Linux-Advocacy Digest #336, Volume #26 Tue, 2 May 00 09:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: which OS is best? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
NYC LOCAL: Tuesday 2 May 2000 LXNY General Meeting: Michael Smith will speak on Unix
and Free Software ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: X Windows must DIE!!! (Donn Miller)
Re: Are we equal? ("Edward L. Sandwicheater")
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Full Name)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (Roberto Alsina)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (Roberto Alsina)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (Roberto Alsina)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (Donal K. Fellows)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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: Tue, 02 May 2000 07:12:46 -0500
On 2 May 2000 01:04:23 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>You're kidding, right? Installing a new Linux kernel is a nightmare -
>>>>my 486/75 laptop is now next to useless until I figure out what went
>>>>wrong.
>
>You are talking about customizing the kernel, not installing an
>update from the distribution which is done handily with rpm.
Quite true.
>>>>First, do a make mrproper to clean up any old stuff (and reclaim
>>>>needed hard drive space).
>>>
>>> Or you could just do a make "clean". This is a rather standard
>>> option. <sarcasm>Notice the arcane terminology:clean</sarcasm>
>>
>>It is. Unless you specifically know what to type in, you'd never get
>>it, so I fail to see why you think that's funny. To a normal person
>>it all looks like geekspeak.
>
>The first time you do anything it is new and different.
Not just the first time...
>>There's nothing *hard* about it if you know waht to do; I'm just
>>telling what I did, so perhaps someone can tell me why it doesn't
>>work.
>
>It sounds like you managed to get a mismatch between the modules
>and the kernel. What happens if you try to 'insmod' the ones
>that aren't loading?
How could I do that? The kernel source is the same as what was
included in RH6.2 - nothing's been updated; I want to just change a
few kernel options.
>>> zImage,bzImage,zlilo,bzdisk & zdisk are all somewhat cryptic.
>>
>>It's -all- cryptic.
>
>'make install' does all this stuff.
All what stuff? That's not in the docs, it appears.
>>>>...and come back 8 hours or so later, when it all finishes.
>>>
>>> That's what you get for compiling on a 486.
>>
>>Yep. On the P2/450 it takes 5-10 minutes.
>
>You can build there and copy over.
Tried that. Got the same module errors, and that stopped me from
getting on the network, which put me in my current predicament (having
to compile on the 486 because I can't get on the net anymore). That
machine's running the exact same RH6.2.
>>>>Something's obviously wrong with that, though, because I now can't get
>>>>any of my modules to work. Since my PCMCIA controller is controlled
>>>>with a module, that laptop's dead in the water unless someone
>>>>(please!) can tell me what's wrong. It's done this time and time and
>>>
>>> I just used the Bughat 6.1 download version...
>>
>>So you've no idea what's wrong either, eh?
>
>Do you get error messages?
Sure; I listed them already; want me to e-mail you some logfiles? The
modules won't load, devfs won't load, /proc/pcmcia isn't found....
> Do you have anything in /etc/modules.conf
>for things the install process detected but you removed from
>the configuration you built?
Huh?
>Does your lilo load a ramdisk,
>and if so did you rebuild the image with your new modules (or
>stop using it if you don't need it to boot)?
LILO doesn't use a ramdisk. There is no initrd = statement; I load
bzImage directly; this is purely an IDE workstation.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: NYC LOCAL: Tuesday 2 May 2000 LXNY General Meeting: Michael Smith will speak
on Unix and Free Software
Date: 2 May 2000 08:32:32 -0400
LXNY will have a general meeting Tuesday 2 May 2000.
This meeting is free and open to the public.
The meeting runs from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm. After the meeting full and
precise instructions on how to get to our traditional place of refreshment
will be given in clear.
Thanks to support of the IBM Corporation, the meeting is at their building
at 590 Madison Avenue at East 57th Street on the Island of Manhattan.
Enter the building at the corner of Madison and 57th and ask at the desk
for the floor and room number.
Michael Smith of LXNY will give an introductory talk on the connections
between Unix and Free Software.
1. What is Free Software?
2. What is Project GNU?
3. What is UNIX(tm)?
4. What is *n*x?
5. Why is so much free software *n*x software?
6. What does the Digital Millennium Copyright Act have to do with all
this?
http://slashdot.org/interviews/00/05/01/1052216.shtml
http://www.gnu.org/gnu/initial-announcement.html
http://www.gnu.org
http://www.unix.com
http://www.linux.org
http://www.freebsd.org
http://www.netbsd.org
http://www.openbsd.org
http://www.inch.com/~william/DMCA98.pdf
Thanks to William Abernathy for the copy of the DMCA.
Upcoming Events:
Enterprise Java Beans: Overview and Mini Tutorial by Eric Gudgion
Thursday 18 May 2000
6:00pm - 8:00pm
Sun Microsystems
2 World Trade Center
25th Floor
NY, NY
http://www.javasig.com
http://www.mta.nyc.ny.us/nyct/maps/submap.htm
If you plan to attend please send an email stating your intent to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Include your full name and email address, else you may be forcibly slowed
in your approach to The Beans.
Check in with World Trade Center (WTC) Security on
the ground floor of 2 WTC (south tower, entrance on Liberty Street).
Jay Sulzberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Corresponding Secretary LXNY
LXNY is New York's Free Computing Organization.
http://www.lxny.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 08:39:15 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: X Windows must DIE!!!
bytes256 wrote:
>
> Am I the only one here who thinks that X Windows is crap?
> X Windows is extremely archaic, ridiculously bloated,
> way too slow, and extremely hard to install.
>
> Let's get rid of it completely.
Sounds like you just described Windows 98. I've been running XFree86
4.0 since the early snapshots of that release came out, and it seems
very fast and lightweight compared to Windows 98. The problem you're
having sounds like you aren't using graphics acceleration. Without
graphics acceleration, graphics will be very slow in XFree86.
I'm using XFree86 4.0, and I compiled it myself in order to get better
performance. For example, I initially tried
-march=pentium -Os -pipe
as the CFLAGS when building X. I installed it. Then, I rebuilt
XFree86 using the CFLAGS
-march=pentium -O3 -pipe
It seems like the "-O3" did make a good bit of difference in the speed
of X. Of course, I normally use -Os over -O3 when building most
stuff, including kernel, xemacs, teTeX, and world. But, I've found
that it helps to use -O3 for other stuff, like mpg123, mp3 encoders,
etc.
Also, XFree86 4.0 seems much more stable than XFree 3.3.*. 4.0 is a
big big improvement over 3.3.*. The downside is that XFree86 had to
drop support for some older video cards when they overhauled the
server architecture.
- Donn
------------------------------
From: "Edward L. Sandwicheater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,talk.politics
Subject: Re: Are we equal?
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 12:39:36 GMT
Craig Kelley wrote:
> Being a biological father does not give you those rights,
In most states in this country and in most other countries it does give
you those rights unless it can be proven that the biological parent is
unfit
that's why
> we have familiy courts and such. If Elian's father loved him so much,
> then why did he abandon him to his mother who felt that life was so
> bleak she risked it to go to the US?
>
He didn't abandon anyone. She left with him and risked his life. This
was pure selfishness on her part.
> There are more issues than the kidnapping angle, despite what Janet
> Reno claims.
>
No, holding the child illegally as the Miami crowd was doing was the
only issue.
> > As for the police, that is a different subject all together.
>
> And I agree 100% with your other post about them. Why are you
> waffling on this issue?
>
> > The whole argument about "too much force" is kind of funny. The U.S.
> > negotiated a good long time with the family to turn over the boy to his
> > father. When it was clear that they were not going to do it,
It was never clear they were going to do it. Why do you have to create
your own 'facts'?
The family stated publicly on more then one occasion that they would
never turn the child over. That the government would have to come and
get him. They did, they should have done it sooner.
>> they had to
> > act. They had ample chance to avoid this whole thing by just giving the
> > boy back to his father.
> >
> > Once the decision to "act" occurs, however, what do you do?
> >
> > (1) Do you send in unarmed police that may be injured by armed
> > civilians?
> > (2) Do you send in only one or two armed police, that may cause a
> > firefight?
> > (3) Do you go in with a very intimidating force, designed to scare the
> > hell out of anyone that would think of causing trouble, get in, get out
> > and move on?
> >
> > Obviously you go for option (3) anyone that says otherwise is either
> > lying or lacks a fundamental grasp of the realities of life.
>
> (4) Let the judical system handle it as if Elian were a citizen, and
> don't send the INS in with fully automatic weapons.
>
> Unless they had knowledge that Elian was being abused or was in
> danger, they should have kept the peace. The raid is a huge
> emarassment to the US.
>
We ALL had knowledge that he was being abused. Didn't you watch
television while he was being held by the Miami family? The dog and pony
show they put on for the press was severe abuse. The only embarrassment
to the US is that it didn't happen sooner and that the right wing
extremist faction of Congress is using this case as a political
opportunity to wave their flags and shake their dicks at Castro. Typical
sub-human primate reaction from the far right.
> --
> The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
> Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Full Name)
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 12:40:43 GMT
On Tue, 2 May 2000 10:28:41 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff
Lane) wrote:
>
>The ideal personal computer system has yet to appear. All we know at the
>moment is the current systems suck. The only way to discover the best is
>try the rest.
By "we" I assume you mean Lunix advocates who refuse to learn how to
set up and maintain a reliable Win95/98 system.
At my last job all of the clients ran Win95/98 (with the exception of
two NT boxes). There were more than 70 client PC's.
Each day we processed students, marked exams, organised lectures and
performed important research. Each year PhD students completed their
theses and honours students met their deadlines. All on Win95/98
clients.
Our user down time across the 70 machines was negligible. When
clients did fail it was simply a matter of hot swapping with a fresh
PC and the user was back on line within minutes. This was made
possible by the tight integration of NT with Win95/98 clients via the
use of network drives, logon scripts and roaming profiles. Most times
when I exchanged a PC the user did not even realise I had given them a
different machine. Their drives reconnected automatically, their
desktop was restored and their files were immediately available from
the NT file server. Packages such as Office97 and Outlook were
automatically configured to suit the user through their roaming
profile. Even their IE5 favourites were sitting there waiting for
them.
The clients rarely locked up or crashed. When they did it was
invariable due to inadequate memory or disk space, poor quality
hardware or rabid users who insisted on down loading and installing
every half-baked software package they could find on the net. This is
one of the down sides of using an exceedingly popular OS for which
novice programmers can very easily produce attractive utilities.
We also had a total of eight NT servers across two domains.
During the eighteen months I worked in the department (as the sole
network administrator) we had four server crashes. Over a six-month
period our e-mail and WWW server BSOD'd twice. This was due to a bad
SCSI hard disk. After disconcerting this disk the machine has
operated without a single second of down time for well over six
months.
A remote NT server stopped on two other occasions. The first was due
to a faulty UPS which simply stopped supplying power to the system.
The other was a main board failure. Exchanging the main board fixed
the problem.
Outside of those instances I described above we never had another
second of unplanned down time.
Our four main NT servers performed the following functions:
WWW & E-mail Server
Modem Bank Server (8 modems)
Exchange Server
File, Print, DHCP and Backup Server
The other four servers performed simple file, print and DHCP serving
at remote sites.
Over the eighteen months I worked in the department we would have
experienced a total of at most 6 hours unplanned down time across the
8 servers (all due to hardware faults). Most of this down time was in
travelling to the remote site.
In the six months since I have left and the new administrator has
taken over they have experienced zero unplanned down time across all
eight servers.
If you think such a system sucks then you are simply clueless.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: KDE is better than Gnome
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 12:36:19 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> On Mon, 01 May 2000 18:24:20 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> >> On Mon, 1 May 2000 14:24:03 +0200, Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >> >It was the Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:14:56 GMT...
> >> >...and Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> > ...just another reason to await (or even help) GNOME become
> >> >> > more stable...
> >> >>
> >> >> You know, if I believed you would actually go and code for
GNOME,
> >> >> I would respect you much more. But so far, you seem to me a
poser,
> >> >> and nothing else. Just blah blah blah from you.
> >> >
> >> >I wish Jedi would just shut up. People like him are making the
GNOME
> >> >community look like a rabid bunch of babbling KDE-haters.
> >>
> >> If you think I'm part of some mythical 'gnome community', you
> >> haven't been paying attention these years.
> >
> >Looks like the GNOME community (whoever they are) got lucky.
>
> No, the world is a little bit more complicated than some
> people would like to think. One does not need to be a
> GNOME user to find KDE objectionable.
You missed the point. It was more like: you are not part of the GNOME
community, that is good luck for the GNOME community!.
> [deletia]
> >Well, looks like you ARE typical, after all, at least on the ignorant
> >community.
>
> Just in what way does the fact that KDE and GNOME are INFACT
> two completely isolated standards as they exist for end users
> (NOW) NOT suck?
Well, if you say this is a fact, you will have to be a bit more
specific.
Is interoperable DnD all that's needed to make them INFACT not two
completely isolated standards? If yes, well, that was easier than I
expected! And I have good news: since next version, they are! Happy?
> This is precisely the sort of fragmentation that
> people who love to trash Unix thrive on.
Well, lately, I came to believe that fragmentation is nothing compared
to advocacy like yours.
> The excuse for the modifications not having been done already are
> similarly lame. This is something that should have been a priority.
Well, since you are just standing in the sideline, I have more news
for you: development is not a spectator sport. You want it done
faster than we want it done? You do it, or you pay us. Else, you ask.
And if you are not going to ask nicely, don't bother.
> >> I was quite foolish for ever taking that for granted.
> >
> >Well, I will not disagree about you being a fool, but let me say it
> >one more time: The DND protocol is agreed. After it is agreed, it
> >needs to be implemented on both sides. By chance it happens that
there
> >has not been any new KDE versions since the agreement.
>
> It's been quite a while since that agreement.
So? It has been quite a while since KDE released a version that
contained more than bugfixes.
> >> You mean you wanted to interact with OTHER libraries: Sorry,
you'll
> >> have to pay an extra $1000 and get the next version...
> >
> >What the heck is that supposed to mean? Are you somehow implying,
> >in your obvious ignorance, that you need to pay someone $1000 to
> >make KDE's DND interact with GNOME's? Did you understand nothing
> >you read in this thread?
>
> Depending on the licencing structure of QT, you just might.
> That's the catch with a 'marketed as free' desktop having a
> $1000 commercial library at it's core.
Well, no. You are simply showing your cluelessness. As KDE grafted
the modified Offix DnD to Qt 1.4, you can graft any other DnD to Qt
2.x. And paying $1000 will not get you any new DnD protocols, really.
> >> In retrospect it's actually kind of funny that a $1000 per seat
> >> commercial library didn't have as much legacy support as was
> >> practical. Supporting unadulterated offix or Motif DnD wouldn't
> >> have been too impractical. (someone else managed it)
> >
> >Yawn. Look at Qt 2.1. Look at DnD protocols supported. Look at how
much
> >I paid to use it )ok, you can't look , $0.00.-).>
> >You seem to be losing that tenuous grasp of reality, Jedi... time
> >to pack your light saber and go home, methinks.
>
> Just because you're not footing the bill, it doesn't mean that
> no one else will be. It's still commercial software after all.
Well, emacs is commercial software, too. Just ask the FSF for the full
tape set, and its price.
> As far as reading the Qt documentation goes: that suggestion
> would be equally as valid for you as it would me. <snicker>
Well, there is a small difference. I have read it. I have coded a few
dozens of thousands of lines of code based on that. If you are
implying that I ignore something, be specific. I have no problem
admitting lack of knowledge when it's warranted.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: KDE is better than Gnome
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 12:41:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> On 1 May 2000 22:32:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) writes:
> >>
> >> Tough fucking shit.
> >>
> >> I'm not some German who thinks its OK for the state to treat
> >> it's citizens like children (even if they are).
> >
> >I didn't think this flamewar could deteriorate any further. It seems
it can.
> >Which enlightened corner of the world are you from then?
>
> I'm a federalist if that gives you any clue...
I got it! You are argentinian! To be more precise, you are
from the party that in the early 19th century supported Juan Manuel de
Rosas "The restorer of the law", wore a rojo punz� color, and whose
motto was "death to the savage unitarians", right?
I thought federalism as a political party had become extinct around
1865, although Argentina is still officially a federal republic.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: KDE is better than Gnome
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 12:49:33 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Neil McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm a federalist if that gives you any clue...
>
> That gives no clue whatsoever. The fact that you hold to a certain
> political ideology does not determine you're nationality. I am in
> Scotland where many people think a federal system would be good. If
you
> don't want to answer the question then don't.
Well, the concept that saying things like "I'm federalist (or
republican, or democrat, or whatever)" is enough, seems to me
tipical of a not too educated USA native[1].
Did I guess right, Jedi?
[1] Well educated USA natives would not say it that way in a
international forum, that's all.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: KDE is better than Gnome
Date: 2 May 2000 12:48:57 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) writes:
> The interface didn't have to change. KDE and GNOME are both to a
> certain degree 'wrapper' libraries. There's no need for either of
> them to be hung up on implementation details of underlying
> interfaces when presenting it's own interface. Even if Xdnd is in
> some way rather bizarre in comparison to Motif DnD or Offix DnD
> there should be some 'simple' mode of interopability that could be
> achieved with minimum impact. Motif dnd, for example, has several
> types of interaction and clients can choose to implement a only
> subset.
Xdnd does a *lot* more than Offix DnD, and is considerably less
blecherous and more robust than Motif DnD (though it does fractionally
less without an extra protocol layer on top.) It is possible to
support both Xdnd and the Offix protocol simultaneously[*], and if you
only take advantage of a subset of the functionality available, you
can use the same application code for all three basic protocols (by
abstracting the differences within the library.)
A few links on this matter can be found at:
http://purl.org/thecliff/tcl/wiki/DragAndDrop
Donal.
[* Motif and Xdnd can probably be shoehorned together, but it is not
easy to do at all. The state of the documentation on Motif doesn't
help either. ]
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[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
******************************
