Linux-Development-Sys Digest #252, Volume #6 Sun, 10 Jan 99 20:14:16 EST
Contents:
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Perry Pip)
Re: Sound Blaster Live! (** LuCiFeR **)
Re: How to run Windows Applications on Linux ("Jim Ross")
Re: How to run Windows Applications on Linux (Chip Sintax)
Re: Kernel 2.2.0-pre6 (mlw)
Re: Open Configuration Storage - was Registry for Linux (George MacDonald)
/dev/pts (Adam Popik)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (jedi)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (jedi)
Re: blocksize / file write speed anomaly (Waldek Hebisch)
Re: Kernel 2.2.0-pre6 (Frank Hale)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 21:14:53 GMT
On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 17:59:53 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Yes, but they are just co-owners. Take a look at the Gtk+ and Gnome
>> sources and you'll see copyrights not only owned owned by Redhat, but buy
>> FSF, and dozens of other individuals.
>
>Look at the sources of control-panel and you will see a different
>thing.
Control-panel is an application, not a core library. It's not part of
Gnome but was written specifically for the RH dist (although some other
dists are using it. I'm running RH5.2 and I don't even use control panel.
>> >Red Hat does own the code they create, just like Troll Tech and Microsoft.
>> >That you have a copy of it under the GPL doesn't mean they can't later
>> >re-release it under a proprietary license.
>>
>> But they would have to get dozens of other developers to go along with it.
>> You can be sure many would either flatly reject or ask for a peice of the
>> action.
>
>Dozens? It depends. Some pieces of software are written nearly 100% by
>Red Hat. ORBit, for one thing.
The AUTHORS file in the CVS ORBit distribution contains half a dozen
non-redhat authors. rcs2log indicates patches from at least a dozen
others. Furthermore, LGPL gaurantees the other developers can fork it
any time they want.
>> In this respect, i personally feel Gtk/Gnome offers a better contract for
>> developers.
>
>Compared to what? KDE? KDE is in exactly the same position.
KDE is not in the same position. Qt offers a different contract to
developers than what Gtk+ offers. You can't deny it's different.
I feel developers most definitely should understand the licence terms of
any libraries they use and make their own decisions.
How, you, I or anyone else feels about these differences is a matter of
personal judgement. You obviously trust Troll Tech. I personnally don't
trust Troll Tech or Redhat. Both are businnesses acting in the interest of
their own bottom line. I just feel the GPL/LGPL terms offer better
protection for contributing developers. That's strictly my opinion.
Please understand I think you have done excellent work. You have built a
wonderful house and you're sharing it with everybody. You even let people
build their own additions to it. I just don't want to see a tornado come
along and rip your house away. I think the Gnome house is more tornado
proof. I have read your signed contract with Troll Tech and I still feel
that way. Did you even bother to consult a single Norwegian attorny before
signing that thing??
>It could be that KDE app writers don't advertise as much.
>I have released 5 apps for KDE and you won't find one in freshmeat.
OK. I checked the KDE apps page, and both the Gtk/Gnome app pages and they
are about even.
>Choice of language is way, way, overhyped.
I strongly disagree. Languages are tools. A programmer chooses the best
tool available for a job based on 1) suitability of the tool for the
particular job and 2) his knowledge of how to use the tool or his time
available to learn how to use a new tool. The more tools available for him
to choose from, the more chances he will use the best tool.
>I wrote C bindings for Qt. Do you know how many people downloaded them in
>the first month? 20.
>
Writing a C binding to a C++ toolkit is kinda going backwards. I see C as
a mid-level langauge. It's a good platform independant abstraction of
assembly, perhaps as low level as such a platform independant abstraction
can be. It's a common focal point to bind higher level languages to. Take
a look at
http://www.gtk.org/language-bindings.html
Eleven different languages. This will be big plus for Gnome when these
bindings are more developed.
>I wrote a tutorial for KDE programming on c++. Actually just a draft of the
>first third of the tutorial. Downloads in the first month? 356.
What does that have to do with language bindings? I'm sure the Gnome and
Gtk tutorals many downloads to.
------------------------------
From: ** LuCiFeR ** <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sound Blaster Live!
Date: 10 Jan 1999 17:10:26 GMT
Am I the only one who got his hardware running under Linux with no
problems but still has trouble with his hardware under Windows after weeks
of trying? :)
I have no experiences with SoundBlaster Live! as I have a Soundblaster AWE
64 PnP..
But I got my 64 PnP working using the isapnp tools and loading the module
with the parameters i set with those isapnp tools..
The soundcard in my laptop i got working by downloading a trial version of
OSS/Free and letting it detect my soundcard.. then i unstalled OSS and
used the settings it found in my kernel. Although this might not help you
much since you know what soundcard you have and you still can't get it to
work it's still worth a try. OSS has the big advantage you don't have to
recompile stuff just to screw around with your settings and various sound
drivers.
--
Tsjauw,
Jan David
========================================
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
homepage: http://www.twi.tudelft.nl/~tw576595
netmail: 2:286/111.4
bbs nr: +31-15-3105230
fax nr: +31-15-3105230
========================================
------------------------------
From: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How to run Windows Applications on Linux
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 17:17:44 -0500
Robin V. Stacey wrote in message ...
>> Santa's making a list. If You could have any piece of software ported
>> to Linux, other than Microsoft's what would it be?
Paint Shop Pro 5 by Jasc
Jim
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chip Sintax)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How to run Windows Applications on Linux
Date: 10 Jan 1999 22:48:21 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 17:17:44 -0500, Jim Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Robin V. Stacey wrote in message ...
>>> Santa's making a list. If You could have any piece of software ported
>>> to Linux, other than Microsoft's what would it be?
>
>Paint Shop Pro 5 by Jasc
>Jim
Just curious, have you used Gimp? If so, how do you compare it to PSP?
I've been playing around with The Gimp for a 'lil while now, and it seems
to be pretty great. That it's *free* is incredible.
That being said, as much as I (really) like slrn, I think I might like to
see Agent ported to Linux. I think that's the only program I actually miss.
--
"Hi, I'm Chip Sintax. I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on Usenet"
"Playing the lovely music of the bandejo"
"I'm not a chef, but I played one on apte" (T146)
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.2.0-pre6
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 23:57:55 +0000
Frank Hale wrote:
>
> I am using RedHat 5.2 I am upgrading my kernel to 2.2.0-pre6
> I need to upgrade my modutils package. Its installed now as an RPM. How
> can I upgrade this package if I can't find an RPM? I have the newest
> version of modutils in tar.gz format. I can't unistall the old modutils
> rpm cause it has dependencies. Do I just make install on the new and
> overwrite the old? Will that mess up stuff?
>
> Thanx....
>
> --
> From: Frank Hale
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ICQ: 7205161
> Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/frankhale/
> Jade: http://jade.netpedia.net/
I have Redhat 5.2 and it said it was "2.2 ready," so I tried it. It just
worked. Perhaps I should do a bit more research.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit the Mohawk Software website: www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: George MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Open Configuration Storage - was Registry for Linux
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 23:18:21 GMT
Frank Sweetser wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > >
> > >> Have you looked at how nsswitch works? Just a thought.
> > >
> > >now you've got the idea =) do for a general configuration api what
> > >nsswitch does for gethostbyname, but with even more flexibility.
> >
> > But the catch is that you are going to need a superset of the
> > choices (if you add ldap, sql, acap, etc.) and you need to
> > be able to specify the order of checking separately for
> > at least every program and possibly every option. And there
> > will be some cases where the local setting should not be
> > allowed to override the network globals. It seems like there
> > should be some other way, like specifying a priority value
> > where there could be default ranges at each level. Specifying
> > a lower value locally could give you a fall-back default if the
> > expected global setting doesn't exist. Bumping up the global
> > setting at any level would override the local defaults that others
> > haven't bothered to change. It could work something like the
> > way routing protocols choose the best route from an assortment
> > of independently-configured choices.
>
> <note that this has already been well disccused in one of the other related
> threads>
>
> hmm... that actually makes a lot of sense, assigning a priority or a weight
> to each setting. there would have to be some restrictions, though - the
> system config should be able to unconditionally override a user's
> settings. still i like the idea =)
Actually this is quite interesting. As frank says we definately need a way
for administrators to *lock* values by marking them final and then also
not allowing the evaluation methods or "store path" to be overriden.
We also want to allow the opposite(in some cases), i.e. allow the user
to override these(e.g. A Trusted user). I had only envisage one evaluation
mechanism, but the priority evaluation suggest there may be others.
So perhaps making the evaluation mechanisms definable externally and
then configuring them?
Good idea, thanks Leslie.
--
We stand on the shoulders of those giants who coded before.
Build a good layer, stand strong, and prepare for the next wave.
Guide those who come after you, give them your shoulder, lend them your code.
Code well and live! - [EMAIL PROTECTED] (7th Coding Battalion)
------------------------------
From: Adam Popik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: /dev/pts
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 00:35:28 +0000
Hawto use this devices ?
linux kernel 2.2.0-pre4, glibc 2.0.109, devfs mounted on /dev/pts ?
Adam
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:20:12 -0800
On 10 Jan 1999 07:04:13 -0800, Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <777pr8$bve$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Remember Jedi, free software is not a spectator sport, and you are
>>standing outside of the field, throwing beer cans to the players.
>
>Go look him up on DejaNews, and you'll find a post where he comes out and
>admits that he's going to attack KDE and Qt every chance he gets, no matter
>what changes are made to the licensing. It's pointless to try to argue
>with him on this topic, so just killfile him--you actually produce free
>software, so shouldn't let non-producers drag you into their pointless
>arguments.
This is an attitude towards consumers genuinely worthy
of Microsoft and goes a long way to explaining the
plight of it's many millions of vendorlocked victims.
Whereas, RMS at least gives some nice lip service to his
minimally producing end users , instead of just
trivializing them like some pompous ass with a messiah
complex.
If you want to be a lemming, just go back to Windows.
--
Herding Humans ~ Herding Cats
Neither will do a thing unless they really want to, or |||
is coerced to the point where it will scratch your eyes out / | \
as soon as your grip slips.
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:26:42 -0800
On 10 Jan 1999 20:20:33 GMT, Christopher B. Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 10 Jan 1999 18:58:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>posted:
>>In article <77afhd$tcj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith) wrote:
>>> In article <777pr8$bve$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >Remember Jedi, free software is not a spectator sport, and you are
>>> >standing outside of the field, throwing beer cans to the players.
>>>
>>> Go look him up on DejaNews, and you'll find a post where he comes out and
>>> admits that he's going to attack KDE and Qt every chance he gets, no matter
>>> what changes are made to the licensing. It's pointless to try to argue
>>> with him on this topic, so just killfile him--you actually produce free
>>> software, so shouldn't let non-producers drag you into their pointless
>>> arguments.
>>
>>I agree on principle, but... well, one of the reasons I write free software
>>is because I think cool people will use it, and I am, so to speak putting
>>my 2 cents worth to help the same community that has provided me with a lot
>>of very useful things.
>>
>>So, I feel really bad, almost phisically ill, when I see people like Jedi who
>>just spit on it while at the same time posturing as a part of that community.
>>
>>I get this feeling that if I don't reply his opinions may stick on some
>>innocent folk. Goebbels-like, if you remember that "lie, lie ..." quote.
>>
>>I suppose I'm a fool for trying, but then again, I knew that already :)
>
>The *real* best answer to jedi is to produce useful software.
>
>Or to bounce a donation to the FSF or XFree86, and then respond with
>"I support free software. Do you?"
That's not really relevant. To bring back the Nazi comparisons:
it doesn't really matter how much you put into your Cathederal's
alm's box or collection plate if you turn right around and
contribute to the anti-thesis of that by way of supporting the
whole cult of Hitler.
What Alsina produces isn't free software at all.
>
>I'll suggest the thought that if you don't bother fighting with him,
>while this may mean that his anti-KDE attacks may go unanswered, which
>is not a good thing, he'll not be likely to dwell on KDE, but rather
>fixate on whomever else *is* responding.
>
>Of late, the jedi "diatribes" have been against iMacs; by doing a
>suitable comparison of apples to oranges, he's gotten to claim that
>they're overpriced by on the order of $700.
That just shows that you pay little attention to ANY thread.
It's not a matter of whether an iMac is suitably replaced
by a $500 PC for someone who cares about the relative CPU
performance of a PPC750/233.
>
>(He may discover the web site where PCs are being sold, OS-less, for $375.
>That is, of course, a wonderful opportunity to claim that iMacs are
>overpriced by closer to a full $1000...)
>
>The validity of his arguments are made quite self evident by the quality
>of his argumentation.
You've not demonstrated either in the slightest.
--
Herding Humans ~ Herding Cats
Neither will do a thing unless they really want to, or |||
is coerced to the point where it will scratch your eyes out / | \
as soon as your grip slips.
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Waldek Hebisch)
Subject: Re: blocksize / file write speed anomaly
Date: 10 Jan 1999 23:09:11 GMT
libby ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I originally wrote my test program with fdatasync and I got the same (bad) results.
: Also ,
: I need to be sure the inode entries are updated at that time.
: Also , I am still wondering if anybody out there knows under what conditions Linux
:will read
: the block before writing the block on a random write. I do not think it should as
:long as you
: write to a 512 byte ( sector) boundary but that does appear to be what is happening.
My results (for unmodified program):
write_linux running ...
recs=20000 time=15 bps=2730666
write_linux running ...
recs=10000 time=117 bps=175042
write_linux running ...
recs=10000 time=9 bps=2275555
Next I changed the block size to 513 bytes (to force read before write)
and increased number of blocks to 80000 and i got:
write_linux running ...
recs=80000 time=11 bps=3730909
write_linux running ...
recs=40000 time=21 bps=977142
write_linux running ...
recs=40000 time=10 bps=2052000
My theory is as follows. First about original. In the first
and third pass we have sequential
writes, only difference being that in the third pass files is roughly of
half size (no space get allocated for omitted blocks). The drive mechanics
operate in almost optimal way. In the second pass the kernel issues seek
requests to drive. I would expect this to succeed instantly, but appearently
it takes one disc rotation. In the modified test the kernel was forced
to read data before writeing them, but this was done in sequential way
(thanks to write buffering) so we got only twice the time for writeing.
Also, due to misaligment, all three passes write roughly the same amount
of data.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Frank Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.2.0-pre6
Date: 11 Jan 1999 01:11:24 GMT
mlw wrote:
>
> I have Redhat 5.2 and it said it was "2.2 ready," so I tried it. It just
> worked. Perhaps I should do a bit more research.
You mean you downloaded 2.2.0pre6 kernel and installed it and you booted
fine? No problems? Really? I had to do a total reinstall of everything
cause it got all messed up? People told me I needed to upgrade ksyslog,
modutils, etc....... But that just made it worse. It worked better when
I used the stock ones that were installed with RedHat 5.2.
If anyone has anymore info on installing the 2.2.0 pre6 kernel on RH 5.2
let me know. I would like to put it on but I have wastes about 4 days on
the new 2.2.0pre kernel with absolutely no luck at all. All I got out of
it was having to reinstall everything from scratch.
--
From: Frank Hale
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ: 7205161
Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/frankhale/
Jade: http://jade.netpedia.net/
------------------------------
** 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.development.system) 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-Development-System Digest
******************************
