@derobert I've read unix.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic and meta, even wrote some of it, and I haven't changed my mind. Programming questions are off-topic here.
I don't understand why you and @FaheemMitha want to change this all of a sudden
According to Unix C API calls ontopic? and the help center, "UNIX C API and System Interfaces ( within reason )" is explicitly on topic. That within reason links to the meta question.
Mounting a file system using a C program seems to be within that. Note that:
mount(2) seems like a common UNIX...
I've seen before that some people wanted to keep kernel programming questions here — which boggles my mind because kernel programming is as far from user/admin experience as it gets
Proposed Q&A site for professionals and enthusiasts of embedded hardware and software. Created in lieu of the pending closure of Embedded Programming and Design, this is a reboot.
@slm - I agree with Gilles there too - but I also agreed with Faheem and derobert... I upvoted everybody... I'm just glad no one tried to sell me anything.
@Gilles Yeah I noticed it wasn't getting much traffic. I stopped watching it. The reboot sounds like a better mix. The current embedded is strange b/c it seems broad enough, but to only get ~80 Q's seems pretty lackluster. When I'd go most of the Q's were ultra specific yet they were almost unanwerable to most b/c w/o the specialized hardware it was impossible. I'll follow the new one as well.
@Gilles yeah I never got why kernel programming would be a good fit here, it's 2 different aspects to Unix. I know we have a subset of users that that's their forte and could easily A those Q's but it confuses the base of this site by allowing them..
I did this one yesterday, but I wikied it - mostly because it was a flat-out copy+paste - but partly because the guy was specifically asking for C examples. I found them - and they were demonstrative of the process - but they were in C.
From https://blogs.oracle.com/ksplice/entry/disown_zombie_children_and_the
A process is put in an uninterruptible sleep (STAT D) when it needs to wait on something (typically I/O) and shouldn't be handling signals while waiting. This means you can't kill it, because all kill does is send it sign...
@Gilles Yeah I know, but it makes it hard to get enough eyes on them that can actually A them. It's also hard to get enough Q's since most that have worked with a piece of H/W don't have many basic Q's nor will likely be asking Q's. We would work all the time w/ H/W but there are dedicated forums for these, often from the manuf. so this site is competing with those well established sites.
I agree with Gilles because there are already like 400 programming SE sites.
But I agree with derobert because for anyone that wants to get to know their system they're going to need to understand to some degree what the kernel is doing in C to make it happen.
That was in a link in a top comment on the gaming post: "What is the probability of 4?" And one of the top comments at that link is... "Did ANYbody notice that the troll changed color?!?"
So you did - nostalgia will get you every time!
This one is in the next comment - "Where it is 4..."
I dunno why -- the whole thing had me laughing pretty hard. I'll shutup now...
So I've done my share of investigating this problem...
I just recently created a CentOS 6 VM on my LinuxMint box using VirtualBox. I left all the recommended values the same upon creation (8GB HDD, 512MB RAM, blah blah blah...). But it DOESN'T connect to the internet! When I try to ping an exter...
@Caleb - minor nitpick about ctrl+{c,z} - they're really just a configurable scan codes the terminal driver looks for based on stty settings - and it's then the kernel that sends a SIGINT or SIGTSTP after its picked up in input.
@mikeserv Ya I actually know how it works but the guy is clueless and I was trying to give him something he could digest. If there is something flat out wrong that I could fix without confusing him I'm fine with edits.
He's not trying to debug a broken terminal where things aren't getting passed through right -- it's not even clear to me what he expected to have happen since it appears his system is working as documented.
I think you may be confused about the job control notation. Notably "Stopped" means that a job is still alive but that it's ability to process anything has been held (it it given no CPU time). This is effectively a "Pause", although that is not the correct term.
CtrlC does not "stop" a job, it ...
I don't know why he's talking about backwards though - does he think that ctrl+z kills it? well he won't have any doubts now - but where do people come up with that stuff?
@mikeserv No idea. I might not even be addressing his problem. I almost VTCed as "unclear what you are asking" but decided the only thing was he was confused on what "stopped" meant.
I know how to change the font color via preferences, but it changes the color of ALL text, as in below:
What I'm going for is something more like this:
Any tips?
Thanks!
@slm - I meant - I know you use vim a lot - do you have some kind of stylesheet or preformatted template you use to get out your answers the way you do? I've noticed the formatting is very similar amongst them and very professional. I like it - is there a method in that madness?
@Gilles I stand by my opinion that allowing Unix kernel and system programming questions here is reasonable. Perhaps kernel programming questions are particularly reasonable. You write "this is a site for users and system administrators". Is this documented somewhere? I assume the word "only" is implied here. Having said that, this site doesn't seem to attract many of such questions.
@mikeserv Actually I use the emacs bindings even though I use vi. I'm left handed and have always been adaptable to the setup since I have to use right handed setups all day.
I don't know whether this is because people prefer SO, whether such questions are actively discouraged here, or simply because such questions are simply not asked very much on SE.
Also, the Help Center says "UNIX C API and System Interfaces ( within reason)". So UNIX C API and System Interface questions are on-topic but Unix kernel and system programming questions are not?
Usually they'll just insult your intelligence for a weeks until they decide you're not going away then toss a coin on whether or not they'll answer you.
Just reading them. I emailed them once actually, but my email was so long I think they were too bored to insult me. Um, that was the sarcastic bit. I figure it's the difference in accessibility between the old usegroups and boards like this that is the reason boards like this exist in the first place.
I agree with that statement. I spent a solid hour today at stackapps looking at the API calls because I"d like to be able to navigate this in kind of place in the cli like I did with usenet.
My impression is that the top linux devs tend to be quite publicly unpleasant, which tends to set the tone. If people see them doing that, they think it is ok to do so as well.
Yeah - which is not to mention their ins with the Intel UEFI people are tenuous at best - they probably weren't about to go on the record with anything I suggested.
And yes, your email was quite long, which probably didn't help. I tend to write long emails too, because I try to be through. Unfortunately, the end result is often that people can't be bothered to read them. Or, if they read them, they tend to misunderstand them.
@mikeserv Yes, after sending a post to a regular mailing list it is impossible to edit. One advantage a forum like this has over more traditioanl venues.
@mikeserv if you have a few spare minutes, consider updating/completing your post on that getting to know you question. one bit that was missing was your reason/motivation for being on the site.
@FaheemMitha this site is for users and admins, not for programmers. This has been the case since the beginning — no programming questions. It was a constant trend in all meta discussions.
/tour says “for users of Linux, FreeBSD and other Un*x-like operating systems” and further down “Using or administering a *nix desktop or server” (hmmm, that excludes other kinds of devices running unix, which is a bug — we've never discriminated by device type)
same wording on /help/on-topic which is where /tour was copied from
@FaheemMitha the interfaces are on-topic if you're seeing them from a user's or admin's perspective. Read the linked meta thread to know what “within reason” means! It excludes programming.
@FaheemMitha kernel programming is particularly not reasonable. Kernel programming is very far removed from user experience. It uses interfaces which you never see without a kernel debugger and which vary very quickly (unlike the system interfaces which come up in strace, auditd, etc. and have a large standard and stable core).
I don't understand that bit: why on earth would kernel programming be more on-topic? It's less unixy than the system interfaces: the kernel insides have little to do with unix system programming.
@Gilles Well, my take on it is that it is reasonable / makes sense for all Unix stuff to be under "one roof". Things like Unix system and kernel programming are related to other unix things, and people who know about one thing know about the other. I think this scope issue is ultimately up to the site users, if they want to deal with such stuff. I think the current description of the site in this respect is a little ambiguous / unclear.
If the site definitely doesn't want system programming / kernel programming questions here, then I think that it would be reasonable to change the relevant to say so. I personally think saying just user/admin stuff is on-topic here is a bit restrictive.
Having said this, this discussion is kinda theoretical since few such questions come to the site.
well, that earlier sentence should have probably been "people who know aboutone thing are more likely to know about the other".
@Gilles also, as you have already noted "no programming questions" is not strictly accurate, since people ask programming questions here all the time - about sed, awk, and shell, and possibly other similar things.
@Gilles Well, if there is community concensus that this is not wanted, then that is fine. The SE sites don't really seem to have a formal mechanism for garnering community concensus on such questions anyway - this would be something like a Debian general resolution. I didn't get a sense most people had strong feelings about it one way or the other. Also, I don't think changes in site scope are necessarily a bad idea. Site scope doesn't have to be set in stone.
It depends on what people want. As long as we don't suddenly find that discussing MS Windows is on-topic on this site...
One reason I'm personally somewhat is favor of such an expansion in scope is that it might lead to more intereresting questions. We get a lot of helpdesk questions about how people's computers are broken. Questions about kernel programming issues could well be more interesting. As least, by definition, they could not be as elementary.
@FaheemMitha the fact that some questions are interesting is not an argument to make them on-topic. I'm interested in type theory and French usage, but I wouldn't propose to make them on-topic on this site.
@FaheemMitha Changing the site's scope is possible but problematic — we have no programming content to seed the site with. But even if it wasn't a change, even if we were just starting out, I prefer the current scope.
@FaheemMitha suggest it on meta. Like you did in your answer, except that for a change of that magnitude, it needs to be a separate question rather than an answer on a discussion that starts out as a scope clarification
@FaheemMitha It opens a discussion on expansion. If people like the idea, congrats you just expanded scope. Of course, there is generally a lot of discussion first.
@Seth Ok, but I'm still missing the formal mechanism. So, I write a question asking whether scope should be expanded. two answers, say, one pro, one against. all of them get votes. then what?
In general, answers shouldn't be just "yes" and "no". If people present real problems that will arise out of an expansion of scope, those need to be addressed. If no one can come up with a good reason to not expand and expansion has good support otherwise, you'd probably expand.
If people come up with good problems it would cause you either address those or don't expand.
@FaheemMitha if there's a consensus, that becomes policy. If there's no consensus, moderators decide — as this is a major change, without consensus, we wouldn't change.
@Gilles Yes, but imo there is no concensus generating mechanism. I don't think asking a question on Meta can generate a concensus. Something like a voting mechanism, where say everyone with a score of over 200 could vote, would qualify. Most of the questions on meta only get a few votes anyway. Hardly representative of site users.
@derobert xsane doesn't seem like the best designed thing. my scan is getting truncated, so I'm trying to adjust the paper size. but there does not seem to be a sensible way to tell xsane that i'm scanning a4
I tried simple-scan which works more or less correctly. At an A4 setting it cuts off the very bottom of the page, which is not ideal. So the problem is in the xsane settings.
@derobert I've tried it both ways. Currently I'm mostly using the ADF, because that seems the better option, at least for multipage documents. the orientation is better, and I don't have to manually swap pieces of paper in and out.
The top part (whatever it is called) which lifts up, has two hinge type things. The right one comes most of the way up when I pull it. That is not good, but is that grounds for a replacement?
the net effect is that the top is wobbly.
basically it does not seem to be properly attached.
According to Unix C API calls ontopic? and the help center, "UNIX C API and System Interfaces ( within reason )" is explicitly on topic. That within reason links to the meta question.
Mounting a file system using a C program seems to be within that. Note that:
mount(2) seems like a common UNIX...
I think you may be confused about the job control notation. Notably "Stopped" means that a job is still alive but that it's ability to process anything has been held (it it given no CPU time). This is effectively a "Pause", although that is not the correct term.
CtrlC does not "stop" a job, it ...
I know how to change the font color via preferences, but it changes the color of ALL text, as in below:
What I'm going for is something more like this:
Any tips?
Thanks!
