Linux-Development-Sys Digest #632, Volume #6 Sat, 17 Apr 99 08:14:11 EDT
Contents:
Re: fopen() fails when it should succeed, linux 2.2.5 ("G. Sumner Hayes")
Re: fopen() fails when it should succeed, linux 2.2.5 (Kalle Olavi Niemitalo)
Minimum Hardware For Ghostscript on Linux ("Donald R. Brewer")
company ("mee")
Re: Can you make a driver that runs as an application? (Christopher B. Browne)
Re: Minimum Hardware For Ghostscript on Linux (Ken)
Re: Linux task switching, schedule(), and do_timer() (Peter Samuelson)
Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0 (Geoff McCaughan)
Re: Can you make a driver that runs as an application? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: fopen() fails when it should succeed, linux 2.2.5 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Minimum Hardware For Ghostscript on Linux (Christopher B. Browne)
Re: Download file like NetVampire or Getright ??? (Andre van Dijk)
Re: asynchronous disk I/O (XuYifeng)
Re: fbcon/S3 Virge (XuYifeng)
Can you make a driver that runs as an application? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Driver for Intel740 video card ("George Tachev")
Re: CodeWarror for Linux (was: Re: Programming tools for ...) (Gregory Nicholls)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "G. Sumner Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: fopen() fails when it should succeed, linux 2.2.5
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 16:37:35 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I noticed that when I try to edit /etc/inetd.conf I got a permission
> denied error (using vim 5.3, see strace output below). I was running
> as root, the file permissions were 644 and "fuser /etc/inetd.conf"
> (from psmisc version 17) reported that no one had the file open. (See
> note about fuser below)
1. Is the filesystem mounted read-write?
2. Is the immutable or append-only attribute set on the file? Use
lsattr to list the attributes and chattr to change them
------------------------------
From: Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: fopen() fails when it should succeed, linux 2.2.5
Date: 17 Apr 1999 01:01:40 +0300
Followups set.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Any ideas?
What does lsattr say about the file?
------------------------------
From: "Donald R. Brewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Minimum Hardware For Ghostscript on Linux
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 15:45:03 -0700
Does anyone know what the minimum processor and memory requirements would be
to run Ghostscript on Linux?
For example if you run Ghostscript on Linux running on an embedded 386, what
would be the mimimum memory requirements.
Thanks,
Carlos
------------------------------
From: "mee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: company
Date: 16 Apr 1999 22:25:11 GMT
What company makes linux? I'm trying to invest and I can't find the stock.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher B. Browne)
Subject: Re: Can you make a driver that runs as an application?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 03:56:57 GMT
On Sat, 17 Apr 1999 01:50:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
> It's been quite some time since I've written a driver for Linux. In
>fact it's been quite a while since I've used Linux.
>
> I wanted to do a proof of concept experiment with Linux. I would like
>to write a driver that is SEPERATE from the kernel so that when I screw up
>I don't take the system down. I work in the real time embedded arena and
>am used to working with threads instead of processes. What I would like to
>do is make an API available to several programs that is loaded into one
>location in memory and is completely reentrant - basically a driver. Is there
>any way I can divorce the "driver" from the kernel so that I can do this?
>
> You may need to know what I plan to do: Basically I want to make
>a GUI api that runs on top of X with XSHM. This will be a low level graphics
>library that will support fonts, sprites, etc., but only at the low level.
>I would then like to make it possible for applications to access the GUI
>API but without having to send data via a TCP/IP pipe or something slow
>and ugly like that and without a context switch. I understand that X11 will
>need to make a context switch, but the only reason I'm using X11 is because
>I already know it quite well and that it's ubiquitous. I may dump X11
>after a point to go directly to the hardware, but only after it is working
>reliably.
>
> So is this possible to do without making it an actual driver? I'd
>hate to be crashing my system everytime I make some stupid mistake. Being
>able to use X11 would be a strong plus as well which I don't think would be
>possible to do with a real driver.
I think that what you *really* need to do is to look at GGI, which has
the intent to provide that low level stuff.
<http://www.ggi-project.org/>
It does low level interfacing to a framebuffer kernel interface in
order to get out to graphics hardware, and then you define successive
levels of libraries on top of that to layer on functionality.
"libggi" knows how to run on top of X, which means that you can
program to the lower level GGI interface (preparing for it to be
generally available/usable as such), and running (at present) atop X.
Eventually, the theory is that they'll have graphics card drivers for
GGI for various sorts of hardware, and you can then take out the X
layer.
[I think people will *actually* care about it when GTk runs directly
atop GGI, and Tk does, perhaps via
<http://www.multimania.com/fbonnet/Tcl/TkGS/specs.htm> TkGS, and ditto
for several other graphics libraries that are presently used atop
X...]
--
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
-- Henry Spencer <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - "What have you contributed to free software today?..."
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 17:29:55 -0700
From: Ken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Minimum Hardware For Ghostscript on Linux
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.postscript
Why not ask the developer, L. Peter Deutsch (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])?
Note that there are two versions of gs, the freeware version and a more
up-to-date commercial license. For a commercial product, you might want
the latter.
You'll need to give a few more details, though. Memory requirements are
going to be dependent on your desired output format. Resolution? Color
depth? The frame buffer is going to be the biggest memory hog.
Donald R. Brewer wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what the minimum processor and memory requirements would be
> to run Ghostscript on Linux?
>
> For example if you run Ghostscript on Linux running on an embedded 386, what
> would be the mimimum memory requirements.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carlos
--
Ken
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.well.com/user/shiva/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Samuelson)
Subject: Re: Linux task switching, schedule(), and do_timer()
Date: 11 Apr 1999 05:29:17 -0500
Reply-To: Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Arkadion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> How does the timer interrupt switch tasks? Shouldn't do_timer()
> switch tasks? It doesn't look as if it does but then if it doesn't
> what should?
Nope, the timer tick could happen any time, and the Linux kernel is not
preemptible. That means when it is in the middle of something it can't
be arbitrarily switched to something else. So if a process is in
kernel mode it is a bad idea to do a context switch on the spot. Much
better, and what Linux does, is that the timer tick causes the global
flag `need_resched' to be set, and this flag is checked (a) upon exit
from kernel mode to user mode, and (b) periodically during some of the
longer kernel-mode code paths. Look through a few pages of kernel
source, and you'll see a lot of
if(need_resched)
schedule();
This does just what you think it does.
--
Peter Samuelson
<sampo.creighton.edu!psamuels>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff McCaughan)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Idea: Make a seperate "i686" tree for Redhat Linux 6.0
Date: 16 Apr 1999 21:08:37 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christopher Browne ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On 8 Apr 1999 17:07:45 -0400, Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>not if you're from a commonwealth country - which includes new zealand
> >>(where is the old zealand btw?). in *english* (as opposed to american
> > ^^^^^^^ - Zeeland.
> >
> > Gaak... Across the North Sea (looking from England, that is).
> >Netherlands. Heck, they *really* don't teach history and geography
> >in schools, or what?
>
> Not even in commonwealth countries... :-(
>
> I was not aware of that; the surprising factor is that it was named
> after a "foreign" nation, or am I showing *complete* ignorance in being
> unaware of a transition of New Zealand from Dutch control to English
> control?
NZ was named by Abel Tasman, but it was never under Dutch control. The next
European on the scene was James Cook, almost 100 years later.
I'm not sure what you mean by "named after a foreign nation". Zeeland is not
a nation, and it was not foreign to Tasman.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Can you make a driver that runs as an application?
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 06:41:17 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Apr 1999 01:50:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
> > It's been quite some time since I've written a driver for Linux. In
> >fact it's been quite a while since I've used Linux.
> >
> > I wanted to do a proof of concept experiment with Linux. I would like
> >to write a driver that is SEPERATE from the kernel so that when I screw up
> >I don't take the system down. I work in the real time embedded arena and
> >am used to working with threads instead of processes. What I would like to
> >do is make an API available to several programs that is loaded into one
> >location in memory and is completely reentrant - basically a driver. Is
there
> >any way I can divorce the "driver" from the kernel so that I can do this?
> >
> > You may need to know what I plan to do: Basically I want to make
> >a GUI api that runs on top of X with XSHM. This will be a low level graphics
> >library that will support fonts, sprites, etc., but only at the low level.
> >I would then like to make it possible for applications to access the GUI
> >API but without having to send data via a TCP/IP pipe or something slow
> >and ugly like that and without a context switch. I understand that X11 will
> >need to make a context switch, but the only reason I'm using X11 is because
> >I already know it quite well and that it's ubiquitous. I may dump X11
> >after a point to go directly to the hardware, but only after it is working
> >reliably.
> >
> > So is this possible to do without making it an actual driver? I'd
> >hate to be crashing my system everytime I make some stupid mistake. Being
> >able to use X11 would be a strong plus as well which I don't think would be
> >possible to do with a real driver.
>
> I think that what you *really* need to do is to look at GGI, which has
> the intent to provide that low level stuff.
>
I've already looked at GGI, but it's a driver. I *need* the
application to run in user mode if possible. If the driver crashes in kernel
mode it takes down the system and quick. It is also nice to have printf(),
syslog() and other debugging tools not to mention gdb which are also
not available in kernel mode. My real job is a aggravation enough, for
play I don't want the pain.
Thanks,
-Rich
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: fopen() fails when it should succeed, linux 2.2.5
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 02:42:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"G. Sumner Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2. Is the immutable or append-only attribute set on the file? Use
> lsattr to list the attributes and chattr to change them
>
This was the problem. Now that I know about lsattr and chattr I just
can't wait to use them for something productive.
Thanks!
Mike
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher B. Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: Minimum Hardware For Ghostscript on Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 03:34:19 GMT
On Fri, 16 Apr 1999 17:29:55 -0700, Ken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>Donald R. Brewer wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone know what the minimum processor and memory requirements would be
>> to run Ghostscript on Linux?
>>
>> For example if you run Ghostscript on Linux running on an embedded 386, what
>> would be the mimimum memory requirements.
>
>Why not ask the developer, L. Peter Deutsch (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])?
>Note that there are two versions of gs, the freeware version and a more
>up-to-date commercial license. For a commercial product, you might want
>the latter.
>
>You'll need to give a few more details, though. Memory requirements are
>going to be dependent on your desired output format. Resolution? Color
>depth? The frame buffer is going to be the biggest memory hog.
The answers are *all* in the details.
Memory requirements depend heavily on notable things such as:
- The nature and complexity of the documents being rendered
- The resolution that you wish to use in the output (600dpi will
require 4 times the memory of 300dpi, generally...)
- What output device is being used
That first point is liable to be the prohibitively difficult part to
nail down, particularly since it depends on things that you may not
even know yet, which is what sorts of Postscript documents users are
going to generate.
I'd suspect that at 300dpi, an otherwise quiescent machine with 16MB
of RAM is likely to be able to "do the job" in an acceptable manner.
RAM is *definitely* a more important issue than CPU; as soon as you
start eating into swap space, that slows things down by a factor of
(say) 50, which overpowers any likely differences in CPU performance.
A Pentium III, if hampered by inadequate RAM, may process slower than
a 386 that has enough memory that it can start cacheing disk accesses.
The only reasonable way to evaluate this is to generate a bunch of
sample documents, use gs to process them repeatedly, and watch memory
consumption to see how much RAM is getting eaten.
Any alternatives will represent mere guesswork, since RAM consumption
depends not only on the size of the "frame buffer" but also on how
much is consumed in situ by the Postscript code...
--
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
-- Henry Spencer <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - "What have you contributed to free software today?..."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andre van Dijk)
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Download file like NetVampire or Getright ???
Date: 17 Apr 1999 09:46:42 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 16 Apr 1999 19:13:39 GMT, Dr H. T. Leung wrote:
>
>GNU wget. It is *much* better than anything in the windows world.
Erhm, there's also a Windows version of wget :^)
(And quote below the original messages!)
--
A. van Dijk Hmmm, I smell Bacon, Elvis is in the kitchen
mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Denis Leary
icq : 4249631 There's no place like Gnome
------------------------------
From: XuYifeng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: asynchronous disk I/O
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 18:24:53 +0800
test aio_??? etc somethings.
XuYifeng
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Can anyone confirm that Linux does not support asynchronous disk I/O? On AIX
> and Digital Unix we have system calls like lio_listio(), but I cannot find
> anything similar to that.
>
> Huayong
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: XuYifeng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: fbcon/S3 Virge
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 18:23:09 +0800
if you have installed dos program --- univbe from scitechsoft, ant boot from
DOS using loadin, it maybe work.
XuYifeng
"David L. Bilbey" wrote:
> Does anyone know where I can find out whether I can get s3 virge support
> for fbcon. I have 2.2.2, and S3 virge does not seem to be supported and I
> can't get the vesafb to work (maybe my bios doesn't support it). I just
> would like to find out if any of the recent kernels support this chipset
> before I go and download patches on my s...l...o...w modem connection.
> Thanks.
>
> bilbey
>
> --
> "One good thing about hell, at least, is you can probably pee wherever you
> want to." --Jack Handey
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Can you make a driver that runs as an application?
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 01:50:32 GMT
Hello all,
It's been quite some time since I've written a driver for Linux. In
fact it's been quite a while since I've used Linux.
I wanted to do a proof of concept experiment with Linux. I would like
to write a driver that is SEPERATE from the kernel so that when I screw up
I don't take the system down. I work in the real time embedded arena and
am used to working with threads instead of processes. What I would like to
do is make an API available to several programs that is loaded into one
location in memory and is completely reentrant - basically a driver. Is there
any way I can divorce the "driver" from the kernel so that I can do this?
You may need to know what I plan to do: Basically I want to make
a GUI api that runs on top of X with XSHM. This will be a low level graphics
library that will support fonts, sprites, etc., but only at the low level.
I would then like to make it possible for applications to access the GUI
API but without having to send data via a TCP/IP pipe or something slow
and ugly like that and without a context switch. I understand that X11 will
need to make a context switch, but the only reason I'm using X11 is because
I already know it quite well and that it's ubiquitous. I may dump X11
after a point to go directly to the hardware, but only after it is working
reliably.
So is this possible to do without making it an actual driver? I'd
hate to be crashing my system everytime I make some stupid mistake. Being
able to use X11 would be a strong plus as well which I don't think would be
possible to do with a real driver.
Thanks for the help,
-Rich
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "George Tachev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Driver for Intel740 video card
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 14:24:41 +0300
I can't find place with drivers for video cards, if anyone can help me,
write, please!
------------------------------
From: Gregory Nicholls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: CodeWarror for Linux (was: Re: Programming tools for ...)
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 10:07:38 -0400
Sam Holden wrote:
> I guess we lose those programmers who can't work out how to use
> make. Oh well no big loss.
<chuckle> That's what IBM orignally said about OS/2.
>
> There appears to be just as much quality software out there for these
> Unix environments then for these MS Windows type environments.
>
> Maybe that's because once someone bothers to learn how to use a
> few simple tools properly they can do everything an IDE does.
> And those people that can't be bothered learning because they
> assume that a bunch of old command line character stream based
> tools are too cryptic and useless to bother with won't be
> missed anyway.
>
> Nothing worse than a programmer who can't be bothered spending
> some time learning a few tools.
Sure there is. People who use C and other wimpy languages. I mean if you can't be
bothered
to learn to program in hex . . .
>
> My experience tells me that Unix is more powerful than an IDE.
<sigh> Unix is an OS . . . .
Are you sure you're a programmer ??? you sound like a coder.
Gregory Nicholls,
(an engineer is someone who can do for $4 what any fool can do for $5)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
