Firefox market share bounces back 6718
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Lin¿nut wrote on Tue, 06 Dec 2005 11:30:46 -0600
Because BMP is far more to their liking, of course. Or was it GIF? The former of course is a bloated uncompressed proprietary (though reasonably easy to decode) format, and the latter was until recently a proprietary patented format with a limit of 256 colors.
Can't be too careful with that PNG format; it might lead to dancing. Especially since RFC2083 explicitly publishes a CRC algorithm, and there are many image libraries that can properly process PNG.
Oh, the horror.
On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 07:26:22 -0800, John Bailo This is not really surprising. They only tested the older Smithfield (Pentium 8xx) cores. Intel released...
Presumably
Hmm...a search for "PNG code" or "PNG source code" on www.microsoft.com pulled up vulnerability MS05-009 (890621).
OK, that is more clear to me. I would buttert, however, that the *payment* you make for GPL software is...
Fortunately, this one's been patched.
The Code Center didn't fare that much better; half of the first 10 results mention PNG transparency problems, either in IE or FrontPage.
I'm not hopeful.
He might. I can't say I do.
Probably depends on what "derived work" means. I could probably twist it ridiculously but IANAL; however, any program that uses readline could be construed as deriving utility from the readline library and therefore is a derived work of the readline library (which presumably stands the GPL intent on its head!) and therefore no one will use readline because they'd have to publish *everything*. :-)
(Unless they intended to release the product GPL anyway, of course. Separate issue.)
It's only "packaged" if it can be dropped on the desktop and installed via double-click, presumably. :-) (Personally, I prefer "emerge"; others here use "rpm" and derivatives, "yum", and "dpkg" or "apt".)
Microsoft Package Installation. So simple, a worm can do it.
-- It's still legal to go .sigless.