[LWN Logo]
[LWN.net]

Sections:
 Main page
 Security
 Kernel
 Distributions
 Development
 Commerce
 Linux in the news
 Announcements
 Back page
All in one big page

See also: last week's Back page page.

Linux links of the week


DotComma is a slashdot-like site aimed at providing programming information to programmers. It is relatively new, and seems to mostly interested in PHP at this time.

Linux Commentary is a site put together by Neil Brown; it contains a set of documentation on how parts of the kernel work. Covered thus far are the virtual file system (VFS) and the NFS server; pointers exist to some related documentation elsewhere.

Section Editor: Jon Corbet


December 30, 1999

   

 

Letters to the editor


Letters to the editor should be sent to letters@lwn.net. Preference will be given to letters which are short, to the point, and well written. If you want your email address "anti-spammed" in some way please be sure to let us know. We do not have a policy against anonymous letters, but we will be reluctant to include them.
 
   
Date: 23 Dec 1999
From: toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl
To: letters@lwn.net
Subject: Elements of Programming Style

On the front page of todays Linux Weakly News, you wrote:

> Those of you lucky enough to have Kernighan and Plauger's The Elements of
> Programming Style can imagine that Eric's book will be something similar,
> but presumably (hopefully) without the Fortran code.

I...must....not....
Awww - nuts

I fail to see what's wrong with K&P using Fortran for their
*examples*.  It only shows that people who can really think -
as opposed to those who can only code - can write clean
programs in any language.

I wouldn't be surprised if even COBOL programs from their
hands would be easily understandable.

Cheers,
Toon Moene (mailto:toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl)
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG  Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Phone: +31 346 214290; Fax: +31 346 214286
GNU Fortran: http://egcs.cygnus.com/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
   
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 12:58:20 -0500 (EST)
From: William Stearns <wstearns@pobox.com>
To: Gracian Mack <gracian@redherring.com>, edit@redherring.com
Subject: LinuxOne IPO - concerns

Good afternoon, Gracian,
	I found your article about LinuxOne (*1) on Red Herring today.
While it covered the financial aspect of the IPO quite well, it didn't
seem to cover the concerns that the Linux community has raised about the
company itself.
	I honestly can understand why you might decide to stick to
numerical facts.  However, would you at least consider looking at some of
the concerns that have been raised?
	In a nutshell, LinuxOne has released a very small number of
products.  They appear to be almost entirely straight copies of the code
released by RedHat Linux and Mandrake Linux.  I did a comparison one
afternoon of the LinuxOne Linux distribution and RedHat and Mandrake
Linux; all but one of the packages making up that distribution were exact
copies from RedHat or Mandrake; the sole changed package was the initial
web page presented in the web browser which had become a mini-prospectus
for LinuxOne.  This tends not to support the claim that they provide
additional value.
	Others have covered the additional concerns of the Linux community
better than I can; please take a look at the following links to read more:

http://www.samba.org/netfilter/linuxonescam.html
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1505138.html
http://technocrat.net/941620583/index_html
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-806525.html
http://linuxtoday.com/stories/14322.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/991102-000009.html
http://www.linuxworld.com/linuxworld/lw-1999-11/lw-11-linuxone.html

	I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the debate.
	Cheers,
	- Bill

*1 http://www.herring.com/insider/1999/1228/inv-ipoweek.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
	Every program has at least one bug and can be shortened by at
least one instruction--from which, by induction, it is evident that every
program can be reduced to one instruction that does not work. 
(Courtesy of Weather-Man(a/k/a wormied dude, <worm@Thirdwave.NET>)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Stearns (wstearns@pobox.com).  Mason, Buildkernel, named2hosts, 
and ipfwadm2ipchains are at: http://www.pobox.com/~wstearns/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

   
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:26:30 -0500 (EST)
From: Seth Vidal <skvidal@nospam-phy.duke.edu>
To: letters@lwn.net
Subject: free code? free art?


Below is the text of the message I sent to elliot rusty regarding his
journal entry posted to lwn on dec 28th.
URL:http://www.macfaq.com/journal/freedocumentation.html

thanks
-sv


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 15:16:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Seth Vidal <skvidal@nospam-phy.duke.edu>
To: elharo@metalab.unc.edu
Subject: free code? free art?

Hi,
 I read your journal entry regarding free documentation. I would like to
note that it was well written but I would disagree with certain points of
what you are saying.

While much free software can be forked and separated from the original
branch - and then distributed under another name or the same name
(excluding trademark infringements) - a great deal of free software is
people re-integrating ideas into an original tree - or making suggestions
to sections etc.

ie: if I we're to pick up one of your books and I had suggestions for
improvments or grammatical problems or more verbose examples etc etc - I
would submit them to you. You could choose to include them or ignore them
- your option. I would make my changes available on the web for people who
wanted them but not for all.

Its like kernel development - if Linus thinks it sucks - then it sucks -
and it won't get far. If he likes it he puts it in. 
The author's "voice" could most closely resemble tabbing and code
organization in source code. Linus and others HATE bad formatting in the
source - they either fix it when they come upon it or they send it back
for fixing to the original author. either way formatting is maintained
throughout the kernel.

I agree with your points regarding Kai's power GOO - but would it not be
better for him to open the source and allow user interface options to
develop? - If he is really for non-standard - imaginative and innovative
designs then he'll want to open it to all.

The crux of this rambling email is that while you're correct that the
voice is important, it is not true that the author loses ALL control over
the format once the document is open sourced. It just means that others
can help - and will need coaxing and convincing to alternative ideas.

The reason so many open source projects work is b/c they have a very few
people in charge who have a vision of what it should look like. They are
willing to change their minds and visions - but they are also willing to
be sticklers about certain features:
You could be a stickler about the number or kind of jokes to make about
microsoft or sun - but be willing to be bend on the type of and scope of
the examples.

It really can be great to have a collaborative effort.

Thanks.
-sv

Seth Vidal
skvidal@nospam-phy.duke.edu



   
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 14:12:25 +0530
From: Anand Srivastava <anand@aplion.stpn.soft.net>
To: info@lawnewsnetwork.com, letters@lwn.net
Subject: Has anybody patented Law yet.

Hi,

I guess its about time somebody should patent laws. Many laws are being
used by governments over the world. I think US Govt would be willing to
pay substantially for a law that they want to frame (rather they have to
frame, because of various reasons). Here is another gold mine.

Seriously, you would think that this is stupid. Likewise to us software
people, single click order, is stupid. And a whole lot of similar
patents, like the windowing patent.

-anand


 

 

 
Eklektix, Inc. Linux powered! Copyright © 1999 Eklektix, Inc., all rights reserved
Linux ® is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds