And Now a Story About Bunny Poop
Friday, April 16, 2010 at 11:34 am
I was working today on compiling a program that would help a company stream their webcam over the Internet. I decided to try out a program called Xuggler.
Anyone that's ever tried to compile software on Linux knows that ./configure pumps out hundreds of lines of checks in a few moments' time.
This time was different...
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... gawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking how to create a pax tar archive... gnutar
checking whether to enable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles... no
checking whether to use captive versions of dependent libraries... yes
checking whether to enable compiler optimizations... yes
checking whether to regnerate java interfaces from swig... no
checking build system type... i686-pc-linux-gnu
checking host system type... i686-pc-linux-gnu
checking whether we saw a bunny... no
checking for gcc... gcc
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking whether we are cross compiling... no
checking for suffix of executables...
checking for suffix of object files... o
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed
checking for a sed that does not truncate output... /usr/bin/sed
checking for grep that handles long lines and -e... /usr/bin/grep
checking for egrep... /usr/bin/grep -E
checking for fgrep... /usr/bin/grep -F
checking for ld used by gcc... /usr/i586-suse-linux/bin/ld
checking if the linker (/usr/i586-suse-linux/bin/ld) is GNU ld... yes
checking for BSD- or MS-compatible name lister (nm)... /usr/bin/nm -B
checking the name lister (/usr/bin/nm -B) interface... BSD nm
checking whether ln -s works... yes
checking the maximum length of command line arguments... 1572864
checking whether the shell understands some XSI constructs... yes
checking whether the shell understands "+="... yes
checking for /usr/i586-suse-linux/bin/ld option to reload object files... -r
checking for objdump... objdump
checking how to recognize dependent libraries... pass_all
checking for ar... ar
checking for strip... strip
checking for ranlib... ranlib
checking command to parse /usr/bin/nm -B output from gcc object... ok
checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E
checking for ANSI C header files... yes
checking for sys/types.h... yes
checking for sys/stat.h... yes
checking for stdlib.h... yes
checking for string.h... yes
checking for memory.h... yes
checking for strings.h... yes
checking for inttypes.h... yes
checking for stdint.h... yes
checking for unistd.h... yes
checking for dlfcn.h... yes
checking for objdir... .libs
checking if gcc supports -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions... no
checking for gcc option to produce PIC... -fPIC -DPIC
checking if gcc PIC flag -fPIC -DPIC works... yes
checking if gcc static flag -static works... yes
checking if gcc supports -c -o file.o... yes
checking if gcc supports -c -o file.o... (cached) yes
checking whether the gcc linker (/usr/i586-suse-linux/bin/ld) supports shared libraries... yes
checking whether -lc should be explicitly linked in... no
checking dynamic linker characteristics... GNU/Linux ld.so
checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate
checking whether stripping libraries is possible... yes
checking if libtool supports shared libraries... yes
checking whether to build shared libraries... yes
checking whether to build static libraries... no
checking whether we smell bunny poop... no
checking whether to build 64 bit version of package... no
checking for gcc... (cached) gcc
checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... (cached) yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... (cached) yes
No, those lines weren't highlighted in bright white when I ran the command. I happened to see them while it was scrolling by at 20 lines a second.
Reminds me of the Mozy backup service's Terms & Conditions. A couple years ago, I decided for no apparent reason at all to skim through them, and it said. "Furthermore, you agree to use Mozy for good or for awesome." They've since changed their terms, but I assure you that it was there. It's not so much that it's in there that's funny, it's that it's almost invisible and yet still people notice it.
Don't Get Me Wrong - I Love the Bunny
Sunday, April 11, 2010 at 5:26 pm
I got a Russell Stover solid milk chocolate bunny to celebrate Easter with. As I was eating away on it, I saw a nice little letter on the back saying how they use only the finest ingredients.
And then, of course, I had to read the ingredients. I'm very glad that they use cocoa butter for their chocolate. I can't stand “chocolate” made from palm kernel oil. But I noticed that they also use vanillin.
Why vanillin? There has to be what - one drop of vanilla flavoring in the whole thing. Why on earth would you cut corners there? For those that don't know, vanillin (imitation vanilla extract) is usually commercially extracted by soaking burnt wood or coal tar in alcohol. Yum!
New Google Maps Feature
Saturday, August 22, 2009 at 11:33 am
Google Maps now automatically routes around roads closed for road construction. I was trying to get to somewhere on I-64 on the west end of St. Louis. When I asked Google Maps for help, it sent me all around the city, starting on I-64, then taking I-44 southwest, and then I-270 North to meet up with I-64 again.
I know that I-64 is closed from the Kingshighway exit to I-170 but I didn't think Google Maps knew that. I tried to drag the route onto the closed section of I-64 and it wouldn't let me - it acted like there wasn't even a road to drive on. Technically, there isn't at the moment.
So that was pretty exciting to me. Although I wish Maps would at least tell me why it redirected me, so that I'd be sure that their route-planning isn't just getting dumber.
Overdrawn at the ... Bank
Wednesday, August 05, 2009 at 5:19 pm
I logged into our First Bank account, because I wanted to check on a couple things (we are moving to a new checking account this week. When I got there, I saw that I was $45 overdrawn!!! So after a nice, long panic I found check #2111 (not my check). Ours are in the 600's. Someone else's check for $57 posted to our account.
Their electronic check reader (or human) read the 229 as 559 and it posted to our account.
We're saved? I hope so. Otherwise, we'd be facing over $100 in overdraft fees, 75% of which would be for purchases under $7.00
Aveo Is Not Beautiful
Tuesday, July 14, 2009 at 11:42 pm
I just got an email about General Motors announcing their restructuring. Then I went on a Wikipedia run to look at what's new. Then, I got bored and clicked on Daewoo, which they have a major stake in (> 50%). Apparently Daewoo is South Korean - I had no idea. Yes, when I visit Wikipedia, I will read about cotton and werewolves in the same sitting.
So then I read that a bunch of Daewoo models are sold in the US under the Chevrolet name. The Chevrolet Aveo is actually a Daewoo Kalos. I had to drive one of those when our car got rear-ended. They are not pretty. They don't even feel safe. When we went under a bridge, the car shook from the "wind tunnel" effect!
The ultimate irony is what I read when I looked at the article about the Daewoo Kalos. They chose the name Kalos, because the Greek word καλóς means beautiful. I dare a commenter to say that they like the way the Aveo looks.