Linux-Advocacy Digest #347, Volume #30 Tue, 21 Nov 00 16:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Curtis)
Another happy Linux user ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: MS Office goes SUBSCRIPTION! (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats ! (James)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Another happy Linux user (Mig)
Re: Small Distro? (mark)
Re: Another happy Linux user ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights? ("Evan DiBiase")
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Small Distro? (mark)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Curtis <alliem@kas*spam*net.com>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.linux.sucks
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:12:01 -0500
T. Max Devlin wrote...
> >You see, part of the problem with a lot of us comp
> >(experts|hobbyists|professionals) trying to understand the average user
> >who does most other things than tinker and show above average interest in
> >their computers and how they can get them to work better, is that we fail
> >to be able to really understand how they think.
>
> Well, as I mentioned in my previous post, this very particular issue has
> been my bread-and-butter for the last twelve years.
I don't much care about this. It may indicate to me that you may have
some experience but I was not born yesterday. There are a lot of people
who post here spouting credentials and their knowledge is lacking.
There's no one answer to anything we're discussing here and human
psychology can be quite illusive. To grasp how or why people think, you
need to know *all* the circumstances, something you never know.
> I am not a tinkerer
> by nature, though I like to rig things to be efficient for repetitive
> tasks. I study how average end users (including home users) think, and
> I must say without false modesty that I understand how they think.
> Allow me to explain it to you.
>
> Yes, it is a problem with comp experts/advocates/professionals that they
> don't understand how casual/amateur/end users think. But the reason
> this is a problem is not so much that you expect they wouldn't question
> "why are you changing it?" or wanting the same thing everyone else has,
> but that you don't know how to answer.
>
> Of course, if you did know how to tell your sister why you are
> interfering, or calm you're mom's fears that a Windows PC gets better
> "round the corner" support than a Mac, you'd know the reason they are
> using Windows has nothing to do with technical decisions, professional
> or amateur, but with legal issues of restraint of trade and
> monopolization.
Did you ask me what I said? Don't make any assumptions please. :=)
> >One problem I had with my
> >mother when she taught me how to drive was that she always assumed that
> >my abilities could not exceed hers. IOW's if she cannot do a particular
> >manoeuvre, then I couldn't. If she took a long time to master an ability
> >then I shouldn't be able to learn it in a snap. It's the same thing I'm
> >seeing here. If I see the problems with Windows, and furthermore make the
> >necessary effort to learn an alternative and install it, then the average
> >user will or should show a similar interest.
>
> Perhaps you've confused the average user with someone who wants to spend
> a lot of time making up for someone else's deficiencies in designing a
> computer OS.
Nope.
> I think maybe you just have your own private concerns
> about what amount of effort is "necessary".
Nope. Do you?
> People aren't stupid;
Agreed.
> they
> know that adding things to a Windows computer is a good way to get the
> third degree from the local Micro-brained weenie next time you ask them
> why it crashes on occasion.
Same for Linux. Not for the Mac since the Mac architecture is more
controlled.
> "Have you installed any shareware? Any new drivers? It must be a DLL
> from an application vendor. What version of IE do you have? Which
> service pack? Have you replaced the hardware to see if that's the
> problem?..."
This is if they have significant trouble, something which most don't. Are
we talking about the same population here, or is this an American thing?
> >If they don't then they're
> >just lemmings or a conspiracy theory is formulated as the cause of the
> >Windows dominance.
>
> The conspiracy theories are formulated as results of Windows dominance.
Indeed they are. That doesn't make them right.
> The cause isn't a conspiracy theory; just simple monopolization and
> tying.
Amiga Persecution Complex n.
The disorder suffered by a particularly egregious variety of bigot, those
who believe that the marginality of their preferred machine is the result
of some kind of industry-wide conspiracy (for without a conspiracy of
some kind, the eminent superiority of their beloved shining jewel of a
platform would obviously win over all, market pressures be damned!) Those
afflicted are prone to engaging in flame wars and calling for boycotts
and mailbombings. Amiga Persecution Complex is by no means limited to
Amiga users; NeXT, NeWS, OS/2, Macintosh, LISP, and GNU users are also
common victims (and Linux users frequently used to display symptoms
before Linux started winning).
:=)
> >MS became a monopoly because they know how people
> >think. I do agree that since becoming a monopoly, they have exercised
> >some strong arm tactics to further their monopoly. However, to me, just
> >as how Stephen King will today write shit, and it still becomes a best
> >seller, the Windows user base will continue to expand despite any great
> >effort on MS's part.
>
> You notice Stephen King isn't the only horror writer around,
Windows isn't the only OS around either. :=)
> though he
> may be the only one you've heard of.
I've heard of many others. He's just perhaps the most popular among them
and he abuses it. Good example.
> MS became a monopoly by acting anti-competitively (the only way you can
> do it in a free market).
That doesn't take away from the momentum that's behind Windows at
present.
> It is illegal to attempt to monopolize, so
> that's a crime right there.
Isn't the MS case a civil matter. Are civil matters concerned with
criminal acts? Are all illegal actions crimes? Hmmm?
> So you pretend that Windows is wonderful
I pretend no such thing. Is your perception of the average user just as
off base based on you personal prejudices as you expound on below?
> and we haven't suffered more than a decade of almost complete
> suppression of innovation and development in the PC markets because of
> Microsoft's criminal behavior, and its all just a great marketing job
> and most people are sheep.
A twisted perspective. I don't think I wish to hear from you how people
think. You seem to have your own personal hangups and yet you dare to
accuse me of letting my own personal hangups interfere with my judgement
of how average users think. Again, PLEEAASE, Sir Max, give me a small
break here.
> Just don't expect me to consider it a
> reasonable opinion.
<Yawn> After reading your self-righteous, arrogant invective, I couldn't
give a rats ass about your opinion. :=)
--
| ,__o
!ACM _-\_<, A thing is not necessarily true because
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ a man dies for it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Another happy Linux user
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:13:38 GMT
The OS that runs the internet, but makes it such a PITA to connect to
it. Doesn't make any sense to me, but here is another satisfied Linux
soul:
*************************************************************************
Path:
bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net!wnslaves3!wnmasters2!wn4feed!worldnet.att.net!207.172.3.44!feed2.news.rcn.net!rcn!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.frii.net!easynews!uunet!dfw.uu.net!news-feeds.jump.net!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Success
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 22:28:32 GMT
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <8v4be7$ar6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <8uudsj$ci7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<8uuel4$de5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <8v13l8$jii$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<#th4b7JUAHA.328@cpmsnbbsa09>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 160.79.188.18
X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Nov 17 22:28:32 2000 GMT
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.72 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x64.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client
160.79.188.18
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDthe_herring
Xref: wnmasters2 alt.os.linux.mandrake:86457
X-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 22:40:08 GMT
(bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net)
At midnight last night, I was finally able to dial out of my box under
Linux. What I did was:
1: Record what resources and IRQs Linux was assigning
2: In BIOS, set Onboard Port 1 to the first of these. (02f8, 3)
Disable Onboard Port 2.
3: On reboot, the machine assigned a second port by itself (03e8, 4)
4: Reinstall Mandrake.
It worked!
>From what I saw, Mandrake tends to want to install to these resources,
regardless of what your BIOS is prepared to support. And if your
machine provides 3 ports, it will assign resources to all of them,
even
if they conflict.
Don't know whether this will help anyone or not, hope it does!
The Herring
PS: Thanks to those who helped me!
**********************************************
Yea, yea, I know, it's the machine, it's the user, it's that
particular distribution, Linux is the kernel, it worked in 5 minutes
for me, he should have read xxxxx amd so forth.
Why is it that such simple things like dialing up to the internet
become missions of mercy when trying to run Linsux?
claire
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: MS Office goes SUBSCRIPTION!
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:16:06 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 20 Nov 2000 16:41:06 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> What's your point? If you plan to stay current with the software, it's a
>> great deal.
>
>This is called...not only do you not own the sofware your purchased,
>now MS won't even let you own your own data.
Why should you own your own data? After all, it was
generated using Microsoft's tool, and they have all rights thereto! :-) :-)
(Spot The Sarcasm.)
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random data here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:20:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Brian Langenberger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 20 Nov 2000 21:04:24 GMT
<8vc3ko$sa5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Dan Hinojosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><copy & paste woes snipped>
>
>: Thanks you crazy bunch of penguins.
>
>Try highlighting with the left mouse button and pasting with
>the middle mouse button. No extra keystrokes necessary.
>It should work practically everywhere in X.
>
If you don't have a three-button mouse, you may have to configure
X to emulate 3 mouse buttons, and depress both buttons
simultaneously in order to paste.
(Guess who gave us the two-button mouse?
M - I - C ..... R - O - S .... O - O - F - F - T ... :-) )
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- with apologies to Michael Eisner
------------------------------
From: James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats !
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 22:18:58 +0200
Guys,
Have just spent a few days playing with ML 7.2 using KDE2. Must admit that
I am very impressed with the improvements. Even between ML 7.1 and 7.2.
Now USB printing, USB scanning is working (albeit not by default). And my
modem and ppp worked first time in KDE2.
In fact all my hardware that I have tested is working OK, including UDMA-66
on /dev/hda. Still have to try out the specific capabilities of my
CD-Writer (an HP9310) and DVD reader, however.
Well done Linux community! You now have a desktop which may stand a chance
against W2k. The apps are not quite there yet. E.g., downloaded Netscape
6 which is even worse than Netscape 4.7 (why is the file>page_setup menu
grayed out? Cannot even select landscape mode when printing).
The system seems pretty fast - once I set up UDMA-66. Is there any way
that I can determine whether my graphics system, a NVidia GeForce256 made
by GigaByte, is optimally configured? Dragging screens seem a bit sluggish.
James :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:10:21 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Curtis wrote:
>Les Mikesell wrote...
>> > You have a gross double standard. You wish them to learn so much, but on
>> > your terms. We wish them to learn a few things, you scream "bloody hell,
>> > but why make them learn so much?"
>>
>> No, I am reacting to the reverse claim that windows users don't need
>> to know anything which is not true at all. They do have to learn
>> lot, yet they end up only knowing about special cases that will
>> likely be different in next year's version. They are not encouraged
>> to see the potential for using the computer to work for them as
>> they notice the repeating patterns in their jobs. That is, there is no
>> straightforward way to go from the interactive use of typical
>> windows tools to automation of the same action. The program
>> may have its own special-case internal language for automation
>> but it has nothing in common with normal use.
>
>You have a very impractical and hopelessly purist view on things. How
>many computer users do you think know how to use grep, Perl and regex's
>to help deal with the repetitive aspects of text editing. How many people
>know how to use scipting languages to automated repetitive tasks or even
>know how to write simple batch commands. I'm one of those non-
>professionals who knows and believe me I feel like a fish out of water.
>
It's interesting to note that in my organisation, Word documents have
virtually disappeared. Larger docs now appear as slide presentations,
smaller ones just as emails. Word's development over the last few
years really sum up the 'learn special cases that will likely be
different in next year's version' comment above. Our own docs are
increasingly created as html docs to get away from this problem.
Thus current trends are tending to take us away from a microsoft-
centric world. I note that even Unix is being mentioned again on
major internal web-sites, as well as comments about the IS depts'
committment to a multi-software-vendor environment.
Mark
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:25:52 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Giuliano Colla writes:
>
> >>>> sfcybear writes:
>
> >>>>> That still leaves the FACT that NT uptime clocks are only acurate for
> >>>>> 49.7 days while Unix clocks are 10 times more acurate than that.
> >>>>> remaining accurate for 497 days.
>
> >>>> You're confusing range with accuracy. Both clocks could be equally
> >>>> accurate. Range usually comes at the expense of precision. That is,
> >>>> the same number of bits can provide a greater range if the precision
> >>>> is reduced.
>
> >>> Maybe the terms he used aren't exact.
>
> >> You're not sure?
>
> > It depends wether you're speaking of clock accuracy (which is a hardware
> > issue, not OS related, and therefore off topic), or of uptime estimate
> > accuracy.
>
> Which do think fits into the context of the discussion, and how does
> your "depends" matter?
>
Clock accuracy of course has nothing to do with the context
of the discussion, but uptime estimate accuracy has to do.
That's what he was speaking of. If you're out of range
you've lost all accuracy.
> > Whenever uptime estimate is completely wrong you may well say that
> > accuracy of the measured value is not so good, even if clock accuracy
> > comes from a caesium primary. In that case with Unix you have an
> > accurate measurements for a time 10 times longer than with NT.
>
> That's range, not accuracy.
The out of range error may be the reason to loose any
measurement accuracy. A reading of 2 instead of 51.7 is a
2500% error. How do you define accuracy? Something like the
difference between actual and measured value, divided by
actual value, or something different?
>
> >>> But if someone comes to your home to measure the floor in order to
> >>> deliver you the wall to wall carpet,
>
> >> That's a matter of fitting some material into a space. Rather different
> >> from an uptime measurement, which is open-ended.
>
> > That's an abstract notion.
>
> Not at all.
>
> > Any value may be open ended.
>
> Incorrect; consider the amount of carpeting example.
>
What will be the upper limit? The average room or the
Versailles castle ballroom? Or carpeting the fifth avenue to
give it a Christmas look? You see, it's not so obvious, even
if you're just selling carpets.
However what do you suggest for uptime? 64 bits with 1
second resolution gives a range of 50 billion years (roughly
the Universe age). Following what you say it's not
appropriate because it's not open-ended!
> > Writing a program you must decide what will be your upper limit, and
> > reserve space accordingly. If your decision is wrong, then you've made
> > a silly mistake.
>
> No program writing is involved in computing the amount of carpeting
> needed.
Off topic, but have you ever heard about architecture
programs, used to design interiors?
>
> >>> and does it with a micrometric gauge, providing .1 mil accuracy, but
> >>> spanning only 3 inches, you'd call him an idiot, wouldn't you?
>
> >> He isn't the one who chose the poor analogy.
>
> > Maybe you don't grasp it,
>
> Maybe I did grasp it.
>
> > but if you select a word size and a time resolution, you set your
> > upper limit.
>
> If you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would realize that I
> already grasped it:
>
> DT] Range usually comes at the expense of precision. That is, the same
> DT] number of bits can provide a greater range if the precision is reduced.
>
> Note that the correct word is now precision, not accuracy.
>
> > If the choice is poor you end up exactly like that. Using milliseconds
> > to measure uptime isn't much smarter than using a gauge to measure a
> > floor.
>
> If uptime is the only thing being measured with that choice, then you
> would have a point. You don't suppose they're using that same value
> for something else, do you?
If they use something not appropriate for uptime, then
they're making the same mistake of the gauge. The man
measuring the floor could have a gauge in his pocket for
other purposes, but it's not appropriate for measuring the
floor.
Do you believe that a second counter, with an appropriate
resolution would have been such a task to endanger system
performance? Or a few instructions to handle overflow of the
millisecond counter would have been dangerous?
Unix had a 10 ms counter, and they judged that a range of
over one year and a half was enough, so they didn't bother.
MS roughly 30 years later had a 1 ms counter and didn't
bother either. Judging apparently that a range of one month
and a half was enough.
>
> > If you think differently I'll address elsewhere whenever in need
> > a) to measure my floor, b) to measure uptime.
>
> Be sure to write a program to handle (a), with appropriate upper limits.
Whenever in need I'll do it. But you may be sure that
existing interior design programs are using appropriate
upper limits: the feature is visible, competition is present
and if they made it as crappy as MS, they wouldn't survive
for long time.
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another happy Linux user
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:26:14 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Yea, yea, I know, it's the machine, it's the user, it's that
> particular distribution, Linux is the kernel, it worked in 5 minutes
> for me, he should have read xxxxx amd so forth.
>
> Why is it that such simple things like dialing up to the internet
> become missions of mercy when trying to run Linsux?
Well Claire its obvious that you didnt even know that such things are more
serious in Windows Ahhh... coming to my mind problems with
- NdisWan
- NIC's that cant bind to protocols
- Internalmodems and interrupts
- Windows not releasing serial ports
- VIA chipsets with Windows and PCI controllers
- Having to disable PnPOS in the BIOS to get NIC's installed
Ahhh.... its so easy when the hardware sucks to fix things in Windows...
come on gal can you solve any these problems in Windows?
--
Cheers
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Small Distro?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:34:12 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, LuisMiguel Figueiredo wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam Warner) wrote in <8vdqhh$4a8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>> [ . . ]
>>the
>>
>>Before anyone jumps on me--yes there is also the dselect interface.
>>
>>Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>And there's debian 1.3
>small, fast, nice!
>
I think debian 1.3 (aka 'bo') was the last libc5 version of debian, so
if you're really strapped for space, it's slightly slimmer. The linux
router project used bo as the basis for this reason, iirc.
400M should allow a reasonable installation, however.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Another happy Linux user
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:36:50 GMT
I've installed Windows form v 2.0 all the way to the present on
hundreds, if not thousands of machines over the years and the only one
in your list that I have had problems with is any motherboard using
the VIA chipset..Yukkk...
I am excepting the earliest versions of PNP though because the first
versions simply didn't work correctly, either under Windows or Linux.
The difference between Windows and Linux is that Windows has solved
all of those growing pains over the years and Linux has not. Damm
Linux still can't even recognize the correct amount of memory
installed.
It is generally behind the 8-ball when attempting to incorporate new
hardware interfaces that Windows already has. And until the hardware
manufactures can actually make some money selling hardware to
Penguinista's, it will continue to stay that way.
claire
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:26:14 +0100, Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Yea, yea, I know, it's the machine, it's the user, it's that
>> particular distribution, Linux is the kernel, it worked in 5 minutes
>> for me, he should have read xxxxx amd so forth.
>>
>> Why is it that such simple things like dialing up to the internet
>> become missions of mercy when trying to run Linsux?
>
>Well Claire its obvious that you didnt even know that such things are more
>serious in Windows Ahhh... coming to my mind problems with
>- NdisWan
>- NIC's that cant bind to protocols
>- Internalmodems and interrupts
>- Windows not releasing serial ports
>- VIA chipsets with Windows and PCI controllers
>- Having to disable PnPOS in the BIOS to get NIC's installed
>
>Ahhh.... its so easy when the hardware sucks to fix things in Windows...
>come on gal can you solve any these problems in Windows?
------------------------------
From: "Evan DiBiase" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux INstability & Netscape : Insights?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:38:20 +0500
In article <8v61q9$jdj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "MH"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why is it that Netscape can ship a product that is broken in SO many
> areas
> (address book, Java, dysfunctional menu items,etc,.) but if a windows
> product had one tenth as many out of the box problems it would be
> laughed out of existence?
Perhaps because there haven't been many web browsers in Linux. This is
starting to change (witness Mozilla, Konqueror, and Opera).
> Easy. No one is paying for the linux version. This is the accountability
> you get with open source. Not that the folks at KDE aren't doing a great
> job, they are! It's amazing to me. I feel retail products coming out of
> KDE once the kinks are worked out of Koffice. Then watch the faithful
> turn on them. Linuxers are a tough crowd.
If your "This is the accountability you get with open source" statement
is supposed to be a cricicism of the Open Source/Free Software model, I'd
like to point out that Netscape Navigator versions < 6 are not Open
Source.
How exactly do you "feel retail products coming out of KDE?" KDE is a
desktop environment, not a company.
Furthermore, why would Linux users "turn on [KDE]?"
> In another 8 years perhaps?
What is supposed to happen in another eight years?
-Evan
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:42:55 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 21 Nov 2000 04:16:02 -0600
<6WrS5.9453$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Jacques Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> If you'd done any work on a Unix box, you'd know. Click at the beginning
>> of the text you want to copy, drag to the end (DO NOT click there!),
>> go to where you want to paste the text, click the middle button. Voila.
>> If you have only a two-button mouse, click both buttons at once.
>
>This annoys me. One of my most common paste operations is to copy some
>text, highlight some other text and paste, deleting the text in the second
>document and replacing it with the pasted text. Can't do that.
>
>It also seems that you can't have highlighted text in more than one
>document.
The X Selection protocol currently does not allow more than one window
to have the "selection token". Most applications in X -- xterm,
for example -- dehighlight their selected area if they lose ownership
of the selection token (someone else takes it, usually because the
user went over to another window and highlighted something else).
This is arguably stupid, but it also makes it fairly clear who has
the token for subsequent pastes.
(One interesting exception: the Motif text widget will highlight
*all* of its viewers (one can have multiple text widgets in
an application, all pointing to the same source) when the
application controlling them has the selection token (actually,
the Motif library handles the gory details thereof). However,
all of them will dehighlight if the selection token is lost.)
I think Windows wins out, here -- but then, I think Windows
probably had a bit more marketing input than MIT did
back in 84 (?). :-) One might be able to do something using
an intermediate tool such as xclipboard, but it's not horribly
pretty as a solution. (kwrite tries to do cut and paste with CTRL-X,
CTRL-C, and CTRL-V, but it doesn't quite work right either, in
RedHat 6.2 anyway. Might be a bug.)
It also may be because of a gigantic misunderstanding in the
programming cummunity; obviously, the highlighting doesn't
have to tie in with the selection token. (But then, how does
one tell who's going to feed the paste? One minor problem I have
with Windows is that I occasionally paste the wrong bit of text -- and
that bit can be arbitrarilly large; thank goodness for undo! --
because a previous copy didn't go through properly. With X,
the main risk is pasting nothing.)
X also has 8 rotating cut buffers as well. I'm not sure
when they get involved; I'll have to re-read the documentation.
Presumably, these are for smallish pieces of text.
There is also (IIRC) the notion of a "secondary select" -- this may
assist in your question if the app is sufficiently smart
to implement it. However, I think the highlighting thereof
is application-specific.
Most of all of this goo is handled by the underlying widget set
(such as GTK) which means either the app never sees it, or doesn't
concern itself with the gloppy details.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Small Distro?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 20:36:23 +0000
In article <3a1a7adb.104951256@news>, mitch wrote:
>On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:41:08 +0000, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>I've found monkey linux a good option. It's quite an old distro, so it
>>is very small.
>>
>>It comes with netscape3, X, sendmail, pine, etc on about 5 floppies.
>>
>>http://www.spsselib.hiedu.cz/monkey/docs/english.htm
>>
>
>Cheers Ed, I`ll check it out. I take it that I can still upgrade the
>kernel and all the apps in the usual way, despite the distro size?
>
>mitch
>
I think monkey uses a fat16 filesystem rather than ext2, so it's not
quite as robust as a larger distro.
I would imagine so long as you keep support for its root filesystem
you could upgrade as normal.
Mark
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
