Clint Adams: Write-in campaign

Since Ari was too incompetent to successfully complete a self-nomination this year,
I have taken the liberty of writing his platform for him against his will.
Ari's Platform What follows is a grassroots movement for positive social change through fostering and giving voice to initiatives and local activism, civic engagement, volunteerism, taking trendy Whole Foods tote bags to supermarkets that are not Whole Foods, and the broader motif of green, eco-friendly, environmentally-sound, community-based, issue-driven, civic-minded focus on saving the environment through awareness of energy and power. Even though recycling consumes lots of energy and pollutes the ground and water, do it anyway. You can make up for it by buying carbon offsets. You don't need to buy carbon offsets for aluminum can recycling, since that is actually good for the environment on a long-term basis, but you should, since it's Fun. Always recycle!
I do not agree with Ari's platform; therefore I will not be writing him into my ballot.
Ari's Platform What follows is a grassroots movement for positive social change through fostering and giving voice to initiatives and local activism, civic engagement, volunteerism, taking trendy Whole Foods tote bags to supermarkets that are not Whole Foods, and the broader motif of green, eco-friendly, environmentally-sound, community-based, issue-driven, civic-minded focus on saving the environment through awareness of energy and power. Even though recycling consumes lots of energy and pollutes the ground and water, do it anyway. You can make up for it by buying carbon offsets. You don't need to buy carbon offsets for aluminum can recycling, since that is actually good for the environment on a long-term basis, but you should, since it's Fun. Always recycle!
The worst team dynamics can be found in appointed teams. The best team dynamics can be found in self-selecting teams.Give some thought to the teams (Small or otherwise) you observe. The self-selecting teams are well-oiled machines, competent and effective in every way. In stark contrast, the appointed teams are vulnerable to cronyism, acceptance of bribes, poor communication, pettiness, abuse of power, tunnel vision, xenophobia, and egomania. Who is appointing these teams? It should be stopped, and all teams should be self-selecting to avoid these problems. Face-to-face meetings and events are very important, but we are being terribly irresponsible by using planes, trains, and automobiles. We need to reduce our carbon footprint, so bicycles should be the preferred tool of transportation, and therefore travel sponsorship should be allocated according to these categories: Spandex, Chamois, and Mudflap.
- Self-nomination
- Conservation of power and hats
I do not agree with Ari's platform; therefore I will not be writing him into my ballot.
There have been a number of discussions on sane-devel in the past months revolving around the SANE2 standard (still in development) and/or extensions to the current SANE1 standard. SANE2 is an effort that has been “ongoing” (on and off, mostly off, unfortunately) for a number of years already.
This led to a number of questions being raised, most notably this one: do we need SANE2, or can we get away only with extensions to SANE1? Or should we just redesign the whole stack from the ground up?
It's been a long time since I've written on my blog; longer than I'd like. I really want to get back in the swing of it, if only to keep this entire site from bitrotting interminably. My
One of the loveliest things about Unix is the select() function (or
its replacement, poll()), and the way it lets a single thread handle a
host of concurrent tasks efficiently by just using file descriptors as
work queues.
Unfortunately, it can be a nuisance to use – you end up having to
structure your program as a state machine around the select() invocation,
rather than the actual procedure you want to have happen. You can avoid that
by not using select() and instead just having a separate thread/process for
every task you want to do – but that creates a bunch of tedious overhead
for the OS (and admin) to worry about.
But magically making state machines is what Python’s generators are
all about; so for my little pet project that involves forking a bunch
of subprocesses to do the interesting computational work my python program
wants done, I thought I’d see if I could use that to make my code more
obvious.
What I want to achieve is to have a bunch of subprocesses accepting
some setup data, then a bunch of two byte ids, terminated by two bytes
of 0xFF, and for each of the two byte inputs to output a line of text
giving the calculation result. For the time being at least, I want the
IO to be asynchronous: so I’ll give it as many inputs as I can, rather
than waiting for the result before sending the next input.
So basically, I want to write something like:
In my
Obviously any human being can recognize satire. There is obvious motivation on behalf of SCO’s PR department (correct me if I am wrong on where this comment originated; I did just some basic Google lookups, and also, this is a PR tactic known as “dead agenting”) to ignore the fact that this was clearly a satirical review. I would say, “perhaps SCO doesn’t understand why it is criticized,” but I believe it is obvious that they know why people are being critical and satirical of their company and their efforts.
I would like for everyone to think, for a moment, about how things could be if SCO didn’t take the litigious strategy that they have taken over the past 6 years. SCO UnixWare could have remained a successful product, and could have in reality become a major asset to the open source world. SCO could have been the good guys here, but instead they chose a path of litigation instead of innovation.
In the Open Source and Free Software world, innovation is what is seen as important. Companies may be in some sense rival to each other, but when it comes down to it, everyone appreciates and respects the work that everyone else contributes to the ecosystem. When people do not contribute in a positive way, or worse, betray their peers like SCO has done, it opens them up for criticism.
As I see the situation, I think that SCO’s current tactics as a company represent those of someone who is paranoid. People who are paranoid attack first, instead of defend their position. So, while I am sure this is a pointless question, I believe it must be asked anyway: “What would SCO UnixWare have been like if they did not take a litigious strategy against Linux users?”
If you look at it like this, it doesn’t really matter if we’re right, or SCO is right on who has the basic cases (well, it does, but we all know how that’s going to come out anyway).
Why does SCO keep pursuing a strategy of litigation when the feasibility of this strategy is at best, unknown? To some extent, I think it is now a matter of morale. After all, it’s bad if you have to admit that the strategy you have taken for the last six years, was wrong. In some ways, you could say that SCO’s current strategy is cult-like.
Furthermore, if any SCO people are interested in doing an interview about this whole matter, I encourage you to comment back, and I’ll be happy to publicize SCO’s viewpoint of this. It’s only fair.

Since about half a year now we have a fibre to the home connection. This means that two fiber lines terminate at a box in our living room. It is a blown fibre which means that a tube is buried to your house, after which they use air pressure to put the actual fibre from the house to the POP. There are two fibers: one for bidirectional data (IP), and one that does nothing more than carry the analog cable TV signal. We started out with only the internet facility but now have so-called triple play: phone, analog tv and internet connectivity.
The results are in: I find it to be just as good or better than the previous offerings: phone from KPN, tv from Casema or internet from Surfnet. But there's nothing revolutionary. Phone and tv just provide the same service over a different medium. The internet connection is with the standard of 24 Mb/s more than fast enough for any day to day use and an upgrade to 50 Mb/s is pending. A real improvement is that the upstream speed is just as high, very useful when uploading photos, packages or the text of this blog post.
One drawback is that they only provide one IP address instead of 32. Also, the service provider (XMSnet) does seem to be a bit stuck in the late nineties with an unfriendly help desk telling you that your situation is impossible , and bad billing, There are plans however to open up the line to other providers in the future.
So for now it's just a convenience bundling of services, but nothing really ground breaking. Let's see what the future brings.
Dear lazyweb: I claim to know quite a bit about the IPv6 theory,
but I lack experience. I have a couple of hosts out there which are
already properly IPv6-addressable and work, but I don t have a
network scenario.
Unfortunately, I also don t have a lot of time available for
this right now. I was thus wondering if anyone of you knew of a
document that explained the Debian way of
I have been using Arch to package my Debian packages since 2003;
which means that Arch has had a good long run as my SCM of choice.
I have been using CVS for a few years before I moved to arch, and
the migration took me about six months, since it involved a while
new philosophy of packaging; I am hoping that migrating to git
would not involve such a major paradigm shift, and thus be less
disruptive and time consuming. What follows is a narrative of my
efforts to get educated about Git.
Yesterday 

Exim has the habit of trying to find out about its host names and IP addresses when it starts up. This has, in the
past, been an issue for the Debian packages, since a Debian system might be on a dial-on-demand modem line with
expensive costs and thus should not do unnecessary DNS lookup when the MTA is started.
This article tries to describe the issue and which countermeasures debian took, and asks for tips how to solve this in
the case of IPv6, where our past measures unfortunately do not directly apply.
I’d like to solicit opinions from people who are more experienced than me with Unix, the local resolver library
including /etc/hosts and /etc/nsswitch.conf, DNS, and - especially - the customs that apply on a system running IPv6.
To avoid the extra DNS lookups, the Exim packages have a Debconf option to configure exim for “minimal DNS
usage”, which hardcodes the hostname into Exim’s configuration at package configuration time. This was
necessary since - without this option - exim looks up its own host name in the DNS even when a completely local
operation is invoked.
In some cases, exim still looks up its IP address when a listening daemon starts up. This is why the Debian installer
configures 127.0.1.1 (not 127.0.0.1) for the local hostname on installation, yielding /etc/hosts files like
