Him or a Vikings fan.

That’s rpm, suse Linux 1.0 was never built off the same source or installer that Redhat Linux was.

Do you have a historical example where any suse distribution used redhat based source? As opensuse as I said only used the rpm package manager, it never used any other components of a redhat derived install.

Source: I work there and can find zero redhat strings in any old source code from that era, the old greybeards took offense to the implication that suse was ever based on redhat other than using rpm which at the time was about it for packaging.

All they did was start to use rpm instead of tar for packaging.

Opensuse and fedora have no common history though? Just because it uses rpm doesn’t make it a red hat derivative.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Linux_Distribution_Timeline.svg

I’m an annoying millennial I call em acetates cause I figure what they were called in the 40s or thereabouts is good enough for me see. Now I’m off to my ether frolicking and ice cream social daddy o or watever.

Yeah this only really applies to Algol style imperative languages. Dependent types and say stack languages like idris and apl are dramatically different in their underlying axioms.

Why use many word when few word do trick.

Sorry, but your reply suggests otherwise.

I’m at work, I’m not going to go into a thesis on ip allocation.

The RIRs (currently) never allocate a /64 nor a /58. /48 is their (currently) smallest allocation. For example, of the ~800,000 /32’s ARIN has, only ~47k are “fragmented” (smaller than /32) and <4,000 are /48s. If /32s were the average, we’d be fine, but in our infinite wisdom, we assign larger subnets (like Comcast’s 2601::/20 and 2603:2000::/20).

Correct all noted here https://www.iana.org/numbers/allocations/arin/asn/

Taking into account the RIPE allocations, noted above, the closer equivalent to /8 is the 1.048M /20s available. Yes, it’s more than the 8-bit class-A blocks, but does 1 million really sound like the scale you were talking about? “enough addresses in ipv6 to address every known atom on earth”

If you’re going to go through and conflate 2^128 as being larger than the amount of atoms on earth to a prefixing assignment scheme I’m just going to assume this is a bad faith argument.

Have a good one I’m not wasting more time on this. The best projections for “exhausting” our ipv6 allocations is around 10 million years from now. I think by then we can change the default cidr allocations.

https://samsclass.info/ipv6/exhaustion-2016.htm

Its old sure but not worth arguing further.

Their sprocket based economy next?

I’m fully aware how rirs allocate ipv6. The smallest allocation is a /64, that’s 65535 /64’s. There are 2^32 /32’s available, and a /20 is the minimum allocatable now. These aren’t /8’s from IPv4, let’s look at it from a /56, there are 10^16 /56 networks, roughly 17 million times more network ranges than IPv4 addresses.

/48s are basically pop level allocations, few end users will be getting them. In fact comcast which used to give me /48s is down to /60 now.

I’ll repeat, we aren’t running out any time soon, even with default allocations in the /3 currently existing for ipv6.

This is the worst math that ever mathed. IPv4 is 32 bits of address space. IPv6 is 128. That is 2^32 vs 2^128. Not 2^52, which isn’t even wrong it’s just weird, hopefully this is just some weird performance joke. There are enough addresses in ipv6 to address every known atom on earth. We aren’t running out anytime soon. 96 doublings of IPv4s address space is a number you can’t fathom.

Mr soldering iron fixes that easy enough good luck connecting to anything without a working antenna.