The release notes for py2exe 0.6.9 (from 3 whole years ago) say that this version adds a feature to allow you to specify the necessary Windows Vista User Access Control level for your application. Indeed, this feature does exist. The release notes call the flag to utilize this feature uac_execution_info. The release notes are also the only place in the entire source tree where this string exists.
The flag is actually called uac_info.
I was able to install Wheezy using kernel version 3.0 on a multi-device (RAID-1) btrfs filesystem, booting with GRUB 2 version 1.99 without an ext3/4 boot partition.
The Debian installer refuses to install to a btrfs root without a boot partition, and doesn't know how to create a multi-device btrfs FS. So I installed onto a third HD with a boot partition and single-device FS. Then I booted from a LiveCD, partitioned my other HDs (with gdisk), created my new FS (mkfs.btrfs -m raid1 -d raid1 -L btrfs_root /dev/sda3 /dev/sdb3), mounted the btrfs_root FS and the root and boot FSs created by D-I, and copied the entire system (with cp -a) onto the new FS. I bind mounted dev, proc and sys on the new FS and chrooted into it. I edited /etc/fstab to specify the correct UUID for the new FS as root, and to disable fsck on this FS (there's no fsck.btrfs yet). I edited /etc/default/grub to set GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX=“rootflags=device=/dev/sda3,device=/dev/sdb3” (without this, the system can't boot). Then ran update-grub and ran grub-install against /dev/sda and /dev/sdb.
That was enough. The system boots properly and everything works. I also spent a lot of time trying to put the root FS in a subvolume for easy snapshotting, but without success. That was before I discovered the rootflags kernel option so maybe it would have worked had I tried that.
Btrfs and the btrfs-tools seem solid and reliable, but Debian's support for them lags behind a little.
user@linuxbox:~$ VBoxHeadless --help
Oracle VM VirtualBox Headless Interface 4.0.10_Debian
(C) 2008-2011 Oracle Corporation
All rights reserved.
Usage:
-s, -startvm, --startvm <name|uuid> Start given VM (required argument)
-n, --vnc Enable the built in VNC server
-m, --vncport <port> TCP port number to use for the VNC server
-o, --vncpass <pw> Set the VNC server password
-v, -vrde, --vrde on|off|config Enable (default) or disable the VRDE
server or don't change the setting
-e, -vrdeproperty, --vrdeproperty <name=[value]> Set a VRDE property:
"TCP/Ports" - comma-separated list of ports
the VRDE server can bind to. Use a dash between
two port numbers to specify a range
"TCP/Address" - interface IP the VRDE server
will bind to
-c, -capture, --capture Record the VM screen output to a file
-w, --width Frame width when recording
-h, --height Frame height when recording
-r, --bitrate Recording bit rate when recording
-f, --filename File name when recording. The codec
used will be chosen based on the
file extension
user@linuxbox:~$
CBC:
Activities that boost children's “cardio-respiratory fitness” should be the focus of a federal tax credit, an expert panel urged Thursday as it outlined the types of activities and costs that should qualify.
The war is over. The socialists won.
The Inquirer claims that Nvidia is preparing to produce it's own CPU. I don't know. I've never heard of this Stexar thing before.
Anyway, they say the following about the problems with non-x86 compatible CPUs, and they're mostly right:
To step aside for a moment, let's ask this question. If Nvidia does not make an X86 CPU, but an ARM, PPC or some other ISA? Well, it is, again more than capable, but that would mean giving up the market it has a pretty solid lock on now. Buy the new Nvidia CPU, it doesn't run Windows and won't run your software or games, but the theoretical graphics power is astounding! I can see the lines forming to buy one as soon as they are released. Not. Linux is very cool, but basing a mainstream CPU only on it may not be a bright business move.
OK. But x86 is an ancient, ugly kludge. The chips are horrifically inefficient because they have to support instructions no one has used in 20 years. Plus there's the BIOS, the design of which is nearly that old by itself, and which is only now beginning to be replaced.
I’ve finally learned what “upward compatible” means. It means we get to keep all our old mistakes.
– Dennie van Tassel
Then there's Windows. It suffers from this architecture, but worse, it adds it's own layers of obsolete APIs and bugs intentionally preserved and screensavers that ship in original Windows 3.1 form with XP. Vista won't fix it. Vista will make it worse.
It doesn't have to be this way, though. Check out the list of architectures supported by a decent Linux distro, such as Debian. All the software that ships with these systems works on all the architectures supported. Hardware compatibility isn't necessary, because all the source code is available and portable.
So, how can we fix this? How can we free the computer industry from the tar pit it's mired in?
Emulation. There are already a number of low-power processors that emulate x86 entirely in software. Suppose an enterprising CPU manufacturer created an extremely high performance CPU, with a huge number of cores. Suppose they built a software x86 emulation layer that allowed the OS to run natively while some threads ran emulated x86 code. You could even imagine that the released this software under the GNU GPL and integrated it into the Linux kernel, so that it became platform independent.
The next step is obvious: WINE. A reimplementation of the many Windows APIs that runs on Unix.
Now we're set. We can run our legacy apps, DirectX games included, on any platform at all, so long as it has a Linux port. Our hypothetical manufacturer starts churning out massively parallel, high performance legacy-free boxes for a third the cost of a conventional x86 machine. They sell, because people can use them to do what they want. A competing manufacturer can ship an entirely different hardware platform, this one optimized at the instruction-set level for video processing, and people still buy it because they can run all the same software on this one as on the other.
Stephen Browne spent a year living in Saudi Arabia, and has some things to say about Arabs.
http://rantsand.blogspot.com/2006/09/observations-on-arabs.html
EDITED TO ADD: “Jill Carroll, a freelance reporter for The Christian Science Monitor, was kidnapped by Sunni Muslim insurgents in Baghdad on Jan. 7, 2006. Over the next 82 days, she had closer contact with Sunni insurgents than any American who has lived to tell the tale.”
Machine Intelligences are not 'just around the corner', and if they were, they probably wouldn't change anything much, says The Register. I agree.
“We are in a state of civil war, orchestrated by radical Islamists,” said Michel Thooris, the head of the hard-line trade union “Action Police”. 2,500 police officers have been wounded this year, according to France's Interior Ministry.
http://www.upi.com/InternationalIntelligence/view.php?StoryID=20061013-083614-1432r
int main(int argc, char ** argv) { printf("Hello, world!\n"); }
I wonder what language the first Hello World program was written in?