Linux-Development-Sys Digest #780, Volume #6 Fri, 4 Jun 99 18:14:23 EDT
Contents:
Re: What are the differences between mySQL and mSQL? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS ("G. Sumner Hayes")
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS ("G. Sumner Hayes")
Re: kernel vs egcs vs PentiumPro/II (Paul Kimoto)
Re: Problem with kernel 2.2.9? (Phillip Deackes)
NT driver writer new to Linux kernel/drivers (Holden McGroin)
Re: What are the differences between mySQL and mSQL? (Kaz Kylheku)
Re: A simple question... (Eric Hegstrom)
Dynamic Kernel Memory Mapping ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Make Clean Error (Jonathan DelStrother)
Re: bootinfo.h missing for make dep (Jonathan DelStrother)
exiting X kills 2.2.5 and 2.2.9 (Michael Hirsch)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Stefaan A Eeckels)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.lang.java.databases
Subject: Re: What are the differences between mySQL and mSQL?
Date: 04 Jun 1999 13:29:15 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Don Baccus) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I'm merely pointing out that, as behooves us on a Linux newsgroup, when
> >I say "this app is free" I mean much, much more than just "it doesn't
> >cost anything".
>
> Hmmm...don't folks in Linux newsgroups know the difference
> between "free" and "free and open source"?
absolutely. actually, as it turns out, while all Free Software
(http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) is Open Source
(www.opensource.org), not all Open Source software is Free Software.
consider the APSL (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/apsl.html) for which
apple was granted permission to use the Open Source trademark, but
which isn't a Free Software license.
therefore, we say Free or Free Software when we mean Free Software,
and we say Open Source when we mean falls under the Open Source
guidelines and/or is allowed to use the Open Source trademark.
andru
--
==========================================================================
| Andru Luvisi | http://libweb.sonoma.edu/ |
| Programmer/Analyst | Library Resources Online |
| Ruben Salazar Library |-----------------------------------------|
| Sonoma State University | http://www.belleprovence.com/ |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Textile imports from Provence, France |
==========================================================================
------------------------------
From: "G. Sumner Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 15:34:24 -0400
"Vladimir Z. Nuri" wrote:
> I'm not designing memes? excuse me? anyone who posts on
> usenet is designing memes, imho.
Curious opinion. I can see an argument that anyone who posts
is spreading memes, but "designing" implies originality and
not just repeating things that have been long studied and either
are well-known or long since rejected.
> where are the documents?
I gave you a number of pointers, both to names and URLs of
institutions with literally hundreds of documents.
> HCI.. what is that?
Human-computer interaction. It's the field dedicated to making
it easier for people to get computers to work for them. It includes
psychological research to determine how people think about solving
a task, "normal" UI development, hardware development, and anything
else that can make computers easier to use.
Given that you say:
"The system favors end-user convenience and simplicity more than
any other criteria"
HCI should be the primary focus of your research. But you show
a complete lack of understanding of the field. I really think
you should educate yourself in the current state of the field before
you try to duplicate the work of hundreds of people on your own.
Courses or self-study, I don't care -- it'll take a while to get
up to speed, but if you come in understanding usability issues
you'll have at least a chance of designing a system that meets the
goal above.
> : judging from the reaction you're getting you need to change your
> : approach if you really want to convince people.
>
> what approach do you suggest, dear sir?
Well, I can think of a number:
1. Show some code -- that seems to be what people here want.
2. Post an original, well-researched, and concise design
document.
3. Move to a different forum that might be more receptive.
That is assuming that you're actually interested in coming up
with a better system. If you just like flamewars then your
approach is doing fine.
> do you believe it is a worthwhile goal to come up with a design
> document that represents a consensus, irrespective of code, prior
> to code being written?
Yes (unless there's already such a document out there). But it needs
to be a document that is well-studied and probably has tested some of
the ideas with sample implementations.
> : For example, do you understand why there was a boom in object
> : databases (like you propose for the filesystem) about 5 years ago
> : and why people have become much less interested in the idea today?
>
> performance?
No.
> : Or the FS approach that Beos took? Do you understand the difference
> : between the object models in C++, Python, and Smalltalk? How about
> : signatures? Information-flow (leaving that term nebulous) interfaces
> : as an alternative to object-oriented (idem) design?
>
> there are many ways to implement objects. I'm familiar with the
> basics (including a more recent language you don't mention, java)
> notice that you are referring to languages, not OSes.
No, I'm referring to object models. That's why I said object models.
Duh. I don't mention Java because it uses the same basic object model
as one of the languages I do mention. I also don't mention CLOS,
Perl5, Objective C, Ada95, Modula, and a bunch of other languages that
use basically the same object models as the languages above or other
less-common object models.
In your document you say things that show that you really don't
understand common object models -- for instance, you conflate
"C++-style object" with "interface", which shows that you either
don't understand the C++ object paradigm or you don't know what
interface means in the OO community.
> : Just screaming "make it all object oriented!" is worthless. It's
> : not even clear what you mean by object oriented, but if you mean
> : bundling data and code tightly together then there's a pretty
> : strong consensus among HCI researchers that that is a terrible way
> : to design a system if you're worried about the end user being able
> : to do what he's trying to do without a fuss.
>
> the point is to make the entire system based on objects
But you haven't clearly defined what an object is. You've
listed a few properties of objects, but not enough to give the
impression that you've seriously considered the options and
made informed choices.
Let's dissect the parts you give to an object:
: An object can be contained in other objects
IOW, objects are first-class elements of the system. There are no
exceptions. I'm not sure how you plan to do this efficiently, but
at least it's well-formed.
: An object has several basic elements: a *name*, *type*, *version*
: *interface*, *code*, and *data*
By "name" do you mean a locater in an organized namespace used to
open communications to the object (as per Plan 9 names) or do you
mean a reference that's a unique handle to an object (as per Java
references)?
By "type", what do you mean? Are types a string explaning what
kind of thing the object is as per MIME types? Are they a hint to
the system as to what to do with the object as per C++ types? Are
they an absolute guarantee as per ML types? Are types dynamic or
static? Strong or weak?
By "version" what do you mean? Is this a guarantee of a specific
interface a la HTTP versions? A compatibility measure as per
glibc symbol versions or kernel module versions? A hint of some
sort about stability of the interface?
When you say "interface" do you mean just an API/ABI? Or do you
mean something like OO interfaces, an inherited set of calls that
defines an object hierarchly? If the latter, why is only one
interface allowed? If multiple interfaces are allowed, you should
clarify that. If inheritance is possible, you should specify how.
By "data" do you mean arbitrary bits? A typed byte stream? A list
of objects? Why is all data associated one-to-one with code? What
mechanisms exist for having multiple views (possibly from disparate
machines with disparate capabilities, possibly in different modes)
onto the same data given that data has a bijective relationship with
code? If there is some such mechanism, what is the special nature
of the code that's in the same object as the data?
By "code", do you mean actual machine instructions? Source-level
code to be interpreted? If the former, how do you propose
that:
: Objects can be "moved around" to different "places" either on a
: local computer or remote computers.
Is that only within heterogenous computers? Or are all objects
guaranteed to have binary representations available on some set
of architectures? Or is source code included so that the objects
can be built natively as they migrate? Or is there a standard
architecture a la the JVM that is abstracted out on all
architectures?
All of these issues have huge amounts of literature behind them, and
yet you make no effort to discuss them. Throwing a word like "type"
or "interface" out there and then not discussing the basics of it
is unprofessional at the least.
> I don't know what you mean by "bundling code and data together"
That's a part many object models. Indeed, you even list code and
data as two of the parts of your objects.
> : There are conventions, CS departments, and an ACM SIG dedicated
> : to the general topic that you're trying to tackle. Attacking
> : the problem without understanding even the basic research of the
> : last 20 years is foolish. I'm not about to give an HCI course
> : on Usenet, but CHI and Carnegie Mellon's HCI institute are good
> : starting places that link to other sites and a good number of papers.
>
> believe we are talking about two different problems. I am not
> trying to create a better object oriented paradigm for languages.
Nor am I, and I'm not suggesting that you should.
> I am trying to leverage the already outstanding research into
> objects to invade the OS itself,
How can you leverage that research if you haven't read it and don't
understand it? That's my whole point -- leveraging that research is
exactly what I would love to see, but you've demonstrated a complete
lack of understanding of the past 20 years of research in both
programming models (e.g. object orientation, functional programming,
structural programming, information-flow programming) and HCI (and
the two are sometimes closely entwined).
--Sumner
------------------------------
From: "G. Sumner Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 15:43:31 -0400
"Vladimir Z. Nuri" wrote:
>
> prior to OOP, there was a dichotomy between code and data.. OOP
> gives you a kind of symmetry between code and data. it says the
> basic unit of computing is an object, which contains both code
> and data. earlier procedural programming used a form of data
> hiding by saying a function or procedure was the basic unit
> of programming, but then you have difficulties with stored state.
> the object has a stored state. it's a reasonable /fundamental/
> enlightened standard I am not challenging-- I'm saying it needs to move
> outside of languages into the OS and file system itself.
>
This is the sort of statement that indicates to me that you don't
have much knowledge of the state of the art in either programming
models or UI design.
You're describing the world ca. 1980. In the past 20 years, there's
been a lot of research that indicates that this definition of "object"
is worse than useless when you're designing a simple to use, powerful,
and flexible user interface. Most people doing research in the field
these days would say that a procedural programming model is pretty
bad, but at least better than _this particular_ object model. Of
course, using other object models or information-flow models is
considered vastly superior to either approach by people.
In another post you asked what I meant by "bundling of code and data".
In this paragraph you summarize exactly what I meant.
--Sumner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Kimoto)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: kernel vs egcs vs PentiumPro/II
Date: 3 Jun 1999 00:24:14 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Conrad Sanderson wrote:
> what is -Os ?
See the gcc info pages, of course! But in case you don't have an egcs
installation at hand (as this is a new option):
> `-Os'
> Optimize for size. `-Os' enables all `-O2' optimizations that do
> not typically increase code size. It also performs further
> optimizations designed to reduce code size.
> Any news when egcs-2.0 (or gcc-3.0 if that's what it's called these days)
> is going to be released ?
The tentative schedule for 2.95, the first egcs-maintained gcc, is at
http://egcs.cygnus.com/gcc-2.95/schedule.html .
--
Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phillip Deackes)
Subject: Re: Problem with kernel 2.2.9?
Date: Thu, 03 Jun 1999 08:09:25 GMT
On Wed, 2 Jun 1999 17:52:52 -0700, "Ausias"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Are you using 'make xconfig'? If so, the graphical menus that pop up have
>scroll bars that are kinda hard to see (well, not really, but it got my
>blind ass). you can scroll them down and see more options. Disregard this
>if you already did that.
If you install tkstep the graphical menus are *much* nicer
--
Phillip Deackes
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Holden McGroin)
Subject: NT driver writer new to Linux kernel/drivers
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 20:45:17 GMT
Hi all. I'm an experienced NT kernel developer. I'm looking to get
back to my hacking roots and have some fun in the Linux world. Can
someone point me at some good documentation (besides the source) on
the linux kernel and development for it? You know, block diagrams,
sample driver, API suite yad yada.
BTW, are there threads in linux ?
Thanks
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kaz Kylheku)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.lang.java.databases
Subject: Re: What are the differences between mySQL and mSQL?
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 21:15:12 GMT
On 4 Jun 1999 12:59:19 PST, Don Baccus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>absolutely. actually, as it turns out, while all Free Software
>>(http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) is Open Source
>>(www.opensource.org)
>
>The simple english word "free" has a meaning very different
>than the formalized "Free Software" as defined by RMS and
>his crony, and I suspect the OED will honor that distinction
>for many decades to come.
The english word "free" is far from simple, It has many shades of meaning.
Which meaning is emphasized depends on the cultural context of the discussion.
>If you're saying that folks who post to the linux newsgroups
>don't understand English, who am I to argue with you?
It's not enough to understand English. One must also understand the
cultural context which establishes the shades of meaning.
But the context is not always clear, such as when there is a mixture of poeople
coming from different backgrounds. The term ``freeware'' should be preferred
to ``free software'' because it is a precise jargon specific to the
source code sharing culture.
If some CD-ROM full of binary-only, proprietary software came in the mail
claiming to be ``freeware'', I'd be pretty pissed off. :)
------------------------------
From: Eric Hegstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A simple question...
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 13:22:46 -0700
Oh yea. What I really meant to sayL The GA-6BXC supports the pentium III
just fine. I have a PIII 450 that just cruises (once I am able to force
it to boot from the SCSI )
-eric
Igor Zlatkovic wrote:
>
> I use a dual Pentium II motherboard, Gigabyte GA-6BXD. With the newest BIOS, it
>claims to
> support Pentum III as well. I had no problems with this board so far.
>
> --
>
> Igor Zlatkovic
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> University of Applied Sciences
> Frankfurt, Germany, EU.
--
Eric Hegstrom .~.
Senior Software Engineer /V\
Sonoran Scanners, Inc. // \\ L I N U X
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /( )\ >don't fear the penguin<
520-617-0072 x402 ^^-^^
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development
Subject: Dynamic Kernel Memory Mapping
Date: 04 Jun 1999 14:11:54 -0700
Hi, there,
I have a question regarding kernel memory mapping. During run time,
the kernel components, e.g., modules, may allocate some pages (both
virtual and physical) by invoking vmalloc. The mapping will be
reflected in the swapper_pg_dir (init_mm).
I am wondering whether such dynamically created mappings are
propagated to other existing processes at all.
I can think of several possibilities here.
1. When a process enters into kernel mode, we switch to use
swapper_pg_dir. Therefore, the propagation of dynamic mapping is
not necessary. (I don't see it happens though).
2. The dynamic mapping are propagated to other existing processes
through some magic, which I don't know yet.
3. Such dynamic mappings are only necessary for those processes
which always use swapper_pg_dir. (I don't see how it is
enforced).
Maybe there are other approaches I don't see. If you know how it is
done, please help. Even better, if you can compare it with other OS.
Thanks in advance,
-- xulu
========
Xu, Lu HP Labs Phone: +1-650-857-2235 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Jonathan DelStrother <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Make Clean Error
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 11:36:24 +0100
Right - Back again....third problem in 3 days *sigh*
Altho 5 replies in 3 days ain't bad - thankyou people...
OK - the latest problem is...I've Make config'ed the kernel, all fine.
I've Make dep'ed the kernel - also fine.
I then Make clean, lots of stuff comes up - looks OK, & then I get this
error:
rk.a(802.o): In function `tr_rebuild_header':
802.o(.text+0x7e8): undefined reference to `arp_find'
make: *** [vmlinux] Error 1
Hmmmm....Ideas anyone? Cheers
Jonathan
[Terminal Newbie]
------------------------------
From: Jonathan DelStrother <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: bootinfo.h missing for make dep
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 11:33:21 +0100
Right, sorted...
Cheers guys
Jonathan
------------------------------
From: Michael Hirsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: exiting X kills 2.2.5 and 2.2.9
Date: 04 Jun 1999 16:59:06 -0400
Does anyone else have this problem? I have a fresh RH 6.0 system.
Almost every time I try to exit X the system hangs. No warnings in
the syslog file, no nothing, it just stops dead with a blank screen
after the X server goes down. It doesn't answer pings, so I think it
is more than just the X server crashing.
I discovered that I can get X to shut down cleanly if I first kill
esd. (I've been trying the default GNOME setup on 6.0). Does anyone
else have this problem?
I've got an ATI All in Wonder Pro, a celeron 333 and a soundblaster
audio card, if that makes any difference.
Thanks,
--
Michael D. Hirsch Work: (404) 727-7940
Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322 FAX: (404) 727-5611
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/~hirsch/
Public key for encrypted mail available upon request (or finger
[EMAIL PROTECTED]).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 4 Jun 1999 21:55:53 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vladimir Z. Nuri) writes:
> Stefaan A Eeckels ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>: Insofar as Linux is UNIX, it presents a pretty coherent vision
>: (essentially, everyting is a file, small, cooperative programs
>: around a text pipeline, etc). It's a tribute to the coherence
>: of the UNIX vision that it is still relevant 30 years after it
>: was conceived.
>
> imho vision refers to the future, not the past. YMMV
So that only things that don't exist can be visionary ;-)
>
>: Why the obsession with Linux advancing further? It does what
>: it does quite nicely. Those who want to use it, use it. Those
>: who need new features, add them (or squeal).
>
> an attempt to reach the next level..?
That has no intristic value. The tool is OK as is. Another tool
can do better (but remember that the glut of electronic screwdrivers
hasn't made the manual ones irrelevant).
> again, obviously I don't debate the point that if you want
> a working system, you must write code. I am saying, if you want
> to write great code, perhaps there is even a step before
> that.. which can be done in public.
> "you can't run something that hasn't been written"...
> wow........the mind reels.......NO KIDDING!!! methinks
> I sense a collective blind spot
> (arghghghg)
As long as you stay on the philosophical level, you'll think
sterile thoughts. Distill the fundamental concepts, and
prove they work. The rest will follow...
--
Stefaan
--
PGP key available from PGP key servers (http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/)
___________________________________________________________________
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add,
but when there is no longer anything to take away. -- Saint-Exup�ry
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
