Linux-Development-Sys Digest #902, Volume #6 Mon, 28 Jun 99 13:14:05 EDT
Contents:
FREE 4GL Compiler on Linux (Mehdi Afshar)
Re: Where is the compose key? (Villy Kruse)
Current kernel configuration ("Doron Rabia")
Re: Why not C++ (Isaac)
RocketModem II and Linux ("Miguel A. Rivera")
Proposal For New Windowing software (Matthew Carl Schumaker)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: NT kernel guy playing with Linux (Villy Kruse)
Re: Why we are still holding on to X Windows (Philip Boucherat)
Re: Why did 2.2.5 explode in size? (Villy Kruse)
Re: Differences in /usr/include/sys/ipc.h (Villy Kruse)
Re: Why not C++ ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: sources for the empeg car player? (Peter Gavin)
Re: Proposal For New Windowing software (Tristan Wibberley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mehdi Afshar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: FREE 4GL Compiler on Linux
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 11:33:41 +0100
Hi;
Download your FREE Copy Of QueriX 4GL compilers
for Non Commercial Use directly from QueriX Site @
http://www.querix.com/
QueriX 4GL Compilers are Informix 4GL compatible with the
following features
Basic Compiler
==============
1 -Fully Compatible with Informix 4GL.
2 -Dynamically configure size of report
3 -Open to non-Informix databases
4 -Fully-interactive debugger
5 -NT & Linux Support
6 -Use of context dependent input functions anywhere in your
code
7 -Functions can safely be called from reports
QueriX GUI
==========
1 -Windows Look and Feel
2 -Cut & Paste
3 -Resizable Windows
4 -OLE support
5 -ActiveX support
6 -Editing Makes use of native windows functionality
7 -Dynamic Form and Field property control
8 -Configurable HTML Report Generation
9 -No need for TCL/TK.
10 -Choice of 3 tier THIN or FAT Client Server Applications.
11 -Much improved API.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: Where is the compose key?
Date: 28 Jun 1999 13:38:10 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bernd Strieder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>where in the kernel is the default setting for "Compose", i.e. which
>keys have to be pressed to start a compose sequence.
>
>The problem behind it: I don't like dead-keys. I need those special
>characters occasionally. I don't want to remember ASCII-Codes, to input
>them as ALTLEFT+DIGIT DIGIT DIGIT.
>
>I've been looking at the Keyboard-HOWTO, the man-pages and outputs of
>various programs related to the keyboard. I even tried to understand to
>some extent what is happening in the kernel when reading from keyboard
>and putting characters to the console. But I couldn't figure out myself.
As long as you don't load the us keymap the compose key is ctrl dot
that is hold control and type the greater than or period key. Why
this is disable from the us keymap seems to be a mistake.
Following is the entry from the default keymap, which you could add
to the keymap you are using. (gunzip the file; edit the file; and gzip
the file).
+ zcat /usr/lib/kbd/keytables/defkeymap.map.gz
keycode 52 = period greater
control keycode 52 = Compose
alt keycode 52 = Meta_period
shift alt keycode 52 = Meta_greater
For newer kernels try locate to locate the defkeymap as the file
probably has moved.
Villy
------------------------------
From: "Doron Rabia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Current kernel configuration
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 14:37:27 +0300
Hi all,
How can i tell what is my running kernel configuration if i dont have
the .config file ?
Is there a utility that can extract current kernel configuration like
/usr/lbin/system_prep found in HP-UX systems ?
Thanx ,
Doron Rabia
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Isaac)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Why not C++
Date: 28 Jun 1999 12:53:51 GMT
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 07:55:12 +0200, Thomas Stuefe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> In my opinion, the only thing that C++ has over C is
>>>better support for data encapsulation via classes and, possibly,
>>>exception handling.
>
>Only is good.
>
I think the argument that the syntactical differences aren't compelling
is supportable, although I don't agree with it. But even after dismissing
things like // comments, declaring variables at point of use, class names
as types, etc. I still find the following 5 things the most compelling
reasons to use C++ over C (roughly in decreasing order of importance)
1) Data Encapsulation
2) Inheritance
3) Polymorphism
4) STL library
5) Templates
Exception handling didn't make the list, but it's not far behind.
Name spaces didn't make the list, but I like them too.
I'm partially convinced that references and operator overloading are
negative features (except for new and delete) so I avoid overloading
which cuts down on the need for references too. I don't use
references simply to clean up syntax, but others do find it useful.
Isaac
------------------------------
From: "Miguel A. Rivera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: RocketModem II and Linux
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 08:04:51 -0500
Hi everyone,
I have been trying to setup a Linux box to act as a fax server. I bought a
RocketModem II that has 4 modems in a single board. The board is a PCI
board. I am having a lot of trouble trying to use the driver with redhat
6.0. I downloaded a new driver from Theodore's site at MIT (version 1.16). I
can get the driver to load and recognize the card, but I cannot get the
loadrm2 program to load the firmware to the board. Does someone has a
similar experience? If anyone have been able to make this setup to work,
could you please let me know and share your experience?
Any help is rgeatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Miguel Rivera
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Matthew Carl Schumaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Proposal For New Windowing software
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 09:40:08 -0400
During the past couple weeks I've seen many people express their opinions
on both Xwindows and C++. The project that I'm proposing is one that I
not only want seen done but is also one that I want to participate in.
The proposal is for a new Windowing System that is based on the premise of
a 3D UI. I know other people are interested in this sort of program as
well as a couple private ventures, but to the best of my knowledge there
is no Open Source project of this type.
This UI would provide:
1 Native interfaces for 3D devices such as the Spaceball, flying mice,
pucks, etc
2 Would be able to use 2 video cards for stereoscopic viewing
3 Would be able to be networked so people can share Worlds
4 But still provide support for X apps
I feel that a project of this type would be beneficial to the OS movement.
Instead of seemingly always having to say" yeah we can to that" It would
give us a chance to say "Lets see you do this"
I also feel that there are many technical hurdles that would be have to
passed to make this happens(but thats part of the fun)
I'm looking for some people that would be interested in working with me on
this project
Disclaimer - These are my Opinions and aren't meant to be construed as
fact. Yes I realize my english skills stink.
Matthew Carl Schumaker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
veni, vedi, velcro
I came, I saw, I stuck around
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 28 Jun 1999 13:20:57 GMT
In article <7kutv9$qmp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Terry Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When you are doing two such distant phases of the product [design
> and coding] in parallel, you are going to inevitably going to
> introduce defects into the system a code time, which should have
> been found at design/requirements time (i.e. if you bothered to do
> it), which will cost you somewhere in the neighborhood of the figure
> quoted above.
The problem is that producing the formal design/specification is a lot
of work (i.e. slow,) and coding the formal spec. up is also a lot of
work, and most projects are working within fairly strict *time*
budgets. Running the two in parallel (especially where you have an
outline of the system early on) can let you deliver much faster. Very
few software developments outside the safety-critical arena find the
full formal process (it is the "Waterfall" model you are advocating,
isn't it?) fast enough, preferring the calculated risk of showstopping
bugs to the uncertain amount of time to generate a "perfect" version
that might not meet the actual real requirements anyway.
Or are you one of these people that thinks a formal requirements
document always describes what the clients require? :^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- The small advantage of not having California being part of my country would
be overweighed by having California as a heavily-armed rabid weasel on our
borders. -- David Parsons <o r c @ p e l l . p o r t l a n d . o r . u s>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: NT kernel guy playing with Linux
Date: 28 Jun 1999 16:05:33 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>And never backed with numbers.
>
>And always backed with statements like "SUN are dropping STREAMS".
>
Which I don't beleive is true, as you can easily implement the socket
system calls as a STREAMS module so you don't need to socket interface
routins converting to tli calls. Lachman implemention of sockets on
SVR3 systems usualy did that (long time ago).
Villy
------------------------------
From: Philip Boucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Why we are still holding on to X Windows
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 15:03:17 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, dsfox@c writes
>Marcus Sundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > Let's face it. X Windows is a really premitive base for modern GUI,
>> > terrible font support breaks GUI all the time, no sound capability, ....
>>
>> What the hell has sound got to do with GUIs or fonts?
>
>I must say that this thread has changed my mind on this point. X
>handles screen output, but it also handles mouse and keyboard input.
>Why? Because they are part of the user interface - the "UI" in "GUI",
>and the events that are generated need to be coordinated with the
>events that generate the screen output. It is now little funny to
>hear someone say "What the hell has sound got to do with GUIs..."
>Sound is a part of the user interface, graphical or otherwise, and
>sound events also need to be integrated into the stream of events
>associated with a given application. This is especially important
>when you are running applications over the network.
>
>But I still don't think this is any reason to throw away X.
My piano tuner is blind and he recently showed me his computer which has
got voice recognition, voice synthesis etc. It reads text (either typed
in typed or scanned in and OCR'ed), it describes every element of the
screen current screen and so on. This is more like an AUI than a GUI
although I suppose the whole aim is for help him to visualise a GUI in
some way. Anyway sound certainly is a very large part of the GUI here.
--
Philip Boucherat
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: Why did 2.2.5 explode in size?
Date: 28 Jun 1999 15:52:56 +0200
In article <7l6bua$k1a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Frampton Steve R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello:
>
>There seems to have been a helluva lot of code added between kernel
>versions 2.2.4 and 2.2.5. I had quite a bit of difficulty getting
>2.2.5 going on two different servers (both running Red Hat 5.2) due
>to "out of memory" errors. Even with most of the options built as
>modules, and only choosing the bare minimum things (ie. scsi, ethernet,
>file systems -- thank god I don't need sound card or other such frills
>support!), and building the kernel as a bzImage, I still had lots of
>problems.
This may not be releated, but on RH6.0 systems the memory used initially
by the initrd file system will become about 1.5 Mb waisted memory.
This has been reported to redhat through proper channels, so hopefully
this will be fixed real soon now.
Of course non scsi user won't be affected by this problem.
Villy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse)
Subject: Re: Differences in /usr/include/sys/ipc.h
Date: 28 Jun 1999 15:59:37 +0200
In article <7l601s$2et$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Manickam Umasuthan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I have two different versions of the ipc.h in RedHat 6.0 and Slackware
>Linux OSs.
>
>My problem is as follows. I like to use __POSIX__SOURCE macro to compile
>some programs. However RedHat 6.0 forces me to use either __XOPEN__SOURCE
>or __SVID__SOURCE.
>
>The software fails to compile under RedHat 6.0. Could someone
>please let me know how to use the __POSIX__SOURCE macro with
>/usr/include/sys/ipc.h under RedHat 6.0??
Check the comments found in /usr/include/features.h on the redhat system.
It is a bit confusing.
It says though that, _XOPEN_SOURCE inplies _POSIX_SOURCE, and that
_GNU_SOURCE implies everything except BSD incompatible things.
Note single leading underscore.
Villy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Why not C++
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 15:47:24 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > >
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > "Ralph Glebe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> my point is that it's a bit early to start basing important system
> tools on C++ because the implementation is less than stable. changing
> libc is a pain in the ass. if everything were C++, then just imagine
> the pain. it'd be silly to redo `cat', 'ld' and `gcc' in C++.
>
> iirc the original question was to the effect of why don't we port all
> the existing C programs to C++. well, this is why.
No, you don't rc, the original question simply asked why were most
current apps available on linux written in C rather that C++. The
author didn't give even a hint of a suggestion toward porting everything
to C++. He was just trying to find out whether it would be feasible to
use C++ for the app he wanted to write.
>
> i said earlier in this thread that i *do* use C++. i use it on much
> of the software i develop myself. when the library changes (which it
> has done multiple times in the last year while i follow egcs), i can
> recompile. by all means, use C++ where it makes sense. do not redo
> existing programs. just think carefully about the choice between C
> and C++.
I haven't seen any messages in this thread that have suggested porting
everything to C++. I didn't suggest it in any of my messages. Why are
you bringing it up?
>
> reading the egcs mailing lists, it seems that there is a new function
> name munging scheme in the works. it doesn't matter if the standard
> is fixed or not. there will be movement in the implementation for a
> good while yet. you can have multiple incompatible libstdc++
> implementations which both conform to the standard.
>
I bet if you were reading the Gnu C Lib mailing list you would advocate
against using that as well. For a while there was a new C lib release a
month.
> in light of the fact that there certainly *will* be continuing
> changes, i think it is very important to keep a core system done in C
> to allow migration to new C++ development. this isn't unreasonable
> fear, uncertainty or doubt. this is based on egcs/gcc C++ experience
> over the last year or two and the information from egcs mailing list.
>
> --
> J o h a n K u l l s t a m
> [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Don't Fear the Penguin!
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
------------------------------
From: Peter Gavin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: sources for the empeg car player?
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 10:37:18 -0400
I've emailed them, asking where I could get it.. I'll post an update
when (if) he emails me back.
Peter Gavin
Michael Hirsch wrote:
>
> As I recall, the guy who built the empeg (www.empeg.com) car player
> built a custom MB and then put a custom version of linux on it. Since
> it is now shipping, the sources to the GPLed parts of the player must
> be available.
>
> Does anyone have a pointer for these sources? I couldn't find
> anything on the above URL.
>
> 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: Tristan Wibberley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Proposal For New Windowing software
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 1999 13:53:32 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matthew Carl Schumaker wrote:
>
> During the past couple weeks I've seen many people express their opinions
> on both Xwindows and C++. The project that I'm proposing is one that I
> not only want seen done but is also one that I want to participate in.
>
> The proposal is for a new Windowing System that is based on the premise of
> a 3D UI. I know other people are interested in this sort of program as
> well as a couple private ventures, but to the best of my knowledge there
> is no Open Source project of this type.
>
> This UI would provide:
> 1 Native interfaces for 3D devices such as the Spaceball, flying mice,
> pucks, etc
>
> 2 Would be able to use 2 video cards for stereoscopic viewing
>
> 3 Would be able to be networked so people can share Worlds
>
> 4 But still provide support for X apps
I think you'll be interested in Berlin.
They're not designing 3D support into it, they're designing it to be
extremely general, so 3D support can be added later with no disruption.
You can find out all about it at http://www.berlin-consortium.org
--
Tristan Wibberley Linux is a registered trademark
of Linus Torvalds.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
