Linux-Development-Sys Digest #734, Volume #7 Mon, 3 Apr 00 16:13:18 EDT
Contents:
Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux ("The Wogster")
Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux (Don Waugaman)
Re: kernel loader (John Gluck)
Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux (John Gluck)
Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Rubini's device driver example (Girish Chandraiah)
Re: software raid patch (bill davidsen)
Re: 2.3.99pre3 - still won't compile (bill davidsen)
Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "The Wogster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 12:53:34 -0400
Peter:
When did technical proficiency mean rudeness, and irrespect of others? I
have been in the business for 20 years, currently as a consultant, and for
hire programmer. If your THAT rude to a client, then you quickly run out of
clients. The geek who's tan comes from his/her monitor, is 98lbs, and
hasn't talked to another human face to face in years is a stereotype, and
not a very good one. There are some very technically proficient people, who
are not rude and impolite, want a good example, look at Linus.
You always have to remember, when dealing with newbies, and people who are
not technically proficient, that we were all there once. There are also
people who are technically excellent, that have not previously worked with
Linux, who would ask this very question. Beleive me, there are tonnes of
them out there.
Peter T. Breuer wrote in message <8c9g98$i25$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>In comp.os.linux.development.system Lee Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>: So does this mean that you are only a good programmer, or worthy of a
decent
>: (and respectful) reply, if you're on the Kernel list?
>
>It means that I am probably exposed to more information than you. And I am
>not exactly kidding!
>
>: Come on...let's quit this - everyone has a right to post to these
newsgroups (be
>: they seasoned programmers, accomplished designers or NEWBIES), so don't
try to
>: make others feel inferior or less capable than yourself.
>
>I'm not. As usual, the perception is in the eye of the beholder. This
>ascii might have been written by a computer ...
>
>: One as "developed" as yourself should realise that everyone has to start
from
>: somewhere. It's hard enough doing so without getting cut-down for posting
(what
>: ONE indiviual) believes to be irrelevant or ridiculous.
>: Believe me, I'm not doubting for one moment that you don't know what
you're
>: talking about, but a little respect doesn't hurt..
>
>I don't mind what you think I know or don't know. As to respect: it's
>hard to earn. And I for one will always respect truthfulness when I see
>it! I personally don't have anything but repulsion for "consensus"
>(i.e. smarminess) if it implies the corruption of honest speaking, and
>I believe it does. So, while I'm entertained by the proposed amendments
>to my initial post, I really don't feel that there is any worthy end to
>be served thereby. Those who object seem to be worried by the use of
>two words: naive, ignorant. They seem to me to have been correctly
>applied. There is no stigma attached to them. They simply describe
>the situation.
>
>
>Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Don Waugaman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux
Date: 3 Apr 2000 09:59:37 -0700
In article <8c8hme$9eo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.development.system Don Waugaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: You are equating politeness with inassertiveness. That's a singularly
>: bad trap to fall into. Technical correction can be done in polite
>: manner. Being polite in correcting someone does not mean being some
>: kind of milquetoast. Pointing someone asking for help in the right
>: direction does not give you free rein to insult their ignorance (which
>: is *not* the same as a lack of intelligence).
>Interesting point. It's a well-phrased point and has considerable merit
>(but I'm hardly likely to put bruised feelings before bruised truth, or
>I wouldn't be being honest with myself or you).
Nor is anyone asking you to (certainly, I'm not). Error should not be
mollycoddled, but it should be corrected in the most effective way, and
I think that politeness tends to be the most effective form of correction
over the long run, as it doesn't produce a rather visceral emotional
reaction against the truth.
[ snips ]
>That said, a person asking about how to test their own software on
>linux distributions gets a solid zero for intelligence. They
>can't be serious!
I'll go into it in a little more depth below, but I disagree with this
conclusion.
[ snipped - I enjoyed _The Mote In God's Eye too ]
>: with what you wrote. This makes substantially the same point you made in
>: your initial reply, and cuts no slack by comparison, but is *more* likely
>: to have a positive response simply because it is *more polite*.
>Quite possibly. I'm not sure that it's worth it, however. The software
>in question can't be worth much or a more technically rehearsed
>person would have been placing the question, no?
Hard to say. Maybe the coder in question is a whiz at programming but
doesn't know much about configuration management. Maybe they're a bit
> You'd expect a
>responsible architect or group leader would have asked for directions to
>the policy documents of the various distros, and contact points! Well,
>they wouldn't even have asked on the newsgroup at all. Can you imagine
>a person who has to organize and design software asking about libraries
>and being unaware of configuration file placements, compiler issues,
>standards, policies ...?
Perhaps the lead is busily working through a testing program and decided to
farm the question out to the newest wet-behind-the-ears intern, who will
distill what information he finds out about the subject and pass it on to
folks who will actually do something about it? From the original posting,
it's hard to say one way or the other. On a straight Occam's Razor basis,
I'd have to say your assumptions are probably more valid than mine, but I
think it's important to realize that we're both making assumptions. I'd
generally prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt - which of course
does not prevent a solid round of castigation when doubt becomes
(negative) certainly.
>: Politeness is the oil that lubricates contact points in any system of two
>: or more humans. Don't throw sand in the gears just because you think it's
>: the only way to get your point across - that reflects more on you than on
>: who you are communicating with.
>If you examine the original reply again, you'll find its not as brusque
>as you are making it out to be. I'd quote it here, if I weren't working
>across a modem link and an xterm.
True - and I'll add that your original follow-up contained a good deal of
useful information for someone to ponder - particularly in terms of
pointing them towards source distribution.
However, when the first paragraph of a posting is
"These questions are so naive that I wouldn't trust any programmer that
has to ask them. Who are you hiring, if anyone?"
that tends to set the tone in terms of pushing readers towards
associating more negative connotations with your words for the remainder
of your posting.
--
- Don Waugaman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) O- _|_ Will pun
Web Page: http://www.cs.arizona.edu/people/dpw/ | for food
In the Sonoran Desert, where we say: "It's a dry heat..." | <><
Always remember that you are unique, just like everyone else.
------------------------------
From: John Gluck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kernel loader
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 13:38:20 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I would like to know if anyone can point me to some information on the
> linux execuatable loader and the processes that it follows when it loads
> an execuatable and runs it. I am relatively new to the scene and don't
> know where to find stuff. I am particularly interested in the ELF side
> of things. i already have a lot of info on the ELF file format but I
> would like to have a look at the source for the loader. Is it relativly
> the same for all distro's? I am particluarly interested in Redhat.
>
> thanks.
>
> dan
>
> ps. can you cc to my email thanks.
The loader should be the same for all distro's
Try looking in /usr/src/linux. Since the loader can be a module, it may
be in one of the modules directories.
--
John Gluck (Passport Kernel Design Group)
(613) 765-8392 ESN 395-8392
Unless otherwise stated, any opinions expressed here are strictly my own
and do not reflect any official position of Nortel Networks.
------------------------------
From: John Gluck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 13:55:55 -0400
"Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> I don't mind what you think I know or don't know. As to respect: it's
> hard to earn. And I for one will always respect truthfulness when I see
> it! I personally don't have anything but repulsion for "consensus"
> (i.e. smarminess) if it implies the corruption of honest speaking, and
> I believe it does. So, while I'm entertained by the proposed amendments
> to my initial post, I really don't feel that there is any worthy end to
> be served thereby. Those who object seem to be worried by the use of
> two words: naive, ignorant. They seem to me to have been correctly
> applied. There is no stigma attached to them. They simply describe
> the situation.
>
> Peter
You have managed in a very short time and relatively few posts to dig a
very very deep hole.
Respect is not a difficult thing to earn. Start by respecting others.
Your idea of truth appears to be rudely brow beating others into
submission.
It is possible to be honest and show good manners at the same time.
You appear to be a lonely person with a big chip on your shoulder. That
I think in all honesty is sad.
As far as your techinical expertise is concerned, it is still a big
question mark. That's because you have not shared any technical
information in any posting on this thread. I suspect your skills are
exceeded by your arrogance.
There is professional help available for people in your situation.
--
John Gluck (Passport Kernel Design Group)
Unless otherwise stated, any opinions expressed here are strictly my own
and do not reflect any official position of Nortel Networks.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux
Date: 3 Apr 2000 18:16:39 GMT
In comp.os.linux.development.system The Wogster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: When did technical proficiency mean rudeness, and irrespect of others? I
Oooooh. Almost always, I think.
: have been in the business for 20 years, currently as a consultant, and for
: hire programmer. If your THAT rude to a client, then you quickly run out of
I am talking to an equal, not a client. That's left to the oily people
up front.
: clients. The geek who's tan comes from his/her monitor, is 98lbs, and
: hasn't talked to another human face to face in years is a stereotype, and
: not a very good one. There are some very technically proficient people, who
: are not rude and impolite, want a good example, look at Linus.
Linus can be plenty impolite! Not that he generally is.
: You always have to remember, when dealing with newbies, and people who are
: not technically proficient, that we were all there once. There are also
: people who are technically excellent, that have not previously worked with
: Linux, who would ask this very question. Beleive me, there are tonnes of
: them out there.
Then they don't deserve any respect in software engineering terms. They
haven't gone to a college course, even. The question was naive and
ig'rant.
: Peter T. Breuer wrote in message <8c9g98$i25$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
:>I don't mind what you think I know or don't know. As to respect: it's
:>hard to earn. And I for one will always respect truthfulness when I see
:>it! I personally don't have anything but repulsion for "consensus"
:>(i.e. smarminess) if it implies the corruption of honest speaking, and
:>I believe it does. So, while I'm entertained by the proposed amendments
:>to my initial post, I really don't feel that there is any worthy end to
:>be served thereby. Those who object seem to be worried by the use of
:>two words: naive, ignorant. They seem to me to have been correctly
:>applied. There is no stigma attached to them. They simply describe
:>the situation.
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux
Date: 3 Apr 2000 18:28:27 GMT
In comp.os.linux.development.system Don Waugaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <8c8hme$9eo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>In comp.os.linux.development.system Don Waugaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: However, when the first paragraph of a posting is
: "These questions are so naive that I wouldn't trust any programmer that
: has to ask them. Who are you hiring, if anyone?"
: that tends to set the tone in terms of pushing readers towards
: associating more negative connotations with your words for the remainder
: of your posting.
I believe I gained the impresion from the use of the phrase "my company"
that the person was posturing. I also got the impression from "you out
there" and "our" that he was in authority "in there":
My company is currently finishing its product on Red Hat 6.1.
Given the multiplicity of Linux versions, we are worried about
distributing our product on Linux in general.
You out there that have already gone this route, could you please
share your experience:
- How compatible are Linux versions between vendors on the executable
format (a.out), and on the object format (.o) ? On what Linux versions
will a pre-link on RedHat 6.1 link and execute correctly ?
- How does one measure this compatibility (egcs version? glibc
version? xf86 version?)
- How general is the rpm packaging format for the release?
Our thanks in advance for any answer
Peter
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux
Date: 3 Apr 2000 18:16:56 GMT
In comp.os.linux.development.system Pjtg0707 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On 3 Apr 2000 07:12:40 GMT, Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: -------------------------snipped--------------------------------
: Can you guys take this offline to private email? This discussion is not
: relevant in this group.
Amen.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Girish Chandraiah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rubini's device driver example
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 13:18:05 -0500
I thought this might help some newbie's like myself. As suggested by one of the replies
to the original posting, printk outputs did apprear in the /var/log/messages
xterm -C didn't seem to help. Thanks to those who responded.
nilesh patel wrote:
> "Roger J. Pryor" wrote:
>
> > > Harish K Chandraia schrob:
> > > > I am trying to run the first example in Rubini's Linux Device
> > > > Drivers and when I run the insmod command, I don't see "Hello World"
> > > > from the init_module() being printed and I don't see anything from
> > > > the cleanup_module() being printed when I run the rmmod command
> > > > either.
> > >
> > > Are you running X? printk's don't appear on an X console.
> > > Switch to a standard console and try from there.
> > >
> > > HTH
> > > Christian
> > >
> > > --
> > > |~-_ /~~~~~ Free Linux Portal: http://www.linux-config.de ~~~~~\ _-~|
> > > | // de.etc.schreiben.* - Usenet-Literatur im www: \\ |
> > > | // http://www.usenet-autoren.de \\ |
> > > |_||[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.thepoet1.de__||_|
> >
> > Or take a look into /var/log/messages, that is the printk daemon's log
> > file.
> >
> > --
>
> try xterm -C if you want that on xterm .
>
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Roger J. Pryor P. Eng. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Pryor and Pryor Inc. Telephone: (+1)(604) 685-2621
> > 602 - 1230 Comox Street Fax: (+1)(604) 683-3488
> > Vancouver, B.C., Internet: http://www.pryor-and-pryor.com
> > V6E 1K7, Canada
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bill davidsen)
Subject: Re: software raid patch
Date: 3 Apr 2000 19:40:00 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dieter Rohlfing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On 29 Mar 2000 19:47:21 GMT, bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > RAID-0 is already built into the kernel. You are using the wrong
| >toolset, which in turn requires the patches. See the "md" stuff.
|
| I'm not quite sure about your statement.
|
| On one Linux box I'm running Suse 5.1 with a 2.0.38 kernel and the
| mdutils-0.35 (included in Suse 5.1). This combo works flawlessly. :-)
Yes, that's what I meant, use mdtools rather than raidtools, because
mdtools interface to the RAID in a Linux kernel.
| On another Linux box I installed RedHat 5.2 and they offered the mdutils
| and the raid-tools. I wondered about the difference between both packages
| and read the docs. For me it seems, that the raid-tools supercede the
| mdutils. So, for the future the mdtools will be obsolete. Did I miss
| anything? Can someone jump in and clearify?
It depends on how much you need RAID other than -0. I've had no luck
with other RAID levels in a Linux kernel w/o the raidtools patches and
support.
| Under RedHat 5.2 I want to run kernel 2.2.14, and therefore the question
| about the right raid-tools and/or kernel patches is essential for me.
You have to understand that mdtools works with Linux kernels, and
raidtools works with Redhat kernels (and one's you patch yourself to use
raidtools). If you want to run a stock Linux kernel off the net, use
mdtools, because it is in 2.2 kernels.
For RAID-0 I have seen no measurable benefit from going to the
raidtools stuff, in terms of performance or CPU use. Therefore, unless
you have a reason to use raidtools, I wouldn't. The Radhat kernel can
use either, but if you want to go to newer kernels it's just more work.
I don't believe that raidtools is going to be stndard in 2.2 kernels
ever. I don't recall it being in the last 2.3 kernels I tried, but I
didn't look. The 2.3.99pre3 config doesn't offer RAID-5, so I believe it
is not currently in the beta series at this time.
I run the raidtools patches on several of my machines, but I see no
reason to do so for RAID-0. Seems solid, both RAID-5 and RAID-0+1. But
it's a pain to run a patched kernel if you don't have to.
Hope that let's you make an informed decision.
--
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
"Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979"(tm)
The hardest test of maturity is knowing the difference between
resisting temptation and missing a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bill davidsen)
Subject: Re: 2.3.99pre3 - still won't compile
Date: 3 Apr 2000 19:47:32 GMT
In article <8c0q7h$rgl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
| In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
| Paul Kimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| | I don't think you need the netfilter "compat" options.
|
| Have a realtime packet app, rewrote it from ipfwadm kernel interface,
| though this might make it run in 2.4.
|
| Thanks for the hint, compiles fine without the compat, but the app
| doesn't run.
Followup data point:
the latest Alan Cox patch (2.3.99-3ac1) removes the compatibility
code. My joy at finding I could upgrade to 2.4 with my app was
short-lived.
--
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
"Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979"(tm)
The hardest test of maturity is knowing the difference between
resisting temptation and missing a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: How compatible is Linux with .. Linux
Date: 3 Apr 2000 19:45:41 GMT
In comp.os.linux.development.apps Don Waugaman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <8c80ku$482$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>In comp.os.linux.development.apps q_49@hot###mail.com wrote:
:>: Well said Rod. Mr. Breuer also made some unseemly comments in
:>: response to a question I asked. His answers are usually condescending
:>: and invariably unhelpful. It seems that this is "normal" behavior
:>: for him, I pity his co-workers. It is consoling to know that his
:>: attitude is in the minority.
:>What world do you live in? Producing software is a technically
:>difficult task. It requires technical expertise, not politeness and
:>good manners! Indeed, politeness is culpable homicide in the technical
:>area.
:>I recommend you to fly in a plane controlled by a software written by
:>a technical incompetent you were too "polite" to tell to go and fix
:>his software.
: You are equating politeness with inassertiveness. That's a singularly
: bad trap to fall into. Technical correction can be done in polite
: manner. Being polite in correcting someone does not mean being some
: kind of milquetoast. Pointing someone asking for help in the right
: direction does not give you free rein to insult their ignorance (which
: is *not* the same as a lack of intelligence).
: Compare for instance:
: "From your question, I'm not sure you have enough of a technical background
: on Linux at the moment to be able to do much with the answer I'd have to
: give you. Perhaps you should either rephrase the question somewhat, giving
: a brief overview of the issues you know about already, or have someone with
: a broader technical background ask this question."
: with what you wrote. This makes substantially the same point you made in
: your initial reply, and cuts no slack by comparison, but is *more* likely
: to have a positive response simply because it is *more polite*.
: Politeness is the oil that lubricates contact points in any system of two
: or more humans. Don't throw sand in the gears just because you think it's
: the only way to get your point across - that reflects more on you than on
: who you are communicating with.
Also consider that the above is far less clear than the original post, and
takes a lot longer to say. I've been told many a time, "Geez, you're an
idiot! Go read, [insert FAQ]!" I learned a lot. I was also motivated to
go do a little research before bothering people on here. There's enough
noise on USENET as it is without adding to it (like, say, this thread?)
<grin>.
Anyway, I thought I'd point out that while politeness is nice, it often
wastes a lot of time. Saying what you mean may not be nice, but it's
fast and it's effective.
And, of course, there's always Wesley Snipes' point of view:
"Hey! You can't take away people's right to be assholes!" :-)
--J
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
