Linux-Development-Sys Digest #784, Volume #6 Sat, 5 Jun 99 04:14:36 EDT
Contents:
FREE HARDCORE TEEN PICS 1955 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: WipeOut IDE crashes - help? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What are the differences between mySQL and mSQL? (Don Baccus)
help ("Song")
Re: the ultimate OS (Joel Garry)
Re: What are the differences between mySQL and mSQL? (Chris J/#6)
Re: HP JetDirects (using DLC) on Linux??? ("Don Young")
Re: Linux development tools - new : download freeware compiler with IDE and
GuiDesigner for Linux & Windows ("Max Reason")
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Bill Vermillion)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Bill Vermillion)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Bill Vermillion)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: FREE HARDCORE TEEN PICS 1955
Date: 5 Jun 1999 04:26:52 GMT
FOR THE BEST FREE TEEN SEX PICTURES VISIT:
http://freespace.virgin.net/eric.johnston/freepics.htm
ludhzbolfrfkfpfixesoyvgpnpzhlc
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: WipeOut IDE crashes - help?
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 19:49:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have just downloaded and installed WipeOut
(glibc ver) on my newly
> installed RedHat 6.0. I used the default method
of insallation for
> WipeOut. There is lots of free memory and
harddrive space. JDK 1.1.7 is
> installed and working.
>
> When I try to run wipeout, I get this:
>
> rbw abort handler: signal 11 caught
> Please send a full bug report (WipeOut
version, OS version, library
> versions) to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks!
> Killed
>
> I have e-mailed softwarebuero, but not heard
back yet (granted, I only
> e-mailed them last night). I am in a hurry for
this because my class
> assignments are due almost immediately. Can
anyone advise? Please reply
> to newsgroup.
>
> Thanks for any help!
>
> Luke
>
>
Please download the new version (1.5.2) of WipeOut
for glibc2.1/libc6.1. This version is especially
compiled for RedHat 6.0.
Regards,
Lars
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
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?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Don Baccus)
Date: 4 Jun 1999 12:59:19 PST
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.
If you're saying that folks who post to the linux newsgroups
don't understand English, who am I to argue with you?
Meanwhile, Sybase is free. It is not Open Source.
--
- Don Baccus, Portland OR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nature photos, on-line guides, at http://donb.photo.net
------------------------------
From: "Song" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: help
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 13:20:18 +0800
I can do some development on NT by C++, how to begin develope on Linux?
Thank you in advance
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joel Garry)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: the ultimate OS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 1999 05:44:44 GMT
On Fri, 4 Jun 1999 11:25:08 -0500, Tim Doffing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Tim Doffing ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> : Blah, blah, blah. I intend on inventing cold fusion, and a pill that
>will
>> : extend your life indefinitely. No Code=No OS. We all have dreams!
>>
>> the tiresome hacker position/canard/harangue that without code, you
>> have nothing. "design is bull****" .. which btw I have some
>> sympathy for.
>
> It looks as if your post has generated allot of traffic. I think this
>demonstrates the degree of frustration we all feel with modern operating
>systems. None of them work the way we work, or think others should work. We
>all have the vision of what the perfect OS would be, which is the one that
>would suit our individual needs the best. If I sat down today and composed
>an "OS Manifesto", I would expect that many of the elements in that document
>would echo some of the design concepts in your document, and we would differ
>in some areas. The areas of difference is where most debate occurs, as this
>is where I would like the OS to compliment the way I work and think.
>
>> excuse me, but I am both a hacker & a designer. and sometimes
>> design logically comes before hacking. want to overtake win95?
>> you have to have a vision. you can't just keep writing code
>> blindly.
>
> I too have written a design template to code my own OS from. It is based
>on many other kernal ideas that have been proven effective over time. I
>believe that planning and design are critical to the outcome of a successful
>coding project, no matter what it is. You need a map to get where you are
>going. I think we would all like to see Windows products fall back to the
>areas where they belong, instead of spread around for lack of a better
>choice.
>
>> I agree, writing code is hard work, and writing design is less
>> difficult. but there are many hackers with no vision. arguably
>> linux has very little vision. what is it, a copy of a
>> OS that existed two decades ago? you want "world domination"?
>> you think that you will get there by endlessly tweaking the
>> performance of the kernel?
>
> I do agree with you somewhat on Linux. I fully support the open source
>movement. I also believe that in order to be a competitor in the commercial
>software arena, you must adopt commercial software development practices.
>(Now that I am securely within my flame-proof suit). In order to adopt these
>practices, the open software movement would effectively have to sell it's
>soul to Microsoft. This is why I believe that although important, it is not
>the solution for putting Windows in its place. I would like to see the open
>software stay where it is, grassroots cutting edge development for the
>masses. Many people working together to devise better ways of doing things.
>I equate this most other technologies out there. You look at colleges, they
>have allot of cutting edge breakthroughs, but no commercial interests.
>(Aside from the funding dependencies). The technology is out there for
>implementation and improvement. They share their information with other
>colleges, and businesses. In the business environment, it is refined and
>repackaged as a consumer product.
This is no longer true, look at some of the recent news about patents and
court cases and universities (bioscience as well as infoscience). The
real reason W95 is so successful is because commercial development is
ahead of intellectual property law. Much as we would all like "free
markets" to magically lead to the "survival of the fittest," it doesn't
happen that way. If it did, wouldn't we all be using Xerox Stars? The
only solution that leads to real progress is a control issue - make it
socially, legally and economically the only way. The open source community
partially has it correct socially, use social correctness! (as in this
thread, put up code or shut up, of course the other side of that is it
disallows "coherent vision" documents as Nuri has found out). The legal
issues go deep and wide and are far from being resolved, in some instances
going the wrong way - patents in every country need to be worked on, perhaps
some equivalent of the American Bill of Rights is needed worldwide. The
economics derive from the political and legal issues - but most surely, the best
is _not_ the most likely to succeed, under any of the systems tried so far.
jg
--
These opinions are my own.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/joel_garry Remove nospam to reply.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Oracle and unix guy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris J/#6)
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: 3 Jun 1999 18:47:18 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Try looking at the dictionary definition for 'free'. No payment is just
one of the several definitions.
Chris...
Don Baccus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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"?
>
--
@}-,'-------------------------------------------------- Chris Johnson --,-{@
\ Life is a strange thing. Just when you think \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] \
\ you've learned how to use it, it's gone \ http://www.nccnet. \
\ -- Shakespears Sister \ co.uk/~sixie/ \
------------------------------
From: "Don Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.networking,linux.redhat.development,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: HP JetDirects (using DLC) on Linux???
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 01:04:45 -0500
I've set up these old printers using DLC on an NT Box then shared the
printer. RH 5.2 seen it just fine as a SMB shared printer.
Billy Dunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:%NQ_2.1605$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Sorry for the cross-post, but this is an question that has been asked by
> many and never addressed in these newsgroups - and I've searched back 6
> months.
>
> There are thousands upon thousands of old Hewlett Packard JetDirect boxes
> and cards out there that allow you to setup a stand-alone printer. While
> many of the newer cards and external boxes allow TCP/IP communication, the
> old JetDirects do not.
>
> I have been using Windows NT's DLC protocol to connect to these boxes
> without much difficulty. Apparently, the DLC protocol is not something
that
> Linux supports at this time. I have hundreds of these boxes out there and
I
> am at a total standstill in my efforts to move to Linux because of this
> problem.
>
> Does ANYONE know of a way to communicate with the old JetDirect boxes that
> do not support TCP/IP? They support IPX/SPX and DLC (not LPD).
>
> Thanks very much - and sorry again about that cross-post.
>
> Emailed replies are fine, but I will also be checking here several times a
> day in the hopes that there is light at the end of this very dark tunnel.
> Billy Dunn
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Max Reason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux development tools - new : download freeware compiler with IDE and
GuiDesigner for Linux & Windows
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 21:20:07 -0000
Chris White wrote in message <7ivfgf$90a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Can anyone suggest some good tools for developing applications for X
> Windows? I come from the Microsoft Windows world and I think Visual C++
> has me spoiled. :) Please help so I can break away from the Microsoft grasp.
> Chris
If you can stand to program in something other than C++, there is a complete
integrated development environment that just became available for download
as freeware. In fact, there are two source-code compatible implementations
available as freeware for download - one for Linux and another for Windows.
The development environment has editor / compiler / debugger / GuiDesigner
and lets you lay out GUI windows interactively sorta like Visual Basic. And you
can develop a program on either the Linux or Windows package and run it on
both without any changes - even if its full of graphics and GUI stuff. Though the
language is not object oriented, it's been called "C in BASIC clothing" - it's as
fast as C, has the same basic capabilities as C, talks in C function protocol
so you can call Linux or Windows operating system functions or C libraries
naturally, but the syntax is somewhere between C and hopped-up BASIC.
You can write serious programs in XBasic, and the best evidence I guess is
the fact that the whole XBasic development environment is written in XBasic.
Anyway, if you're game, check you can read an overview and download from:
http://www.maxreason.com/software/xbasic/xbasic.html and associated pages.
You can ask me pointed questions about XBasic if you like. :-)
max
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 05:11:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mario Klebsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Shamsuddin, Amir (EXCHANGE:MDN05:7E24)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>Current hardware, almost without exception, uses 8-bit binary bytes as a
>>fundamental unit (call it a char if you like). Thusly, all software uses these to.
>>Any attempt whatsoever to hide this from people will limit things, there would
>>always be a lower level to go to. This is the reason I like *nix over soley
>>GUIfied oses, you can do a majority of things from a text console (Where the text
>>characters correspond to the underlying 8-bit bytes).
>
>Have you ever read about early unix systems? In the beginning, it
>was not always 8 bit bytes. There where a lot of different word sizes
>and several methods of packing characters into words. Some systems
>even did not have character addressing.
How early. When Compuserve started up (called MicroNet
originally) they used the DEC-10 with 36 bit words. The encoded
five 7bit patters to handle the ASCII values below 128d.
That was about 3% wastage. The system with 8 bit bytes, using 7
bits for ascii and ignoring the high-order bit - had 12% wastage.
Programs such as WordStar used the high order of a letter - eg
they'd take A and add 128 to it, and this would indicate a space
preceding the letter and the letter itself. This eliminated all
the spaces in a document, and when you only had 256, 512, or 1MB
of removeable disk storage and no HD's it made a big difference.
8 bit seems a good fit for text - but makes other things awkward.
--
Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 05:13:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Eric Hegstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>BCD rocked!
Really.
________________________________________________
/BCD-ROCKED |
|]]] ] ]] |
| ]]] ] |
| |
|111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111|
|]222222]2222222222222222222222222222222222222222|
|3]3333]33333333333333333333333333333333333333333|
|44]444444]44444444444444444444444444444444444444|
|55555555]555555555555555555555555555555555555555|
|66666]666666666666666666666666666666666666666666|
|777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777|
|888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888|
|9999]9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999|
|________________________________________________|
Bill
--
Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1999 05:06:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Bill Vermillion ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>: The concept is a file is a file is
>: a file .... Just a stream of bits.
>for a long time, in C, functions were considered all that
>was necesary. C++ introduced the idea of objects. I am
>suggesting the same may be true for file systems. treating
>a file as "just a stream of bits" is appropriate at
>one level of abstraction, but we need a higher level of
>abstraction in which *every* entity in the OS is simply
>an object. implementing this as "raw bytes" does not
>conern me too much. now, I'm not saying this is gonna
>happen tomorrow. but I do believe in a few years, all
>serious OSes will be object oriented.
We shall see. The object oriented OSes that have been released so
far seem to have had underwhelming success in the mass market, but
are dearly loved by those who program in them.
>[deinstallation]
>: Again - Windows and non-Unix systems. The good Unix systems
>: require nothing more than clicking on a program name and clicking
>: remove or install. Not all Unix systems behave that well but many
>: of the commercial installs do. The will also check for
>: dependancies, and give you options of loading the dependancies, or
>: aborting the install.
>I would like to see a system in the OS in which it keeps track
>of which applications created what files. i.e. every application
>exists in its own sandbox. such a system has incredible usefulness.
That's going back to the early DOS model when the files created by
an application were in the same directory as the application.
Why do you need to know what application created it, if you can
manipulate with other applications. The Unix model where the
created files exist in the users home directory and not in the
applications directory makes more sense to me. The user can
then sub-divide them in the priorities they feel is appropriate.
Having program enforce their design decision upon you down to
mandatory extensions or file placements means that while it may fit
the needs of many to most users, no one can forsee what every user
may need.
>: The only time I've had one of these fail in a half-baked state was
>: a vendor supplied driver, that when it failed, it removed the files
>: IT thought it had installed, but also took a couple of system
>: library files with it.
>this kind of thing is incredibly common with an OS and I suggest
>the OS should be designed to handle it. "half baked state"-- exactly.
>now maybe linux doesn't have as bad a record as Win95, but imho
>it can still be better handled, and it makes sense to implement it.
This was an application. Smart serial ports, the linked a
pre-compiled object into the kernel. When the link failed, it
tried to clean up after itself, taking some system libraries with
it. This was not some little company but software for one of the
top 4 or 5 smart serial board manufactureres.
It failed for us as we were using it in a documented, but
apparently not thoroughly tested mode. The end fix (kludge in
reality) was to install in the default mode, and then go in an
manually makes changes to some .c files and recompile.
There was an interface card in the system, and it linked to upto
eight 16 port cards. Link was normally over 1Mbit/sec.
However in this app we cut the link speed down to 56K, put the
interface card 150 miles away so maintenance seem as if it were
local, and we didn't have to fool with assorted muxes and CSU.s
I re-installed the link kit about 5 times one very long Saturday
afternoon.
>: I gave up MS pretty much when I moved to *ix in 1983. Many things
>: you describe in TAOS are there in current modern commercial Unix
>: systems. There is more to Unix than just Linux.
>ok, "let's" get it in linux, or some new OS that will
>achieve world domination <g>
Why should there be one OS that will achieve world domination.
(I did notice the <g>)
Up until the last few years when merger mania hit there were lots of
choices for lots of things. We are now down to 6 major publishing
houses in the world that account for over 90% of what we can read.
With transportation we are down to about a dozen, as things like the
Damiler-Chrysler merge show.
The best OS is the OS that runs your application best - and that
doesn't mean it has to be popular at all. There may be just a few
hundred copies extant.
And has been shown by some OSes in use today, trying to put
features in that appeal to a broad mass of purchases, with most
purchasers only need a particular subset of features, leads to
nothing but bloat, instability, and innumerable patches which often
require more patches for things the patches broke.
--
Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
