Linux-Advocacy Digest #236, Volume #26 Tue, 25 Apr 00 11:14:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: on installing software on linux. a worst broken system. (Terry Porter)
Re: MS caught breaking web sites (Sean LeBlanc)
Re: on installing software on linux. a worst broken system. (Terry Porter)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Leslie
Mikesell)
Re: Rumors ... (Osugi Sakae)
Re: which OS is best? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress (Roger)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Roger)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: on installing software on linux. a worst broken system.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 24 Apr 2000 10:21:50 +0800
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 12:58:11 GMT, The Cat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 23 Apr 2000 17:07:10 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
>Porter) wrote:
>
>>Oh I enjoy this type of troll :))
>
>You think everyone who doesn't agree with you is a troll Terry.
Only a Wintroll like you would think that "Heather/Steve/Keys88/hepcat"
>
>>On 22 Apr 2000 14:09:25 -0700, test@myhome <test@myhome> wrote:
>>>In article <8dsoom$7k9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John says...
>>>
>>>
>>>> My rules of thumb:
>>>>
>>>> - if you are going to be doing a lot of rpm loading, update your
>>>> full OS to at least the current major revision (ex: RH 6.X)
>>>>
>>>
>>>what makes you think I was not using the latest and greates?
>>How would *you* know what your using ?
>
>He mentions what he is using below. You just didn't take the time to
>read it and preferred to make a cute, totally empty comment instead.
Nope, he has no clue. The install told him he *didnt* have the required
libraries, yet he *expected* he did, this equals no clue.
>
>>>I have the latest SUSE 6.3, did FULL and COMPLETE installation,
>>>the whole 11 GB I told it to load to the disk, all the packages
>>>on the those 6 CDROM are INSTALLED on my disk.
>>Size solves all huh ?
>
>Installing 11GB of software via SuSE install everything option should
>mean he gets everything. At the very least this should have installed
>basic Gnome libs which seems to be what he is missing.
Steve your as clueless as this guy, have you no idea about library versions ?
>
>>>
>>>Yet, many applications on the net, requires yes more packages
>>>that are missing.
>>So what, the world is a lot bigger than you realise, obviously.
>
>What does that mean?
Simple its a big world, there are many Linux apps, and many libraries.
>
>>>
>>>see, I wanted to install etherape:
>>And Xfce the window manager, and others:-
>>
>>>
>>>>rpm -Uhv etherape-0.5.3-1.i386.rpm
>>>error: failed dependencies:
>>> gnome-libs >= 1.0.0 is needed by etherape-0.5.3-1
>>> libglade >= 0.11 is needed by etherape-0.5.3-1
>>Excellent, now you know what you need.
>
>But you just told him he didn't know what he needed.
Please re read Steve, I said he didnt know what he was using, now he knows what
he needs.
Using != needs!
Duh!
> You need to make
>up your mind here Terry, you can't have it both ways. Now did he know
>what he needed? Or did he not know what he needed?
Not relevant, please re read the article. I appreciate that as a Wintroll, the
idea is for you to write as much nonsense as possible Steve, and this does not
allow a great deal of time for you to properly *understand* what's written.
Neverthless please try a little harder ?
>
>>>
>>>>rpm -Uhv gnome-libs-1.0.58-1.i386.rpm
>>>error: failed dependencies:
>>> gtk+ >= 1.2.1 is needed by gnome-libs-1.0.58-1
>>> libjpeg.so.62 is needed by gnome-libs-1.0.58-1
>>Ditto.
>
>Seems to me that these are basic libraries that should have been
>installed with 11 gig of SuSE "install everything" option .
What *seems* basic to you, is hardly applicable, Steve the Wintroll.
>
>>>
>>>>rpm -Uhv gtk+-1.2.7-1rh61.i386.rpm
>>>error: failed dependencies:
>>> gtk is needed by gkrellm-0.7.1-1
>>> gtk is needed by ginetd-0.99.2-43
>>> gtk is needed by libglad-0.7-3
>>> gtk is needed by xfce-3.1.1-0
>>>
>>>Do you want me to go on?
>>I imagine you will anyway ?
>
>Why does it bother you so much when someone discusses a problem they
>are having with Linux? He went into quite a bit of detail which shows
>that he probably did try and do the function.
I only go after trolls like you and this poster Steve, you post here, you're
fair game.
His details are nonsense, he threw in Xfce in the list of required dependencies
its a *window manager* !.
This troll needs to try harder.
>
>>> The above chain reaction will
>>>go on for ever it seems.
>>No nothing last forever, not even your rantings.
>
>How is he ranting?
>He presented the facts and an opinion he formed based on the three
>legged circle jerk merry-go-round he was on trying to do a simple
>operation. It's not HIS fault SuSE's libraries seem to have non
>standard names.
No he simply threw in some libs, some error messages and some fabrications.
Anyone can post anything here, there is no requirement to be accurate, as you
know only too well. Especially amongst Wintrolls.
As an aside Suse is a commercial entity, complain to them.
>
>>> Each package wants few packages, and
>>>each one of those packages wants more few packages.
>>Yes thats how Unix works.
>
>No. That's how a broken system does it.
Steve, puleeese.
Nothing is perfect, and least perfect is the OS you use, Windows.
> See Jim Richardsons reply for
>why it didn't work. BTW it didn't work for me either running SuSE 6.3.
>If he had used Mandrake, like I am, he would be posting a message
>about how great rpm is.
Personally I don't use or like RPM.
>>>
>>>and for each of those packages one has to go to the net search
>>>for it.
>>You should be thankfull you have net access, and that this terrific resource
>>exists.
>
>Nebulous argument.......
Hahahahahah
Nebulous statement.
>
>>>
>>>What an absolutly stupied design.
>>What a clueless remark.
>
>When the system fails, like it did for him and the Windows system
>works, his opinion will be formed by his experience.
His Windows system works huh ?
You get a LOT of expected mileage out of that one 5 letter word Steve.
"Works"
Of course I know Windows, works "mostly", but otherwise remains a moribund,
lackluster, crippled OS. Still i suppose it does kinda "work".
>He had a bad experience due to a flaw that was not his doing.
>How the hell is he supposed to know the libraries have slightly
>different names?
He's using a computer, how the hell is he supposed to know how to use it ?
Osmosis, crystal ball ?
He could *learn* I imagine ?
>Same type of frustration I went through with Corel when their kernel
>source was in a non-standard place and compiles would go amok.
Corel is a commercial entity, complain to them.
>>>
>>>Who cares that a windows package is 5 or 10 MB instead of the few KB that
>>>linux package is.
>>I have a 28.8k line, please see above, where I mentioned the world is
>>a LOT bigger than you can imagine.
>
>So do I.....He most likely spent just as much time online tracking
>down packages for Linux then he spent downloading a 5 meg Windows
>file.
Possibly, as ignorance does go a *long* way.
Still he can fix that if he wants.
However he doesnt want to, hes a Wintroll, just like you Steve.
>
>snip........
>
>>>
>>>disk space is cheap. I have 200 GB of disk space.
>>I have 1.2 gig, and it supports 6 users.
>
>That's nice.
>>> you can buy a
>>>40 GB disk for $200 these days.
>>Bullshit. 10 gigs costs $300 Australian dollars.
>
>http://www.pricewatch.com
>
>Hardisks -> first page displayed:
>
>Maxtor 37.5 gig EIDE dma66 for $233.00 USD
Nice if thats where you live, but the worlds a big place steve ... have I
mentioned that before ?
>Close enough.
>
>>> I care not about large packages,
>>>I just need something that just simply works.
>>Then you'll be dissapointed, as not even your mind can meet that one
>>requirement imho.
>
>Those five other users must be real patient.
Why, this system is always up.
Its a Linux system, so you wouldnt understand what I meant.
>
>>>
>>>Linux people need to go back tto the drawing board and fix this
>>>utterly broken sw installation system they have managed to create before
>>>even think about talking down windows SW installation.
>>I think Ms Windows sux bricks thru straws, and I'm able to install it and Linux
>>and Bsd, no problem, so perhaps you still have someting to learn ?
>
>Seeing as you haven't used Windows in several years based on your own
>claims, you are in no better a position to comment on Windows than
>someone who tried a version of Linux 5 years ago.
Bzzzzt
I haven't used it myself since Aug97, which is 3 years.
However I've installed it since then for others. Something Linux users seem
to get asked to do now and again, as 99% of us <came> from a Windows
environment in the first place.
>Many things have changed in both operating systems.
Crap. Windows is still junk.
No multiuser, no remote Gui.
Please sell your snake oil elsewhere Steve ?
The last re install I did, was when my daughters bf tried to install Win98
over Win95 and it hosed the Win95 system and wouldnt install Win98.
Windows remains a pile of whitegoods junk.
>>>
>>>Not only that, there seems to be no official home for the packages
>>>themselves.
>>You need a clue badly, Wintroll.
>
>He's right. Corel's directory tree is not the same as SuSE's nor is
>RedHat's the same as Caldera's.
>They are close, but not identical. Even Corel despite being based on
>Debian, is a customized version on which not everything built for
>Debian will work. Most will, but some will not because Corel doesn't
>install everything Debian does.
This is a strawman Steve, and your argument is a joke accordingly.
Windows95, Windows98, and WindowsNT drivers are incompatible.
This from the ONE company.
The distos above are seperate commercial companies.
>>> same package you see on number of websites, some even work
>>>on suse, some on redhat, some on freshmeat, etc.. This only adds
>>>another dimension of complexity, to an allready too complex of a system
>>>for an end user.
>>>
>>What a imaginative mind you have.
>
>You're going downhill fast on this one Terry.
I don't think so, Wintroll.
> So tell me how I can
>install a package for debian on Redhat? Alien doesn't always work.
>Sure I can compile from source, but that assumes the kernel source is
>named correctly, is in the right place, all the libraries are there
>and are also in the right place, the paths are set up correctly and so
>forth.
>Caldera 2.2 didn't even include pcmcia support as default when
>installing on a laptop!
>Surprise!
>>90% (guessing) of all tarballs will install on ALL linux, Bsd and Unix boxes.
>
>But it always seems to be that 10 percent that will bite you.
No its not.
I've installed tarballs for Sun stuff here.
A few *library* path or name changes.
>
>>Linux is not too complex for me, perhaps you should stick with MsWindows,
>>as it seems to hold your mind in thrall ?
>
>You're a perfect reason why people get annoyed at Linux.
Please stop pretending to be God Steve, you have no clue what "people" think.
This is a crass generalisation.
Why dont you say it Steve....
"Terry is the excuse Steve uses to get "annoyed" at Linux"
>You didn't make one constructive comment in your entire ranting. Take
>a look at Jim Richardsons reply for why this poor soul has had so much
>trouble. He explains it quite well and unlike you, offers suggestions.
Then I suggest you re read it, seeing his reply appeals to you.
>
>
>TheCat
>
>(Steve)
>
>"Agent under Wine and powered by Mandrake 7.0"
This I doubt Steve, more like Agent under Windows, given your trollism
and inability to learn.
Always a pleasure "chatting" Steve :)
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 3 days 8 hours 35 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: MS caught breaking web sites
From: Sean LeBlanc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 02:25:44 GMT
Yes, but Unix world, you have the option to NOT run a GUI. Granted, Win9x can
do this, too, but I don't think Visual DOS, ahem, I mean, Win9x is up to the
task of a workstation, much less a robust server.
I think you have a valid point, but it's a matter of degrees. Servers should
be "tweaked" for serving, workstations "tweaked" for working as a station.
Both /could/ do the other's job, but it's a matter of using the right tool
for the job. Otherwise, I could argue that one programming language
(say assembler) can fit all tasks for all people.
>From a software point of view, BTW, there *are* differences...the various tasks
that are given priority comes to mind as an example.
Jianmang Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gary Connors wrote:
> >
> > in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], laugh at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on
> > 4/16/00 1:07 AM:
> >
> > > Robert,
> >
> > > And with Linux growing to 35% of all servers and 10% of desktops this year
> > > alone
> > > (half of those being NT replacements), there won't be much of an audience
> > > for any future releases of windows when and if they do make it out.
> >
> > If its a "NT replacement" is not on the desktop. In the real world, NT is
> > not a desktop OS.
> I'm always puzzled when people calling Desktop and server. From software
> point
> of view, what is the different. MS had difficulties to let Windows9x
> offering
> network services so it call it Desktop. In Unix world, if you got the
> right
> hardware nobody stop you offering network services from your "Desktop" -
> they
> are the same.
> --
> Jianmang Li
> Stachanov
> Phone: +31-72-5646664 +31-6-22977904
> Fax: +31-72-5627410
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: on installing software on linux. a worst broken system.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 24 Apr 2000 10:29:12 +0800
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 16:49:24 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter) writes:
>
>>Bullshit. 10 gigs costs $300 Australian dollars.
>
>Uhm --- in a word, no. A$300 will get you around 17-20G at the Melbourne
>swap meets. A$300 got you 13G many many months ago, when I bought two such
>disks.
>
>Bernie
>--
>Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible
>Lord Kelvin
>president, Royal Society
How about Perth, Bernie, thats where I live. Plus I mean a *good* HDD
not some junk, or second hand.
Its 5000 miles from Melbourne :(
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 3 days 9 hours 35 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: 23 Apr 2000 21:46:00 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Sea1Dragon2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>There is a certain "elite snobbery" that goes hand in hand with a
>>command-line environment, be it UNIX, or VMS, or even DOS.
>
>Correct. Most users of CLI's think that they are Really Smart(tm)
>because they know how to operate a CLI. What is funny is that conceptually
>deleting a file is the same thing whether you drag it to a trash can, type
>in rm, or whatever, but CLI users believe that typing in the commands is
>actually somehow closer to the computer (as if the GUI's are interacting
>with the CLI's and not directly with the system).
No, that's not really the point of the difference. With a CLI, especially
general purpose ones like unix shells, anything you do repeatedly
can be automated by putting exactly the same commands you would
use manually into a script, perhaps with variable substitution for
the variations of each run. with a GUI, if automation is possible
at all it has to be done in some macro language embedded into
each program with its own peculiar syntax. There is almost
never a way to do something by hand, then paste those commands
into a script for re-use.
>>IMHO, Linux was born out of a sheer dislike of Microsoft, unlike its BSD
>>cousins, who seemed to originate from a need for a BSD-like OS.
Both Linux and the *bsd's are updated clones of unix systems that
pre-date windows by at least a decade. Microsoft is pretty
much irrelevant.
>The very early development of Linux was decidedly for hobbyist purposes,
>but it is clear that the Linux _movement_ is primarily anti-Microsoft
>and has minimal technical basis.
You mean there are still people that aren't anti-Microsoft?
>The debate between Windows NT and Linux is more interesting
>as Windows NT solves most of those problems as well as Linux does.
It is possible to keep NT working under very controlled conditions,
but as an experiment, try installing and testing 3 random new
programs a day on both an NT and Linux box in active production.
My experience say the NT box will have to be rebooted in less
than a week and is fairly likely to end up needing production
programs reinstalled due to dll conflicts. The Linux box is
unlikely to have any problems.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Rumors ...
From: Osugi Sakae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 20:11:27 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Se�n �
Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<big snip>
>Yep, it's the fatal flaw of "negative advocacy". When you're
that
>concerned with slapping every possible negative label on
someone, it
>won't be long before you start making claims that make no
sense. Let's
>see now. Microsoft's prices are both predatory and monopolistic
>simultaneously. Microsoft enjoys an impenetrable monopoly, yet
is
>powerless against "Tux The Terminator". Microsoft's products
are only
>popular because OEMs can't afford not to provide them (that's my
>personal favorite).
>
Who said all of these things and regarding what were this things
said? It is possible that MS has monopolistic pricing on its
windows software and predatory pricing on its browsing software.
MS may indeed _today_ enjoy an impenetrable monopoly and yet
sometime _in the future_ be powerless against Tux. Windows
products (IE, for example) may in fact become popular because
for years OEMs are required by MS to ship said software on every
windows machine that they sell, regardless of whether consumers
want it or not. And because they are selling a lot of windows
machines, the OEMs cannot afford not to ship the other software
(IE in this example) - since the option is to go out of
business. Of course, when you turn the argument into a sound
bite, it sounds absurd.
These specific examples aside, I agree that sometimes people
make claims that are confusing to others because of unstated
assumptions or simply poor choice of language. It is certainly
not limited to anti-MS types or pro-linux types. Many winvocates
make claims like "linux sucks because it doesn't support USB".
This is certainly a valid point, but ignores the fact that
WindowsNT (AFAIK) for many years didn't support USB. The poster
was obviously comparing linux to Win98, but did not say so.
Other posters (or sometimes the same person) will claim that
their windows boxes can run as long as linux boxes. Possibly
true for WinNT, but even most die-hard winvocates wouldn't claim
that for Win98. Shall we dismiss what they say out of hand
because their assumptions aren't the same as our assumptions?
Point is that usually these errors are the result of
miscommunication. There is no reason, in the lack of evidence to
the contrary, to assume that such errors are intentional
attempts at misinformation or the result of plain stupidity. Of
course those happen too. MS has done it themselves once or
twice - as anyone who read their "Linux Myths" page and some of
the resulting critiques of it well know. But that is a different
topic.
--
Osugi Sakae
It seems that it is now a crime in Japan to provide, on your
homepage, links to sites that contain material that is, or could
be, illegal. This troubles me.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: 23 Apr 2000 22:17:09 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>The simpleminded way to make UID/GID's the same is to copy one password
>>>>and group file over to the other machines. NIS becomes better at
>>>>some number of machines.
>>>
>>>And how do you sync them once things start changing again?
>>
>>Rdist would be the typical way, but if they don't change often
>>you could just rcp/rsync when you add someone.
>
>Tell me about both, please.
Rdist is program that maintains identical copies of files/programs
over a set of destinations. It has a lot of options so you are
going to need the man page for that one. You basically build a
distfile that tells it which files to check for updates and where
to send new copies. It runs over rsh which may be a security
problem in some locations. If you have rsh permissions set up for
root among machines, you can simply 'rcp file othermachine:/path/to/file
for ad-hoc copying. Rsync does this as well, but can update
full directory trees with miminal copying and can be run over
ssh. It is included with some distributions, but worth
picking up from http://rsync.samba.org if you don't have it.
There are also ports to Win95/NT that work with some restrictions.
>>Can a beginner be expected to make this work without reading
>>anything?
>
>No, but I don't suggest that, do I? I suggest that Win9x's sharing
>setup is far easier than similar setups in Unix/Linux.
Linux is multi-user so it doesn't make much sense to compare
it to single-user concepts.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 03:26:48 GMT
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 20:21:13 -0400, someone claiming to be T. Max
Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Quoting Roger from alt.destroy.microsoft; Sun, 23 Apr 2000 14:54:36 GMT
>>On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 02:42:07 -0400, someone claiming to be T. Max
>>Devlin wrote:
>>You claim to have been forced to accept the terms of a EULA which you
>>as good as admit below do not exist (the terms, not the EULA.) [...]
>No, I didn't claim what you stated. Thank you for your time.
Hmmn. And conveniently clipped to hide the evidence. Here it is
again:
"I seem to recall one of those outrageously excessive clauses I was
forced to agree to saying something about 'you can only run this on
the os which we allow you to'"
And you now deny having posted this.
>Boring!
Yes, consistency can be. It does, however, help one who so frequently
appeals to his own authority to * not * be so blatantly wrong so
often.
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 03:28:35 GMT
On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 20:22:53 -0400, someone claiming to be T. Max
Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Quoting Roger from alt.destroy.microsoft; Sun, 23 Apr 2000 15:00:12 GMT
>>On Sun, 23 Apr 2000 02:31:59 -0400, someone claiming to be T. Max
>>Devlin wrote:
>>>Quoting Roger from alt.destroy.microsoft; Sat, 22 Apr 2000 23:20:40 GMT
>>>>On Sat, 22 Apr 2000 17:28:55 -0400, someone claiming to be T. Max
>>My assumption, being an optimist, is that if you had been willing to
>>answer the question you would have done so since you took the trouble
>>to respond.
>The only thing wrong with this response is that it is BORING!!!
Max has learned a new word which arguably * can * be applied to my
posts, being a matter of opinion and not fact.
>>Of course, your intention could simply have been engage in a personal
>>attack [...yada, yada, more boring things...]
So, you've abandoned all pretense of engaging in reasonable
discussion?
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
