Linux-Misc Digest #377, Volume #18 Mon, 28 Dec 98 00:13:09 EST
Contents:
enabling 'LF->CR/LF' ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
AOL as ISP? (Rod Brick)
Re: Am I stupid or am I stupid. PPP. ALMOST!!! (Michael Fross)
Re: Redhat Linux @Home cable modem Intel EtherExpress ("Scream")
Re: Embarrassingly dumb question
Re: RISC 6000 MACHINE (Rob Clark)
Re: Anti-Linux FUD (Brett W. McCoy)
Re: Easy UNIX editor (erikc)
Re: Am I stupid or am I stupid. PPP. ALMOST!!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Can you all please help me and support Linux Community! Please Read (Bill Pitz)
Re: Am I stupid or am I stupid. PPP. ALMOST!!! (Niann Shiang)
Re: Am I stupid or am I stupid. PPP. ALMOST!!! (Marc)
Re: Applix or Corel WP? Anyone using new version of Applix? (Rod Smith)
Re: Problem With Shutdown ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Fonts For WP8? (Rod Smith)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: enabling 'LF->CR/LF'
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 02:12:00 GMT
I got a Deskjet 722C color inkjet printer (yes, I know it is a "windows"
printer). It is connected to my win95 machine which shares it with my linux
box via windows sharing and samba. It prints out postscript like a charm,
including color. However when I print the test page for ASCII, all it prints
is this error:
If this is all you see, try enabling 'LF->CR/LF' translation in printtool . .
. Line
I used Red hat's graphical printer configuration tool (from control-panel) to
configure this printer, and it does not seem to have such an option. What do
I do?
TB
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Rod Brick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: AOL as ISP?
Date: 28 Dec 1998 04:09:01 GMT
Does anyone know if it's possible to connect to the internet via AOL as
the ISP? If so, can you point me in the direction of any relevant
documentation to accomplish this. Thanks much.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 20:21:40 -0600
From: Michael Fross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: Am I stupid or am I stupid. PPP. ALMOST!!!
"Joel D. Carter" wrote:
>
> Sergei Gerasenko wrote:
> >
> > I've been working on this problem for 4 days already. I've had three nights
> > when I went to bed at 8 a.m.! Here is the problem. I bought a RedHat
> > distribution of Linux (kernel 2.2.32) a week ago and decided to install it
> > on my notebook (NEC VERSA 4000). Of course, the first thing I wanted to work
> > was PPP (I have a PCMCIA modem). My modem was successfully recognized and I
> > didn't have any problems with that. But I was concerned about PPP support.
> > At first I thought that it wasn't built in the kernel because the PPP
> > registration lines wouldn't show up at boot up. So, I recompiled the kernel
> > with the support built in. For some reason other features got messed up and
> > I decided to switch back to the old kernel. (You must notice here that all
> > that was going on during the Christmas time when everybody was drinking
> > booze and having fun). Luckily, it turned out that the old kernel had PPP in
> > modules. With great relief I edited all the scripts (PPP-on and
> > ppp-on-dialer). Of course they didn't work right away, but ultimately I
> > successfully passed the login-password phase. I'm sure that I send right
> > responses to my ISP because /var/log/messages goes all the way to "serial
> > connection established" and I also looked through the log line by line.
> > Nothing suspicious. "Serial connection established" was about the only
> > encouraging line in the whole log. Then comes the following:
> >
> > connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/ttyS2 (pretty lively too:-)
> > channel ppp0 closing (Oh, oh!)
> > hangup (SIGHUP)
> > modem hangup
> > connection terminated
> > exit
> >
> > I have read a whole bunch of readme's on PPP. Nothing describes SIGHUP
> > in a detailed way. There was a short description of that in PPP-HOWTO, but
> > it didn't help. I have looked through old postings dated all the way back to
> > 1997 and found nothing similar.
> > The PPP service also starts O.K. according to the log. I have tried
> > minicom. The same thing. I get to the point when I enter my credentials, get
> > the garbage, exit the program without resetting the modem, type
> > #pppd -d -detach /dev/ttyS2 38400 & and it goes no further. Something
> > disconnects the modem all the time. My PPP is 2.2.0, so I'm safe there. No
> > other errors. I'm in despair and about to get on an anti-depressant. Anybody
> > who has a good suggestion, will get a bottle of virtual vodka and even drink
> > it with me (virtually)!
> >
> > THANXXXXXXXXXX
> I am experiencing the exact same problem. Anyonw that has some insight.
> Please let me know. Thanks.
What version of Redhat is that? v5.1? v5.2?
------------------------------
From: "Scream" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.networking,linux.redhat.install,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Redhat Linux @Home cable modem Intel EtherExpress
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 04:13:07 GMT
Thanks very much. I've been screwing around with this for just a day so
far. BTW, anyone try the RedHat ftp server with a cable modem? Downloaded
a 53MB postscript FAQ in under 90 seconds. Got up to over 950KB a second.
Fastest I've seen that thing move. Kick-ass server with a T3 connection I
gotta assume. Anyway, thanks again.
Jason Brossa wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Here is a small guide for setting up your Linux machine with a PnP
>ethernet card, @Home cable modem and DHCP
>
>http://www.monmouth.com/~jay/Linux/
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Embarrassingly dumb question
Date: 28 Dec 1998 00:41:55 GMT
Reply-To: [email protected]
Charles Mosher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [...]I am used to having documentation in clear text, and
> being able to see what files in a directory include any words of my
> choice, and then have the computer jump to them and read them, ie, scan
> all the words in the files themselves, not just what some "expert" thinks
> are the key words.
Man pages are just text files that contain plain text plus mark-up
instructions for the "man" command. You _can_ go to any directory
containing man pages and search for files that contain keywords (e.g.,
cd /usr/man/man1; grep -i keyword *).
The man page directories can be found by looking in the /etc/man.config
file. These are any directories listed after a MANPATH statement. For
example:
MANPATH /usr/man
MANPATH /usr/X11R6/man
etc.
If you want to save man pages as plain text (with no mark-up), you can:
man <command_name> | col -b > <file_to_save> or
groff -man -Tascii <actual_man_page_file> > <file_to_save>
> Where is the master index to the man files, so that one can read them,
> starting at the beginning, and stopping when one gets to the end,
> rather than just groping a round?
You could, if you wanted, go to all the man directories, save all the man
pages as text and assemble one long text file. I think a better approach is
to read "Linux in a Nutshell" from O'Reilly Books, which contains brief
summaries of the most common commands. There are also book versions of the
man pages available.
> [...]
> Where are the HOW-TOs? What is the correct capitalization of HOW-TO, so
> that find can find them?
On Red Hat, go to /usr/doc/HOWTO (with HOWTO capitalized, since Unix is
case sensitive). While you're there, check out the DOS-to-Linux-HOWTO,
which has some useful information for making the transition.
> [...]
> What is the hex browser/editor provided?
>
> What is the equivalent of DDT in Linux.
>
> What is the equivalent of DM (Director Maven)? ProFind? List?
>
With a new operating system, comes a new set of tools. I realize that
learning a new toolbox takes time and can be frustrating. But I think
you'll find that when it comes to controlling the system, networking, and
manipulating text, Linux surpasses anything DOS has to offer.
Midnight Commander (mc) will help ease the transition. It has a decent
file/directory manager and a file viewer that includes a hex display. For
displaying text files on the command line, "less" is the viewer of choice.
You didn't mention a text editor. But I think it's important to get
comfortable with a decent text editor as soon as possible. Coming from DOS,
I think joe or jed (in WordStar mode) is a good place to start. You can
explore the standard Unix editors, vi and emacs, when you get more familiar
with the system.
> Where is the files list of a distribution, with their descriptions, at
> least token but useful descriptions?
>[...]
> At least in DOS one puts an application in a particular directory, and
> there it is. Unfortunately linux is like Windows, in that the stuff is
> thrown in all together, so that it is hard to blow away one's mistakes in
> choosing what to install. The wonderful secure path of linux is a trap.
> I keep a minimum path in DOS, and start everything with DOSKEY macros or
> batch files, and have no problems with this.
Linux is definitely organized differently than DOS. Rather than putting an
application in a particular directory, Linux puts its binaries in "bin"
directories (e.g., /bin, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, etc.), its libraries in
"lib" directories (e.g., /lib, /usr/lib, /usr/local/lib, etc.), its
documentation in "man" or "doc" directories, and so on. The question is
really: how do you find and keep track of the files belonging to a
particular application?
And the answer is: a package manager. On Red Hat systems, this is the Red
Hat Package Manager or rpm. Applications are organized as a "package" of
files (binaries, libraries, configuration files, documentation, and so on).
These are the <package_name>-<version_information>.i386.rpm files you see
on the Red Hat CD-ROM. The rpm program lets you install, upgrade, uninstall,
and get information about each package.
I strongly advise that if you are going to use a Red Hat system, that you
learn the basics of rpm. "rpm -qa" will produce a list of every package you
have installed on your system. "rpm -qi <package_name>" will produce short
description of that package. "rpm -ql <package_name>" will give you a list
of every file in the package and where it is installed on your system. And
this is only the beginning. I think rpm is an incredible tool and more
than anything else has made Red Hat the most popular Linux distribution.
One final note. Linux is far better organized than DOS or any flavor or
Windows. The directory structure is well defined and documented. Files
that belong together are kept together, though the filesystem or
well-managed packages. System files are properly separated from a user's
own collection. Unix is designed for good housekeeping.
> The list goes on and on. I have had Red Hat 4.1 installed for a month, and
> nothing is set up, because most of the documentation is _so_ bad.
First: toss out Red Hat 4.1 and do a fresh install with Red Hat 5.2. Red Hat
4.1 uses a now-obsolete standard library. And besides, 5.2 has been
improved in many other ways. The GUI-based network and printer setup tools
in Red Hat 5.2 can get you quickly set up in those areas.
It is true, unfortunately, that much of the documentation only makes sense
when you already know how things work. And it would be nice if all
documents were all in one consistent, text-based format. Ultimately, I
think these problems will be solved. Literate users (like yourself!) will
contribute clearer documentation. And I think that eventually document
source will be in XML, from which you will be able to generate any format
you like: man pages, info pages, HTML, postscript/PDF, or just plain plain
text. And it will all be indexed and searchable.
> Sorry to dump on you folks, but the mood in these groups has gotten to me.
Yeah, there's a lot of chaff among the Usenet wheat.
> I am not a dummy, I do things in DOS that many people think are
> unbelievable, my PhD is as a microwave tube engineer, and I took my first
> computer course in the 1956-7 school year, but I am finding the Linux
> documentation too much of an uphill battle.
Don't give up. As an ex-DOS-diehard, I can tell you that learning Linux is
worth it -- though the first three months can be tough. DOS is obsolete,
dead, broken in its memory management model, filesystem model, and much
else. Linux is rough-hewn in places, but built on a solid foundation. And
it's a living system, evolving, with thousands of developers all over the
world contributing.
> It was the third parties that saved DOS for Microsoft, and with Windows9x
> they effectively blew away the third parties. What is left is linux. I
> wish it were better.
I whole-heartedly agree that the third parties made DOS work. But I see
that same energy now being poured into Linux. Use and learn Linux for
ninety days, and I guarantee you'll never want to go back.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: RISC 6000 MACHINE
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Clark)
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 01:11:39 GMT
In article <oIAh2.4509$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Israel Ameh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does anyone know if Linux can be installed on an IBM RISC 5000 machine? I
>have a Bull variant of the IBM RISC 6000 type 7006 and I hate to junk it
>since it only runs on IBM's AIX (As far as I am aware)
If it's a PowerPC-based RS/6000:
http://www.linuxppc.org/hardware/
Rob Clark, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brett W. McCoy)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 12:18:52 GMT
On Wed, 23 Dec 1998 09:38:29 +0000, John Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In over three years of post registry Windows usage I have only seen
>a corrupt registry ONCE, and this was caused by a screwy hard disk
>which not long afterwards exited stage left.
In my office, where we are running both Win95 & 98, we have at least one
registry corruption every week. One machine in particular seems to be
having problems. The scariest message I got the other day was "Unable to
load explorer.exe. You will need to reinstall the operating system."
--
Brett W. McCoy
http://www.lan2wan.com/~bmccoy/
=======================================================================
"The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected."
-- The UNIX Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June, 1972
===== BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK =====
Version: 3.12
GAT dpu s:-- a C++++ UL++++$ P+ L+++ E W++ N- o K- w--- O@ M@ !V PS+++
PE Y+ PGP- t++ 5- X+ R+@ tv b+++ DI+++ D+ G++ e>++ h+ r++ y++++
======END GEEK CODE BLOCK======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (erikc)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Easy UNIX editor
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 02:36:08 GMT
On Sun, 27 Dec 1998 05:12:19 -1000
CSO Visitor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-- origin: comp.os.linux.setup:
>|
>|
>|> > N. Richard Caldwell wrote:
>|> > >
>|> > > In article <72clf2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>|> > > >Lionel Parker wrote in message <72b2gi$om1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>|> > > >>I have to go along with this. vi uses less keystrokes than any other
>|> > > >>editor I know. As a ratshit typist this is most inportant to me.
>|> > > >
>|> > > >Well, actually there is one bug/feature in vi that drove me nuts:
>|> > > >To insert *ONE* character you have to type *THREE* keys: "i", the character,
>|> > > >and "ESC".
>|> > >
>|> > > Inserting one character is a worst case proposition for vi. Whatever
>|> > > time you lose in those rare instances is recouped 1000 times over
>|> > > during normal use simply because it's so efficient in most other
>|> > > respects.
>|> > >
>|
>| This is hardly a "rare instance"! I spend a good fraction of my vi
>|time doing it. Is there a way to make a vi macro or somesuch to get
>|around this problem?
Put the cursor over the character you want to replace and type 'r'
followed by the character.
Erikc (alt.atheist #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
| "The Truth against the World."
| -- Bardic Motto
If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
---- Noam Chomsky
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: Am I stupid or am I stupid. PPP. ALMOST!!!
Date: 27 Dec 1998 18:09:32 -0800
In article <zmAh2.2159$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>In article <766d1l$22g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Sergei Gerasenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I've been working on this problem for 4 days already. I've had three nights
>>when I went to bed at 8 a.m.! Here is the problem. I bought a RedHat
You could have bought an NT, and in 5 minutes had this done, (without
reading a single HOWTO) and spend the rest of your time actually using
the PC instead.
This is a typical Unix junk that we have to live with. If you think
setting up a PPP on Linux is hard, try it on Solaris. May be there in 2 weeks
you'll get it working (assuming you'll skip sleeping).
People brag and shout how wonderfull and powerfull UNIX is, yet when it
comes to a common task such as this, it failes on its face, becuase no
one wants to write a simple GUI tool to automate this task once and for
all. (no, I am not going to write this tool, becuase I am not the
one who is screeming how wonderfull Linux is).
But if it can be done on Windows, why can't it be done on Linux? is it
really possible that Windows actually is easier to use than Linux! oh no,
it can't be, yes, right.
Erick.
------------------------------
From: Bill Pitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Can you all please help me and support Linux Community! Please Read
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 04:31:53 GMT
Well it looks like you will probably win, since yours has over 50 votes and
the others have none..
Good luck to you.
Bill
Kailash Bhatia wrote:
> Hello,
> Can someone please help me by going to
> http://www.x10.com/contest_entries1219.htm
> and clicking on entry 39 (regarding linux home)
>
> I am just trying to win 1000 bucks, I am 14 and i need of funding for my
>
> linux software project (at 14 you don't make much money), I can gett
> money if ppl vote for me in a contest!!!!!
>
> Can someone please help me by going to
> http://www.x10.com/contest_entries1219.htm and clicking on entry 39
> (regarding linux home)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Niann Shiang)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: Am I stupid or am I stupid. PPP. ALMOST!!!
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 23:36:12 -0500
Sergei Gerasenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> connect: ppp0 <--> /dev/ttyS2 (pretty lively too:-)
> channel ppp0 closing (Oh, oh!)
> hangup (SIGHUP)
> modem hangup
> connection terminated
> exit
>
> I have read a whole bunch of readme's on PPP. Nothing describes SIGHUP
> in a detailed way. There was a short description of that in PPP-HOWTO, but
> it didn't help. I have looked through old postings dated all the way back to
> 1997 and found nothing similar.
> The PPP service also starts O.K. according to the log. I have tried
> minicom. The same thing. I get to the point when I enter my credentials, get
> the garbage, exit the program without resetting the modem, type
> #pppd -d -detach /dev/ttyS2 38400 & and it goes no further. Something
> disconnects the modem all the time. My PPP is 2.2.0, so I'm safe there. No
> other errors. I'm in despair and about to get on an anti-depressant. Anybody
> who has a good suggestion, will get a bottle of virtual vodka and even drink
> it with me (virtually)!
>
> THANXXXXXXXXXX
One tricky part with ppp-on and ppp-off is that you have to call your
ISP to find out the script your ISP expects before accepting account
name and password. For example, my ISP would need :x and :e before
accepting account and password. It took me quite sometime to figure it
out. Another route is to install KDE which would allow you to connect
thru PAP using kppp. The kppp is much easier to set up and does not
require any special script. It works both on Mac and PC. However,
installing KDE is another issue you have to figure it out. Good luck.
------------------------------
From: Marc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: Am I stupid or am I stupid. PPP. ALMOST!!!
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 04:44:43 GMT
Ed Young wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > In article <zmAh2.2159$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > >
> > >In article <766d1l$22g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > >Sergei Gerasenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>I've been working on this problem for 4 days already. I've had three nights
> > >>when I went to bed at 8 a.m.! Here is the problem. I bought a RedHat
> >
> > You could have bought an NT, and in 5 minutes had this done, (without
> > reading a single HOWTO) and spend the rest of your time actually using
> > the PC instead.
Keyword here "Bought" assuming you are going to go the cheap route and install
workstation you are looking at about $200 for a copy of NT workstation. over $700
for a 5 CLIENT licence of server,,,and server can;t do HALF the things that Linux
can do right out of the box. My SuSE 5.3 cost me $1.95 for the GPL version.
how much is MS developers studio??? $3000? $2000???? how muchare the equivalent
tools in linux???? $free ????
>
> >
> > This is a typical Unix junk that we have to live with. If you think
> > setting up a PPP on Linux is hard, try it on Solaris. May be there in 2 weeks
> > you'll get it working (assuming you'll skip sleeping).
>
that's funny, my partner and I had a PPP connection on solaris up and running in
about 20 min,,,,
>
as to writing the interface,,what if I was running a mission critical application
that discovbered a bug in NT??? could we simply correct the problam??? nope cause
microsoft won't let anyone even take a peek at thier code. whereas with linux, if I
find a flaw (such as the max PPP tunnels allowed) all I ahve to do is fix some code
and recompile
> >
> > People brag and shout how wonderfull and powerfull UNIX is, yet when it
> > comes to a common task such as this, it failes on its face, becuase no
> > one wants to write a simple GUI tool to automate this task once and for
> > all. (no, I am not going to write this tool, becuase I am not the
> > one who is screeming how wonderfull Linux is).
> >
actually there is,,it's called kppp and is only one of several that work well
hmmm,,,you are right!~ the easy way is always the best way. In fact I have learned
SOOOOOOO much about how PPP works when I set up my NT workstation at the office.
NOT!!! setting up NT requires almost NO thought whatsoever. oh sure you have some
tasks that are hard. but the simple fact of the matter is that an idiot can
administer NT. believe me I have met some people who are "Microsoft Certified" to
be systems engineers and they don;t know the first thing about what they are doing.
all they have learned how to do is "point and click" and how to pass the tests. I
actually know someone who is an MCSE and has never used a computer for more then
playing games..all he did was study the books ans was able to pass the tests. and as
to NT having simple gui interfaces,,,have you ever tried to disable silent RIP in
NT??? where is the gui or that??? I beleive it's called Regedit,,and one simple
mistake in there and 'POOF' there goes UR NT!!!
the simple fact of the matter is that when you take the easy route out you end up
losing something in the process,hmmm what about Vietnam? the EASY way was for us to
believe the gvmnt told us,,and blindly accept the fact that we were at war,,instead
we stood up and made our voices heard. was that easy?
>
> > But if it can be done on Windows, why can't it be done on Linux? is it
> > really possible that Windows actually is easier to use than Linux! oh no,
> > it can't be, yes, right.
>
Actually it can. You are right in the fact that Windows is easier to use, like I
mentioned before, easier does not necassaraly mean better. Didn;t Oracle and Intel
recently run some datawarehousing software taht achieved some hiedous data transfer
rate that windows can only dream of? was it run on NT? nope RED HAT TO THE RESCUE
THERE!! When DES encryption was finally broken on that special cracker machine, did
NT shine there? nope that was done with linux.
personally I have learned more about TCP/IP networking from using linux then I ever
have running any microsoft product. the reason is like I mentioned before, Using
linux makes me think, everything is not cut and dry. I have to do research and
think about what I want to do,and oin that thinking I learn!
> >
> > Erick.
>
> Hmmm. When my wife or son bring up a browser on their Linux boxes, my Linux box
> automatically dials our ISP, and the URL appears on their box. Not only that,
> we can all three use the internet at the same time, through the same phone
> connection. And our ftp's are straight, no proxies to mess with. Try this on
> NT, without spending a dime.
>
I fully agree, in order to get this kind of functionalitly with NT you ahve to spend
THOUSANDS if not tens of thousands FOR LIMITED CLIENT ACCESS!!! what was the
limitation on linux the last timeI checked??? NONE
>
> If you want to line Microsoft's pockets, that's your business, I'll stick to
> using Linux and helping those I can do the same...
I wholeheartedly agree, it's time to realize that just cause microsoft has a
monoploy that it is not necassaealy the best. the fact is that linux is faster more
stable and can do more for less $ so what if it takes me a week to get my ip
masquerading working??? to a company what;'s a week of my salary vs the cost of
NT????
ok I;d better stop before I get angry,,, :-)
'Have a happy new year all!!! let's try to have peace on earth for once eh???
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Smith)
Subject: Re: Applix or Corel WP? Anyone using new version of Applix?
Date: 28 Dec 1998 04:48:42 GMT
[Posted and mailed]
In article <766s24$951$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"G. Hugh SONG" <ghsong@\"Spamspoiler\"kjist.ac.kr> writes:
>
> Presentation program (in the spirit of PowerPoint in the M$ world) under
> Applix is "Presents", and it sucks (is awfully unflexible) when it comes to
> equation handling. I am using Applix 4.37. What is the counterpart of
> Presents
> in WP 8 package? Is it any better than "Presents"?
There is none. At the moment, WP for Linux is ONLY that -- WordPerfect,
the word processor. The other parts of the Corel WordPerfect Suite 8
haven't yet been ported to Linux. That's slated for the version 9
release, and there's no due date on that as of yet, AFAIK, except that I
heard a claim that the goal was to get the Linux version out within a
month of the release of the Windows version.
--
Rod Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.users.fast.net/~rodsmith
NOTE: Remove the digit and following word from my address to mail me
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Problem With Shutdown
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 04:35:33 GMT
In article <766rm0$icv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nevermind. After much grepping and RTFM-ing, I found /etc/nologin. All is
well. Thank goodness Linux stores stuff in ASCII files rather than some
proprietary, binary registry ;-) .
> I ran a command the other night to shutdown my linux box (shutdown -h 120)
> after I went to sleep. That appeared to work fine. Now when I go to login
> as anyone other than root I get a message "System Is Going Down For A Halt
> Dec 25 at such and such time" and the login fails. I can successfully login
> as root however. I tried to set the system time back thinking it would
> shutdown at the specified time and reset itself. This didn't work. Does
> anyone know where it's storing this phantom shutdown notice so I can wipe it
> out? Thanks in advance.
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod Smith)
Subject: Re: Fonts For WP8?
Date: 28 Dec 1998 04:53:29 GMT
[Posted and mailed]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ken Plumbly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyone know of any fonts for WP8 ?
>
> Like to get as few more than the default ones that
> come with it.
The downloadable version of WP8 is missing the font installer, so you
can't install fonts in it unless you use the font installer from WP7 or
the WP8 beta version that was floating around a few months back.
That said, WP for Linux uses Type 1 fonts, so any collection of Type 1
fonts will be a good place to start. These can be found in computer
stores for $5-$50 (or more for very high-end font collections). Details
on how to install the fonts can be found on my web page, at:
http://www.users.fast.net/~rodsmith/wpfonts.html
--
Rod Smith
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.users.fast.net/~rodsmith
NOTE: Remove the digit and following word from my address to mail me
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
