COMPSCI 111 / 111G Software
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Increasing Automation in the Backporting of Linux Drivers Using Coccinelle
Increasing Automation in the Backporting of Linux Drivers Using Coccinelle Luis R. Rodriguez Julia Lawall Rutgers University/SUSE Labs Sorbonne Universites/Inria/UPMC/LIP6´ [email protected] [email protected] [email protected], [email protected] Abstract—Software is continually evolving, to fix bugs and to a kernel upgrade. Upgrading a kernel may also require add new features. Industry users, however, often value stability, experience to understand what features to enable, disable, or and thus may not be able to update their code base to the tune to meet existing deployment criteria. In the worst case, latest versions. This raises the need to selectively backport new some systems may rely on components that have not yet been features to older software versions. Traditionally, backporting has merged into the mainline Linux kernel, potentially making it been done by cluttering the backported code with preprocessor impossible to upgrade the kernel without cooperation from the directives, to replace behaviors that are unsupported in an earlier version by appropriate workarounds. This approach however component vendor or a slew of partners that need to collaborate involves writing a lot of error-prone backporting code, and results on developing a new productized image for a system. As an in implementations that are hard to read and maintain. We example, development for 802.11n AR9003 chipset support consider this issue in the context of the Linux kernel, for which on the mainline ath9k device driver started on March 20, older versions are in wide use. We present a new backporting 2010 with an early version of the silicon, at which point the strategy that relies on the use of a backporting compatability most recent major release of the Linux kernel was v2.6.32. -
Is Published Semi-Annually by the Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law, Campus Box 401, Boulder, CO 80309-040
JOURNAL ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS & HIGH TECHNOLOGY LAW is published semi-annually by the Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law, Campus Box 401, Boulder, CO 80309-0401 ISSN: 1543-8899 Copyright © 2009 by the Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law an association of students sponsored by the University of Colorado School of Law and the Silicon Flatirons Telecommunications Program. POSTMASTER: Please send address changes to JTHTL, Campus Box 401, Boulder, CO 80309-0401 Subscriptions Domestic volume subscriptions are available for $45.00. City of Boulder subscribers please add $3.74 sales tax. Boulder County subscribers outside the City of Boulder please add $2.14 sales tax. Metro Denver subscribers outside of Boulder County please add $1.85 sales tax. Colorado subscribers outside of Metro Denver please add $1.31 sales tax. International volume subscriptions are available for $50.00. Inquiries concerning ongoing subscriptions or obtaining an individual issue should be directed to the attention of JTHTL Managing Editor at [email protected] or by writing JTHTL Managing Editor, Campus Box 401, Boulder, CO 80309-0401. Back issues in complete sets, volumes, or single issues may be obtained from: William S. Hein & Co., Inc., 1285 Main Street, Buffalo, NY 14209. Back issues may also be found in electronic format for all your research needs on HeinOnline http://heinonline.org/. Manuscripts JTHTL invites the submission of unsolicited manuscripts. Please send softcopy manuscripts to the attention of JTHTL Articles Editors at [email protected] in Word or PDF formats or through ExpressO at http://law.bepress.com/expresso. Hardcopy submissions may be sent to JTHTL Articles Editors, Campus Box 401, Boulder, CO 80309-0401. -
2020-Floss-Roadmap.Pdf
-1- -2- Why do we need a 2020 FLOSS1 Roadmap? Based in Paris, Open World Forum (openworldforum.org) is a forum dedicated to FLOSS, its players and projects. OWF offers all contributors this open space in which they can express their own vision of FLOSS. 2020 FLOSS Roadmap is the Open World Forum’s main manifesto, and is designed to support discussions taking place during the different OWF seminars and forums. This is a prospective Roadmap, and a projection of the influences that will affect FLOSS between now (2008) and 2020, with descriptions of all FLOSS-related trends as anticipated by OWF contributors over this period of time. It also highlights all sectors that will, potentially, be impacted by FLOSS, from the economy to the Information Society. It is easy to find a wealth of writings on the subject of FLOSS contributed by various analysts, but this study represents a first, not just because of its inward looking vision of the future of the FLOSS Community itself, but also because it is the result of a collaborative effort by all OWF contributors. This first version of 2020 Roadmap is open to comment, and will be re-assessed annually during the OWF. Studies have been carried out in seven key areas: Theme 1: Public policies: promoting sustainable development of shared resources Theme 2: FLOSS: the key to future innovation and competitive differentiation? Theme 3: Ensuring sustainability for FLOSS developer communities and business ecosystems Theme 4: Technological and economic breakthroughs: challenge or opportunity for FLOSS? Theme 5: IT 3.0: towards new governance for information systems? Theme 6: FLOSS: a lever for employment and careers Theme 7: FLOSS in an Open World: Innovations and best practices from Brazil In the first section, we have summarized the discussions that took place during the study period, and this is followed by a special focus on Cloud Computing. -
Download Date 24/09/2021 14:31:55
To Upgrade or Not To Upgrade Application Item Type Thesis Authors Francisco, Neil Download date 24/09/2021 14:31:55 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12648/1799 To Upgrade or Not To Upgrade Application __________________________ A Master's Thesis Project Presented to the Department of Communication and Information Design __________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of Science Degree State University of New York Polytechnic Institute By Neil Francisco May 2021 TO UPGRADE OR NOT TO UPGRADE SUNY POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Approved and recommended for acceptance as a thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Information Design and Technology. ____________________June 11, 2021 DATE ________________________________ Dr. Kathryn Stam Thesis Advisor ____________________ DATE ________________________________ Dr. Ryan Lizardi Second Reader 2 TO UPGRADE OR NOT TO UPGRADE ABSTRACT New Technology consists of new hardware devices, computational workflows, digital advances, and information systems. As technology continues to evolve over the years, this never-ending cycle of new devices and experiences will always be present amongst consumers. Traditionally, new hardware devices are intriguing because they are designed to improve our access to information, media, and a connection to the digital world, but does this mean our previous-gen devices are no longer valuable? This project involves creating a prototype application designed for both computer and mobile interfaces to help improve the accessibility to information and the overall user experience with an older device. The “To Upgrade or Not To Upgrade” app will inform end-users of their older technological device specifications and suggest hardware/software methods to unlock their full potential. -
Open Source Software
The Medicine Behind the Image OOppeenn SSoouurcrcee SSoofftwtwaarere -- IIss iitt aa VViiaabbllee AAlltteerrnnaattiivvee foforr aa HHeeaalltthhccaarree IInnssttiittuuttiioonn?? David Clunie, MBBS, FRACR CTO - RadPharm, Inc. AAcckknnoowwleleddggeemmeenntsts • Several recent presentations by various PACS luminaries – Steve Langer (Mayo) – Brad Erickson (Mayo) – Paul Nagy (University of Maryland) – Steve Horii (University of Pennsylvania) • Most recent (RSNA 2005) talk at OpenRad – http://www.openrad.com/rsnaopensource.pdf IIss PPrroopprriieettaarryy PPAACCSS VViiaabbllee ?? • Why are PACS much more expensive than the underlying off-the-shelf PC, server and storage hardware ? • How profitable is PACS for the vendor ? • Will the vendor fail or be acquired ? • Will the installed base survive acquisition ? • Will there be long term support ? • How long will the current offering last before sites are forced to upgrade ? • Big vendors are not immune - how many PACS have the they built or acquired then orphaned ? • Is their pace of innovation sufficient ? It only needs to be “incrementally better than the competition” IIss OOppeenn SSoouurcrcee VViaiabblele ?? • Does it exist for your application ? • How much hand-holding do you need ? • Open source deployment is about taking control • With control comes responsibility • Requires that you have the necessary expertise to deploy and support - may be out-sourced WhatWhat isis OpenOpen SourceSource SoftwareSoftware ?? • Open source software (OSS) licensees are free to: – Use software for any purpose -
Crippleware - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Page 1 of 1
Crippleware - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 1 of 1 Crippleware From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Crippleware is any product whose functions have been limited (or "crippled", thus the name) with the express purpose of requiring the user to pay for those functions (either paying a one-time fee or continually paying a service). Crippleware is also used to describe software that makes use of Digital Rights Management. Crippleware programs are usually free versions of computer programs that lack the most advanced (or in some cases, even crucial) features of the original program. Crippleware versions are made available in order to increase the popularity of the full program without giving it away for free. An example of crippleware is a word processor that cannot save or print. There are several types of crippleware programs. A crippleware version can be the full program with the features disabled; this type can be "unlocked" into a fully functional version of the software, usually via a serial number. A crippleware version can also be a special trial version of the program that does not even include the executable code for the disabled features. In this case, only users who buy a license are given access to another version of the program, which is fully functional. A third type is where the functionality of the software or hardware is permanently compromised from full functionality due to third party agreements. For something to become crippleware, it usually requires the manufacturer or author to take active steps to reduce the capabilities that the hardware or software could otherwise handle. -
CGD Compute Infrastructure Upgrade Plan
CGD Compute Infrastructure Upgrade Plan 1.0 Introduction The CGD Information Systems (IS) Group (ISG) is charged with providing a modern, progressive, and stable computing environment for the CGD user community. Scientists, engineers, and support staff should be able to concentrate on their individual duties without worrying about systems administration. The current infrastructure is being redesigned and upgraded to meet this goal. Achieving this on a restricted budget requires careful planning, time for implementation, and communication between the user community and the systems staff. Services provided by infrastructure systems will be distributed to provide ease of recovery, ease of upgrade, and flexibility to meet the growing needs of the Division. Hardware will be reused where possible, and eliminated if beyond reasonable use. Automation of services (software builds, user addition/deletion, etc) will be key to managing the growing demands. 2.0 Future CGD Computing Trends Written surveys from 2001 and meetings with each of the sections have revealed a wide variety of needs, desires, and deficiencies. Each section has a unique set of needs that often do not complement other sections. The one common factor among all sections is that more of everything will be needed to meet the common CGD goals: · More disk space for project data, home directories, and e-mail. · More Linux support to take advantage of the price/performance x86 hardware offers. · More computational processing power for modeling development. · More Microsoft products to support presentation/documentation efforts. · More laptops (MS and Linux) for travel and home use. 3.0 General Problems Computers have a useful life span that averages three years. -
The Ultimate Guide to Software Updates on Embedded Linux Devices
The ultimate guide to software updates on embedded Linux devices foss-north 2018 Mirza Krak Session Overview ● Intro ● Basics ● FOSS ecosystem ○ Strategy ○ Key Features ○ Community 2 Mirza Krak ● FOSS enthusiast ● Board Support Package development ● Linux kernel developer ● Yocto/OE-core ● Disclaimer: Mender community member 3 Embedded Linux Devices @internetofshit 4 Embedded Linux environment ● Remote in some cases ○ No physical access to devices ● Long life span ○ 5-10 years ● Unreliable power supply ○ Power loss at any given time ● Unreliable network ○ Mobile ○ Low bandwidth 5 Why do we need update software? ● Fixing issues (bugs) ● Feature growth ● Security updates 6 Software update on-site ● No connectivity ● Easy access to an device ● USB Flash drive ● Technician 7 Software updates (OTA) ● No easy access to device ● Deployment management server ○ status reports ○ current versions 8 What to we need to update? U-boot Linux + DTB Root file-system (distro) Root file-system (apps) MCU/FPGA 9 Requirements (basic) ● Able to update all components ○ Unsafe to update bootloader ● Never render the device unusable (brick) ○ Fail-safe ● Atomic updates ○ No partial install ● Roll-back ○ Not always possible ● Integrity check ● Signed images ○ Trusted images ● Compatibility check ● Persistent data storage 10 Requirements (basic OTA) ● Secure communication channel ○ Encrypted ● Device Authentication (trust) 11 Alternative approaches ● Image/block based updates ○ Easy to implement, test, verify and maintain ● Incremental atomic image upgrade mechanism -
Consumer Response to Versioning: How Brands Production Methods Affect Perceptions of Unfairness
Consumer Response to Versioning: How Brands’ Production Methods Affect Perceptions of Unfairness ANDREW D. GERSHOFF RAN KIVETZ ANAT KEINAN Marketers often extend product lines by offering limited-capability models that are created by removing or degrading features in existing models. This production method, called versioning, has been lauded because of its ability to increase both consumer and firm welfare. According to rational utility models, consumers weigh benefits relative to their costs in evaluating a product. So the production method should not be relevant. Anecdotal evidence suggests otherwise. Six studies show how the production method of versioning may be perceived as unfair and unethical and lead to decreased purchase intentions for the brand. Building on prior work in fairness, the studies show that this effect is driven by violations of norms and the perceived similarity between the inferior, degraded version of a product and the full-featured model offered by the brand. The idea of Apple gratuitously removing fea- been recommended by economists as a production method tures that would have been actually easier to that benefits both firms and consumers (Deneckere and leave in is downright perplexing. McAfee 1996; Hahn 2006; Varian 2000). Firms benefit by reducing design and production costs and by increasing profits The intentional software crippling stance they have taken with the iPod Touch is disturbing through price discrimination when multiple configurations of at best. (Readers’ responses to iPod Touch re- a product are offered. Consumers benefit because versioning view on www.engadget.com) results in lower prices and makes it possible for many to gain access to products that they might otherwise not be able to afford (Shapiro and Varian 1998; Varian 2000). -
Establishing a Need for a Protocol for the Interoperability of Heterogeneous Iot Home Devices
Georgia Southern University Digital Commons@Georgia Southern Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies, Jack N. Averitt College of Spring 2018 Establishing a Need for a Protocol for the Interoperability of Heterogeneous IoT Home Devices Jenna Bayto Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd Part of the Computer Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Bayto, Jenna, "Establishing a Need for a Protocol for the Interoperability of Heterogeneous IoT Home Devices" (2018). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 1742. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/1742 This thesis (open access) is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies, Jack N. Averitt College of at Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ESTABLISHING A NEED FOR A PROTOCOL FOR THE INTEROPERABILITY OF HETEROGENEOUS IOT HOME DEVICES by JENNA BAYTO (Under the Direction of Christopher Kadlec) ABSTRACT The Internet of Things (IoT) refers to the field of connecting devices consumers use every day to the internet. As the world relies on more and more internet-driven technological devices to control functions within the home, issues with compatibility of those devices are surfacing. This research was created to establish the need for standardization of IoT devices within the home. INDEX WORDS: Internet of -
Orphan Works, Abandonware and the Missing Market for Copyrighted Goods
Orphan Works, Abandonware and the Missing Market for Copyrighted Goods Dennis W. K. Khong University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom Paper prepared for the 1st Annual Conference of the Asian Law and Economics Society, Seoul, Korea, 24–25 June 2005. 1 Introduction Of late, the issue of orphan works and abandonware is gaining attention in the legal circle. Following the case of Eldred v. Ashcroft,1 a new case is pending appeal in the United States raising the issue of orphan works.2 The Library of Congress (2005) recently issued a notice of inquiry on orphan works. In the US Congress, a bill3 has been put forward to remedy the problem of abandoned copyrighted works in the light of the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998. All these activities indicate that the problem of orphan works and abandonware is a legitimate subject of enquiry, not less by using the tools of economic analysis. It is this endeavour that this paper will try to undertake. In this paper, the use of the term ‘copyright owner’ is meant to denote the owner and his assigns and licensees, such as publishers, unless the context requires otherwise. Examples of the law are United Kingdom’s unless stated otherwise. 1. 537 U.S. 186 (2003). 2. Brewster Kahle et al. v. John Ashcroft, 72 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1888; US Dist. Lexis 24090 (N.D. Cal. 2004). 3. Congress, House, Public Domain Enhancement Act of 2003, 108th Cong., 1st sess., H.R. 2601. 1 Part I 2 The Problem Copyright law confers an exclusive right to the owner of a copyrighted work to control, inter alia, the copying and issuing of copies of his work.4 Through this exclusive right, copyright owners5 may earn profit by granting a license or sale of a copy subject to payment of a fee. -
Oracle Unbreakable Linux: an Overview
Oracle Unbreakable Linux: An Overview An Oracle White Paper September 2010 Oracle Unbreakable Linux: An Overview INTRODUCTION Oracle Unbreakable Linux is a support program that provides enterprises with industry-leading global support for the Linux operating system at significantly lower costs. The support program, which is available for any customer whether or not they’re running Oracle Unbreakable Linux currently includes support for three architectures: x86; x86-64 (e.g. the latest Intel Xeon and AMD Opteron chips, as used by most Linux customers); and Linux Itanium (ia64). The program offers support for any existing Red Hat Enterprise Linux installations and for new installations of Oracle Linux, an open source Linux operating system that is fully compatible— both source and binary—with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Complete Support for the Complete Software Stack Oracle’s industry-leading support organization offers expertise that looks at the entire application stack running on top of Linux; only Oracle delivers complete support for the complete software stack—database, middleware, applications, management tools, and the operating system itself. By delivering enterprise-class quality support for Linux, Oracle addresses a key enterprise requirement from customers. When problems occur in a large, complex enterprise environment, it’s often impossible to reproduce such occurrences with very simple test cases. Customers need a support vendor who understands their full environment, and has the expertise to diagnose and resolve the problem by drawing from their knowledge of and familiarity with their framework, as opposed to requesting a simple reproducible test case. Another customer demand is for bug fixes to happen in a timely manner, as customers cannot always afford to wait for months to get a fix delivered to them.