Linux-Misc Digest #358, Volume #18 Sat, 26 Dec 98 17:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux equvalent of batch files? (Matthias Warkus)
When will kernel 2.2 be released? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A crazy idea (FTP install via null modem?) (Don Grbac)
Re: Anti-Linux FUD (W R Carr)
Re: only L in LILO BOOT :) (Marc)
Re: Write two drives at same time? ("Anthony W. Youngman")
Re: Anti-Linux FUD (W R Carr)
Re: Anti-Linux FUD (Jeremy Crabtree)
gcc on RedHat 5.2 (Jinsong Ouyang)
Re: FSCK time on 50GB partition (Chris Hedley)
iso9660: date/time information recorded by mkisofs - help needed (Jim Y. Kwon)
Two Epson Stylus Color 640 questions (Ramin Sina)
Has anyone notices this about WP 8 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Embarrassingly dumb questio (Jim Shaffer, Jr.)
Re: Torvalds distribution? (Bill Unruh)
Re: Anti-Linux FUD (Jeremy Crabtree)
Re: When will kernel 2.2 be released? (Ed Young)
RedHat-5.2 kernel and serial ports.. (ishwar rattan)
Re: Infringement of the GPL (steve mcadams)
Re: Reasons for me to toss Linux (steve mcadams)
Re: 2+ Graphics Cards (K&A)
Re: A crazy idea (FTP install via null modem?) (Equinox)
Re: The goal of Open Source (steve mcadams)
Re: The goal of Open Source (steve mcadams)
Re: The goal of Open Source (steve mcadams)
Re: The goal of Open Source (steve mcadams)
Re: The goal of Open Source (steve mcadams)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Linux equvalent of batch files?
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 18:52:22 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 25 Dec 1998 22:01:28 -0800, Michael Powe...
..and <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You're right -- that's a much better idea. My first attempt did not
> include the `startx' line -- I just did a script to change the wm
> value in .xinitrc. That's what got me going on sed. Then I didn't
> rethink when I decided to add startx.
If you're interested, I can send you my selector and .xinitrc, so far, it
supports twm, ctwm, lwm, 9wm, wm2, wmx, Bowman, AfterStep, WindowMaker,
BlackBox, fvwm2, mlvwm, amiwm, icewm, fvwm95, qvwm, Enlightenment, gwm,
scwm, mwm, tvtwm, OpenWindows, CDEsim, XFCE, KDE, Gnome and UDE.
I am still hoping that piewm will compile on my machine some day. If someone
knows another WM for my collection, be sure to tell me ;)
> Not a world record, though, I don't think. I saw somebody in
> comp.unix.shell claim to have seen a 110-branch case statement in a
> piece of GNU software. ;-)
Was that in a shell script or in C?
mawa
--
Matthias Warkus | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Dyson Spheres for sale!
My Geek Code is no longer in my .signature. It's available on e-mail request.
It's sad to live in a world where knowing how to program your VCR actually
lowers your social status...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: When will kernel 2.2 be released?
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 18:56:15 GMT
By December 1999?
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Don Grbac)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: A crazy idea (FTP install via null modem?)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 19:16:07 GMT
On Wed, 23 Dec 1998 13:36:17 -0700,
JD Weiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See the subject for my crazy idea. I was pondering installation
>under difficult situations, and I came across
>http://electron.phys.dal.ca/PPP-HOWTO-27.html It got me
>thinking...would it be possible, during setup, to start a null modem
>connection, and use that link to do an FTP install? I realize you
>might have to make a custom boot disk containing pppd, but I've heard
>of people doing PLIP installs, so I wondered if this was possible.
>Any ideas?
>
>JD Weiner
>Network Messaging
>Motorola SSTG
I don't know what you mean by null modem. To do an ftp install, you
would need a "real" network connection. Usually, modem connections
are too slow for ftp installs; it would take hours which most folks
don't have time for, not to mention the possible errors over such a
long transfer time. Ftp installs were meant for fast network
connections, like ethernet.
Don
--
Registered Linux User - [It's not just for hackers anymore!]
Care about your family's health? Check out
http://www.notmilk.com
------------------------------
From: W R Carr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 11:41:13 -0600
Jeremy Crabtree wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] allegedly wrote:
> >On Fri, 25 Dec 1998 16:23:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >>On Fri, 25 Dec 1998 15:55:37 +0000, mlw wrote these thought provoking
> >>words :
> >>
> >> :[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> :>
> <<clip>>
> >>The file was not corrupted. It was deleted. Wow.
> >>
> >>Very unfortunate.
> >
> > You do realize that it does take some intent to
> > delete a system file even under DOS.
>
> Especially those two files. In Win95 even the DOS "kernel" is hardcoded to
> not let you touch them. (you can't even copy the buggers, making backup
> rather awkward)
In my experience, that's not true. It's a simple matter to execute "ATTRIB -S -R -H
*.*
/S" to have access to all files in the system and do anything desire. The same is
also
true in Windows 98. Pure DOS allows you to wreak havoc on any file you choose...
------------------------------
From: Marc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: only L in LILO BOOT :)
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 19:19:52 GMT
Tobias Andersson wrote:
> Hello I've got some problems after I installed Redhat Linux 5.2. I have
> two harddrives.
> 1: 7,6 GB
> 2: 3.4 GB
> When I bought the second drive I didn't format and partition the whole
> drive, I left 1,12 GB to Linux. I suppose you don't have to use for
> example fdisk or partionmagic to get a Linux-partion, to work, if you
> have spared 1 GB which isn't used by any OS.
No and yes, you should be able to use Linux Fdisk (Or Disk Druid of U are
using RH). Partition magic is not needed at all unless you want to resize
some windoze partitions. Last I checked Partition magic did not support
ext2fs partitions that linux uses. (allthough I have not checked in a while
so they may by now)
>
>
> Maybe that's my problem, that I hadn't formated and used the space under
> Windows/dos first? Because when I installed Linux on my other drive I
> took away a partition which had been used by Win 95 and then installed
> Linux.
>
No, shouldnt have made any difference. when I made the switch from Windoze
to Linux I simply repartitioned and formatted then all was ok
>
> The installation seemed to succed. I made a swap partition on my second
> drive, 124 MB. And a native Linux partition on my first drive, 1,12 GB.
> I mounted the native partition as: / , that is root I suppose.
>
Looks good so far
>
> I installed everything on the CD-rom, so the installation took about 800
> MB. The last step for me was to "enable" or tell Linux that my system
> use LBA, and that I have 96 MB of memory. (I wrote: mem=96M )
> '
Shouldn't that read "append mem=96M" or someting like that in /etc/lilo.conf
?
>
> When I tried to reboot my system it couldn't boot. I got a big L which I
> suppose is the beginning of: LILO (LILO BOOT) Then my computer
> crashes/(doesn't do anything more). I still got the LILO BOOT left on my
> second harddrive but because I don't boot from it I suppose it's doesn't
> matter. I think I will remove it with FDISK /MBR...
> I would appreciate some help!
>
> Thank You!
> /Tobias
what version of Linux are You running? from what I can see here it should
work,,unless the setup program picked up the existing lilo from the second
drive that you had Linux installed on before. try fdisking the mbr of the
second drive and see if that happens,,if not then hopefully someone else
knows what's up.
Hope this is of some help,,,
Marc
------------------------------
From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Write two drives at same time?
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1998 02:13:02 +0000
Reply-To: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <75os27$q52$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes
>I have an application in which a small data file (2K-30K) will be FTPd to a
>Linux box 10 to 50 times a day at random times. It is important that the data,
>when it arrives, be instantly preserved in the event that if a total hardware
>failure occurs the media can be removed and carried to another system.
>Recovering the data, if lost, would be a major hassle thus the desire to
>preserve it.
>
>I've read the CD-Recordable FAQ (http://www.fadden.com/cdrfaq/) and it appears
>that one cannot easily write small data files... you have to 'burn' an entire
>track at once, so my plan to use a CD-R is out- it would fill up too soon and
>would be a very inefficient use of disk space.
>
When (I gather it isn't there yet) UDF support is available, then CD-R
would be a very good solution. You can add lots of small files and you
only waste space when you close a session, which is an option not a
requirement. Mind you, you can only get about 520Mb onto a 650Mb CD if
you use UDF :-). But that's still 3 years per CD if you write 1/2Mb per
day.
--
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
Trousers with a single hole in their waistband are topologically equivalent
to a doughnut. These sugarcoated trousers have yet to catch on at fast-food
outlets! (SuperStrings by F. David Peat)
If replying by e-mail please mail wol. Anything else may get missed amongst
the spam.
------------------------------
From: W R Carr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 11:47:56 -0600
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
> Let me add my $0.02 of opinion here,
>
> On Sat, 26 Dec 1998 15:42:56 GMT, Anthony Ord wrote these
> thought provoking words :
>
> -> >Personally I think they are wonderful, well at least an API is
> -> >wonderful.
> ->
> -> What was wrong with the .INI file API?
>
> I don't know if this is related but I have a book here on the 9x/NT
> registry that states that the maximum size of an .ini file is 64Kb.
> This is why software vendors supplied .ini files of their own before
> the registry was designed.
>
> Because there was such a plethora of ini files all over the system
> there were hierarchical problems associated with this. If the win.ini
> file had a particular setting and an application's .ini file overrode
> that setting, who was responsible and where should a system-wide
> setting that had priority be made?
>
> The ini files could easily be edited and tampered with by the
> inexperienced and mistakes could be made. Security was also an issue.
>
> The registry file size can be up to 40MB and it was made complex on
> purpose.
>
> Interesting.......Any comments?
>
>
> -== Allie ==-
>
> *----------------------*
> Allie Martin (Mr.)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> *---------/*\----------*
Sadly enough, the 64K file size limit for .ini files still exists.
That's not
a problem for most newer software, but some older things that I would
like to use (Masquerade, for instance) want to add 30 or 40K to the size
of system.ini, depending on how many active fonts are in the system.
Needless to say, that software is no longer useful.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Crabtree)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Date: 26 Dec 1998 17:45:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
W R Carr allegedly wrote:
>
>
>Jeremy Crabtree wrote:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] allegedly wrote:
>> >On Fri, 25 Dec 1998 16:23:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >>On Fri, 25 Dec 1998 15:55:37 +0000, mlw wrote these thought provoking
>> >>words :
>> >>
>> >> :[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >> :>
>> <<clip>>
>
>> >>The file was not corrupted. It was deleted. Wow.
>> >>
>> >>Very unfortunate.
>> >
>> > You do realize that it does take some intent to
>> > delete a system file even under DOS.
>>
>> Especially those two files. In Win95 even the DOS "kernel" is hardcoded to
>> not let you touch them. (you can't even copy the buggers, making backup
>> rather awkward)
>
>In my experience, that's not true. It's a simple matter to execute
>"ATTRIB -S -R -H *.* /S" to have access to all files in the system
>and do anything desire. The same is also true in Windows 98. Pure
>DOS allows you to wreak havoc on any file you choose...
HRMPH! I must have a broken copy of DOS then, because I assure that no
matter what, the only way I could successfully copy those things was to
use a third part applet with its own, built-in copy routine.
(I will try again later...I may have forgotten to attrib them, though)
--
"Being myself a remarkably stupid fellow, I have had to unteach myself the
difficulties, and now beg to present to my fellow fools the parts that are
not hard" --Silvanus P. Thompson, from "Calculus Made Easy."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jinsong Ouyang)
Subject: gcc on RedHat 5.2
Date: 26 Dec 1998 10:22:19 GMT
On RedHat 5.2, if you write a very simple C code like below
main()
{
char input[80];
gets( input );
}
Then when you compile it using gcc or egcs, you will get the following
strange warning message. What hell is going on? Anyone knows?
/tmp/cca094601.o: In function `main':
/tmp/cca094601.o(.text+0xb): the `gets' function is dangerous and should not be used.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Hedley)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: FSCK time on 50GB partition
Date: 26 Dec 1998 19:32:59 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Teodor Romeo Mihai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 50Gb?? I truly envy you for having such a huge hard-drive. Or was it
> 5Gb?
I'd say 50GB is average-ish for a small to mid-size server. 50GB is a tiny
amount of storage compared to IBM S/370 and DEC VAX datacentres going back
over the last couple of decades. Even my home PC has about half that amount.
Chris.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Y. Kwon)
Subject: iso9660: date/time information recorded by mkisofs - help needed
Date: 24 Dec 1998 17:59:51 PST
Hi all, can anyone offer some help on the following problem?
I'm using mkisofs v1.11.3 on linux 2.0.34.
When I create a cdr image with mkisofs, then mount that image file on linux
(using the loopback device, to test out the integrity of the CD image before
actually burning it), the date/time stamps are off by (x) hours. I'd like the
date/time stamps on the CD image to match the original date/time stamp on my
files that I'm archiving.
I've done an actual CD burn (using Plextor 12/20plex), and when I mount the
CD-ROM under linux I'll get the same result - the date/time stamps are all off
by (x) hours. HOWEVER, if I boot to Windoze95 and look at the CD-ROM, the
date/time stamps are correct and match the original files. The original files
are stored in a linux partition (ext2).
Is the problem with 'mount' (with the iso9660 fs), or with mkisofs? If I play
with the 'TZ' environment variable, I could probably make it so that linux
would report the correct date/time, but I suspect the date/time would appear
wrong under Win95. I'd like a consistent (and correct) solution.
I've briefly scanned through the source code for mkisofs, and I don't really
see anything wrong in this regard; it looks like mkisofs is recording the
correct date/time information.
I couldn't find any information on 'mount' on manipulating the date/time
information. I'd like to think that I need to configure something else in
linux to get these date/time stamps to match between linux and win95. I'm
presently using 'timeconfig' to configure my timezone to "US/Mountain" (and
'date' reports the correct information).
I've glossed over the patch notes for linux 2.0.35 and 2.0.36, but I didn't
see anything related to this.
Can anyone offer some helpful advice? Thanks.
--
-Jim
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Ramin Sina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Two Epson Stylus Color 640 questions
Date: 25 Dec 1998 08:52:15 PST
Hi everyone,
I have an Epson Stylus Color 640 connected to my suse 5.2 machine and I
can use the lpr command line to print text files with it. But I have a
problem printing postscript with either lpr or with the print command
within ghostview: I get many many pages of textfile garbage. I have gs
5.5 on the machine and I know it does support uniprint. I have two
questions:
1) What command line I use, or what is the best way, to print
postscript ?
2) What process should I kill to stop the printer from printing garbage.
I killed lpd and restarted it, and turned the printer off and on, and it
still kept printing garbage.
Thanks,
Ramin
--
========================================================
Ramin Sina [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Has anyone notices this about WP 8
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:09:34 GMT
As I was playing around with WordPerfect 8, I couldn't fail to notice a
few curious factoids... My version of WordPerfect 8 was apparently
compiled on June the 23rd...
And it has 10000 licenced sessions, of which none are used.
And looking throught the strange binary configuration files, I find the
following notice:
(Quoted) AWP UNIX RULES! WP UNIX R ULES! WP UNIX RULES! WP UNIX RULES!
WP UNIX RULES! WP UNIX RULES! WP UNIX RULES! WP UNIX RULES! (End
Quote)
On the whole, wp has been stable and quite well-behaved, with a few
glitches, like not showing text on the buttons when run remotely, or
complaining about too many concurrent users when opening a second
document (though not consequently). And it wants, most annoyingly, put
it's colour configuration file, XWp as an undotted file in my home
directory, which is already badly cluttered by StarOffice, KDE, pine,
tin.
But even a complex WordPerfect 4.2 document, on which WordPerfect 5.x
for Dos used to choke, can be loaded without errors. It's nice to see
all the characters from the WP charset working, but it would be better
if that set conformed to some standard, like Unicode. For someone with
about ten megs of old WP documents lying about, this is a gift from
heaven, and I am busily using it to convert everything to text and
html.
--
Boudewijn Rempt | www.xs4all.nl/~bsarempt
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Shaffer, Jr.)
Subject: Re: Embarrassingly dumb questio
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 20:11:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 26 Dec 1998 02:50:12 +0000, Rich Grise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>you know what you want done, how do you find the appropriate command?)
apropos
--
"Withdraw in disgust is not the same thing as apathy." --R.E.M.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Subject: Re: Torvalds distribution?
Date: 26 Dec 1998 21:00:51 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams) writes:
>So far I've tried RedHat 5.1 and RedHat 5.2 and both seem to have
>things that simply don't work. I've ordered several other distros but
Well, I have used 5.1 and things do work. You might get further if you
actually said what it was that tyou were having problems with.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Crabtree)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Date: 26 Dec 1998 21:00:02 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<THWAP!...the sound of me smacking my forehead>
Jeremy Crabtree allegedly wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] allegedly wrote:
>>Let me add my $0.02 of opinion here,
>
>[SNIP, mostly because the formatting was atrocious, and I didn't
> want to fix it]
>
>>
>>Yeah. Boot to a command line and enjoy. Copy anything you wish.
>>
>>I would expect that these linux experts would know this. <laugh, duck
>>and running.>
>
>Well, when you use the perfection that is BASH, you tend to let go of
>the broken ways of DOS ;) (Also, it probably just slipped my mind)
>
>(Or, CSH, or ASH, or PDKSH, or ZSH, or...)
Yup, it was my mistake. I forgot to change the attribs so I could copy the
files. <D'OH!>
--
"Being myself a remarkably stupid fellow, I have had to unteach myself the
difficulties, and now beg to present to my fellow fools the parts that are
not hard" --Silvanus P. Thompson, from "Calculus Made Easy."
------------------------------
From: Ed Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: When will kernel 2.2 be released?
Date: 26 Dec 1998 21:12:23 GMT
When it's quality is up to 'excellent'.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> By December 1999?
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 16:10:25 EST
From: ishwar rattan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RedHat-5.2 kernel and serial ports..
Hello,
Just installed RedHat-5.2 and recompiled the kernel for SMP. The
serial port (COM1) does not work. The message in dmesg is --
..
Serial divers version 4.13 with no serial options enabled
..
In /usr/src/linux/.config the line reads
..
CONFIG_SERIAL=y
..
What else is to be enabled for standard serial ports? Please
help.
Thanks in advance.
- ishwar rattan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: Infringement of the GPL
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:21:48 GMT
On Fri, 25 Dec 1998 21:17:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>And that's a reason not to use the GPL? It would piss you off less had
>you used a different license?
Absolutely, because I'd use a proprietary license and distribute the
source code to paying customers with a non-redistribution restriction.
So I would earn some income from the work, and possibly be in a
position to earn more by sueing the copyright infringers. With GPL I
get nothing for doing the work, they get money for unlicensed use, and
I can't afford to sue. In my book, that sucks.
I'm starting to think that the GPL is just for hobbyists. I probably
would have thought it was swell when I was 25; now at almost 50 and
wondering what I'll do about retirement (cardboard box anyone?) I'd
like to earn money for doing work, not just do it for the fun of it.
Not that it isn't fun, but are all those who get to use my work going
to support me when I'm old(er)? I don't think so. I wonder what
Richard Stallman thinks about free software now that he's older
(assuming he's nearing retirement age? and hasn't skimmed a million or
so off the FSF along the way; there's nothing wrong with a non-profit
corporation paying immense salaries you know).
Maybe I sound like a greedy asshole, but unless you are at least
50-ish and have raised kids instead of a stock portfolio, you need to
think about it before you say so. -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: Reasons for me to toss Linux
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:21:46 GMT
Lots of cool stuff here for me to check out... thanks, and I'm sure
I'm not the only one reading to which much of this is "news". -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: K&A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2+ Graphics Cards
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 14:28:44 -0700
> Does Linux support the use of more than one graphics card - I know that
> X supports the concept of multiple display screens (:0, :1 etc) but does
> Linux allow this ??
I know that Linux does, but I've never done it myself. I'd search archives
of X-related newsgroups for "multi-head displays." I've seen a number of
such questions and answers by people what have done it.
Sorry I can't be of more help.
James
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Equinox)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: A crazy idea (FTP install via null modem?)
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:37:42 GMT
On Sat, 26 Dec 1998 19:16:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Don
Grbac) wrote:
> I don't know what you mean by null modem. To do an ftp install, you
> would need a "real" network connection. Usually, modem connections
> are too slow for ftp installs; it would take hours which most folks
> don't have time for, not to mention the possible errors over such a
> long transfer time. Ftp installs were meant for fast network
> connections, like ethernet.
A null modem connection is a direct connection between the serial
ports of two computers. It requires a specially-wired serial cable
(usually referred to as a "null-modem cable"). I think you're
right... a serial connection would be rather slow. It would probably
be better to stick to parallel (for PLIP) or Ethernet connections.
--Equinox
==========================================================================
Email (spam-disabled):
lord *underscore* equinox *at* mindspring *dot* com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: The goal of Open Source
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:40:40 GMT
On Thu, 24 Dec 1998 11:32:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
wrote:
>The idea is that programmers will make money from their services rather than
>products. Most programmers do in fact get payed for their services and
>don't receive any kind of royalties from product sales. The situation is
>similar to the music industry where it's the middlemen rather than musicians
>who get most of the profits from sales.
Yah, I get paid for my services, as an employee. I get told when to
show up, how long to work each day, how much I will get paid, and what
I will work on. Frankly amigo, it sucks bigtime. I would far prefer
to work out of my home writing the code that interests me and selling
it to people who need it. So am I greedy or just an unwilling slave?
-steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: The goal of Open Source
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:40:44 GMT
On 24 Dec 1998 14:04:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Smith)
wrote:
...snip
> If nothing else, organizations will likely
>need to hire programmers to write entirely in-house utilities -- it's hard
>to imagine the CIA giving away some sensitive spy-related software! ;-)
>There will also be a need for organizations to hire programmers who can be
>trusted with confidential data if/when that data is causing an open source
>program to misbehave. (In this case the result might be put back into the
>original source tree, but the programmer would still have to be hired with
>a contract that says s/he doesn't reveal the employees salaries or
>whatnot.)
More talk about being a hireling. If I was into that I would have
stayed in my cushy job at IBM. Not I pard. -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: The goal of Open Source
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:40:38 GMT
Now -that- is reassuring. I better start looking for a job as a
clerk... yummy! -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: The goal of Open Source
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:40:42 GMT
On Thu, 24 Dec 1998 14:02:39 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>When you need a program written and are not a programmer, who are you going
>to hire to write it?
In other words, all programmers will become the "hired help". Hell,
if I'm condemned to that position I'll become a manager, or better yet
go into real-estate or stock brokering or something where I get paid
some serious money for putting up with the daily crap. The idea of
being a programmer, for me at least, is that it's one area where with
a reasonable outlay of cash up front for education/equipment, you can
be your own boss. Sounds like the FSF is dead set against
independence for workers. -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Subject: Re: The goal of Open Source
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1998 21:40:46 GMT
On 26 Dec 1998 16:55:47 GMT, Ed Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Programmers are required to modify applications to fit a
>business well.
Ooooh, yummy! Open Source takes over the world, then I get to be a
maintenance grunt for the rest of my life, cleaning up other peoples'
garbage so it works to company spec-of-the-week. Arrgh. -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
** 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.misc) 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-Misc Digest
******************************
