Linux-Advocacy Digest #650, Volume #26 Tue, 23 May 00 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. ("Chad Myers")
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Napster to Linux ! (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=E5NdRew?= yEonG)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (josco)
Re: Is the PC era over? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Napster to Linux ! (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (John Sanders)
Re: who is linux really hurting the most (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: who is linux really hurting the most ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (s@-)
rdram: WIll is speed up a linux box? (john)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (EdWIN)
Re: Windows by Day, Linux by Night (David Steinberg)
Re: who is linux really hurting the most (abraxas)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (abraxas)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (JEDIDIAH)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 11:42:53 -0500
"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ge8f5$592$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8ge7sa$ur6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >> I'm not saying that it cant happen, im saying that there is a
> > >> marked difference between a panic and a frozen console. :)
> >
> > > Not to the person in front of the console, there isn't.
> >
> > If the person in front of the console is an idiot, to be sure-
> > you are correct.
>
> No, if the person in front of the machine is unable to tell the difference
> between a locked console and a hung machine and then fix it. I'd say that
> encompasses about 99% of computer users, being conservative.
>
> From the end user's perspective, on an end-user machine, a hung console is
> the same as a system crash. Not only because the machine looks and acts
> dead, but because if they "fix" the problem by killing the X server then
> they also most likely lose all the data they were working on anyway.
>
> > However, if that person has a functioning bit of grey matter
> > somewhere in their head, and they really, really dont want to
> > have to power cycle the machine, they do not have to. There
> > are alternatives.
>
> Sure, they can walk down the hallway, find another machine, kick the person
> using it off for a few minutes to ping, telnet etc and *maybe* successfully
> kill the hung process, but 99% of the time it would just be quicker to
> reboot and have the same end result. Or they can harass the admin and wait
> while he tries to fix it, again with most likely the same end result.
Christopher, you're forgetting the most obvious answer here...
They could call the sysadmin and just have him rewrite the video drivers,
write a new windowing system and rewrite their applications. Remember, this
is all open source and all sysadmins are programmers and have limitless
amounts of time to be coding things like this.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 16:53:48 GMT
On Tue, 23 May 2000 11:40:02 -0500, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Christopher Browne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Jim Ross would say:
>> >So theory aside, X in reality can crash the entire machine.
>>
>> I blame it on the video hardware. You can send instructions to the
>> video card that will cause it to dump data pretty arbitrarily _anywhere_
>> in system memory, outside the control of the CPU.
>
>Hrmm.. nope. Sounds good, but nope. I've installed RH Linux (yes, I know
How long ago? 5 years? X was a little more problematic a few
years back. However, even then when I ran various Cirrus Logic
cards myself I never quite had as many problems as you describe,
even while running Netscape & Applix and otherwise 'polluting'
the system.
>RH != (necessarily) Linux, but it uses X11R6 XFree86) on several machines
>and have seen X puke on all of them. They all have varying display hardware
>from Matrox, to Cirrus Logic, to Chips and Technologies, etc. The odd thing
>is, it crashes seemingly unprovoked. I will start X, be browsing the file
>system, fire up an xterm (note that Netscape has not be allowed to defile
>the system at this point), and boom, locks up. Numlock works, mouse moves,
>but nothing else. I attempt to switch terminals using the CTRL+ALT+F(x)
>to no avail.
[deletia]
What you're describing sounds more like an overclocked motherboard
(including overclocked AGP to go with it). This is likely purely
coincidental of course as these experiences you describe rather
likely complete fabrication.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 04:39:09 +0800
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=E5NdRew?= yEonG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Napster to Linux !
Try to convince the author of Napster to give you the source codes...so
that you can port it to Linux and...make some improvement to it like
supporting more file formats....
then more students will use Linux .
Mongoose wrote:
> Hello,
> I am attempting to start a college project and have two of my
> ideas already being worked on. So I wanted to know what other people
> had for suggestions for linux projects? I was thinking of something
> along the lines of a project that would help promote the use of linux.
> What is something that most people could use? Something that could
> make a good 1 year R&D project?
--
.~. Live free or die !
/V\
// \\ ---------------------------------------------------
/( )\ �NdReW YEoNG� � ===> cHocoL�teM�[EMAIL PROTECTED]
^`~'^ ---------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 10:07:06 -0700
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Joseph only cares about two things 1) using real arconyms and 2) the
> > origin of OLE.
> >
> > You've stopped using OLE1 and OLE2 - we have real progress here Eric.
> > When asked about the origin of OLE you have to refer to OLE Version 1.0,
> > not OLE Version 2.0.
>
> For someone so hung up on the correct spelling of things, you can't even
> bother to spell someones name correctly.
>
> I think that about sums it up.
Are you NOW telling me your use of OLE1 and OLE2 were mistakes and
misspellings?
Make like Microsoft and split.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the PC era over?
Date: 23 May 2000 12:02:32 -0500
In article <8ge5a7$mbg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Why does a typical PC need anything but a fast video card a bunch
>> of RAM, and a 100M ethernet interface? There are already 'appliance'
>> file servers, printers have had network interfaces for years, cheap
>> modem/routers are coming around, hubs/switches are cheap. The
>> advantage of this approach becomes obvious as soon as you plug in
>> the 2nd PC. When you can get the 100M for less than $20, why not
>> just build the chips into everything and only have one kind of
>> connector to worry about?
>
>Because 100Mbit ethernet can only realistically shift around 10MB per
>second and that would tend to get flooded very easily with the sheer
>quantity of data you'd end up slinging about.
Most local disks can't sustain much more than 10MB/second anyway and
you can isolate the traffic any way you like. If you need your
own disk, hang a disk drive with embedded ethernet on your
side of a switched network.
> And you *really* don't
>want to swap over a network (I really don't want to remember it!) The
>words "bad idea" really fail to encapsulate just how horrid this is.
You really don't want to swap at all and RAM prices are such that
you don't need to. But, I'll bet the network swapping you disliked
did not sustain 10MB/sec throughput.
>Local HDDs make a big difference to machine speeds (especially app
>startup times) so you'd need to put some storage in locally, and
>100BaseT just isn't fast enough.
Do your drives really sustain more than 10MB/sec? Do you only
use them for 3 seconds to fill 30Megs of RAM at startup?
>ATM and FDDI are better, but much
>more costly and more difficult to install IIRC (ATM is also less well
>suited to internet traffic and TCP is better routed directly over ATM
>instead of having IP as a separate layer in there between, since you
>are then using a stream protocol over streaming hardware.)
You don't need these on a desktop. You might want them on a server
to switch backbone, but gigabit ethernet to the switch is cheaper.
>Another problem with using networking for all interconnects is the
>amount of contention you get.
With switches there is no contention.
>Or is it acceptable for the printing of
>a document by machine A to block the loading of a program executable
>by machine B? Avoiding this sort of problem as a network grows in
>size seems to be a major issue. Maybe smart hubs can handle this. I
>don't really know...
Switches give the full bandwidth (and in full duplex) out each
connection. You still have to deal with the server side of the
connection where the packets are still multiplexed, but you can
use gigabit there. But, scaling up wasn't my point - we have to
deal with that anyway. I meant that standalone PC's could be
built with nothing but 100BaseT (maybe a couple) and a video
card and the local peripherals could be made to match. Then
everything works the same, scaled up or not. You need a bit
more intelligence on the disk drive to turn it into a network
file server, but only a bit more and it would pay off as soon
as you plugged in the 2nd PC.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 16:58:40 GMT
In article <8gd4si$23mc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jim Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Similarily, we all know that because W2K has GDI in the kernel,
> >> > bad video drivers can also cause a BSOD. In contract, an X server
on
> >> > linux does not have access to kernel address space, and so X
crashes
> >> > only lock up the console. Of course, if you are running a
desktop, you
> >> > work is lost anyways so it doesn't matter. If you are running a
server
> >> > however, it makes all the difference.
> >>
> >> X can also cause the graphics adapter to fault the bus, which can
cause
> > your
> >> entire machine to lock up.
> >>
>
> > I've seen X crash an entire machine.
> > My guess is it caused an out of memory situation.
> > Caused by a simple graphic resize in a buggy little KDE app.
>
> > So theory aside, X in reality can crash the entire machine.
>
> In many, many years of dealing with X under linux, bsdi, freebsd,
> openbsd, netbsd, mklinux, hp/ux, solaris, aix and sunos, I have
> never once seen X lock up an entire machine.
>
> Ive seen other locks caused by other things, but not X.
>
> I'm not saying that it cant happen, im saying that there is a
> marked difference between a panic and a frozen console. :)
In the Unix world yes, there is a difference between a panic and a
frozen console. BUT, in the MS OS area a frozen console has the same
result as a PANIC. The system MUST be rebooted to gain access to the
console.
>
> -----yttrx
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
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: Napster to Linux !
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 17:10:59 GMT
On Mon, 22 May 2000 04:39:09 +0800, �NdRew yEonG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Try to convince the author of Napster to give you the source codes...so
>that you can port it to Linux and...make some improvement to it like
>supporting more file formats....
...where have you been? Napster has already been reverse engineered.
>
>then more students will use Linux .
>
>Mongoose wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>> I am attempting to start a college project and have two of my
>> ideas already being worked on. So I wanted to know what other people
>> had for suggestions for linux projects? I was thinking of something
>> along the lines of a project that would help promote the use of linux.
>> What is something that most people could use? Something that could
>> make a good 1 year R&D project?
>
>--
>
> .~. Live free or die !
> /V\
> // \\ ---------------------------------------------------
> /( )\ �NdReW YEoNG� � ===> cHocoL�teM�[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ^`~'^ ---------------------------------------------------
>
>
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 12:00:13 -0500
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jhair Triana (Praktikant Atkinson)) wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >Fortunately Linux can not do that, and will never be capable to do that.
> >Linux is an operating system, not an user interface.
>
> Oh I'm sure it will come (KDE? Gnome?). After all, this feature is
> available as an API on Win32. Along with transparent windows/layers (not
> regions) on Windows 2000.
>
> Pete
--
Fade out windows? What's wrong with you morons? Of course this can be
done using X. You can fade out any region, color/set of colors or the
entire display. You can make all the pixels on your screen fall to the
'bottom' of the display. And, what's the most fun, you can do it to
another user remotely!
You guys need to work in UNIX shop sometime. You're working away
quietly at your desk when you hear a flushing toilet and your screen
turns into a tornado and whorls away off stage left.
Jeez. Fade out windows. When will the innovation stop?
John W. Sanders
===============
"there" in or at a place.
"their" of or relating to them.
"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: who is linux really hurting the most
Date: 23 May 2000 12:18:44 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Full Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 22 May 2000 20:56:55 +0200, "Davorin Mestric"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>now even the netcraft guys are saying it. linux is hurting commercial unix
>>vendors more than microsoft.
>>
>
>Linux is hurting Unix - but not in the way you indicate.
>
>I've administered in excess of 10 flavours of Unix since 1992. All of
>these have been rock solid with little or no problems. Linux simply
>does not achieve these sorts of reliability and stability levels.
What did you do wrong?
>Linux is creating a generation of programmers who will believe they
>must run VMS if they want a rock solid operating system.
Yes, I think it is realistic to expect to want to reboot a Linux
box once or twice a year to install the new features that have been added
in that time. If you are running a service that can't ever be down
you probably need a fully-clustered OS.
>Administrators should think twice before compromising their systems by
>introducing a Linux box.
There is no reason to expect software related problems to be caused
by Linux. It isn't going to be a match for a redundant clustered
configuration but you have to balance the cost of that against
being down for upgrades.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 17:13:58 GMT
Sort of a narrow view of what OS's can do, isn't it???
In article <8gbrj1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Espen) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >Oh, so what version of Windows is now shipping with TeX/LATeX,
> >emacs, gcc, python, perl, etc.
> >
> >
>
> I run both Windows NT and RedHat 6.2 on two boxes networked together.
> To be fair, you can freely download and run TeX/LaTeX, emacs, gcc,
python,
> perl on Windows NT. They all work just fine on Windows NT. It's a
bit
> easier on Linux cause most distributions include them by default, but
they
> are also free and work great on NT. I'd also include the free Cygnus
Win32
> tools/DLLs for NT.
>
> Peter
> --
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: who is linux really hurting the most
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 17:23:20 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Full Name) writes:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>I've administered in excess of 10 flavours of Unix since 1992.
Yeah, sure. And in another 8 years, you'll figure out how to configure a
newreader?
Bernie
--
Among my most prized possessions are the words that I have never
spoken.
Orson Rega Card
------------------------------
From: s@-
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 23 May 2000 09:33:38 -0700
In article <8gdp99$k4a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter says...
>: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>:>What a load of crap. Alan Cox is the bug track system.
>
>: haha, what a joke.
>
>: a person is a bug tracking system? wow! so if this person gets sick,
>: the bug tracking system goes down?
>
>Yep. Just like if your bugtracking server develops a virus.
I thought linux sw can not get any viruses? but if the bugtracking server
got a viruse, you can get a backup. If the above person got
sick, how do you make a backup of him? And what if he get kidnapped?
and what if he fell and hit his head and lost his memory? and what
if you need to find something about a bug but Allen happened to be
busy in the bathroom at the time, do we wait for him to finish
to find out about a bug? what if he on a vacation?
tell me right now, how many priority one bugs are there against
linux kernel 2.2, and how many are against kernel 2.3.99? Where
can I go now on-line and look at the status of these bugs?
NOt only a bug-tracking system is critical for any modern software
engineering group, it will also help others volunteer work and time for
linux. One can look at the list of bugs and decide to go fix some, it
will actually be good for linux.
May be you guys who think a bug tracking system is not needed for
linux kernel, need to take a course in software engineering one
day, but from the types of replies I read, I doubt that one course will
make any difference.
/s
------------------------------
From: john <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: rdram: WIll is speed up a linux box?
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 12:25:13 -0500
I have been in the market recently for a computer. Should I get one
with rdram it I want to run Linux? Will it be worth the extra cost?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
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: 23 May 2000 12:28:02 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Do people really have trouble with ./configure, make, make install?
>>>It has _never_ been a problem for me. Maybe I am just lucky. Even
>>>though I changed my compiler, libc, and libtools.
>>
>>Given a thousand packages, how long does it take you to be sure
>>you have the latest version of each installed using this
>>technique? How long does it take to figure out what is missing
>>when the linker can't resolve a symbol?
>
> Typically the configure script should tell you. That's what
> it's there for. All a binary package buys you is the ability
> to easily force install a whole bunch of stuff at once. In
> the case of RPM, one is specifically abusing the tool in order
> to get it to work in a more convenient fashion.
I like the ability of rpm to NOT install older or matching versions
on top of what is running and to later tell me which files have been
modified or are missing compared to the installed packages.
Also, configure scripts don't know how to satisfy dependencies when
you install several related things at once that must be done in a
certain order. Rpm gets this right if you install them all in one
command.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 17:23:36 GMT
In article <8gd076$2kf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Bill Altenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I wouldn't liken MS to the Nazi era of Germany. I think a more
appropriate
> >example would be a state univerisity directly east of Illinois in
Elam's
> >territory..
>
> I'm totally lost.
Then you're in the right place! This group was created as a hang out
for "totally lost" people. :-D
> --
> Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
> My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
>
--
"Let all who oppose the OverMind feel the Fury of the Swarm!"
-- Infested Kerrigan, aka The Queen of Blades, StarCraft.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: Windows by Day, Linux by Night
Date: 23 May 2000 17:30:26 GMT
Brian Langenberger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: : Don't bother. The free book is "windows 98 in a nutshell."
: That's the whole point. It's basically a book to help UNIX
: users navigate the painful unpleasantries of Windows.
: I'm looking forward to paging through my free copy in a week
: or two. It looks interesting.
How about this, then:
Don't bother unless you live in the US.
(Like it's SO much harder to ship to Canada...grumble, grumble...)
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: who is linux really hurting the most
Date: 23 May 2000 17:32:09 GMT
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2000 09:18:46 GMT, Full Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Mon, 22 May 2000 20:56:55 +0200, "Davorin Mestric"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>now even the netcraft guys are saying it. linux is hurting commercial unix
>>>vendors more than microsoft.
>>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>Linux is hurting Unix - but not in the way you indicate.
> No, more than likely the perception that you can get a Quad Xeon
> that can replace a Sun Enterprise Ultrasparc is what is 'hurting
> Linux'. Linux just happens to be taking the place that NT would
> try to push itself into.
The sparc is better hardware in dozens of ways, and anyone who knows
anything at all about server hardware will tell you that.
>>
>>I've administered in excess of 10 flavours of Unix since 1992. All of
>>these have been rock solid with little or no problems. Linux simply
>>does not achieve these sorts of reliability and stability levels.
> Odd then that it's making Commercial Unix installations
> drop like flies.
Oh really? Which ones? I wonder if you can find me a "linux solution"
which will cover our quad e420r (quad procs a piece), running in
cluster, each dealing with a 3.5 gig in-memory dynamic database?
I didnt think so.
>>
>>Linux is creating a generation of programmers who will believe they
>>must run VMS if they want a rock solid operating system.
> VMS is still more robust than the Commercial Unixen. VMS will
> take server loads that HP/UX and Irix and SunOS melt under.
> Unix is thrown together well but it's still thrown together.
I suspect you actually dont know what youre talkinga bout.
>>
>>Administrators should think twice before compromising their systems by
>>introducing a Linux box.
>>
> The VMS remarks are a matter of firsthand experience: RDBMS QA.
How bout the unix remarks? :)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: 23 May 2000 17:35:28 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 05/23/2000 at 02:33 PM,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) said:
>> Much as youd like to think otherwise, bob, you actually arent helping
>> anyone here. You're simply actively appearing to be a fucking
>> lunatic.
> What a proven psychotic like you who defends a criminal organization
> thinks matter not a whit to me.
You're insane, bob. Ive never defended microsoft.
Looks like YOURE the liar now, aintcha, bob? Go ahead bob, you find where
I defended microsoft and quote me.
You're insane and very stupid.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
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: Tue, 23 May 2000 17:36:19 GMT
On 23 May 2000 12:28:02 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>Do people really have trouble with ./configure, make, make install?
>>>>It has _never_ been a problem for me. Maybe I am just lucky. Even
>>>>though I changed my compiler, libc, and libtools.
>>>
>>>Given a thousand packages, how long does it take you to be sure
>>>you have the latest version of each installed using this
>>>technique? How long does it take to figure out what is missing
>>>when the linker can't resolve a symbol?
>>
>> Typically the configure script should tell you. That's what
>> it's there for. All a binary package buys you is the ability
>> to easily force install a whole bunch of stuff at once. In
>> the case of RPM, one is specifically abusing the tool in order
>> to get it to work in a more convenient fashion.
>
>I like the ability of rpm to NOT install older or matching versions
>on top of what is running and to later tell me which files have been
>modified or are missing compared to the installed packages.
>
>Also, configure scripts don't know how to satisfy dependencies when
>you install several related things at once that must be done in a
>certain order. Rpm gets this right if you install them all in one
>command.
No it doesn't. Infact that's one of the most annoying things
about RPM. Given a collection of packages, it's unable to sort
things out for itself.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
