Linux-Advocacy Digest #264, Volume #30 Thu, 16 Nov 00 05:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: I WANT WIN2k drivers! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Another Silent Computer :( ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights? ("Osugi Sakae")
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Sixth Sense (Steve Mading)
Re: RedHat BugList Summary (LuisMiguel Figueiredo)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Christopher Smith")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.linux.sucks
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 03:41:54 -0500
Giuliano Colla wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft;
> > > > >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >
> > > > >> >As a bonus, it makes this action the default for non-associated
> > > files...
> > > > >> >which means double clicking on ANY unregistered file type will open it
> > > in
> > > > >> >notepad instead of bringing up that damned 'which application' box.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And perhaps that's not at all what I wanted to do? This isn't a bonus,
> > > > >> BTW: it is the only thing your technique does. Unfortunately, it
> > > > >> doesn't do what I am describing at all.
> > > > >
> > > > >You want to add Notepad option for all file types, right?
> > > >
> > > > No, I wanted to be able to open any file with Notepad, at my option.
> > >
> > > Okay, here is how you do it.
> > > Start>Run> "Regedit"
> > > Go to:
> > > "HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\"
> > > if there is a sub key call "shell", go to it, otherwise, create it.
> > > In "HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\shell", delete any previous attempt to do the
> > > notepad.
> > > Then create a subkey to "HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\shell\" called "notepad"
> > > create a subkey to "HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\shell\notepad" called "command"
> > > Go to "HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\shell\notepad\command\" and double click the
> > > default value. (called "(Default)" )
> > > Enter "C:\Windows\Notepad.exe %1" at the edit string box that would appear.
> > >
> > > That should bring notepad as alternative for all files on the computer,
> > > (right click, and it would appear)
> > > If you don't want it this as a default action for unknown file types, go to:
> > > "HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\Unknown\shell" and change the default value there
> > > "(Default)" to "openas"
> > > This should do it.
> >
> > So when does it begin to get "INTUITIVE" ????
>
> I don't want to turn the knife in the wound, but on my linux
> KDE desktop I wanted to make Acrobat Reader the default for
> pdf document instead ot the PS reader, add kwrite besides
> kedit for C and C++ sources, and have Real Player default
> application for stream audio. As I'm too lazy to read
> documentation, I just gave a look on how it was done for
> other applications, and was able to figure out how to do it.
> It worked at first attempt.
Linux never promulgated the "intuitive" lie.
Microsoft does.
spot the difference.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: I WANT WIN2k drivers!
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 03:44:42 -0500
Quantum Leaper wrote:
>
> "Marc Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 09:52:24 GMT, Quantum Leaper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >"Milton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> On Wed, 15 Nov 2000 07:51:04 +1000, "steve erntner"
> > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >how hard is it to get drivers for aztech sound cards???
> > >>
> > >> In Linux, it's relatively simple.
> > >> http://lhd.zdnet.com/db/searchproduct.cgi?_catid=12
> > >>
> > >Linux does seem to support alot of discontinued products.
> > >
> > >> >all i want are win2k drivers for em...but do they exist?
> > >nooooooooooooooooo
> > >> >im about to break down and cry
> > >>
> > >> Don't use second-rate OS's and you won't be easily disappointed.
> > >
> > >He shouldn't have bought from a second rate sound card company, Aztech
> went
> > >out of business over a year ago.
> > >
> >
> > * alert! alert! Double-standard detected! *
> >
> > You know, one of the points about Windows *.* that is always harped upon
> > is how great driver support happens to be for peripherals. That
> > vendors make Windows drivers first and everyone else gets sloppy
> > seconds, if anything at all.
> >
> If you want a good legacy driver support than use Win9x not Win2K. Also if
> you read my other message I give him a suggestion on a driver to TRY, which
> was a Sound Blaster 16 driver. NT or 2K doesn't have the greatest driver
> support but it a hell of alot more stable than Win9x.
>
> > I'm got an ATI Rage Fury Pro that's less than a year old. Still doesn't
> > have non-beta 3D Win2k drivers. And the beta level drivers are very buggy.
> >
> Who fault is that? Microsofts or ATI (who writes the driver)?
It really doesn't matter.
It just puts the lie to the claim that Microsoft has the drivers
for everything...and the other lie that Microsoft drivers are better
than drivers for competing OS's.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Silent Computer :(
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 03:46:57 -0500
Frank Van Damme wrote:
>
> In bericht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peroreerde "mlw"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > [snippage]
> >
> > Finding a single issue and saying it is a system wide issue is a bit
> > self serving for your purpose, isn't it?
> >
> > There are many installation issues with Windows which fall under the
> > term difficult. Just upgrade to an ATI RAGE IIC in a functioning Windows
> > 98 box and many things will stop working. Why? because they can't
> > allocate a suitable frame buffer. Make sense? of course not, it isn't
> > supposed to. It means that ATI only supports a newer version of
> > direct-draw, different from what is currently installed, and you must
> > download a new version and install that from Microsoft.
>
> Two days ago, I tried installing windows 98 on someones computer.
> Installed. reboot. hung. Tried it over. Hung. Tried the '95. reboot.
> runs. installed drivers. reboot. Install more drivers. reboot. Turn of
> the computer and go home. The morning aftrwards: hung. No error messages,
> not a hint of what was going wrong. _Very_ user-friendly.
>
And Intuitive.
My intuition tells me....WINDOWS SUCKS!
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Osugi Sakae" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 18:36:18 +0900
In article <8uvf4s$aa8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> In article <8uvd9k$8om$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Osugi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Just an uneducated guess, but if you just went to a console and left
>> the misbehaving netscape process running, it might have caused some
>> problems - that isn't supposed to happen (and almost never does), but
>> you never know.
>>
>> You weren't running netscape as root, were you?
>
> I think at that point I was logged in as a user. Can't remember. I
> initially went in as root of course to set up the modem, then set up the
> ISP in Kppp and logged on for awhile to make sure it was working okay.
> I'm *pretty* sure I logged out as root because the last thing I did as
> root was to add the two setserial lines to the appropriate file so the
> modem would show up for all users. I wouldn't have been able to do that
> when Netscape locked up things. (Actually, I was still able to open up
> the "start" menu; i looked around for something akin to Windows' Task
> Manager to kill the errant process.)
Mandrake should have put an icon on your desktop called "Xkill" - if not,
you could try right clicking on the desktop and choosing run command (or
hit ALT+F2, it will pop up the same box) and run xkill. You curser will
change, and then you just left click on a Netscape window and it goes
bye-bye (hopefully).
> When I first got to the command prompt, it never even occurred to me to
> run a "jobs" command to see if Netscape was still going. What is the
> Linux equivalent to Task Manager? Do I have to go to a console and use
> the appropriate counterpart to "jobs", or does KDE have something
> useful?
What exactly happened to your gui? Was netscape still visible or not? It
has a way of hanging around, even after it crashes.
Anyhow, I use ps -aux to veiw running processes (see man ps for details).
Kde prolly has a gui version, but i've never looked. you can also use
"top" to see processes and the memory / cpu time they are using.
>> like someone suggested, try pan, which you can get from here:
>>
>> http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/PByName.html
>>
>> if it isn't on your 7.1 cd. IIRC, pan-0.8.0beta2-1mdk works well, but
>> try out the newer ones as well.
>
> Shoot, that site is even more confusing than the one at superpimp! They
> keep running you around in circles; I never did get to a file that could
> be downloaded.
>
Get used to that site, it is great for quickly getting a package you want
or need. go to the PByName.html page, click on the "i586" in the same row
as pan-0.8.0beta2-1mdk. The new page will tell you more than you want to
know about the package. At the top of the page in big letters is a link
to download the package (the text is the name of the package). Shift-Left
click and you are set.
later,
Osugi "I am not really an Anarchist" Sakae
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:27:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Easy. It isn't an emotional dislike. C++ just isn't suitable for the
> job. C++ is slower than C by an order of magnitude (almost as slow as
> Java). It is difficult to manage any sizable project in C++. Multiple
> inheritance and friend functions are just two reasons. C++ is almost
> impossible to maintain. C++ has all the weakness of C and none of its
> advantages. I can think of any number of alternatives to both C and
C++.
> But C does have the history behind it.
Precisely. Operating Systems, unlike application software,
need to be quick on its execution. C++ just does not cut it.
With its on the fly resolution of a member function to execute
(polymorphism) and other nitty gritties, god knows how long
long, compared to C, does C++ need to execute a simple function.
It is not an emotional dislike, but due to some concerns which
are very practical.
--
Ng Kai Hoe Raymond ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.gazy.org
Technical Director, Aeon/Xe Technology
http://www.aeonxe.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: 16 Nov 2000 09:43:58 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:8uvvmk$pdc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> : Limited function? Shortcuts are great!
:>
:> Their funcitionality is a subset of the functionality of symbolic
:> links in Unix.
: OTOH, links only have a subset of the functionality of shortcuts.
: What's say we call it even ?
If the above is true, I will. But I doubt it. See below.
[snip]
: Shortcuts are somewhat limited because they operate at the shell level, but
: that does offer them certain advantages links do not have.
: For example:
: Shortcuts can point to printers, computers, URLs etc.
I fail to understand why this is even needed. You refer to a computer
by its hostname. Now, if this alias were at a low level, such that you
could, for example go to http://foo and http://bar and have them be
the same thing, then that would make sense, but shortcuts are only
at the interactive GUI level, where it doesn't matter what it's called.
The same is true for shortcuts to URLS or shortcuts to printers. These
things are just strings. A shortcut URL makes no sense since a URL is
something you *type* anyway. Once you've got a clickable icon thingy
to refer to a URL, who cares what it's called? You aren't typing it
in anymore at that point, you are just clicking on an icon, so who cares
what it's called?
: You can make a shortcut to an object, move the shortcut to another drive and
: it will still resolve.
This is also true of symbolic links with full paths in Unix. Furthermore,
if you actually *want* the relative path to change, you have that option
too - it all depends on whether you start your path at the root or
use a "../../.." type of path.
: You can make a shortcut to an object, move the shortcut to another computer
Stop - "Move the shortcut to another computer" how? Only in the explorer
window, or does this work everywhere else too?
: and it will still resolve to the original object on the original computer
: and access it (assuming the other computer has appropriate permissions).
: You can make a shortcut to an object on a remote computer, disconnect from
: that machine and the shortcut will re-connect to it if necessary to resolve
: the shortcut when you open it (assuming correct permissions etc).
: Aliases on MacOS and Shadows on OS/2 have similar pros/cons vs links, for
: the same reasons.
:> Shortcuts are handy, no doubt, but they only cover a small subset of
:> what can be done with unix symbolic links, which is why they look
:> like they have limited functionality to someone used to unix. If
:> you don't try to compare them to symbolic links, then sure, they
:> do a fine job. Something doesn't lose functionality just because
:> something else is better.
: It's an invalid comparison because a) they operate at totally different
: levels (filesystem vs shell) and b) have almost completely different
: features and purposes. About the only similarity they share is that both
: can point to files.
True - they are totally different. I don't consider the things shortcuts
do to be *good* things though, because they lock you into one user interface.
(By making you rely on things that don't exist "for real" on the underlying
system. You can't "fopen()" a shortcut in a program, and so they only work
for those programs that expressly make use of them with special code. (the
MS user interface). (When you make the change at a lower level, it retro-
actively works in old programs that never heard of the idea.) )
------------------------------
From: LuisMiguel Figueiredo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: RedHat BugList Summary
Date: 16 Nov 2000 09:58:59 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Myers) wrote in
<SGwQ5.4210$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Marc Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> [ . . ]
>
>The only people being naive here are the penguinistas. We have heard
>the continual mantra that OSS is superior, produces less bugs, if ANY
>bugs at all, because of all these "reviewers" that constantly review
>EVERY SINGLE line of code ALL THE TIME.
>
>However, we know this to be false and the numbers speak for themselves.
I don't know that...
>
> - OSS is superior
True
> * Then why are there more bugs in Linux than any other of the
> closed source projects combined?
Except for win2k... A 80 MB service pack!? That's not a service pack it's a new
OS.
Am i'm still waiting to the fix of the fixpack...
elmig
http://www.alunos.ipb.pt/~ee3931
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 20:07:27 +1000
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8v0a8u$isu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : news:8uvvmk$pdc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> :> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :>
> :> : Limited function? Shortcuts are great!
> :>
> :> Their funcitionality is a subset of the functionality of symbolic
> :> links in Unix.
>
> : OTOH, links only have a subset of the functionality of shortcuts.
>
> : What's say we call it even ?
>
> If the above is true, I will. But I doubt it. See below.
Whether or not you consider the extra functions of shortcuts to be useful or
valid is irrelevant. They _do_ do things that links don't.
>
> [snip]
> : Shortcuts are somewhat limited because they operate at the shell level,
but
> : that does offer them certain advantages links do not have.
>
> : For example:
> : Shortcuts can point to printers, computers, URLs etc.
>
> I fail to understand why this is even needed. You refer to a computer
> by its hostname. Now, if this alias were at a low level, such that you
> could, for example go to http://foo and http://bar and have them be
> the same thing, then that would make sense, but shortcuts are only
> at the interactive GUI level, where it doesn't matter what it's called.
> The same is true for shortcuts to URLS or shortcuts to printers. These
> things are just strings. A shortcut URL makes no sense since a URL is
> something you *type* anyway. Once you've got a clickable icon thingy
> to refer to a URL, who cares what it's called? You aren't typing it
> in anymore at that point, you are just clicking on an icon, so who cares
> what it's called?
I really don't understand what you're trying to say.
The point of being able to have shortcuts to any GUI object is that you find
it *once*, then make a shortcut to it and you don't have to go through
whatever rigamarole you had to go through to navigate to it the first time.
You just open the icon and its there. I fail to see how what the shortcut
is called is relevant at all.
The advantage to these things is that you can move them around, or send them
to other people, or take them with you.
> : You can make a shortcut to an object, move the shortcut to another drive
and
> : it will still resolve.
>
> This is also true of symbolic links with full paths in Unix. Furthermore,
> if you actually *want* the relative path to change, you have that option
> too - it all depends on whether you start your path at the root or
> use a "../../.." type of path.
A *lot* of links don't use absolute paths. More importantly, if a link
breaks it won't try to fix itself, nor does it automatically keep track of
the target if it moves.
These are all just UI issues.
> : You can make a shortcut to an object, move the shortcut to another
computer
>
> Stop - "Move the shortcut to another computer" how? Only in the explorer
> window, or does this work everywhere else too?
Floppy disk, email, whatever. The shortcut encodes information like the
computer name, path to the file etc.
It's very handy.
> : and it will still resolve to the original object on the original
computer
> : and access it (assuming the other computer has appropriate permissions).
> : You can make a shortcut to an object on a remote computer, disconnect
from
> : that machine and the shortcut will re-connect to it if necessary to
resolve
> : the shortcut when you open it (assuming correct permissions etc).
>
> : Aliases on MacOS and Shadows on OS/2 have similar pros/cons vs links,
for
> : the same reasons.
>
> :> Shortcuts are handy, no doubt, but they only cover a small subset of
> :> what can be done with unix symbolic links, which is why they look
> :> like they have limited functionality to someone used to unix. If
> :> you don't try to compare them to symbolic links, then sure, they
> :> do a fine job. Something doesn't lose functionality just because
> :> something else is better.
>
> : It's an invalid comparison because a) they operate at totally different
> : levels (filesystem vs shell) and b) have almost completely different
> : features and purposes. About the only similarity they share is that
both
> : can point to files.
>
> True - they are totally different. I don't consider the things shortcuts
> do to be *good* things though, because they lock you into one user
interface.
And links lock you into a certain filesystem, so ?
Shortcuts are a *User Interface* feature and a damn useful one.
You might care to all decent GUIs have some equivalent - KDE with .kdelnks,
for example.
> (By making you rely on things that don't exist "for real" on the
underlying
> system. You can't "fopen()" a shortcut in a program, and so they only
work
> for those programs that expressly make use of them with special code.
(the
> MS user interface). (When you make the change at a lower level, it retro-
> actively works in old programs that never heard of the idea.) )
But the disadvantage is you lose features like being able to refer to
high-level objects, because something as low-level as a filesystem can't
know about the UI implemented on top of it.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
