Linux-Advocacy Digest #630, Volume #26 Sun, 21 May 00 19:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Time to prove it's not just words (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Re: Lies, damn lies and statistics (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Ray)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (Paul Voller)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Mig Mig)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (JEDIDIAH)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (JEDIDIAH)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Bob Hauck)
Re: The Path Dependence (Grant Fischer)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Lies, damn lies and statistics (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (David Steuber)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (David Steuber)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Time to prove it's not just words
Date: 21 May 2000 15:13:46 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Full Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>3. Set the creation umask of all the users so that all files they
>create have rw group permissions.
>
>Problems like these highlight how antiquated Unix permissions are.
>When you combine this with Samba even more problems arise.
Why say that when you just demonstrated how the simple unix
permissions can solve the problem?
>The irony is that many of the advocates in this group do not know
>enough to understand this (if their posts are anything to go by).
And perhaps they also don't understand the directory permissions
control the ability to create and delete files, so a only slightly
more complex scheme allows letting the httpd server create and
delete files in all directories without letting the users
do it outside their own directory. There is also a simple
alternative - since PHP is available in source, modify it to
keep its work files in a parallel tree instead of mucking
around in the real directories anyway. It is generally considered
to be a bad idea to let the web server have write access to
the document tree so I am very surprised that this would be
a requirement for php.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: 21 May 2000 20:27:34 GMT
>Total investment over 5 years:
>
>$89.00 Windows 98
>Nothing for Windows 98SE (online update)
>$149 Win 2000
Interesting.
Win98 Second Edition (OEM copy, no support): 100USD.
Linux Book with CD: about 28USD
Three orders from CheapBytes: about 35USD
Boxed set: 30USD
Copy of WordPerfect: 20USD.
Let's see what I've gotten there for a little more than Win98. I've gotten
convinent CDs to update with four times, a vague promise of support for
problems I don't have, and plenty of *useful* packages. Win98 gave me, let's
see here, monumental crashes because it doesn't install needed drivers, and
WordPad.
>> And who in their right mind needs such stuff?
>>
>> Geek crap.
If MS "invented" source distribution, and called it something like
"ActiveCustomXDirectConfigure", would it be better?
Even if you never look at the source code itself, the compiler allows you to
build to your hardware and tastes.
--
Marada Coeurfuege Shra'drakaii
Colony name not needed in address.
DC2.Dw Gm L280c W+ T90k Sks,wl Cma-,wbk Bsu#/fl A+++ Fr++ Nu M/ O H++ $+ Fo++
R++ Ac+ J-- S-- U? I++ V+ Q++[thoughtspeech] Tc++
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Lies, damn lies and statistics
Date: 20 May 2000 07:59:51 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>UXVpdGUgaW50ZXJlc3RpbmcuIEhvd2V2ZXIgZG9lc24ndCB0ZWxsIChpdCdzIGhhcmQgaW4N
>CnN0YXRpc3RjcywgSSBrbm93KSBob3cgZWFzaWx5IHRoZSB2dWxuZXJhYmlsaXR5IGNhbiBi
>ZQ0KZXhwbG9pdGVkLiBJZiBwaHlzaWNhbCBwcmVzZW5jZSBpcyByZXF1aXJlZCwgYSBnb29k
>IGxvY2sgbWF5DQpiZSBlbm91Z2gsIGlmIGV4cGVyaXRpc2UgaXMgcmVxdWlyZWQsIG9ubHkg
>bWFsaWNpb3VzIGV4cGVydA0KKGZldyBhdmFpbGFibGUpIGNhbiBleHBsb2l0IGl0LiBJZiBh
>IGJvcmVkIHRlZW5hZ2VyIChtYW55DQphdmFpbGFibGUpIGNhbiBleHBsb2l0IGl0LCB0aGUg
>dnVsbmVyYWJpbGl0eSBjb2VmZmljaWVudA0KZ29lcyB1cC4NCg0KLS0NCkluZy4gR2l1bGlh
>bm8gQ29sbGENCkRpcmV0dG9yZSBUZWNuaWNvDQpDb3BlY2Egc3JsDQpWaWEgZGVsIEZvbmRp
>dG9yZSAzL0UNCkJvbG9nbmEgKFpvbmEgSW5kdXN0cmlhbGUgUm92ZXJpKQ0KDQpUZWwuIDA1
>MSA1My40Ni45MiAtIDAzMzUgNjEwLjQzLjM1DQpGYXggMDUxIDUzLjQ5Ljg5DQoNCg0K
This is why MIME is a *MAIL* standard, not a Usenet standard. Please do
stick to the specifications of rfc1036.
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP 0x07606049 GPG 0xD61A655D
Unix *is* user-friendly. It is not ignorant-friendly and idiot-friendly.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 20:53:17 GMT
On 20 May 2000 15:08:21 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>How graceful is it about hardware differences?
>>
>>The above shouldn't change your hardware config. at all. In Debian hardware
>>configuration is pretty much a manual affair anyway.
>
>That's a problem - I'm looking for a full-auto system administrator
>(to the extent possible, anyway).
Well, we started out talking about a way to distribute the list of software
installed on one machine to others so that they could start out with a known
good set of packages for a particular task. Such a system really shouldn't
touch a persons hardware config IMHO.
> RedHat uses something called
>kudzu to deal with hardware setup, and it handles things like
>plugging in new hard drives, scsi tape drives, etc.
That does sound rather good although I personally prefer that hardware
configs stay put until I tell them othwise.
> I'm not
>sure if it will catch video card changes on i386 machines but
>I suspect it will.
Xs' SVGA driver detects and properly handles most video cards regardless of
what distro it is installed on. Changing from a big modern monitor to an
older one can be a problem though. Also, the frame buffer driver is very
portable (although it's not accelerated).
>
>>> And is there
>>>a way to do a subsequent update (including adding/removing as
>>>well as updating packages) on the master so the copies can
>>>track along?
>>
>>I imagine you could repeate the above any time you wanted to sync the client
>>machines' packages but I can't say I've ever tried it. Most people just use
>>"apt-get update" "apt-get upgrade" to keep their packages up to date. If
>>you have several machines that you really want to stay identical then you
>>might be better nfs mounting the / dir from the server or maybe using rsync.
>
>Rsync doesn't know about any of the config changes that go along with
>changed files. We need something that knows how to delete an
>existing package that the maintainer no longer wants (example: he
>switches from sendmail to postfix).
How many programs really need different configs on each client? I havn't
used postfix but with exim a single config file should be ok for all the
target machines (localhost is localhost no matter where you are right?).
You might want to have a look at the remote-boot HOWTO (I think that's the
one) since the issues of dealing with a bunch of remote booted machines are
essentially the same as the ones you're facing.
--
Ray
------------------------------
From: Paul Voller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 22:10:02 +0100
JEDIDIAH sent an email on Sun, 21 May 2000 like this:
<snip>
> >> I've never bought a single Linux book. I only bought an
> >> official distribution ONCE by choice. Even in 1994, there
> >> were low cost options. Now, high speed net access and CD
> >> burners are so cheap that there's no good reason anyone
> >> should be paying more than they want for a copy of Linux.
> >
> >In America I guess. Here in the UK we still have local charges for
> >telephone calls (nothing is free yet) and a max. of 56K modems. ADSL and
> >Cable modems aren't here yet.
>
> That still leaves the cheap CD burners and $1 a pop blanks.
Sure, but CD burners are still quite expensive. If, like me, you are a
resident of the UK, then go here for all you Linux distro needs:
http://www.linuxemporium.co.uk/
I found it very useful and the quality of service is good too.
P.
--
~~~
Paul Voller
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why not go to http://www.themullet.org.uk/paul ?
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 23:23:01 +0200
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >The goals were to design a better system
> >which united the features of Windows 98 with
> >USB support as well as bring in the network
> >support found in NT under an all 32 bit
> >compiled code base.
>
> [snip]
>
> >They didn't meet goal #1 very well and
> >totally failed at goal #2.
>
> They added USB support, so how did they not meet that one very well? They
> added PnP (more so than Linux and ISA Pnp). Also, where is there non-32 bit
> code in NT for networks?
USB does not work particularlly well in win98.
> >W2K is slower than NT as well as it still
> >blue screens.
>
> I read a long note by an Open Source advocate that Windows 2000 is _faster_
> than Windows NT. From the technical description he gave, I find his
> comments far more reasonable than yours.
Its slower but more stable... still not as stable as Linux as the heise
reallife webserver survey proved very effectively.
> >And at the same time have provided the public
> >with no improvements to the desktop.
>
> Depends what you mean by improvements. Fadout menus (can Linux do that?),
> fadout Windows (now part of the API).
Ntohing to do with Linux but with X and i guess the Windowmanager...
Enlighenment has probably a theme with that kind of crap.
Do you really think of that as an improvement????
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 21:25:32 GMT
On Sun, 21 May 2000 19:52:10 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>The goals were to design a better system
>>which united the features of Windows 98 with
>>USB support as well as bring in the network
>>support found in NT under an all 32 bit
>>compiled code base.
>
>[snip]
>
>>They didn't meet goal #1 very well and
>>totally failed at goal #2.
>
>They added USB support, so how did they not meet that one very well? They
>added PnP (more so than Linux and ISA Pnp). Also, where is there non-32 bit
Run many ISA cards on your NT machines? That's the only area of PnP
where NT would have room to do any better than Linux.
[deletia]
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 21:31:06 GMT
On Sun, 21 May 2000 19:46:53 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>>In America I guess. Here in the UK we still have local charges for
>>>telephone calls (nothing is free yet) and a max. of 56K modems. ADSL
>>>and Cable modems aren't here yet.
>>
>> That still leaves the cheap CD burners and $1 a pop blanks.
>
>�1 a pop blanks if you shop around ($1.60). CD burners aren't as cheap as
Actually, if you shop around you can get brand name high speed
blanks for less than $1(US). You can get generic blanks less than
$1(US) just by going to the corner office supply store.
>in America.
Then pay a little more for cross-atlantic shipping.
[deletia]
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 21:34:03 GMT
On Sun, 21 May 2000 22:10:02 +0100, Paul Voller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>JEDIDIAH sent an email on Sun, 21 May 2000 like this:
>
><snip>
>> >> I've never bought a single Linux book. I only bought an
>> >> official distribution ONCE by choice. Even in 1994, there
>> >> were low cost options. Now, high speed net access and CD
>> >> burners are so cheap that there's no good reason anyone
>> >> should be paying more than they want for a copy of Linux.
>> >
>> >In America I guess. Here in the UK we still have local charges for
>> >telephone calls (nothing is free yet) and a max. of 56K modems. ADSL and
>> >Cable modems aren't here yet.
>>
>> That still leaves the cheap CD burners and $1 a pop blanks.
>
>Sure, but CD burners are still quite expensive. If, like me, you are a
$100 isn't 'quite expensive'. That's about as much as you would
pay for a Windows Upgrade or half of what you would pay for an
MSOffice update. Plus, only one member of your circle of
acquaintances would need own one.
>resident of the UK, then go here for all you Linux distro needs:
>
> http://www.linuxemporium.co.uk/
>
>I found it very useful and the quality of service is good too.
[deletia]
Typically, shipping on 'cheap CDs' ends up being more than
the price of the CD's themselves. It's a shame more Linux
mags don't have coverdisks...
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 22:20:00 GMT
On 19 May 2000 17:03:30 GMT, Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Bob Hauck <hauck[at]codem{dot}com> writes:
>: You do repeatedly make claims about Linux "doing" this or that,
>Fair enough. The point is, all operating systems have problems. All of
>them have potentially fatal bugs. To say that there is any one operating
>system that does not have these flaws is simply absurd.
Yes, it is. Most serious Open Source advocates are making the argument
that their way results in fewer such bugs, not none. They also argue that
Open Source encourages the timely fixing of bugs. The very definition of
"fanatic" would be an OS advocate who says that OS products are "perfect".
That's obviously not true.
>: I find it helpful to keep firmly in mind the fact that the people who work
>: at Microsoft or IBM or any other big company are in general not any
>: smarter or more serious or more professional than you or me.
>Perhaps. There is no way to know, when one is not on the inside of such
>establishments.
The law of large numbers would suggest that the skills and attitude of the
average engineer working for a large company would tend toward the average
of the population of engineers as a whole. It would be very difficult for
a company like IBM or Microsoft to be able to hire "the best" on a
consistent basis simply because they hire so many people. Only in Lake
Woebegone and press releases are all people above average.
>These large entities have certain standards for behavior, and I'm sure
>that excessive diversion from the accepted standards would easily get
>someone fired.
In most large entities, nobody from management ever looks at people's
code.
>Fair enough. Now, explain the attitudes of the various people that I've
>had to endure at user group meetings, and technology expos, and you just
>might have me using Linux again.
I can't explain who you met at user group meetings. I have not had that
experience. In fact, at the last Linux UG meeting I went to the featured
speaker was there to tell us about FreeBSD. The people from that
particular group are by and large pretty level-headed. Perhaps you just
attract a different sort?
>Let's say I install NetBSD 1.4.3 on a reasonably well-equipped system.
>Let's also say that it crashes constantly, with no apparent reason. Let's
>say that this happens similarly on 20 different machines. Now, answer me
>this:
>
>Does NetBSD suck, or do I just not know what I'm doing?
Likely the latter. But if 20 different people install NetBSD on 20
different machines and they all have constant crashes, that starts to look
like a statistic.
>So, if I state the NetBSD sucks, simply because of my experience, it means
>absolutely nothing.
I would say that how much it means depends a lot on your level of
expertise. I do agree that one person's experience is not statistical
evidence in any case.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Fischer)
Subject: Re: The Path Dependence
Date: 21 May 2000 22:21:48 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Newsgroups trimmed drastically -- I'm not getting into any of those
pan-kook flame wars. Posted & e-mailed.]
On Sun, 21 May 2000 19:51:20 GMT, MK
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 21 May 2000 17:53:25 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
>
>>>>>Read it and weep, Loren.
>>>>>4. Evidence for Third- Degree Path Dependence [...]
>>
>>>> Why don't you go and truck-bomb some military bases and police
>>>>stations? Yes, those infamous instruments of state coercion ;-)
>>>> Or dynamite some of those awful socialist roads?
>>
>>>Why don't you admit that you lost the argument and you're plain
>>>ignorant, since all you have left is resorting to lame arguments unrelated to
>>>issue itself?
>
>> No, path dependence is completely real.
>
>If so, you will not have the trouble explaining path dependence in case
>of Beta being on market two years before VHS and existence of many
>other typing systems except QWERTY instead of cutting the quoted
>article like a true coward (you can snip it, I can quote it again)?
I don't think anyone is arguing that network effects are inevitable
in a new market, just that they can happen. Showing examples of
their absence is meaningless.
As for you and this article, I'm wondering if you've read it carefully.
Basically, it doesn't say what you want it to.
>Other aspects of the fable are also untrue. There were many touch-typists,
>on both QWERTY and rival keyboards. There were other typing contests right
>around the time of the Cincinnati contest, some of which were won by
>non-QWERTY typists. So it was not the single happenstance of McGurrin's
>choice that established QWERTY as the keyboard standard. It is unlikely,
>therefore, that QWERTY could have survived if it were as poor as it is
>sometimes alleged to be. If, in fact, some typewriter keyboard really did
>offer advantages such that the retraining investment would be repaid over
>every ten days, is it reasonable to think that companies would not make such
>an investment?
The article is saying that the keyboard layouts are close enough
in efficiency so that retraining away from the entrenched standard
isn't worth it.
That, to me, demonstrates the influence of path dependence. The
authors focus so much on demonstrating that no obviously superior
alternative was killed by QWERTY's dominance that they forget
about equal alternatives. There is an external influence in the
selection of keyboards, other than the selection of the best
solution, that causes QWERTY to dominate.
Having said all that, you forget that disproving the QWERTY
and other illustrations does not disprove all examples, such
as the path dependence in desktop operating systems.
It may be that the authors are going by some strict theoretical
definition of path dependence (third degree path dependence is
mentioned, whatever that is) and you are losing sight of the forest
for the trees. The effect of a large installed base of MS Windows
and applications that use Windows API's has a very large influence
on people when they buy their next computer or upgrade their OS.
Any technically equivalent or superior alternative will find
that the natural market forces will not be as responsive as would
be expected otherwise.
--
Grant Fischer (gfischer at the domain hub.org)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 22:25:56 GMT
On 19 May 2000 17:03:30 GMT, Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Fair enough. Now, explain the attitudes of the various people that I've
>had to endure at user group meetings, and technology expos, and you just
>might have me using Linux again.
Counterpoints from cola:
Steve "the Keymaster" (and his menagerie of sock puppets)
Boris
ax
Drestin Black (post w2k)
If you can explain these, I might start liking NT again (I'm required to
use it).
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 22:31:03 GMT
On Fri, 19 May 2000 03:03:09 GMT, Brad Wardell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Doesn't Linux now live in the United States?
Yes.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Lies, damn lies and statistics
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 00:53:13 +0200
"Rob S. Wolfram" wrote:
>
> Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >UXVpdGUgaW50ZXJlc3RpbmcuIEhvd2V2ZXIgZG9lc24ndCB0ZWxsIChpdCdzIGhhcmQgaW4N
> >CnN0YXRpc3RjcywgSSBrbm93KSBob3cgZWFzaWx5IHRoZSB2dWxuZXJhYmlsaXR5IGNhbiBi
> >ZQ0KZXhwbG9pdGVkLiBJZiBwaHlzaWNhbCBwcmVzZW5jZSBpcyByZXF1aXJlZCwgYSBnb29k
> >IGxvY2sgbWF5DQpiZSBlbm91Z2gsIGlmIGV4cGVyaXRpc2UgaXMgcmVxdWlyZWQsIG9ubHkg
> >bWFsaWNpb3VzIGV4cGVydA0KKGZldyBhdmFpbGFibGUpIGNhbiBleHBsb2l0IGl0LiBJZiBh
> >IGJvcmVkIHRlZW5hZ2VyIChtYW55DQphdmFpbGFibGUpIGNhbiBleHBsb2l0IGl0LCB0aGUg
> >dnVsbmVyYWJpbGl0eSBjb2VmZmljaWVudA0KZ29lcyB1cC4NCg0KLS0NCkluZy4gR2l1bGlh
> >bm8gQ29sbGENCkRpcmV0dG9yZSBUZWNuaWNvDQpDb3BlY2Egc3JsDQpWaWEgZGVsIEZvbmRp
> >dG9yZSAzL0UNCkJvbG9nbmEgKFpvbmEgSW5kdXN0cmlhbGUgUm92ZXJpKQ0KDQpUZWwuIDA1
> >MSA1My40Ni45MiAtIDAzMzUgNjEwLjQzLjM1DQpGYXggMDUxIDUzLjQ5Ljg5DQoNCg0K
>
> This is why MIME is a *MAIL* standard, not a Usenet standard. Please do
> stick to the specifications of rfc1036.
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
> --
You're right, but I'm using Netscape messenger, which, although not
being a MS program has nonetheless whims of it's own. I try to tell him
to behave, but apparently sometimes the quoted text preferences override
mine in a funny way.
However thank you for the feedback. In that particular case what you got
may be more interesting than what I had written...
========
Ing. Giuliano Colla
Direttore Tecnico
Copeca srl
Via del Fonditore 3/E
40139 Bologna (Italy)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 23:00:00 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
' I haven't followed the latest License Wars series, but I thought
' the real contentention was between KDE vs. GNOME, with GNOME's
' main reason to exit being that KDE wasn't GPL'd. Did I miss
' a twist in the plot? (Yes, I agree that LGPL is a relatively
' sane license, but sanity rarely has much to do with anything.)
Well, KDE _is_ GPL'd. That is a requirement of using Qt Free
Edition. I'm not sure that using the Lesser GPL is even an option.
That option _does_ exist for GTK+ and GTK--.
For myself, if I am going to produce free software, I want it to be
GPL. I don't want my work to be used in proprietary software unless I
get paid for it. I also don't feel that I can produce code of such
high quality that others should pay to use it a la' Microsoft
shitware. However, I can certainly do good things with the help of
others. I think such help is easier to get if the code is GPL. It
means no one can steal the work of others.
What TrollTech is currently doing with Qt 2.x and higher is a good
thing. People who produce GPL software can use Qt without worrying
about the QPL. Modifying Qt is another story, but I expect that
worthy changes would be incorporated into Qt. It is certainly
possible to use inheritance to extend Qt. Your code is GPL anyway.
TrollTech can't take GPL code and put it under the QPL.
If you don't like Qt, then you can simply use another toolkit.
GTK+/GTK-- is a popular, free toolkit. There is also Tk. Tk has been
ported to more platforms than both Qt and GTK+.
If the above options, including toolkits I haven't mentioned, are not
to your liking, then you can undertake writing your own toolkit. I'm
sure that is more work than writing any single application.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2000 23:00:01 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
' In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
' David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
'
' >Granted, when I first started out, SuSE was great. It allowed me to
' >set up my system without knowing much of anything. I still think SuSE
' >or some other good package is the way to go for a beginner. However,
' >I have started to outgrow it.
'
' In what way? I have several things that I maintain locally either
' because they aren't in the distribution or contributed rpms or
' because I need local changes.
Source becomes available before an rpm does. Also, I am not working
with a large set of packages that would make dealing with source
installs unmanageable. With my DSL connection, I don't really need to
bother with waiting for the CD to come out with the latest versions of
the packages I use.
' This is your choice, of course, and having that choice is a
' very good thing. You just have to realize that this is a
' fast-paced business and you are going to be repeating that
' work at least every 6 months just to stay at the point
' where a single distribution 'update' run would put you and
' you have to track all the bugs and improvements yourself.
' I prefer to take advantage of the thousands of programs
' that someone else has bundled in a workable form and spend
' my own time on a few critical ones where I actually need
' more control. However, even with these I would be perfectly
' happy to let a distribution update that worked as well replace
' my older version.
One thing that is tricky to do is stay on the bleeding edge when you
need to if you are using rpms or other package management tools. For
example, I use the anoncvs server to keep my KDE2 up to date. All I
do to build everything is run a single shell script.
If I ever get the time, as you rightly suggest is a scarce commodity,
I would like to put together a shell script that updates the world.
As more and more sources become available via cvs, rsync, cvsup, etc,
that becomes easier to do.
What would be truly ideal, if it is sane, would be to have a single
update command that I could launch that would grab the latest versions
of the packages I use, build them, and then push them out to all the
machines I have on my network, or to nfs shares. Obsolete libs and
such should then be removed from the system to free space.
>From what I hear, debian may be closest to that ideal.
I agree that it is very convinient to have a good package management
system. However, I don't think rpm does the job. It may be that I
just don't understand rpm well enough. After all, I've been shielded
from details by yast. But rpm files do require that the person[s] who
put the package together create a correct spec file for dependencies
and such. Considering that information is available in the make file
or in the binaries themselvies (for ldd visible linkage), it should be
something that is automated.
Ok, I'm beginning to ramble now. My needs are not always going to fit
in a single package scheme.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
