the kind of rabid hatred on both sides. Some people get a bit too excited about MS, I think. I don't think they are that interesting." An interesting contrast to our earlier conversation.Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Source: Slashdot: Linux

kripkenstein writes "We have just heard that the SCO fiasco is finally going to end for Linux. But Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols at DesktopLinux.com points out that the favorable result for Linux may cause unpleasant consequences for rival open-source operating system OpenSolaris: 'At one time, Sun was an SCO supporter Sun's Jonathan Schwartz — then Sun VP of software and today Sun's president and CEO — said in 2003 that Sun had bought "rights equivalent to ownership" to Unix. SCO agreed. In 2005, SCO CEO Darl McBride said that SCO had no problem with Sun open-sourcing Unix code in what would become OpenSolaris. "We have seen what Sun plans to do with OpenSolaris and we have no problem with it," McBride said. "What they're doing protects our Unix intellectual property rights." Sun now has a little problem, which might become a giant one: SCO never had any Unix IP to sell. Therefore, it seems likely that Solaris and OpenSolaris contains Novell's Unix IP.'"Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Source: Slashdot: Linux

kripkenstein writes "Jim Zemlin (executive director for the Linux Foundation) gave a talk at LinuxWorld saying that the open source community should stop poking fun at Microsoft. From the VNU article: 'Open source vendors have to recognize that Windows is here to stay and that together with Microsoft it will form a duopoly in the market for operating systems. This also requires that the Linux community respects Microsoft rather than ridicule it. "There are some things that Windows does pretty well," Zemlin said. Microsoft for instance has excelled in marketing the operating system, and has a good track record in fending off competition.'"Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Source: Slashdot: Linux

Jaden writes "Oracle expanded the list of hardware compatible with its Linux distribution and added support for Novell's YAST administration tool. They have now certified six hardware configurations able to run Oracle Enterprise Linux. Certified products include those made by Compellent Technologies, Dell, Egenera, EMC, Hewlett-Packard, Pillar Data Systems and Unisys. Oracle also said it is releasing an open-source version of the YAST Linux installation and configuration tool for Oracle Enterprise Linux and Red Hat Enterprise Linux under the General Public License."Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Source: ONLamp.com

A few years ago I was at a meeting where a salesman was trying to pitch his terribly expensive closed-source software to our company. Since security of our data was very important, this topic was raised a few times. I asked about how they encrypted their data. The salesman replied that since security was so important, the company created a proprietary encryption algorithm which was secure because no one knew how it was implemented. He seemed a bit flustered when I burst out laughing.1

If you’re reading this blog, you probably have a technical bent and know that the vast majority of software out there has bugs. The larger the project, the more bugs. In fact, I’ve never worked on any significant (you know, large) piece of corporate software without known bugs. I’m constantly talking to friends who complain bitterly about long-standing problems with their systems. So why is closed-source software allowed to take a witness stand and accuse you of crimes when you’re not allowed to cross-examine it?

The tech Web site “ars technica” recently reported about a Minnesota man who won the right to examine a breathalyzer’s source code. The manufacturer of the breathalyzer does not wish this code to be released, nor does the state of Minnesota (why the latter is objecting is anyone’s guess). Defendants in Florida have also have won the right to analyze the source code used in breathalyzers.2 This is welcome news.

In the United States, the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads as follows (emphasis mine, obviously):

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

But what do you do when your accuser is a series of ones and zeros? This is, of course, becoming more and more common. Here in the UK, officials in Cumbria have been caught lying about faulty speed cameras. London was forced to refund over £300,000 due to faulty speed cameras. A man in Dorset luckily managed to prove he was only driving 13 miles an hour despite the camera claiming he was driving at 51 miles per hour.

It’s not just criminal cases where this is a concern. Many people assume that if you’re accused, you must be guilty and it’s tough to work up sympathy for drunken and reckless drivers. Then how about sympathy for your right to vote? We’ve had more fantastic news about California effectively banning touch screen voting. Why? Because of poor security and many software bugs. The California Secretary of State also wants the attorney general to bring criminal and civil charges against Diebold for fraud. While criminal cases are important, the voting machine fiasco is even more important. Take away your right to vote and nothing else matters.

The problem here is not an open source versus closed source debate. I have no problem with companies producing or adopting closed source software. That’s their choice. Instead, this is a human rights issue. After all, not only are we being erroneously convicted by buggy software, we’re being killed by it, too. While I understand official’s desire for the labor saving benefits of software, we cannot continue to pursue this while ignoring the human side.

This is why I firmly believe that any software with substantial risk to harm your life or liberty must be open source. I’m not saying that it should be free or that manufacturers should not be allowed protections, but the protection of the people must come first. Certainly we could come up with schemes for various systems which might purport to thoroughly test them without opening up the code, but there are too many systems and too many parameters for us to do this safely on a case-by-case basis.

How this would work in practice is anyone’s guess. I’ve done a fair amount of human rights advocacy work, but I’m hardly a lawyer. As the RIAA has done an excellent job of demonstrating, we frequently don’t know how to handle the changes being wrought by technology. Forbidding certain categories of code from being closed source will likely cause serious financial issues with many companies. Even if releasing their code as open source wouldn’t significantly impact them, their investors may well panic and cause their stock to suffer. Also, software flaws thus revealed may well open the companies up to litigation and I’m quite certain that many politicians would rush to their defense. Somehow the rights of the people keep getting ignored.

1. The security was later rendered moot by a contractor accidentally emailing a spreadsheet with confidential employee data to many people in the company.

2. Perversely, the Florida state legislature felt that the rights of a private corporation were more important than the rights of Floridians and passed a bill making breathalyzer source code unavailable to the defense.

Source: ONLamp.com

I’m running Firefox 2.0.0.6 on my (relatively) new (intel) Mac. Problem is that Firefox locks up several times a day. I found a forum which suggested disabling the anti-phishing functionality. Several people seemed to have benefited from said disabling.
I also found a Bugzilla report about the same behavior. It sounds like the anti-phishing thing can cause some problems during startup, but is probably not responsible for hanging during regular browsing. My problem is not on startup, but on browsing, so disabling anti-phishing probably won’t help me. But I’ve disabled it just on the off-chance that it will. If this hanging persists, I’ll either switch to Opera or Safari.
What are your experiences with FF on Mac? Crashes, hangs? Or is your world just peachy?