Re: Example where testing-security was used?
- To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Example where testing-security was used?
- From: Rich Walker <rw@shadow.org.uk>
- Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 15:08:37 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] m3r7fmtbiy.fsf@shadow.org.uk>
- References: <20050521224609.GI4489@stusta.de> <20050531120148.GW3627@stusta.de> <20050531125021.GG23271@mauritius.dodds.net> <200505311508.09821.madcoder@debian.org> <20050531200317.GD9770@suffields.me.uk> <m3is0z5ea7.fsf@shadow.org.uk> <20050531205317.GG9770@suffields.me.uk>
Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org> writes:
> On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 09:30:40PM +0100, Rich Walker wrote:
>> Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org> writes:
>> >
>> > Moore's law is cpu speed.
>>
>> *TRANSISTORS* on a single die
>>
>> <http://www.intel.com/research/silicon/mooreslaw.htm>
>
> Bah, yeah, but it's more or less the same thing for a given line of
> chips, even when it's not a linear relationship.
You don't read computer architecture stuff, I take it.
<asbestos=on>
Saying "more or
less the same thing" would be like saying, ooh, Debian and Ununtu are
more or less the same thing.
<asbestos=off>
cheers, Rich.
--
rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | rw@shadow.org.uk
technical director 251 Liverpool Road |
need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487
www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml
Reply to: