Linux-Advocacy Digest #721, Volume #26 Sat, 27 May 00 19:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0 (Mig Mig)
Re: Linux (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0 (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux Losers (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Will Linux run MSDOS programs (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Gary Hallock)
Newsgroup for Gnome? ("Greg")
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0 (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (Angry Bob)
Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0 (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Will Linux run MSDOS programs (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: You need to reset your antennae; you're not getting the signals from (Jim
Stuyck)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Arclight)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Arclight)
Re: Linux Losers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 23:46:55 +0200
Leslie Mikesell wrote:
> >Oh yeah, I tried installing Corel Linux. It hung during installation.
>
> Probing for ISA cards has a fair chance of locking some systems. They
> have to make a tradeoff between the number of things they try to
> auto-detect and the number of machines they lock up. This is
> unfortunate, but reflects the nature of the hardware.
I heard from a collegue that he actually had problems installing Corel -
like Pete it hungs- while old ReHat installations (5.1) and later didnt
have any problems...This on exactly the same machine... So Pete can be
right on Corel's distro having some problems with specific hardware.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 21:49:22 GMT
Bad grammar --> bad semantics
abraxas wrote:
> Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is there a Real Unix, dude? Or do we still have the AT&T and Berkely
> > offshoots? Or are you talking about SCO UNIX, HPUX, AIX, or what?
>
> Knowing what theyre called does not infer knowing what theyre for.
>
> -----yttrx
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 21:50:46 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Heavy Gear II does.
>
> UT and Q3 happen to be among some of the few titles alread ported
> to Linux. If they are your short list then games hardly constitute
> a 'show stopper' for you.
3D Sound?
>>"The Bat" (a mail reader)
>>XNews (a news reader)
>>Paint Shop Pro
>>CorelXara
>>Microsoft Word (eek! I like the cat! I'm really sad!)
>
> ...as if all the other Win32 major word processors couldn't
> fill in just as easily. (including ones that run on Unix).
I tried some of the Linux alternatives, and just as many Windows
alternatives. Whilst Word is pretty bloated and offers more features than I
could possible (and some that don't work very well), some of Linux
alternatives are not that impressive. Like I keep saying, they lag behind
in functionality.
> This insistence on ignoring several other perfectly viable
> options always annoyed me about WinDOS culture.
And the blindness I see in Linux circles about Windows products is as
equally annoying.
Yes I could start using equivalents on Linux for some of the above
packages, but that leaves me with a dilemma - the files aren't shareable
between Linux and Windows. I'd have to start again with Mail or News etc.
Netscape is one product I could share files with in that I could use the
same bookmarks file.
Pete
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Losers
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 21:51:32 GMT
If you're so happy why are you here with us losers?
Chris
P.S. Surely you know that Video trumps Truth.
The Truth wrote:
> Trendy happy people who laugh with their friends at popular
> restaurants use Microsoft products.
>
>
> Crawl back into you isolated holes and stop bothering those of us who
> are happy to have lives that don't revolve around building kernels and
> waiting for patches.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Will Linux run MSDOS programs
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 21:54:21 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mathias Grimmberger) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Hehehe, it just occured to me that MS must be a Unix wannabee then. At
>least they have a Posix subsystem in NT. Ohhh, they emulate OS/2 too (is
>that still in NT 5?). And DOS/Win16.
I thought Posix support had been dropped.
>Sorry, I don't think your argument holds water.
Well, think of it this way. Windows does not support Linux executables as
it is not felt that anyone would want to do this; whereas Linux offers
several alternatives to allow Windows apps to run on Linux. That tells me
that Windows is what people want.
In any case, what I remember of Windows emulators is that they don't
support everything, they run slower etc. Not that I've tried anything on
Linux - just previous OS's attempts at this.
Pete
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 17:57:35 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > > Ask Darren about his 2.4 version number...
> >
> > Well, how do you like that, Drestin. I'm glad you admit you were wrong.
> 2.4
> > does exist
> >
> > ftp://ftp.us.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/
>
> Interesting. Did you read this:
>
> ftp://ftp.us.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/README-2.4
>
> "No.
>
> It doesn't really exist yet.
>
> But I'll be gone for three weeks, and in the meantime there's a
> "2.4.0-test1" kernel here. It's not a real 2.4.0 release, but we should
> be getting closer. There's going to be other test-kernels after this
> one, and we'll find bugs. And bad behaviour. And wonderful features
> which we'll document some day."
>
> > Now, you can no longer claim you never saw a kernel labeled 2.4. Of
> course,
> > as long as we are playing games with semantics. this is called a "test"
> kernel,
> > not a "beta".
>
> And Linus says it not a real kernel.
Yes, I read it. Drestin said he never saw a kernel labeled 2.4. Well, now
he has.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Greg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Newsgroup for Gnome?
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 21:59:14 GMT
I'm suprised there are no newsgroups for Gnome yet.
As someone who has to extensivley deal with Windows,
I'm very impressed with Gnome 1.2. The taskbar is way more
functional and customizable than Windows'. It makes MS
"Freedom to Innovate" campaign look just plain silly. If MS
is innovative, why is the Windows taskbar so drab and rigid
by comparison?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 27 May 2000 16:59:32 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Richard Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Here in comp.os.linux.misc, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
>spake unto us, saying:
>
>>Cvs is free, fairly painless, works cross-platform and gives you
>>a nice consolidated area to back up even if your working/testing
>>space is distributed. I'd recommend it for your 20000 lines of code
>>even if the kernel never goes that route.
>
>Thanks, but I'm afraid cvs doesn't run on OS2200. :-)
It is fairly vanilla C code. If it is even close to a
unix-like environment there is a good chance it would
compile. If not, you could stick the repository somewhere
else and commit with anything that can see both the
workspace and the repository.
>I'd use the same tools we use for the application I support if I had
>need for a real change control facility.
Does that provide cross-platform client/server access?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 27 May 2000 17:01:14 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Richard Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Here in comp.os.linux.misc, Mark Wilden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>spake unto us, saying:
>
>>Personally, I use source control for practically everything I do. If for
>>no other reason, because when I'm finished a set of changes, I can
>>compare them to the previous version and make sure I didn't leave in any
>>debugging code, etc.
>
>It's easy to do that using a file comparison utility. :-)
If you keep complete copies of every file in every version
every made... Cvs sits on top of rcs and is able to construct
every version while storing only the differences.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: 27 May 2000 17:08:21 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Of course it does. There wouldn't really be much point of GNOME
>> being a seperate entity if it weren't distinct in some way.
>> Visual distinctiveness in interfaces is one of the easiest sorts
>> of variety to get away with.
>
>Variety in a desktop is OK provided it's a consistant variety. The subtle
>differences between KDE and Gnome are not quite part of that. I don't want
>two visual interfaces, I want one that I control.
If you want control, you have to write it yourself. I'm happy to
pick what I like best from what others have done.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0
Date: 27 May 2000 17:18:40 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Exactly the same Linux gets installed as on a normal partition. The
>>difference is the boot sequence where Windows gets a chance to
>>poke the p-n-p ports first and apparently disturbs things on that
>>machine.
>
>Why would windows messing with PnP upset Linux? Surely Linux would take
>over, or can't it do a reset?
I don't know if it would break things, or if a freshly booted kernel
just assumes the hardware reset has been done.
>It's the PnP version. I had to do the following:
>pnpdump > /etc/isapnp.conf
>... edit the /etc/isapnp.conf file, making sure the settings are correct...
>isapnp /etc/isapnp.conf
I thought that was basically what sndconfig did for you. Could
you tell what went wrong in the automatically generated version?
>>Probing for ISA cards has a fair chance of locking some systems. They
>>have to make a tradeoff between the number of things they try to
>>auto-detect and the number of machines they lock up. This is
>>unfortunate, but reflects the nature of the hardware.
>
>Windows does this, and tells you that it might happen. It warns you when
>something like this might happen and what to do - why can't Linux do this?
It could. The hardware detect/install portion is not part of the
kernel and is being done separately by each distribution. It is
getting better with each release, but it is a tough job and
probably impossible to get completely right, especially for
hardware combinations that the testers don't have. You are
right that it would be a good idea if the installers had some sort of
log file and were able to skip the test that caused a crash
last time around.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Angry Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: 27 May 2000 22:22:33 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Variety in a desktop is OK provided it's a consistant variety. The subtle
: differences between KDE and Gnome are not quite part of that. I don't want
: two visual interfaces, I want one that I control.
I suppost that when you "make a choice" that you are out of control!
that makes you an addict.... kick your addiction....
--
Angry Bob
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0
Date: 27 May 2000 17:25:47 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This insistence on ignoring several other perfectly viable
>> options always annoyed me about WinDOS culture.
>
>And the blindness I see in Linux circles about Windows products is as
>equally annoying.
I don't think anyone is blind about most of those products' attempts
to lock you in through the use of proprietary file formats and
network protocols.
>Yes I could start using equivalents on Linux for some of the above
>packages, but that leaves me with a dilemma - the files aren't shareable
>between Linux and Windows. I'd have to start again with Mail or News etc.
If you control the mail server, you can use IMAP interchangably
with access to the same server-stored folders. An LDAP address
book will work across platforms as well.
>Netscape is one product I could share files with in that I could use the
>same bookmarks file.
You might even be able to share local mail folders - I haven't
tried that.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Will Linux run MSDOS programs
Date: 27 May 2000 17:31:21 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Sorry, I don't think your argument holds water.
>
>Well, think of it this way. Windows does not support Linux executables as
>it is not felt that anyone would want to do this; whereas Linux offers
>several alternatives to allow Windows apps to run on Linux. That tells me
>that Windows is what people want.
I look at it the other way around. Linux is the one trying to provide
what people want. Windows doesn't care.
>In any case, what I remember of Windows emulators is that they don't
>support everything, they run slower etc. Not that I've tried anything on
>Linux - just previous OS's attempts at this.
VMWare supports just about everything. Wine doesn't but it is
still pretty amazing. If you installed a full Mandrake, you've
got a copy. Try a game of solitare if it can see your
windows partition.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Jim Stuyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: You need to reset your antennae; you're not getting the signals from
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 22:46:19 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jack Troughton) writes:
>
> >Interestingly enough, there are no supporting URLs to any announcement
> >by IBM saying "warp is dead" in the "WinInfo Short Take" about this.
>
> Of course not. The article is quoted from zdnet, which is quoted
> from network news in the UK. It is all based on an article
> claiming that an unnamed IBM spokesperson provided the
> information. I just can't remember the last time IBM made any
> "official" announcements by way of anonymous sources talking to
> relatively unknown and less well respected correspondents for
> equally unknown and less well respected on line publications.
> Maybe it represents a new policy <g>?
"An IBM spokesperson" is NOT the same thing as your
characterization of "an *unnamed* IBM spokesperson."
The article in question does NOT say "unnamed."
On things OS/2-related, in the past, IBM's spokeperson
was Joe Stunkard who OFTEN was mentioned as "an
IBM spokesperson" or "IBM's spokeperson" without being
actually named as "Joe Stunkard."
When asked by the press, any member representing any
publication, the "IBM spokesperson" usually responds. This
was true, by the way, when *I* would ask an "IBM spokesperson"
for input to an article I prepared for my modest "Update/2"
publication, which I had for about three years before finally
retiring.
A "spokesperson" is just that, a person that speaks for an
organization.
Jim Stuyck
IBM-Retired (I add that so you *know* this is an authoritative
statement) ;-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight)
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 22:47:00 GMT
On Fri, 26 May 2000 10:15:10 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Quoting Arclight from alt.destroy.microsoft; Fri, 26 May 2000 14:58:23
>>On Thu, 25 May 2000 20:31:29 -0400, "Keith T Williams"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>1. Microsoft office (at least 4.3 and 97) crashes frequently.
>>
>>I've used 4.3, 95 & 97 and they have never crashed on me.
>
>Thanks for the data point.
I've used every version of office.
>>>2. Microsoft office is full of bugs (at least 4.3 and 97) that's why they
>>>issued (for 97) sr1 and sr2.
>>
>>What bugs would they be then?
>
>Troll.
What? I ain't no troll, just someone who is fed up of people whinging
at microsofts software when there isn't anything wrong with it.
TTFN
Arclight
Web Site:
http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight)
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 22:49:25 GMT
On Fri, 26 May 2000 20:35:47 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Quoting Arclight from alt.destroy.microsoft; Sat, 27 May 2000 15:16:35
> [...]
>>That sounds like a faulty installation of windows & office, if it were
>>bugs in office, I'd have experienced them.
>
>That sounds like pathetic apologist bullshit. If it was coherent
>thoughts in your words, I'd have understood them.
what the fuck is your problem you stupid piece of shit?
It ain't pathetic or bullshit it's the truth,
and it ain't apologist, because I ain't apologising
and there are coherent thoughts in my words, your just to fucking
stupid to make sense of it.
TTFN
Arclight
Web Site:
http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux Losers
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 23:04:45 GMT
On Sat, 27 May 2000 21:51:32 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If you're so happy why are you here with us losers?
>
He's upset that BG won't let him suck his cock.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
