Linux-Advocacy Digest #266, Volume #26 Wed, 26 Apr 00 14:13:43 EDT
Contents:
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
(s_Ea_DAag0n)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Leslie
Mikesell)
Re: What GUI development tools are there for Linux? (abraxas)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Jim
Richardson)
Re: which OS is best? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Factory pre-installed Linux. ("Rich C")
Re: Factory pre-installed Linux. ("Rich C")
Re: Programming Languages ("Alaric Fox")
Re: i cant blieve you people!! (Marty)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Leslie
Mikesell)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Leslie
Mikesell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (s_Ea_DAag0n)
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 04:20:48 GMT
On 25 Apr 2000 10:20:40 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You did something very wrong if that's all it was doing. I've had
>a 486 with 8 Megs RAM do DNS for a remote office of 50 or so for a
>year without any trouble. The machine was upgraded to 32M when
>it also became the internet email relay but it still never
>crashes. That one is FreeBSD, but in the local (larger) office I
>run Linux with the same results.
The machine in question was actually a 486 (4-way!) with 16 MB of RAM,
also running FreeBSD.
As far as doing "something very wrong", all I did was edit my DNS
configuration files, and start named. I thought the explanation of
named memory leak was reasonable, but now you are blaming me? Exactly
what do you believe I could have done to cause this? Look, I don't
have time to continously monitor bug reports - I thought since it was
Unix I could just let it be and forget about it (that's what I always
read on COLA).
>If you want something else to run in the same process space, try
>'exec command'. It's a one shot deal because your shell is
>then gone, but if you can fix the problem with that one
>command (killing the offending process) you will then be able
>to log back in normally. If you want to reserve 2 chances
>(for the ps to get the pid, plus the kill) keep another login
>running on a different VT.
I did try exec, and that was my final word to the system. I ran out
of memory trying to get the second session.
>But, I find this rant amusing after the hundreds of times I've
>had NT pop a Dr. Watson or system error dialog and die instantly
>when I clicked 'OK' or 'cancel' to get rid of it.
A dialog box is a bit more gentle than the system locking up.
>>Trust me - I wish I wasn't. But it is hard to avoid, and the Grand
>>Linuxification continues reaching influence in to literally every corner
>>of the industry.
>
>Odd how it works for every else, isn't it?
I've still never seen a Linux box with a uptime of more than 60 days.
I've heard reports on the net, but I've never seen one (and I have
seen __lot__, literally hundreds of production Linux machines at
several different companies and institutions). I am not conviced that
it works for everbody else.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: 25 Apr 2000 23:25:54 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>A serial console is not remote capability.
>>
>>What??? You mean all those years I used unix with modems
>>on serial ports I wan't really remote?
>
>Are you really new to computers or something? Modems on Unix machines
>are typically connected through terminal servers, not to the computer
>itself.
Say, aren't you the guy who was trying to tell me that not all
unix machines had TCP? Hmmm, odd that they would depend on
terminal servers then, eh? Odd that they would have programs
called getty for logging in directly on a serial port, and
communications programs like cu and uucp, too, if they don't
use serial lines directly. (And yes, I have used unix without
tcp, with modems, spread over several states years ago.)
>A serial console refers to a serial port which the console lives
>on (by means of a terminal). Typically it has special priviliges. For
>example, sometimes root is only allowed to log on through the console. It
>has nothing to do with connecting to a machine over a serial port.
What? If it has a special serial port (and they are only special in
that the bootup sequence may be directed there - the rest is run
time configuration) then why wouldn't you connect to it there?
>>Would you be able to do all necessary administration through
>>this interface?
>
>The original poster's point was that they are useful in cases where TCP/IP
>is down. You can certainly restart TCP/IP through this and continue over
>Termial Server (or whatever technology). I doubt most Unix admins would
>want to do admin over a serial line, and would prefer an xterm as soon
>as it was available.
Direct modem lines work just fine on unix boxes. The only real problem
is that you have to run screen or something similar if you want
multiple windows - or do everything inside of emacs.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: What GUI development tools are there for Linux?
Date: 26 Apr 2000 04:31:45 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Good. Its so entirely unlike windows that youd probably not have a very
>>good time trying to understand it anyway.
> Really? On what do you base that piece of logic?
On the blatantly obvious mindset of a linux user who refuses to use
a search engine.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 04:33:59 GMT
On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 08:42:14 GMT,
s_Ea_DAag0n, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 08:18:14 GMT, Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Well, your first posts, I respected. I didn't agree with a lot of what you
>>said, but I did respect your opinion. Over the next few rounds, you slipped a
>>little each time making some odd claims.. but now; conspiracies against you and
>>your views?!? Come on... get real. You just lost _all_ credibility IMO.
>
>I am sorry that you do not believe me, but I can definitely assure
>you that I _have_ been cancel-botted for all of Usenet from posting to
>this newsgroup in the past. If I didn't change my address regularly,
>you wouldn't hear from me again, not because I gave up, but because I
>have been silenced. I am not claiming that it is a conspiracy against me,
>but clearly there are some LNUX shareholders who do not want one single
>bad word to get out lest they lose millions of dollars.
more likely you've either pissed some individual off enough to cancel bot
you, or you have something misconfigured in the loop somewhere (the you there
is not directed at you neccessarily, but someone in the loop) or general
network problems eat your posts.
All these sound a lot more likely than masked penguinistas hunting your
posts down and terminating with extreme-prejudice.
>
>>What's that sound? Oh no! The black helicopters are outside... they're after
>>you, look out!
>
>Whatever.
>
>>So the fact that it's less robust, not as useful and not as capable isn't
>>enough for you?
>
>So now it has gone from being an extra product to being less robust and
>not as useful? How is it less robust? For starters, when the power goes
>out in my Windows client, all of the programs are still running on the
>server, and I simply need to re-connect. When using X, and the Linux
>client crashes, I lose all of the programs I was working on, and they
>go into thin air, and it is impossible to reconnect to them. Sure sounds
>to me like Terminal Server is more robust - certainly more fault
>tolerant. Less useful? Huh? Please explain.
Can I get a Terminal server client for my palm pilot?
(not kidding, vnc is available although I haven't tried it, and
telnet is. But there are so many things you can't do with telnet under
NT, and NT doesn't have a serial console anyway.)
>>That's all that matters to 99.9% of the people in the world. The most
>>technically advanced technology (which WTS isn't) doesn't always win anyway...
>>just look at MS' market share.
>
>Please provide __ONE__ __TECHNICAL__ reason why Terminal Server is less
>advanced than X.
Fewer clients available, (no client for StrongARM for one)
I'd say that made it less usefull
Can I send (from client A) the output of a program, to client B, whilst
connected to server using WTS? I can with X, easy as program -display for
most, or edit the DISPLAY variable for those programs that don't have a
command line switch for it.
>
>>I didn't say that NT didn't have "remote capabilities" but it's remote
>>capabilities are severly limited compared to Unix. If an NT server is having
>>problems, and the GUI isn't responding (or WTS isn't running, or the TCP/IP
>>stack is dead) you can't admin it... period. Whereas with a decent Sun box, or
>>a properly configured PC with a serial console I can. There's a technical
>>advantage for unix boxes: Serial console as a way to connect and admin/fix the
>>box if there's a problem.
>
>A serial console is not remote capability. In any case there are tools
>available which allow you to connect a serial console to a Windows
>machine, to run a DOS session.
What do you mean it's not a remote capability? I have had one hooked to a
leased line modem over a mountain pass, some 5 miles away! Is that remote
enough for you?
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 23:32:43 -0500
On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 03:27:37 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Subpop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> in article 8e5h9i$qv5$[EMAIL PROTECTED], Leslie Mikesell at
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> wrote on 4/25/00 7:37 PM:
>> I wouldn't go as far as to say CLIs are useless, but there sure is a
>lot
>> more than can be done on modern GUIs if they are laid out right.. (of
>> course, this leaves Windows out of the picture)..
>
>*NIX shells are (and always have been) much more than "just" a Command
>Line Interpreter. They're a robust scripting language. We recently had
>a domain name change where I work, and the MS-Exchange admins spent more
>than fifty man-hours pointing-and-clicking to update our users' e-mail
>addresses. I wrote a few quick lines of shell script, and did the same
>thing to all my UNIX boxes in five minutes that it took the MSFT GUI
>folks all day to implement.
That's a function of how Exchange works, not necessarily a flaw in the
operating system. If there was demand for it, a CLI-driven mail
server could easily be made for NT.
------------------------------
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Factory pre-installed Linux.
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 00:48:11 -0400
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> OK, lets say we can get some OEM's to do a good job at factory
> pre-installation. The box arrives at the door, excited, happy user
> connects the color coded wires, and violla! It boots. What should that
> user see?
>
> What kind of startup screen? Presumably an initial startup program that
> creates a new user name and password? Music?
No music. Not if it's Midi. I hate that stuff. I always turn it off and I
hate when people send me those on-line "cards" with midi files playing.
First thing: You should be given a "stock" root password (like one of those
free ISP signup disks). Once you log in, you should be FORCED to change it.
Next, a real user account should be set up. The screen should explain why
you need one, and not to log in as root unless you need to.
Next, something like the "Add dialup connection" in windows where you plug
in your ISP's phone number, your user name and password. Alternatively, if
the system "comes" with internet access, this can be pre-configured.
Next, a utility to BACK ALL THIS UP on disk, so it can be restored if the
system needs to be reinstalled. The back-up CD should put the system to
EXACTLY the same state as when the user first turns it on, with the
exception that this back up disk is requested, and the settings can be
restored, including the user's account and password settings. (Obviously, if
the user changes any of this info, the backup disk should be recreated.
Perhaps a prompt to do this when any utility is invoked to change the
password file, network settings, or the like. This can all be done with
scripts invoked from the menus. Knowledgable users can simply invoke the
passwd command if they wish and bypass the handholding.)
>
> Here is a list of "pre-configured" apps that must be setup and ready to
> function:
>
> Applix or StarOffice (Depending on the kind of deal you can get)
> Netscape, of course. With Shockwave and RealAudio
don't forget ICQ and AOL IM clients!
> KDE and/or Gnome (I prefer KDE)
> AcrobatReader
> Java
> Modem setup and configured.
> PPP dialup ready to go with modem and dhcp.
> Sound card setup and configured.
> Video setup and configured.
> Optional network, setup and configured.
If the Linux machine has a modem AND a network connection, you should assume
that the machine will be some kind of home network proxy server, and
additional utilities should help the user SECURELY set up services like
squid, socks proxy, qmail or smail server, etc. (I could use such a utility;
that is why I'm not using Linux to post this :o))
>
> All the mime-types have to be configured.
> All the file types have to have icons.
> The user must be able to "click" on a file and start the correct
> application.
> It all should have the commercial quality fit and finish of a fully
> configured system.
>
> Are the KDE or GNOME program menus sufficient, or should the OEM
> rearrange them to a more logical order? The default menus I see are
> biased toward the Window manager, not necessarily ordered as an end user
> would like.
See above re: friendly utilities for saving system settings. The menus
should have EASY access to routine maintenance items like backing up,
changing passwords, creating settings backup disks, etc. I agree with your
statement about the default menus. Mine are arranged into categories that
make sense:
Accessories (kedit, calculator, address book, file viewer)
Games (contents obvious if a little sparse :o( )
Graphics (paint program, scanning software if installed)
Help (HTML-based help links, local and on-line)
Internet (kppp, Netscape, ICQ and IM clients, mail and newsreader)
Multimedia (CD player, graphics file viewers, video viewer, MP-3 player,
mixer and sound editing software)
Office Apps (Word processor, spreadsheet, etc)
Setup Tools (RPM/DEB package manager, Linuxconf, password change utility,
settings backup utility)
System Tools (Process Manager, kdiskfree, xterm, a tool for changing video
depth and resolution, fsck front end, runlevel editor??)
As far as xterm windows goes, I think there should be a special "root
window" menu item, button, etc, to encourage users to "su root" in an xterm
just to do what they need to, rather than logging on as root and then going
on line, browsing, downloading dangerous java applets, and jeopardizing
their system. What would be REALLY cool is if the ppp app would give the
user a warning message if they tried to go online while logged in as root.
>
> What are the best multimedia programs?
>
> Would anyone care if we mixed and matched Gnome and KDE applications?
It would be OK, if there is enough disk space (is it true that the full
install of some distros is around 11 GIG???) The best app for the job,
regardless of affiliation, I say.
>
> Any suggestions?
Heh, you asked! :o)
-- Rich C.
"Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people."
>
>
> --
> Mohawk Software
> Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
> Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
> "We've got a blind date with destiny, and it looks like she ordered the
> lobster"
------------------------------
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Factory pre-installed Linux.
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 01:01:19 -0400
"David Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8e4pfi$p2o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Joe Kiser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : > What kind of startup screen? Presumably an initial startup program
that
> : > creates a new user name and password? Music?
> : On normal booting, the user should *not* see the the console, or the
> : Kernel's output. Instead, they should instantly see a graphic screen on
> : bootup, like MacOS. Maybe even little pictures telling you when a
> : certain device driver has been loaded.
>
> Why? The kernel messages are very useful if something goes kaput. If
> you're looking at your pretty picture of a penguin (or whatever logo you
> would have a booting system display), something goes wrong, and it just
> freezes, you're no better off then you are with Windows.
I agree, I like the fact that RH6.x has the color coded messages on bootup
that tell you whether a driver or daemon loaded correctly or failed to load.
You can quickly see if your boot is going normally or if you have a problem,
because the messages go by way too fast to read (on my PII 450 anyway.)
[snip other stuff I agree with]
-- Rich C.
"Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people."
------------------------------
From: "Alaric Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Programming Languages
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 04:51:48 GMT
David E. Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> A shell is an interpeter and an interpeter is a shell. But
> ulitmately they are no different than compilers.
>
Well, compilers, shells, and interpreters do have one thing in common --
they are programs that run under an operating system. However, compiled
programs and interpreted programs (e.g., scripts) are *NOT* the same. A
compiled program needs only the OS to run[1]. An interpreted program does
*not* actually run -- rather, the interpreter runs under the OS. Thus, one
can run a compiled executable directly, but one needs to run the
interpreter to run a script. Also, a compiler only runs once for a given
executable -- after that, the compiled program is in machine language and
can run immediately. An interpreter interprets a script every time that
you run the script. That is, the compiler overhead is a one time cost, and
the script overhead is a per-use cost. For short scripts / programs (e.g.,
"Hello World"), this overhead may be trivial, but for longer / more complex
operations (e.g., real-time telecommunications), this is nontrivial.
Here is a short reason why compiled programs are superior to interpreted
ones: the Operating System cannot be an interpreted program (otherwise the
interpreter could be called the OS). Thus, compiled programs are necessary
for a system -- interpreted programs are not.
--Alaric
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: i cant blieve you people!!
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 05:11:17 GMT
Bob Germer wrote:
>
> On 04/26/2000 at 02:06 AM,
> Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > IBM stock dropped over 20 points at the announcement that 4Q99 profits
> > were disappointing due to Y2K issues. The market is very volatile and
> > dependent on news. MS stock is not at all unique in this way.
> > Everybody attempts to be at the leading edge of the "curve" when a stock
> > price movement is occurring to maximize profits. That's the way the
> > market works.
>
> Bullshit. MS is selling 45% below its high in the last 6 months. It was at
> 119 and change in December or January. It closed around 67 today or up
> less than 2% in a market up nearly 8%.
>
> IBM on the other hand closed up nearly 4% today after being up 3%
> yesterday when MS lost 16 points.
How does that counter anything I've said above?
> What is hurting MS right now is the number of margin calls and people's
> positions being liquidated because they can't cover them. In my opinion
> they are getting exactly what they deserve for supporting a corrupt
> organization.
>
> Greed is its own reward.
Each new article of bad news that comes out is triggering another drop in MS
stock prices, which is my point. News items are the main cause of
volatility. It's not "lemmingism" which leads to the stock price volatility,
but the desire to be ahead of the curve, no matter which direction it is
moving.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: 26 Apr 2000 00:26:05 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>You did something very wrong if that's all it was doing. I've had
>>a 486 with 8 Megs RAM do DNS for a remote office of 50 or so for a
>>year without any trouble. The machine was upgraded to 32M when
>>it also became the internet email relay but it still never
>>crashes. That one is FreeBSD, but in the local (larger) office I
>>run Linux with the same results.
>
>The machine in question was actually a 486 (4-way!) with 16 MB of RAM,
>also running FreeBSD.
>
>As far as doing "something very wrong", all I did was edit my DNS
>configuration files, and start named. I thought the explanation of
>named memory leak was reasonable, but now you are blaming me? Exactly
>what do you believe I could have done to cause this?
Running some or several other apps that also leak memory perhaps?
A squid proxy might do it.
>Look, I don't
>have time to continously monitor bug reports - I thought since it was
>Unix I could just let it be and forget about it (that's what I always
>read on COLA).
The you should just install the updates on a regular basis. I have
never read anything advising against installing the bug fixes
recommended and made available by the distributors. You don't
need to know what is being fixed or why, but you need to install
them, just like we have to install the service packs from
Microsoft or bad things will (continue to) happen.
>>If you want something else to run in the same process space, try
>>'exec command'. It's a one shot deal because your shell is
>>then gone, but if you can fix the problem with that one
>>command (killing the offending process) you will then be able
>>to log back in normally. If you want to reserve 2 chances
>>(for the ps to get the pid, plus the kill) keep another login
>>running on a different VT.
>
>I did try exec, and that was my final word to the system. I ran out
>of memory trying to get the second session.
You can't exec another session, but if you had the process id
of the process using all your memory you probably could
have managed the 'exec kill -9 xxx'.
>>But, I find this rant amusing after the hundreds of times I've
>>had NT pop a Dr. Watson or system error dialog and die instantly
>>when I clicked 'OK' or 'cancel' to get rid of it.
>
>A dialog box is a bit more gentle than the system locking up.
Read the rest. As soon as I would click either OK or cancel
(the only choices) so I could attempt to restart the program
the box would lock up instantly (about 90% of the time - sometimes
it would come back). Very annoying when you are only connected
by VNC.
>>>Trust me - I wish I wasn't. But it is hard to avoid, and the Grand
>>>Linuxification continues reaching influence in to literally every corner
>>>of the industry.
>>
>>Odd how it works for every else, isn't it?
>
>I've still never seen a Linux box with a uptime of more than 60 days.
>I've heard reports on the net, but I've never seen one (and I have
>seen __lot__, literally hundreds of production Linux machines at
>several different companies and institutions). I am not conviced that
>it works for everbody else.
I suppose you won't believe mine... I've moved several around
recently so they aren't all that spectacular, but:
(1) a dns primary, and email relay loaded with Redhat 5.2 with
a 2.2.12 kernel update (not busy at night)
11:45pm up 117 days, 5:35, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
(2) a production web server running VALinux (modified RedHat 6) with
a patched 2.2.12 SMP kernel (dual PIII 600's).
11:50pm up 160 days, 4:01, 3 users, load average: 0.11, 0.18, 0.22
(3) a development machine similar to above but with P450s' and
it wasn't on a UPS last time the power went out.
11:56pm up 82 days, 7:22, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
There are several others sitting at 35-39 days uptime for an
assortment of reasons, none of which involve software crashes.
The web servers are fairly busy doing millions of hits a day, mostly
CGI scripts, driving a pair of T1s to peak at about 160K/sec each
for a good part of the day. Internally we have samba and email
servers that have had about 2 problems causing 15 minute outages
in a span of 2 years, none recently.
Oh, and here's one I set up years ago for a remote office that was
sold off to another company and is still delivering their mail
even though no one there touches it. (I still have access because
a few of our people are still connected there). This one is a
bad example because it is RedHat 4.2 and still has security problems
that would let people break in if it weren't firewalled from
the internet - a 2.0.32 kernel:
1:08am up 98 days, 14:46, 2 users, load average: 0.16, 0.46, 0.25
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: 26 Apr 2000 00:39:59 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
s_Ea_DAag0n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There are various other limitations; for example, on X you have to have
>the fonts installed client-side (which is a _major_ inconvenience when
>you run something like Mentor Graphics which has its own suite of
>fonts).
X is perfectly happy with remote font servers.
>>Regarding losing your apps on a remote box... never heard of nohup eh?
>
>Sure, but it doesn't work with X. The X protocol is not capable of
>reconnecting to a different server. I know a thing or two about this.
>In a past life, I was on a team developing an X app, where all of the
>customers had two different monitors. Since each monitor was a different
>display, there was no way to move the window from monitor to monitor.
>The only solution was to write a "switch display" button on each dialog
>box which would re-construct the window on a separate display, and then
>destroy the current one. X doesn't support redrawing an existing windows
>on a new display, and AKAIF no available X apps will do this.
You just need a proxy in the middle, like VNC if you want to hold
sessions or remap an existing one to a different color depth.
>You couldn't do it on a PC running Linux though, as it has basically no
>support for a serial console. This is a hardware issue not a software one.
>You __could__ do it on a Alpha running Windows.
I thought it was possible to install Linux on a headless PC with
only a serial terminal. I've never tried it, although I often
disconnect the monitor and keyboard afterwards.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
